Interpreter of Maladies
Saturday, August 12, 2006
Why I didn't like OMKARAOmkara was one movie I had been waiting for. Being someone who appreciated and loved Vishal Bharadwaj's previous works, Omkara was the ultimate piece de resistance.
I had loved Maqbool-it was a stark take on the Mumbai underworld with the underpinnings of tragic Macbeth. So well conceptualized-whether it be the two cops masquerading as the three witches or the struggle for power amongst the underworld substituting for the battle de royale in Macbeth-it was such a treat to watch. I keep it very high-close to Ijaazat for the craft of film making. Then Makdi-with Shabana Azmi and the little actress Shweta-was delightful because of its simplicity. It reflected of a director who was sure not getting lost in gloss to forget what essentially fim making was about. The one movie of Vishal that I have not seen is the Blue Umbrella-still looking for a VCD.
So we come back to Omkara.
Omkara is a mammoth effort because,
a) it is set in the heartlands of U.P.- a setting that has its unique difficulties in portraying
b) it tries to work with commercial stars in an "artie" film subject
c) it works on a story that has been often translated into cinema but has never been really close to the bard's work
d) it battles with the percarious line between what is more important-commercial success or cinematic glory
And, the movie does not fail at least on some counts. Where it fails, you can empathize with the director, as to why he failed on that count in the first place. It tries to make a lifeless Vivek Oberoi act-no use-he is as wooden as he always is. It tries to make an actress like Kareena Kapoor act like a typical girl in the cowbelt. Not much use-considering her "Hamein to ji" looks more artificial than most stuff in the movie. She does look much better in the scene where Ajay kills her. Majorly coz she is not speaking and only has to act helpless.
Where Omkara fails and fails miserably is that its characters lack depth. You cannot make characters only with how foul is the language they use or with what eyes do they treat woman. Yes, those are characteristic of what UPites are known for but that is not all. The character that comes close is that of Konkana and to a certain extent, Saif. Konkana's role is beautiful with the ease with which it is portrayed. She gels so gracefully into her Indu that its a treat to watch. Who would ever guess that this woman is a Bengali, who is a TamBram one day (Mr. and Mrs. Iyer), a slick jounro the other (Page 3) and a hardcore UPite behanji (Omkara). Vivek's Kesu is spineless. You can actually laugh when he talks to his Billo (Bipasha) as it looks so much like Sathiya's Vivek rather than the uncouth Kesu, he is supposed to portray. In the middle of the film, one is actually forced to question: What did Omkara really see in Kesu to make him the liutenant in the first place. His is not a character actor role and he fails to live up to it. Extremely disappointing.
Ajay Devgan is a fine actor. I agree. In Omkara too, there are scenes in which he is so natural, so starkly himself. He is dark, brooding but very, very repetitive. I saw the same Ajay in Company. Not very different. The same half crooked smile minus the expletives maybe. But the same facial expressions. Has he stopped to experiment-I am forced to ask or are the experiments limited to washouts like Golmal for Godsake. He does not get into the character of Omkara but makes Omkara get into him which is fatal to the movie. His last few scenes (before the tragic end) are not well crafted and they look like a badly sketched end, mostly.
Saif, I should commend him on the performance. He has grown and grown so well as an actor. Look at Ek Hasina Thi and you could gauge that. This is a bigger challenge. More than being a pseude villain, he is now required to be an uncouth, uncivilized but intelligent villain. As reviewers have rightly said, he is required to portray the most difficult character in Shakespeare's plays. And he makes a valiant try. His expletived don't look forced. His jealousy does not look apparent. His chaemistry does not look frothy with Indu. And that's where he succeeds. It is one of the high point of the movie when he is not crowned the lieutenant and instead shouts Kesu's name from the temple top. His expression is not astonishment, its more of sympathizing with himself. Even in his debauchery, he empathizes with himself. Its beautiful and he has acted beautifully. Except the end, which might not be his fault. In the end, its mere facts and not emotions that we get to see. Saif's acceptance of his crime is a mere 2 second gesture. Not much depth, not at all.
Kareena, I wish not to waste words on her. Inspite on the non makeup look and the salwar kameez, she looks every bit as filmi as she really is. I do not for a second felt that she is as innocent and pure as she is portrayed to be. Although she is dressed mostly in white, there is that artificialness that takes away her purity that she is supposed to represent.
The movie has well shot scenes, specifically the marriage rituals are well depicted (the ubtan scene) and the old lady is amazing !! It does remind me of home, many a times. But no, not always. It takes away the purity of the feeling by mixing filmdom with reality.
I still love Maqbool and I still believe Vishal is a terrific director. And so, I will wait for him to write another epic, direct another film and take more KonkonaS and less KareenaS maybe.
