Category: Movies

Dead Poets Society was Disappointing

On June 5, 2023

Quotes of the movie Dead Poets Society keep popping up on my Facebook and Twitter feeds. Recently, I came across a few tweets celebrating its 34^th anniversary. I had never watched the movie and didn’t even know its plot, so I decided to watch it. However, it did not meet my expectations. The premise of testosterone-filled boys within a strict school system had to be impactful and somewhat relatable, but the initial promise faltered towards the end.

The film begins with the boys of Welton Academy carrying the banners, labeled, “Tradition,” “Honor,” “Discipline,” and “Excellence.” It reminded me of Amitabh Bachhan’s “Parampara, Prathistha, Anushasan (Tradition, Prestige, Discipline) speech from Mohabbatein (2000). Both the movies are set in a tradition-loving boys’ school, and in both, a teacher disrupts the status quo. The differences are numerous. However, a major difference is that the Bollywood movie ends with a light note, whereas the Hollywood flick has a tragic ending, which I think, was too contrived.

Dead Poets Society has problems from the beginning. The first scene I noticed is the one where the boys are smoking in Neil and Todd’s room. How they are not caught and punished for smoking in the school premises is beyond my comprehension. Also, Neil’s father does not scold his son for smoking. I don’t know if smoking in school was normal in the US in 1950s since they show the Principal and parents doing so when Todd comes to sign the confession letter, but it absolutely bothered me.

The students also get assignments (which is normal for all schools), but they are never shown to get punished for failing to submit them in time in never shown. Moreover, the other teachers seem to notice the members of Dead Poets Society leave the school at night, but they don’t act on it. Because the first act never shows any consequences for the actions of students, I was not convinced that the school was strict. So, when Charlie aka Nuwanda gets punished later, it does not have an impact.

The book ripping scene is also overdramatic and has a dangerous message. It’s one thing to dislike someone’s views or not conform to unnecessary technicalities, but tearing pages from a book is a different matter. John Keating tells early on that he won’t tolerate anything that is against what he believes. He encourages his students remove the entire preface based on one paragraph and his students follow his instruction without even bothering to see if there are better insights into poetry. He wants his students to be anti-conformists, but makes them conform to his ridiculous ideas. He talks about them finding their own voice, but does not even ask for their opinion on the matter. What hypocrisy!

Keating has great lines like:

We don’t read and write poetry because it’s cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion.

No matter what anybody tells you, words and ideas can change the world.

“Boys, you must strive to find your own voice. Because the longer you wait to begin, the less likely you are to find it at all. Thoreau said, “Most men lead lives of quiet desperation.” Don’t be resigned to that. Break out!”

“There’s a time for daring and there’s a time for caution, and a wise man understands which is called for.”

“Now we all have a great need for acceptance, but you must trust that your beliefs are unique, your own, even though others may think them odd or unpopular.”

These lines in the movie, however, are just those—lines! Keating’s students don’t use words and ideas to change the world. They are attracted to poetry because they want to flirt with girls. Also, they could have changed so many things, but they just want is for the school to become co-educational. Neil does not try using words to change his father’s thoughts, cannot fight for his passion, and commits suicide when he could have either rebelled or escaped his father in a few months.

The other boys, too, can’t follow their teacher. They don’t speak in favor of the teacher they are so keen to follow. They can’t tell why or how Neil was unhappy and that the pressure put upon them is sucking the lives out of them. Except Charlie, everyone signs the confession which expels Keating. As a result, the last “O, Captain, My Captain” scene looked artificial to me. (Keating shouldn’t even have been allowed to get in the class or see the students after what he has been blamed for!) They might have been able to overcome their fear, but it does it help Keating? Can they overcome their guilt? What will the Principal and the school administration do to them? Will they be expelled or silenced?

Some other questions trouble me. Is it wrong to honor tradition? Is it bad to become disciplined and pursue excellence? While I believe that sticking to tradition can make us rigid towards change and less rebellious, I don’t think it is bad to work towards a goal with discipline.

Overall, despite wonderful quotes, Dead Poets Society did not work for me. It skips realism (just as Keating does in his poetry class), does not embrace rebellion, and forgets what it preaches.

Movie Review: The Tale of Princess Kaguya

By Sandeept

On January 22, 2021

In Blogging, Movies, Review

Kaguya-hime no Monogatari (The Tale of Princess Kaguya) is a 2013 animated movie produced by Studio Ghibli and directed by Takahata Isao. Based on one of the oldest and most popular folktale, “The Tale of the Bamboo-Cutter”, the movie shows the story of a nymph who descends from the Moon to the Earth.

In his early career, Takahata was inspired by French and other European animators and the tales they told. As his career progressed, he was more engrossed in the stories of his own country. That thought gave birth to the classic “Grave of the Fireflies”, one of the saddest tales ever told in cinema. His interest in telling stories rooted to Japan reaches its height in The Tale of Princess Kaguya.

