He was born in 1887 In Beenton’s Christmas Annual in the form of a short story titled “ A Study in Scarlet”. His creator was a Scottish author and physician call Sir Arthur Conan Doyle. I think he modeled Sherlock on himself because both of them were extra ordinarily brilliant, sharp, quick witted, observant and had forensic skills to add to their eye for details. However, Arthur said that he had apprenticed with a certain Dr. Joseph Bell on whose mannerisms and working styles, the character of Homes was based. Homes lived through 4 novels and about 50+ stories and most of them are written through the perspective of his friend Dr. John H. Watson. Not only Watson is his confidant, but is also shown as a brave man with a lot of Brit sense of humor and Homes cares about him more than blood brother.
Sherlock Homes is a product that is a Guy Richie product and yet not so. For the lesser mortals, Guy Richie is now the estranged husband of pop icon and diva Madonna. For some sane ones, one of his earlier films Snatch was shamelessly and incorrectly made in to super duper flop “Fool & Final” by choreographer Ahmed Khan. I don’t know what he was thinking when he was plagiarizing Snatch. Any Indian film director doesn’t have enough dope in his head to even coming close to make the eccentric snatch. For the informed ones, this is the 4th cult classic by Guy Richie after Lock, Stock & Two Smoking Barrels, Snatch and Rock N Rolla. Let me add to the fact that Rock N Rolla is a pure trip. For those who have never done dope, can never understand the layers of the film. The film was sheer brilliance. I haven’t been able to find the right adjectives for it till date.
Coming Back to Sherlock Homes. It is a James Bondish affair. In other words, an American detective story set in early British world. For those who love Guy Richie, this film will take their love to another level. He deftly handles the settings, and he cleverly deals with the idiosyncratic characters. For someone who has got an academy award nomination for playing the role of the biggest comic in the world Charlie Chaplin, Robert Downey Jr. effortless slips in to the role of a reverse-suave Sherlock Homes. The icy and dry Brit humor which stings like a diluted Hydrochloric acid falling on the back of your hand when you are fooling around with the preparation of colored concoctions in the Chemistry lab on the pretext of identification of an Element. In the movie, Robert is in his true elements.
Sir Doyle had given quirks to Sherlock while writing it. He was also a known drug addict and yet not so. Occasionally he would humor himself by injecting himself with a special concoction that he made. In the movie, he is lazy and his mind is shown to find solace in chaos of the scattered and littered room that he lives in. He also shares his room and life with his friend Dr. John “Jude Law” Watson. For the much publicized role of Jude Law, we were all wondering what is he doing in the film but from the frame he enters the film, he begins to steal the show and stands as tall as Downey. The camaraderie is evident, the bond goes beyond the ordinary. The two of them live like hand in glove and the quick ones thrown at each other, the dry repartee, the first one to give it back wins the race and Jude Law’s affection for Downey was just out of the world. Rarely you will find this kind of equation between two actors. Finally, Hollywood finds its equivalent of Jai and Veeru. Though, I must admit I was kind of intrigued with the connection between Brad Pitt and George Clooney in Ocean series.
Sherlock Homes is a must watch for the acute observations, the beautiful British alleys and some heartwarming action which doesn’t blow your mind but keeps you on the edge. The film also promises something which I personally always endorse. There is no God, there is no spirit, there is no magic or paranormal shit, its all science. If there is God, it better be called as Science or else, I don’t subscribe to anything. The ease with which Sherlock proves that everything is just an experiment was partially convincing too. His experiment on the dog were not only hilarious but also quite simply put. We must not forget that the film was set in late 19th century/ early 20th century and most of the things like chloroform, cyanide gases, remote control, sonic triggers were almost unknown. That makes the film believable.
The one on one fight sequences in the arena with the heavily built fighter showcased Guy’s brilliance. How unique can you make an ordinary display of power and Guy is adept at doing so yet surprising everyone. Things which I need not mention are other characters, the supreme sound track, out of the world cinematography and yes, outstanding story and screenplay. However, I would be a fool to not pay my respect to the British humor thrown in at regular intervals in the dialogues. Jude and Downey’s scene when Jude introduces his girlfriend to Downey who had turned in to an almost a-social after getting dumped twice by a hottie, decides to try his detective charm on the girl. Man, what a scene? Downey and Jude steal the scene with their expressions, when the girl breaks in to tears and announces that the white mark of the ring that she wore on the finger was because she was married to someone who did not dump her but died. Awesome thought in itself. A very subtle nuance and not wasted at all.
It opened on no. 2 in US, right after Avataar which is all set to become the biggest English film released in India by doing Rs. 10 million in next 2 weeks. Sherlock may not be as big as Avataar but it surely is a worthy film where every frame says more than it hides. It is a film makers delight. I am wondering if Sir Doyle is tossing, turning and cursing Guy Richie in the grave for making a haggard and disheveled James Bond of his otherwise suave, stylish and extremely courteous Homes. Are you listening Mr. Bhagat?
