It is currently Mon Nov 17, 2025 3:27 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 5:50 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jan 07, 2003 6:44 pm
Posts: 205
Location: Rolla, MO, USA
Yesterday I watched this movie and I found it to be too good and I strongly support indiafm's rating of 4/5. it deserves that. the best part of the movie is it makes you feel good though it somewhat drags at the end. but has its full quota of masti,humour and songs too are ok(except pretty women) its too loud. As far as the performance is concerned S.A khan has the one of his best performance with good timming of commedy. pretty is preity and good in acting. I think SRK should stop his usual type of acting and show us something different.
Atlast I will say that the director tried to make an out and out commercial movie and he is to a large extent successful in that.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 6:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2001 5:31 am
Posts: 397
Location: C A N A D A
Kabir wrote:
Apparently someone at NYT has taste. They've given the thumbs down to KHNH with this fantastic review that points out whats really wrong with the film :

By MEGAN LEHMANN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(snip)



.

The two leads have strong singing voices, but they're not helped by songs with titles like "It's Time to Disco."


KAL HO NAA HO

I have to discard this review because of the last line: "The two leads have strong singing voices." It's obvious she's never seen a Bollywood movie before. Overacting, lack of subtlety....yeah this sounds like a typical Bollywood movie. It's a Karan Johar film. People expect fluff and melodrama from him, and he delivers in spades. It's manipulative but it works. I'll admit, I shed a tears during KKHH and K3G...these movies were guilty pleasures. I don't expect these movies to join my Criterion library, but they I found them entertaining in their context. I'm sick of Western reviewers slamming Bollywood films for the reasons outlined in this review. They just don't get it....Bollywood is all about escapism. Granted a trickle of 'quality' movies are coming out of India, but are limited to the multiplexes of urban centres. As long as India is a dirt poor country with a low literacy rate, expect more of the same.

On a tangent, I was watching 'Mard' on DVD last night and I was laughing at some of the scenes at how bad they were. Camp? Absolutely, but I guess it worked at the time (1985). Unfortunately, Manmohan Desai's luck ran out with the 'lost and found' formula with duds like Toofan and Ganga Jamuna Saraswati. Today's Bollywood productions are all about gloss but short on substance, spending obscene amounts of money on star contracts and production values, but spending a pittance on the script.....the days of author backed roles is long gone, which is indeed a shame.

-Bh


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 6:16 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 10:26 pm
Posts: 198
I went to NY this week and saw the movie. First of all I think Indian escapist commercial cinema should be separated from the more emerging western-styled type. These are definitely two different genres that at times seem to be merging together, especially with KHNH. The problem is that the reviewers are judging by just one mind set, either commercial or western.

I personally loved the movie as a commercial flick and enjoyed it with both friends and family. As repeated as the following statement is, it's a movie everyone could actually enjoy. Although my opinion may be biased because I love NYC, I liked it from start to finish. There were minor flaws that could be overlooked, but overall the movie was directed very well. It made NYC look good and had a few characters we could all relate to especially Rohit and Naina. The jokes weren't all corny compared to Karan Johar's previous efforts. This was miles better than K3G in terms of entertainment. Overall, I agree with the previous statement made in this forum about thinking of the movie as escapist entertainment. In that respect especially as a bollywood movie, it takes the cake.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2003 8:53 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 8:14 pm
Posts: 1086
I found the film disappointing. Same old story line and
love triangle, version 2.135. Yawn. Where is the innovation?
Gay jokes? New York? Digital image manipulation during the
credits? Want to see a film where a stranger changes
things for the better? Watch "Bawarchi" instead. Much better
film.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 01, 2003 9:57 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 11:01 pm
Posts: 2070
Location: Toronto, Canada
Saw Kal Ho Naa Ho earlier today, and I feel initially ambiguous as to what to say about this film, but after having thought about the films overall investiture, I'm left to reason that the film wasn't worth it's calculated hype. Why? For starters, It's melodrama is cliched. It mostly falls into the hole of creating a formulated production for the masses. It was inconsistently written, inferior subconscious character development; the film's voice-overs wasn't effectively used. I didn't feel for any of the character's emotional longing in the film, there highly drived by non-stop crying, and just a spheroid of continous yapping about who loves who? And the inside film jokes did nothing for the film either, most people laughed at them, I however did not, they meant nothing. I thought the Nsync dubbing was poorly used, at parts, I noticed the dubbing was interchanging from the foreground to the background, and was this film really presented in DTS sound(as promoted)? Because; either the cinema hall I saw the film, is ineffectively equipped to its DTS presentation, or I just didn't feel its impact on me. Non of the performances weren't anything to note about; the core character Shah Rukh Khan (Aman Mathur) was illogically sketched. He enter's the film (as mostly usual with him) as the bigger than life person, thus our predictable 'hero' of the film, and supposidly the angel sent by God to resolve the conflicts of a selected group of people's lives. He appear's out of nowhere into people's irrelavent conflicting issues to the subtext(if there is one) to the film. He illuminate's situations within seconds or days, but where is the actual human entity in this? His character is written as such that, he's the guy with all the answers, believe him, and there's no room for critical analysis here. I didn't buy his self-rightous attitude. I didn't care for him dying. Shah Rukh Khan wasn't alone, Preity Zinta's character pretty much failed in the same department, her crying scenes were just down right unbearable to watch. Saif Ali Khan was just about tolerable, but this isn't saying much. The only character I truly got a kick out of was that of Rajpal Yadav's video piracy master. All of his scenes, not many, but for what it was, was a delight to watch, it's too bad, Karan Johar didn't extent his character in the film as a stronger supporting cast member, I could have liked the film more. Having said all this, at parts, I didn't think the film was all that bad, it's interesting editing and jump-cut scenes gave the film a distinctive feel (even for a Bollywood film), it's NY locations looked beautiful, I particularly liked the very last scene of the film, it was some-what of a nice ending. The film's few here & there "gay" jokes were funny, I laughed. But that's about it clan, beyond this, I didn't think too much of Kal Ho Naa Ho.