The movie is painting in motion. Beautiful water-colour hand drawn paintings made me feel like I was watching old Japanese paintings in succession. The animation looks rough (a deliberate choice), the line art gets chaotic at some points (the best use of “abstraction” as said by some of the best animators in the industry) and does what it has to do (bring the characters and story to life).

The main characters are multi-dimensional. The woodcutter seems cold at times when he uses divine powers to name Kaguya a princess and makes her stay as a noble. However, he thinks it is the best thing to happen for a child who was divine herself. Kaguya’s mother is kindlier, although she also desires to make her a princess. Kaguya herself is a fun-loving girl who dreams of escaping back to her village when she is brought to the mansion in the town. Her sense of freedom is depicted well in the scenes in which she unleashes a cat, frees a sparrow from the cage, and dances when she sees sakura in the Spring.

The movie gave me a feeling so intense it is impossible to explain in words. Takahata’s mastery of storytelling, his artistic sense and vision has produced a movie that will soon be regarded as one of the classics.

Why Kazuo Kiriyama did not win the Battle

By Sandeept

On November 9, 2018

In Blogging, Book Review, Character study, Movies, Review

Kazuo Kiriyama is the best “player” of the “game” that involves killing classmates. He alone kills twelve of his classmates. Yet he ends up dead. A lot of Battle Royale video game fans seem to be annoyed by this fact. They say, “He deserved to win.” I say, “He didn’t. A novel or a movie is different from a video game.”

The kid who never smiled

We get the first and the most important insight into Kazuo Kiriyama’s character through Mitsuru Numai in Chapter 11. Mitsuru had been in an occasion, saved from bullies by Kazuo and since then, he had revered the latter. He believed Kazuo was the one capable of beating the system and destroy the Battle Royal Programme because he had defeated local yakuza (Yakuza is an organization of powerful Japanese gangsters or mafias).

Mitsuru and his friends make him the leader of the gang called the Kiriyama family. Despite being called notorious in the city, the Kiriyama family never bullied upon others in the school. They all relied on Kazuo Kiriyama and did things for fun. However, when Kiriyama kills his gang within an hour of the beginning of the game, Mitsuru Numai notices one thing that they had always ignored: “Kazuo Kiriyama never smiled.” (Chapter 11, Battle Royale)

Kazuo Kiriyama is apathetic. He does not feel anything. Neither joy, nor sorrow, no pity, no guilt. We later know that while he was still in his mother’s womb, she fell in an accident and a stake had entered Kiriyama’s head. The accident destroyed his emotional centre. Whatever the reason, Kiriyama is what Shogo Kawada tells us: “A hollow man … There’s no place in his heart for logic or love, no. For any kind of values. That kind of person. On top of that, there’s no reason for the way he is.” (Chapter 67, Battle Royale).

The coin toss

If one thing that changed the complexion of the story, it is Kiriyama’s coin toss. He had two options:

To participate in the game, and
To destroy the Battle Royale Programme and the government.

Kiriyama’s choices are not based on logic. They were based on chance. Had he used logic, he would have chosen the second option. He would have been a great helping hand to our heroes Shogo Kawada, Shuya Nanahara and Shinji Mimura. None of our heroes believed he was capable of killing his classmates. He hadn’t even bullied one! Kiriyama’s coin toss, thus becomes a bane for all his classmates.

Even if Kiriyama had not been thinking logically, had the coin toss made him destroy the Programme, he would have got support from his gang as well as the others. They would not have to fear their own classmates. Forty of them could have brought down the Programme in no time.

In the movie, however, Kiriyama is a new student like Shogo Kawada and is a mystery. In the novel, he is their classmate and still a mystery. Kiriyama from the novel, to me, is a bigger villain. But he could have easily turned into a hero.

Why Kiriyama did not win

Simply, because letting Kiriyama win was against the books theme of love and kindness. Kiriyama is the exact opposite of love and kindness. Had Koshun Takami, the author, let Kiriyama win, he would have set a wrong example. He had to save the lovely Noriko and the lucky Shuya to send a message: “Apathy is a vice,” and: “Choice made without reasoning is a curse.”

Had Kiriyama won, another theme of the book would have been crushed: rebellion. After the coin toss, Kiriyama’s chance of being a rebellion dies. Rebellion stays alive in the form of Nakagawa and Nanahara. They didn’t get long lecture from Kawada about the system and change to get killed in the end. They are there to bring about some change. Kiriyama’s victory would have shattered Shogo’s dream, and our hopes that the Battle Royale Programme would come to an end. Kiriyama did not win. We still have a hope.

