It takes a himmatwala to say this about Himmatwala (2013), but I liked it!

Synopsis: Ravi (Ajay Devgn) returns to his family's village once he finds out his mother and sister were not dead as he had long thought. There he finds a village cowering at the grip of Sher Singh (Mahesh Manjrekar), his daughter Rekha (Tamannaah) and his brother-in-law Narayandas (Paresh Rawal). Of course the himmatwala (braveheart) is tasked with setting the village free.

Firstly, I DIDN’T THINK IT WAS TERRIBLE. (AND THIS IS NOT AN APRIL FOOLS JOKE.)

That bears being in all caps at the beginning of any discussion because no one I know in the blogosphere was willing to go see Himmatwala. The bad word of mouth even had me dreading the fact that I was hooked into it via the Bollywood group.

But… I didn’t hate Himmatwala!

In fact, I had a good laugh… or maybe a hundred!

They are the same and not.

If you didn’t like the original Himmatwala, don’t worry — I didn’t either. I gave up on it less than halfway in. Kitna boring hai!

But this version is definitely not boring. If you don’t like silly movies and heroic antics — aka Paresh Rawal and Ajay Devgn — or you are in fact one of the snobbish tight-asses I recently complained about, then you won’t like the bulk of it. But there are some plot tweaks and twists thrown in that even this queen of spotting the twists wasn’t expecting in such a film! (Hint hint: Ritesh Deshmukh’s appearance is short-lived but very important!)

But I think the crux of what makes this Himmatwala different from the first is that this Himmatwala is a slapstick comedy (hullo, Sajid Khan), and if you try to pretend it’s the original or take it seriously, you’re gonna have a bad time.

So, simple advice: Don’t take it too seriously.

There were some lagging moments, but for the most part, Himmatwala made me laugh from start to finish. There’s some mincing words, some putting crabs (ACTUAL CRABS) in people’s pajamas, asides directed right at the audience, a couple of visits from a tiger, the chicken dance (at a wedding!), some literal butt-kicking/bum pe laat (also at a wedding!), spoofing the infamous shower scene from Psycho…

Does Paresh Rawal’s squeaking voice get old? Yes. Are some of his lines flat? Yes. Does that negate the fact that he is hilarious and the master of comic timing and that he rocks that Dali-style mustache? Absolutely not.

Even the hero himself cracks some rib-tickling good lines when, of course, he’s not being overly serious and macho. If you’ve seen Singham or any of his movies since, you know Ajay Devgn is all about the ultra-dramatized hero role — and playing the titular himmatwala seems tailor-made for him. I’d say that this role is a lot more geared toward Ajay than the original was toward Jeetendra, though I can’t profess to be any great fan of Jeetendra anyway.

Have some fun, ji!

Less perfectly fit for the role is the heroine. Sure, she generates her own share of laughs, but I wish Tamannaah’s thighs hadn’t been on glaring display the whole time. C’mon, guys. They’re not that great. Really. And she’s fine enough that she didn’t bother me, but she’s certainly not the next Sridevi.

Sadly could have done without
Sonakshi, though I liked TGIF.

If you are expecting something groundbreaking and new, that Himmatwala is certainly not. If you are expecting something archetypal that will generate laughs with its ridiculousness, that it certainly is.

Oh, and wait, this movie is set in the 80s? Not just remaking the 80s? Could’ve fooled me, minus a few not

so special references to the year.

Though its tagline of “the 80’s will be back” seems to ring true since a Chashme Baddoor remake comes out next week.

Umrao Jaan (1981 & 2006): A Courtesan's Tale...Times Two

Well, this was a Bollywood first for me: I've seen two versions of a film and am able to do a comparison. The 1981 and 2006 versions of Umrao Jaan! Forgive any spottiness in this post as I watched the 2006 remake in September and the 1981 version about three weeks ago with spotty subtitles.

If you don't already know… The films are based on a 1899 Urdu novel (often considered the first Urdu novel) called "Umrao Jan Ada" (امراؤ جان ادا) by Mirza Hadi Ruswa, and there is some dispute about whether an actual courtesan named Umrao Jaan existed (as Ruswa claimed). In the story, Amiran is from a modest family in Faizabad, and an enemy of her father captures her and sells her into prostitution at a Lucknow brothel in 1840. Renamed Umrao, she grows up to become a charming courtesan, and she steals the heart of Nawab Sultan, with whom she falls in love (earning her the "Jaan" in her name). But the match is obviously not an approved one and Sultan marries to please his family instead. After a sort of mishap with another would-be suitor who turns out to be a bandit, Umrao returns to Lucknow but finds it under attack by the British and flees. She attempts to return home but her family rejects her, so she goes back to the now-looted Lucknow brothel with only her poetry and courtesan's arts. Rekha plays Umrao in the original 1981 film, and Aishwarya Rai plays her in the 2006 film; Farooq Sheikh plays Sultan in 1981, and Abhishek Bachchan plays him in 2006. (Also interestingly but not necessarily importantly, Shabana Azmi plays the role of brothel owner Khannum Jaan in the 2006 film after her mother, Shaukat Azmi, played the same role in the 1981 version.)

