The Measure of Success

Success – the word rings like a gong in the ears and minds of even the most hardened skeptics. Often people are characterized by success. Sometimes it acts like a status marker while at other times it becomes the bane of our very existence. So, what is success anyway? And how does one measure it?

Today’s world broadly bases success on 2 parameters – monetary and social (achievements). Society stamps people with their approval of ‘arrival’ when they fulfill either one or both of these vital components of societal success.

I find this entire hullabaloo about success to be rather far-fetched, linear and grossly hyped. No, don’t think for even one moment that I don’t believe Ratan Tata or Siddhartha Mukherjee are not successful. Of course they are! What I find troublesome is that we don’t look at success in other areas.

Confused? No? Good (in which case you can stop reading right here). Yes? Well, I was pretty lost till I gave this some hard thought. Success thrives where you look for it. Where you stretch beyond your own capacity, fight with all your strength and emerge victorious.

You might ask, “If I decide to quit smoking and I manage it in say a month’s time, am I successful?” You damn well are! Ditto for the person who has managed to be fit, healthy and disease-free at 75 years of age or the person who made a New Year’s resolution to spend more time with his family and managed to do it. These are concrete, real-life examples of success in daily life.

Someone I know expounded ‘The Ladder Theory’ to me. The theory has 2 main pillars:

a) However much success you amass, never ever be happy with it otherwise you’ll never grow.

b) Hence one must keep climbing the ladder of success forever.

At a very basic impulse-driven level, the theory has truism but at a thought-driven level it makes for great gibberish. For starters, it doesn’t take into account the fact that every ladder leads to a new level and that beyond a certain level (the highest being the tip of the Burj Khalifa as I write this) there is empty space. So, sooner or later you’re so high up that you’ve left everything else in life way below (because not everything can make or wants to make that seemingly godlike ascent). Also, what kind of success related theory advises one to never be happy (because satisfaction is the greatest enemy of growth)? I can rattle off another 10 reasons why I find ‘The Ladder Theory’ to be simplistic but I’d rather stop here.

Success, like happiness is a state of mind. Different for different people. No more no less. Break free from the delusion that you have to prove yourself to anyone, except yourself. Sure, success won’t come easy and it has to be earned (just like a Bournville ) but that doesn’t mean that it’s beyond the reach of the common man – You and I.

Brave Pixar

For a very long time after falling in love with Disney’s ‘The Lion King’, I didn’t watch animated films. Honestly, I don’t know why. Perhaps it was a belief that no one could make a better animation film. Perhaps it was the bond I shared with Simba. I really don’t know.

And then one fine day, perhaps one of the best days in the life of the film-buff inside me I saw a movie that brought life to every child’s best friends – toys. ‘Toy Story’ was perhaps the game changer of its time. True, Disney was still making animated movies, scores of them. But a little animation studio that was an erstwhile computer graphics division of Lucasfilm, was the brain behind this wonderful game-changer of a film – Pixar Animation Studios. Was the genius of Pixar in its Photorealistic Renderman CGI software, its creative hero John Lasseter or the fact that the man at the helm was Steve Jobs (Yes, Apple’s Steve Jobs)? No one knows. But a daring, brave challenger of an animation studio was born. And with every passing film its cult grew. A section of moviegoers who did not miss a single Pixar film. People like me.

In its 26-year lifespan Pixar has arguably made the most brilliant animation movies in history. And by that I don’t mean technical brilliance. That’s table-stakes. Pixar has infused life into inanimate objects and made us laugh at their jokes, cheer in their victories, cry at their failures, scream at their faults and even love their stories. Be it Buzz Lightyear, Sulley Sullivan, Nemo, Lightning McQueen, Remy, Wall-E or even Carl Fredricksen; every single character has bonded with the audience much more than some live-action characters.

Today, I saw yet another Pixar gem called ‘Brave’. A really brave move by Pixar to have a young woman protagonist. True, Brave is not as good as some other of Pixar’s films such as Finding Nemo, Wall-E and Up. But that’s because every film by Pixar competes with its own films. Compare them to any other animation studio….Sony Pictures Animation, Animal Logic Studios, Dreamworks, Blue Sky Studios…and you’ll know that though the others are hugely competent and creative…they’re not in Pixar’s league. Little wonder, that in 2006 Disney who had been a leader in animated films for ages, bought out Pixar after the hugely successful Cars.

