LATEST NEWS

After a series of well- written scripts, it is the film that will test the star power of Kangana.

Katti Batti could have been an important film. Designed to exploit Kangana Ranaut’s rebellious image, it is a film which examines the perks of a live-in relationship. It is also a film which tries to put a girl in control of the relationship. In a role reversal of sorts, she wants the relationship to be a time pass when the boy is looking for eternal love. When he talks of values, the lissom lass doesn’t want to be a lesson in moral science. Here the boy uses phrases like main ghabra gaya tha while the girl has the acumen to hide her pain so that her man doesn't suffer.

Unfortunately, director Nikhil Advani fails to package; the word they use for kneading narratives these days, his intentions for the second week in a row. If Hero was close to zero, it does marginally better because of the covalence between the lead players.

There is an emotional core somewhere but the director has covered it with layers of gloss to please the market forces, which seems to suggest that every emotion has to be packed in a comic pill. Every frame has to be eye-catching, matters of heart can wait. So you can gather lot of trend in hairdos and interior design but when it comes to the architecture of human emotions, the writing disappoints.

Advani is like that sub-editor who is more interested in writing headlines and doesn’t care to back them with substance. Perhaps, that is why the promos evoke more interest than the real thing as somebody has put all the best lines and situations in the three- minute teasers. He hopes editing gimmicks will do the trick for him but as the narrative goes back and forth in time it only adds to the confusion and exposes the hollowness of the whole idea. 

 A middle class young architect Maddy (Imran) is smitten by Payal (Kangana) who is keen to have just a casual relationship. She obviously comes from an elite fractured family. She moves into his house but after five years of bonding one day she leaves him. As Maddy goes looking for answers, he faces questions from within and without. Many of their actions look crazy but then Advani wants us to believe that this generation is like that. A little childish, a little crazy. This explains the title. Perhaps that’s why we have a song called “Main Sirphara, Tu Sirphiri” (I am crazy, you are crazy) in the film.

But then when a film that is being positioned as a rebel among the tribe of rom coms, only pushes stereotypes and tries to manipulate tear ducts towards the end for a few ounces of sympathy, it irks. A caricature of South Indian boss, a society of frustrated lovers, a turtle as a pet, the script is replete with situations which have ceased to be funny for many years now. The saving grace is that the turtle is called Milkha.

After a series of well- written scripts, it is the film that will test the star power of Kangana. Can she pull off a weak script solely on the basis of her performance? She has this amazing quality of making us laugh and cry at will and as Payal she explores her wild side to the hilt. But then she is expected to conform because she is the hero now and the hero always has a back story to justify the transgressions. The idea lies in the introductory scene where Maddy asks her name and Payal shows her ankle which has a tattoo of lightening and an anklet. Like us, Maddy also thinks she must be Bijli but Kangana wants to be a more generic Payal now. The idea of a please-all heroine at the helm is not bad but Katti Batti is not that film to give it a shot. Imran Khan is a good support. He plays second fiddle to Kangana with remarkable sincerity. Your heart goes out for him when he questions his value in the scheme of things and laments being used as a puppet.

The feeling is mutual. As after two hours of cuddling and canoodling, when the big reveal happens it is not only manipulative but also amounts to a cop out.

 Sooraj Pancholi, who is being mentored by Salman, has done something similar in his debut film, Hero. The superstar's fans have apparently demanded for the young actor to go shirtless. Having worked really hard on his physique, the debutant is only happy to flaunt it in this Nikhil Advani-directed movie. And for those who can't get enough of him in one go, he will oblige with an encore in the climax as well.


 Whether Salman's lucky charm will work for his protege Sooraj too, is something that everyone is waiting to watch. Hero, produced by Salman Khan Films and Mukta Arts, and released worldwide by Eros International, opens in cinemas on September 11.

Hrithik Roshan's HRX announced its first Brand Ambassador — Tiger Shroff.

The brand is a fitness and lifestyle brand based on Hrithik's ideology, which is to empower and inspire people to become the best version of themselves. HRX has disrupted the celebrity industry with its innovative model and with Tiger's signing, has added another feather to its cap. Said Hrithik, "The mission of our brand is to impact, transform and empower a billion people to be their own hero. Tiger embodies the values of our brand. In him, I see the potential to break norms and become an inspiration for others. For us to reach our goal, we need to bring on more people who believe in our brand's vision along with me."