[Featured image obtained from fdzeta.com]

Battle Royale: Themes in Movies and Books

By Sandeept

On October 26, 2018

In Review, Blogging, Book Review, essay, Movies

Battle Royale has a simple concept: 42 students are abducted to an island, provided with weapons and made to fight each other. What would they do? Some would fear for their lives and attack first. Some would form allies (and later betray). Some would go on a rampage, while some would seek for peace. Koshun Takami plays at these possibilities and delivers the details of the battle at an unimaginable level. Here I discuss some of the themes I discovered in Battle Royale.

Authority, trust and rebellion

The novel is set in the fascist regime of the Republic of Greater East Asia (RGEA) in 1997. The country is basically Japan in an alternate timeline. However, from the details in the plot, I could sense that the Republic of Greater East Asia also included China.

I wonder how the fascism originated in the Republic. Could it be the Chinese communist influence, or could it be the World War II Japan? The latter feels more likely. During the Second World War, Japan was an imperialistic force that had sided with Germany. Japan even invaded China until they were sent back the PLA led by Mao. In the alternate timeline, Japan might have won both the wars and established an authoritarian rule. But we do not know.

Here is a conversation that makes it difficult to know the country’s history.

Noriko interrupted him, ‘Seventy-five years ago?’ Hugging her knees under her pleated skirt, Noriko tilted her head with a puzzled look on her face.

Noriko then looked over at Shuya. Shuya nodded and then looked back at Shogo. ‘I heard something about how the history they teach us is a big lie and that the current Dictator is hardly the 325th Dictator. In fact, he’s only supposed to be the twelfth one, right?’

Shuya glanced at Noriko’s surprised face, but when he heard Shogo’s next statement, ‘Well, even that might not be true,’ he raised his brow.

‘What do you mean?’

Shogo smiled and said, ‘There is no Dictator. He doesn’t exist. He’s just made up. That’s what I heard.’

‘What?’

‘That can’t be…’ Noriko said hoarsely, ‘but we see him on the news…and on New Year’s he makes an appearance in front of everyone at his palace…’

‘Right.’ Shogo grinned. ‘But who is this ‘everyone at the palace’? Have you ever met someone who was actually there? What if they were actors too, just like the Dictator?’

Battle Royale (Chapter 31)

Though the history is dubious, it is clear that the government wants control over its citizens. Battle Royale Programme (aka Battle Experiment No. 68 or the Programme) is a form of control. The abducted children are forced to fight and one of them stands out as the winner. These children fear (and/or mistrust) each other. In the situation, they forget the good times they had together. Some examples are:

Yoshio Akamatsu is the first to be grabbed by fear. He kills a girl from a safe spot and attacks Shuya Nanahara.
Yuko Sakaki sees Nanahara “kill” Tatsumichi Oki and out of fear, tries to poison him. Her action causes a shootout in the Light House (the most intense scene in both the book and the movie), and five girls kill each other. She herself commits suicide.
Kayoko Kotohiki attacks Hiroki Sugimura thinking he is going to kill her. Hiroki’s only mission, however is to search her, protect her (if possible) and to confess his love for her. (This is one of those scenes which is better than in the book than in the movie.)

What about the parents and guardians of the students who are abducted for the “Experiment”? They get informed about it. Some protest. They are killed or tortured by the government. Shogo’s father was killed when he was the participant of the previous Programme. Kinpatsu Sakamochi (Programme Supervisor) raped Anno, Nanahara’s caretaker. And the others accept their fate of having to lose a child. Noriko Nakagawa’s parents are said to be alive at the end of the story.

Any resistance against the Programme or the government is crushed. Mr. Hayashida (the teacher) is killed when he resists to cooperate with Sakamochi. Shinji Mimura’s uncle is said to have died in an accident but Shinji believes that he was murdered by the government for being rebellious.

Also, the Programme is equal to all. The participant could be the son of a bureaucrat or an aristocrat or may be an orphan. None of it matter. No one is spared. The moment between Kyoichi Motobuchi, the class representative and Kinpatsu Sakamochi makes this concept clear.

Some of his classmates might have been hoping that Kyoichi would provide some adequate rational form of protest. Kill the friends you were hanging out with yesterday? It was impossible. Someone’s making a mistake here. Hey rep, can you take care of this one for us?

“’M-my father is a director of environmental affairs in the prefectural government. How could the class I’m in be selected for th-the Program?…’

Due to his shaking, his tense voice sounded even more wound up than usual.

The man who called himself Sakamochi grinned and shook his head, his long hair swinging in the air. ‘Let’s see. You’re Kyoichi Motobuchi, right?

‘You must know what equality means. Listen up. All people are born equal. Your father’s job in the prefectural government doesn’t entitle you to special privileges. You are no different. Listen up, everybody. You all have your own distinct personal backgrounds. Of course some of you come from rich families, some from poor families. But circumstances beyond your control like that shouldn’t determine who you are. You must all realize what you’re worth on your own. So Kyoichi, let’s not delude ourselves that you’re somehow special—because you’re not!’”

