09
Dec
09

Movie Review: Paa

“Rishte mein toh hum tumhaare Paa lagte hain.”

-by Devdutt Nawalkar

Film: “Paa” (2009)

Director: “R Balki”

Cast: “Amitabh Bachchan”, “Abhishek Bachchan”, “Vidya Balan”

Not feeling it.

Paa, and Amitabh Bachchan, have been receiving fellatio from all and sundry. Before I dig in with scalpel and fork, a few caveats. I recognize the escapist element that has always been present in Hindi film, and it would be foolish to expect an accurate rendition of life, even in a movie that is purportedly sincere about its subject. Hindi movies tend to get a free pass masquerading under the “sab chalta hai, boss!” and “public ko yahich mangta hai” sentiments. Unfortunately, this blunt resignation to mediocrity and everything that resides and excretes through its rank bowels is, in itself, an indictment of the sad plight of our movie industry, pervading even our so-called parallel scene, or what remains of it anyway, to such an extent that the delineation between mainstream and the quirky is virtually non-existent. Paa, of course, is unabashedly commercial but the pedant in me has a few bones to pick with it, and modern, mainstream Hindi cinema in general:

(1) Complete lack of subtlety, and a growing dissociation with reality.
(2) Overt pandering, in turns, to the maudlin and the saccharine.
(3) Ridiculously inept use of music.

“Told you to take it up the bum.”

Paa runs afoul on all counts and then some. Characters are routinely used as sounding boards for political or medicinal issues with an astounding lack of nuance. Picture this; a kid with a visible ailment is playing in the park. A nosy woman walks up to the kid’s mother and asks her what’s wrong with her child. A normal single mother, consumed with the cares of raising a disabled child, would shake off the busybody. Not in this case, though. Our mother, admittedly a practicing gynaecologist, proceeds to give the shrew a crash-course on the intricacies of genetics and inherited disorders. On another occasion, the ongoing degeneration of modern journalism is the debate at hand, and is resolved with the accused absolving himself in unbelievably scheming ways.

Of course, movies have every right to raise political issues. But drinking the kool-aid is much easier if administered with a modicum of homogeneity in the greater context. Instead, Paa chooses to hammer down its agenda with all the elegance of a rusty jackhammer, and at times reduces its characters to soundbite-spewing cutouts, showing a remarkable lack of appreciation for the audience’s intelligence and reasoning faculties.

Nitpicking on, another complaint I have is the tactless use of music. There is no need to suffuse every frame with it. Characters can talk with each other perfectly well without something or the other humming in the background. Music can play a pivotal role in raising the timbre of a scene to a crescendo, but only when used with a bit of insight. Paa obviously goes in for the boneheaded approach, which is in keeping with the general aesthetic of the movie.

Bollywood critics assemble to suck some cock

The story itself has been told before. Auro (Amitabh Bachchan) is a Progeria-afflicted, pampered twelve-year old with a scatological sense of humour, born out of wedlock, and raised by his mother Vidya (Vidya Balan), who has kept his existence a secret from his father Arun (Abhishek Bachchan), a hotshot, idealistic politician. Progeria is a disorder that essentially speeds up the ageing process, and drastically reduces the lifespan of its victims. Auro’s mother has ensured that he’s lived as normal a life as possible under the cirumstances. He goes to school, has a regular clique of friends (even a chick fawning over his every move), and is generally the apple of everyone’s eye. He meets his unsuspecting father through chance, and they gradually get to know each other. Of course it’s all too good to last, and you know how it’s supposed to end.

“Jaya…guess who I am?”

Abhishek Bachchan is adequate, saying things with a fuckall accent which I’m sure he feels is all hep and hiphoppy. Vidya Balan looks like a dream at times, and puts in a decent performance to boot (ooh sexist me!). But they’re merely props, human canvasses for the cynosure of all eyes, Bachchan Sr. himself, to record his flourishes on. How is he, you ask? Well….hey, the make-up’s great! He’s not unrecognizable or anything, and looks like a taller Mini-Me, but it’s a good job. As for his performance, well, it’s kind of underwhelming to be honest.

Blasphemy! Sacrilege! Confound me and all my patron saints! How the fuck could I?

Relax. First things first. Let’s get one thing out of the way. The sole purpose behind casting Bachchan in the lead role is for the movie to generate buzz, and also, hopefully, to fulfill some quaint, artistic itch (that, miraculously, seems to have come in the aftermath of The Curious Case of Benjamin Button).