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Five Point Someone Vs. 3 Idiots
It looks like a Pandora’s box has been opened which in turn resembled a can of worms. Who gets the credit? Chetan : It is based on his book and so many of the scenes have been used as it is. Raj Kumar Hirani & Abhijat Joshi : They have hardly spoken against anything in their entire life and the outburst, probably taking a cue from Vidhu, was something that shocked everyone.
I am one of those who few millions who have read the book and seen the film both so let me put my point across. What Chetan missed in bringing in his book were a couple of things which I am trying to put across. Some of them may sound trivial and frivolous but for some reason I believe that they are integral to the whole controversy.
My observations :-
Characters
1. IIT became a regular engineering college not something where students across nation battle it out for admission. Five Point Someone was about GPAs of the student studying there but 3 Idiots had no such mention of GPAs.
2. Hari, Alok and Ryan became Farhan, Raju and Rancho.
3. Neha became Pia.
4. Instead of falling for Hari, Pia falls for Rancho.
5. Professor Cherian became Viru Sahastrabuddhe aka virus.
6. Chhotu, Ranchhoddas Shyamaldas Chanchad (the poser and the original) are not there in the book and Mona doesnt exist anywhere in Viru's family.
7. Pia's supposed fiancé Suhas appears mysteriously in the film.
8. There are other characters in the film which take the movie forward like the boy in the hostel, and not to mention Chatur aka silencer was such a full blown character in the film that he not only stole the lime-light but also assumed the role of narrator.
9. While Hari urf Farhan is supposed to be the narrator in the book, here everyone helps story move forward.
10. Professor Veera finds no place in the film and hence Rancho aka Ryan’s fluid mechanics machine made with Kinetic scooter also finds no mention, instead it is replaced with the idea of Virus generator.
Now the scenes
1. The ragging scene is gross in the book, as the students are supposed to sit butt naked with the cold drink bottles going up their arse. Just when some of them are doing, Ryan appears and breaks one bottle and threatens these seniors to sod off, which they do and thus saves two of his friends. The ragging scene in the film is sadly hilarious with james bond…alampanah tohfa kubool ho etc.
2. The indigenous idea of the spoon connected with electrical wires for the senior to piss on is only in the film the book somehow seem to have missed it.
3. Story of Rancho’s disappearance and then the journey of Farhan and Raju to find him was hidden in the book I presume.
4. The original Ranchhod das angle to the whole story was classy and was making fun of the education system where someone else takes the exam for you and the degree at the convocation and the photograph can all be yours.
5. The story did not have any mention of the special pen that Virus treasures and yet awards it to Rancho in the end.
6. In the book, they steal the exam papers for themselves and not for Raju.
7. Raju’s jump from the building is kept ass it is but his selection in the interview has been a journey of self realization, which has been acutely underplayed in the book.
8. Neither Mona’s marriage and her pregnancy was in the book nor was Pia’s angle of Suhas and then her becoming a runaway bride.
9. The delivery scene has been conceived originally and finds no space in the book.
10. Pia’s brother has couple of elaborate chapter in the book while in the film he finds only a couple of mentions.
11. The love making scene between Hari and Neha, and Prof. Cherian coming back, Neha’s cigarettes etc. are living in the book but not in the film.
12. Chatur’s character has been really built upon and his histrionics including the “Balatkar” scene was not in the book.
13. The 50’s setting of Raju’s house and the his mom using the same handle for scratching his father were two things which were not in the book.
14. The idea used for Farhan’s stroke just when the flight is taking off and his running away, picking up Raju, running in only Kurta etc. were not in the film.
15. Phunsuk Wangdu, the entire sub-plot is not in the book. Including the climax scene where Pia is blabbering about her surname changing to Wangdu is also not in the film.
16. Pissing on Virus’ name plate was an idea which was purely original and has no mention in the book.
Now please read the whole thing again, and think of the most hilarious scenes in the film. You will find that they were never in the book but created by Abhijat and Raju to add to the meat of the film. Cinema is a willing suspension of disbelief while book is like a mirror to life. The book had a lot of believable things while the film took to a more dramatic level with funny scenes and dialogues.
In my opinion, the film is based on the novel. The film has not been shot exactly the way novel is written. It has the writer and director’s imagination built in to it. I had posted the contract between Vidhu’s company and Chetan a couple of days back which also says that the credit will be given in a certain way as agreed and the payments will be made to Chetan as agreed. The producer went by the contract and paid him the money, giving him the credit. Why cry over the spilled milk now?
I am yet not clear about Chetan’s intention on this whole controversy. Also, he is an investment banker by profession so I am sure he understands the importance of legal agreements and sticking to the deliverables. If he had any doubt about the film not doing well, he should have put his foot down and asked for the final draft of the script before it went for filming. Another case in point is that we have read “One night at a call center” and have seen the adaptation in hello (Salman/ Katrina/ Sohail/ Arbaaz/ Amrita Arora/ Isha Koppikar/ Sharman/ Gul Panag, directed by Atul Agnihotri) and co-written (story/ screenplay) by none other than Chetan Bhagat himself. Now the fate of “Hello” is almost like a call transmission in terribly stormy weather conditions, only garbled sounds are heard.
