The Cabin in the Woods: A cinematic lesson in existentialism

A few months ago, against all my natural instincts, I watched Cabin in the Woods. My reasons for doing so were largely due to the trailers that promised something unexpected and the words ‘you think you know the story, but….’ aroused sufficient interest in me. I convinced a friend- who is horror/ thriller aficionada and didn’t need much convincing- to tag along.

!!SPOILER ALERT!!- Do not read further if you intend to watch the film and want the film’s plot to remain a secret. You have been warned. My responsibility ends here.

 

The story revolves around five college goers (being represented by a jock, a somewhat provocative blonde woman who is also the jock’s girlfriend, an academic guy, a stoner and a demure, brunette woman) who take a weekend break to a cabin in the woods and like any other slasher film, start getting killed off one by one.

Usually, films of this kind have plots that offer thrills and little else. Remember the episode of F.R.I.E.N.D.S in which Rachel suggests that Joey can't take her bra off because on some level he doesn't want to, and Joey responds with “No! I don’t have another level!”? Well, that’s my opinion of slasher films of the I-know- what-you-did-last-summer and Scream genre. Cabin in the Woods however has several levels. In fact, I think the film offers rich subject matter for a discussion on philosophy and existentialism. And having sat through some rather tedious films in the course of my academic life, I can honestly say I’d be happy to attend such a class.

Some of the dialogues and one-liners are quite witty and the film definitely has its moments. It offers thrills and humour in somewhat equal measure, sending an ever so slight chill down your spine or making you laugh at appropriate junctures.

Secondly, it’s gory. Now all slasher films necessarily involve some amount of blood and gore, but Cabin in the Woods leaves most of them far behind by depicting a colourful tumult of blood, body parts and bodily fluids. I loved it. I’ve always enjoyed blood, gore, decapitations and disembowelments. Some of that is down to curiosity about the human body I suppose (‘I wonder what slicing through flesh feels like?’). I am not a violent person in my real life. That being said, I am also not in denial of the fact that certain actions – cruelty, bullying or abuse of any kind- make angry enough to want to rip the perpetrators to shreds with my bare hands and wish them a slow, painful death. I find that indulging my aggressive side in the form of fantasies, videogames etc. is quite therapeutic. The key is the ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality, thought and action, desire and behaviour and to accept the psyche’s various inclinations without judgment or suppression.

Those are the textual elements of the film, what is seen and heard. What sets it apart from other slasher films is what can be inferred from the plot.

Before I delve into the film’s subtext, I feel the need to expand on the plot somewhat for the benefit of readers who ignored the spoiler alert because they don’t want to watch the film or don’t care much for its surprise element(s).

So the youngsters are on vacation but what they don’t know is that in passing through a tunnel they have crossed over from the real world into a world controlled by white-collar technician type of people. These technicians are employed by their bosses ‘downstairs’, referred to in the film as the ‘ancient ones’, and the travellers are essentially sacrificial lambs who are to be killed off to please the ancient ones. Similar events are shown to be taking place all over the world. The cabin world contains a plethora of evil creatures that can potentially be the cause of the youngsters’ deaths, each one the result of a separate action taken by the vacationers. Long story short, in the end only the brunette and stoner reach ‘downstairs’ in their quest for answers and discover that their sacrifice is essential for the survival of the species because the ancient ones (aka Gods) are mad at human beings for their transgressions, and they will destroy the species unless placated.

Call it delusional over-thinking or unparalleled creative prowess in film interpretation (there are no prizes for guessing which one I prefer), but here’s why I think Cabin in the Woods is a film of great relevance to human existence.

 

Puppets and puppeteers

 

The human-beings-as-puppets theme was apparent on two levels- philosophical and cinematic. On a  philosophical level the film was significant because of its allusion to aspects of human existence that we cannot control. In some ways, we are puppets in the hands of destiny, fate, biology, science, god- whatever you choose to call it. I resort to lines from the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam to make my case:-

 

'Tis all a Chequer-board of Nights and Days

Where Destiny with Men for Pieces plays:

Hither and thither moves, and mates, and slays,

And one by one back in the Closet lays.

