03.26.09
On Monty Python
Men who like to dress like women and appear on national television? Who talk in silly voices and walk with silly strides? Men who sing about rugged lumberjacks wearing women’s clothing? Who prance about slapping each other silly with fish? Men who can keep a straight face while mouthing the line “And now for something completely different – a man with three buttocks“? Monty Python!
To quote directly from the wiki page, Monty Python “is a group of six comedians who created Monty Python’s Flying Circus, a British television comedy sketch show … the phenomenon developed from the television series into something larger in scope and impact… The group’s influence on comedy has been compared to The Beatles’ influence on music.” Their impact has been so great that not just do they have a word in the dictionary – Pythonesque, but they are also the inspiration behind the use of spam for junk mail.
Monty Python’s brand of humour is essentially absurdist (which means a lot of bizarre situations, a lot of things which are funny because they are illogical) – the Parrot sketch is a perfect example of this – a man walks into a pet shop and tries to get a dead parrot exchanged. This does not mean they are stuffy/tedious English-gentleman-types who are masters of the understatement. Their sketches seem to have almost every dimension of humour covered – from slapstick (like the Fish slapping dance), to caustic humour (Guy de Lombaird’s castle) to innuendo (Dirty Hungarian Phrasebook or Nudge,Nudge) to parodies (Four Yorkshireman) to surreal comedy (The Dirty Fork).
Apart from those mentioned above, a list of some of their best sketches -
1. Argument Clinic – a man walks into an “argument clinic”, where he pays to argue with a trained professional.
2. Self Defense Against Fresh Fruit – This sketch involves a man dressed as a martial arts instructor telling his “students” how to defend themselves against a man armed with a banana (first you shoot him with a gun, and then EAT the banana thus disarming him).
3. The Spanish Inquisition – Three pseudo-incompetent clergy (cardinals) are unable to decide how best to make up a scary intro dialogue and are ill-equipped to torture those deemed guilty.
4. The Funniest Joke in the World – A man writes a joke so funny, it kills anyone who understands it. It is then weaponised and used in “joke warfare” in the World War.
5. The Lumberjack Song – A song about a lumberjack who isnt quite as manly as he looks.
They also wrote/acted in some films, two of which are very well known – Life of Brian and Monty Python and the Holy Grail. These two are frequently voted in the top 10 comedy films ever made, and would make my top 10 among all the films I have seen. The Holy Grail is also a good starting place for those who dont know anything about the Pythons. Be warned though – watch it for too long, and you might actually laugh your way to death.
-> Badrinath.S
P.S.: Damn the international break. Liverpool could have used the momentum. Is Alex Ferguson the only manager who time and time again doesnt talk to the official press after a loss?
P.P.S.: A pointless post, but I have spent far too much time watching/admiring the work these six men have done to not pay a tribute to it.
03.17.09
Gulaal
This post is a pseudo-review of the hindi film Gulaal.
I watch my fair share of films. But if I were to make a list of films, sort them by language and count how many of each I have seen, hindi films would be in joint fourth. English would lead the count, followed by Chinese (mostly from the erstwhile Hong Kong film industry – Jackie Chan, etc) and then Tamil. Admittedly, some of you may be tempted to compare me being asked my opinions on hindi films with asking a monkey its opinion on the Large Hadron Collider.
However, last I checked, I was no monkey and hindi films were usually dumb feel-good affairs – it was easier to “understand” a hindi film than it was to tie ones own shoelaces. Even a LOLcat would understand one – “BOY MEET GURL. PARENTS NOT LAIK. SHIT HAPPEN. HERO BE AWSUM. PARENTS AGREE. COUPLE CAN HAS MARRIAGE. HAPPY 4 EVER!!”
That appears to have changed over a fairly short period of time though. With serious cinema suddenly coming to the fore, I can finally watch hindi films without cringing. One such film is Gulaal, which I managed to catch on the big screen. With a quality backdrop, some stunning performances and hauntingly addictive music, it appears to have everything to be an outstanding film.
KayKay Menon (Dukey Bana) and Piyush Mishra (Prithvi Bana) are practically flawless in the portrayal of their respective characters. The incendiary speeches were especially well done. Abhimanyu Singh (as Rananjay) and Deepak Dobriyal (Bhati) are quite good as well. The whole film appears to have a bit too much red (obvious from the name/posters) but it just adds to the atmosphere. As mentioned before, the music score is addictive – after I got back, I simply HAD to listen to the music again.