Battle Royale, Chapter 3

***

But the characters do not stop thinking about the rebellion. Shinji wants to avenge his uncle and tries hacking into their Programme computer which is in a school. When he fails, he makes an explosive to blast off the school. He fails again.

Shinji might have also been successful if he had tried to look for more allies but he does not seem to trust people. His uncle had told:

‘It’s best not to trust groups and movements. They’re not very reliable.’

He even kills a friend, Keita Iijima when he feels that he would leak his plan of blowing up the school.

The conversation between Shogo Kawada, Shuya Nanahara and Noriko Nakagawa provide insight into whether the rebellion would be successful. Shogo, who seems to know a lot, believes that people wouldn’t resist the government and a revolution for freedom may never occur. Their prosperity had made people oblivious to freedom. They believed in what the government believed: “controlled freedom is necessary for prosperity”. (Personally, I too feel this is true but I believe in soft control, unlike that of the RGEA.)

Even though Shogo has personal grudge against the government, he begins a rebellion by saving two people from the Programme and hijacking a military boat. Nanahara and Nakagawa are in the run in the book and the movie. Battle Royle 2 is the movie (I haven’t watched yet) in which the government has declared them as terrorists.

Kindness and Love

The novel has a lot of moments in which one character says to another: “You’re kind.”

Shinji Minura helps Noriko Nakagawa during the briefing by Kinpatsu Sakamochi, when the bullet ricocheting through Yotitoki Kuninobu hits her leg. Shuya Nanahara helps Noriko after they are sent to the “battlefield”. Shogo Kawada helps both of them. And though Hiroki Sugimura cannot help as he would like to, he has also been described as kind. Hiroki is also the tragic hero, who dies at the hands of his beloved.

On the opposite spectrum are Kazuo Kiriyama and Mitsuko Souma. While Mitsuko’s backstory makes one sympathetic towards her, one can’t even sympathize at Kiriyama’s death. His apathy makes him a one dimensional character—one who is perfect and wants to win the battle. However, he does not succeed. Had he succeeded, kindness and love would have lost. Rebellion would have lost. Battle Royale would have ended in a darker note, with a loss of hope.

Sakura Ogawa and Kazhuhiko Yamamoto are among the first to die. I felt their suicide was a symbol of lost love. Mitsuko Souma is one of the girls who has involved in prostitution even before her puberty. The book says she was gang-raped, the movie shows her mother forcing her into prostitution. The way she acts during the battle was also the result of lost love. Hiroki’s loss is also an instance of love losing to fear.

So the one way to make love victorious was to save Noriko and Shuya. Shogo, who himself is a tragic hero from the previous battle, helps them. He had been their savior and their guide. It was extremely tragic that he died. Had he survived, it would have been a wonderful journey for the three.

Mutual Respect among teachers and students

The theme of mutual respect is not prominent in the book. The movie is different in this respect. The whole Battle Royale Programme stems from a law (BR Act) to control the rebellious youth. The school students frequently bunk Kitano’s classes and attacks him with a knife in the corridor. When Kitano enters later as the Programme Supervisor, he seems to be taking a revenge.

However, the individual youth might have also been thinking: Why should I respect elders who don’t respect me? The characters have gone through a lot due to the neglect of the adults. Shuya has been an orphan when his father couldn’t bear the pain of poverty. Mitsuko has been pushed to prostitution by her own mother. Yoshitoki Kuninobu and Fumiyo Fujiyoshi are killed by Kitano against the rule and no one punished him, though he talks about following rules.

The second epilogue in the movie (Requiem II) shows the common dream of Noriko and Kitano. Noriko says she had taken the knife that had been used to attack him. He asks, “What am I supposed to say at this moment?” Though Kitano likes Noriko, and Noriko respects him, her statement is surprising. I felt that the complexity of the relation between adults and children is shown in that scene.

Battle Royale: PUBG, the movie, the novel

By Sandeept

On October 12, 2018

In Review, Blogging, Book Review, Game, Gaming, Movies

PUBG: “The original Battle Royale game”

My best friend Anish introduced me to PUBG. The concept was simple. Maximum of 100 players dropped into an island fighting each other and the winner was the last one standing. It looked interesting but my phone could not meet its specifications. A couple of months later, Ashok (my friend from college) discovered an emulator for desktop. At least a dozen of us downloaded the emulator and the game. When the game downloaded, it said: “The original Battle Royale game is now installed on your device.”