 Tiger is a perfect fit with the brand's tag line Push Your Extreme. Afsar Zaidi, Director, HRX, added, "Signing Tiger Shroff is a fantastic step for the brand. Fitness and movement through dance are an integral part of his personality, which make him a perfect ambassador for the brand." On the occasion, Tiger said, "I am very excited to represent Hrithik sir's brand. For me, it's a dream that has come true. The brand philosophy is truly inspiring. I am very eager to be part of the campaigns in the days to come."  

Beyond the themes of ‘good’ versus ‘bad’ Muslim and justifying the need for India to undertake covert operations against Pakistan, Phantom can be seen, and experienced, as the fantasy of the non-religious Muslim middle class to have their loyalty to the nation believed in and accepted. This is the class which is minuscule, largely English-speaking, even deracinated and westernized, a category to which this writer too would perhaps belong.

No doubt, the perceived suspicion about the Muslim community’s allegiance to India perturbs its members across the class divide. Yet it rattles the non-religious, English-speaking Muslims infinitely more, largely because in their sensibilities they are no different from their Hindu middle class counterparts.

Unlike most Hindi films involving Muslim protagonists, the community identity of Phantom’s Col Daniyal Khan, essayed by Saif Ali Khan, is not revealed through his expressions of religiosity. He doesn’t take the name of Allah even once in the film, doesn’t visit a mosque or prays, and though he sports a beard, it does not have what is widely recognised as the Islamic cut. Long before the intermission, we are told Col Khan isn’t averse to tippling, a taboo in Islam.

The question to ask is: Could the non-religious, or secular, dimensions of Col Khan’s persona have been inadvertent, or spring from unfamiliarity with the Muslim’s cultural and religious system?

This is unlikely. Phantom’s director is Muslim (Kabir Khan), who teamed up with other Muslims (Kausar Munir and Parvez Shaikh) to write the story and the screenplay for the film. Phantom is based on Mumbai Avengers, whose author is Hussain Zaidi, yet another Muslim. It is inconceivable that not one of them would know the tenets of Islam or the dominant cultural practices of Indian Muslims. We have to assume, therefore, that the character traits of Col Khan were deliberate choices of those who invented him.

In India, the community identity of a person doesn’t necessarily have to be known through his or her performance of religious rituals or the makers of their religion he or she wears, a beard, sindoor, tilak, turban, a cross, etc. The identity of the person is revealed through his or her name, quite unlike, say, in West Asia. Thus, even an atheist is deemed Muslim, in case he or she has a Muslim name.

Viewed from this perspective, Phantom seems so much the fantasy of the deracinated Muslim middle class for acceptance. But what makes this fantasy a little startling are the implicit assumptions on which it is based. (Those who intend seeing Phantom are advised to stop reading at this point, because of disclosure of its plot.)

To cut to the story, Phantom is about a group of spooks in the external intelligence agency, the Research and Analysis Wing (RAW), which decides that the only way to deter Pakistan from carrying out terror strikes in India is to punish the masterminds of the horrific 26\11 Mumbai attacks. Though the group fails to get clearance from the political masters, it decides to undertake the covert operation, codenamed Phantom, which requires an agent to kill the plotters of 26\11 residing in Pakistan and elsewhere in the world. Who’s the “pagal” or madman who would undertake the veritable suicide mission, asks the RAW chief.

They hit upon the madman in Col Daniyal Khan, who lives the life of recluse in the snowy mountains, after having been dismissed from the Indian army on the mistaken grounds of deserting his post when under attack from the Pakistanis. The dismissal of Col Khan has even his father, a former defence personnel himself, disown him.

The RAW strikes a deal with Khan– should he liquidate the masterminds and manage to return to India alive, he would be reinstated in the Army. Col Khan agrees to this proposal, after having earlier rejected the offer of money. As he says to Nawaz Mistry (Katrina Kaif), a RAW agent in London, he wants his izzat to be restored. Restoration of respect is his prime motivation then.

