Guru- A Review By Kaveetaa Kaul : NAACHGAANA

Guru- A Review By Kaveetaa Kaul

April 10th, 2007

A friend, who is also a film maker, enquired of me conspiratorially, prior to the release of the film ‘Guru’ as to what were my reactions to the promos or rather what were the expectations from the film. The pre- release buzz which surrounds a film based on rather nebulous criteria, word of mouth gossip, disgruntled colleagues, envious peers, or the plain diabolic variety of ‘industrywallahs, who revel in pulling down any effort they feel threatened by either by sheer enormity of the project or sincerity in its making, is often hugely erroneous.

Since I correspond to none of the above mentioned categories, my assessment was based on plain heuristics, if I may add, home grown. I had expected a ‘CitizenKane-ish’ film, dark, serious, perhaps boring. That it was meant to be major boost vehicle for AB’s son Abhishek, was another factor which added to the sentiment that here was a film which may attempt to take on more than it can chew, and leave the viewer dull and lifeless in a zombie like state ,once the curtains fell.

Lets just say simply, I erred. It came across as a film which was remorseless in its argument, unapologetic in its message. That to me was a refreshing, invigorating departure from the usual hackneyed affair churned out in Bollywood..daring to be different. No moral fable with a pretentious message for social upliftment .

I refused to view it as a venture which was biographical . No sirree.. No Dhirubhai Ambani legions meant to be niggling you while viewing . It unsettles you, brings on dynamics not meant to be considered and before you know it, you are criticising the logistics of events, frantically connecting fictitious names with their real counterparts, when all you should be doing is surrendering your senses to a creative attempt.

One of the most unnerving tasks for any film maker, is the onset of his film, when establishing his characters with conviction and in the light they are meant to be viewed in the next three hours. Mani Ratnam scored majorly in this area. The Turkey bit, as also the early years in Gujarat (scripted by Suhasini Ratnam, one hears) were shot with a certain innocent vivaciousness and energy. Of course the newness of the actual locale was a contributory factor.

However, what rankled me was the introduction of Aishwarya , with that rather inane song number in the rain after which she quicky runs home to change and elope!! Hello..why should we swallow that! It would have been so apt had the juxtaposition of ‘departures’ been dealt with synonymously. Consider this. Abhishek is leaving from Turkey , to return to his land, to fulfill his dreams . Aishwarya is leaving her home in search of her dreams as well. Both were destined to meet on the same train a few minutes later( screen time) Juxtaposing departures, with synchronocity of aspirations.. Perfect. So why was not this available opportunity readymade in the script, not exploited? It would have given Ash a substantive entry point. I would hate to think that inclusion of a song sung on top of a rock, or behind another boulder in the rain was the raison d’etre of such a crucial decision…sigh..all they had to do was ask..me Kidding..Criticising another’s work is soo much simpler.

Barring this , the story now goes on to graph the journey of a spirited, uneducated, village boy, never a wannabe, but made up of Alexander’s grit of conquering the world, as it were, and the ups and downs of his life. Ofcourse certain situations were ‘filmi’ and too good to be true . But, alls fair if the sum total is innovatively different.

For the first time, the pair of Ash and Abhishek, so madly, badly, deeply in love otherwise, translated into an on screen chemisry which kept one rivetted. They were endearing and lovable as a couple . The song ‘aye hairathey’ lent magically to the aura of a romance which brought a smile to your face and a longing in your heart. Mani Ratnam ..vintage..most certainly.

Despite the angry protests of the ‘rationalising of unlawful activities’ kinda outburst from most critics of the film, to me it seemed hardly worth reckoning, both from a cinegoers pov and that of a citizens.. Without going off tangentially into an economic reform tirade, one can say with utmost placidity, if laws that encourage growth are promulgated with a vision to encompass masses, lawlessness would not be an option. ‘Laissez faire’ a viable option, capitalism an intended goal. I think that is what the final speech of Abhishek is meant to convey when the parallel with Mahatama Gandhis civil disobedience movement is drawn in almost sanctimonious exemplificartion, of his modus operandi.

Just a thought.. If indeed the occurrence in the 80’s when Sr. Ambani was recriminated for abuse of law, had resulted in conviction..there would have been no Reliance! So what does this speak of.. archaic laws and blinkered execution of the self same.

