12 comments

Articles linking here

1. 1 On September 21st, 2008, cinefreak said:

   Hey, read your review and your review seems to be predominantly negative, but still you have given the film a good rating overall.
   I found the film tedious, a cross between a DD social serial and a Films Division documentary.
   So yes, Mr. Benegal is a known nationalist at least from his filmography and here is yet another attempt to make a rural film which would appeal to the multiplex audience.
   But does it work?
   What you get is a squeaky clean village, ostensibly Ramoji Rao film city, which exists in never never land, and is not real. And the characters are stereotypes, the goon turned politician, the letter writer with a heart of gold, the romantic compounder, the feisty independent girl who wants to work, and the wife in waiting for her absent husband. That is it, one line summarizes the characters in the script. What else is there about them; in a village for eg there would be caste as the most important factor. What makes them what they are, we come to know nothing. They are props that is it for the story to move, and what is the story, a romance that is fated to remain half baked?
   The only “real” character is that of the transgender Munnibhai, but even there we see just a very limited side of her. Nothing else is explored.
   The director has thrown in everything from power cuts to sms’s and the scenes seem to be written for the lines and the message rather than the other way around which results in a script which just plods around, with a few songs thrown in for good measure!
   Yes, the film does have its moments, the dialogues are for the most crisp, and Amrita Rao has done a good job and so has the actor playing the Transgender(Ravi Jhankal I think). Shreyas Talpade needs to move away from the cute, chocolate, ever smiling boy roles and do something serious for a change, his sweet boy acting gets terribly irritating.
   The best of Benegal’s films have been intense / satirical. This film has neither the intensity nor the satirical punch.
   I mean if you want to laud it just because it has a rural theme, go ahead, but otherwise it disappoints.

   posted on September 21st, 2008 at 5:10 am

2. 2 On September 21st, 2008, cinefreak said:

   And yes, I completely forgot, the film harps so much on democracy, ha ha through another stereotype, the army subedar! We even have one song thrown in for that!
   I liked Munnibhai’s song the best.

   posted on September 21st, 2008 at 5:12 am

3. 3 On September 21st, 2008, chavanni said:

   http://chavannichap.blogspot.com/2008/09/blog-post_368.html

   posted on September 21st, 2008 at 2:42 pm

4. 4 On September 21st, 2008, Arpit said:

   That is your best review ever meetu

   I really liked that gag on the sms forwarding
   superstition.

   posted on September 21st, 2008 at 8:16 pm

5. 5 On September 21st, 2008, Arpit said:

   I really liked the movie.

   I watched this movie Sunday late night with my parents.

   I noticed that the film was still titled Mahadev ka Sajjanpur in the Censor certificate

   I told my mum that the movie’s old name
   “Mahadev ka Sajjanpur”

   or was it

   “Sajjanpur ka Mahadev”

   I thought that if it was about Mahadev , than it should be “Sajjanpur ka Mahadev”, but I was so sure it was “Mahadev ka Sajjanpur”

   After the movie
   when I was changing into my nightclothes at my home,
   it struck me.
   Shyam Benegal, YOU ARE A GENIUS!!!!

   I really think he purposely publicized the movie in its old name for some time.

   posted on September 21st, 2008 at 8:21 pm

6. 6 On September 22nd, 2008, Paras said:

   Very Well written film ..only for mature people who want entertainment with logic..Very Nice film 5 star rating .doesnt deserve Indian Audience. Most of them will like to have fun. but it shows the roots of our culture where we come from and if we do want a change in our systems ..then where to start from . Also highlights the Power of the PEN. as it can change anybody’s life.
   This is a film about a writer, his limtations and how he can bring a good or bad change within a society.

   posted on September 22nd, 2008 at 3:05 pm

7. 7 On September 24th, 2008, meetu said:

   @ Cinefreak, I try my best not to be inconsistent. I’m sorry, if I sound that way. I certainly liked the movie, and like always, despite its faults.
   The village is squeaky clean, because it is Mahadev’s idolized view of his village.
   The letter-writer is not with a heart of gold. He is manipulating the life of the woman he loves to the best possible manner. He does things out of fear, he lies.
   A romance that is half-broken, is that not real? Would have liked a hunky-dory happy ending?

   “the scenes seem to be written for the lines and the message rather than the other way around”

   Yeah because it is a novel written by a person from a village who doesn’t have training in novel-writing. He’s just writing where his emotions lie.

   I’m not lauding it because it has a rural theme. The satire worked for me, especially because it wasn’t preachy.

   Every time democracy is mentioned it is very sarcastic.

   @ Arpit, thanks! And yeah, for me one of the main reasons the movie worked is because of the concept in the climax. It was rushed, but it makes you rethink about what was fictional and what was reality in the last 2 hours.

   @Paras, glad you enjoyed it!

   posted on September 24th, 2008 at 8:20 am

8. 8 On September 25th, 2008, Vivek said:

   OK folks; This is the first I read a detailed review before watching a movie. Now that I had already bought tickets for this Sunday (befor reading the review); you will find me come back and add my notes ; see you in <100 hrs.

   posted on September 25th, 2008 at 12:58 pm

9. 9 On September 29th, 2008, meetu said:

   cool Vivek, so what was your take?

   posted on September 29th, 2008 at 5:55 am

10. 10 On October 12th, 2008, Ramkumar said:

    What an useless review. This article don’t even say properly what the story is before giving your opiniom.

    posted on October 12th, 2008 at 3:29 am

11. 11 On October 13th, 2008, Vivek said:

    Hi Meetu, Sprry could not update sooner; though I have taken some notes on the day.

    PS: Ramkumar - if the review was to write the complete story; then what is the use of seeing ANY movie;

    Anyways, coming back to my views on the movie; slick direction; editing could have been better on some counts (especially Mahadev’s interaction with a couple of characters; I feel the end was also suddenly rushed; compared to the comfortable pace of the rest of the movie.

    Rajeshwari just does not fit the bill (and infact neither does Ila Arun); It may have been better to swap Rajeshwari and Divya’s roles.

    I quite liked the clever use of songs in the film (except maybe the initial one - Sitaram); and the deliberate narration style to keep the interest level.

    Overall quite good as expected. Thanks for this Movie Shyam; and Thanks meetu for the useful insights.

    posted on October 13th, 2008 at 12:56 pm

12. 12 On October 21st, 2008, meetu said:

    Thanks, vivek!

    And Ramkumar…what can I say man…I just don’t like writing about the story!

    posted on October 21st, 2008 at 4:13 am

And what do you think...