And by the way, the film measurably tries to pass parts of downtown Toronto as New York City. How shamefull of Bollywood?

[color=red]Rating: **1/2 (out of 5)


Image[/color]



Edited By DVD Collector on 1070273160


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:16 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 1:14 pm
Posts: 2256
Location: National Capital Region (India)
Saw the movie last night and found it to be quite entertaining overall. To me it seems the film was very good in the parts that seem to be to the credit of the director, and quite stale and boring in the parts that were so obviously Karan Johar's doing. Also the film has been dragged way beyond neccesary and the film could have and probably should have ended atleast 30 - 45 minutes sooner.


*SPOILER ALERT*


Someone needs to tell Karan Johar that all those special two second appearances from ...... is just boring and stale.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 7:26 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 11:01 pm
Posts: 2070
Location: Toronto, Canada
Sanjay wrote:
To me it seems the film was very good in the parts that seem to be to the credit of the director, and quite stale and boring in the parts that were so obviously Karan Johar's doing.

Coincidentally, this was one of my biggest beefs with Kal Ho Naa Ho, at parts, it was a refreshing experience, but it kept on drifting towards the same old melodrama, candy-floss Bollywood films are known for.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 1:38 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2002 3:20 pm
Posts: 886
mhafner wrote:
Want to see a film where a stranger changes
things for the better? Watch "Bawarchi" instead. Much better
film.

Well said....indeed there was nothing new here......the cliched plot of the sick one sacrificing all for his loved one....at least ANAND did not get lost in unnecessary love angles.....Anand Saigal was dying and he was smart enough to be focussed with his little time on the earth.....yet credit must be given for the dialogues were by and large pretty nice (niranjan iyengar)....some reviewer out there said KHNH takes off where 'Dil Chahta Hai' left off....I think that reviewer needs to get his head checked......the biggest difference being DCH had the talented Aamir Khan essaying his role with absolute ease and relish whereas KHNH has Shahrukh bumbling through his, relying heavily on his dimples instead of an absent talent.....


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 1:58 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2001 3:26 pm
Posts: 2253
Location: Birmingham
Sanjay wrote:
*SPOILER ALERT*


Someone needs to tell Karan Johar that all those special two second appearances from ...... is just boring and stale.

That isn't a spoiler - you should read Taran Adarsh's review for a spoiler!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:21 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 5:53 pm
Posts: 14989
In DCH, at no time, AAMIR made u believe that he is not 25 years old..

SRK..25 years!!? :sus: :nopity: :hmm:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:46 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 5:53 pm
Posts: 14989
What went wrong with KHNH?

Aseem Chhabra | December 01, 2003 19:47 IST


The crowds last Thursday evening at the Loewes State Theatre were uncontrollable.

Men, woman, grandmothers, grandfathers and lots of little children, all gathered in the heart of Manhattan's Times Square to catch the first day show of the latest tearjerker/entertainer offering of what has become a ritual from the Karan Johar factory, Kal Ho Naa Ho.

