Bombay Velvet --- just one word, Surprised.
I am surprised why critics called this as disaster ... i am surprised that finally India had guts to have its own authentic Noir drama.
Many would be knowing that 50s was era of Noir, post that it was 90s when Hollywood recreated Noir era once again with stylish frames and contemporary narrations. One man who had put his stamp on this Genre was Martin Scorsese, Good fellas, Casino were the best and following that was Kevin Spaceys LA confidential.
What AK did with BV was the clinical precision treatment with bad actors. The soul remains pure but it was body that was flawed.
Movie Genre are as good as Newtons Theorem, you cannot redefine it as per your convenience.
A Noir should have a struggling Mobster who wants to become godfather, "The Master"; a local thug who becomes mobster, "Apprentice" ... and then there has to be emotion where greed crosses over loyalty and lastly there has to be SEX in its theme, most important element of Noir.
Noir remains pointless without having the element of Sex. The same reason LA Confidential was about 2 police officers, Master and apprentice chasing Sex Syndicate.
Kashyap incorporates everything, he Has Master in Khambata and Apprentice in Jhonny and voyeurism by dull chemistry between Rosy and Jhonny.
Bombay Velvet starts on a very high note, it describes 50s Bombay in a very stylish manner but as soon as first half is done, second half fails to deliver the powerful reaction which is a pre-requisit of any Noir film.
The primary reason to the failure would be KJo as Khambhata. He was hands down the worst choice. His persona and looks were just superb but his voice had zero impact, in short he was not at all convincing DON.
Some of the most crucial scenes were ruined because of miscast, he looked like a sophisticated gentleman which is fine, but that gentleman needs to be cunning and convincing. Just to put a perspective, such roles were done by Robert De Niro or Alpachino which Kashyap sheepishly offered to Kjo.
The most tricky part was to decide the story track for Rosey. She should be integral part of the movie yet her characterization needs to be of a trophy women, a mistress who is of no purpose. Kashyap directs Rosey with flying colors. He maintains the balance with effortlessly but somehow the conviction of her chemistry is like dead meat.
Overall movie is not a disaster but could have been much much better.
Kashyap could have easily incorporated the Cotton mill issue in much greater depth. He could have stressed more on the transformation of 60s Bombay into financial Capital .... the sad part is that Script of BV has all these elements but then Kashyap confines himself to only characters of Jhonny and Khambata and misses the most important character, BOMBAY
I am surprised why critics called this as disaster ... i am surprised that finally India had guts to have its own authentic Noir drama.
Many would be knowing that 50s was era of Noir, post that it was 90s when Hollywood recreated Noir era once again with stylish frames and contemporary narrations. One man who had put his stamp on this Genre was Martin Scorsese, Good fellas, Casino were the best and following that was Kevin Spaceys LA confidential.
What AK did with BV was the clinical precision treatment with bad actors. The soul remains pure but it was body that was flawed.
Movie Genre are as good as Newtons Theorem, you cannot redefine it as per your convenience.
A Noir should have a struggling Mobster who wants to become godfather, "The Master"; a local thug who becomes mobster, "Apprentice" ... and then there has to be emotion where greed crosses over loyalty and lastly there has to be SEX in its theme, most important element of Noir.
Noir remains pointless without having the element of Sex. The same reason LA Confidential was about 2 police officers, Master and apprentice chasing Sex Syndicate.
Kashyap incorporates everything, he Has Master in Khambata and Apprentice in Jhonny and voyeurism by dull chemistry between Rosy and Jhonny.
Bombay Velvet starts on a very high note, it describes 50s Bombay in a very stylish manner but as soon as first half is done, second half fails to deliver the powerful reaction which is a pre-requisit of any Noir film.
The primary reason to the failure would be KJo as Khambhata. He was hands down the worst choice. His persona and looks were just superb but his voice had zero impact, in short he was not at all convincing DON.
Some of the most crucial scenes were ruined because of miscast, he looked like a sophisticated gentleman which is fine, but that gentleman needs to be cunning and convincing. Just to put a perspective, such roles were done by Robert De Niro or Alpachino which Kashyap sheepishly offered to Kjo.
The most tricky part was to decide the story track for Rosey. She should be integral part of the movie yet her characterization needs to be of a trophy women, a mistress who is of no purpose. Kashyap directs Rosey with flying colors. He maintains the balance with effortlessly but somehow the conviction of her chemistry is like dead meat.
Overall movie is not a disaster but could have been much much better.
Kashyap could have easily incorporated the Cotton mill issue in much greater depth. He could have stressed more on the transformation of 60s Bombay into financial Capital .... the sad part is that Script of BV has all these elements but then Kashyap confines himself to only characters of Jhonny and Khambata and misses the most important character, BOMBAY
No comments:
Post a Comment