sarkar a comedy movie
if you have seen "GODFATHER" then sarkar is a comedy movie.
shareif you are reading this post, you can have a good laugh.
shareyeah... thats a good laugh :D
share
MovieChat Forums > Sarkar (2005) Discussion > sarkar a comedy movie
if you know pradeep_n_r, i feel sorry for you.
shareStop comparing SARKAR with GODFATHER..because its faaaaar better movie to overshadow its individuality ...and lets not forget that its only because of makers like RGV we r still not deprived of goood cinema..
and also remeber it needs guts to credit the original source ...and RGV has it and he did it ..and as far as i see it .. its a good Adaptation which is a good tribute to the classic and not a cheap imitation..
PS: wanna see cheap imitation of GODFATHER here u go:
1.DHARMATMA
2.ZULM KI HUKUMAT
3.AATANK HI AATANK( well this one casts aamir khan and guess who ....RAJNIKANT....LOL!)
cheers.
what about maqbool.
similar lines../??
but maqbool was a masterpiece. pankaj kapoor can be comapared with marlon brando.
sarkar movie was good.
amitabh lacked the cold, calucalted, emotional attitude of don vito corleone in Godfather.
for example -
1) the scene where rashid comes in to do business with sarkar and
'forgothisname' dude meets don corleone and family with some drug business in Godfather. Marlon Brando carried the scene to perfection. amitabh lacked that coldness.
2) Also, consider the scene where don vito cries over his dead son bullet ridden body in the morgue with the undertaker watching. this, in my opinion the best piece of acting, direction and camera work.
notice the darkened eyes on marlon brando, the frowns on his forehead, the light focussed on the face. great direction.
When sarkar hears that junior has killed his brother, his reaction was not what i expected. nor was the camera work up to the mark.
guess Junior B did a better job than father!
He potrayed his role to perfection.
I am an ardent fan of the Godfather series, and saw Sarkar tonight. One could easily draw up comparison between the two movies. But before doing so we ought to consider the differences. Amitabh Bachchan's portrayal of "Sarkar" is human. Also he is a simple man- at least home. And of course, money is not the focus. Sarkar is a force to be a dealt with not a business empire.
Similarities such as brother shooting brother (widow wife), and surviving shooting are borrowed for sure but those should not be the focus. The question of morality - the difference between wrong and right- if any, is far better portrayed in this Indian "version" of the Godfather. Note the catchphrase Ram Gopal Verma has used- there is no wrong and no right.
Godfather is Godfather, and Sarkar is Sarkar.
Good work- I loved the fact that the lead roles didn't shave their beards off- I don't get why most Bollywood and Hollywood heros like to be clean shaven. Abhishek Bachchan delivered a magnificent transformation from literate guy to educated guy. Wow. His performance blew me away.
Music was perfect.
Loved the marginal gore of this movie.
maqbool was a modern day remake of the shakespeare play macbeth u dumb piece of *beep* the only similarity it shares with the godfather is that both were underworld based.
shareDude you missed the whole point of how the movie differs from Godfather. Godfather is about mafia, money, gambling. Sarkar is nothing like that. Ramu does not show anything about the underworld or gambling. amitabh is not an underworld don in this movie. that's why he lacks the "cold, calucalted, emotional attitude of don vito corleone in Godfather".
1. "Virgil Sollozzo" was the drug dealer's name in godfather. I am sure that Amitabh lacked the coldness because of the script and not because of his abilities.
2. Don Vito cries over a dead son whom he loved. That scene was really brilliant in every sense. But in case of Sarkar, the son was already kicked out of the house and sarkar never loved him. So Amitabh's reaction that you see is what can be expected from someone who hears the death of someone whom he did not love.
