Monday, 22 February 2010

3 Idiots


























Loosely adapted from the Chetan Bhagat bestseller Five Point Someone, 3 Idiots tells the story of a road trip undertaken by two friends on a journey to find a long lost companion. The man Farhan and Hari seek is Ranchoddas Shamaldas Chanchad, also known as Rancho. The bond between these three men unfolds in a series of flashbacks as we learn of their time at the Imperial College of Engineering.  The enigmatic Rancho challenges the success driven ideology of the institution inspiring his friends to adopt his freethinking philosophy for themselves. He subsequently clashes with the university’s headmaster whilst romancing his daughter behind his back. The three idiots, as their teachers refer to them, disband after graduation. Whilst Farhan and Hari keep in touch their friend Rancho disappears. Ten years later they reunite amidst mysterious circumstances in an effort to track down the man who made such an impression on their lives.

3 Idiots’ biggest flaw is that Aamir Khan, now in his mid-forties, is too old to be a believable protagonist. His character Rancho is a university student who is obviously supposed to be in his mid-twenties or younger. Although his star power is an obvious commercial draw, Khan’s persona as one of the most successful Bollywood stars of the last twenty years, if not all time, detracts from the role. Therefore the film requires a suspension of belief in order for the audience to root for the protagonist. The same can also be said for the narrative as a whole, which is overly ambitious and often unbelievable, even though its slapstick comedy is not grounded in realism.

For those unfamiliar with the conventions of the Indian film industry the running time, over two and a half hours, may seem lengthy for what is essentially a campus comedy. This is not helped by a weak soundtrack, minus a couple of songs which aid the narrative instead of attempting standalone success. Being a mainstream Bollywood film, however, 3 Idiots is not as purely juvenile as the gross out films that have come to be associated with the campus comedy genre, such as its western counterparts Porky’s and American Pie. It aims a lot higher drawing comparisons to Good Will Hunting, albeit with added fart jokes.

Like any “masala” film 3 Idiots tries to please all demographics of the cinema-going audience. Its simple message of overcoming the odds and learning to be yourself is universal. There is also a strong emphasis on the family unit and an added dose of romance. The gags come hard and fast but are accentuated by the emotional weight of the sombre scenes. The fact that it actually succeeds despite all of its shortcomings is nothing short of a miracle.  In the words of the film’s protagonist Ranchoddas Shamaldas Chanchad “aal is well”.

The juvenile humour and rapid pace of 3 Idiots cloaks the ambitious and thought provoking film at its core. The self-referential idealistic romantic side-plot highlights the film’s refusal to take itself seriously. Underneath its bright and energetic surface, however, lurks a dark subtext which deals with suicide amongst India’s student population. The burgeoning pressure of economic expansion on the country’s youth population haunts the cast of self-tortured individuals. Meanwhile through Rancho the filmmakers dissect the hierarchical structure of India’s education system.

The humour remains dark throughout the course of the film with the best gags coming from the blackly comic moments. To his credit the film’s director Rajkumar Hirani uses imaginative visual gags to compliment the film’s surreal tone. The repetitive use of black and white in the scenes that take place in Hari’s house are a brilliant spoof of the sentimental portrayal of poverty in classical Bollywood cinema. Aside from the clever self-referential narrative, the film provokes gut-busting belly laughs. At times it evokes comparison to the Farelly Brothers, who mastered dark humour and gross out gags in genre classics such as Dumb and Dumber.

3 Idiots’ barrage of jokes is reminiscent of the wisecracking classic Hollywood films such as His Girl Friday and Bringing Up Baby. Unlike those golden age masterpieces, however, it does not contain a single interesting female character. Pia, as played by Kareena Kapoor, is bland to the point of nonexistence. The Female sorority found at a mixed university campus is also completely ignored. We glimpse girls onscreen in the classrooms but they remain nameless and voiceless. The focus of the film is on the male student body. Both Aamir Khan and Sharman Joshi are satisfactory in their roles. The standout performance belongs to Madhavan as the quiet conformist Farhan. He portrays the young man with reserved grace as an internally tormented individual.