His fervent wish to be reinstated in the Indian Army establishes his loyalty to the nation. The film doesn’t explicitly say this, but depends on the viewers to draw this conclusion. After all, to work in the Army, to defend the border, symbolises the utmost fealty to the nation, as also selflessness, in the popular discourse. Col Khan the Muslim is a true Indian, resembling in every way the non-religious Hindu from the middle class, barring, obviously, his name.

Not only Col Khan, but even his father is a true nationalist, evident from his refusal to speak to his son who has been dismissed because he deserted his post. No, father Khan would rather believe the Army than his son. The father, in this sense, has passed the loyalty test. Can his son do the same?

Against this backdrop, it becomes tricky to interpret the dismissal of Col Khan from the Army. Is it a mistake or a case of discrimination? The evidence is such it suggests it was a mistake. The RAW chief even knows Col Khan and his father are not on talking terms. Could he have been then oblivious of the circumstance in which Col Khan was found far away from the post at the time it blew up – and which was consequently misconstrued as desertion? Would the RAW chief have hired a deserter to undertake a risky, suicidal mission?

Regardless of whether or not it was a case of discrimination, Col Khan accepts the RAW mission because it is his only chance of redeeming himself before his father. Redemption for a Muslim who has been wronged lies in displaying reckless valour in the service of the country.

But winning the confidence of his father is just one side of the story. The other side, the more powerful impulse, for him is to see, once again, the same respect and honour in the eyes of the Hindu soldier every time he would salute him at the time he was the colonel. The conclusion – the arbiter of the Muslim’s loyalty to the nation is always the Hindu, whose respect he must win.
So Col Khan goes on an odyssey – from Delhi to the UK, to the USA, to Lebanon and Syria, killing the Lashkar footsoldiers and their patrons. He, then, enters Pakistan, with assistance from Nawaz Mistry. She and Col Khan are out to hunt and kill the two principals of the Lashkar, who enjoy the ISI’s protection.

But before Col Khan gets them, there is the debate, skillfully executed, between who is a good Muslim and who is a bad one. The RAW undercover agents in Pakistan are all good Muslims, as is the ageing Pakistani nurse, whose son joined the jihad only to end up as a dismembered body. The unmistakable conclusion is that for a Pakistani to be a good Muslim, to be even a good citizen, he and she must betray their state, the unconscionable sponsors of terrorism, to reclaim their faith and nation hijacked by the blood-thirsty radicals.

Between this binary of good and bad Muslim, where is Col Khan located? He doesn’t enter the debate; in fact, the Pakistani nurse is persuaded to betray her employer and the state by Nawaz, a Parsi from Mumbai. Col Khan is indifferent to religion. Nationalism is his religion. Before shooting the Lashkar boss, Col Khan doesn’t throw lines at him about the true meaning of Islam. He simply declares, “India only wants insaaf (justice).”

It is indeed ironical that the RAW’s quest for justice is realised through a Muslim colonel. This is so because the RAW has an unwritten official policy of not recruiting Muslims. In 2000, a grandson of eminent educationist Humayun Kabir was not recruited into the RAW only because he was Muslim, as this Outlook story reported.

Phantom’s deliberate overlooking of this fact of RAW – journalist and author Hussain Zaidi would surely know this – renders the non-religious, middle class Muslim’s fantasy for acceptance extremely poignant. It also establishes that despite the Indian state’s palpable prejudice against the Muslim community, its members must strive in the manner of Phantom’s Col Khan to convince the nation about his loyalty to it.

Col Khan passed the loyalty test through his death. To become a martyr for the country, therefore, defines the good Muslim. Conversely, a good Pakistani Muslim is one who embraces the traitor’s death.

No doubt, the film’s director, Kabir Khan, and his band of writers have broken the stereotypical depiction of Muslims in Hindi cinema. Yet their fantasy of acceptance has them conform, in subtle ways, to the idea of good Muslim as defined by Bal Thackeray and the BJP. And that is truly worrying, amidst the thrill and glitz of Phantom.

Taylor Swift won video of the year, Miley Cyrus briefly flashed one of her breasts and Kanye West ranted at the MTV Video Music Awards.