In 2001 the Academy Awards introduced a new category called Best Animated Film. Since then Pixar’s films have won it 6 times, apart from winning an overall 26 Academy Awards. Only 3 times in the history of the Oscars has an animated film been nominated for Best Picture….2 of those are Pixar’s. With all its films being among the 50 highest-grossing animated films and 3 of them being among the 50 highest-grossing films, I think Pixar will need a name change very soon – ‘Pics Czar’.

Movie Review: Shanghai

I awaited with bated breath till Shanghai began. And I thought I would be calm once it started. But I was wrong. My breathing didn’t slow down, my pulse rate didn’t normalize and my eyes didn’t blink. That, in a nut-shell was how I received Dibakar Banerjee’s political thriller.

I’ll wrap up the acting first because that’s the least interesting part. Abhay Deol is easily the best of the lot…very competent and in control. His body language is positively a brilliant portrayal of an Indian bureaucrat. Emraan Hashmi surprised me completely…this is not what I ever, ever saw him coming up with….he’s terrific as a part-time media videographer, part-time pornography filmmaker. Kalki Koechlin is good…but her expressions are very similar to the ones in Shaitan, That Girl in Yellow Boots and Dev D…nothing ‘really’ new to offer…needs to work on emoting more earnestly. Prosenjit Chatterjee is extremely competent as the political activist….most importantly his character is extremely crucial to the story and he does make the viewer believe that he’s going to make a difference(there’s a mention of this in the film about him having stopped some Government project in the past).

Moving over, the most brilliant parts of Shanghai are the screenplay, dialogues (Dibakar Banerjee and Urmi Juvekar), direction (Dibakar Banerjee), cinematography (Nikos Andritsakis) and background music (Michael McCarthy). Being a political thriller, it’s imperative that the story has sub-plots, grey characters and powerful dialogues. Dibakar Banerjee and Urmi Juvekar (screenplay writer of ‘Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye!’ and the national award winning ‘I Am’) just don’t go wrong in this crucial area. Dibakar Banerjee has already made his mark as a ‘hatke’ filmmaker, with films such as Khosla Ka Ghosla, Oye Lucky! Lucky Oye! and Love, Sex Aur Dhoka, behind him. In Shanghai he leaves you ample scope for imagination, guessing (almost every viewer loves predicting the next move in a thriller) and yet…you don’t visualize what’s coming next. The end of the movie is a classic point-in-case…I saw it very very differently in my mind…but….but…but…watch it to know! With Shanghai he doesn’t just climb the ladder, he joins a small group of promising filmmakers who dare to make different films (I’d put Anuraag Kashyap, Onir, Shimit Amin, Farhan Akhtar in this list for now). This is very difficult in a country that loves films such as Dabangg, Singham and Rowdy Rathore. Cinematography is top-notch in Shanghai…Nikos has left no-stone-unturned to showcase everything right from rowdy crowds, rallies, government enquiries and even sleazy films…as authentically as possible. Some of the slow-mo shots are brilliantly timed! The background score in Shanghai is a separate character in the film…it’s got its own voice which turns up at the perfect moments in the story…delightfully haunting!

Shanghai is dirty, contemporary and dangerously close to reality. It makes the viewer squirm, uncomfortable, think, think again and at some sequences…scream! Yes, it’s a powerful film…a film that draws inspiration from Vassilis Vassilikos’ 1960s book ‘Z’. I also saw shades of Khakee and Yuva in some portions. But by no means is it a blatant copy. The best I can compare is the relationship between Othello and Omkara….inspired; yet topical, relevant and original.

If you’re looking for a movie that DOESN’T stress you, make you think and rethink, make you face some ugly truths and question your beliefs….DO NOT WATCH SHANGHAI. It’s only for serious film buffs…people who only love popular, actor-driven cinema, picturesque photography will absolutely despise the movie…so don’t waste that seat and your money…let a serious film-goer occupy it.

With Shanghai under his belt I think Dibakar has made one point amply clear…aam filmmakers ki ‘wannabe’ talent ki aan, baan aur shaan-gayi!

The irony called Goafest

It is touted to be the Indian version of the Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity. The Mecca for creative inspiration for advertising in India. A hot-spot for headhunters for creative jobs. Yes, ladies and gentlemen, I am talking about Goafest.

