Gladiator 2, 2024 - Film Review

As an ardent and a generous film viewer, I am well aware of the perils of comparing sequels of original masterpieces. But when you have the same brilliant movie-maker in second one as well, you can’t help but keep your expectations high.

Gladiator 2, coming 24 years after the original oscar-winning magnum opus, tells the story of Hanno (aka Lucius), a daring solider of Numidia, who after getting conquered and enslaved by a Roman slave owner Macrinus, rises the ladder to become a fierce and winning gladiator in the Colosseum games. Set fifteen years later after the events of Gladiator 1, when the brave solider-turned-gladiator Maximus (Russell Crowe) fought to restore the dream of Rome to be a true republic, the state is still in shambles, controlled by ineffective and corrupt emperor brothers, Geta and Caracalla, with the senate and its members either largely impotent or corrupt. As Lucilla (Marcus Aurelius’s daughter, Maximus’s lover) and her current husband, General Acacius try to rescue Rome from its politics, and Macrinus devises his own vile plan to rule Rome, the protagonist Lucius uses his rage to fight the gladiator battles, and the evil rulers, growing ever stronger, and eventually realising his destiny of being the rightful heir to the throne and setting Rome on its visioned path of a great, free, prosperous and just Republic.

Like i said, when you have Ridley Scott directing the sequel after his genius first one, one can’t help expecting an absolute cinematic treat. But, it saddens me to say, that the film disappoints, and on many counts, unfortunately.

Starting with the story. Even though the film starts 15 years later, with a seemingly new character, Hanno (later discovered to be Lucilla’s sent away son Lucius) fighting as ferociously as Maximus did (as we know from first movie to be his father), and a new plot of Rome conquering new lands, it very quickly falls into an exact replica of the first film. Lucius becomes a slave, then a gladiator, and then a leader of all the gladiators, and eventually winning against the bad guys. Sure, there are new and supposedly surprising elements, with the character of Macrinus (Denzel Washington, no less), a former slave and now slave-owner, plotting his own game. But in essence, there is no new story to tell. Classics, when re-told to a new generation, can be powerful, with new interpretations, borrowing from contemporary culture and a topical relevance of what’s happening around the world today. Imagine the potential of telling the story of a movie like Gladiator (the common man’s heroic quest to fight for a fair and just democracy in a world that has lost its way) in 2024, with everything going on around us. But it is not to be. The film ends up being more or less a nostalgic replay of the first story, minus the genius performances by the central actors. Alas!

That brings me to the second disappointment. Paul Mescal, as the protagonist, to be fair, does a decent job of holding his role together. But Gladiator cannot be made with just a decent performance. Gladiator requires a performance of sheer force, brutality, presence, dominance, and gravitas that Russel Crowe had with his performance (for which he deservedly won the oscar). A performance that blew us all away, both in its intensity and and in its subtlety. Mescal, despite his best efforts, misses this by a mile. At best, Mescal feels like a Gen Z-on-a-bad-day version of Maximus - all talk, no impact. The other actors have the same unimpressive performance. The bumbling-almost-queer emperor brothers as the evil power-hungry-but-incompetent-rulers are a far cry from Joaquin Phoenix’s brilliant and emotionally-nuanced portrayal of the evil Commodus. Lucilla, as the un-empowered princess, is a shadow of what the same actress played in the original story. And Denzel Washington, as the conniving Macrinus is an absolute damp squib. Only Pedro Pascal, as General Acacius, gives a solid performance that makes you want to root for him, but it’s not enough to save the overall film.

Finally, the other appeal and one of the reasons we enjoyed Gladiator 1, was the no-holds-barred adrenaline rush of watching human combat in its most raw, ugly and violent form. We’d all be lying to ourselves if we didn’t acknowledge this appeal of the film, despite our high brow pretences of rooting for an Oscar winner! Again, Gladiator 2 fails at creating this impact, despite having so many fight sequences, all set to large screen Dolby music effect. The attacks are there but we don’t feel it, the blood is there but it doesn’t make us squeamish, the rage is there but it doesn’t provoke us, the fight-choreography is there but it doesn’t move us, the arms and ammunition are there but it doesn’t deter us, the horrifying bad guys and their beasts are there, but it doesn’t scare us. As a result, we are left watching a series of what feels like inconsequential fights, leading to an inevitable ending, like we would a WWE match or like we watched Jake Paul vs. Mike Tyson. Meh!

As we walk out of the theatre, we remember that actually this is not the first time that Ridley Scott has let us down. The memories of Prometheus and Alien: Covenant are still recent enough to know what this disappointment feels like. And in any case, we are getting used to our heroes and icons letting us down, so just one more on that list. No big deal. And not that it’s going to stop us from coming back and rooting for more, and continuing to believe in the power of good cinema. And in geniuses like Ridley Scott. Just like with everything else in the world, we will keep showing up again and again and again… Till the next time Mr. Scott.

Bhool Bhulaiya 3 - Film Review

After the box office successes of the first two Bhool Bhulaiya movies, first one in 2007, and last one in 2022, comes the third in the series, that capitalises on the current popular craze of horror-coms (aka Stree2), perfectly timed to capitalise on the long Diwali weekend.

The story revolves once again (like BB2) around the fraud ghostbuster Rooh Baba aka Ruhaan (Kartik Aaryan), who again finds himself in a haunted palace, with the responsibility of rescuing the place as well as its residents, from the evil spirit of Manjulika, trapped behind a door for 200 years. What ensues, is a series of hilarious adventures and mis-adventures with multiple characters entering the story, adding to the intrigue and twists (and jokes) in the story, keeping us guessing ‘who and where is Manjulika’ till the final climax with an unexpected twist in the tale and a happy ending.

When compared to its previous movies, BB3 has the opposite effect of Stree 2. Unlike Stree 2, which, by itself, was a well made, entertaining and engaging movie, yet felt disappointing compared to Stree 1, Bhool Bhulaiya 3, comes out winning compared to the highly annoying and a cropper BB2 (even though it did well on the box office). BB3 is a fun and funny family entertainer as a good weekend outing of a 2 hour plus laugh-a-thon, just what we would expect from one of the better Anees Bazmee movies. The jokes are slapstick, ridiculous, sometimes totally arbitrary, but all the while, genuinely funny. And if you’re willing to leave your minds behind for sometime, it is a full paisa-vasool break from the rest of our lives that we all take so seriously. 

The whole premise of the BB series is to not exert our minds too much. It’s a proven success formula that seems to work every time. All the familiar ingredients are there, that gives us the predictable assurance of what we’re in for. A haunted palace, a trapped evil ghost Manjulika, lots of jokes and laughs, the long and arduous path of trying to rid the world of the evil spirit, and an eventual twist in the tale ending. No suprises there, and that, in many ways, comes as a welcome relief. We know what we’re signing up for. And the film delivers to it. The additional sparkle of new characters, like Mandira (the still-gorgeous and can’t-get-enough-of Madhuri Dixit), Mallika (Vidya Balan, as an ode to BB1), Meera (Tripti Dimri), and old characters like the pandits add to the overall entertainment value of the film.

But, for those of us, who have seen Bhool Bhulaiya 1 (directed by Priyadarshan), we can’t help lament how removed from the original vision these last two BB movies have been. The shift from Priyadarshan to Anees Bazmee is of course what it is. While Priyadarshan (who gave us the genius Hera Pheri, among other acclaimed Hindi and Malayalam cinema) saw Bhool Bhulaiya as a metaphor for the maze of the mind, intertwining with the physical and the meta-physical reality of our world, Anees sees Bhool Bhulaiya as a physical space where a spooky-but-fun story is being told. Two different directors, two different visions. A bit like DC and Marvel, both about superheroes but two completely different worlds. In fact, BB1 to BB2 and BB3 is a bit like moving from Zack Snyder to Joss Whedon on Justice League, that made many of us fans protest at the Marvelisation of the DC universe.

Ofcourse, the other big criticism of BB3 (as it was for BB2) is the main actor, Kartik Aryan. One of the big reasons why BB2 didn’t work was because of him. Thankfully, BB3 works despite him. There is so much of the story and so many more characters to anchor the plot on, that Kartik’s non-performance can almost be ignored. But that also makes one wonder how much better the movie impact could have been if there was a better actor. Especially when the twist in the tale at the end has so much to do with his character and his acting, which of course, he messes up completely. Imagine if it was Akshay Kumar (from BB1), one of the best comic-timing actors we have, or even Ranveer or Rajkumar Rao from the new actors. Alas! May be there is hope for BB4.

Still overall, the film delivers a packed punch, with an out and out Bollywood fare that is not disappointing at all. A weekend filled with no-holds-barred laughter with the family, without reason or logic. What more could we ask for from a long weekend.  

Nobody Wants This - TV Series Review, Netflix

The revival of rom-com on the small screen seems to be continuing, at least on Netflix. After a successful run of One Day, a heartfelt Brit-rom-com, comes an American one, that ‘almost’ quite nicely hits the spot.

The story revolves around Joanne (Kristen Bell), an independent modern woman that’s only had bad relationships, and along with her sister Morgan (Justine Lupe), owns it and even monetises it through a wildly successful podcast on relationships and sex. Convinced of this destiny of hers, she unexpectedly and reluctantly falls in love with a young Jewish rabbi, Noah (Adam Brody). The odds are against them right from the start, because there couldn’t be two more different people in all of Los Angeles, and everyone does try to break them apart - Noah’s family, his heart-broken ex-fiancé, Joanne’s sister, and even the two of them themselves. And yet, none of the sabotage works, and as the season 1 ends setting base for season 2, they get together for what could be a happy ending.

In the main, the series is nicely done. Erin Foster’s first creation is a great promise of a new maker that is able to understand and express love and romance in its subtle and nuanced nature. An experience that is so personal and specific to the two people who are involved, that apart from the two, no one else could really understand or be a part of. This is what hits the spot. The everyday-ness of love, the banal moments of romantic conversations that simultaneously mean nothing and yet so much. The flutter of newness of a relationship yet daunted by the uncertainty of where it might be heading. Feeling like a teenager all over again, but rationalising it all like an adult. The complete disconnect of the head and the heart. The balancing act of being the same person with everyone in their lives so far, with, the entirely new persons they both are becoming as a result of their relationship. The struggle of losing their independence yet relishing the idea of their dependence on each other. Navigating the everyday question that, in fact is the Netflix byline for this series Will they? Won’t they? Should They?

If Erin Foster creates this story telling beautifully, the actors and the performances do complete justice to the vision. Adam Brody and Kristen Bell do a wonderful job of playing their conflicted-yet-passionate characters. We are fully engrossed in their emotions and can feel what they feel. All other characters also do a terrific job in bringing to life the two completely different worlds that the central characters come from, convincing us why they can never get together. Timothy Simons as Sasha, Noah’s hen-pecked brother is especially a fab discovery, reminiscent of Vince Vaughn’s hilarious characters.

But, as I liked a fresh love story on the small screen, and especially the fact that it was was a 10-episode season, each episode being less than 30 mins, I couldn’t put aside the slightly “icky” feeling (to quote an emotion that Joanne uses as a reason to get out of many relationships) I got due to the overwhelming ode to the Jewish community that the series gives, with an inherent celebration of the faith, the beliefs, the practices and the rituals of the Judaism religion, during this time in the world where against the heart-breaking reality of war and suffering of millions, we cannot have mainstream popular culture taking sides, heroing one faith over another. The love story would have worked even without this being the centre of the plot. There could have been many script alternatives to have as the reason for the perceived inevitability of them falling apart….

All in all, despite the fault in its ‘stars’, it’s great to see romantic stories making a come back, even as the big cinema has thrown it away. And perhaps rightly so, reminding us that a love story is not a big public social event, but an everyday personal lived reality that we feel when we tuck into our beds and sofas at night, with our loved ones, for our daily dose of Netflix.

One Day - TV Series Review, Netflix

After a while, and amidst the world’s continued obsession with crime and murder and war and historical epics, comes a breath of fresh air in a very watchable rom-not-quite-com limited edition series, based on David Nichol’s successful novel of the same name.

The series is a fourteen-under 30 min- episodes story told over two decades of the growing relationship between Dexter (played by Leo Woodall ) and Emma (Ambika Mod). Meeting in 1988 at their university graduation party in Edinburgh, when they almost get together, their lives go separate ways meandering through relationships, careers, jobs, and everything in-between that happens in the lives of young Brits during the roaring 90s. And all this while, staying connected to each other mostly only as friends, even though there is clear chemistry between them that they both deny and even fight against. Eventually as they get together, life seems to have other plans, because Emma and Dexter are destined to be forever together and forever apart at the same time.

The beauty of this series is in the ordinariness of the story. A little reminiscent of When Harry Met Sally, in the idea of love spanning a long timeline, but minus the drama or the sparkle or even the romance. One Day, as the name suggests, is not larger than life, or a big love story. It’s an almost banal tale of two very British youngsters and their adulting years. It’s like a story of your friend or your friend’s friend that someone is narrating to you. And that actually is what works for the series. No hype, no jazz, no over-promise, no commitment of a happy ending or even an ending. The series is not trying to say something, or prove something, or make a point about love and relationships or people or society. One Day, just is, and we watch it like a picture book of Emma and Dexter’s lives.

Leo Woodall and Ambika Mod, the central characters, as qunitessential opposites, deliver a very convincing performance. Some moments of vulnerability when they are with each other, and when they are with other characters are beautifully done. There is also a no-fuss story-telling that’s easy to watch like a warm cup of English tea that you go back to every day before bed time. Which makes it a good reason to watch.

However, the one big issue with the series is that episode-after-episode, it leaves you with a feeling of dissatisfaction. It’s like the series doesn’t want you to feel anything fully and is deliberately trying to leave you with incomplete and unresolved feelings. Be it Dex’s broken marriage, or his pain on not being able to see his child grow, or seeing his mom die,  or Emma’s breakup with a boyfriend that really loved him, or her relationship with her best friend’s baby, or her reluctant yearning for a baby herself… many more such feelings, just left of the table, for us to leave behind in every episode.  One way to look at this is that it’s genius because this feeling of incompletion we are left with is exactly what Emma and Dexter are going through in the entire story, in their relationships, in their jobs, in their families, and even when they finally get together. And for us to be left with the same feeling, is brilliant.  

But the other way to look at it is that as a piece of content, we want to feel like we’ve got good return for the time we’ve spent investing across many days. And at the end of all the episodes, we are left with so many unresolved emotions that we feel a bit exhausted and unfulfilled. Well, perhaps a little bit like life… is that the point?

All in all, a good easy watch if you’re in the mood for romance and a little light non-drama. But keep your expectations low on waiting for things to happen..