Need No Education

BAD TEACHER (2011)

Bad Teacher is not a bad movie. It's just not a good one. It definitely isn't as good as Bad Santa (2003). It isn't even as good as School of Rock (2003). I wish Bad Teacher was a combination of the two or probably with just better humor and a better screenplay. It seems like the makers of this film were incredibly lazy when they wrote this film since there are absolutely no memeorable laughs throughout its run time. I did chuckle though, sometimes. This came mostly because of the talented cast members who managed to make this film watchable. Yes, it is watchable of course. But when the standards of American comedies are high, why settle for a standard comedy?

Could Write A Bad Romance

NOT A LOVE STORY (2011)

I have said this before and I will say it again - I am a big Ram Gopal Varma fan. His films have consistently showed up on my end-of-year lists. Sadly, Not A Love Story will not. This is one of those misfires that he brings out after every good movie or two. While I am a fan, I know his penchant for making giant pieces of turd. It isn't as bad as Agyaat (2009) but it is as indulgent as Nishabd (2007). Sometimes Mr. Varma finds these stories with enormous potential. The premise itself is interesting. Not A Love Story is another such premise. But Varma fails to bring out the good stuff. You see it near the end the end, flashes of it. As soon as the court case heats up, you think "Now we are getting somewhere, now all that makes sense". But that's it. Poof. Nothing more.

Ouch, Charlie

FRIGHT NIGHT (2011)

Fright Night is a remake that isn't better than the original. But I'm not one of those people who think the original is sacred anyway. Albeit, Fright Night (1985) was a a very good film about a young lad in a suburb living with his single mother who finds out his neighbour is a vampire. Chris Sarandon played the vampire which is played by Colin Farrell now. No points for guessing who did a better job. Sarandon also makes a cameo in this film which comes during the film's most exciting action set-piece. The original film was not a film that was a really good film in itself, it went on to get a new life because it had a kind of movie magic. That magic I feel cannot be recreated, even if you hire (insert your favorite director name here) to direct. Movie magic itself is not created, it happens. A great director knows there's only so much he can control to create that magic, the rest is not in his hands.

War, Children, Is Just A Shot Away

AARAKSHAN (2011)

Aarakshan is great cinema. It combines the best of social, issue-based cinema trend that we have seen engulf our movie screens in the past decade, with the best of storytelling. I did not love Rajneeti (2010), It started out great but ended up as a mess. My major problem with Rajneeti was how it was supposed to be a movie about politicians and yet failed to show any politics. It turned out to be more about organized crime. The Godfather influence also didn’t go down well with me, I was expecting more of a Mahabharat influence. You could argue that Aarakshan is the same as Rajneeti in this aspect. It starts out like a film about reservations but ends up somewhere else. It tackles too many issues, most importantly the commercialization of teaching and learning. All the ingredients of a giant mess, right? Wrong. Aarakshan is a responsible film. First and foremost this is a film, which tells a good story. 

You Say You Want a Revolution

RISE OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (2011)

Rise of the Planet of the Apes is to the Planet of the Apes series what Batman Begins (2005) was to the Batman franchise. Sadly, Tim Burton was attached to both and didn't finish the race with the baton in his hand. (In my utopian film universe, Burton would get to make a third Batman film and at least a sequel to the 2001 Planet of the Apes film). This new movie in the series is definitely the best film of the series since the original film, Planet of the Apes (1968).

You've Come A Long Way, Baby

THE TREE OF LIFE (2011)

I was 15 when I saw 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) for the first time. I thought I will see the first few minutes and then sleep (this was around 2 in the a.m.) I had decided to come back from school the next day and watch it properly. But that didn't pan out. I was sitting awestruck in front of the TV 2 hours later. Wide awake. The images were so big and vast that they could hardly fit on my TV screen, let alone my brain. I could not believe what I had just witnessed. "You can do THAT in movies?" I kept repeating to myself. The medium of film and its quintessence was finally unearthed for me. I could see the extent of the beauty that results from the juxtaposition of the visual and the aural. I did not understand the movie in its entirety, I confess, but I felt it. It took me two more viewings over the years to fully comprehend what the movie was about but the experience I had the first time could not be replicated. The Tree of Life is another such experience. I'm not going to be repeating these two things for the rest of the review; First that The Tree of Life is a visual spectacle. Second that it is a masterpiece. Not that both these statements are not true but I want to get done with the obvious first, put it on the side and continue.