What stuck out as a sore thumb was the character of Vidya Balan…both in its scripting and her acting abilities. Cynically speaking it was meant to underline the humane side of ‘Guru Bhai’..the almost angelic saintly, philosophical man who is a businessman, married to his set of ethics but not without the strain of a compassionate, caring human being first, with no hint of revenge or retribution..in stark contrast to ‘Nanaji’..I suppose. But where was the need to bring on a child who suddenly grows up into someone on a wheel chair, and agrees to marry the single person on this planet who has vowed to destroy her Guru Bhai!

Abhishek Bachchan under the hawk like supervision, guidance, and Direction of Mani Ratnam, has given a performance which has been his best so far. It has at once catapulted him into a muliticrore star bracket, and placed him along the erstwhile list of the star- actors of Bollywood. Harangued by the burden of being Sr. Bachchans son must have been a daunting task. The albatross is free from his neck. He can look forward to a glorious future..personally and professionally.

Albeit with a caveat. Its no big secret that this enterprise was author backed, sharpened to perfection for showcasing his talent, with the help of a a master craftsman. Will Abhishek be successful sans these? Will he be able to sustain his credibility? Will a less talented Director mange to extricate a performance worth the mention? This remains to be seen.. .his next release will tell all!

Aishwarya Rai, despite criticism from various quarters , has remained a personal favourite. Her performance in “Hum dil de chuke sanam’ and ‘Raincoat’ had more or less amply proven her mettle. But sadly, often beauty impedes the recognition of talent. Its as if the two are mutually exclusive..If you are beautiful, you cannot be as talented..Why? ..Just… Well , that jinx has been broken presumably. She pulls off an underplayed, sincere, mature performance, with just the right tenor of mischief in the eyes and pride in the accomplishments of ‘her man’. One can almost hear the briefing by the Director here. Lets face it..every actor needs a Director to lift the perfrmance form the mundane and plastic to one which takes it to dizzy heights.

The rather stridently bold characterisation of the ‘woman behind the man’ Sujata,was brought out brilliantly. What a relief and refreshing diametrically opposite stand to not just pathetic representation in Bollywood down the years, but those regressive tele seials. Here was a woman, who preferred to be in the background, one step behind her man publicly, but make no mistake about it, she was a stough as nails. The scene when Gurubhai collapses on the floor, struck with paralysis, Sujata responded, with ‘ keep breathing, while I get an ambulance’.. No wailings, harried dramtics, though with tension writ large in her body language, she handled the situation with stoicness and adeptness, so remarkable..if not exemplary.. An Ardhangini in the truest connotation of the term, where she was a ‘fifty percent partner’ not just economically, but sharing centrestage with her husband both for the brickbats and the bouquets.

The ‘bedroom scene’ was a moment in cinema which I will never forget. Stripped of pretensions, the two in complete abandon , innocence, naivete, as if frolicked, intuitively, naturally, unaffectedly.. with an undercurrrent of passion running through. I wonder who the creator of that scene was. It difficult to script a moment of the kind..it either organically grows on the sets as a result of chemistry or in a rare second of innovation, or then is a replica of a personal experience. It culminated beautifully in the ‘jhoola sequence’.

Mani Ratnam, is one emancipated male..deserved of a tribute..in more ways than just the maker of a technically brilliant film. Anyone who attempts to break away from the shackles of stereotypes and risks presenting a woman, otherwise conventional, in a passive aggressive stance, strong, determined, non flummoxed, is worthy of being lauded. While the man behind it may have been Mani sir, yet Ashs histrionics cannot be swept aside. She underplayed the character, with just the right dose of fire in her eyes, and a stiffness in her body which spoke volumes. This is the tenor of women that embodies the truth as prevalent today or rather as ought to be the paradigm of woman hood.

Mithun Chakraborty is unrecognisable from his ‘disco dancer days’. One is compelled to recall however his advent into Bollywood. He was A Mrinal Sen protege in ‘Mrigaya’..remember that powerhouse performance? In ‘Guru’ as ‘Nanaji’, the honest to a fault editor of a Newspaper who prides himself in his veracious demeanour and upright sensibilities, he came out TOPS. Not a single scene which struck one as being artificial, contrived, or forced. He lived his character..which is truly noteworthy, considering his long hiatus from films..But then again only goes to prove ..Once an Actor, always an Actor.