“Hain saala…tum kya babe hai, maloom?”

Anyway, I hope he manages to put butts in the seat because his work here isn’t great shakes in my opinion. I know how a patient with Progeria interacts with his surroundings, and Bachchan comes nowhere close to filling out the mould. His shortcoming are evident in the minutiae; keep an eye out for his conversations with his bumchum Vishnu. His friend talks the way you would expect a twelve-year old to; speech slightly slurred, coherence, diction, and punctuation all a bit amiss. Amitabh, however, seems to have forgotten that sped-up ageing doesn’t imply precocious levels of maturity. Sure, he modulates his voice a bit, makes weird chimp-like noises, and does the silly jig where he looks like he’s washing his ass with one hand and rubbing his head with the other. But his speech is fully-formed, and pregnant with pause and expression in a way that would make an established thespian proud. The inability to convince that there truly is a child living inside a decrepit body is ultimately his biggest failing. But, the make up should be good enough to coast on, eh?

“Arey bhai Balki, I’m stuck.”

Not to mention, Auro seems to have a fascination for the human rump. He goes around pinching his grandmother’s butt, and relishes talking about “doing potty”. He gets off lightly because of his condition, but he spends fair time being an insufferable, spoiled brat. I felt bad hating him; it’s like stealing a blind beggar’s coins.

This is a longass movie, clocking in at 140 minutes. Frankly, it was a chore sitting through it. But I’m glad I did because now there’s one more flick I can call everyone’s bullshit on.

“Laudey loot.”

Also check out: The Best Hindi Film Ever Made


68 Responses to “Movie Review: Paa”


  1. December 9, 2009 at 11:16

    The best movie review to grace this blog!!! DEVDUTT!!!!!!!!!

    Like

  2. December 9, 2009 at 11:48

    Paa is a damn good movie.
    It’s a good story, well executed and well enacted. Why sitting through it turned out to be ‘chore’ for Devdutt is something that baffles me. Paa didn’t have a single moment of boredom in it.

    The sole purpose behind casting Bachchan in the lead role was to generate a buzz, true, but so what? What’s wrong with that? Another reason for this casting was that his company has produced this film but again so what? The fact remains that he did the role and he did it well.

    Right, the media bashing was something that maybe the film could have done without, but I didn’t think it took anything away from the story. A story within a story is a good way of establishing character traits.

    Don’t go by what Devdutt has said, me thinks that he’s just trying to be cool by blasting a movie that everyone else has applauded. And he did so by going nuts with a thesaurus.

    I don’t know who Devdutt is but I’m sure he has a brilliant sense of film-making. I probably just missed the super classics he’s made, without music in the background, of course.

    There’s nothing wrong in calling a bad movie bad, but bashing a movie because no one else is… get real, dude.

    And by the way, I’m not a big Bachchan fan. He’ll probably take away all the awards, but that’s only because of a brilliant make-up artist.

    Like

  3. 3 ashwin
    December 9, 2009 at 11:53

    I haven’t watched it yet, but very well-written review dude. P.S. Why is AB’s head shaped like a martian?

    Like

  4. December 9, 2009 at 12:01

    Hi Aditya,
    I almost had a heart attack reading the review. I had not noticed the byline and thought it was you. Was wondering why the hi-fi English. I really believe that language is a tool of communication and if one is not able to allow the readers to understand what one is saying than there is something wrong with the writer. And all the while I thought it was you and that’s when my heart almost stopped. I am really sorry. I should have known better. It just did not read like you. And Thank God for that! As far as the movie is concerned, I think I will see and decide for myself. 🙂
    Sundari

    Like

  5. 7 Poonam
    December 9, 2009 at 12:33

    I’m glad Mr.Dutt pointed out the flaws in acting because mostly people overlook the real thing and you know, just make do with a character that attracts audiences who dont care what the real thing is, which is majority of the audience ofcourse. So this flaw shouldnt really bother the producers. 🙂
    As is the case in Bollywood, medical technicality is something people never cared for anyways. So, were you surprised?

    Haven’t seen the movie so won’t say too much. I do want to watch it though.

    Oh yeah, when I saw the firt picture of Paa, I was thinking ‘E.T go home, E.T go home’. 😛
    hehe.

    Like

  6. December 9, 2009 at 13:00

    @Saurin: “Why sitting through it turned out to be ‘chore’ for Devdutt is something that baffles me.”

