Ăbzee’s musings on DRONA
Related|Filed Under
October 5th, 2008

With great power comes great responsibility. These words, uttered by Peter Parker in Sam Raimi’s Spiderman, spell out, more or less, the hubris of a superhero. Superheroes are a tricky breed, and haven’t we seen much of them of late. Hollywood is slowly coming to terms with the inherent dark gloom of the life of a superhero- a life which has all the powers that may make one envious, but also a life which is unimaginably full of challenges; beyond the call of duty, and beyond the seemingly easy line between good and evil. Those dilemmas are the easy ones, left to choice for us mere mortals. The problems of superheroes are of an existential nature.

That the quote I opened this piece with was mouthed by Peter Parker, and not Spiderman, is an indicator of the wrangle that being a superhero comes saddled with. And it is this wrangle that is absent in Drona, this week’s Bollywood offering about the supposed birth of a superhero. Only, this superhero is destined to be one. His status is ascribed, not achieved. And this is another problem with this film, which tries to play with filial subtext, handled much more effortlessly in Sarkar and Sarkar Raj.

Aditya(Abhishek Bachchan) belongs to a lineage of Dronas- warrior kings chosen by the Gods to protect the elixir of life- amrit – brought about by the churning of the ocean(sagarmanthan). This is about the only ingenuous aspect of this film, which borrows from Harry Potter, The Matrix, The Mummy, etc., etc.- falling back on one of the more interesting legend of Hindu mythology. Of course, there are demons(asuras) after this elixir, and in one of the many battles between the dronas and asuras, Aditya’s father loses his life. His mother Jayati(Jaya Bachchan) packs him off to foreign shores, lest an asura find him. Aditya grows up, oblivious to his destiny and his inherent superpowers; until a chance meeting with the magician Riz Raizada(KayKay Menon), the most recent of demons, propels Adi on a journey of discovering that which he is chosen for.

All this is fine- but where’s the wrangle? Adi seems reluctant to accept his role, not because he is overwhelmed by the role posed to him, but simply because…well, neither Goldie Behl nor the script bother to invest any thought into that. Adi meets his mother, and in a recreation of the Deewar moment of “Mujhe meri maa waapas de do”, almost proves that superheroes(or even heroes for that matter) cannot and should not be pre-ordained. Having faced his moment of weakness, Adi accepts his role as Drona. But even then, where is the ‘responsibility’ that comes with the acceptance of such a ‘role’? Part of the reason is also because in Riz, Drona has a rather tepid and feeble nemesis. Riz never seems to pose any threat to the world at large, and hence the stakes are never registered. Also, like all good superheroes and their villains(think Batman and Joker), Drona and Riz never feed off each other. It’s almost as if these two could survive in the absence of the other, and happily so. There’s nothing that binds their fates together.

Even if one were to overlook all of this, and I’m asking you to overlook a mighty lot, there’s still the problem of legacy. You feel for superheroes, because before becoming superheroes they are all like us- until fate chooses them to accept the curse of having a gift. Drona’s superhero status is ascribed, and his reluctance puts you off. It’s like a rich kid squandering his father’s money, not knowing its worth. The end credits, which has Master Veer Arya as Drona in waiting, signals to a sequel; and if Goldie thought it best to address the burden of legacy in the next film…well, he’s left it too late.

Abhishek Bachchan is the perfect casting for Drona, only because of the filial subtext that the narrative clumsily tries to address. But otherwise, this is the worst performance by Abhishek. Forever maintaining a pout, his face stoic…he looks like someone intent on not letting us in on what he’s thinking. A superhero without a mask cannot afford to use his own face as a mask to conceal his emotions. But Drona does just that.

The only two worth recommending in this film are Priyanka Chopra and Sameer Arya. Priyanka, looking wow, does justice to her part and infuses life in it. Also, unlike the other actors, she makes her Elektra-inspired Sonia believable.

If there is one person who can hold his head up high, it is Sameer Arya. Sameer’s cinematography is one of the best this year. Never resorting to flat lighting, Sameer boldly lights scenes as they are required to…using darkness and luminance to create breathtaking visuals.

