Yashdeep Patil: I would like to submit a review for Boom.
I love your articles, and like you I am passionate about movies.I also host blogs. Do visit them whenever you have a chance.
Boom
Saw Boom on the first day of its release. I wish I had heeded the advice of the many people who had seen it on pirated VCDs and lived to tell the tale.
Synopsis
Boom, as everyone and their second cousin know, is the story of 3 models Anu Gaekwad (Madhu Sapre, looking like something the cat dragged in on a bad day), Sheila Bardez (Padma Laxmi looking delectable half the time, and for the other half, she looks like Madhu) and Rina Kaif (Katrina Kaif, the gorgeous bombshell, who I think will be relegated to bikini roles after this debut), who get into the bad books of the underworld as they make the gangsters lose 50 crores worth of diamonds due to a scuffle they have on the ramp with a rival model.
These diamonds were stolen by Abdul 50/50 or Chotte Mia's, as he is called (Jackie Shroff in a minuscule role where he fails to impress), men and were to be sent to Bade Mia (Amitabh looking detestable and acting wacky, but he doesn't seem to enjoy it, and neither do we).
The go-between is the very imaginatively named Medium Mia (Gulshan Grover in a baddie role being overshadowed by the Big B). Both Chotte and Medium want to rise a level up to being Medium and Bade, respectively.
Alice (Zeenat Aman looking charming, but that's about all I can say) is Amitabh's secretary, and feels that she can actually rule the underworld, if given a chance.
Boom Shankar (Jaaved Jaafferi, hey, that's how he spells his name nowadays, must have gone to that numerologist Jumaani guy. He has a role which is interesting, to say the least) is given the responsibility of chaperoning the models, and to take care that they get the diamonds back. Seema Biswas also has a role as Bharti, the models' housemaid, who is smarter than she lets on.
When all these characters come together, it is time for the audience to leave the theatre nursing a BIG BAADAA BOOM in your head.
Also thrown in are some real-life designers, Wendell Rodricks, Tarun Tahiliani and Rohit Bal. They better stick to their professions, for sure as hell they can't act.
Analysis
For the first time in his life, Amitabh is playing a negative character with no excuses whatsoever (his roles in Aankhen, Kaante, Faraar, etc had some justification for his being bad). Is he impressive? Hmmm... the less said about it, the better. I don't want to alienate the Big B fans here. He seems totally disinterested in the proceedings. One of the few scenes he shows chutzpah in is when he flicks some comic books from his own store. Jackie Shroff and Gulshan Grover have little to do except growl menacingly. Katrina Kaif looks good throughout the movie, but little else can be said about her. She sucks at acting. Even the furniture in the movie is a lot more animated than her face. Madhu Sapre does show a few histrionic capabilities. Padma Lakshmi is passable, but she needs to be consistent with her makeup.
Technique
Kaizad Gustad made his debut with Bombay Boys. Though this was not a great film, it had its snatches of innovative humour. It was well received, and that escalated the expectations from this flick. He thoroughly disappoints. Considering that this movie was through and through a Kaizad Gustad venture (he writes as well as directs), the blame for it should also squarely land at his doorstep. The movie is so shoddy that all of the sequences seem absoulutely disjointed. Seems like he just sat down and thought: "Hey... I think this sequence will look cool! Why don't I shoot it and then think where to put it in the film." It seems all the marijuana being smoked around in the film addled his brain cells and gave him delusions of being Quentin Tarantino.
Cinematography by Hinman Dhamija, an international cinematographer, is okay in parts, but it leaves you completely baffled in places. I always maintain that a good cinematographer is someone who doesn't let on that you are seeing stuff through the eyes of a camera; he actually makes you feel that you are present there. This is where he fails absolutely. His pyrotechnics with the camera leave him completely out of favour as far as I am concerned. The music (Resul, the sound engineer, and music by Talvin Singh, with background music by Sandeep Chowta) is fine, but I was completely disgusted when the models break into a song in the midst of a bank robbery. That is when the movie went beyond redemption. Editing by Reva Childs makes you wonder whether s/he really knew the language. Most of the scenes are so choppy and come out of the blue that you start wondering what you would have understood if you didn't know the much publicised theme of the movie.
What saddens me the most is, here you have an example of a producer (Ayesha Shroff) who gave absolutely free rein to her director to translate his vision on to film; and he screws up big time. On the other hand we have the great Sudhir Mishra, who is forced to bring in commercial considerations in his film (Calcutta Mail) due to his producers (Allu Arvind and Mukesh Udeshi) and his lead actor (Anil Kapoor). How I wish these directors had exchanged producers.
