Reflections: A Note on Mausam!!

When I set out to watch Mausam,i had a pre-determined state of mind not to like it.I  had read the reviews by the Siskel--Taran Adarsh and Ebert-Komal Nahta [pun intended] and had been influenced a lot by my fellow NG-ites who were pouring in with terrible reviews about the directorial debut of Pankaj Kapoor.

But strangely,the movie did have an impact on me,somewhat positively.It is no masterpiece,not even on the fringes of it but it has quite a few heart-warming tones running throughout. The length of the film is not a question in itself as is the pace.But i will first defend some accusations and then embark on my views regards the film. The pace of the film is definitely slow but the slowness is not dragging. The sequences have been built around many incidents that have rocked India through the past two decades and the effective summation can be:

1. Overwhelming if one is well versed with the intended desire of some directors who are well influenced by the European "feel" and "class" and try injecting the same in their movie. As for example,Mira Nair and Deepa Mehta are two directors who Americanize the emotions,to some extent. Kapur is highly and radically different from them but he does take the liberty to induce various subtle tones about an under-expressed emotion in a manner that has a very operatic touch to it.

2. Underwhelming if one is accustomed to a fast paced narration where each scene might be disjointed from the former but individually the pack enough punch to make up for literally no story.

The difference with Mausam is that it takes its time and executes itself while operating in a space that it does  certainly take for granted at times but never mis-utilizes it. There is enough "politics" through out the length of the movie--Politics of Emotion,Religion,State of Affairs,Outlook and Fate!! One just cannot look at major flaws of the movie without appreciating the great vision encapsulated within the movie.

The first half an hour are sheer magic.Kapur introduces the state of Kashmir Affairs contrasting it with the lush green fields of Punjab and thereafter introduces each character with great detailing - thus providing a deep insight into each one of them in just half an hour. Harry is charming,zealous and smart....Aayat is introverted but expressive at moments-reflecting the intermittent memories of trauma in Kashmir from where she had to immigrate to Punjab. Kapur could have opted for the "glossy" Punjab,rich and refined but his territory goes into the deep interiors where the frame set is "dusty" but "effective". Here Kapur delivers a stellar in the first meeting of Aayat and Harry by utilizing the setting to the optimum. It is a hallmark of a great director that he can utilize the setting properly and to an effect that it contributes to the narration. Also there is an attempt to showcase the "essence" of Punjab and the various attempts to do it are endearing.Probably the most awesome first half an hour that has been churned this year.

The film continues to be a poetry of sorts reading out love letters to time itself.The exchange of "notes" between Aayat and Harry might seem outdated to many but then it encapsulates the most basic essence of expressing love--in a silent ambiance and silently..so silent that the night revels in perceiving the scenery. Kapur goes highly poetic here,dramatizing it but then the whole sequence might not have a definite impact but the outline it traces,is definitely applaud-worthy!! Fate is the cinematic "tool" of this movie.The movie tries attempting much in single frames,it succeeds beautifully many times,it also fails at times. For those beautiful moments,one can just behold the first time Shahid chases Aayat to the Royal Dance School in Scotland..the desire to meet is there,there is no excitement of sorts..all is being operated in a purposely slowed canvas but the net result is equivalent to a soulful music that touches the heart.The result is not adrenaline pumping but it uniquely show-cases the "intense emotions".

The film also speaks a lot about the Kashmir Issue in undertones--the scene where Aayat's father is showing the ancestral home to Harry,the mentions of major spots of Kashmir like Dal Lake etc. provides a very vivid picture of the distorted state of affairs back home in contrast with the peaceful valleys of Scotland.The snow is the same,the difference is that it is not coloured Red. I will definitely not give full marks to Kapur here in this "Scotland" setting as he fails to evoke the intended operatic feeling..a sense that provides the timeless feel to the emotion of love.Although the scene where Aayat says "Kahaan Le Ja Rahe Ho" in response to Harry's "Kahaan Jana Hai" [a metaphorical grammar for the acceptance of love] is a treat to watch but the extended dance and waltz sequences do stretch the movie here a bit. The love should have been explored in that beautiful frame but rather it is awkwardly subjected to the "fate". Here Kargil War becomes the agent of exercise of Fate!

The film reflects on the disposition of love amidst the various circumstances that life may provide with. One may question the rationale of such a theme and ask questions.One may also jeer and laugh at the scene where Harry mistakes Aayat to be married,saying the extent to which the fate has been utilised is just not believable. But as i was explaining about Malick-the other day,Kapur is not interested in exploring the answers or even in entertaining the questions--he is presenting a perspective based on assumption--"Why can't it happen". This is a difficult theme to understand as even the biggest fans of Malick tend to criticise the director for assuming much.But one must applaud Kapur for treading a similar path.The repercussions can be felt at the Box Office but then the reclined manner of film-viewing experience gets enriched by such a perspective.Mausam is not loud nor does it attempt to excite.It narrates a story and goes on with a serious intent..to such a gravity that the emotions of jealousy are show-cased with utmost sincerity and great detailing when Rajjo burns the letter of Aayat written to Harry in the fire.Notice the metaphorical gramamr when jealousy is causing a deed in fire! Masterstroke by Kapur there!