Satte Pe Satta (1982): Seven Brides for Seven Bhais + a hitman and a nonparalyzed paraplegic

Kickin' it a little old school this time with our first full pre-1990s Hindi film. :)

Satte Pe Satta (1982):

In the Bollywood take on the classic Hollywood musical Seven Brides for Seven Brothers (1954), the seven Anand brothers, named in order for the days of the week, live in a large farmhouse and, devoid of human contact, grow up somewhat animally, led by oldest brother Ravi (Amitabh Bachchan, whose, side note, wax figure was recently hugged by certain persons :D). In town, Ravi falls in love with the nurse Indu (Hema Malini) and marries her, bringing her back to tame the wild mess that is his brothers – without telling Indu he has six brothers, of course. After the shock, Indu goes about civilizing them, and the remaining six brothers meet and fall for a group of six women, who are caring for Seema Singh, a cripple about to inherit a large sum of money on her 21st birthday. This subsequently gets the poor Anands mixed up in Seema’s uncle’s plan to kill her and take the inheritance for himself.

 

Well, first off, let me say that I came into this film with high expectations because Seven Brides for Seven Brothers is one of my favorite movies of all time, and I usually love to see how things get adapted and changed for a Hindi audience. I gave a happy shriek when I found out the two were combined into Satte Pe Satta.

Ultimately, I had mixed feelings about the adaptation. Some of it made sense to me; some of it didn’t.

For the most part, the plot of the first half and even a decent dose of the second is lifted straight out of Seven Brides without a lick of adaptation unless you count dialogue shifting languages. But of course, there are some changes.

A change for the better is the way that Ravi and Indu fall in love, as opposed to Adam Pontipee and Milly in the original: In Seven Brides, Adam goes to town to “get him a wife” because the farmhouse needs a little TLC from a woman. While grabbing lunch, he falls for Milly’s cooking and nerve (in the way that she deals with customers) and makes her a proposal that she takes right away to get away from everything. The degree of misogyny in this has always struck me, and in Satte Pe Satte, it’s somewhat rectified: Ravi falls in love with Indu after a case of mistaken identity leads to him receiving a tight slap to the face. Despite Ravi’s over-the-top attempts to win her over, Indu remains strong and aloof for a long time before falling for him.

Not even a man faking a suicide attempt and a head injury can inspire Indu to fall in love.

But AB Sr. Ravi looking like this can. :)

A change that is maybe borderline is the addition of the Seema storyline, which is a wholly Bollywood addition. At times it feels like a valid addition, but at others it feels like an INSANE completely random greed/murder plot that has absolutely nothing to do with a woman’s attempt to civilize seven brutish and crude but dancing and singing brothers. I mean honestly, who the heck thought of putting a hitman in a musical?

Overall, I think I have mixed feelings about this one mostly because it introduces my least favorite plot device of all time: look-alikes. After meeting Ravi, Seema’s uncle Ranjit hires newly out-of-prison hitman Babu to kill Seema because Babu looks JUST like Ravi. Cue a switcheroo, of course.

The two faces of Amitabh Bachchan: Ravi and Babu.

For the most part, sticking to the working formula that is Seven Brides’ plotline is a mark in favor of Satte Pe Satta. But at the same time, the film perhaps goes out of its way to keep the brothers in costumes resembling the attire of the Pontipees. I can’t help but think that farmers in 1980s India weren't wearing the same clothing as redheaded 1850s Oregon farmers.

Wardrobe comparison!

The film’s great omission comes at the end, when the only closure for the brothers having kidnapped seven women turns out to be, well, that they stand on a balcony watching Seema and Babu make up/unite. No families seem to have missed these women, nor do the boyfriends who feuded with the Anands over the girls earlier…

Overall, I enjoyed the film except for those WTH?! murder plot moments and the fact that despite being nearly 30 years after Seven Brides, many aspects are the same quality, and let’s just say I’m definitely looking forward to the remake that’s being launched with Madhuri Dixit and Sanjay Dutt. :)