The performance of Roshan Seth deserves special mention. His screen time may not have exceeeded 10 minutes. Yet, the sheer reality and authenticity of his emotion, made you believe as if it was an Honorable Judge Of The Supreme Court, whose presence awed you.. Actors like him come but once in a while. His every nuance, from the lift of an eyebrow to the hint of a smile conveyed magnificently…In humble praise..Your Honor.

Cinematography by Rajiv Menon was world class..to say the least. It lent remarkably to the tone, ambience, mood of the film, almost as if speaking a language, subtle and yet unmistakable.

Although based in Mumbai factually and scriptwise, Shooting for the film took place in Turkey and Badami, Melkote, Karnataka, as well as in Chennai and Madurai, Tamil Nadu.(wiki) and other locations except.. Mumbai. What this must have translated into budget wise is anybody’s guess. To recreate a city outside of its periphery is an astronomical extravaganza. Suffice to say that most films to day have a budget of what might have been just the CG (computer graphics), DI ( digital intermedia) cost of sets , involved in this film. Dichotomies at work even in the Film Industry are tell tale of those of India as a whole!

To surmise, Mani Ratnam, allegedly inspired, has dealt out a hand that insiduously proves that he is one of the Gurus in our industry..a man who knows fully well the worth of his wares and has honed his skill at selling it adroitly.

Rating : 4/5

There Are 39 Responses So Far. »

Comment by Sid on 10 April 2007:

NIce review - Although I feel you are giving less credit to Abhishek for his performance and more to Mani which I dont agree with. (Interestingly this is not the case with Ash in the review. mmm…)
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 10 April 2007:

Hi Sid,

“Although I feel you are giving less credit to Abhishek for his performance and more to Mani which I dont agree with.”

In fact both Abhishek and his Dad would have agreed with the contention that Mani has a role to play in making this Abhis best performance to date and have in fact spoken of it to the media. To relegate to the sidelines the guidance of a Director in an actors performance would be most unfair. Most actors blatantly confess to being ‘Directors actors’. Its true. Most times you are only as good as your Director..

This is not meant to diminish the talent of Abhishek.. but rather meant to convey that under the baton of a maestro, the finer nuances, are rhythmically, sensitively and artistically brought forth in all this potency. Which also simultaneously conveys that if the basic ‘clay’ is poor, a craftsman can do precious little. So Abhis talent was a given.. it needed a deft touch. In fact he has been a favourite albeit one who had failed to reach his zenith.. a dark horse I had often put my money on, in many a fierce argument with fellow cine lovers!

Its not as if Ash does not need the same dexterous handling..She has been appreciated in a lot more ..perhaps has been luckier in working with Bhansali and Ghosh etc.. Therfore her performances had been listed even previously, while for Abhi this so far has been his best.
Comment by Sid on 10 April 2007:

Oh yes ofcourse Mani has a big part in the performance of both. No doubt about that. But I just thought that you were giving lot more credit (lets say 95%) to mani and lot less to Abhishek (5%) but now sice you have clarified it. I take my words back. I am not the biggest fan of Abhishek but he has clearly put in a looot of effort for in the role. And I have read a lot of other articles where every one else except him have been given the credit for this movie. Which is really unfair.
Comment by Tango on 10 April 2007:

Wow , wonderul review Kaveetaa ji .

And you have said ir rt “This is not meant to diminish the talent of Abhishek.. but rather meant to convey that under the baton of a maestro, the finer nuances, are rhythmically, sensitively and artistically brought forth in all this potency. “
Comment by Sid on 10 April 2007:

Well if Tango agrees on some thing about abhishek then you must have said it right. .
No offence Tango! Just kidding. As long as you say good things about Dutt I am cool ! ha ha ha !

BTW, have not had any scoops from you all day today?? Too busy kya?
Comment by akshay shah on 11 April 2007:

Kaveetaji, *jaw drops*..what a wonderful review! Simply loved reading it, and is no doubt a reference points of sorts. I do agree with the questions you’ve raised about Abhishek, will he be able to maintain this? Has he raised the bar too high for himself? Will any less a director be able to extract a performance like GURU? To my mind this is one of the greatest performances since the new Millenium, and to my mind Mani knows too well that not many(if any) would’ve been able to pull of Gurukant Desai like Abhishek. The mere fact that the performance can be compared to Hassan(NAYAGAN) and Lal(IRUVAR) is ample proof.

As for Mani Rathnam, the man is a genius, to my mind the greatest director in a commercial sense Bollywood has today!