 

From a cinematic perspective, and as someone easily scared by scary films, I like the idea of there being a finite number of gimmicks employed by filmmakers to frighten audiences. In the moment that we watch these films and submit to fear, we are like puppets in the hands of puppeteers/ filmmakers who are able to evoke certain reactions from us by pulling the right strings. In Cabin in the Woods, we see the two survivors travel in an elevator of sorts across different rooms, each containing a different scary character. This scene was quite comforting for me because once you’ve seen scary creatures tucked away in closets by other humans it makes them less scary. Context is everything. If the guy from Texas Chainsaw Massacre approaches you in the dead of the night in an isolated dungeon it’s much scarier than if he were to be walking around in a crowded mall on Halloween.

Free will

 

The film highlights that even in the midst of a world they cannot control there is some element of choice afforded to the unsuspecting vacationers. As one of the technicians points out, they have to choose to ignore the extremely creepy guy in the run down petrol station, they have to choose to go down to a cellar in the night, and the reason for their demise is directly dependent on which, of many different objects strategically placed in the above mentioned cellar, catches their fancy. The final choice facing our protagonists is whether to kill themselves and save humanity or save themselves and face the consequences. The relevant point is that even in a world under the influence of an entity other than you, you have the capacity to make choices and the consequences you face depend on those choices. Additionally, though you don’t choose to be born, how you die can be up to you. I think the right to self-determine how or even whether one lives is a fundamental and unconditional right, well depicted in the film by the final decision taken by the protagonists to sit down with each other and smoke a joint while the world comes crashing down around them.

Tied to this idea is the eternal struggle between fear and freedom. For the religious- particularly followers of a prescriptive religion that tells you you’ll go to hell if you are gay, drink alcohol, have pre-marital sex, use contraception etc. etc.- many decisions are motivated entirely by fear of some allegedly negative consequences of deviating from the prescribed path. I’ve met many people who are all too willing to relinquish any rational thought or introspection in the face of religious scripture or doctrine. The answers to questions such as “Why/ why not?” are mind-numbingly simple – “Because my religion says so”. And more often than not, the follow-up question “Why do you follow said religion?” doesn’t yield an intelligent answer either.

I am reminded of a conversation I had with an old African woman. She said “The fear of God is a great excuse to make people do what you want them to. When I was young, my mother used to tell us not to play in the street because God would punish us if we did. We listened. We wouldn’t have listened to her if she’d said we’d get run over by a car”. This particular story made me smile but how many people the world over perform the cruelest, most despicable acts of hatred and aggression because they believe they’re doing what their religion asks of them? “People are never so completely and enthusiastically evil as when they act out of religious conviction”, writes Umberto Eco in The Prague Cemetery.

In the film, the threat of extinction is used to persuade the girl to kill her friend, and she very nearly succumbs to it. In the end however, they both choose not to kill each other despite Sigourney Weaver’s (who by the way, seems to be in every science fiction film!) attempts to scare them into taking each other’s lives. This is refreshing to say the least because what you see is a human being exercising free will in the face of catastrophe, taking a stand for what feels right to him/her, choosing a friend and fellow human over the alleged dictates of a God they’ve never met.

The end of the human species

Those who know me and/or have read this blog may be aware that I don’t have a high opinion of the human species and in fact delight at every little thing that puts us in our place and drags us down from the high pedestal on which we usually park ourselves.  Consequently, I thoroughly enjoy watching films in which people come under attack from other creatures – aliens, spiders, dinosaurs, sharks and suchlike. Even better if the attack is the result of human arrogance and/or stupidity (like in Jurassic Park). Watching such films, there is a huge part of me rooting for the non-humans to win. I mean, I thought it was tragic when the shark gets blown up in Jaws! :-( I find it utterly disappointing and boring when we are promised the end of the world and at the last minute, Tom Cruise or Will Smith manages to single-handedly save the day.