    I think it’s because he’s seen far better movies and would like Hindi cinema to rise above expectations once in awhile at least. I could be wrong, though.

    “The sole purpose behind casting Bachchan in the lead role was to generate a buzz, true, but so what? What’s wrong with that? Another reason for this casting was that his company has produced this film but again so what? The fact remains that he did the role and he did it well.”

    Where does Devdutt say there’s ANYTHING wrong with that? In fact, he says he hopes it helps fill up seats. Please read that part again.

    “Don’t go by what Devdutt has said, me thinks that he’s just trying to be cool by blasting a movie that everyone else has applauded. And he did so by going nuts with a thesaurus.”

    I disagree completely. It’s one thing to go against popular public opinion and entirely another to be able to back it up. For everyone’s information, Devdutt doesn’t need a thesaurus. In fact, I suspect thesaurus refers to Devdutt from time to time.

    “I don’t know who Devdutt is but I’m sure he has a brilliant sense of film-making. I probably just missed the super classics he’s made, without music in the background, of course.”

    How many super classics have self-appointed critics like you and I made? I’ve missed them all. BTW, the background score part is something a very respected director gentleman was telling Demonos and me about last night. Devdutt must be fucking psychic, because he’s said the exact same thing!

    “There’s nothing wrong in calling a bad movie bad, but bashing a movie because no one else is… get real, dude.”


    He’s not bashing it because no one else is. He’s pointed out a lot of things that EVERY OTHER CRITIC who comes along to wax cinematic is either oblivious to or unqualified to understand or too meek to write about.


    “And by the way, I’m not a big Bachchan fan. He’ll probably take away all the awards, but that’s only because of a brilliant make-up artist.”

    What your review says about Amitabh Bachchan is “The eyes, the voice, the laugh, the monkey dance, the walk, the behavioral antics… no amount of adjectives are enough to exalt Big B’s performance in Paa.”

    Are you now taking that away from him?

    @Ashwin: Nice of you to drop by…check out Devdutt’s death/black metal reviews…KILLER STUFF.

    @Sundari: We all need a change 🙂 I was so sick of the usual critics who have nothing to say or even add to what’s already there. It’s a refreshing change for me to have Devdutt’s opinions here 🙂

    @Poonam: HAHA, that’s Mr Nawalkar to all of us. Devdutt is his first name 😀

    Like

  7. December 9, 2009 at 15:00

    Hi Aditya,

    Have you seen the movie?

    Like

  8. 11 Sam
    December 9, 2009 at 15:13

    Now that’s outrageously acerbic review. It’s crap. Nothing more. Nothing Less. It’s indeed a refreshing new movie with a message about ‘Progeria’ – Still an unknown condition affecting kids with accelerated metabolism. It ultimately spells doomsday for the suffer. Either the bloke who wrote this review was stoned or that, he is downright inexplicable. It shows that, the ‘critic’ is too devoid of sensitivity of the issue projected by the movie.

    The bloke who wrote this insipid review must take a long hard look at his satire. Either he is smart alec or pretending to be. Well, understanding a movie is not about watching with a preconceived notion, that this blog seems to have been written with. I found acting top notch. Perhaps, one of the Big B’s best movies till date for his sheer audacity to go for a role reversal. He must be lauded, when he experiments and does full potential to the role and director’s vision.

    Obviously, it seems that he is averse to watching ‘Quality Cinema’ that is devoid of skin flicks and drugs. Move on. Life is about reality. Unfortunately, people have made a habit out of their escapist outlook. Face the reality. How many fellas knew about this rare genetic defect called ‘progeria’. I can emphatically say ‘Zilch’ from general audience who are not Medical professionals.

    After going through the ignominy of an atrocious review, it’s time to reflect the irate mind frame of the concerned bloke, who saw the movie with apparent loathe. It’s a blatant display of travesty behind the veil of being a kick ass critic, till to his dismay, after putting together this. I can’t figure, what stinks worst – shit or this blog! 😛

    Like

  9. 12 Sam
    December 9, 2009 at 15:15

    Now every hard hitting view / opinion has an equally stinker of an opinion. It’s always fun to rip apart someone, without caring a damn! hahaha 😛

    Like

  10. 13 Poonam
    December 9, 2009 at 15:25

    okay okay Mr.Nawalkar 🙂

    Like

  11. 14 GrandPaa
    December 9, 2009 at 16:27

    I agree with the reviewer. Nowhere does he say the film is unwatchable, he has merely brought up points which filmmakers, critics and the consumers do not pay attention to. If someone thinks it’s easy to tear apart a piece of work, you should also know it’s equally simple to exalt something and go with the tide.