It's also kind of a loose interpretation of the life of Bal Thackeray.
bal thakeray works in the government, sarkar worked outside the government, thakeray never sits down 2 listen 2 people's problems and help them out, infact he himself is responsible for totruting many innocent people, sarkar helped people out, there is NOTHING like bal thakeray in sarkar.
sarkar loved his son and didnt like his attitude thats all, the scene wasnt handled well when he hears of his son's death.
sarkar contradicted his own logic he said once in the movie that u gain power by joining people not by making them against u, and he did exactly the same thing with "rashid" when he came 2 strike a deal with him, instead of being nice with him and telling him he cant do business with him, he was aggressive and inviting rashid 2 be his enemy, also sarkar says he doesnt interfere with other's work but he himself tells rashid he wouldnt let him do business on his own either!!!
Rashid needed Sarkars premission as whatever he had planned was to be done in sarkars territory but sarkar new it was drugs so he said that he didnt wasnt anything to do with it and also that he wouldnt let rashid do it either, man of morals!
shareMaqbool is based on Shakespeare's Mackbeth
share[deleted]
There could be some similarities between GodFather and Sarkar but I don't consider it a complete adaption. Nice analysis regarding M. Brando's expressions but I'd say Amitabh did a wonderful job too. About the cold, calculated and emotional attitude of Don Vito, I think you missed the essence of "AB....?". The way Big B delivered that word had all the coldness and before that the tears in his eyes had the emotions too.
shareThere is simply no comparison. Sarkar doesn't come close to the sheer poetry, excellent cinematography, unforgettable music by Nino Rota and far superior technical work of Godfather.
shareI saw Sarkar three times and I just saw Godfather (because of Sarkar). I thought that Godfather was good movie, but it was not having intensity of Sarkar. E.g. The sequence of Mike marraige in italy and eveything was unnecessary. Another thing, how mike comes back to US and how his charges are cleared??
Acting was the Sr. GF was good. But can't compare that with Bachhan. Amitabh has not used anything add-on (like to change voice or keeping something in mouth). He has reacted the way any person will react. He was excellent as he was in 'Dev'.
In short, I liked Sarkar more that Godfather.
Sarkar is a pretty tight film by itself, I would agree to that extent. It is much better than the standard Bollywood fare (and many Hollywood crap as well, for that matter). However, few living filmamkers can parallel Francis Ford Coppola's groundbreaking work.
You give one instance of plot incongruity in Godfather, I can point out many in Sarkar. Let me give an example. Abhishek Bachchan plays squash with the Katrina Kaif character and carry on a conversation. Now, squash is a physically strenuous game. Even if you play at a low intensity, it is simply not possible to carry out a conversation in a normal tone. An italian crew such as the one that shot Godfather would never commit such a blunder. They live, eat and breathe cinema and it is fairly evident in each and every frame of Godfather.
Then of course comes the basic framework. Godfather is about a mafia family, a very realistic portrayal. There is no moral ambiguity here, they break the law and make money from dubious businesses. Sarkar tries to make a character who has no clear business interests and yet has a sprawling mansion and employs numerous help. I can very well understand the motivation here but let me not venture into politics.
The problem with Ram Gopal Varma is that he is making a dozen films a year. A great film requires a great deal of sacrifice, hard work and patient thinking. You can not get around that no matter how great a genius you are. But for a few nicely composed scenes, Sarkar remains a hastily filmed melodrama with an overdose of diffused light shots.
[deleted]
Very nicely put piperonthemoon
shareBy far this was the only comment I was convinced with and could find myself in congruence with. I just watched Sarkar and thought it was a brilliant film. But, like @piperonthemoon pointed out, there are some scenes that lacked thought unlike godfather in which lot of effort and time was invested.
But, I found myself completely immersed in the plot and the movie and ultimately thats what you want.
If you compare both the movies , Yes SARKAR is a comedy movie to any non-Indian. But, if you see it from Bollywood's perspective, Its a tremendous effort by RGV. It is absolutely not an easy task for any director to start from scratch(novel).
Good job by Varma.
Uday.