Films in which human beings end up vanquished rather than victorious are a breath of fresh air. Cabin in the Woods such a film. The film suggests that the survivors’ decision not to kill each other leads to the ancient Gods rising from the depths of the earth to take over (a giant hand comes out of soil and engulfs the screen). The last dialogue of the film is “Maybe it’s time we gave someone else a chance”. That’s terrific I say, because it reflects an awareness of something bigger than us, in whose plans human beings are just another species that happened to come into existence because the conditions were right rather than having some kind of central or special place in the cosmos. Whether due to Gods or physics or both, the universe is ever changing. Species come and species go. Stars are born and they collapse. Even the end of the world is not necessarily the end of the world. It’s only the end of the world as human beings know it.

If there is a choice between between fear and freedom, quantity and quality, longevity and liberty,  one hopes that one has the courage to make the right choice. The way I see it, the final decision of the people in Cabin in the Woods is a respectable one.

 

Kya hai bharosa aashiq dil ka, aur kisi pe yeh aa jaaye....

Readers of this blog who have found enough shreds of interest by which to hang on to it over the last two or so years that it has been around, may have got the impression that I don't particularly favour the rule of reciprocity in matters of love, kindness, sensitivity and such. All things nice, if you please. My policy is largely one of - I do it because I want to do it, and if you don't want to reciprocate I have absolutely no right to ask you to. I mean, it's the only rational way to be isn't it? We do what we want, the other does what he/she wants and sure it would be nice for the others' wants to be the same as our want but when it isn't so it really is arrogant for us to demand that it be so. No?

The sentiment of 'iloveyouwithallmyheartandsoul' is a very common theme of songs from Hindi films (Though this post is more about songs from the 50s, 60s and 70s, it could very well apply today). Slightly less pervasive is the expression , in varying shapes and sizes, of the sentiment 'howniceitwouldbeifyoucouldlovemetoo'. Next comes the 'iknowyoushallneverloveme' which at times is tied to the preceding sentiment by threads of despair and futility. This third sentiment is in most cases also accompanied by the helpless 'butishallcontinuetoloveandlongforyou'.

Moving, heart wrenchingly beautiful songs of love-filled despair. I am in no way mocking them. No sir. I like to listen to them, love them, and live them. Read the first paragraph and be convinced that I swear by such sentiments!

Be that as it may, there come along certain songs bearing sentiments that are quite the opposite. Unlike the above-mentioned variety that seep naturally into your skin and become a part of your existence, the latter variety of songs brazenly float in through the front door on a magic carpet of melodies and you only realise you let them in after you have spent a good second or two in awe of their presence. Much like guests who annoy us by walking in uninvited but do so bearing wonderful presents to placate us, thereby leaving us doubtful about whether to proceed with our original decision to throw them right out, with these songs, we might be angry with them for upsetting the equilibrium of our unhappybutcontentintheirunhappiness hearts, but find we cannot do anything about it because a part of us is taken in by the novelty of their message and wants to hear more.

For those unable to decipher my very unambiguous description ( :-p ) allow me to clarify what songs and sentiments I mean.

The songs I find refreshing and belonging to the second category as described above don't care for supplication and unrequited love. They mean business. Love is a two way street, and I certainly don't intend to walk up and down it by myself. It is conditional, reciprocal, and at times, yes, vengeful.

I have recently been on a spree of appreciating such songs and so an example comes easily to mind, allowing me to illustrate. (In the following example, I am using the word "I" for the singer and "you" for the one being sung to. I am not trying to wave my fists at the reader. This is for the sake of convenience. One does not like to go on talking like this for a long time about complex matters should the other lose track of what is being said and fails to understand the point, does one?)