    Saurin, you need to focus on writing relevant and effective stuff instead of trying to analyze how others review films. Some people just know and use words you didn’t know existed, deal with it.

    Good job, Devdutt!

    Like

  12. December 9, 2009 at 16:31

    @Aditya: I’m not a critic and I’ve never attempted to be one. I’m a reviewer, I portray things the way I see them.

    I haven’t made any classics and for that very reason I don’t pass out movie-making tips in my reviews.

    Devdutt’s review pissed me off because his critique is misguided and unfair. Paa is a good movie, and that’s that.

    Like

  13. 16 GrandPaa
    December 9, 2009 at 16:49

    Once again, the reviewer has not said Paa is a bad movie, he has only pointed out things most of you wouldn’t be able to comprehend in your dreams. Why is his critique misguided and unfair? Because he hasn’t gone off about how wonderful Abhishek Bachchan is in Paa? Or because he knows how children afflicted with progeria tend to behave and doesn’t think Amitabh Bachchan has got it right? A critic has every right to say how something could be done better. Heck, everyone does. Instead of telling him how you think he could do something better, you’re going on and on about what he’s done wrong that’s pissing you off. See the difference? Nothing wrong with passing tips every once in awhile if they’re necessary, even if they light up an otherwise dull review it’s a good thing, y’know. Beats the usual boring commentary that everyone else passes out all the time. And the review and his perspective is very interesting, sorry that some of you had to rush out to buy a thesaurus to figure it out. And that is that.

    Like

  14. 17 Tanya
    December 9, 2009 at 17:10

    i like how opinionated the writer is! and yes i haven’t seen the movie yet but i can already sense that its factually n medically a little unrealistic!

    Like

  15. December 9, 2009 at 18:26

    I got signed out and ended up posting a comment as Anonymous.

    Here’s the comment:

    Phewww…too many essays here, I’ll keep it short this time.

    1) I could’ve gatecrashed the press show and written about “Paa”, but it would’ve sounded like every other “Paa” review out there.

    2) Instead, I pestered Devdutt to write the review because I knew it’d be the most unique critical analysis on the fucking internet.

    3) I was bloody right.

    4) I bet Devdutt wasn’t watching the movie with a frown on his face waiting for something to go wrong, and I’m sure he laughed at funny parts if the movie has any. I know critics who know they’re going to trash a movie even before they’ve seen it, and Devdutt is NOT one of them.

    5) I don’t think this review is going to discourage anybody from watching “Paa”. I’ll be borrowing a pirated DVD from someone sooner or later, unless some hot chick drags me to a nearby theatre.

    6) You may not agree with Devdutt, mainly because most of you still haven’t understood what he’s getting at, because you’ll can’t get over the fact that he hasn’t gone apeshit over the film like everyone else.

    7) You’ll agree this is the most interesting review of “Paa”; it’s not pointless trashing, and the reviewer has made some deadly points in a style you’ll are not used to at all. You may not remember what Taran Adarsh or Rajeev Masand had to say about Paaaaaaaa, but you will never forget Devdutt Nawalkar’s take on it. Once again, he didn’t write it for this effect.

    8) I’m not sure I know the difference between a critic and a reviewer. Online dictionaries say they’re pretty much the same thing. Someone please explain? Or lend me the thesaurus you’ll bought this evening, HAHA.

    9) Comment more often, you stingy fucks…it doesn’t cost anything.

    10) Sitafal icecream > alcohol.

    Like

  16. December 10, 2009 at 08:57

    Yo Devdutt, here’s a comment one of my favourite people left on a Facebook link to the review:

    Zeus Unwalla: Dude, what a review, i love it.. Curious Case of Benjamin Bachchan?

    Like

  17. 22 Janak
    December 10, 2009 at 09:27

    I saw the trailer and I went..”uffff”. So, i’m not even going to bother with the film. Most of the times you just get the hint from the trailer. I’m so sick of it that i’m going to call it XXX.

    For us to understand – Bollywood is part of Indian cinema. Bollywood is purely commercial in nature. And what “consistently” sells globally is Bollywood, and not Indian cinema. Not everyone goes to the cinema to watch the film/story. They go in for the actors. And, thats why the Bachchans are there in it.