Sidelights
1) This film was shot in Burj Al Arab (correct me if I am wrong), which is supposed to be the most opulent hotel in the world. This is the first time that a film was given permission to be shot there.
2) There was a controversy regarding the payments to be made to Amitabh Bachchan for this film. He dragged the producers to the Producers Association, where they agreed to pay him in two instalments, one before the film's release, and one after. I think Amitabh will have to kiss his second instalment goodbye.
3) As a result of this feud, the producers also had to let go of the satellite rights of this film to Sahara Television (with whom Amitabh is associated) instead of it being broadcast by Sony Television (in which Jackie Shroff has a stake).
Verdict
Would I recommend this movie to someone? Forget it! If you want a headache, why don't you play Boom instead for 10 straight hours. This movie is a no-show right from the beginning. I wish I had watched the other B-Grade release this week, Miss India. At least Om Puri would have been a treat to watch. My recommendation for this week is Pirates of the Caribbean. Go watch this swashbuckling tale and praise Jerry Bruckheimer for his opulent fairy tales.
Ayan Chatterjee: Couldn't have agreed more to your perspective on the movie Boom. It is one thing when you got a movie not expecting and another when the expectations built up by the media hype, the cast, the previous hits (Bombay Boys) come tumbling down.
While viewing Boom my dilemma was the constant itch i felt in the seat which wanted to propel me towards the exit door of the theatre every 15 minutes and trying to balance it with money spent (Rs 150 in a modern-day multiplex) and the pathetic display of so-called "new-age crossover entertainment" being dished out on screen and enjoying at least the AC comfort for the film's duration.
As you have mentioned, Prem, story is absent like the government employee in a CPI-M bandh in Kolkata. The crude vulgarity beats B-grade soft-porn movies which run in shady theatres and Jaaved Jaafferi's pelvic thrusts at the drop of a hat don't in any remotest imagination characterise a hoodlum's gesticulation in reality (at least that's what i hope!!).
The splurging of wealth and opulent sets of hotels and fashion shows are a criminal injustice to Ayesha Shroff's money (no wonder they couldn't pay Big B!).
Have a lot more to say about the movie, but let me stop here.
As I remember, "In order for 'evil' to prevail, all that need happen... is for 'good' people to do nothing". I felt that I should do something. Warn U!!
Ashok Singh: Man, I loved your analysis of the film. Although I haven't seen the film, the film trailers and posters gave enough reason to not see a film such as this one. If there was even 10% of a chance for me to see the film, that seems to have dropped down to less than 1%.
Your article has a great sense of humour and gives a perfect picture of the film.
Eagerly waiting for your next article.
Mukta Raut: Have you heard of the person who was so poor that he couldn't pay attention? Or of the guy so out of sorts that he thought 'Black Beauty' was Naomi Campbell's sobriquet?
Any of that strike you as funny? I didn't think so. My take on Boom is that it is such a movie. Yes, it is unnecessarily lewd, exactingly pointless, but all in all good fun... like confetti, irritating if they fall on your cake or bubbly, but otherwise droll.
In fact, the film tantalizes with the promise of a story here, a hint of logic there -- but never to reveal either. I think it's quite a class act of peek-a-boo(m).
Hee hee ! And if one talks of life imitating art, the title has inspired the kind of puns it itself is peppered with.
For worse movies, might I recommend Footpath?
Nirav Shah: As it is evident from my email id, I am a very avid follower of films (both Hindi and English) and even I endured the pain (read: saw Boom) last Saturday night.
Besides what you've written on rediff.com, these are my stray thoughts:
1. Even if one assumes that lack of logic in a movie is totally acceptable to the viewer, the least he can expect is a story. As you've rightly pointed out, that Kaizad Gustad has tried to camouflage the lack of story (script, screenplay, editing, poor sound quality...) with the sleaze show. He should definitely give the viewers some credit.
2. Although his first film Bombay Boys bombed at the box office, I liked it for its sheer black and dark humour, in spite of its slow pace. It was an in-your-face kind of humour. But that clearly seems to be an aberration after seeing Boom.
3. Although I'm not a film-maker, I think that this film could have been salvaged by cutting down the length of the sleaze show and developed that part of the story (by making it more plausible) where the three models outwit the three dons. Clearly, that never was Kaizad's intention. Maybe his logic was, sex sells in India, any which ways.
I have loads of more thoughts to share, but I've got to go back to work.