There Are 24 Responses So Far. »

  1. Comment by Som on 4 October 2008:

    Nice set of thoughts Abzee!! Would like to hear your thoughts on “Rock On”, “Wednesday” and “Welcome To Sajjanpur” if you have seen them.

  2. Comment by ăbzee on 4 October 2008:

    Hey Som. Been very very busy. I’d actually gone to see Sajjanpur with my folks, but the show was cancelled since we were the only 3! Rules require that a minimum attendance of 5 be there for a multiplex to scree a film. Haven’t seen Rock On or Wednesday.

    I’m really glad for Shahana Goswami. The gal always deserved to go places, and she’s finally on her way. Oh that skin!

  3. Comment by Som on 4 October 2008:

    Yes Abzee,this girl Shahana Goswami has tremendous talent,she was effortless in Rock On.

  4. Comment by rudresh on 4 October 2008:

    excellent review abzee. right on spot.

  5. Comment by jayshah on 4 October 2008:

    Great to see you back here abzee and excellent review too…

  6. Comment by Som on 4 October 2008:

    TheSkeptic: Abzee’s review is the first from NG-ers to bother to mention the imagery and in my opinion serves as a corrective to Satyam’s and Saket’s unrelievedly negative takes on the film. Just from the trailers, it’s evident that however profoundly Goldie and Abhi may have goofed up, they have delivered some of the most iconic framings for the Bachchan physicality in a long time. It’s a pity that the rest of the film failed to fulfill the promise of those images, and indeed the promise of the Drona comicbook, but anyone wholly oblivious to such imagery is not giving us the whole picture.

  7. Comment by Tango on 4 October 2008:

    Thanks Abzee for your wonderful thoughts as ever. Please come to NG more often because life is very short :!:

  8. Comment by Tango on 4 October 2008:

    Som - “Yes Abzee,this girl Shahana Goswami has tremendous talent,she was effortless in Rock On.’

    Well, you are the first person (apart from Shahana’s PR) who has mentioned and praised her for Rock On!! By and large its Prachi Desai who has walked off with all the accolades.

  9. Comment by goodfella on 4 October 2008:

    Rangan’s review is up. Characteristically more thoughtful than most: http://www.desipundit.com/baradwajrangan/2008/10/04/review-drona-kidnap/

  10. Comment by ăbzee on 4 October 2008:

    JayShah, Rudresh- Thanks!

    Tango- Life is short, I know. Which is why I’m spending these days being in love, doing what I love!

    TheSkeptic- Thanks mate. But this is no review. These are merely observations at the top of my head. I wish I could do a proper review on the lines of a Rangan(I’m not suggesting that I can match his brilliance). Anyway, Drona was a visual treat alright and nobody in their right mind can deny that. Some of the images and icons are still with me. Wish the movie were upto the levels of the cinematography.

  11. Comment by ăbzee on 4 October 2008:

    Rangan’s review is a good one, but I don’t agree with him. I cannot praise a film just because it was trying to do something…in this case, recreate the Bachchan coda operating in a mythical world. The film must also succeed at what it is trying to do. Drona has very little going for it. Most of the time, the film keeps tripping over itself.

  12. Comment by ăbzee on 4 October 2008:

    “a sequence with the villain and his clone is counterpointed with one where the hero faces a ghostly doppelganger. (Pop psychology students could tie themselves up for years deconstructing these moments.)”

    I hardly think this is rich enough to merit a psychological analysis.

    I am nevertheless glad that Rangan continues to represent all that is good about film criticism. He hasn’t dismissed the film as most seem eager to do. I wish he’d extended the same tretment to Mumbai Meri Jaan, which I felt he’d unfairly criticized.

  13. Comment by satyam on 4 October 2008:

    Great stuff here Abzee. The only moment I liked in the film (now that you bring up the doppelganger point) is the one where Abhishek has to swim through the water and rescue a ghostly self to get to the sword. The tone here and also the liquid visuals of his nightmare are what the entire film should have been like.

