Top Gear – The BBC Television Series

I can’t stand series/ sitcoms. I thought Friends was fake and a big big bore, Grey’s Anatomy had a decent soundtrack and Ms M. Grey blabbered too much philosophy and Boston Legal was horribly made (Never figured out if it was a comedy or drama. That is definitely not a good thing!).

What I did like was Yes Minister and Yes Prime Minister series. It had the right mix of satire, comedy and some brilliant acting. And it was just about half an hour. Perfect. Sample this:

Hacker: Don’t tell me about the press. I know exactly who reads the papers: the Daily Mirror is read by people who think they run the country; The Guardian is read by people who think they ought to run the country; The Times is read by people who actually do run the country; the Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country; the Financial Times is read by people who own the country; The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by another country; and The Daily Telegraph is read by people who think it already is.

Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?

Bernard: Sun readers don’t care who runs the country, as long as she’s got big tits.

or

Sir Humphrey: Politicians like to panic, they need activity. It is their substitute for achievement

or

Hacker: When you give your evidence to the Think Tank, are you going to support my view that the civil service is overmanned and feather-bedded, or not? Yes or no? Straight answer!

Sir Humphrey: Well Minister, if you ask me for a straight answer, then I shall say that, as far as we can see, looking at it by and large, taking one thing with another in terms of the average of departments, then in the final analysis it is probably true to say, that at the end of the day, in general terms, you would probably find that, not to put too fine a point on it, there probably wasn’t very much in it one way or the other as far as one can see, at this stage.

It was simply simply amazing.

___

The only show that comes even close to Yes Minister is Top Gear. The show

Top Gear

is a motoring magazine show (if you didn’t know) which began in 1977 and was relaunched in 2002 and is presented by Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond and James May. They also have The Stig, an anonymous test driver.

Obviously, the show has its fair share of amazing cars which, at times, are put to some very interesting tests. A must watch for any car lover. But whats more interesting is the the humour quotient that is presented. It is funnier that most comedies that are being released.

What is more interesting is the challenges that are presented. They have what is called “Star in a reasonably-priced car” segment where Clarkson interviews a celebrity.  Then the celebrity has a go at the top gear test track and timings are recorded on a board. Apart from this they have some weird and absurd challenges and something called the “Cool Wall”. Its basically a board which are segmented into various categories of “cool”. Clarkson and Hammond then decide which cars are cool and which aren’t by sticking photos of them on the board (this has even led to fights with Hamster (Hammond) eating up the photos).

…

But what draws a ‘automobilically’ challenged chap like me is the humour. It is funny in a quirky and offbeat sort of way. And that makes it all the more interesting to watch. Am sure the estimated 350 million viewers would agree.

The humor comes in various forms, be it mimicking the co presenters (reference to Hamster’s ‘white teeth’ every now and then “I have not got my teeth whitened! – Richard Hammond”, Jeremy: “POWERRRRR!” mocking Clarkson, Jeremy: I would rather be in this, than in Keira Knightley. [on the Aston Martin V8 Vantage] James: And now the news: and this just in from Keira Knightley; She says she’s disappointed but she understands.) or some fantastically absurd comment introducing The Stig (“They say that his Scrotum has it’s own gravity Field”, “Some say he has been banned from the town of Chichester, and his face is upside-down.”) or making fun of the French (“This car is more fun than the entire French Air Force crashing into a fireworks factory!”, “Jeremy: I don’t want to go around this corner fast. I want to go home and Make Love and make Cheese because that’s what I like doing most of all because I’m French!”) or the mocking the Americans (“Jeremy: This turning right on a red light is America’s only contribution to western civilization.”, “You see, the thing about putting a nice big engine like this on is for one big reason: weight, alot of weight. this big thing weighs nearly 600 pounds, which is the same as putting a whole American on the back” – Clarkson”).

Most of what they present has a touch, nay, a big dose, of humour to it.

Watch it if you are passionate about cars. Or if you want to have a good laugh.

Cheers

Jais

Milk (2008)

Milk

Milk is a biographical film directed by Gus Van Sant based on the life of the Harvey Milk, a gay rights activist and the first to openly gay man to be elected to public office in California as a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors (thank you wikipedia). It has Sean Penn, Emile Hirsch, Josh Brolin and James Franco amongst others.

The movie starts with Milk and his lover Scott Smith (James Franco) moving to San Francisco where they open Castro Camera. Soon the charismatic Milk becomes an activist having a devout group of followers. The movie then proceeds to how Harvey starts his political career showing his unsuccessful runs for the office. Finally he gets elected but then is embroiled in a struggle against the so-called Proposition 6 – a referendum designed to allow school boards to fire gay teachers.

