Pakeezah sucks: it's boring. That said, I acknowledge that the film is, indeed, a classic. That said, it is not quite so much a "classic" as Sholay (I think Mughal-E-Azam comes near that level).

'nuff said ... moving on to a different thread ...

that is just a little glimpse or one tiny flavor of Sanjeev Kunar you have seen..I can tell that you might have seen Bhagwan Bachan enough but not Sanjeev Kumar!!

I will sincerely advise to see immense library of his films too.

Actually Pakeeza is not considered a classic in "filmic" sense - as a film its nothing special, but the characters esp. the romantic screenplay and meena kumari's presence propelled it to cult status ( along with off-screen relationships or lack-off) . In addition 70s was a very important time in india (huge social flux - emergency period), end of aristocratic life-style and also the film style was changing rapidly ( a parallel movement in full swing among other things) and Pakeeza in a way marked the beginning of an end to classical style of film making in India.

So what Commando303 experienced was really the effect of watching a film in the wrong period – Pakeezha is a very 70s film and not knowing “what” to look for can alienate people…, Lot of people I know warily acknowledge Pakeezha as a classic though they yawned through the movie …., I love the movie ( I try to quote dialogs from this movie every time I get a chance !) . Now SHOLAY on other hand is a much “simpler” classic to acknowledge – atleast imo

Upperstall has a good writing on it ( i will try to hunt down more such references )


http://upperstall.com/films/pakeezah.html

The book that I'm currently reading, "The Politics of India's conventional cinema" By Fareed Kazmi tears apart Sholay as nothing more than a "good vs. bad" film strongly driven by predictable characterization and setting of the entire film. And in alliance to the theme of timing, Kazmi discusses that Sholay couldn't have had a better timing in its release in '75 just around the time Indira Gandhi declared a state of imergency, where inexplicitly allowing people to easily decide who's good and who's bad around them, giving the film its capital advantage.

Weather or not I agree with the writer is another point of debate, but I found his arguments quite noteworthy.

OK, what are you talking about? I'm just naming a few of my favorite Sanjeev-Kumar films (which I think well represent his prowess as a performer); I'm not listing every single one I've ever seen. You didn't even list a single film of his that you like/love.

Actually, I am aware of the circumstances in which Pakeezah is considered a classic (and I do maintain that it is considered a "classic"). That said, it is not a classic that I enjoy; I find it dull, and it is simply not my "kind" of film. I think that every movie — "classic" or not — is of its era. Come now, The Matrix seems, already, to be "rusting," and not long ago, it (story, as well as technical-aspects) were "thrilling." I think a large part of what makes one see a film as a "classic," is whether the person in question likes, or dislikes, the given film. That said, there are certain financial aspects, and there is poplularity, to consider. Furthermore, there are the films that become "classics" after they have left theaters. Raj Kapoor's Mera Naam Joker was utterly trashed at the box office, yet it is now often cited as one of the Showman's finest works. In any event, Sholay is a "classic" — this is not debatable, as it is not entirely subjective; whether it is a "masterpiece" or not [it is — ] is in the eye of the beholder.

(Just a general comment:) All works of art are products of their environments. Beyond a point, it is just reaching at nothing to suggest that the particular events that led to a film, are invalid, and that the film is thus of no true "artistic merit." It is good to be analytical, but it is never desirable to pick things apart to the degree at which nothing is left intact, and thus nothing is left enjoyable.

that is absolutely ridiculous

when did we start equating the popularity of a film to the quality of a film??

by your definition, ‘sholay’, ‘dilwale dulhania le jayenge’ and ‘hum apke hain koun’ are the greastest bollywood classics of all time



agreed, but I am talking abt 2nd and 3rd gen Indians whose only contact w/ bollywood is when a big bw film gets played in a normal hollywood theatre (which are mainly chopra films, but occasionally other big films like sarkar)

and believe me, this is definitely the reality among many Indians living abroad



‘psycho’ is a definitely a great film, though I wouldn’t say it is hitch’s best



the original mc is w/out a doubt a masterpiece, while the remake was a disgrace

and watching meryl streep & liev schreiber butcher the parts which were brilliantly played by angela lansbury and laurence harvey was just unbearable

it will probably be just as bad as watching lal play sanjeev’s part in sholay



the sequels/prequels were all z-grade junk… but the original is definitely one of my favs

but like you said it is a cult classic… its not for everyone



I never said they were great, just that I preferred them over the originals

though having said that, I did luv the O11 sequel - Ocean’s 12 - thought it was great, one of my fav heist films

anyways, the rat pack O11 was a horrible film imo

and on the topic of soderbergh - I just watched ‘syriana’ - a definite masterpiece, easily the best film of the year!