The fact that 3 Idiots manages to maintain its comedic momentum whilst successfully tackling larger complex themes is what makes it a cut above the rest. Aamir Khan’s Rang de Basanti tried to achieve a similar feat. That production’s ambitious storyline, however, worked against it. The first half of the film was about male bonding while the second half concerned itself with student protests and terrorism. Consequently Rang de Basanti felt like a muddled film that had crudely been split in two. Much like the motivation behind Farhan and Hari’s nostalgic quest to find their friend Rancho, the success of 3 Idiots lies in its unity.

Friday, 12 February 2010

The Panic in Needle Park


























I’d like to start by drawing attention to the awful poster. Its religious tone draws parallels to the silent propaganda films that promoted the temperance movement. Panic, however, is much more than a junkie romance or an old-fashioned moralist message on the dangers of drug use.

Panic is a film full of surprises. Most notably it is credited as Al Pacino’s breakthrough. Both Francis Ford Coppolla and Dino de Laurentis have stated that it brought the actor to their attention. Pacino was subsequently cast in both filmmakers’ respective projects, The Godfather and Serpico. Jerry Schatzberg, the film’s director, worked with Pacino again in 1974 casting him alongside Gene Hackman in Scarecrow. Although I have not seen Scarecrow the clips of it that I have watched indicate that aesthetically it contains similarities to Panic. Both films show Schatzberg to be a promising talent with a distinctive vision. The director’s career, however, sadly never progressed past his auspicious early productions. Perhaps there was no audience for his gritty, realist take on the lives of America’s displaced citizens.

As stated in the title sequence Needle Park is the name bestowed upon the junction of Sherman Square in New York by its inhabitants. In the film the area is populated with cheap hotels, diners and run-down apartment blocks. The people that dwell in this dilapidated environment include pimps, prostitutes, drug addicts and petty criminals. Bobby, Al Pacino, is both an addict and a thief. The film follows his relationship with Helen and their increasing drug use.

The environment that the film creates correlates a number of the social problems that affect Needle Park. The community of drug users, dealers and prostitutes co-exist and the boundary between their identities is blurred. Bobby, for example, starts the film as an addict who steals in order to feed his addiction. Later, however, he starts dealing and working with the substance manufacturers. His relationship with Helen and their excessive dependence on heroin leads him to use her as a sexual object when he needs his next hit. Eventually Helen herself becomes a prostitute and thief as she robs her clients. What at first seems like a food chain, a hierarchical system of corruption, ends up becoming a vicious cycle of despair.

Another component in the cycle are the cops that monitor Needle Park, who are as self-absorbed as the junkies that they detest. “They all rat” is what one of the detectives tells Helen when trying to bribe her into setting up Bobby. This only adds to the atmosphere of paranoia that governs the region. Ultimately the cops are portrayed as a deterrent to the problem rather than a solution. Their method of blackmailing criminals into betraying one another makes Needle Park an increasingly volatile place.

Schatzberg sympathetically portrays his displaced characters. Their conflicting emotions present a contrast to the cold and manipulative motives of the police force. Helen best reflects this theme. She is presented as a soft spoken, fragile and helpless female. At the beginning of the film we find her bed ridden after getting an illegal abortion. She is not, however, an addict. Her exposure to Bobby’s lifestyle subsequently leads her to start using. In the process her dependent nature is revealed. She is more reliant on men than drugs. We later learn that she ran away from home and therefore her attachment to men is almost out of necessity as she is homeless. Bobby is in the same predicament, navigating the vacant spaces he can use as shelter and stealing in order to survive.

Schatzberg’s film borrows from the neo-realist tradition by detailing the hardships of marginalised communities. The exclusion of music from the film’s soundtrack places further emphasis on its commitment to realism. Furthermore the use of handheld camera in the sequence in which Bobby overdoses, coupled with quick cuts, deliberately gives the scene a documentary style, Cinéma vérité appearance. The superb editing in the film also adds to the moments of dramatic tension. The first time Bobby gets busted is an excellent example of the film's imaginative use of the technique. The simple cut to show Bobby showering in prison, which takes place immediately after he tries to rob a truck, is a brilliant example of how to successfully build suspense and how to maintain an economically tight narrative structure.