BTW-Saw NISHABD last night, and as suspected I thoroughly liked the movie, the movie is indeed faulted, but i’m a sucker for Varmas artistic and creative sensibilities as well as his rather twisted and demented vision at times. This IMO in many way is a superior film to SARKAR. Review up later tonight,

Thanks and keep up the great work,

A.Shah
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

And Sid,

you said; Although I feel you are giving less credit to Abhishek for his performance and more to Mani which I dont agree with. (Interestingly this is not the case with Ash in the review. mmm…)

But this is what was said by me about Ash:

“She pulls off an underplayed, sincere, mature performance, with just the right tenor of mischief in the eyes and pride in the accomplishments of ‘her man’. One can almost hear the briefing by the Director here. Lets face it..every actor needs a Director to lift the performance form the mundane and plastic to one which takes it to dizzy heights.”

There.. in black and white…sigh.. one puts in a lot of effort writing.. I wish it was read, with a lil focus, without skipping Its like preparing the Rogan Josh, marinated with original spices, herbs et all and its all over in 5 minutes..eaten, assimilated, flavors unnoticed..sigh..

Thanks a ton Tango.. you are a dear.
Comment by Tango on 11 April 2007:

LOL at Sid ” Well if Tango agrees on some thing about abhishek then you must have said it right. .
No offence Tango! Just kidding. As long as you say good things about Dutt I am cool ! ha ha ha ! ”

I like Baba since I saw Naam and there has been no change in that
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Dear Akshay,

Thanks sooo much..and thankfully you seem to have read in detail

So Abhis next movie will tell all..although this film will remain ingrained in ones psyche for-almost-ever.

And as long as you use words like ‘twisted and demented vision’, as you have done here, to explain Nishabd.. go ahead have a ball writing the review! Looking forward to it
Comment by Tango on 11 April 2007:

Thanks Kaveetaa ji “Thanks a ton Tango.. you are a dear.”

Sid ” not had any scoops from you all day today?? Too busy kya?”

No today is BO report day , though a couple of scoops may come up .
Comment by Sid on 11 April 2007:

Kaveeta, I did read the whole review and I dont comment if I dont read the whole thing. Even with the cut and paste It sounds atleast to me what I commented (Comparatively more credit to Ash then Abhi with directors involvement.)
Trust me each and every review written in this site is written with a lot of passion and commenting on stuff without reading it would be a crime in my books.
It was just my openion and thats what I said there. Dint mean to offend you or take anything away from your review. Like I said it was a nice review.
Comment by akshay shah on 11 April 2007:

Kaveeta: I appreciate knowledgable writers, so always read in detail:)

I too felt that this will be the movie ingrained in the viewers mind right after I saw YUVA, but again GURU changed that. IMO it’s too early to tell.

And yes, Twisted and demented is definetly what I call Ramus vision, and I love it!

A.Shah
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Cool Sid..its heartening to read that.

No offense taken..Relax! and Thanks for the ‘nice’ words:)

Akshay..thats sweet

you have a point there… who knows.it is too early to tell..Que sera sera..

You like twisted demented, flawed, quirky? I no like..I like ’satya, rangeela, even sarkar..but Nishabd? na na
Comment by akshay shah on 11 April 2007:

My sentiments towards this scene is exactly the same as yours

“The ‘bedroom scene’ was a moment in cinema which I will never forget. Stripped of pretensions, the two in complete abandon , innocence, naivete, as if frolicked, intuitively, naturally, unaffectedly.. with an undercurrrent of passion running through. I wonder who the creator of that scene was. It difficult to script a moment of the kind..it either organically grows on the sets as a result of chemistry or in a rare second of innovation, or then is a replica of a personal experience. It culminated beautifully in the ‘jhoola sequence”!
Comment by akshay shah on 11 April 2007:

Kaveeta: I don’t like SATYA, SARKAR, COMPANY, and RANGEELA for that matter, I thrive off those movies!! Even Ramu’s lesser works like JUNGLE, BHOOT and MAST I hold in relatively high regard, as for NISHABD, I know i’m in the minority with this one, and have no problem being so.

A.Shah
Comment by Tango on 11 April 2007:

Kaveetaa ji lol “Its like preparing the Rogan Josh, marinated with original spices, herbs et all and its all over in 5 minutes.”

I am getting hungry .

