Raajneeti

-
The Indian religious mythological tales “Ramayana” and “Mahabharata” continue to fascinate Indian filmmakers. Ramanand Sagar’s “Ramayana,” an epic TV series from the late 80’s (1987-1988), chronicled the holy tale of Ram and his battle against the evil King, Ravaana, becoming the first TV series to present the epic on a grand scale. Following the success of the “Ramayana” series, B.R. Chopra in the late 80’s (1988-1990) took on the ambitious project of creating a TV series of the biggest mythological tale in Indian history, the “Mahabharata.” The series was watched by more than half a billion people during the course of its run.

The impact of both of the series was immense on Indian culture; it immediately refreshed memories of fabled Indian characters, gods, and their stories. Undoubtedly, by the time both of the series were over, people became more aware of their traditions in relation to religion and the battles that defined India’s history. Even so, the series had a bigger influence on Bollywood. Zealous filmmakers routinely employed the characters and stories from “Mahabharata” and “Ramayana” in their films with contemporary settings and stories. This summer Bollywood presents two movies based on these mythological tales: Prakash Jha’s “Raajneeti” (“Politics”) and Mani Ratnam’s “Ravaana.” The former borrows certain thematic elements from the “Mahabharata,” whereas the later represents a modern take on “Ravaana.”

“Raajneeti” was marketed heavily as the modern “Mahabharata”; the strategy paid off and the movie became one of the biggest hits in India in 2010. The film’s success is also attributed to the presence of a talented cast in the form of Ranbhir Kapoor (“Swaariya,” “Rocket Singh”), Katrina Kaif (“Singh is King”), Nana Patekar (“Parinda,” “Salaam Bombay”), Ajay Devgan (“Raincoat”), and Manoj Bhajpai (“Satya”). The movie’s trailers also gave an impression that “Raajneeti,” though a fictional tale, has characters that resemble politicians associated with the politically affluent, the Gandhi family. Of course, this only led to censorship issues for the film later on. The movie asks questions like: Is “Raajneeti” an effective piece with the inclusion of “Mahabharata” themes? Does the presence of a star-studded cast make “Raajneeti” more entertaining and rewarding? Is “Rajneet” a satisfying take on the politics involving the Gandhi family? My initial response to the films is somewhat ambivalent.

Apart from its warfare strategy and heroes, “Mahabharata” is also renowned for its tactical execution of political ideas on a bigger scale, predominantly impacting territories and communities that resulted in the formation of new regional alliances and borderlines. The director, Prakash Jha, uses this aspect of “Mahabharata” in “Raajneeti’s” story line to represent the divide-and-conquer theory prominent in the Indian politics. Uncle Shakuni was one of the characters in “Mahabharata” who masterminded the plan to take away the kingdom from the Pandavas. His character is replicated through Brij Gopal (Nana Patekar), whose father is a Chief Minister. His sister, Bharti Rai (Nikhila Trikha), rebels against her father’s ideology and ends up having an illicit affair. Soon, Brij gives away Bharti’s illegitimate son because his presence possesses a threat to their bigger political plans.

Bharti later marries Chandra Pratap (Chetan Pandit), the younger brother of Banu Pratap, who heads a big political party. Shortly, Banu’s party loses the majority in the government and he suffers a stroke. He transfers the power to Chandra’s son, Prithviraj Pratap (Arjun Rampal), against the wishes of his own son, Veerendra Pratap (Manoj Bajpai). This creates a rift between the two families, and desperate Veerendra nominates Sooraj Kumar (Ajay Devgan) to his political party so that he can gain a clear majority. Along the way, Veerendra and Sooraj plan events that lead to full-scale violence, and Samar Pratap (Ranbir Kapoor) responds accordingly.

The movie generated a lot of controversy and prerelease buzz because its character Indu (Katrina Kaif) loosely resembles Sonia Gandhi--a key member of the ruling Congress Party in India. However, characters in “Raajneeti” are pretty hollow. Amidst all the political turbulence surrounding the characters, their motives are inarticulate and at times unconvincing. Coupled with a gangster mentality, the film is an ordinary effort with no striking uniqueness in its story line. The movie shows how political planning is done on a large scale in the realm of Indian politics, and that gangster approach is a means of achieving political success. Maybe that is the nature of Indian politics. Nonetheless, by solely focusing on the political planning process, the film discards the impact of corruption in Indian politics. It seems rather unconvincing because corruption and politics in India go hand-in-hand, which also is a hindrance to cleaning up politics and improving the overall economic prosperity.

