A rose by any name : Red Rose - 1980

The serial killer is the most infrequently used bogeyman in Indian films. It is a far cry from the West which has a fair share of cinematic
tributes to the lunatic fringe of murderers — Psycho, the Hannibal Lecter films, Se7en, and the Saw series.

To say nothing of some of the infamous giallo thrillers from Italy by Dario Argento and Lucio Fulci. Which is probably why Bharathi Rajaa’s Sigappu Rojakkal (Red Roses) was such a sleeper hit in 1978. It had a highly original premise and was taut and unsentimental, both rare qualities in Tamil cinema.

Besides, no one expected a slick urban thriller from Bharathi Rajaa who was known for village-themed films. For the Hindi remake, Red Rose (1980), the director (also credited with screenplay and story), roped in Rajesh Khanna and Poonam Dhillon as replacements for Kamal Hassan and Sridevi.

The plot remains unchanged. Anand (Rajesh Khanna) is a misogynistic playboy, constantly on the lookout for unattached, generally flirtatious women. He murders them after a one night stand and has them buried in a rose garden in his backyard. He unwittingly falls in love with one of his potential victims, Sharda (Poonam Dhillon playing the only ‘chaste’ woman in the film), and marries her.

But it is just a matter of time before she stumbles into his Bluebeard’s room like den, full of grisly accounts of his crimes and flees, with Anand in hot pursuit.

Red Rose/Sigappu Rojakkal was exceptionally daring. It’s suffused with an all too rare quality that only the best horror films possess — an oppressive claustrophobic intensity. It works as a grotesque parody of the mawkish conceit so common in Indian films about servants being part of the family.

A young Anand is first given employment and then adopted by Satyen Kappoo. Both Kappoo and the family gardener Shera (Om Shivpuri) are more than a little south of sanity and participate vicariously in Anand’s crimes, watching home videos taped by a hidden camera in his bedroom.

What made Red Rose better than the original was a stellar performance from Khanna. With his glory days as a romantic lead behind him, he seemed ready for total reinvention. He brought a level of lecherous malice to the role that was unprecedented — something a young and dapper Kamal Hassan could never have hoped to accomplish. The scenes where Anand flirts with Sharda are laden with a predatory creepiness that belies Khanna’s history as a melodramatic lover from films in the early 1970s.

Red Rose is layered with irony and black humour — there’s a ‘blink and you will miss it’ joke about the death of Sheela aka Chocolate (Aruna Irani); Khanna is named Anand, a sly dig at one of the star’s most affable roles — Kamal Hassan was called Dileep.

The sequences where Sharda discovers the true psychotic nature of her husband are interspersed with Anand staking out a witness at a night club with Donna Summer’s disco classic I Feel Love blaring in the background. The last half hour is particularly nightmarish. Bharathi Rajaa pulls out all the stops and throws in bizarre Argento-inspired lighting and a truly unsettling score by Bappi Lahiri.

And yet Red Rose was nowhere near as successful as Sigappu Rojakkal — perhaps Khanna’s transformation into a lady killer of a more literal variety was more than his dwindling fanbase could take. There was no redemptive arc to the story, no happily ever after ending. Yet as a psycho-thriller, Red Rose has few equals. One suspects it would retain its pre-eminence even if serial killers were a more popular subject with Indian directors.

Reviewed by:

http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/2547342.cms

Films like Wafaa cannot be made. They just happen. : Wafaa - 2008 (Review - 1)

WAFAA - 2008 : Films like Wafaa cannot be made. They just happen.

For those who haven’t heard of the movie, this link (Not Safe For Work, but depends on where you work) might give you idea of what you are dealing with.

The story is about Amrit (Rajesh Khanna) and his rather young wife, Beena. The theme is similar to an Amol Palekar sleaze-fest Anaahat, which for strange reasons was hailed by the intellectual critics as a sensitive and brilliant movie, the same people who are now trashing Wafaa. Hypocrisy anyone ?

I don’t think most people got this movie. The movie is complex and multilayered and it takes more than an intelligent person to appreciate its greatness. Now for some of the points that I could comprehend given my very limited abilities compared to what this movie demands.

Firstly the lead actress, her physique is just the director’s way of promoting good health among women (and not sleaze as the pseudo-intellectuals would remark) in this age of size zero and dieting.

The film really kicks off during the first intimate scene Amrit shares with his wife when he starts exhibiting some rather strange behaviour. Initially, you assume that he suffers from a medical condition that the Indian railways and airways are immune from : early arrivals. But then you discover that it is a case of acute asthama. His repeated mention to his doctor that things were going great till recently, but have slowed down now is a hint at the world economy, not some cheap physical act.

Now you would expect Dr. Mahendra Watsa to enter as the saviour with some advice like “If you start like Sehwag, you are bound to get run out !” or “Look at your age ! You should be making love to a 60 year old woman or three 20 year olds, not one !”, but unpredictability is what makes Wafaaa great (althought not in the same league like masterpieces Gunda and Loha, but close to Jimmy).

What follows is a tale of deceit and moral grey areas, an attempt to murder Amrit by his poor wife and his return to avenge his death, which technically might not make sense to a few as he never really died, in fact he doesn’t even carry Band-Aid or Hansaplast wounds. The fact that Rajesh Khanna escapes the fall of a few thousand feet with unnoticeable injuries seemed illogical at first, but metaphorical on retrospection. For someone who has survived the fall from Anand to Wafaa, what is a few thousand feet ?

The success of a thriller is measured by how many repeat viewings it takes to understand the movie. Even by that standards, Wafaa succeeds in the hands of its director Rakesh Sawant, who by his mastery over the craft makes sure that in the first viewing, you only concentrate on one thing .. er .. make that two.

Lastly, it deals with some complex social and moral issues that can best be described to be in a grey area : What does a woman do in her situation ? What is right and what is wrong ? It is a larger question posed to comtemporary society and forces you to introspect. In this age of moral watchdogs and forceful cultural impositions, this movie assumes special significance.

The acting is top notch. Worth mentioning are Rajesh Khanna’s potrayal and some parts of the anatomy of actress Laila Khan. The music is of course brilliant, but unfortunately overshadowed in the acting department as mentioned in the previous sentence.

I can only hope that when Rajesh Khanna’s grandson Arnav grows up and tells his friends about his great grandfather (not great-grandfather), we are in a time where Wafaa would be mentioned proudly. But for now I have to conclude by saying this with a heavy heart :

Some things are best left untouched, unopened and unknown. Wafaa, Himesh Reshammiya and Mamta Banerjee are fine examples.

Reviewed by:

http://iyerdeepak.wordpress.com/2009/02/04/wafaa-movie-review/#comment-1082