The term “Battle Royale” intrigued me. I had seen the term before in Wikipedia when I read about the game but I had somehow skipped it. That time, I guess I only wanted to know why the game was popular. I did not give it another thought. While playing the game (and after going through a lot of “funny moments”, which were not so funny), a thought came into my mind, What if I could write a novel based on the game?

That’s why I looked if there was a novel like that. And (unfortunately for my creativity) I found the Japanese movie. Curious, I went through the Wikipedia, movie was actually inspired by a Japanese novel.

Battle Royale: The Movie (2000)

The Kinji Fukasaku movie destroyed my PUBG experience. It was unlike any of the games I had played. It felt scary, tumultuous, and even childish at times, but mostly it felt nauseous. I mean, who would be in a right state of mind when you are forced to kill your friends in an island. Crazy situation dictates crazy measures but the madness of the fifteen-year-olds disturbed me.

The movie, in my opinion, is not the best in terms of execution but the idea itself felt great. What would happen if 42 students are forced to kill each other in an island by the government? The question hooked me till the end. The outcome of the movie was not unexpected. I actually knew who were going to survive but still I hoped Kawada survived. The end of Kitano (former teacher and BR Programme Supervisor) too felt comical and I thought it could have been better.

Battle Royale: The Novel (1997)

Koshun Takami, the author of the novel sent the book for a horror competition in 1996. The horror of being killed by your own friend is inexplicable but the book is more like dystopian adventure. The dispute of genre probably helped the book. Takami’s book became a best-seller and controversial because of its violence. It was banned in several countries. Even the Diet (Japanese legislature) was interested. Then later, it was made into a movie. I felt so excited when I read this history.

And I (wrongly) thought the movie was dark! The novel is even darker. It’s been inspired from the Pro Wrestling Battle Royale as described in the “Introduction” section. (You must have noticed a real long list of inspirations by now.) “I feel like puking,” Shuya Nanahara and Shogo Kawada say often in the book. That’s what I felt. Yes, the novel is even more nauseous than the book.

The book explains the motive behind the initiation of the Battle Royale Programme aka the Programme clearly than that in the movie. It goes in length inside the minds of each character to give the reader complete information about them. This scheme is great mostly and feels boring at times, but I love Takami for taking the risk. The end of the Programme Supervisor Kinapatsu Sakamochi is not comical but I did not feel the satisfaction. I wanted Nanahara to kill him instead of Kawada. Kawada did have personal issue with the government and Sakamochi is a government official but Nahahara had a personal vendetta against him. Sakamochi had raped his caretaker Anno and had killed his brotherly best friend, Yoshitoki Kuninobu.

Differences

Both the Battle Royale novel and the movie have the same basic premise: 42 students forced to kill each other by the government. However, the novel is about the revolt against atrocious Fascist government, while the movie is about the adult-teenagers (teacher-student) relationship. The attack on Kitano in the beginning and then his love for the disciplined Noriko (despite being the Program Supervisor) emphasize this. The movie also might have been made in a lighter tone to make it approvable for 15+.

The book is not just about the teenagers and the adults. It is about the system that has been economically successful but does not tolerate protest. Any protester is a threat to the government who is removed immediately. The Programme is about creating mistrust among people, to keep them divided and to rule upon them. It is a story of how three students deceive the government by trusting each other—an act that was totally unexpected in the state of chaos. Government is the villain in the book. Kinpatsu Sakamochi is only a scratch in a very long and webbed list of villains.

PUBG, on the other hand is a sort of distraction to the youth. A way to let out your frustration so that you can start something anew in an efficient manner. (I am reminded of Fight Club, which I watched today.) The game is addictive and I love the way it has been executed. However, in some years I feel it is going to fade away. I don’t know why. I just feel it. (Let’s say like Kawada’s sixth sense in the novel.)

To conclude this review…

I found the book and the movie influential, though the movie has a lot of issues. (Stephen King and Quentin Tarantino haven’t praised them just to make them popular.) Battle Royale also inspired gaming franchises, which will keep on increasing the popularity of both the book and the movie.

I still have a lot of things to say about Battle Royale—book and the movie, as well as some of the individual characters. I won’t include all of them here. I will come up with more essays on this topic. (That’s a sort of influence, isn’t it?)

Monthly Feature 16: Midnight in Paris

By Sandeept

On April 4, 2017

In Happiness, Monthly Feature, Movies

The exam schedule came unexpectedly. There was not a month to study and I had no notes. I took risk. I wrote and wrote and wrote on my notebooks. After two weeks, I was fatigued. I decided to watch Midnight in Paris.
The movie was in my watch list for about a month. And it absolutely refreshed my mind from the first second. The beauty of Paris and the light humour changed my mood, made me more energetic.

The best thing is Gil’s travels from 2010 to 1920s presenting the debate of better present versus better past. I am not writing much about the movie. I just want to share a couple of quotes from the movie (Source: IMDb).