I will borrow a few recipes from you

Apart from scoops & box-office cooking is another passion !
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

akshay..”sach sach batao..’jiya jale jaan jale’? a la ‘Vijay’?

And that bedroom scene was simply brilliant..glad you saw it the same way too.
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Anytime..Tango..In all immodesty, am a great cook
Comment by jayshah on 11 April 2007:

Kaveeta, thanks for this review.

I agree with the point ‘your only as good as your director’ the majority of times. Two of Abhishek’s best performances are with Mani so its no coincidence.
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Hi Jay,

“Two of Abhishek’s best performances are with Mani so its no coincidence.”

Absolutely! A ‘good Director’ would primarily cast perfectly. Having done that, would assess his raw material for its strengths, highlight the positives, camouflage the negatives. This asks for a great amount of keenly observing and then honing accordingly. Its amply clear that Mani Ratnam has studied Abhi to the hilt!

Most dirctors are often in awe of their stars. ..announcing ‘NG’ to a take based on histrionics , does not come easy. For that the captain of the ship has to have a clear vision as to the pitch of emotion/ performance he wishes to take the scene. That is why I firmly believe that performances are ‘made’..by hard work.. they just do not ‘happen’.
Comment by jayshah on 11 April 2007:

‘Absolutely! A ‘good Director’ would primarily cast perfectly. Having done that, would assess his raw material for its strengths, highlight the positives, camouflage the negatives. This asks for a great amount of keenly observing and then honing accordingly. Its amply clear that Mani Ratnam has studied Abhi to the hilt!’

I think the perfect casting bit is a really good point. Also its pretty important for the director (and the actor) for that matter to know the limitations of the actor. Some actors can be extended beyond there limitations (like Big B or De Niro) but only a select few IMO. They are more pioneers.
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Jay, your comment really got me thinking..What are the weaknesses of AB sr. and Robert DN? Great examples of those who have as if mastered the entire gamut of possible emotions.Gosh what a feat!

AB even in a 20 sec ad like “Miss Palampur’ is maginificent! So its comedy, black comedy, tragedy, romance..he has done it all and with aplomb..as is with Robert..Raging Bull to taxi Driver.. Cape Fear to King Of Comedy to Good fellas..The mission..Falling In love..Meet the Fockers.. even The fan..The two are a University In Emoting..

Sadly just two? I think one can safely add Naseerudin Shah to the list and also Dustin Hoffman..if not Al Paccino.

In their case its not even an extending beyond their limitations..there are no limits or limitations, except ofcourse age and physicality. There is Brando.. But somehow the tractability and malleability of these two is something else..They become the character..effortlessly..without any baggage of their personas!

Whew!! So making roles fit in for the other 99.99% is no mean task

And yet some consider acting as easy! And Directing as just another profession!
Comment by jayshah on 11 April 2007:

What are the weaknesses of AB sr. and Robert DN?’

I doubt there are many. If there are they are well marshalled !

‘They become the character..effortlessly..without any baggage of their personas!’

This is probably natural ability and also a lot of hard work. I think with Raging Bull De Niro just took it took another level, he completely changed the physicality of himself, just got into the skin of the character. This guy is just my favourite actor period. In anything I have seen him in (mostly his highly regarded movies) he is just a character. He hardly brings his De Niro presence to the forr. Now after doing loads of serious roles, he is a damn funny guy aswell ! Taxi Driver is another one which is quite a ’sicko’ performance, the last few scenes and the look on his face are twisted.

Also even when they do supporting roles they tend not to be overshadowed.
Comment by akshay shah on 11 April 2007:

Kaveeta: LOL @ Jiya Jale!:-)

BTW, Great set of thoughts on Bachchan and De Niro, couldn’t agree more. But I would rank Pacino several leagues higher than Hoffman. Nasseruddin Shah is no doubt brilliant, though I would rank Om Puri on the same level as Nasseruddin.
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Yes..you are right Akshay. It should have been Al and then maybe Hoffman.. I kinda reversed it without thinking..How can one forget the whiff of ‘Scent Of a Woman or Godfather? Godly

About Om puri.. without any offense meant. He is superlatively great..But if one includes ‘charisma’ of the type that can send your heart -a-flutter, then even at this age Ab is a winner. Nasser has a peculiar endearing raw energy and charm as well.If one is assessing from the perspective of a ‘can-do-any-role-’ paradigm..then besides these, Om somehow does not fit that criteria. During his younger days, Vinod Khanna was a hot contender to AB..Now…I dont know.. have not seen ‘Risk’.
Comment by jayshah on 11 April 2007:

Not really a big fan of Om Puri. Particularly because he has a very distinctive voice
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

LOl Jay..’distinctive’ is correct.