Owing to a sizeable amount of decent work all of last year, I got a chance to go to Goafest 2012 with my colleagues this year. From what I hear our agency went to Goafest for 3 years and then stopped suddenly! Sources say the take-back was very less as compared to the expense. It took quite a bit of collective cajoling the boss for us to go this year.

So, there we were at Zuri White Sands Resort in South Goa. Dressed in our best summer clothes and doused in sunscreen. Eager to soak in some of the best creative ideas on display, attend some inspiring seminars and partake in uninhibited work cum fun for 2 days. Goafest proved to be everything that I’d read about it. I saw some of the most brilliant yet simple ideas and attended seminars which served as guidelines for the future of advertising. And the shutter-happy photographer in me refused to not snap anything interesting in view…from great work, to super-hot scantily clad women and even the upside-down Google Beach House.

I must admit I took back a lot from the entire experience. It was more idea-inspiring than awe-inspiring. Though like every young creative advertising professional in India, even I took a second look when I saw Piyush Pandey, Abhijit Avasthi, Sonal Dabral, Amit Akali, Malvika Mehra, K.V.Sridhar, Agnello Dias, Santosh Padhi among many other industry titans – the very faces of Indian advertising creativity to the world.

Despite all the learning, beautiful women, booze flowing, great food…I still felt there was a disconnect somewhere. Was this platform, this conclave as it was branded, only for awarding great creative work and attending seminars by great speakers? On a personal note, I feel it presented many more ‘active’ opportunities to have one-big-never-ending-beach-party rather than ‘active’ opportunities to learn. The seminars and work displayed is passive learning at best. I really feel amidst all the other activities, mini-events, games, seminars, etc., they should have included a few workshops for the less-exposed, goggle-eyed junta. It would’ve been the perfect sealant to make Goafest a must-visit, for the future minds of Indian advertising.

Around the world in 3 days

I was damn sure that London Paris New York would not be a good film. And by good I mean it would not be intellectual, touching or entertaining (at least). Because that’s how I judge films…they have to either make you think or make you feel or make you laugh…if you’ve got all three…you’ve got a fair chance to pick up the golden statuette in Hollywood.

While scouring the net for previews about London Paris New York, I chanced upon an article that spoke more about Anu Menon (the writer and director) and less about the film. It revealed the passion for writing that this London Film School student exhibited…and being a writer myself, I just had to go and check out Anu’s passion spill out on celluloid.

Without being overtly critical of the story I’d like to point out that it’s got no story, so to speak. It’s more like a slice of life narrative…although a ‘filmy’ slice of life, mind you.

Anu scores heavily in 2 departments – characterization and dialogues. And that’s her winning formula. Because London Paris New York is about 2 people and the moments they share…that’s it. No scope for cheesy, trying-very-hard-to-be-funny comedians, mummys, papas, friends, etc. etc. It’s just Nikhil and Lalita all the way.

Both actors have possibly poured their guts out on the sets and look as natural as you and me would, in daily life. Ali Zafar brings life to the brash, impulsive, rich, spoilt Punjabi brat Nikhil, while Aditi Rao shines in a completely opposite independent, middle-class, limited-exposure-to-real-life Lalita. They’re so good that not once do you feel that they’re acting in front of a camera. Ali Zafar’s explosive confrontation in the pre-climax is just jaw-dropping…he cries naturally…something very very few actors…I’d love to be sexist here…very very few ‘men’ can do…Shah Rukh Khan and Shiney Ahuja being among the worst. As for chemistry between the leads…it’s fresh…and you do pine for the lovers (Ali Zafar to be specific) at a certain point…this viewer’s ‘pining for the lovers’ stage is a critical element of a love story…something Anu has got partly right…so I’d say she needs to brush up her direction skills a bit.

Dialogues as I mentioned earlier are splendid…simply because they’re very today. Lines that you and I would spout in real life with our friends, lovers – in the coffee shop, at the restaurant, in the bedroom…so on and so forth. One can actually relate to the lines like “Hey, I’ve said this line to someone” or “I can imagine myself using this line.”

