BOMBAY VELVET BO collections and REVIEWS - Page 31

#BombayVelvet is a Visual Diarrhea. A review!

Synopsis

In a parallel universe inhabited by doped Anurag Kashyap, there might exist a decade where guns come from Capone's America, gowns from 90s Miss Universe contests, goggles from 40s world War II Era, men's clothes from 50s Europe, art-deco buildings from Fascist Italy, but alas, such a decade never existed. When you are supremely stupid like Anurag Kashyap or brain dead, same in this case, then you mix everything in a grinder and come up with Kafkasque s borefest which is Bombay Velvet. Except some background music, this movie has nothing much to offer except ridiculous caricatures of characters from potboilers of yore.

Performances

Karan:

??????????

We have Karan Johar playing some kind of early-age don rolled up as a newspaper owner a la Shah in Kohra. While Shah was masculine; effete Karan makes piecemeal of his role, being supremely untalented his cartoonish take on villainy is a sight to behold. Wearing ridiculous decade-confused, ill-fitting clothes, he simpers through his character. Dialogue delivery is produced with abundant display of teeth gum; as if he were snarling, unfortunately, also accompanied by a whinny sub-feminine voice. In some serious scenes, you will break out laughing. Karan Johar's acting debut is an unmitigated failure of epic proportion. Given his temperament, a Maharani type of role of Sadak should have been tried. But, alas, I forget, Karan is a MONUMENTAL ZERO in front of Late Sadashiv ji. 

Anushka plays Rosie, love interest of Ranbir in this slow-paced tedious track. There is no chemistry between the two. She could have copied some actress from 50s/'60s but, no, you need brains to copy too. LOL. Unfortunately, for Anushka, her lip job for PK is still evident. Her lips look like a Venus Fly trap plant. They open and snap shut like a frog. She wears Miss World / Miss Universe costumes with long trails and sings some soppy numbers. A Jazz singer in impoverished Bombay of 60s trilling lullabies in a set copied from the film Chicago! Makes sense! NOT! Anushka, too, fails badly. A resounding flop by Anushka.

Anushka:

??

The person who decided Ranbir's look should be fired. His hair is a mop making him look girly. He has uncanny resemblance to 7 UP's cartoon. He plays some sort of a boxer, a character purloined from De Niro's Taxi Driver. Pathetic is the word I would use for Ranbir. A promising start fettered away in wrong films. Despite possessing a modicum of talent, his role is the weakest in the film. He epitomizes a Chinless man. Though playing a boxer with dreams of becoming rich by hook or crook, the script doesn't substantiate his longing. His acting is also very poor; his voice is a cross between Sanjay Dutt s bhidu mannerism and junked up version of Amitabh s Agnipaath. He is entirely unconvincing as Johnny Balraj. Though he tries to bring vulnerability into his role when interacting with Rosie, he manages to look amateurish. The wild kissing between the two may raise a pole or two in sexually frustrated Indian male but all it reminded me was a plumber using his pump to clear a clogged sewage pipe.

Ranbir:

Bombay Velvet is one of the weakest film ever directed by Kashyap. Fault lies squarely with Karan and Ranbir and a tenuous script. The film looks like a kaleidoscope of poached references from at least a dozen of Hollywood scenes. 30s gangster capers, 40s styling, Chicago, Taxi Driver, Rambo were unabashedly referred to create a confused maze of soulless characters, dialogues that go nowhere, sub-plots like smuggling and some land-deal add to the pandemonium. It is a kitsch gone sour. A tribute to one's ego and Anurag fails like no one has ever failed.

Box Office Verdict: 

An opening of 10 crore is assured. Punjabi film critics will pay obeisance to this film because of their leader Karan. Racism in action.

Okay this is an outright negative review but the manner in which the film is being criticized is hilarious..I din even feel bad cos it cracked me up..Esp. the racism bit 😆

Bombay Velvet Movie Review: Ranbir Kapoor and Anurag Kashyap's epic collaboration ends up as a colossal disappointment!

The movie is a technical marvel but a narrative failure. Click to read more...

Anurag Kashyap has always been hailed as the kingpin of alternative cinema in Bollywood by many of his peers. But when someone who is an expert in one thing tries to work on a different expertise, the final result may either be something incredible or an ultimate disappointment. WithBombay Velvet, Anurag Kashyap goes hardcore commercial, as he works with a big star like Ranbir for the first time. The movie had created a lot of curiosity when it was first announced, due to the people and the production values involved. The trailers of the film, however, had been a mixed bag. Let's see how the final product fares...