Song: Haseen ho tum

Lyrics: Hasrat Jaipuri

Singer: Mohd. Rafi

Film: Badtameez

"Haseen ho tum khuda nahi ho, tumhara sajda nahi karenge

Magar mohabbat mein hukm doge, to haste haste yeh jaan bhi denge"

(You are only human, albeit of the attractive kind, and that isn't enough to warrant me getting down on my knees before you. However, though I will not offer you salutations and adoration unnecessarily, if you were to reciprocate my feelings my dear there would be no limit to what I would be willing to do for your sake)

"Hamari nazron ka shukr kijiye, ki aasmaan par tumhe bithaya

Hamare dil ko duaen dijiye, ki dhadkanon mein tumhe basaya"

(Rather than engaging in self depreciation and suggesting that the you deserve much more than I can offer, I suggest that you ought to be grateful to me for having considered you worthy of my affection. What a healthy, even if slightly pompous, attitude!)

"Bulandiyon se giro ge tum bhi, agar nigahon se hum girenge"

(A subtle threat, that you will have a rather nasty fall from the pedestal on which I placed you, in the event that you judge me unfavourably)

"Hamare jaise agar hain lakhon, tumhare jaise bhi kam nahi hain

Jo khud patthar se phod le sar, woh aur honge woh hum nahi hain"

(If you think there are millions like me, allow me to remind you that you aren't one in a million either. There may be others willing to bring about their own destruction in longing for you, but I am not one of them)

I am aware of course, of how grossly inadequate my explanations in English are but, in the spirit of the song, I am not going to be overly apologetic about it. Anyone who doesn't understand Hindi should be grateful for any attempt by me to make things comprehensible :-)

I like the song because it dares to say things others songs don't, and it is grounded in unwavering self respect, self awareness and self control.

It's a perfectly healthy attitude to have if you ask me (and I know no one really asked me, but this is my blog and if I can't lend it some metaphorical elasticity then there is really no justice in the world! None!!)

All it does is remind you to be critical of your love for the one you love, to remember that you may sometimes, perhaps, in the heat of passion judge someone to be more terrific than they really are, to not feel guilty about your rage, to accept that the other does not care for your pleas, to appreciate that while they have a right to do so, you need not join them and double the blow to your feelings and finally, eventually, move the hell on.

I recommend this song to anyone who has tried to nurse a broken heart and has felt the ache and longing for that which cannot be.

You will either identify with it or you won't.

If you do, it will probably make you feel better about life and yourself.

If you do not, then just find it in yourself to appreciate this sore (but defiant) thumb of songs.

Wanted - An entertaining exercise that stretches the limits of what you thought you could withstand

Despite the fact that the question of why someone in their right mind would want to showcase Salman Khan's dancing is beyond my limits of comprehension, I have to say that Wanted was bizarre, entertaining and all in all quite hilarious. Not because of subtle humour or clever, witty dialogues but because if you watch an ageing SK gyrate to songs like "Your papa says you love me, mama says you love me, so love me baby love me", falling off your seat clutching your aching stomach while your eyebrows threaten to shoot up over your head in absolute shock is a natural consequence.

My partner in crime and I went to watch it just for the heck of it. We read this review, which ignited enough curiosity in us. Plus, when something is described as being extremely unpleasant, I have an uncontrollable urge to experience it. It can't just be bad though. It has to be extremely so. Ask my friends from my graduation and post graduation days and they will confirm it, for many a bad milkshake/ song/ book etc have been thrust upon them by yours truly with the words "You have to drink/listen to/ read this just to experience how bad it is". Call me crazy but it broadens your life experience and I stand by it.

Wanted was one such experiment, and it was worth it.

While I realise that I cannot do justice to the entire film, let me share with my readers what I considered to be some of the highlights.

The story isn't bad. Which is to say that there is one, and that in itself was a pleasant surprise. Is it far fetched? Of course! But few Hindi films aren't so I am prepared to excuse that.