    I am confident that if this story & subject had been presented in a regional film, it will be simple, realistic, meaningful & more than everything – acceptable.

    I’ll put the same time and a little more money on a jug of beer!

    Like

    • December 10, 2009 at 10:14

      @Janak – what is so ufff about the trailer? Why get sick about it too? Bollywood is commercial in nature, I agree with that opinion. But there are off-beat moives made in bollywood. Gone are the days of pachaas-lakh’s, if you know what I mean. This movie has got the class unlike the normal bollywood genres. I also do not understand you saying if the role of Amitabh was done by someone else and in a different language would be acceptable. How can the same movie done by a different set of actors and in a regional language be more realistic and meaningful? I’m not vouching for the Bachchan’s coz there are so many movies they act in is simply trash. But not all like that. This is one such movie.

      Devdutt review is done from his view point which is fine. But others I guess is only going by the review rather than watching and deciding for himself/herself. I suggest watch it and then feel free to comment.

      Like

    • December 10, 2009 at 10:20

      “Not everyone goes to the cinema to watch the film/story. They go in for the actors. And, thats why the Bachchans are there in it.”

      That is so true, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

      I’m now ready to bet anything NOBODY would’ve given a shit about the story had the Bachchans not been in “Paa”.

      I was wrong when I told Devdutt that he might be the only one not singing praises of Blah, I mean, Paaaaaaa…

      Did some googling and found something that cracked me up: “Box Office Gods Pee On Paa”

      Most of the UK and US critics seem to be nodding in agreement with Devdutt, who, as always, proves himself to be, to quote Morbid Angel, “above the standard flock and its lies.”

      I’m just very embarrassed that the world should refer to us as “gushing Indians”.

      Like

      • December 10, 2009 at 10:32

        Why even bother to go by numbers? Its not that a movie is good only if its a box office hit.

        And as Sam put it. ‘Its always easy and fun to rip apart someone without even caring about it’ I agree with him.

        Who says you have to watch a movie before commenting on someone’s opinion? —–how do you then judge your personal opinion about the subject? You could only go by whatever the other person is saying.

        Like

      • December 10, 2009 at 10:37

        Why even go by the numbers? Does it mean that a movie is deemed good only if it is a box office hit???

        And about your comment above. How will anyone be able to give his personal opinion if he does not know about the subject in question here?

        Like

      • December 10, 2009 at 10:44

        Why post the same comment twice? Can’t you see there are ladies around?
        I was just coming to you.

        “Why even bother to go by numbers? Its not that a movie is good only if its a box office hit.”

        When did I imply that, jackass? I said it’s something that made me laugh aloud. Go back and read it a few more times.

        “And as Sam put it. ‘Its always easy and fun to rip apart someone without even caring about it’ I agree with him.”

        This has already been dealt with, but of course you twats don’t bother reading comments.

        “Who says you have to watch a movie before commenting on someone’s opinion? —–how do you then judge your personal opinion about the subject? You could only go by whatever the other person is saying.”

        You moron, can I not have an opinion on someone else’s opinion?

        You obviously think you’re very clever, I wonder where you lot come from.

        Like

      • December 10, 2009 at 10:58

        the double post was because of wordpress acting up the first time. Anyways…what does that got to do with ladies around?

        Get this straight Aditya. Just coz you call people names, you are doing something great of feel more macho…

        The verdicts part -are to people who hasn’t watched the movies.

        Good that you are very clever in swearing and think its a big deal. 🙂 happy commenting.

        Like

      • December 10, 2009 at 11:08

        “Anyways…what does that got to do with ladies around?”

        Plenty. You’ll learn when you hit puberty.

        “Get this straight Aditya. Just coz you call people names, you are doing something great of feel more macho…”

        I feel great and macho anyway. I’m just not patient with fools.

        “The verdicts part -are to people who hasn’t watched the movies.”

        I haven’t seen “Paa”, so it’s for me too, yeah?

        “Good that you are very clever in swearing and think its a big deal.”

        I’m clever at a lot of things and it’s not a big deal because I’m used to it.

        ” 🙂 happy commenting.”

        Wheee for Gandhigiri, wheeeeee.

        Like

  18. 31 Dr.Priyanka
    December 10, 2009 at 10:30

    Some people have the habit to show that they are different, but Mr. Navalkar don’t be so different that you will not be spotted at all.
    Paa is a nice film which can be watched without any hesitation if we are with our family, still dealing with sensitive issues. There is not a single moment where we can say “Kya chal raha hai?” I suggest you to go and watch it again.