Come to think of it, the one actor who is a personal favourite and rife with talent and unexplored potential is Victor Bannerjee. He has the most expressive eyes I have seen in an ‘old man’..Gosh hope he doesnt read this. I am sure men are vain as well and would resent being looked upon as ‘old’. but I meant it in its most complimetary connotation. His performance in ‘Joggers Park’ was an exemplification of a restrained, pained yet utterly romantic gentleman..
Comment by akshay shah on 11 April 2007:

Kaveeta: In that context, I guess Om Puri doesn’t really fit into to the descrption like Bachchan. I agree on Nasseruddins charm, and his glowing act in the recent IQBAL is another prime example of that. If you like Khanna, I reccomend RISK! Though beaware the movie is nothing more than a mere retread of other films in the genre. The link to my review below:

http://aakshayshah.blogspot.com/2007/02/akshay-shah-reviews-risk-hindi-2007.html

Jay: Om Puri’s voice is one of his biggest assets, and his delivery is simply powerful imo. BTW Jay and Kaveeta, I highly reccomend you check our Om Puri’s performances in both BOLLYWOOD CALLING, EAST IS EAST and KING OF BOLLYWOOD, put Puri in a whole new perspective for me.

Agreed on Victor Bannerjee Kaveeta, I’ve been a huge admirer of his works right from KALYUG, A PASSAGE TO INDIA, as well as his recent works in BHOOT, and MY BROTHER NIKHIL!

A.Shah
Comment by Qalandar on 11 April 2007:

Good review Kaveeta — especially liked your singling out of the scene where Guru collapses, I thought Ash’s character was very well-etched there…

Only complaint with this review is: no mention of Maddy when even Roshan Seth and Mithun get one?

kidding…
Comment by jayshah on 11 April 2007:

Akshay I’ve seen East is East and no doubt Om Puri is a really good actor. But beyond a point his distinct voice is very very noticeable. It’s a silly point from me I know, but I have the same problem with a singers. Ja Rule is a guy I liked at the beginning but he became relaly annoying for me. Macy Gray another one. Anyhow I am sounding prejudice against voices now
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Akshay, I have seen the films featuring Om Puri mentioned by you. His towering performances need no further validation.One doesnt come by actors like him, often.

Victor in ‘Bhoot’ was outstanding! Unbelievably poignant silences..truly a master at work…There was a film called ‘Doosri Dulhan’ I think..the original one made on ’surrogate motherhood, after which so many have followed, including chori chori. It starred Sharmila, Victor and Shabana..have you seen that?

Hi Qalandar..thanks.

You really are kidding about Maddy, or do I detect a niggling question that has in fact disturbed you?
Comment by satyam on 11 April 2007:

KaveetaKaul: I will echo what everyone else has said here. This is a truly wonderful review.

On the Vidya Balan character I should bring up Qalandar’s point — he suggested that Rathnam was trying to say that in post-Indepence India a progeny of Mithun’s (loosely speaking) was doomed to be a paraplegic. And Mithun is of course a good old Gandhian here.

Tangentially it’s interesting that Guru himself brings up Gandhi later on (and as you’ve pointed out). Because there is a juxtaposition of two readings of Gandhi in this sense. The more left oriented (but also more institutionalised) one of Mithun and the more rebellious, institution-defying one (and ethically more questionable though one could say the same of Gandhi in some respects) of Guru.

To put it another way Nanaji is a bit disturbing in his righteous zeal (as is Maddy in a bigger way), Guru is disturbing in his relative indifference to means to get to desired ends, what unites these two (or three) is Gandhi, as disturbing in the former scale as in the latter register.
Comment by Qalandar on 11 April 2007:

Abzee had made an interesting point on Vidya Balan’s “handicap” as well on NG, one that I found very suggestive…
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 11 April 2007:

Hi Satyam,

Thanks a ton

“I should bring up Qalandar’s point — he suggested that Rathnam was trying to say that in post-Indepence India a progeny of Mithun’s (loosely speaking) was doomed to be a paraplegic. And Mithun is of course a good old Gandhian here.”