If one carefully notices,there is a scene inside the road boulders in the beginning of the movie where Harry and his friends are discussing their future--the matter of operation Bluestar crops up and Harry just tries to brush it off. Cut to the scene during Gujrat Riots--Harry is with Aayat inside a similar boulder of sorts and now the issue is different in "matter" but similar in "character"--hatred prevails. Kapur does well to portray the "Love in the times of Hatred".The future was being discussed in the initial sequence with friends--now it was the present being lamented.Thus Kapur also achieves the intended depiction of growing unrest in the social structure around the world and in doing so stresses on the importance and sanctity of love and also presenting it as a tool to bring peace.

The scene where Harry runs to find Aayat from one station to the previous one is heart-warming. One of the most true depiction of a desire that has outgrown the existence.Desire drives the film. Love plays throughout.Fate challenges the outcome. What is amiss is the proper assimilation of scenes throughout. Kapur fails at maintaining uniformity throughout and thus fails to achieve fruition even after putting his soul into this.Parts of the movie are brilliant and i will not ignore them.The attempt to immortalize love is endearing,just that it does not become timeless--just remains a memorable one! The tragic aspect of the love gets much masked by the attempt to outgrow the script and achieve an unparalleled zenith..Kapur fails here.

But Mausam may disappoint but it has its heart at the right place and ambitions high. It is for you to decide whether the Falcon turned into a Phoenix or that it was never a Falcon!

Milind/Anupam

The Difference between "Kubrick" and "Malick"!!

Dissociation of various cinematic attributes is a major and trademark phenomenon of Malick’s movies.He rarely provides the co-relation between the various “brilliant” visual frames.In other words his grand “visual style” easily overtakes his story sometimes.I have tried hard to understand the “whys” and the “hows” of many stuffs,especially in his earlier works but strangely it has eluded me.It is more easy to understand the “eccentricity” in Kubrick’s works than to comprehend the “un-explained” in Malick’s world.Note both directors are poles apart in their work and approach but they share a common theme-they believe in their own “sense” of the theme they playing with.Malick does not open up the whole theme,rather he just presents them in coherence with the core issue…Kubrick tends to leave it unexplained,or as we may say open for interpretations.Malick’s world has no cue,it is all about the “ambiguity” one can face in deciphering a few things in his movies.

Contrast Malick’s first feature “Badlands” to Hitchcock’s Rope.Set in entirely different world are they but they have a contrasting feature that is too apparent to be missed. Rope has “reasons” for murders.It tried to justify the murder ,although to fail at the end by pitching the metaphysical aspect of good or bad against the intellect of mankind.But Badlands does not provide any such “reasoning” or “debates” for the murders.The past is not explained,nor is there any effort.Such is Malick’s World where the philosophy is done away with[retaining only as much is imperative to the plot] but the charm of the core issue remains,primarily due to the visual treat it offers. Surprisingly,one can most of the time end up criticising this aspect of Malick’s Cinema,which is the only example of such a style of film making ever known probably.

Malick does not make a sincere effort to dwell in the “possibilities” of actions,in the “backdrop” of happenings..he “assumes” them or pleads us to “assume” them to be an effect of human infirmity.He takes the brain of human as a reservoir of countless possibilities and derives his scripts from them.Leaves us to ponder from which part of the reservoir has the script found an inception. Contrastingly,if “obscurity” be a term,then Kubrick too deals with it and in one of his movies “Eyes Wide Shut” and to a lesser extent in ” A Clockwork Orange”,he is in sync with Malick’s vision of leaving things unexplained.The only difference here is that Kubrick’s movies forces one to ponder over the various possibilities,Malick definitely tries to end the speculation by attributing the “unexplained” to the “human nature”.

When i saw The Thin Red Line,I was stunned.This was a radically different movie from Malick’s earlier works,especially “Days of Heaven”.In “Days of Heaven” there is the eternal tragedy against the backdrop of romance.How does Abby fall in love with the farmer? It is not explained–Malick takes it to be “that it can happen” and “why can’t it happen”? He questions our over-stress on reasoning and sometimes even mock it.He portrays reality from an alternate frame,where things are taken as they are,no explanations sought neither warranted. Days of Heaven does deal in the twists and turns in a relationship,but eventually it relies on the “luxuriance of imagery” to define the various ways the movie meanders.There is little of story but then the development of it is noteworthy.Days of Heaven also derives the “required philosophy” from the “pastures” where anything is possible,where life takes awkward turns without intimidating.Therein lies the beauty of “reality” in Malick’s world.The Thin Red line was far more complex and derived many thematic analogies from various greatest textbooks around us.I havn’t seen “The Tree of Life” still as a whole,so wont comment.

Contrast this with Kubrick’s world. He preaches,he advocates,he sends out messages.In “A Clockwork Orange” it is the question about the inherent or induced nature of virtue…In “Paths of Glory”,he reflects on the eternal purpose of war…In “The Shining”,he deals in the supernatural but not before elaborating the effect of isolation on human behaviour and finally in the “Eyes Wide Shut”,he remarks about the sexual undertones in the social structure and combines them with the human psychology. In all movies,Kubrick applies the theme with “justification”. Malick in his world,offers a feature and says–”I think it can happen this way,now behold it”. Kubrick says–” I offer you a feature,i have my own interpretation,you should infer your own”.

Thus with Kubrick you have a director who speaks through images,offers no explanation,takes the human being as an agent of committing any action possible thereby showing his believe on the instability of human mind.Thus without proclaiming his penchant for “psychological” thesis in his films,he ultimately delivers a treatise on them!!