Salman Khan is physically fit, slimmer than he has been in the last decade, and quite old. You can use as much concealer as you like my friend, but no one can hide those bags under your eyes. You could go shopping and bring back 1 Kgs. of alu-pyaaz in each of them. He can't dance, could never really act and can still give a ventriloquist a run for his money. I don't know how he manages to deliver his dialogues without the slightest parting of the lips!

Ayesha Takia is, well...You know the type of roles Katrina Kaif plays in action packed films starring Akshay Kumar? Where all that is required of her is to be dolled-up and stand around? Furniture type, if you will. Ayesha Takia's role in Wanted is similar, except she ends up being a melodramatic item of furniture. Like a sofa that occasionally displays signs of psychosis. Seriously, while I do not wish to trivialise the conflict that one may be fraught with when one falls in love with a contract killer (you know, the whole should-I-love-you-or-should-I-hate-you and I-can't-decide-if-you're-good-or-bad type of conflict), it has to be said that in case of Ayesha's character it ends up looking more like a case of Dissociative Identity Disorder.

All credit for this chaos must go to the dialogue/script writer however. There are times in the movie when Salman Khan and Ayesha Takia are interacting, and one wonders if they are even talking about the same thing.

As for her appearance, I have always thought that her facial features are too childlike when compared with the rest of her. The filmmaker probably had a similar idea, as he has made full use of both her innocent expression and her large breasts alternating between references to her "fit body" and tight clothing one the one hand, and a naive young girl in mean, mad Mumbai who has to grapple with lecherous policemen and lovestruck landlords while falling for a scoundrel like Salman on the other.

Speaking of lecherous, I think Mahesh Manjrekar is quite good as the sleazy cop. Some men on screen might make your skin crawl and make you want to kick them in the balls, but that just means they're great actors! I swear there were times in the movie where Mahesh made me cringe.

The camerawork reminded me of Crank combined with Hindi television soap operas. There are freezes, fast forwarded clips, and the dizzying camera angles that are much loved by Indian soap directors where there are repetitive shots in quick succession of the same person turning around, or when they zoom in to a person's face again and again to indicate heightened emotion. This is usually accompanied by some kind of tree-swishing-in-a-violent-storm music.

The song and dance, sigh! Oh the brutal murder of lyrics, rhythm and choreography with one fatal blow! Apparently there was a trailer for this movie which suggests that Salman does everything (killing, stabbing, swearing, loving, eating, drinking etc etc) casually, except dancing. You may regard that as a compliment till you see the music videos. That's when you realise that he takes dancing seriously because indeed, it is what he needs to work on the most. He reminded me of a guy I saw at the IIT Bombay festival a few years ago. That guy came forward in front of a room full of people to sing "Wonderwall". He blew it. C-O-M-P-L-E-T-E-L-Y ! But I applauded him for his courage anyway.

There was one good thing about Salman's dancing however. I am always sympathetic to the extras who never get the credit they deserve (and this is not just in Bollywood. Have you watched the video of Michael Jackson's "Smooth Criminal"? Do the extras not dance as well as MJ himself?!!). Watching the dancing in this movie, one can't help but admire the extras. Salman makes them look terrific!

There ARE a few good dialogues, and I mean four or five. The villains look convincingly villainous, except for an item girl aspiring for the status of "Behen" (which I have to say, doesn't sound nearly as underworld-ly as "Bhai") called Shayana who has very unattractive legs.

All in all, the movie ends up making you laugh because it is so inexplicably bizarre. I enjoyed watching it, more so than Dil Bole Hadippa. Let us now carry out some reflection to try and analyse why this was the case.