The film does have its flaws though – mostly character development and a lack of a backstory for some of the main cast. Jesse Randhawa’s character seems particularly pointless. Additionally, the poster promises us a film on LUURVE, POWER and REVOLUSHUN. The power and revolution parts are particularly well executed but the LUURVE aspect is underwhelming. The second half of the film falls a bit flat on its face after the first half promised so much. Personally though, I felt the end was quite all right, but to each his own.
Imo, its a bloody good film which could have been better.
-> Badrinath.S
P.S.: Most images shamelessly lifted from the official website. Dont think they will mind.
P.P.S.: Two other movie reviews I have done – The Fall and Dhoom 2
P.P.P.S.: For those experiencing depression due to something they saw on TV, please call – 09 212121 141414. This is for fans of ManU only. Liverpool did the double over them this season. 
08.29.08
On Groundbreaking Cinema – The Fall – I
This is the first of two (or maybe three) posts – all basically about the movie “The Fall” directed by Tarsem. It is only on rare occasions that I have liked a movie so much, I was prompted to write a review of it. The gist of this particular series of posts is – “The Fall is the awesome-est movie I have seen for quite a while, and is hands down the bext film I have seen this year. Its not just a visually brilliant film, but has a solid script and the acting is absolute quality. It pushes the envelope in so many ways, it is unlikely something like this will ever be done again.”
Everybody has an opinion, and nowhere are opinions more varied than when it comes to films. When you come across a review of a film and the guy writes “bloody brilliant! never done before, will never be done again”, you assume he falls in one of the two categories -
1. Rabid fan of a genre or actor
2. Some “critic”
Now for an example of the former.
Look at the number of people drooling over The Dark Knight. Quite a few of them are a fan of that particular super hero and associated acts, so their bias tends to gloss over the short-comings of the movie. The film is based on an existing format (awesome hero outwits and overpowers villainous villains with his awesomeness). True, the film was made well. Some breath-taking scenes, good sound effects, solid acting, a decent script (except for the end bit), etc. However, it still goes down in history as one of the many super-hero films there are. It was spectacular yet solid. It took an existing genre and did very well with it. It didnt push the envelope, though. It did not innovate in any great way. You see the movie, have a good time, and thats it – once out of the theatre, all thoughts about the movie are out of your system.
Similarly, fans of an actor tend to watch certain movies just for the performance that particular star puts in (or sometimes, just to wacth an actress look fabulous in the film). The reason they watch a movie isnt “story sounds interesting” or “from the trailer, it looked like the kind of movie I want to watch” or “good director, good actors” , oh no! Their reason is “that star acts in the movie! awesome! i have to see it and praise it.”
Inherent biases tend to distort the final review to such an extend that the cinematography, the backdrop, progress of events, and even the script and acting are secondary to that one thing such a viewer is looking for in a movie – the actor, the character, the theme, etc.
At the other end of the spectrum, you have the “critics” who usually criticize a normal box-office hit, because its “too commercial” and it “panders to the lowest common denominator” and has “sold its soul to get a thousand more people into theaters”. This is something I myself am guilty of on occasion – “Box office hit? How? It was rubbish! Hmmph! What type of people go watch that movie?” A rant about a particular hindi movie on the previous blog url is proof of this.
Some “critics” however, are more consistent in their criticisms of such box-office hits. They like to point out to the hoi-polloi that a “popular” film is bad and a particular film (which very few saw and nobody really understands) is actually awesome.
Rest assured, despite writing that this is a bloody brilliant film, the reviewer in question (that would be me) claims to belong to neither category here. This first post is just a “what” of the series of posts. The next post will be on “why” I am putting this little-known film by a little-known director and little-known actors on such a high pedestal.
The plot of said film (classed as adventure/drama/fantasy) -
In a hospital on the outskirts of 1920s Los Angeles, an injured stuntman (Pace) begins to tell a fellow patient, a little girl with a broken arm (Untaru), a fantastical story about 5 mythical heroes. Thanks to his fractured state of mind and her vivid imagination, the line between fiction and reality starts to blur as the tale advances
A gallery of all the images in this post (plus some frames of the movie – almost like each frame has been coloured one by one)