When ushers started checking the tickets the long line merged together, people at the back began to push ahead and all hell was let loose. People rushed past the helpless ushers, breaking barriers, down the stairs, straight into the theatre.

When all the seats were filled up, there were still 20-odd people standing. Which would mean two things: the theatre had oversold tickets (most unlikely) or some people had managed to get in without buying tickets.





So the theatre management went by each seat checking every patron's ticket. The 6 pm show did not start until way after 7 pm. When the movie finished three hours later, at 10 pm -- without an intermission -- there was another mad rush of people for the next show waiting upstairs. That show had also been sold out.

By the look of the enthusiasm among New Yorkers for KHNH, two things are clear: most Indians do not eat the traditional turkey meal on Thanksgiving Day (KHNH opened in the US a day earlier so the release could coincide with the Thanksgiving holiday).

Also I can safely predict that the film will become the biggest Bollywood hit of the year in the US, which mostly saw one movie after another being thrown by the wayside.

Two years ago when Johar's Kabhi Khushi Kabhie Gham became a monstrous hit in the US and UK, Sagarika Ghose, an Indian journalist wrote in the Indian Express that most NRIs are living in a world of their own, with no clue about how far India has progressed.

She added Bollywood was 'bound in chains to the dictates of the overseas audiences [the NRIs],' in whose 'cultural imagination, India must remain a vast stretch of villages, fakirs, sadhus and cool spirituality.'

Ghose's conclusion damned all those who have left India and settled in the far reaches of the globe: 'Indian culture itself stands in danger of being colonised by NRIs, precisely because of their power and success.'

Ghose's analysis annoyed me. Blame Indians who live abroad for the weepy, overtly sentimental, and socially retrogressive work that Bollywood dream-makers continue to churn out, with hopes of recouping their expenses and profits abroad.

And one more thing. Ghose refers to us -- people of Indian origin living abroad as NRIs -- a term coined in India to define the rich successful Indians in the UK and the US, with the hope they would reinvest their foreign-earned wealth in India.

In reality we are part of the Indian Diaspora, creating our own Indian identity outside India. We are cab drivers, restaurant workers, teachers, Silicon Valley moguls, writers, filmmakers, doctors, lawyers, community activists, gays and lesbians, and battered women, living our own lives in adopted lands.

Only few of us have plans of returning back home.

There is a big difference between the two expressions: NRIs and those living in the Indian Diaspora. It is an issue of the state of mind, but Ghose does not seem to get it.

The looming box-office bonanza for the makers of KHNH, especially from the overseas markets, will no doubt create further attacks from a small group of intelligentsia in India.

Those idiotic NRIs only think India is a land of Gita-thumping mothers, the articles will possibly suggest, even though to be slightly original, Johar and his director Nikhil Advani have come up with one Guru Granth Sahib-thumping grandmother and a Bible-thumping mother.

Give those NRIs images of New York City and/or a Jana Gana Mana singing child and they will arrive in droves and spend their hard-earned dollars at the box-office, which will eventually be repatriated to India.

Meanwhile, the poor Indians are starving for good culture, never mind the higher aesthetic quality and artistic beauty of the countless saas-bahu soap operas that clutter the landscape of Indian television!

There is a lot good with KHNH. With sharp editing, split-screen images and a quick paced screenplay, at least in the first third of the movie, technically the movie is far superior to what Bollywood has produced in several years.

Some of the songs are a treat to watch as are the actors. And New York City has never looked more beautiful.

But the film is mostly flawed. First, the issue of logistics: Why would a woman (Preity Zinta's character) who lives in Queens go jogging all the way to Central Park (unless she is preparing for the New York City marathon)? And if she tells her mother (played by Jaya Bachchan) that she has gone to Central Park, what was she doing also jogging in downtown Manhattan, around the Tribeca area and South Street Seaport? Where does she go in the ferry -- from Queens to where?

If this woman lives in Queens, how come each time she is unhappy, she turns up under the Brooklyn Bridge to look over the vast expanse of downtown Manhattan? How does her mother (who also lives in Queens) suddenly walk up to the Brooklyn Bridge to find her daughter, considering there are way too many subway and bus lines to connect the two points.

And if her mother runs a neighbourhood diner, how come that establishment is located near Duane and Reade streets, again in the Tribeca neighbourhood?

The crime of mixing New York City's boroughs is a bad crime to be committed by Johar, Advani and company.