We all are intelligent enough to realize what has made the film worth watching. The story as claimed by Chetan or Abhijat and Raju’s working on it. Leave it to you Five Point Someones and Idiots. You guys can take a call.
I am one of those who few millions who have read the book and seen the film both so let me put my point across. What Chetan missed in bringing in his book were a couple of things which I am trying to put across. Some of them may sound trivial and frivolous but for some reason I believe that they are integral to the whole controversy.
My observations :-
Characters
1. IIT became a regular engineering college not something where students across nation battle it out for admission. Five Point Someone was about GPAs of the student studying there but 3 Idiots had no such mention of GPAs.
2. Hari, Alok and Ryan became Farhan, Raju and Rancho.
3. Neha became Pia.
4. Instead of falling for Hari, Pia falls for Rancho.
5. Professor Cherian became Viru Sahastrabuddhe aka virus.
6. Chhotu, Ranchhoddas Shyamaldas Chanchad (the poser and the original) are not there in the book and Mona doesnt exist anywhere in Viru's family.
7. Pia's supposed fiancé Suhas appears mysteriously in the film.
8. There are other characters in the film which take the movie forward like the boy in the hostel, and not to mention Chatur aka silencer was such a full blown character in the film that he not only stole the lime-light but also assumed the role of narrator.
9. While Hari urf Farhan is supposed to be the narrator in the book, here everyone helps story move forward.
10. Professor Veera finds no place in the film and hence Rancho aka Ryan’s fluid mechanics machine made with Kinetic scooter also finds no mention, instead it is replaced with the idea of Virus generator.
Now the scenes
1. The ragging scene is gross in the book, as the students are supposed to sit butt naked with the cold drink bottles going up their arse. Just when some of them are doing, Ryan appears and breaks one bottle and threatens these seniors to sod off, which they do and thus saves two of his friends. The ragging scene in the film is sadly hilarious with james bond…alampanah tohfa kubool ho etc.
2. The indigenous idea of the spoon connected with electrical wires for the senior to piss on is only in the film the book somehow seem to have missed it.
3. Story of Rancho’s disappearance and then the journey of Farhan and Raju to find him was hidden in the book I presume.
4. The original Ranchhod das angle to the whole story was classy and was making fun of the education system where someone else takes the exam for you and the degree at the convocation and the photograph can all be yours.
5. The story did not have any mention of the special pen that Virus treasures and yet awards it to Rancho in the end.
6. In the book, they steal the exam papers for themselves and not for Raju.
7. Raju’s jump from the building is kept ass it is but his selection in the interview has been a journey of self realization, which has been acutely underplayed in the book.
8. Neither Mona’s marriage and her pregnancy was in the book nor was Pia’s angle of Suhas and then her becoming a runaway bride.
9. The delivery scene has been conceived originally and finds no space in the book.
10. Pia’s brother has couple of elaborate chapter in the book while in the film he finds only a couple of mentions.
11. The love making scene between Hari and Neha, and Prof. Cherian coming back, Neha’s cigarettes etc. are living in the book but not in the film.
12. Chatur’s character has been really built upon and his histrionics including the “Balatkar” scene was not in the book.
13. The 50’s setting of Raju’s house and the his mom using the same handle for scratching his father were two things which were not in the book.
14. The idea used for Farhan’s stroke just when the flight is taking off and his running away, picking up Raju, running in only Kurta etc. were not in the film.
15. Phunsuk Wangdu, the entire sub-plot is not in the book. Including the climax scene where Pia is blabbering about her surname changing to Wangdu is also not in the film.
16. Pissing on Virus’ name plate was an idea which was purely original and has no mention in the book.
Now please read the whole thing again, and think of the most hilarious scenes in the film. You will find that they were never in the book but created by Abhijat and Raju to add to the meat of the film. Cinema is a willing suspension of disbelief while book is like a mirror to life. The book had a lot of believable things while the film took to a more dramatic level with funny scenes and dialogues.
In my opinion, the film is based on the novel. The film has not been shot exactly the way novel is written. It has the writer and director’s imagination built in to it. I had posted the contract between Vidhu’s company and Chetan a couple of days back which also says that the credit will be given in a certain way as agreed and the payments will be made to Chetan as agreed. The producer went by the contract and paid him the money, giving him the credit. Why cry over the spilled milk now?
I am yet not clear about Chetan’s intention on this whole controversy. Also, he is an investment banker by profession so I am sure he understands the importance of legal agreements and sticking to the deliverables. If he had any doubt about the film not doing well, he should have put his foot down and asked for the final draft of the script before it went for filming. Another case in point is that we have read “One night at a call center” and have seen the adaptation in hello (Salman/ Katrina/ Sohail/ Arbaaz/ Amrita Arora/ Isha Koppikar/ Sharman/ Gul Panag, directed by Atul Agnihotri) and co-written (story/ screenplay) by none other than Chetan Bhagat himself. Now the fate of “Hello” is almost like a call transmission in terribly stormy weather conditions, only garbled sounds are heard.
We all are intelligent enough to realize what has made the film worth watching. The story as claimed by Chetan or Abhijat and Raju’s working on it. Leave it to you Five Point Someones and Idiots. You guys can take a call.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)