30.05.2015.
Friday evening in US is for a sit up dinner with friends, long drive or a road trip, but if in Bellevue area, which is basically Microsoft domain with fairly large Indian Origin people's presence, a Hindi film is running house full that too in its second week, their is a need to probe what is so engrossing in it. Being a film critic, I am privileged to see preview of the movies for a long time, preview theatre is a place where critics watch the movies not to enjoy but to to threadbare it. But today, the situation was different, I was watching Tanu Weds Manu Returns (TWMR) in a multiplex , where people have come to watch the movie by skipping a dinner,drive or a trip and after paying premium price. I was trying to capture the scenes which compelled this paid audience to laugh a loud. Frankly, in this film that the audience enjoyed most of the moments !
There is absolutely no surprise in the fact that Tanu Weds Manu Returns (TWMR), sequel of Tanu Wed Manu, is doing so well that it crossed Rs 100 crores barrier without any Salman, Shahrukh or Hritik Roshan. And the success is not just owing to the powerful performance of Kangana Ranaut. But also because the film reinforces the overarching narrative of hackneyed misogyny that Indian cinema thrives on, and one that we the audience, are ever so comfortable with. It informs us, amusingly, of course, that men are nice, caring, and reliable while women are unpredictable, unreasonable and puzzlingly turn into harridans post marriage. This narrative then leads us in the film, amusingly of course, to the cruel victory of the sexy siren Tanu over "plain Jane" Datto, confirming the triumph of chauvinism.
Kangana Ranaut has emerged as a performer, and yes, she has played both characters, of Tanu and Datto, superbly. But the film is no trendsetter. It still does not wake you up to the changing norms in Indian marriages, where men are (hopefully) looking beyond the stereotype of marrying, and sticking to, that awfully superficial pretty girl.
Conditioned as we are, we still laugh at the plight of the poor men who are caught up in a mad, bad, sad marriage syndrome, and undergo stoically, all the trials and tribulations laid at their doorstep. The character of Tanu right from the beginning is of a liberated (sic) girl in Kanpur, a 'B' town of Hindi Hinterland, a girl who does not have problem with cigarette, drinks and flirting with all kind of boys. My question is when a girl was in habit of flirting with variety of boys, then how she can have any 'Kick' in a four year lonnnngggg marriage where she has no choice but only a thorough professional husband. And this girl of course, can go upto the extant sectioned in the United Kingdom (UK). While the scene was put there for a laugh, it is far, far more removed from any reality. As someone who had to actually visit one of these mental health hospitals in London to help release someone who had been unfairly put there by their family, the situation is far from simple. And there is a very long procedure before anyone is either sectioned, or released from these centres. Mental health has often being stigmatised, and it is regretful that even a country (in this case, the UK) which has a far superior, though sometimes case-blind, system of mental health has been shown to be arbitrary.
To me the film has come out of traditional stereo typed mould, the characters looks convincing, their language also containing very authentic regional flavor which has its own humor. The dialogues are very crisp and with fine editing table work, the director keeps the story very tight except the climax scene where the film is unnecessary dragged.
And I have a strong feel that film maker has not treated one decent human in the film, Datto,well in the end . She is the quintessential tomboy character, came out of the conservative male dominating Haryanvi rural society , to do some thing different what the girls are still not allowed to do thereat, tried to find her niche in sports and athletics. By allowing Madhavan to dump her at the last minute, despite all that she had done for him, it leave little anguish in the mind of viewer while leaving the theatre.
Another low point was the long-drawn-out, unnecessary, and quite demeaning section, when Tanu stalks her husband in the run up to his proposed second marriage to Datto, till he succumbs. She even does a Meena Kumari number a la Pakeezah, All to win back her man of course after what she has done with him.
I am not at all surprised, therefore, that the film has become a box office hit. It is no different from the Salman-Shah Rukh starrers, where women must look like eye candy, and must work hard through song and dance to convince their "mard" that their svelte bodies and perfectly made up faces belong to their man. All the real Indian "mards" must love watching these Kanganas, Katrinas, Kareenas writhe and beg and plead.
Have your say. You an comment here.For once, the directors of TWMR had a chance to really break out of the traditional mould. They could have taken a reality check on women's aspirations and a changing India. But they chose not to.
On the day Tanu Weds Manu Returns released, reviewer of Mumbai Mirror, Rahul Desai rated it two and a half stars in his review . However in the 26 May web edition of Mumbai Mirror, it was revised to a three and a half stars because 'reader feedback' and 'research'. Late on Thursday night, Rahul Desai announced on social media sites that he was quitting as the tabloid's reviewer.
"Appropriate that I resign as Mirror Critic on the day Bhaijaan teaser appears. Not always wise to adapt to changing systems, broken trust," he said on his Twitter and Facebook.
The controversy began when under a cutout of Charlize Theron from this year's red carpet at Cannes on 26 May, a little notice to readers said:
"Our reviewer Rahul Desai had given this week's main fare Tanu Weds Manu Returns two and a half stars. Following reader feedback and research which differed significantly from him, this newspaper is upgrading the rating of the film to three and a half stars."
The tabloid received immediate backlash from journalists and readers questioning it's press freedom. The most popular opinion being that there's no "right" or "wrong" when it comes to reviews. So Mumbai Mirror and it's film reviewer episode has raised another question, whether a reviewer rate a film keeping in mind public choice or what ever he feels honest about it. Ofcourse. I know many trade magazines and other publications where films are rated on the basis of its advertisements or indirect bounties received but the sad part is when main line publications which are known for their independent views also start doing this, is a sad day for fair journalism.
.jpg "A Gumnam Actress Strips Nude to Protest Auto/taxi Fare Hike")