The poor marketing that Panic received has ultimately detracted from its layered storyline, instead focusing too much on the tragedy at its core and the star-making turn of its protagonist. The open-ended conclusion, unlike so many romantic tragedies, is not about sacrifice. In fact it reinforces the film’s central theme concerning the hopeless cycle of despair faced by Needle Park’s residents, if you can call them that. Therefore Panic is a more complicated affair than the countless other independent films of its ilk. 

Thursday, 4 February 2010

Silent Running


























Silent Running (1972) is a cult classic and with the recent return of thought provoking sci-fi films it has reached an influential status. Duncan Jones the director of Moon has referred to it as an instrumental film in the conception of his production. Silent Running’s themes of isolation, and technology versus nature are inherent to Jones’s directorial debut. Furthermore they fit in with other important seventies science fiction films, among them 2001: A Space Odyssey and Solaris. Significantly Douglas Trumbull, the film’s director, had worked on the former film as a special effects supervisor. He was obviously affected by the scope of Kubrick’s film; consequently its influence can be felt in Silent Running.

The action is set in space in the distant future. Housed in giant greenhouses aboard an American Airline’s commercial fleet are the remains of Earth’s natural environment. Freeman Lowell is the man responsible for monitoring these plantations along with his trio of colleagues. Lowell has devoted eight years of his life to the so-called conservation project. His commitment to his duty has made him an outcast from his workmates. Unlike Lowell they see no future in the programme and yearn to abandon it and return home. Their wish is granted when their supervisors instruct them to detach and destroy the greenhouses. Stunned by the news Lowell manages to save one of the domes. In the ensuing struggle he plunges himself into the darkness of space. Alone on the sole remaining ship with only the worker drones for company, Lowell faces the loneliest journey of all.

Freeman Lowell’s doomed quest provides one of the most thought provoking sci-fi narratives ever filmed. Its timeless message is still relevant today. The film speaks volumes about our environmental concerns especially when compared to a contemporary film like Avatar, which half-heartedly incorporates the theme into its plot. Unlike Avatar it is a film that subtly deals with its subject matter instead of crudely manipulating its audience.

The film’s subdued tone is most evident in the way it makes reference to the past. The unnamed tragedy that the Earth has undergone is a case in point. Throughout the film the reasons behind the conservation project remain unclear. A number of images and dialogue, however, offer some insights. Lowell’s reluctance to return home for example is met with surprise by his co-workers. They point out that unemployment and poverty has been eradicated but Lowell’s contempt is toward the synthetic nature of life that awaits him. Furthermore there are visual indications of the conditions on Earth. For instance when Lowell is confronted by a deteriorating forest an effective tracking shot follows him as he races to find a cure. This is intercut with a pov tracking shot in an earthly forest, reflecting his motivation. Another scene indistinctly refers to our planet without resorting to a flashback. In it we see Lowell reacting with terror to an image of dead trees in a book.


Although Silent Running lacks the scale and budget of other sci-fi films of its time such as 2001 and Star Wars, its special effects still look impressive. The most striking shots are of the exterior of the ships and the greenhouses they are carrying. The intricate attention to detail makes them a joy to behold. There are, however, a number of elements that have not stood the test of time and seem out of place. First and foremost is the soundtrack which contains a collection of songs by Joan Baez. Baez, a popular folk singer at the time, is heard in the poignant montages when Lowell is seen dwelling the ship’s interior in a bid to occupy his time. Her songs, however, detract from the emotional resonance of the scenes. This is exemplified by the one similar sequence in which her voice cannot be heard, instead replaced by the film’s score. The scene is aided by the haunting music and does not detract from its stark, futuristic melancholy.

Another shortcoming is the design of the ship’s drones. They look like portable air-conditioners with legs. The latter humanistic feature becomes relevant when they become Lowell’s only companions. In fact his one-way banter with the silent drones provides a welcome dose of comic relief in the hopeless scenario.


Although Silent Running has an optimistic finale it was never going to achieve commercial success. With very few characters it relies heavily on its protagonist’s ability to carry the film. Accordingly Bruce Dern is commendable as Freeman Lowell, initially creating a cold and distanced persona and gradually exposing its fragility. The unconventional narrative, however, contains no heroes, villains or romance. Instead its heightened use of imagination encourages the same amount of input on the audience’s behalf. Therefore despite its flaws Silent Running is nonetheless a rewarding experience.