After Swift won the top prize for "Bad Blood," Cyrus was backstage speaking and hiding behind a curtain, but one of her breasts appeared onscreen before the camera cut away. MTV said the clip will be removed from all future broadcasts.

Cyrus closed the show at the Microsoft Theater in Los Angeles with a performance, which started with the line: "Yeah, I smoke pot."

She's not the only one: West, who said he got high before going onstage on Sunday, gave a rambling speech as he apologized to Taylor Swift for taking her microphone in 2009, admitting "I don't understand awards shows," bashing MTV, and claiming he would run for president in 2020.

Swift presented West with the Michael Jackson Video Vanguard Award on Sunday night at the Microsoft Theater in Los Angeles.

"This arena tomorrow is gonna be a completely different setup, this stage will be gone. After that night, the stage was gone, but the affect that it had on people remained," West said of running onstage during Swift's speech at the 2009 VMAs. "The problem was the contradiction. The contradiction is I do fight for artists, but in that fight I somehow was disrespectful to artists. I didn't know how to say the right thing, the perfect thing."

It was just one of the dramatic moments at the awards show. Nicki Minaj called Miley Cyrus out at the MTV Video Music Awards after the 22-year-old said in an interview that the rapper was being a poor sport about not receiving a nomination for video of the year.

After collecting best hip-hop video for "Anaconda" on Sunday, Minaj told the audience: "And now back to this b---- that had a lot to say about me a lot in the press. Miley, what's good?"

Minaj's microphone was cut off, and Cyrus fired back with "we all know how they manipulate" words during interviews, referencing a pre-VMAs interview in the New York Times. Cyrus then stumbled over her words as she tried to read from cue cards about voting for the artist to watch award.

"I lost this award in 2008 and I was fine with it. Whatever! Because it's no big deal. It's just an award and I persevered," she yelled, appearing to look over at Minaj. She ended with: "Congratulations Nicki."

Justin Bieber returned to the big stage with slick dance moves to his hit "Where Are U Now" and new single, "What Do You Mean." He was emotional by the end of the performance and cried onstage.

Tori Kelly was a vocal powerhouse during her performance of "Should've Been Us," ending in a cappella to a rousing applause. The Weeknd's smoky performance of "Can't Feel My Face" was energetic and smooth, and even West, Swift and Selena Gomez got out of the chairs to dance to the upbeat track. And Demi Lovato brought a sexy vibe when she sang her anthemic "Cool for the Summer" outdoors with background dancers wearing bright colors that added to the song's summer-feel.

Cyrus hosted the VMAs two years after she stole the show with a risque, but memorable performance with Robin Thicke, and a year after winning the top prize for "Wrecking Ball." She took a selfie with people in the audience and asked them to yell: "Marijuana." "Ellen, you ain't got nothing on this," she said.

Cyrus announced at the end of the show that her new album is available online for free.

Here is a list of the winners of Sunday night's 2015 MTV Music Video Awards in Los Angeles:


Video of the Year: Taylor Swift featuring Kendrick Lamar, "Bad Blood."

Male Video: Mark Ronson featuring Bruno Mars, "Uptown Funk."

Female Video: Taylor Swift, "Blank Space."

Hip-hop Video: Nicki Minaj, "Anaconda."

Pop Video: Taylor Swift, "Blank Space."

Rock Video: Fall Out Boy, "Uma Thurman."

Artist to Watch: Fetty Wap, "Trap Queen."

Collaboration: Taylor Swift ft. Kendrick Lamar - "Bad Blood"

Video With a Social Message: Big Sean featuring Kanye West and John
Legend, "One Man Can Change the World."

Art Direction: Snoop Dogg - "So Many Pros" (Jason Fijal)

Choreography: OK Go - "I Won't Let You Down" (OK Go, air:man and Mori
Harano)

Cinematography: Flying Lotus ft. Kendrick Lamar - "Never Catch Me" (Larkin
Sieple)

Direction: Kendrick Lamar - "Alright" (Colin Tilley & The Little Homies)

Editing: Beyoncé - "7/11" (Beyoncé, Ed Burke, Jonathan Wing)

Visual Effects: Skrillex & Diplo - "Where Are U Now" with Justin Bieber
(Brewer)

Michael Jackson Video Vanguard Award: Kanye West.