Dil Bole Hadippa had the misfortune of combining the issue of women's representation in sports at a regional or national level with the usual romantic elements typical of a Yash Chopra production. It was in a sense like Chak De India minus the good performances, good dialogues, subtlety and seriousness but with the Yashraj attempts at light comedy and romance thrown in. Even if we forget about, among other misrepresentations, Rani's garish clothes (not commonly seen in Amritsar), the movie fails to fulfill either criteria. The Indo-Pak tournament cornily called "Aman Cup" or Shahid and Rani's love story don't really warm the cockles of your heart. Nor does Rani's transformation in the end from a (reasonably convincing!) cute Sikh man to a foundation and eyeshadow covered beauty drive home the point of women trying to make it in the man's world that professional cricket still largely is. It failed in my opinion because it was ambitiously trying to achieve too much.

In contrast, my friends, Wanted doesn't seem to have any such ambitions. In fact, one is compelled to conclude that the movie doesn't have much of a point at all. It just is.

What really cracked me up throughout the film was the image of members of the British Board of Film Certification, and possibly Sir Quentin Thomas (President of the BBFC) having to sit through this film, probably more than once, in order to determine what classification it should get.

"When you realise you want to spend the rest of your life with somebody, you want the rest of your life to start as soon as possible"

(Said a funny man to an annoying yet endearing-in-some-way woman in a feature film I happened to watch today)

Om Madan Prakash Narayan Shivpuri

Conversation between TQ and Holy Cow (A classic example of the randomness that the two of them are capable of)

TQ- So, who killed Ms. McKenzie? (Asking about a mystery novel she was reading)

Holy Cow- Umm.....Om Shivpuri (Keen to jump at a chance to create tumult and confusion)

TQ-Who the hell is Om Shivpuri

Holy Cow- He is the guy in Gumnaam. The one who ends up being the murderer...no?

TQ- Hain?

Holy Cow- Arre, the fellow in Gumnaam yaar! Don’t you remember Om Shivpuri?

TQ- There is no one by that name!

Holy Cow- Of course there is! Okay, he may not be the guy in Gumnaam, but I know there is someone by that name from old Bollywood.

TQ- This guy is someone else. Om Shivpuri is that guy is Karz

Holy Cow- Which guy in Karz?

TQ- The villain. Sir Judah.

Holy Cow- (Laughing at the name)- Who is Sir Judah?

TQ- That guy at the end. The one who cant speak and communicates only in sign language

Holy Cow- What does he look like? I don’t think he is the same guy from Gumnaam. Because he is not ringing a bell at all! And I have seen Karz twice! The Om Shivpuri I am talking about is a mustachioed man.

TQ- Sir Judah also had a moustache. And he was bald

Holy Cow- He was bald but he had a moustache? How vague is that!

TQ- Why? Chacha Chaudhury is bald and has a moustache!

Holy Cow- Yeah, but he wears a turban so it doesn’t count. Coz we can’t see it.

TQ- I think the guy you mean is some Prakash. Om Prakash!

Holy Cow- Oh yeah!! It could be Om Prakash!

TQ- I don’t know, Om Shivpuri is not having the “aha” quality to the name.

Holy Cow- Oh ho, there is an Om Shivpuri for sure.

TQ- You know, now that you have said the name sp much, it is starting to ring a bell. Though I am also getting a hint of Narayan

Holy Cow- maybe his name was Narayan Om Prakash

TQ- Now we are just going to Kaashi- Mathura! Who is that guy who gets mimicked a lot?

Holy Cow- Oh right. He is Om Prakash. Back to square one. Tell me what this Sir Judah looks like.

TQ- He doesn’t have many teeth

Holy Cow- He doesn’t have many teeth?? That’s what you’re giving me to work with? He doesn’t have many teeth??

TQ- (Laughing uncontrollably now) yeah!

Holy Cow- So we have a bald, fat, tooth less, mustachioed man who cant speak.

TQ- Who was the guy who played Mogambo ?

Holy Cow- Amrish puri

TQ- Oh yeah. His elder brother I think is Om Shivpuri.

Holy Cow- Hmmm.... Is Sir Judah the same as the guy who comes as the rich father in most Bmitabh Bachchan movies?