The movie boasts the presence of notable stars, but the underdeveloped script leaves little room for them to show their skills. Nana Patekar, who has performed in a number of unconventional and psychotic roles in the past, has mellowed down in the last couple of years. As a political planner, he is hardly menacing. Similarly, Arjun Rampal is wasted in another negative role, and his character appears as a conventional villain with no complexity. His roles in “Om Shanti Om” and “Rock On” generated positive response from film critics; however, it seems lately that he has been signing for more negative roles. Finally, Katrina Kaif is passable, and her dialogue is filled with clichéd lines; her performance is monotonous and weakest of the entire lot.

Nonetheless, two performances stand out in the movie: Ranbhir Kapoor is slowly maturing as an actor. After an above-average performances in “Rocket Singh: Salesman of the Year” and “Wake up Sid,” his performance in “Raajneeti” is thoroughly convincing, and he seems comfortable in this role. Devgan’s character, even at the forefront of main events in the story, somehow takes a laid-back approach in terms of emotional intensity. In the past, his roles in “London Dreams” and “All the Best” evoked negative reactions for his over-the-top performances. In “Raajneeti” the script gives him enough liveliness that it results in a toned-down performance from him.

“Raajneeti” might throw off some viewers with its convoluted approach in laying out its characters and story. However, on closer inspection the movie, in fact, suffers due to a mundane plot; the story is ordinary and has been rehashed a couple of times now. Even while encompassing elements from the “Mahabharata,” the narrative lacks intensity and emotional content. Seeing the success of the film at the box office, the filmmakers’ gambit of marketing this product as a contemporary take on the “Mahabharata” probably worked from a financial perspective. But I will never understand how it became the blockbuster of 2010.

Final Score = 6/10


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Bad Boys (1983)

-
When I consider the list of the greatest actors alive today, Sean Penn ranks among top five actors in my list. Winner of two Academy awards in the Best Actor category (a rare occurrence) and a three-time nominee in the same category, Penn has become one of the most influential yet underrated actors of his generation. He shot to a top-rated actor with his performance in Tim Robbin’s “Dead Man Walking” (1995), later following it up with another notable performance in Woody Allen’s “Sweet and Lowdown” (1999) for which he received an Oscar nomination. There is no doubt that his earlier movies set the stage for challenging roles later in his acting career. After starting his film career in Amy Heckerling’s coming-of-age comedy “Fast Times at Ridgemont High” (1982), Penn then starred as the leading actor in a brutal prison drama, “Bad Boys” (1983). It was an unusual career choice to sign up for a non-mainstream, violent film. But looking back, his performance in “Bad Boys” reminded me of hi
Read more

2016: Obama's America

-
Image
As the 2012 Presidential race gathered steam, we saw political candidates and political pundits working overtime to acquire vital gains in votes. That is obvious given the nature of the closely-fought election. But we also had filmmakers and authors working within their respective media to produce materials that were bound to influence voters. At one point, in 2012 year alone, there were six anti-Obama books in the Amazon’s top-100 best-sellers list. To name a few books: Paul Kengor’s “The Communist,” Dinesh D’Souza’s “Obama's America: Unmaking the American Dream” and “The Roots of Obama's Rage” on which this film is based, then Mark Levin’s “Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America,” David Limbaugh's “The Great Destroyer: Barack Obama's War on the Republic,” and Edward Klein's "The Amateur." On the funny side, one has to give credit to our President; his name brings money to big publishing houses and keeps writers busy all year around. It
Read more

Django Unchained

-
Image
Ever since writer-director Quentin Tarantino shot to fame with “Reservoir Dogs” (1992) and “Pulp Fiction” (1993), fans have eagerly awaited his films. The reason Tarantino stands out from the rest is because of his talent to continuously push the boundaries of the film medium in his own distinctive way. Considering his two decades of filmmaking experience, it is not difficult to anticipate what Tarantino might have in store for his audience in his latest film, 2012’s “Django Unchained.”  From the opening shot, it is obvious Tarantino has reinvented himself yet again. This time around, he dabbles with the spaghetti-Western action flick, and the results are superb. “Django Unchained” mixes satire, comedy, action, drama, and violence with the most important of Tarantino’s filmmaking characteristics, his handiness to introduce “unexpected” elements into the narrative. Set in the pre-Civil War era, the film’s opening, warm-looking shot representing a barren mountainous
Read more