    On the visuals overall I must confess I didn’t like them as much as you did though I could concede the lighting point in some respects.

    On theskeptic’s point about framing Abhishek I disagree profoundly. I think Abhishek was generally rather poorly framed in the film.

  14. Comment by satyam on 4 October 2008:

    Thanks for that Rangan review Goodfella. A pleasure to read him as always.

    I must say that nothing really worked in the film for me barring the first 25 minutes or so where I felt the tone of the film was more right than wrong.

    The biggest problem leaving aside all else is that the thrill, the danger, the ‘hauntings’ and ultimately the catharsis that the mythic always implies as a mode is completely missing here.

    Finally I think that some of the visuals certainly display a certain elan on the part of the director but again the edits often leave much to be desired. Even otherwise the director does not make many of these moments ‘count’ the way he should have.

  15. Comment by rks on 4 October 2008:

    “Rules require that a minimum attendance of 5 be there for a multiplex to scree a film.”

    If physical presence of two more people were not required, could have bought cheapest two tickets :)

    “Life is short, I know.”
    Very true. May I add unpredicatable.

  16. Comment by rks on 4 October 2008:

    4 Oct 08, 13:48
    TheSkeptic: Satyam demurs when I hail some of the shot-making around Abhi in Drona. Allow me to rebut in turn in the approved post-critical manner - you know, with actual bits and pieces of cinema. What is going on, what does the receptive viewer feel at 2:24 and 2:42 mins into this trailer: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EST2s1A4FwQ Do these poses and framings not match in iconic quality anything from this genre of cinema that we have seen worldwide? From The Matrix’s billowing coats to TDK’s rippling capes to Yimou’s flowing color-coordinated ensembles? And do so in a way that’s plausibly “Indian?

    4 Oct 08, 13:52
    TheSkeptic: Without flailing attempts to equal in prose the emotiona/intellectual/sensory - in short cinematic - effects of these shots, with as little verbal artifice as possible I will state that they suggest possibilities for a fresh-minted homegrown mythos that it appears Goldie sadly was not equal to. And so another dream ends.

  17. Comment by satyam on 4 October 2008:

    Theskeptic: To be honest there are more than a few moments that I could (despite my ire at the film!) point out that are visually quite interesting. The best one I’ve just mentioned. Abhishek dives into the water, it’s truly dark and somewhat scary inside, rescues his ghostly self, gets out on the other side, pulls out the sword and the whole tree lights up. Now this for me is an example of a moment that ‘counts’. The rest of the visuals even when impressive don’t really have the right impact for one reason or another. In one sense Drona is a ‘desert’ epic with lots of space and ‘blankness’. This wasn’t a bad idea. Because in this space Raizada and his magic often appear out of nowhere. The idea works, the execution often doesn’t.

    And this gets me to a point of disagreement we often have. I think that either the visuals must be so extraordinary where any other pitfalls the film might have do no matter or at least one can excuse them. A film like the Fall (you’ve so often talked about Tarsem yourself) falls in this category. Personally I didn’t have problems of ‘narration’ here but I can see why some would. Even for those in the latter group I would like to think that visual artistry can carry the film. But Drona does not fall into that category. And one of the reasons why I am so incredibly irritated with this effort is precisely because there was a lot of stuff it had going for it. Again I didn’t mention this earlier but the graphic novel artwork that is often used to relate the ‘pre-history’ is done very well. The mood of this art, the visual tone of that Abhishek underwater (and similar nightmare) scene is what the film should have been about.

    I think that with the visuals on display what one can safely say is that in the technical department it’s miles ahead of a Krrish. It is perhaps even the film one revisits more often on DVD where one has the luxury of just picking out moments and one has also got over one’s initial annoyance. All of this I concede. But I cannot grant the film more than this.