A huge credit goes to Shyam Salgaonkar for keeping the film as crisp as 140 mins. What creates a problem though is that there are 3 full songs in the story, which eat into the already small running time. So, the story gets edited for the sake of songs…could’ve been explored a little more…this being Anu’s mistake (which is why I said it’s got no real story)…something I didn’t take too kindly…but then ‘most’ Indians just don’t like films without songs, do they?

Cinematography is top-notch…no two ways about that…but then if the film was shot in London, Paris and New York, how wrong could Sameer Arya go? Yet, I feel he’s captured the Paris segment incredibly. And yes, the solo lovemaking sequence is captured tastefully…very subtle yet sensual.

Songs….pah…what should I write…truth be told I’m not one for songs in a movie (unless it’s a musical, which this is not)…but to be fair Woh Dekhnay Mein is possibly the pick of the lot for it’s sprightliness, and to an extent it sets the tone for Nikhil and Lalita’s relationship. Others like Ting Rang and Aaja are just narrative fillers.

So, for me London Paris New York was a decent film…because it made me feel. Without doubt, it was an excellent study in modern day characterization and dialogue writing. I’d recommend it to 2 kinds of people:

1. Men / women who like ‘filmy’ slice of life love stories, set in exotic locations.
2. Anyone who loves to deconstruct cinema and appreciate its finer points, even if the film is not the best one they’ve seen.

Why ‘public soliciting of sex’ should be legalised

Dear readers…this is something I’d written for an assignment in the ‘Mentioning Unmentionables’ module, when I was studying Liberal Arts at Symbiosis, in 2007. Thought I’d share it with you.

Prostitution as defined by Section 2(f) of The Immoral Traffic Prevention Act (ITPA), 1956 means the ‘sexual exploitation or abuse of persons for commercial purposes or for consideration in money or in any other kind, and the expression “prostitute” shall be construed accordingly’.

Prostitution is probably one of the oldest professions in the world. An exact date is impossible to pin-point, but some of the earliest references to prostitution in India dates as far back as the 5^th century, when young pre-pubertal girls were ‘married off’ or ‘dedicated’ or ‘given away’ to a God or a local deity of a temple. They were called ‘Devdasis’ or ‘Joginis’. These women would invariably become prey to prostitution, for upper-caste community members, who in the public eye served as a medium between the common man and God.

In modern times in an era of technology, with supposedly stringent laws and even moral policing by certain right wing factions ideally prostitution should be low in number. Contrary to the same, the number is alarmingly high. In 2007 the Ministry of Women and Child Development estimated the number of Commercial Sex Workers to be around 2.8 million.

The ITPA does have several laws, sections and sub-sections which explore in great detail, the issues related to prostitution and define punishment and fine for offences relating to prostitution, operating brothels, owning a place where prostitution is exercised, trafficking of persons by coercion, fraud, threat, etc. and many more. Also according to Section 7(b) of the IPTA, prostitution cannot be carried on anywhere within 200 metres of a public place and it fits in the definition of ‘prostitution’ as given in Section 2(f). Interpreted, the other way it means that if a man/woman wishes to engage in any explicit/implicit sexual act with another man/woman for a material/monetary gain off his/her own free will, he/she can do so provided the premises on which such act is being carried out is 200 metres or more from a public place.

So, in theory the law does not ban selling sex. It simply prohibits public soliciting of sex, through an organized/unorganized channel. Given this seemingly contrary to popular belief situation, the question that arises is why does prostitution raise its ugly head in our quasi-egalitarian society? The answer is not as simple as the question. It involves a variety of facets ranging from poverty, corruption and negligence to greed, fraud and even victimization.

According to a statistic released by the Ministry for Women and Child Development, nearly 35% of sex workers enter the profession before 18 years of age. The ITPA defines that any person below the age of 18 years is considered a child. It even has much more stringent punishments and heavier fines for child prostitution.

Given the entire aforementioned discussion one comes to think, what could be a possible solution out of the entire racket of prostitution. There are 2 possible solutions to this human trafficking and exploitation racket. One is that the law comes down heavy on offenders and cracks down every single prostitution racket. This we know from experience is a really far-fetched concept. Had abolishment of prostitution been so easy with law enforcement, the number of active prostitutes would not have been 2.8 million and counting. The other is to legalize ‘public soliciting of sex’ and not prostitution. As pointed out earlier there is a world of a difference between the two concepts.