___

The movie is very well made take on the life of the late Harvey Milk. The writing and directing is top notch. The story sticks to the facts and presents a multi-layered blend of history and movie making. The director also (of the Good Will Hunting and Finding Forrester fame) has made use of the genuine 70s footage giving it a very realistic feel. The attention to details in the script should be applauded as well.

The movie covers a large span of time but never feels hurried. It movies at a brisk pace. The acting is top notch. Sean Penn displays amazing restraint while playing the character of Milk. One could almost feel the vulnerability. A serious Oscar contender. Among the supporting cast, who were brilliant, it is Josh Brolin, who portrays Milk’s political opponent and fellow Supervisor, Dan White, who stands out. The complexity of the character is evident in Brolin’s portrayal.

Somehow, the movie had a ‘Brokeback Mountain’ feel to it which is not necessarily a bad thing. Perhaps it was the open display of affection between homosexuals. Those who couldn’t stand Brokeback Mountain won’t be able to stand this one either.

A very well made movie and definitely worth a watch. A strong Oscar contender as well.

Cheers

Jais

Dev D (2009) – A Review

Dev D is a must watch. Directed by Anurag Kashyap, this is a

Dev D

modern day take on Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay‘s classic novel Devdas. Sounds interesting? You bet! This is the first movie which I am contemplating watching again. But not everybody will like it. Its crude, brash, full of attitude and at times, downright vulgar. But its unlike anything Hindi film industry has seen before.

This is one mind boggling piece of cinema. The cinematography, camera work  and the dialogues is innovative and revolutionary and the direction takes it a higher place altogether.  Technically the film is very very good and is comparable to international standards. The editing and the style of making reminded me of Trainspotting with fast cuts, dizzy cameras, lots of neon lights and some crazy symbolism. It is almost disturbing at times.

The movie is full of dark and dry wit. The performances are amazing. Abhay Deol is completely natural as Dev. He is very convincing as a person who is ‘wasted’. The first half, showing his fall, is the most absorbing part of the movie. Mahi Gill as Paro and Kalki Koechlin as Chanda are perfectly cast. Supporting cast does a splendid job as well.

The music by Amit Trivedi, as I have said before is amazing. The way each song is shot, the picturization and the situations in which they come make sense. It doesn’t see forced and bring in this raw energy and adds to the film in such a way that it movie can even be called a musical!

If there is a fault, it is the ending. Unlike the usual Devdas movies, this ends on a positive note. However, the movie loses steam in the last quarter and the ending is a bit abrupt and doesn’t go with the flow of the movie. But then no movie is perfect. just consider it as a minor glitch.

Watch it! You will be doing yourself a favour. That being said, the movie is not for all (please do read the disclaimer in the first paragraph).

___

There is a Dev D in all of us. Sadly, most of us can’t afford him.

Cheers

Jais

PS: You do learn those 6 things from the movie. Honest.

6 Things You Can Learn From Dev D

Was generally wasting time on the internet when I came across this. It was a movie review of Dev D. And it ended with the 6 things one can learn from Dev D (http://thenewsdose.com/2009/02/06/dev-d-movie-review/).

“6 Things You Can Learn From Dev.D

1. A very little communication gap is enough to kill a relationship

2. Never let your ego come in between your relationship.

3. Don’t drink, smoke and never do drugs.

4. Learn to move on and never let go the new girl because of a previous girl who is someone with else now.
5. Learn to manage your money.

6. And the most important, never call your dad with his name, say “Papa” or “Dad”

Wonder how many of us have thought about some of these things. Doesn’t take a Dev D to teach us some of them I guess, but to put them across in a blog is altogether a different issue.

If nothing else, that was an interesting way to end a review.

Jais

Ronin (1998)

Ronin is an action thriller

Ronin

directed by John Frankenheimer and stars Robert De Niro, Jean Reno, Stellan Skarsgård, Sean Bean and Natascha McElhone.

Ronin refers to a samurai with no lord or master. In this movie, De Niro and Jean Reno are two ex-secret service agents who team up along with few others to steal a heavily guarded case while traveling through a maze of violence, betrayal and shifting loyalties (aptly put in wiki I must admit). Honestly, there isn’t much of a plot to base the story around. The storyline is very predictable (where the bad guys aren’t really bad etc.)

The narration is stop-gap and is not very convincing. That being said, stylistically is movie is good with some nice locales and a fast pace. The actors, however, look bored and the performances are just about adequate. Can’t blame them really considering there isn’t much they can do. De Niro does a sincere job and gives a good performance as the cynical smart ass ex-CIA.

However, the movie has to be noted for its car chases. And there are quite a few. Sadly though, they appear forced and offer no excitement. It is just like one set piece after another minus the thrills. It is evident that  John Frankenheimer, who made French Connection II, tries to outdo the legendary chase scene from French Connection original. And fails.

The movie can pass off as an action movie with guns, bullets and car chases but not as an intelligent thriller.