    Like

  19. 34 madame bovary
    December 10, 2009 at 10:32

    Oh you juvenile delinquents! Oh you new-age hippies, the flower children of the 2000s… there is more more to life than wasting your choicest expletives on a film that you merely did not like. If you want to grab eyeballs, try doing a naked samba in the middle of a busy road at high noon… arm chair criticism is the the EASIEST way out. Give me a comp, a blog and a felicity with words… and I can change the world, yessir!

    Like

  20. December 10, 2009 at 10:42

    I NEVER ever wanna watch PAA and never want to hear good words about it. I don’t know why!

    BAA!

    Like

  21. 41 Poonam
    December 10, 2009 at 10:43

    Btw, I still don’t get why the film is named ‘Paa’. 🙂
    Sounds cool I’m sure, now that everyone is PAAing BAAing around. 😛

    Like

  22. 43 Sam
    December 10, 2009 at 11:17

    Adi, dude, i hope, my comments has gotten you more hits. And, as far as the fella who mentioned thesaurus, i don’t need to rummage through thesaurus, for finding words. They come naturally to me, Sir! That’s what bibliophile is.

    But, to extract all kind of reviews. I found the mention of ‘The Curious Case of Benjamin Button’ relevantly irrelevant. Any movie aficionado can figure that out. Someone who has been an avid movie goer with distinct taste.

    But, ignoring all the trash talk – including by me. It was done in good jest, not to ruffle the feathers for eliciting the responses.

    Today, i want to bring to light that much maligned, shameless imitation of multitude of hit flicks, lifted from Hollywood, unabashed. That makes me sick. As a creative professional, originality is a much revered quality, that is despised. A very handful few possess it, BUT, even fewer master it.

    It was a genuine effort by Balki, as he is from Advertising fraternity, i look up to him as a creative professional. He chose Big B from purely commercial point of view. But, no where in the movie, you will find Big B displaying his trademark baritone or for that matter, his charisma. It was a character of Auro that did the talking. His get up is spot on.

    Couple of days back, a news flashed on idiot box on CNN IBN about two boys from medieval town of U.P., where they showed two boys who too are suffering from ‘Progeria’. In fact, joke apart, both of them gave an impression of ‘Golum’ – a weird character from the Peter Jackson’s much critically admired, roaring hit flick, Lord of the Rings (trilogy).

    But fun apart, it was absolutely stunning seeing 12 -13 year old boys, looking like 80 year old blokes, who are waiting to be buried six feet under, or lit up the burning pyre to go up in flames, leaving behind nothing but scattered ashes!

    All in all, a good movie with a message of ‘Awareness & highlight the sufferers plight’. 🙂

    Moving on, it’s a mixed bag of emotions – sometimes fun when Auro breaks into a gig or when, he cracks a joke by calling his Grandma, ‘Big Bum’. I found that amusing, somehow. Though, it was on your face kind of humor.

    Like

    • December 10, 2009 at 11:24

      Welcome back, Sam! I was waiting for one of your expert comments 😉

      No one gets offended here, man…it’s all in good humour 🙂

      “But fun apart, it was absolutely stunning seeing 12 -13 year old boys, looking like 80 year old blokes, who are waiting to be buried six feet under, or lit up the burning pyre to go up in flames, leaving behind nothing but scattered ashes!”

      HAHAHA, you’re too funny!!!

      GOLLUM AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

      Like

    • December 10, 2009 at 12:00

      A good honest review. I also saw the movie and here is what I’ve got to say.

      The film was someting beyond expectations and turned out to be one cinematic experience which was different from anything else that has ever been seen.

      I’m just overwhelmed by this piece of work thats brought to the audience. The central character Auro played by Amitabh is exemplary. He has turned his Auro avatar into one of the most lovable characters of all time. Not once do you see the grandeur of Amithabh Bachchan. Auro captivates your heart and mind. He makes you fall in love with Auro, the 13 year old boy. His relationship with his grandma is a point to cherish. The scenes of Auro & his friends are beautifully scripted. The dialogues are witty and Auro’s one liners makes your smile. Despite the emotional tags the screenplay is not maudlin at all. While Abhishek & Vidya has done well it is worth mentioning Arundhati Nag’s portrayal of Auro’s grandmum – good performance.