Sorry.. but where has Qalandar written of this? In another review?

Progeny of Mithun was doomed to be a paraplegic.. Metaphorically speaking..Brilliant. Now this is what an informed audience does with a film. It lends its own reflection..sometimes even beyond a film makers horizon. Is this what Mani intended to convey?

Taking it further, the film,now, as if has taken on the identity of Gandhi.. different perspectives to varied personalities! Each contributing their unique reasoning and rationale to serve their intended goal.

So in other words..Gandhi needs to be re-mixed And Guru was on his way to achieving that…carefully accumulating and sifting through..in his ‘bania fashion’..looking after his ‘Dhando’.

One has always endeavoured to look for hidden metaphors..especially in the works of say Giuseppe Tornatore and his Cinema Paradiso.and Legend of 1900..One could write essays on the surge of emotions it evinces.
Comment by zero on 11 April 2007:

Superb review, this one, Kaveeta Kaul.

>>”It came across as a film which was remorseless in its argument, unapologetic in its message. That to me was a refreshing, invigorating departure from the usual hackneyed affair churned out in Bollywood..daring to be different. No moral fable with a pretentious message for social upliftment.”

This is such a simple point — though I’d say the film doesn’t dish out any message per se — which most of the reviewers missed in their criticism towards the film. On the contrary, they took offense to the stance Guru takes to preserve himself “mistaking” it to be an righteous/moral/ethical stance. The film is unabashedly mainstream, looks up at the “winner” as a hero, has songs thrust into the narrative thus serving as show-stoppers and all that, but this criticism against the film on a moral basis is something I disagree entirely with.

The unapologetic depiction of Guru as a man full of self-interest and lacking in any belief in any political or social ideologies, who just means business, is quite fantastic.
Any lesser filmmaker, even when not censuring him morally or ethically, would have dehumanized such a character, and bludgeoned us with ideological rigour. The deftness of the director comes into the fore in the depiction of the “personal” side of such a man — I loved the line Guru tells Aishwarya’s father when asking for her to be his bride: “Thoda bahut duniya dekh chuka hoon. Achcha, bura samajhta hoon!.” Yes, he is marrying her for the dowry, but that has got nothing to do with his relationship with her.

I’d argue against those who think he’s depicted as a torch-bearer of sorts of capitalism. He’s more Groucho Marx (”Those are my principles. If you don’t like them I have others.”) than Ayn Rand, to put forth my point in a obscure way!

I think Guru is intellectually more challenging than many of Mani Ratnam’s films.
Comment by satyam on 11 April 2007:

KaveetaKaul: When Guru released we put up a lot of stuff on the film here. I will try to direct you to some of those links shortly.
Comment by satyam on 11 April 2007:

And here are those links (I have tried to put the threads together that are somewhat connected in terms of responses; overall I would say that the exchanges on Guru form the most comprehensive ones yet on NG):

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/13/rathnam-sets-the-stage-abhishek-walks-with-giants/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/13/794/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/14/guru-on-a-3rd-viewing/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/14/goodfella-reviews-guru/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/12/qalandar-reviews-guru-hindi-2006/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/12/review-of-guru/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/14/guru-musings-on-a-third-viewing/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/13/782/

http://www.naachgaana.com/2007/01/13/782/
Comment by Rocky on 11 April 2007:

Chaliye, Iss Duniya mein Kuch to Pasand aayaa !!! Khuda ka Fazal hai !!! LOL
Comment by KaveetaaKaul on 14 April 2007:

Hi Zero,

Thanks.

There is this rather bewildering and at times regaling attitude of our audiences/critics. If its a film which has appealed to them, then if a message conveyed at the end demeans their sensibilities, they will choose to shrug it off with a defiant ..” Chill..its only a film. The maker is not a social reformist.” Then comes along ‘ Guru’, which is ‘different’ and paradigm of evaluation shifts. Questions are raised, angry and incensed critics demand ” What is Mani trying to preach? Is it okay to be dubious in your business ethics?” and some such..totally by passing all earlier claims of ‘Its a film wonly..take a chill pill”

Even if this has not been Manis best work..yet one has to concede that even so it is better than that of the stuff churned out by most makers today.

Satyam..Thanks for the links.. It took for some concentration to get through all.. reminded me of my graduation studies..Comprehensive, most certainly.. can almost combine into a thesis.

Post a Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.