Cheers

Jais

Frost/Nixon (2008)

Recent Releases – A Reflection (Part II)

In continuation of my legendary blog dated 15th of January, 2009, I shall put forth my views on the certain other recent releases, namely, Frost/Nixon.

You might ask why this ‘piece’ after almost three weeks. You have to remember dear interested readers, three weeks is nothing in a Bloggers’ life. It is nothing. Cliched as it sounds, time does fly. More so when the blogger is in college. However, there is a time and place for everything. We shall dwell into the philosophy and dynamics of space and time at a later stage. This is the time to enlighten you, my dear readers, about the recent releases. With the Oscar fever catching up, this is an enlightening read indeed, if I may say so myself (boy, am i bored!).

___

Frost/Nixon (2008)

Frost/Nixon

Frost/Nixon is a cinematographic version of the series of interviews between David Frost and Richard Nixon. It is based on a play of the same name. It is directed by Ron Howard and stars Frank Langella as former President of the United States Richard Nixon and Michael Sheen (Tony Blair from The Queen) as British talk show host David Frost.

The movie takes off after the Watergate incident after which Nixon hands in his resignation. Soon after, Frost requests a series of interviews with the erstwhile President. Frost tries to sell the interview to American Broadcasters but fails. However, Frost does manage to assemble a team of people to research for him. The rest of the movie deals with how the interviews go and how how Frost deals with the Watergate scandal and the cover-up  by Nixon.

The story, at first glance, doesn’t seem movie material. However, some good acting and direction takes it to a new level. The film is basically carried by Frank Langella and Sheen and their interaction. Considering both acted in the play, their familiarity with the characters is unmistakable. Sheen is good as the charismatic celebrity basking in the limelight who at times is bogged down by the pressure of not being able to sell the interviews. Rest of the cast is adequate enough.

Special mention has to be made of the acting of Frank Langella. Even though he doesn’t resemble the President, through his performance, he becomes Nixon. He brings in that force, that spark and demeanor in the performance that makes Nixon less of a villain and more of a person who is victim of the circumstances. He humanizes Nixon.

The movie proceeds at a brisk pace and at times feels like a thriller even! (particularly so if you are unaware of the outcome of the interviews.) The use of cutaway interviews between the movies gives it a documentary feel.

One the whole a good movie. Definitely worth a watch.

Cheers

Jais

Australian Open, 2009 – Nadal Comes Through in 5 Sets! What a Match!

Australian Open, 2009 Finals

What a match! What a match! let me say again, WHAT A MATCH!

One was expecting a mouth-watering experience, but of  such magnitude?!

…

We are witnessing a remarkable rivalry here between Federer and Nadal, just the thing this sport, or any sport for that matter, needs. We saw a period of dominance by Federer but the tide is now changing. And this is the dawn of a new era (perhaps a bit early to call it that I suppose). And the contrast in the styles only makes the competition all the more exciting.

Nadal came through after a 5 set thriller winning the final set 6-2 (7-5, 3-6, 7-6, 3-6, 6-2), a match equal to the Wimbledon, 2008, finals, if not better. Fernando Verdasco had said after the Semi Finals that one has to win each point thrice against Nadal. Doubt Federer would disagree. First 5 setter in 21 one years but worth the wait. Every second of it. What incredible tennis! (let me say it again,what a match!).

___

Federer must be crest fallen. With Each Grand Slam, Federer must see his chances of breaking Sampras’s record of 14 Grand slams diminishing. He must be wonder what he has to do to overcome this man, this machine. For every shot, Nadal had a reply.

For Federer the penny dropped in the final set when he was serving 2 games to 1, 30-love. What followed was a streak of 7 unforced errors. There could only be one winner after that.

However, the game of the match came at 2 games all in the fourth set, with Federer serving. Nadal striking a beautiful winner after running across the court at least thrice followed by a clean ace by Federer. Picture this in repeat mode and even that will not do justice the remarkable game that it was. The standard of play was extraordinary.

___

Nadal fans must be thinking that he reached the pinnacle. A finished product. Having defeated Federer on Clay, Grass and now on Hard Court, it was can said that we are witnessing historical gamesmanship from Nadal. He is, at present, the best player on planet, and arguably the best ever. Federer fans will have to wait for the next round. And there will be a next round.

With limitless endurance, boundless energy and a never-say-die attitude, Nadal has proven himself to be a worthy adversary to Federer’s dominance over the Sport in the last few years. With 10 hours of tennis in two days, who would have thought Nadal will survive this long and go on to win the Australian Open, 2009. He chased every ball as though his life depended upon it. And more often than not, came up with an amazing winner. His powerful forehands was impossible to match.

__

The fact that Federer broke down after the match reveals a lot about what he was feeling and the psychological impact the match might have had on him. The applause that followed, however, said it all.

Two great ambassadors of the sport, two great champions. Congratulations to both of them.

But there was only one winner.