KHNH commits other crimes too. Johar has talked about spending a long time in New York observing how people move around and walk in the city. He captures a certain pace of the life, people picking up coffee at Starbucks, eating at fine restaurants and rushing to work (although I have never seen a desi singing songs in Central Park and on the Brooklyn Bridge).

But Johar and Advani's observation of Indians in New York and their mindset remains superficial, at best. There is no deeper understanding of what motivates these people or what drives them each day.

Instead, the filmmakers have carefully captured Bollywood's one-dimensional characters and placed them in New York City.

Most characters in the movie, especially the supporting cast, remain caricatures. From the bhajan singing friends of the grandmother, to the boy-hungry, overweight neighbourhood Indian girl and her over-the top sex-starved sister, to the desi deejay, who speaks with the most peculiar accent and the video-pirate-turned-potential-suitor.

The inner homes, the bedrooms and the living rooms in the film (other than Saif Ali Khan's upscale trendy apartment with a balcony overlooking the East River), whether in Queens or the suburbs of Connecticut, reek of Bollywoodised lives of the middle and the upper classes.

Then there are political and social problems with the film. There are countless jokes against homosexuals, which worked real well with the audience. That Bollywood has started to accept the existence of homosexuality is a move forward, but the mindless jokes take the issue several steps back right into the closet.

Then there is a more serious issue: a subplot about an adopted girl (subjected to the most crass and hurtful abuses from her Punjabi grandmother), is resolved only when it is revealed that she is the illegitimate child of the man of the household.

What are Johar and Advani saying here? It is okay to adopt children if there is a family blood link, but not okay otherwise?

Very few seemed concerned about these and other issues that bothered me.

Ghose and her supporters will surely say that the NRIs are culturally and intellectually inferior to accept this form of mindless and retrogressive work. But who is to blame for the failure of Bollywood to produce good quality, entertaining and reality based cinema? Indians living abroad, who these days rarely step into movie theatres to see new films from India (unless it is a big production like Lagaan, K3G, Devdas or Kaante) or filmmakers themselves who seem incapable of taking the risk and straying away from the time-and-again proven formula for success?

So here is a message to Johar, Advani, and the Chopras of Bollywood: give us decent entertainment, but do not take us for granted.

Remember what happened to Subhash Ghai when he openly announced that his movies were meant for Indians living in the Diaspora? His preachy, over-the-top and often ridiculous Yaadein had a strong opening, but the movie collapsed in the following week.

Now, it is a painful distant memory.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 02, 2003 5:48 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2001 5:53 pm
Posts: 14989
KHNH: a heady cocktail

Arnab Ray | November 29, 2003 13:53 IST


Punch line:

Another heady emotional cocktail served up by the Karan Johar group: new millennium snazzily dressed Anand or Aman (Shah Rukh Khan) trying to teach the lessons of 'live, laugh, love' to a curvier, sexier Babumoshai, Naina (Preity Zinta).

Story:

Naina Kapur is one of those pretty American desi girls who walk past you on the New York subway and dont give you a second glance even though you keep looking. In her case, it is because she has the weight of the world on her shoulders: the burden of looking after a dysfunctional family you rarely get to see in a Karan Johar candy-floss lovey-dovey world.

Sushma Seth is the Punjabi mother-in-law who blames bahu Jennifer (Jaya Bachchan) for her son's suicide and hates their adopted daughter, leading to a continous battle of attrition inside the household. Between trying to mediate between grandma and mother, looking after her physically challenged brother and adopted sister, coming to terms with her father's suicide and trying to financially suport their sinking restaurant business, Naina has been transformed into a cold, frumpy woman who looks and feels far older than her years.

The only ray of sunshine in her life is her friend Rohit (Saif Ali Khan), an unsuccessful Casanova and golden-hearted loser, who is also her classmate in the evening MBA course at New York University.

Enter into this world Aman, bubbling with life, who charms everyone in sight, touches people's lives, unites Naina's family, rescues their restaurant and after the traditional takkar with the heroine wins over her heart.

Time is scarce and this sets the stage for the predictable tragic end as he seeks to bring back the joy of being into Naina's life as his own life seeps out of him.

Paisa vasool:

Karan Johar deviates from his rose-tinted view of the Indian family and looks at a real expatriate family and their problems in a refreshing way.

The heated exchanges between Jennifer (Jaya Bachchan) and her mother-in-law (Sushma Seth) crackles with raw, understated but palpable hatred, a change from the cartoonish sparring we are used to between the saas and bahu in Hindi movies.