the majority of ramu’s best works started post-company - ab tak 56, ek hasina thi, d, main madhuri, naach…the guy has been dropping one great film after the other

and no doubt, he occasionally releases a stinker (which ‘mr ya miss’ looks to be), but then he will release a few great films within that same year



agreed, though sarkar was a good film… when compared to ramu’s best films it was strictly average

but that is the thing w/ ramu - even his average films - james, sarkar, my wife's murder, road… - are great compared to other bollywood films



lets see…

the bollywood films made within the genre in the last few years - khakee, garv, aan, insaan, dum, plan, kaante, karam, sehar …and other such nonsense

the ramu films made within the genre in the last few years - company, ab tak 56, d, ek hasina thi, sarkar

enough said

and the only great non-ramu film to release within the genre was maqbool



take it easy dude

first - I have never seen a tarkovsky film apart from solaris, so I am in no position to judge him as a director

and the only reason I watched that was b/c I enjoyed soderbergh’s solaris

second - his version of bored me to death, the soderburgh version is much superior imo



benegal - nishaant, bhumika, junoon…
bc - rajnigandha, choti si baat, swami…
gulzar - koshish, achanak, mausam…

and definitely others also

Pretty sure Sodenberg would get a kick out of reading that statement ...., but then you are entitled to your opinion.

Still from one film-fan to another ( in a complementary way, you are def. not a casual viewer) ...., it is often believed ---> "to not know the cinema of Tarkovsky is equivalent to not knowing what Cinema is ...", do yourself a favor and watch his films - pretty sure it will linger with you for a long time to come.

I am equating the popularity of a film with its being a "classic." Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge may well be seen as a classic in twenty years (though I doubt that Hum Aapke Hain Koun? will be quite at quite so "classic" a status). A "classic" is a popular film that has seen very significant box-office success, and is of a certain age. This is what a classic is. I don't understand how you define a "classic," and I honestly have no idea which films you'd consider "classics," if Sholay does not make your list.


Uh, it's perfectly fine if you don't consider Psycho Hitchcock's "best." I was just making a comment about my taste. Out of curiousity, which is your fav. "Hitchcock"? For me, The Birds probably comes on 2nd place.


About your Manchurian Candidate comments, I think your sentiments about "butchering" are what anger most people about Ram Gopal Varma's "Sholay." Just as you referred to the original (Sinatra) version as a "masterpiece," COUNTLESS people hold Sholay in this same regard.


Agreed, somewhat, about The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. The original is miles ahead of the trash is inspired (sequels, perquels, re-makes, etc.), but it just isn't for me. I always thought it was grossly over-rated. Again, though, it is (as you said) a "'cult' classic."


After the Ocean's 11 re-make, I just didn't care to see Ocean's 12. I rather like the rat-pack original, but it's not among my "favorite-films," or anything. I really want to watch Syriana. It looks great — .



With Varma, I actually just meant his directorial ventures. As far as the entire favtory, Ab Tak Chhappan was one of my favorite 2004 films (isn't it great how it was beaten, by Veer-Zaara, for "best film of the year" [Filmfare...and every other awards show]?). I absolutely loved the film, and loved Nana Patekar's work in it. Ek Hasina Thi was very good (great Urmila, good Saif), but I feel that it got a bit more praise than it might have deserved. D was just "bleh." It was the same thing we'd seen a million times before. It offered nothing new, and didn't even bother to wrap a familiar present in a shiny, new wrapper. Main Madhuri Dixit Banna Chahti Hoon was good, thought the entire "journey" was thoroughly predictable (we've all seen the situations a thousand times before), and the film made absolutely no effort to say anything novel. That said, it was well-structured and coherent, and Anatara Mali and Rajpal Yadav delivered excellent performances. Naach was horrible. Abhishek Bachchan more or less slept through his role, and the film — as a whole — was the most pretentious, dull tripe that one could imagine. Start to finish, I just couldn't get over how very shallow and banal this film is.

You feel that Varma's "average" work is far above other films that the industry produces. I largely disagree. This is strictly a matter of taste and preferance. (By the way, James SUCKED. Come on, you have to give me that one: HORRIBLE and STUPID.)


"Enough said"? Not nearly. I don't understand. You are pitting Ram Gopal Varma against as entire industry. The very fact that you could list so many films of his that you placed into one "genre" shows the man's rigidity in terms of exploring various types of cinema.