TQ- No no. Sir Judah doesn’t come as father figure. He only comes as a villain.

Holy Cow- Then who is that guy!?!

TQ- Okay. The guy who gets mimicked is Om Prakash for sure right! So he is in the clear.

Holy Cow- yeah. I don’t know why I am sure that the Gumnaam guy is Om Shivpuri . Though this Sir Judah is boggling the mind.

TQ- Don’t you remember him, he was being massaged by naked women in his little pool in his room. Like a buffalo.

Holy Cow- So now we have a bald mustachioed buffalo without many teeth being massaged by naked women??

Holy Cow- Was Sir Judah fat in absolute terms or relative?

TQ- Absolute

Holy Cow- My gumnaam guy was not fat. And in his defense, he didn’t have any hair loss issues either!

TQ- I know. I have established the chronology of events. Gumnaam was much older than Karz. So maybe the Gumnaam guy was young, had hair and teeth and was thinner. And then when he did Karz, he had lost his hair, gained weight and lost his teeth.

Holy Cow- Ha ha, Isn’t one supposed to become frail and thin when one is old?

TQ- he wasn’t that old ..that he was wasting away! Okay, Google for three things. Gumnaam cast, Karz cast and Om Shivpuri.

Meanwhile....TQ had asked her brother who apparently is a film wiz.

TQ- Okay. He says that Sir Judah is Madan Puri, who is Amrish Puri's brother who is also the guy in Gumnaam. Om shivpuri is the guy who plays Vardan in Don.

Holy Cow- Okay. So Om Shivpuri is the guy who I meant as the one playing father figure in Amitabh films.

TQ- yeah.

Holy Cow- I am not convinced about Sir Judah being same as Gumnaam guy. Did Sir judah have blue eyes?

TQ_ Gumnaam was black and white! How would you make anything out with eye colour?

Holy Cow- Gumnaam was in colour! Don’t you remember Mehmood's dream sequence of "hum kaale hain to kya hua?"

TQ- oh yeah yeah. Well, Madan Puri was the same as Sir Judah. The murderer in Gumnaam is Madan Puri. The bearded chap

Holy Cow- Whoa! Hold on a minute! My chap doesn’t have a beard!

TQ- Well the murderer in Gumnaam was bearded.

Holy Cow- there is a chance I am wrong about my chap being the murderer. Oooh…was there a Madan Mohan? An actor by that name I mean?

TQ- You are confusing Madan Puri with Mac Mohan

Holy Cow- Please! Mac Mohan was such a frail little thing

…….

The conversation flickered to an end.

On Googling for the above mentioned, it turned out that:-

1. The murderer in Gumnaam was Madan Puri. The Holy Cow was pleased to find that his face matched the one she had in her head.
2. Sir Judah in Karz was Prem Nath and not Madan Puri. And yes, Prem Nath is quite fat. Though his dental description requires further exploration.
3. Om Shivpuri is the the man who played father figure ish roles in a lot of Amitabh bachchan films.
4. Madan Puri is Amrish Puri’s brother.

Billa # 786

There are very few things that give me uncomplicated and unadulterated joy. One of them, is watching Amitabh Bachchan in his older, pre Lal Badshah, films.

Oh what a hero he was! Zanjeer, Don, Deewar, Sholay, Muqaddar ka Sikandar, Sharabi, Lawaaris, Namak Halal, Silsila... Hero-giri was never better.

Recognising the mania that still forms an unbeatable aura around Amitabh Bachchan, SET MAX is doing an 'Ab Tak Bachchan' festival where they show Amitabh movies every night. I am happy. Champions league still hasnt resumed, and yet TV remains watchable

Deewar is showing right now, as I write this post.

Now I like this film. One of my favourite Amitabh films definitely. And the man is devastatingly sexy in it. I have just finished rambling about the film to a poor soul who has to put up with me. But it's been quite a lot of fun for me honestly!