The movie has some marvellous comedic moments. Nothing forced, but comedy that flows with the plot and character development.

These moments, which elevate this movie above mere run-of-the-mill, are due to the performance of Saif Ali Khan as Rohit, whose performance is the highlight of the movie. In a King Khan movie, he manages to steal scenes by dint of comic timing.

Unlike the other Khans who are superstars and bear the cross of their stardom no matter what role they do, Saif is not bound by image. That is his biggest asset: he does not take himself seriously. This enables him to act like a 'real' person as opposed to a 'star'.

He is very good in the emotional scenes even with minimal dialogue. Witness the scene in which Naina professes her love for Aman and breaks his heart.

Priety Zinta is one of the most versatile actresses around. Here, she does a more than competent job. Jaya Bachchan is beautiful too as the understated, suffering mother, and Sushma Seth puts in an unexpected grey characterisation which, through loud at times, leaves an impression.

Nikhil Advani introduces the characters innovatively. There were sufficient number of cinematic touches throughout the movie that demonstrate a distinctive directorial contribution (as opposed to a Harry Baweja or Guddu Dhanoa caper!).

Bheja fry:

Dragging the movie down has to be the generous dollops of glycerine Karan Johar doles out which can easily rival the amount of blood in Kill Bill.

The script flags in the second half. Save for the well-executed light scenes, the film suffers from a major hangover from the 1970s' weepies. The end drags on and on, through buckets of tears, farewells, problems simplistically solved.

Shah Rukh Khan as Aman pulls out his repertoire which he unleashed in Baazigar. And also in Darr, Deewana, Ram Jaane, Zamana Deewana, Pardes, Chalte Chalte, Asoka and virtually every movie we have seen him in.

He does it all -- nostril flaring, lip-curling, eyes watering -- the same old stuff.

Karan Johar makes it easy for him to grandstand, feeding him dramatic, over-the-top scenes where subtler displays of grief and loss would have carried greater impact. This dilutes the entire emotional quotient of the movie and almost reduces it to the starchy eye-candy that forms the hallmark of the Yash Chopra school of moviemaking.

Only the genuine comedy and Saif's natural perfomance prevent it from being one among the mass of similar movies churned out each month.

Last word:

An admirable effort which should have ended an hour before it actually did.

Final verdict:

6/10






:hmm: : :ffs:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 03, 2003 8:35 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2001 7:27 pm
Posts: 6146
What's the Box Office Verdict:

http://www.boxofficeindia.com/ reports:
Dec 3 update:
NOTE-There are many rumuors in the trade Kal Ho Na Ho has failed.The film has not failed but its the price which has failed,its near impossible for a film of this genre to recover 1 crore from Bihar or CP Berar(circuits which have just two A Grade centers between them).The film is doing great business where it was expected to but an NRI film cannot recover big sums from interiors.If it was sold like a Chalte Chalte,Tere Naam or Baghban then it would have recovered its price.For all the people emailing us enquiring about the film,the bottom line is the film is doing well but in some circuits the price is too high.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2003 7:53 pm 
Offline

Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2002 8:42 pm
Posts: 24
Saw KHNH with the family in UK.

There were 2 cinema's showing the same film (walking distance). we went to one and all the shows were fully booked so we walked to the other cinema and had to queue with hundreds of others. We managed to get the tickets, needless to say the cinema was full.

I have to say I enjoyed the movie, there were some new elements in the story and good editing, also I think all the major artist gave a very good performance and it suited them perfectly.

I will be getting a dvd of this movie when it comes out, I only hope the dvd is at a good standard.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 04, 2003 11:41 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2001 6:49 pm
Posts: 262
Just saw the film. Had high hopes after reading the film reviews but was let down badly. the story is a rehash of many bollywood films. But can't really blame the actors or even the director for the pure shoddyness of the film.

The blame lies firmly with Karan Johar. It was a great idea which was badly written. It was over the top & Melodramtic to say the least and the first half was really ( I mean really!!) embarrassing. (i.e Lagaan spoof/song)

I'm a big SRK fan, but this film didn't offer anything new. Preity was okay and the only thumbs up go to Saif Ali Khan, nice comic turn.

Is it me or did Karan Johar use the film to tell the world his Gay. I'm serious, When i go to watch a indian film, i don't expect that sh*t in constant reference.
:ffs: :hmm:

Karan Johar will have to do alot to redeem himself, as for SRK I really do hope he does something different in Swades

2 1/2 out of 5
:nervous: :nopity: :(


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group