I agree that most of the films you listed suck, but I think that Khakee and Sehar are both excellent films. Khakee is "'80s' Bachchan" re-visted (which is just awesome), and Sehar is a great film, very under-appreciated by almost all. The rest...trash.

Again: D: hardly meritorious. Sarkar: "eh."


Your "classics": Oh, my god. NONE of your films, barring maybe two (Achanak and Koshish) is a "classic." You're not listing "classics"; you're listing films you like. I think the problem here may just be your (perhaps, incorrect) definition of a "classic" movie.

"major sporting event" which Sholay, KKHH(Satya didn't win Best film either), Veer-Zaara might fit into. Well recognized. Traditional example. Superior or unusual example. excellence.

boy, dictionary sure made it real broad which makes all films to be 'classics' in their own right.

Commando, my beef with your statement(s) is that you are hardly defending a film, rather you are offending a film that you have yet to see.

Staple film? One film does not define a whole industry (vise-versa). Sholay is to India what Star Wars is to the US. No, I haven't seen Star Wars either. Star Wars is probably the most watched film in the world, although you said you've got documentation showing Sholay is(?) but that may be due to chance that there are a billion indians (of which at least half probably haven't seen). Doesn't matter, that is irrelevant. also, Hindi film industry doesn't define "Indian" film industry....there are others!

James is a GREAT, yes thats right GREAT film for it's genre. It delivered what it advertised - a non-stop arse kicking action film. Compare James to boring Hollywood action films...well the modern ones anyhoo. They don't make em like this anymore!

D - though it had typical RGV "Gangsta" elements to it, and as I was watching the film in the theater I was thinking the same, it's still a really good film. I dragged 2 people that aren't really familiar with RGV's work to this film, and they were both surprised to see how good this film is. You have to judge it independent of RGV films - remove his former films from your head. lol. It did have a different story than his former flicks, but the style was heavily inspired by RGV.

Naach - I don't see how people can't like this film. People b*tch and moan about how he's making the same films over and over again, well there you go! It's an awesome, realistic story about struggling artists and moreover for me about relationships. Great performances by Jr.B & Mali!

Sarkar - bad performances? or bad prejudices?

RGV Filmography: http://www.geocities.com/rgv_shiva/changefilmo.htm
Sure there is a variety.


ahem, what he means to say is 1998 for Satya. or the douchebag that transcribed the interview made a typo.

I like reading RGV interviews. HEH. they have a "F.U." attitude in all of them. very arrogant, but very amicable. His movies are the same way too. He mocks all the standard crap out there in every film

Khakhee was alright. it's a decent attempt, but give the same story/script to RGV and see how much better of film he can churn out!

Sehar, I will watch soon. looks interesting.

Nice job bringing the dictionary into it. Even by the "dictionary definition" (which does not take into consideration, very much at all, how a word is actually used colluquially), not nearly "all films" could be considered "classics."

Are you, too, arguing that 1975's Sholay is not a classic (I didn't catch you actually make that claim, which is why i ask)?

If you read back a bit, I am arguing against Mola Ram (not you), stating that Sholay is a "classic" movie. We have somewhat moved away from the topic of Ram Gopal Varma's attempt at a Sholay-re-make.

The one thing I have been dying to say — and constantly forgetting to say — is that Sholay can quite be likened to Star Wars. By the way, it astounds me that you have not seen either of these two classic (little attempt to piss of Mola — lol) films. If you want to be well-equipped to argue films, you should at least have seen the very "important" ones. I'm not at all claiming that Sholay is solitarily representative of the entire Indian film industry, but merely that it is a rather "staple film." It is no doubt more watched than perhaps any American film, and this is indeed likely due to the fact that Indians out-number Americans by A LOT. I think where I initally got the claim that Sholay is the world's "most-watched" film, was from promotional material for this years "Amitabh-Bachchan Retrospective," hosted by the Lincoln Center's Walter Reade Theater.

James sucks. It's stupid. Varma himself admitted that the movie was a failure. Furthermore, the film is basically based of "bad" '80s' Amitabh-Bachchan films. Ram Gopal, himself, said that, with it, he was trying to "re-capture" that "lost" era. It was supposed to be 2005's Shahenshah, so to speak. The movie was idiotic, even for its "genre." What was its genre? Action. That's it. There are myriad better "action films" out there.