[deleted]
Sarkar was the biggest sample of *beep* that I have ever seen. All you people who consider it 'great' have probably never watched great cinema before (Tarkovsky, Bergman, Ray, Kurosawa, Scorsese and yes, Coppola). I pity all of you. You are the typical mainstream audience that such dismal movies are meant for. Get a life!
shareive seen movies by all the directors u mention and i agree that sarkar is not quite as good as the godfather. however if u look at it on its own instead of comparing it to the godfather, u will see its a pretty good movie.
sharewell on one hand you go out to watch the movie and on other hand you criticize a lot. If you happen to dislike SARKAR or perhaps all of RGV and Bachchan's Movie, dont go out to watch them. As simple as that. And throughout the promotion of SARKAR, it was communicated that its an adaptation of GODFATHER. So, why did u go out to watch it in the first place itself. I think you belong to that category of Bastards, who dont use their head while criticizing. People like u criticize because they cant appreciate greatness.
If you want to criticize simply dont go out to watch these movies.
Criticism is a statement of opinion. A relevant opinion can only be formed after one has experienced the event that one chooses to criticize. Too complicated for you Singh-bk? Suggest you read it again...real slow this time. And by the way, Sarkar was a joke. On a stand alone basis it really stank. To think that this is the same director who gave us Company.
shareyou people really have *beep* for brains u knw.. all u people who think sarkar was a comedy movie..
first off...its based along the lines of godfather simply to illustrate the relationship between sarkar and his sond shankar(abhishek's character)..he got warped into the family business without wanting to be involved in it in the firsat place.. but he did out of respect and love for his father..the same on killing his own brother in cold blood...so dont snub this great piece of film-making..jus by comparing every single thing with hollywood standards..
SECOND..forget the squashe part man..they werent even talkin in that normal a tone..notice there was a slight strain in his voice..they werent playing it for that long too u knw.. i'm a state level squash champion..trust me..once u get the hang of it..u can talk while playing... not that kaif and bachhan are profs..
THIRD..all the directors that the as$%^#$ above me mentioned.. they're amazing..but remember..they're hollywood..and we're bollywood..dont compare cuz that comparisson will only make the glass look half empty..
FOURTH..THIS IS BASED LOOSELY AROUND THE LIFE OF BAL THACKERAY..how the heck wud u knw whether bal thackeray helps people or not.. u jus believe what is said in the media.. jus like all the people in movie do on reading about sarkar..subhash nagre is based around bal thackarey..PERIOD.. bal thackarey too is a great man...who believes in what he does.. see the amount of fu^&*%$ supporters he has man... u think a man who does wrong can have that many??? how many supporter does dawood ibrahim have?????!!!! GO ON..ANSWER THAT *beep*
the movie is simply mind blowing...much better than company/...company hit us so hard in the head cuz it was the first realistic mafia movie made for india... it was amazing too..but sarkar tops it all!
if u dont like it..fine...but use ur brains and crticize..weird foreigners...i love the movie..and cant wait for the sequel...
peace out...anyone who wud like to refute and abuse me back...ur most welcome to...
Guys!relax.i see so much conflict over the film and its comparisons, etc. firstly, for those of u who think sarkar is a joke, i do not blame u. when i first watched the film, i was left with a sense of unacomplishment. without doubt its incomparable to the great work of coppola. but thats precisely the problem. anyone who has watched the godfather before watching this film inevitably end up making comparisons between the two. i had to check my self and clear my head of all the pre-conceived notions of what i expected the film to be. for a foreign audience, this film may seem a very average fare due to the much better quality of gangster films around. but its putting this film firmly within the context of indian cinema and as a development of its quality that should be the focus of any critical evaluation.
over the years that has been great debate over the quality of indian cinema and its stagnation as a creative industry. sarkar, is like maqbool evidence of a gradually growing sign of artistic development of indian cinema. let me remind myself and everyone else that these is a GREAT gap between hollywood and bollywood, or at least in the best of both. the cinematic experience of films like citizen kane and the godfather is, if a comparison is to be made, far better than sholay or mughal-e-azam. but making comparisons like this is simply unjust to both. therefore as much as the film sarkar has a direct connection with hollywood, it should still be taken objectively as a BOLLYWOOD film.