      The music & background score by Ilaiyaraja is commendable, gels with the heart of the movie. The camera work by PC Sreeram is magnificently done.

      Full marks to R Balakrishnan for his work.

      Like

  23. 50 Bhavdeep
    December 10, 2009 at 12:43

    Movie to be remade in Tamil called “Apaa”…..to early to comment on it..but Benjamin Bacchan did evolve curiosity 😛

    Like

  24. 52 WolfBerry
    December 10, 2009 at 12:50

    Well said Janak.

    People who dont know how to make movies should not make one in the first place.

    The story of a kid with a genetic disorder is not a very appealing subject to make a movie on. These guys are only making a buck at the expense of kids suffering from this disorder… then they talk about Awareness, YEAH RIGHT!!.

    Just because a 70+ man looks like a 10 year old does not mean that the movie is good. Besides AB never could and probably never will be able to act (anyone seen Black?, its terrible!!). In bollywood no one plays the character; they endup acting in “their style”, which is not acting. Even if they manage to “act” its not genuine or believeable, it is always flawed. Perhaps their courage and encouragement to make shitty movies come from the ignorant masses.

    In addition to the above, its got that no good zero talent zero everything; AB junior, who probably got a part in the movie because AB sr. pulled some strings so that his son can earn some money and get out of his wife’s shadow.

    Whatever, Bollywood movies are just not worth it.

    Like

  25. December 10, 2009 at 16:27

    Who needs this review anyway….
    But still nice discussion goin on here….aditya seems to be the lone warrior …
    good job dude…
    my suggestion:-watch the movie…its not benjamin button…and yah it generates curiosity bcoz big b is in the movie…but being big b is not his fault…and unlike most of our top heroes(dunt read actors),who are wasting our and there time+our money in movies like blue,de dana dan,rab ne bana di jodi etc…he has atleast tried to be different…and yah has is good in the movie ,if not great…
    i will give it a 3.5 star….watch it…

    Like

    • 55 Flying Turtle
      December 11, 2009 at 04:42

      First of all, “Badass” is the gayest nick ever.You’re obviously a girl because no guy would have such a wannabe nickname and plus you type like a girl.Secondly, Saurin and other girls needed this review — seems like it made her day.

      The nice discussion is over, you came in too late.Aditya seems to be having the most fun enjoying stupid comments from visitors such as yourself.
      Keep your suggestions to yourself –they wont affect anything and plus you’re not saying anything new about the Big B.Bollywood has some great actors and no one is wasting your time and money because you can choose to stay home and wait for credible reviews to come out.By that I dont mean desi writers who cant tell an average movie from a masterpiece kissing the Bachchans’ butthole.

      you talk like a fat woman who hasnt got any affection in a long time…..i can tell, trust me….if you werent such a sour puss you wouldnt be pining for a hunk since forever

      You actually think you’re qualified to give anything a rating?
      What a joke!!

      and if you have any selfworth or selfrespect dont hide behind a nickname next time you feel like sounding brave

      Like

    • 56 Nishant
      December 11, 2009 at 04:44

      @Badass: who needs your comment anyway?

      Like

  26. December 11, 2009 at 10:56

    @flying turtle:-
    senti kar dia…[:P]

    Like

  27. December 12, 2009 at 06:20

    @jenny & @ flying yup…
    1st time in my life…some1 has understood me…my feelings….
    amn’t i lucky….

    Like

  28. December 15, 2009 at 10:59

    Fuck this review….
    fuck you all…
    fuck j-k flip flop…
    fuck anjana sukhani….
    fuck fanta…
    fuck …fuck….fuck….

    Like

  29. 64 gauri
    December 16, 2009 at 11:06

    paa was an awsome movie….
    who ever wrote the above movie is terribly insane…

    Like

    • December 18, 2009 at 05:31

      “who ever wrote the above movie is terribly insane…”

      Critics all over the world, you mean? I knew it. Crackpots, all of them.

      See in the pic how they’ve gathered around Amitabh.

      Like

  30. January 14, 2010 at 19:31

    dude i feel like i wrote this myself !!

    bravo bravo !!

    Like

  31. March 21, 2013 at 14:20

    Really no matter if someone doesn’t know then its up to other viewers that they will help, so here it happens.

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Member of The Internet Defense League

Follow Mehta Kya Kehta? on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Blog Stats

  • 1,117,292 hits
December 2009
M T W T F S S
« Nov   Jan »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
28293031  

%d bloggers like this: