Jagannath Chakravarti (jesse13788)
Having stumbled across my review of the director's previous venture Bishh on this site (written some four years ago), there came a natural compulsion to jot this down as well. After the experience of Bishh, my expectations when I finally came across this 'banned' film was not high. The steamy trailer did little to pique much interest although it became a rage among the online (and offline) masses. To be honest, it felt somewhat gimmicky and I was afraid the film was going to turn out to be something similar. Well, it didn't. Gandu is, despite its name, brilliant. The moments of transgression this motion picture dares to make were outlandish, perhaps even 'affected' by a certain sense of the word, but never fails to make a mark. The cinematography is vibrant, the music stimulating. The writing may not have been perfect, but what do I know of perfection... I liked it. There was a profound 'honesty' to the angst (I was tempted to write 'psychedelic honesty') and it was provoking, even without a blunt before the show. Joyraj and Anubrata were perfect to the T & Rii was her best yet. Kamalika was hauntingly natural. The direction had a rudderless precision to it that strikes the right chord, and the interesting play of subtitles didn't harm one bit.I don't know if I can agree with a fellow reviewer calling it one of the best Indian movies ever (although I 'dug' the Midsummer quote), but Gandu is definitely a benchmark as far as Indian Independent Cinema is concerned. It's art, and a fine piece too!
Prasenjit Biswas
Q wanted to be noticed with his first independent venture and this film accomplishes it, especially the nothing-but-shock-value sex.Q has an uncanny ear for local dialogue and some of the exchanges are wry, ironic and sometimes hilarious. He's sketch of the flirty cybercafe Bengali girl is possibly one of the truest sketches I have seen. Also the street talk of lowlifes is bang on.But then - what? Where does this all lead to? Gandu builds up great expectations, then does not deliver. I felt as frustrated as the main character - empty and wasted.As is typical of many those who are attracted to film via the superficials - pithy dialogue or "the look" or sensationalism, that only works on the underlying framework of a solidly good story. You cannot erect a memorable film without a solid foundation of plot, character arc or a satisfying ending.I feel sad that this potentially great talent will only swim on the surface and end up being forgotten unless he goes deeper to see what makes good stories work.Bengali cinema desperately needs a new voice, a new testament and my fear is that unless Q respects STORY and CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT, it will be all downhill for him from here.Why is that the ancient spiritual Indian culture only produces talent incapable of true introspection? Who destroyed our image of ourselves? Why must everything we do be a copy of a copy of a copy?
Amitrajit Banerjee
I would like to start with what 'beerhug' said in his review " I am pretty sure that majority viewers have not got the basic notion of the script."I don't know how many of you have seen Andy Warhol's "Chelsea Girls", this movie kind of looks like it. The framing mechanisms used closed captions, tiled view points.The entire movie is shot in B/W, B/W by default adds more drama to a scene (imagine an HDR shot in color and the same in B/W, the later will stand out better). Added to this, the usage of closeup frames (where the environment is missing just the actors present) makes it even more dramatic. B/W has been used by many directors in the past to indicate mundane/monotonous existence. Eg. Schindler's list is shot in B/W except the few scenes in color, it might indicate the grimness of the movie in contract to the bright colorful positive future (shot in color). In contrast, Hey Ram by Kamal Hasan, is shot entirely in color (as the movie is in flash back), but the present (old man in the ambulance) is in B/W showing that the old man in his grim present lives through the colorful memories of this past.In Gandu, the life of a loser, the only highlight is the scene with the Angel (Rii) his first sexual encounter and something which makes his mundane life colorful, hence the scene in color.Gandu is a rapper, he writes Rap lyrics, hence the use of Rap all over the movie. The movie is through his eyes.In the movie, his real name is never told, he is always 'Gandu', so Gandu is not an adjective here, but also a proper noun.Strange is the character of the Richshaw puller. He is Gandu's hero and friend. He is a Bruce Lee fan and practices Kung Fu, Why do I say hero? The scene where Gandu is slapped by Rickshaw, is followed by a scene where Gandu fantasizes of them having sex, a homo sexual dream, which depicts the Alpha male qualities Gandu sees in Rickshaw!I found the web surfer girl character a bit far fetched, Kolkata girls probably don't sit in an open internet café flaunting their sexuality...The abusive language totally matches the theme of the movie, I know Bengali, and I have heard local low life's speak, yes that is what they use, if we can promote Dev-D, and The Girl in yellow Boots, and god knows what other movies, then why hit on Gandu?Coming to On screen ejaculation, well that scene is very cleverly shot, I am sure it is morphed. But that is mot the point here, the point is, that scene fits completely in the mood of the movie. All in all it ain't porn, it is independent cinema. Yes it is not for everyone, so if you can't take it, please leave it, but lets not call it names.Q makes a cameo appearance in the movie just like many big directors do. That is when he kind of merges reality with fantasy Some tech errors I observed: ------------------------------The first sexual scene, where he steals money, it clearly shows that the woman is lying aside the man, from the angle/position of the legs but they are supposed to be doing 'it'. Also the woman's leg movements don't match the man's 'pushing' at all...director should have been more observant.The house is almost empty, so they are poor people, but the steel fitting in the bathroom and kitchen look posh, they don't gel in. Poor people don't live in such apartments. I think they shot some scenes in a diff house altogether, if one observes the light switches in the house are old cheap type, doesn't match with the kitchen and the modern kitchen getup.The subtitles something don't match the actual dialogs, sometimes it is good, as literal translation don't work all the time, but it is sometimes over done, i am sure a better translation could be possible retaining the meaning of the original bong low life abusive.I don't like the dialog delivery of the main character Gandu, it is not clear, and tail drops a lot, might be cheap recording instruments too, or a bad preview copy, but i think his speech is a bit too slurry (ppl say the over all sound recording of this movie is below expectations)The video scenes (games/porn) have the electrical interference patterns we used to see in scenes from 1970 movies, I would have expected his mother o be naked in the sex scenes, the bra always messes up the power of the scene, makes it unrealistic. perhaps with his budget he couldn't get an actress to show her breastsThe scene where Gandu is caught stealing, it clearly shows they(mother and Das) are doing 'it' with the 'bra on', the next scene the mother comes to slap him 'IN THE NUDE', a full back view of her behind is shown, but no bra, lack of continuity, no one pauses during sex, gets up from bed takes their bra 'off' and goes to slap their son :)
