Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak

Oy. The Indian Romeo and Juliet. Oops, I just gave it away. Well, I doubt any of you are going to see this film (especially after this review), so I don't feel too bad. This film was, apparently, a turning point for Indian cinema. Nothing like it had been done before. My guess is that most of their cinema was (is) silly romances (not unlike our own, in fact) and that this broke the barrier with its shocking ending. However, that doesn't mean it's a good film. In fact, most of it plays like a silly romance. At least in the beginning, this is mind-numbingly boring, what with the horrible over-acting, insipid costuming and tunes that aren't even remotely catchy. The ending (about the last 45 minutes) does make one sit up and notice, but Aamir Khan is nearly unrecognizable. He's a young budding actor and hasn't flowered yet. And that goes for his looks as well. So, I'll have to revise my method of watching all Aamir Khan films. I'll only watch his recent ones, i.e., mid-90s and onwards, unless I want to groan and roll my eyes constantly.

year: 1988
length: 162 min.
rating: 2.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0095936/combined

The Quiet American

Here's a problem with writing a review of a film many days after you've watched it. I get all muddled about the details. It may be, though, that it's just this particular film's winning combination of sparsity and complexity that are to blame. It's based on a Graham Greene novel, and few films do such a good job of showcasing literary quality. Even the voiceovers have literary merit. At first, I thought the story was like so many other stories -- two men fighting over a girl, with the added exotica of it being set in Vietnam as the French are battling the communists for control of the country. But it's filmed with the slow, stately pacing of a play, albeit one a lot less theatrical and melodramatic. Michael Caine and Brendan Fraser play the men in love with a Vietnamese woman (who is very beautiful, but has little else to do, sadly). Caine is a British reporter who needs a story in order to stay in Vietnam, and Fraser is an apparently dorky, yet kind, American who steals away the woman. The chilling denouement towards the end reveals who Fraser really is, and why he's in the country. I don't know whether I'm supposed to believe it, but even if it is untrue, it most certainly was prophetic.

year: 2002
length: 101 min.
rating: 3.5
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0258068/combined

The Quiet Man

I know I'm going to get hate mail because of this review. This film won two Academy Awards, best director and best cinematography, and was nominated for five others. I fully recognize John Ford's genius, but I recognize it in a different way than I think others do (based on how popular and well-liked this film seems to be). I think Ford took a ridiculous premise and an abhorrent ideology and made a semi-OK film somehow. A man retires to Ireland, where his parents came from before they moved to America, and has to learn that things work differently in his adopted country. The problem is that this man, played not ably at all by John Wayne (more wooden acting I've not seen since Keanu Reeves in Much Ado About Nothing), was a boxer and killed a man in the ring so he doesn't want to fight in Ireland. Sounds like a good idea to me. But, everything that happens pushes him towards doing just that. And everybody is happy once he does! As you recall, I had a similar problem with Mr. Deeds Goes to Town. This is even worse -- fighting seems to be all these people live for, and it doesn't much matter that the reasons for starting a fight are noble sentiments, namely loyalty and honor. It's not very noble to physically hurt another person. Especially when there's no reason for it other than that it's tradtional and expected. I suppose this is my main problem with Westerns as well (Ford was one of the premier directors of Westerns in their heyday), but my pacifist attitude is a discussion for another time. The only things I did like were Maureen O'Hara's and Barry Fitzgerald's acting. Fitzgerald was a hoot and nearly saved the film for me. I'll have to leave this review on a negative note (are you surprised?). The folks behind the DVD transfer for some reason didn't feel it worthwhile to restore the film before the transfer. The colors are muddy and washed-out in places, and you're treated to the pan-n-scan version not the widescreen version, so that famous cinematography is wasted.

year: 1952
length: 129 min.
rating: 3.0
IMDB link: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0045061/combined