D was OK. It cannot be seen as "removed" from Ram Gopal Varma. If we "remove" films from the contexts in which they are produced, every "OK" movie, that is a total rip-off of a prior film, would suddenly be excellent. D was sub-par simply because it offered absolutely nothing in terms of both style and substance. What was "novel" about the story? It was a typical "live-by-the-gun-die-by-it" R.G.V. movie. It could have been better than it was, had it not been seen countless times prior.

Naach is a god-damned joke...easily the factory's worst product. For a film that claims to support, so vehemently, "difference" in the industry, the movie does nothing but play into banalities. This is best exemplified in the scene wherein we finally get to see Anatara realize her dream of "doing something unique." What do we get from her? What does the film show us is her unique vision? One of the dumbest, most contrived "item numbers" of recent times. Anatara Mali does a commendable job in her role; she generally does. Abhishek Bachchan in lifeless, and goes way beyond "under-playing" his character. Of course, appreciation of performances (as well as films, actually) is almost totally subjective.

Sarkar was good (I'm not clear, based on your brief comment) on your view of it. I thought the movie was more than bearable, but felt that it was horrendously drowned out by pervasive and inappropriate background music, and a rather predictable plot (though I suppose that the latter is to be expected, in this sort of film — especially when it is "based on" another film). This said, Amitabh Bachchan delivered a terrific performance, as did Kay Kay Menon. Abhishek, I'd say, garnered much un-due praise for his work, but was acceptable, nevertheless.

I cringe at the thought of how Ram Gopal Varma might have killed Khakee. The movie was excellent (especially in the eyes of die-hard Bachchan fans [ ]); Varma might just have sent the whole damned Mumbai underworld after the police force. Pardon me, but cops are nothing but targets in Varma's movies. I don't recall having seen one positive portrayal of a police officer, in any of his films.


Dude, have you seen The Godfather? (Just curious.) Now that the tensions have (seemingly) died down a bit — lol — these conversations are becoming a bit more interesting.

I'm not claiming for or against Sholay in any department as I have not seen it. It probably should be classified as a classic. Usually timeless masterpieces are called "classics" which can be enjoyed by any generation.

myriad of action films better than James, please name some. I'd like to watch them

The Godfather? Isn't that some Italian movie? Are there any good R1 dvd's with good english subtitles?? ok. I kid you on that yeah, I've seen it! and I love every bit of it. I regret to say I've only seen about half of part II, and have not seen part III.

I'd like to watch Sholay, and I have a copy of the DEI version. My problem is that I don't know which version to watch, and I don't want to watch a shitty looking/sounding one as that might spoil the movie viewing experience for me, at which point my opinions might not be suitable. Have you seen Sholay/James/Sarkar/Naach/D at the theaters? I caught the latter 4. Though I would've like Sarkar/Naach/D regardless of where I saw it, I probably would not have cared for James as much had I not seen it at the theaters. I haven't seen Company either. I'm waiting for a film festival or something..lol. there was one in 2002 or 2003 but I was unfortunately working.

Khakhee - the performances were good by all but lacked the intensity it might otherwise have had it been from the Factory. This coming from a guy that likes Santhosi. I forced my crew to drive to a theater across town because the first theater didn't have digital surround sound! :p it wasn't worth the extra effort, imo. I liked Pukar, also one of the few albums I like of ARR post 2000. It too was filled with some tripe that could've been avoided, but overall it reminded me of hollywood style action films.

D - it has a story independent of other RGV films, but the presentation is like that of other RGV films.

coincidentally, Ramu not portraying cops in positive light.....read thread about Ramu's "Shiva 2006" where the protagonist of Shiva will be a cop. Assuming he will remain a protagonist, there is some change for you :p Govt workers, regardless of India/USA (I can't speak for other nations) are filled with a majority of corrupt crooks. This is the reality. They are either corrupt, or they are stupid & they believe the govt should be spoon feeding their rear ends. well, not like gangSTARS are any better but they are more exiiting to watch on screen

Haven't seen ATC or EHT or Bhoot, Kaun. will have to catch these on horrid dvds or wait till next gen?

I think, only solid scene was Tanuja's chanta on Bachan Bhagwan's face! and might be Aish revealation..

other performances, imho, AB role was as usual over the board larger than life!!
Ajay..no doubt he was the best of the group, even I am not pro DEVGUND!

I think, only solid scene was Tanuja's chanta on Bachan Bhagwan's face! and might be Aish revealation..

other performances, imho, AB role was as usual over the board larger than life!!
Ajay..no doubt he was the best of the group, even I am not pro DEVGUND!