I seriously cant unerstand if this is a review. Rather than reviewing the movie, the critique seems to obessesed with only one aspect of the movie, the depiction of Calcutta. He seems to dig holes out of nothing. I am sorry rediff is supporting such a biased and pathetic reviews.
I couldn't figure out the need of this counter-review!! I feel we should learn to appreciate works like "Parineeta". After all you get to watch such beautiful things once in a while! Truly a Gem.
RE:Counter review
by Raghu on Jun 13, 2005 06:26 PM
Hi, I think you miss one thing. If you have to blend with the movie or storyline it has to be a bit exaggerated otherwise one doesnt get it into same frame of thought. I accept the ending was not the good but still I think for that matter even Hollywood movies dont "EXACTLY" reproduce any novel even for that matter "GONE WITH THE WIND" since GWTW was supposed to be exactly reproduced from the same titled novel. Well what if Girin was changed to Girish and what if the story time was changed from 1913 to 1962? I think these are minor matters since if there is a good story that really expresses human emotion and feelings it can still be a good story in any period of time, even at the age of robots. Raghu
Yes, Parineeta do miss the target. When a classic is adapted, it should have resemblance to the original. For instance, to name a few blunders, 1. The age gap between Shekhar & Lolita was about 15 years or more, and Lolita & Girish (Girin was the name in the original novel)were of the same age. Hence, Saif & Sanjay should have interchanged their roles. 2. Sarat Chandra did not specify any sort of physical relationship between Lolita & Shekhar. Those scenes, also the ones with Girish & Lolita, were uncalled for. 3. The climax of the story did not have such a melodrama and there was no breaking of any wall. Moreover, Shekhar's father dies before the story ends. 4. There is too much influence of English dialect which definitely gave the feel of a modern era.
Well, there are lots. But one should remember that classics should never be changed. "Adapted" is a cliche word. Whenever a film maker presents a classic in a cinematic form, automatically he takes up the responsibility in presenting it in its near original form to any generation, who might not know about it. Pradeep Sarkar has just followed what Sanjay Bhansali did with "Devdas" & Rituparno Ghosh with "Chokher Bali".
Never been to Bengal so cannot talk about the culture but I think the movie oozes more culture than the grandeur waste of time 'Devdas'. The beauty lies in the simplicity of the movie. It may not be an awesome movie but for what's out these days it's a very good watch. The acting is good and so is the storyline - what more can you ask for?
Must u trash a movie just for the heck of it?? By no stretch of imagination is Parineeta a \\\\\\\"bad\\\\\\\" movie as your reviewer goes out of his way to prove.While counter views are valid presenting them just for the heck of it is ridiculous. I think Sumit needs to recheck his film sensibilities.
i'd tend to agree with rediff's reviews losing credibility. u guys praised Bunty aur Babli, a fully faltoo piece of idiocy aimed at vacuous teenybopper audiences. it hit me later that rediff had tied up with BAB for a promo special and hence were forced to provide a good (read excellent) rating. Biased but understandable, if one were to consider a film that clearly plays upto the gallery.
So, well, i won't trash the reviewers. i'll just say that i'll stop taking your reviews or just film reviews, in general seriously. Mediocrity in films is ruling the roost and it is sad that a thoroughly mediocre film like BAB should find praise amongst the pseudo-intellectuals likes employed at rediff.
Anything that even pretends to be serious art needs to respect time and space. 1962's Calcutta was about the food movement, horrible partition and its aftermath, people's theatre, protest songs and realistic literature, idealistic leftist dreams and huge social and economic upheavels. It was definitely not about havelis, Punjabi songs and north Indian actors and actresses trying to play cute "bongs". Unfortunately Howrah Bridge, Durga immersion, Victoria Memorial and stealing scenes and Rabindrasangeet tunes from Charulata do not quite fill the vacuum all universal Masala films are doomed to. Sarat Chandra's novel, written in 1914, was set in turn-of-the-century Calcutta. His writings, in general, were among the most authentic description of the socio-economic life of Bengali villagers and suburban Bengali middle-class milieu. Always deeply-rooted, realistic to the core and sometimes subversive, it's a travesty to force his writings to time-travel just so that the global Bollywood audience can feel comfortable with Saif's diction, Elvis, jazz night clubs, guitars and designer clothes. They don't quite work in Calcutta 1912, but were definitely the norm in 1962's Calcutta.
Is this a counterview? I see Mr. Bhattacharya saying wow to the film in a different way .... Music video is considered to be positive in hindi cinema, so are masala movies, so Munnabhai(sanjay dutt does like munnabhai but in different way) and so does he praises Saif. I never believed in reviews.. but the positive tone of the counter review indicates movie must be real good.
The film starts with a bengali wedding with ..wait a minute ..punjabi sangeet. I was kind of confused as to what kind of wedding I was supposed to be watching. Was this commercial libery? And I almost tore my hair each time each of the actors uttered the name Lolita. Why not have just called her Lalita and saved the actors the trouble of having to pronouce it the bengali way and Bengalis the trouble of having to listen to it. And Shekhar broke a wall to express defiance to his father! I am not sure what Sharat chandra would have to say about this commercial libery. What disturbs me is that people who have not read the novel will think that this is the original story now!