This one is when Gil meets Hemingway for the first time.

Gil : Would you read it?

Ernest Hemingway : Your novel?

Gil : Yeah, it’s about 400 pages long, and I’m just looking for an opinion.

Ernest Hemingway : My opinion is I hate it.

Gil : Well you haven’t even read it yet.

Ernest Hemingway : If it’s bad, I’ll hate it because I hate bad writing, and if it’s good, I’ll be envious and hate all the more. You don’t want the opinion of another writer.

And this is the one which I had previously shared on Facebook as well.

Nostalgia is denial – denial of the painful present… the name for this denial is golden age thinking – the erroneous notion that a different time period is better than the one one’s living in – it’s a flaw in the romantic imagination of those people who find it difficult to cope with the present.

In the end, Gil realises that people feel the past was golden because we think our present is painful. But if we look at the lives of people in the past, their own lives were not easy. (For Gil 2010 was painful than 1920s in the beginning, when he is in 1920s, he knows that people thought Renaissance was the golden age.)

Director: Woody Allen

Rating: 9/10

(P.S.:I have been busy for some months now. First there was a month long field tour. Then the report writing and then exams. I am in the middle of my exams but the immediate cause I have not been able to read or write anything on WordPress is the internet connection.)

Monthly Feature 9: Inside Out

By Sandeept

On September 1, 2016

In Monthly Feature, Movies

What happens when you don’t know the role of all the emotions in building your personality? The movie Inside Out answers the question.

Summary

By the personification of the core emotions: Joy, Sadness, Fear, Disgust and Anger, director Pete Docter takes us into a journey inside Riley Andersen’s head. All the emotions, except Sadness, work together in developing Riley’s personalities. Joy is in constant conflict with Sadness, because of which Riley loses her “core memories”. When the family migrates from Minnesota to San Fransisco, the conflict increases, and both Joy and Sadness are sucked up from the emotion centre, “the Headquarters”. As they wander along the labyrinth of “long-term memory”, they witness the crumbling of Riley’s personality islands. To save Riley, the other three emotions, take control over Riley’s emotions. Except for occasional moments of joy from the long-term memory, they destroy Riley’s ability to feel anything.

In the maze of long-term memory, Joy and Sadness meet Bing Bong, Riley’s imaginary friend. He helps them get into “train of thoughts” so that they can reach the emotion centre but the family island falls breaking the train and it being dumped into the “Memory Dump”, a place where old memories are thrown to fade. As Joy tries getting to the Headquarters through a suction pipe that projects the saved memory, the pipe breaks. Joy and Bing Bong fall into the Memory Dump, where Joy understands that Sadness helped Riley when she was distressed. Bing Bong, on the other hand realizes that he would fade out soon. So, he and Joy take up his rocket and helps Joy get into the Headquarters. Once Joy manages to get Sadness and herself into the Headquarters, Riley’s is for the first time controlled solely by Sadness. Riley, who is about to return back to Minnesota alone, goes back and apologizes to her family. The five emotions, then work together to build up newer aspects of Riley’s personality.

The Funniest and the Emotional Moment

To me, the funniest moment in the movie is the one in which Sadness gives up walking she is tired and Joy drags her catching Sadness’ leg.

The most emotional part is the one inside the memory dump. Bing Bong realizes he is fading. Yet, he helps Joy get away from the dump. He waves good-bye and says to Joy, “Take Riley to the moon for me.” He does what a true friend would do, even if he is imaginary.

Some Memorable Quotes

Do you ever look at someone and wonder, “What is going on inside their head?” Well, I know. I know Riley’s head.

– Joy

Something’ s wrong with me. It’s like I’m having a breakdown.

-Sadness

Without you (Joy), Riley can’t be happy. We gotta get you back up there.

-Sadness

Ya ha ha! You (Joy) made it ! Ha ha! Go! Go save Riley! Take her to the moon for me.

– Bing Bong

Cast (Voice Artists)

Amy Poehler as Joy

Phyllis Smith as Sadness

Bill Hader as Fear

Lewis Black as Anger

Mindy Kaling as Disgust

Kaitlyn Dias as Riley Andersen

Diane Lane as Jill Andersen, Riley’s Mother

Kyle MacLachlan as Bill Andersen, Riley’s Father

Richard Kind as Bing Bong

IMdB rating: 8.3/10

My Rating: 9/10

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_Out_(2015_film)

Monthly Feature 7: Kalo Pothi- A Movie about Friendship

By Sandeept

On July 1, 2016

In Blogging, Monthly Feature, Movies, Nepal, Nepali

Nepali is believed to have been evolved from language of the Karnali region. (Sinja valley of Jumla and more popularly known as the place of origin of Nepali language.) To understand the dialogues of a movie which used Khas language of Mugu (a district in Karnali zone) we had to take help of subtitles. We have deviated a lot from our roots. This month, I feature that movie- Kalo Pothi(aka The Black Hen in international film festivals).