What's it about:

The film is set in the '60s in a city they call Mumbai...sorry, then Bombay. But it begins in 1949 when a young Balraj (Ranbir Kapoor) enters the big bad city with his foster mother, and soon learns the ways of the street. Meanwhile in Goa, a young Rosie (Anushka Sharma) is taken away from her mother by a creepy musician with a promise that she will be trained as a singer, only to mistreat her physically and sexually. When she grows up, she escapes from his clutches and lands in Bombay, where the first thing she does is a scandalous' photo-shoot and then becomes a part-time bar singer. Balraj meanwhile becomes a street-fighter and a smuggler, along with his loyal side-kick Chiman (Satyadeep Mishra). It is love at first time for Balraj when he sees Rosie singing in a shady bar. But before he can proceed further, she is whisked away by a socialism-loving newspaper editor Mistry (Manish Chaudhary). The next time they meet, he is now a right-hand man for Mistry's strongest opponent in newspaper business, Kaizad Khambatta (Karan Johar), who is also a shady land-dealer. Kaizad is a villainous scumbag who even pimps out his wife to his opponents to trap them in a compromising position. When a politician is similarly trapped, photographed and blackmailed by Balraj and Khambatta, Rosie is sent as a mole sent by Mistry to get her hands on the negative of the photograph. She is made the lead jazz singer at Bombay Velvet, a club now owned by Balraj, who is now Johnny Balraj. Rosie and Balraj then get into a passionate relationship.

However, it's not just Balraj's life that's having huge developments. Even the city of Bombay is progressing and expanding, while new lands are grabbed and getting developed. We hear World Trade Center being built, union issues, Balraj getting beaten in a fighting match, more jazz singing, shady meetings, fiery journalism wars, more jazz singing, Ranbir getting beaten again in a fighting match, double crossing , pupil turning against his master, shootouts, before we finally give and stop tracking what's happening on screen.

What's hot:

Bombay Velvet is one of the soundest technical products ever made in India, forget Bollywood. Anurag and his technical crew have taken great care to recreate the Bombay of yore, and for that great effort I stand up and salute you, sirs! Special mention must be given to the art director, Sameer Sawant, costume desiger, Niharika Khan, and cinematographer, Rajeev Ravi for taking us into the bygone era. Even the background score goes well with the narrative and the time-frame.

Ranbir Kapoor is superb as the lad who only has a single aim - to be a big-shot. He has put a lot of efforts to establish himself in the street-smart role, and it shows. Though his tapori lingo does jar at times, to the point that he reminds me of Sanjay Dutt; once he is on screen, nothing else matters. Anushka is also great, as the girl who has known abuse all her life. The surprise package, however, is Karan Johar as the gay business magnate, who has more than a soft corner for Balraj. He is oily, sarcastic and vile, yet suave. Satyadeep Mishra and Manish Chaudhary also lend in good performances. The songs by Amit Trivedi , fortunately don't act as speed-breakers, and are interspersed in the narrative well. The recreatedFifi song and Behroopia are especially good.

What's not:

Unfortunately, a technically sound product is not always a good film. While trying to do justice to the '60s era, Anurag fails to offer anything note-worthy to the screenplay. The first half of the film moves like a non-stop train, with lot of events happening and characters dropping in and out, that it doesn't matter whether the viewers are managing to keep track of what's going on. With too many things happening, we don't know or care for the peripheral characters that surround Balraj and Rosie, including Khambattta. If Anurag wants us to invest in their love story, even that's a half-baked attempt. We neither feel for any of the two characters, especially Balraj. Sorry to say, but he is a total douche-bag, who is so self-obsessed with himself that he doesn't care for anyone else, even his best friend, except perhaps for Rosie. Also, he is a cold blooded killer. The second half is nothing but a clichd vendetta saga, with failed assassination plots, fruitless police investigations and a climax that's a predictable let-down. There are no twists and turns that we expect in a Anurag Kashyap film, nor are there any of his trademark witty one-liners. Also the movie looks like an ode to Brian De Palma's master-piece, Scarface. In the climax when Balraj burst out into the club's kitchen with two tommy guns, we smile reluctantly at the obvious reference.

Even the other characters are left without any proper standing. Though Karan's acting ability is impressive, his negative character is no Ramadhir Singh of Gangs of Wasseypur. He lacks the punch to be a memorable villain, especially in the climax, where his volte-face is unintentionally hilarious. Also why he doesn't reveal to Balraj about Rosie being Mistry's mole, after knowing it all along, is still an unsolved mystery. Manish Chaudhary's character, while being an important player in the first half, almost disappears in the second half. I have no idea what's the purpose of Vivaan Shah's character, though the young actor was really good. The terrific Kay Kay Menon is under-utilised. Also after hearing so much about BV being Raveena Tandon's much touted comeback to films, all we could see her on screen was for 30 seconds or so (though she looked really beautiful!).

What to do:

Even if you are an ardent Anurag fan and are expecting another Gangs of Wasseypur, better give it a miss instead of getting monumentally disappointed. However, if you have nothing else to do this weekend and want to have a feeling of how Bombay...sorry Mumbai looked like in the 60s, it's worth taking that risk.

Rating:2 out of 5

Mixed reviews..Not sure what to think of it..I'l judge it myself 😆

Bombay Velvet Review