    I would readily concede that I’d rather have the right visual grammar in a film if I had to choose among all the modes of a film’s ‘narrativity’. However depending on what sort of film it is the rest is crucial too. Drona fails spectacularly as an ‘epic’ or as a ‘myth’. Think of it this way — what if Homer wrote a few good lines in his Iliad but the overall epic turned out to be quite insipid? Or another example from cinema — Godard’s Breathless is justly a cinematic hallmark of technique. However given the kind of film it is it also needs to be an interesting yarn, perhaps a good semi-noir, and so forth. Godard does this. When he however gets to Contempt he has another masterpiece of technique but here one does not expect or demand the ‘Breathless’ kind of narrative. It is a question of how the director has set up the film. It is true that many works are not appreciated when they’re made. As you know I am myself hardly shy in calling works good or important even if I’m the only one saying so. The recent UJ is a good example. However Drona at least for this viewer did not fall into that category. While I might have overstated the ‘lack’ I felt with this film there was certainly nothing here that ‘redeemed’ the film for me. Now having said all of this if I could I wouldn’t mind just sitting through some moments in the film’s second half just to revisit some visual cues.

    On another note the background score was also by and large very disappointing though with a few important exceptions.

  18. Comment by sandy on 5 October 2008:

    ” A superhero without a mask cannot afford to use his own face as a mask to conceal his emotions. But Drona does just that.
    ”

    Abzee: This above comment and the Deewar reference in your review are just excellent!

  19. Comment by nithi_s on 5 October 2008:

    Someone please explain to me what is ‘Bachchan physicality’ and how is it related to plausible cinema???

  20. Comment by Rocky on 7 October 2008:

    Abzee- I wish he’d extended the same tretment to Mumbai Meri Jaan, which I felt he’d unfairly criticized.

    Rangan’s response to a similar query from his blog-

    Sid: I’m kinda along the same lines. I wouldn’t watch it again in a hurry, but while I was in the hall, it kept me engaged, and that’s more than you can say for most films these days. That was more or less the sense I was going for in the review, but judging by the reactions, I’m not sure it came through.
    I was trying to figure out why people thought I gave Rock On and CDI and TZP a “thumbs down” (when in actuality, I quite enjoyed these films overall) while giving Drona a “rave” (when I didn’t quite like it ALL that much). I think it may be because other reviews lean more strongly towards “it sucks” or “it rocks” categorisations, whereas mine tend to merely go over the pluses and minuses without a strong opinion about “viewability” or “worthiness.”

  21. Comment by jayshah on 7 October 2008:

    “I think it may be because other reviews lean more strongly towards “it sucks” or “it rocks” categorisations, whereas mine tend to merely go over the pluses and minuses without a strong opinion about “viewability” or “worthiness.””

    Spot on. And hence why some get easily confused into thinking the Drona review was “so positive” and the CDI “so negative” and draw all kinds of assumptions and insinuations are thrown - bias this, bias that. Kind of unfortunate.

  22. Comment by goodfella on 7 October 2008:

    Rangan’s writings, like those of most great reviewers, don’t feel like mere summaries but, instead, genuine responses to what he sees. For me, that’s the difference between him and the rest, aside from his superior writing skill and terrific wit. With most reviewers you get an opinion, with the great ones you get another side of an ongoing discussion.

  23. Comment by Qalandar on 7 October 2008:

    Well said goodfella: truer words on Rangan can hardly have been spoken.

    Abzee: one is almost glad for Drona being a suckfest if it means seeing one of your reviews (though we might have a certain strike to thank)…

    Aside: I was reminded of the Phantom when I read your review as the “original” hero who is “born”/destined to the task…

  24. Comment by rudresh on 7 October 2008:

    Happy Ram Navmi .

    Every one knows and says that Ram was great person and Ravan was an evil, But Ravan has some good qualites also so if I had to write essay on them I have to mention it clearly to others that “See in totality Ravan was an evil but i am focusing on good qualities only and vice versa Ram is great but i am just focusing on bad ones”. If I donot mention then it will not be readers fault but mine.
    Or else I has to mention that I am effected by syndrome to look different and unique from rest.

Post a Response

You must be logged in to post a comment.