Karnali Zone (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

Summary

In 2001 A.D. (2058 B.S.), before the insurgency, the “People’s War” led by Maoists seems to have influenced Karkiwada, a village in Mugu district. Maoists, who have been working as guerillas, organize a cultural programme to spread the word of “revolution”. Some school kids are influenced. One of them is Bijuli, the sister of a major character Prakash.

Earlier, the Mukhiya(chief) of the village had ordered the villagers to bring up all fowls to him but Bijuli had managed to hide one white coloured hen. This she had given to her little brother Prakash. They live with their father as the Mukhiya’s servants. The boy asks what name he should give to the hen. When she tells him to give whatever name he wanted, he names it Karishma, after the name of Nepali movies. Her movie- Saathi (Saathi means Friend) alongside Rajesh Hamal is about to be shown in the village and the little children seem to have been influenced by that.

The same night, Bijuli flees with her “comrades” to be a Maoist. The hen she had given to her brother Prakash has yielded an egg which he shows first to his friend Kiran, the Mukhiya’s grandson. The hen, however is sold by Prakash’s father to a Tenjing, an old Bhote for 600 rupees. The boys decide to get the hen back the hen by paying Tenjing but they do not have money.

After sometime, when they have half the money Tenjing had paid, they go his home and ask for the hen. Tenjing does not agree. The boys steal it and colour it black. The white hen becomes the black hen. Their act is caught and the hen is taken by Tenjing again.

Meanwhile, Ujeli(the Mukhiya’s granddaughter) is about to be married to Captain Surbir. The Captain, however is abducted by the Maoists. Prakash sees his sister as she and her friends drag the Captain away. Prakash still longs for the hen Tenjing had taken away. Prakash and Kiran go to him again and he tells them that the hen had been sent to his daughter in Serog village.

Serog is far but riding a horse, the boys reach a long way. They reach a forest, where firing breaks out between the Army and the Maoists. Several people are killed. The boys save themselves by smearing blood of the deceased. Later, they wash themselves in a lake and head to Serog. They find the hen but seeing the hen and with her chicks, Prakash, whose mother had died prior to the setting of the movie, says, “I don’t want to separate children from their mother.”

Themes

1. Friendship and Innonence

Prakash is a servant at Kiran’s house and a Dalit(so called untouchable) as well. But they are best friends. Kiran goes through everything to help Prakash get back the hen Tenjing has taken away. Prakash covers up his acts. Their friendship is strong despite the difference in caste and social status. Also, their act of colouring a white hen to black is sweetly innocent.

2. Humanity

Despite being a child of poor servant at Mukiya’s home, Prakash goes to school. Prakash and his family have been provided a place to live. They are also given warm clothes during winter.
But the humanity is waning towards the end. The Mukhiya warns Kiran not to befriend Prakash (he goes away to Serog, however). Policemen threaten to beat them up if Bijuli does not return the village. The Maoists are abducting soldiers who are not on duty, and the firing in the forest kills several people.

3. Transition from Peace to War

The movie shows the changes that occur when a society undergoes the transition between peace and war. The thoughts of people change. They come up to believe that the state of peace was due to their ignorance about the real affairs. They are inclined to change the society by whatever means they have. Some better-off people migrate to a relatively safer place. Those who can not afford, have to undergo whatever happens to them in their homeland.

4. Philosophy of “Letting Go”

After a long journey to Serog, Prakash leaves the hen and says, “Let it be, I don’t want the children separated from their mother.” Every journey of life ends that way. We let go something to embark a new one.

What’s there for the viewers?

1. The movie features a simple storyline. Almost everything in the plot is related with the hen. (Can I say hen is the protagonist?)

2. Khadga Raj Nepali and Shukra Raj Rokaya have done an exceptional job considering their ages and their experience in movies. (They had never acted in movies before.)

3. The movie gives a lot of knowledge about the Khas language and culture.

Some disappointing factors

1. The story is simple but does not seem to be in a flow. The movie does not always stick to the storyline. The transitions between scenes are sometimes unclear and audience do not understand what and why the characters are doing the things shown in the screen.

2. There are two dream sequences that are highly symbolic. The first dream is set at Pashupatinath area, where Prakash sees Hindus, Buddhists, Christians and Muslims one after the other. While the dream might represent a case of religious tolerance, it is highly unlikely that a poor boy in Mugu can dream of such a thing. Moreover, it does not connect to the plot thereafter. (Ten minutes time in the theatre, 25 lakh rupees need not be spend.)
In the another dream sequence, Prakash relives the funeral of his mother a year ago but the people have changed. For example, Bijuli carries a gun, Ujeli is a bride and Prakash’s father carries a hen. This dream connects to the end of the movie, when Prakash lets go of the hen.