I’ll just throw some light on the positive aspects of legalizing public soliciting of sex.

• Legalization of public soliciting of sex and the sex industry will stop sex trafficking.

• Legalization of public soliciting of sex will control the sex industry.

• Legalization of public soliciting of sex will decrease clandestine, hidden, illegal and street prostitution.

• Legalization of public soliciting of sex will protect the women in public soliciting of sex, as they will have rights.

• Women in systems of public soliciting of sex want the sex industry legalized, as they are the one who suffers the most, as they don’t have any rights.

• Legalization of prostitution will promote women’s health as they can have easy access to medical facilities, which they don’t have when it is illegal.

• Recognizing public soliciting of sex as an economic activity, thus enabling women in India to obtain working permits as “commercial sex workers”.

• Legalization of public soliciting of sex will also enable it to be termed as a service offered since women will be given permits. The Government can therefore impose a service tax just like the way they do on telecom, broadband, television, real estate or any other professional services offered.

There will not doubt be right wing political pressure on doing whatever it takes to discourage legalization of public soliciting of sex. What the society on a larger plateau needs to realize is that, legalizing public soliciting of sex is not an attack on our cultural roots; nor is it an acknowledgement or encouragement to prostitution. It is plainly protecting the rights of those 2.8 million and growing individuals who are trapped, in the murky quicksand of the prostitution racket.

Rockstar Ranbir meets Flopstar Imtiaz

I’ll start with a bias. I don’t like Ranbir Kapoor. Period. I don’t think he can act. Double period. But, post Rockstar I stand corrected. I think all he ever needed was a director to extract a brilliant performance. And who better would he choose than Imtiaz Ali? (Remember, he turned Kareena into an actor post Jab We Met. Till then she was just a glam doll.)

Rockstar is a simple story of a boy who wants to be a rockstar. Who looks up to Jim Morrison. Who is a simpleton at heart. Disconnected from the real world. For some unexplained reason Imtiaz has told the story in such a complicated manner, that one fails to understand the logic behind several parts of the script.

Rockstar goofs up quite a bit in the writing and editing department. The movie could’ve been much shorter, without cutting the songs…which means some scenes are just too stretched…like the Prague sequence. Writing is flawed at many places…Ranbir’s love barely looks like love…whenever he meets Nargis he’s on some testosterone overdose…most unlike an Imtiaz Ali treatment (the love stories in Socha Na Tha or Jab We Met were based on feelings and not feeling each other). The first half of the film does have its moments, so does part of the second half. I guess about 20 mins after the interval the film gets stretched and irrational. What was the reason for Nargis’ illness angle? Aise hi movie ka running time badhane ke liye? The opening sequence leaves you wondering what the hell happened and the movie’s end joins back to where it began (the entire story is told in non-linear flashback)…even after the movie ends you don’t know anything about the opening sequence…add to that a supremely confusing finale.

Ranbir’s emotional graph is so damn erratic…forget the aam junta, I’m sure even he must’ve got confused while seeing the preview screening. For no reason whatsoever he’s losing his cool, picking fights, bashing up people, etc. And much as I would’ve loved to bash Ranbir’s acting…actually he’s really good at it…. it’s the characterization that is flawed. Ditto for Nargis Fakri’s character…completely disconnected in parts. It’s like both inspired by Dr.Jekyll and Mr.Hyde. Having said that, Nargis really got a raw deal in the film…she’s got no big scene, no big lines…bah…could’ve been any other model (yep, she’s still a model…not an actor). Kumud Mishra who plays Khatana has possibly the best written character because it is consistent….and he’s really good in his role. Piyush Mishra is very good too. Aditi Rao is completely wasted. The rest are just there as fillers.

Two departments where the movie scores is music and cinematography. A.R.Rehman’s score is amazing. Every song has something special..though some of them take time to grow on the listener, eventually you’ll love the entire soundtrack. Regards cinematography….if someone shoots the most picturesque locales in Delhi, Himachal Pradesh, Kashmir and Prague, how wrong can the visuals go?

There are a few sequences to be watched out for….the Junglee Jawani sequence…Ranbir-Shammi’s first meeting….Ranbir tearing the agreement…some sequences in Stephen’s college.

Overall, Ranbir puts in an earnest performance but is let down by the writing. I’d recommend watching it for Ranbir’s performance and really good music.