It's made more fun by the fact that I know half the lines of the film. Not just by Amitabh, but by villains # 1 and 2- Daavar and Samant, Nirupa Roy- who always ends up playing his blind/widowed/destitute mother, and bubbly Shashi Kapoor.

Some lines I like

Part I- The obvious ones
"Sahib, mein phenke hue paise nahi uthaata" "Is ladke par nazar rakhna. Yeh lambi race ka ghoda hai" (Iftikar aka Daavar aka villain # 1) "Sahib, bahut saal pehle aap us hi footpath par apne joote polish karvate the...Sahib, main aaj bhi pheke hue paise nahi uthaata"

"Beta, tu koi aisa kaam to nahi kar raha, jo tujhe nahi karna chahiye?" (Nirupa Roy worriedly asks, when Amitabh shows her a palatial house he has bought)

To which our hero responds coolly-
"Nahi Ma, main koi aisa kaam nahi kar raha jo mujhe nahi karna chahiye" (He has become a smuggler. But emphasis on this line, because in the eyes of the angry young man, he is only crooked because of what his crooked fate has dealt him)

Scene: Nirupa Roy standing between two brothers- Amit and Shashi- with one hand blessing each one. She says "Bhagwan tum dono ko kamiyaabi tak pahunchaye"

Why is this important? I will tell you. Because, my friends, the two brothers have been led down opposing paths in life. Amitabh is a smuggler, and Shashi a police officer. Both of them cannot be kamiyaab. Ek ki haar mein hi doosre ki jeet hai !

Okay, we wont get into the whole -"Bhai tum sign karte ho ya nahi... "Jao pehle usse sign le kar aao jisne mere haath par yeh likha tha"... "mere paas bangla etc hai...tumhare paas kya hai?".. (Silence) (Emotion) "Mere paas (pause) ma hai" - lines because they are well known, much loved and oft repeated. But yes, they're great!

Part II- The less obvious ones

"Agar yeh mazaak hai to tum hasne ke liye zinda nahi rahoge"

And, when Amitabh is asked a question he would rather not answer he says "Mere yeh bataane se sone ke daam nahi gir jaayenge"
Wah! Kya lakh rupaye ki baat kahi! (The driver at office says this often, and I thought it was relevant here)

The screenplay of this film was written in 18 days btw by Salim -Javed. Not bad eh?

Also, as he becomes richer, he progresses from smoking beedis, to cigarettes, and finally to cigars. Subtlety my friends, is the key to a good film.

Though it isn't reflected in the scene where Shashi Kapoor is chasing Amitabh towards end, and ends up sprawled on the roof of the car Amitabh is driving, looking very much like a cockroach swimming in water would. That scene kills me.

Now for a few things I dont like about the film.

1. The fact that Amitabh needs a woman. He is soo much more attractive being the angry, young, too-hurt-by-life-to-care-about-romance-shomance, man who remains aloof in the face of Parveen Babi's rather fleshy thighs. I was pleased when she was throwing herself at him, and he remained cool, observant and distant. I was disappointed when they start sleeping with each other. I was devastated when emotions entered their equation.

I mean, he was just perfect as the loner. More relatable.

2. Umm...cmon, there has to be something else. Oh right, Aruna Irani in her item number + cabaret + mujrah number. She starts off okay, but in the end does this little dance step that resembles drunk men dancing in baraats. Personally, the mawaali action is quite endearing at times. But when done by a woman who is dressed as a courtesan at the end of a qawwali-ish song, its just shocking and hilarious. This may have turned into something I like in a funny way about the film btw.


I recommend the film to everyone who likes Amitabh Bachchan but by some misfortune hasn't watched Deewar yet.

And also to those who dont have any particular feelings for Amitabh Bachchan, but like filmy films. I like filmy films, but only pre 1990. If a film post 1990 is typically filmy, I am likely to shoot it down mercilessly.