3. Scenes in the movie are shot from quite a distance with still frames. For minutes, when the characters are conversing audience sees a house or a room or a hillock. While that could have been the director’s scheme, close-up shots could have it more remarkable.

4. Finally, (something everyone has been telling) a scene that was completely awkward and unnecessary- a kiss scene between Ujeli and the Captain. The movie might have wanted to represent love between them but because that is not the main focus of the movie, the scene was absolutely unnecessary.

Cast:

Khadga Raj Nepali as Prakash

Shukra Raj Rokaya as Kiran

Jit Bahadur Malla as Prakash’s father

Hansa Khadka as Bijuli

Benisha Hamal as Ujeli

Director: Min Bahadur Bham

IMDb Rating: 7.6/10

Personal Rating: 7.5/10

Sources:

Movie reviews on several newspapers and magazines.
www.mysansar.com
Internet Movie Database (IMDb)

[P.S.: On June 9, I had watched the movie with my friends. Thanks you for your insights. I could not have formulated my thoughts on the movie without you guys.]

Monthly Feature: Maleficent- Really?

By Sandeept

On June 2, 2016

In Blogging, Love, Monthly Feature, Movies

I talk about the art, music and movies that I have adored in the Monthly Feature. For the month of June, I present my views on a movie quite differently than I have done before.

What’s true love? Disney Animations and Pictures seem to change the notion that true love is always a romantic orientation. That’s what we saw in Brave, Frozen and Maleficent.

Maleficent: Meaning
The Dictionary.com defines maleficent as “doing evil or harm”. The dark fairy from Disney’s Sleeping Beauty (1959) is named and meant so. She is the villain who curses the beautiful princess Aurora to an infinite sleep only to be broken by “a true love’s kiss”.

Maleficent Revived

The same Maleficent was revived in the 2014 Disney live action movie of the same name. I had watched both the versions in the same year, unintentionally and I had felt that 1959 movie was more about the villainous Maleficent than the heroine Aurora. Yet, the movie seemed incomplete. I had not been able to understand why the fairy had to be angry at all.

Linda Wolverton, the script writer of the 2014 movie seemed to have noticed the same. So she added a back story where Maleficent’s wings are cut stolen by Stefan to gain powers for himself. The story adds details to why the fairy was angry with King Stefan.

The Villain

The king had stolen her wings- her pride and her fun. She even rescued a raven and named him Diaval. “You will become my wings,” she says something like that. She, however goes to the name-giving ceremony of the king’s daughter and curses that the girl would fall asleep on her sixteenth birthday after being pricked by the spindle of a spinning wheel. The curse could be broken only by a true love’s kiss. (She gives the condition of the breaking of the curse believing that true love does not exist.)

Wait! What was the little girl’s mistake? I don’t understand why Maleficent curses the little girl. Maybe she had psychological problems. (We do not know!) She has magical powers and all. She could have defeated Stefan then and there. Yet she chooses to curse the daughter. Maybe they wanted to show her association with the Princess who slept, which we see later. Maybe she did not like that particular child, we do not understand why. Thereby, Maleficent makes herself a villain.

But the land Stefan ruled must have suffered a lot. All the spinning wheels are thrown, dumped or burnt. Imagine the amount of clothes they could have produced in sixteen years. Forget Aurora and through the curse, Maleficent handicaps their economy.

Villain- Is She Yet?
To prevent the curse, the king sends his daughter with three pixies without even testing their competence. (What kind of father is he?) The dark fairy learns from Diaval that the little girl is not being taken care of. For her interest of bringing the curse true, she takes care of the child. But she also loves the child as her own as time passes.

Maleficent, when she understands that she loves the child, tries to break the curse. But she herself had told that it was unbreakable. Aurora, the Princess sleeps. The fairy brings up a Prince and tells him to kiss the girl. But it goes in vain. How could an attraction of some moments be true love? She knows she made a mistake. She asks for forgiveness and kissing her goddaughter’s forehead. Turns out Maleficent’s motherly love was true even if she had a selfish interest in the beginning.

So, is she yet a villain? Maybe Disney Pictures still say she is. Maybe Wolverton still believes in the villainous Maleficent. But the truth is that at the end of the movie, she does not remain a villain anymore. She has been transformed by the love she developed for Aurora. And she even regrets from having cursed her as a child.

That was the best thing about the movie for me. The transformation was the only reason I was able to forgive her act of cursing a child. Her name might suggest that she is still malicious. But she is not one dimensional word whose meaning cannot be changed. Maleficent is a fairy, cheated by a human. If her anger is justified, why not the change she undergoes? Wolverton still calling Maleficent a villain after a change of heart does not give her any justice.