in this sense, this film i have to say is a wathershed in innovation. the dusty and rusty feel of the entire film is cinematographic brilliance, and blends perfectly well with the dark, haunting background score. this sense a solid foundation for the development of the story. firstly the use of the title sarkar is clever, obviously as it also means government, which ironically specifically what nagare has rejected. so in turn, nagare has formed his own sarkar, with his own codes of justice and morals. but its the shaded characters, which are so elusive in bollywood films that should be noted. as much as this is very common in hollywood films, at least the good ones, we need to see greater character construction and development in hindi films. the character of shankar nagare(junior ab) goes through a development, from one who is outside the family's affairs to one who becomes the centre of it and more cold-blooded and ruthless than any of them. of course the killing of his brother is borrowed from the godfather. the concept of blurred sense of right and wrong with regard to a corrupt system becomes the focus and is well planned out. its this that should be the focus of the critique on the film and not so much the comparison.
Well Put, Sarkar is definitely a leg up in Indian Cinema when strictly comparing to other bollywood movies. But it definitely lacks many of the key elements that made Godfather, the greatest movie ever made (Check IMDB's top 250 movie rankings). It is unjust to compare the plots of the two movies as they do considerably differ while Sarkar definitely borrows some classic Godfather scenes. In godfather, there is no betrayal by any son. That part of the story doesn't come in till Godfather Part II, and even then, it is much more subtle. Although implied, it never really emphasizes that Fredo sold out Micheal and his family.
The main aspect lacking in Sarkar is the subtlety that made Godfather a truly realistic portrayal of the mob world. The scene in which they kill of the godfather's driver is perfect. There is no over dramatization, its clean and simple. One minute they are perfect friends, and the next minute he is dead. None of the characters show any exaggerated emotions that should clearly be absent in professional killers. In comparison, Sarkar is filled with the usual dramatic bollywood fight scenes when in reality, guns have become so cheap that your traditional fight scene is hardly realistic. Some would say that those fight scenes represent his anger but such things don't happen in reality. Moreover, it is insulting to the viewer's intelligence when the grief that anyone would experience over ones father's death is overemphasized. In Godfather, this is completely avoided as Micheal simply gives the order for them to be killed and he himself does not participate directly in any of the killings. This point is later followed up in the second movie when he is under investigation by the senate for having links to the mob. The fact that Micheal never directly participates in any of his illegal dealings removes any connections between him and the crime. That's virtually the definition of organized crime. Sarkar failed to illustrate this point. In fact when you look at most of the well done scenes in Sarkar, its those that were directly copied from the godfather, and not one original scene was truly memorable.
The parts I did like was the excellent and very different musical score, superb acting by Bachan (He was classic in his own way. He doesn't need to imitate Brando.), and the view of how such politicians are almost revered as gods in their own right by the common people. This is different from in the Godfather where the Mafia are respected out of fear rather than love. Even in the first scene, it is clearly evident that the father who's daughter was raped, came to the godfather out of fear and helplessness. His reluctance to be socially involved with the mafia is clearly shown. What I am trying to point out here is that Sarkar and other such adaptations can be good in their own ways and do not have to be copied over directly. However, Sarkar belongs much much lower on the scale when compared to the Godfather, though it had potential to be just as good.
Hi,this is a reply to the post by ishan_619
Well,first of all,no grown up person would be interested on abusing anybody else's opinion.So your getting to hyper about it makes me doubt your sanity.Your use of profanity in your own secret language is oh so childish,grow up man........
IMHO,all this stuff about the son and father realtionship and then comparing it with The Godfather may be true,but I dont think thats the only similarity between the movies.I think the simialrity lies between the tremendous power of the so called 'parallel government'.But this kind of thing can be seen in almost every 'bhai log 'movie bollywood has ever made.The whole rigmarole of RGV's about this being his tribute is a publicity stunt,just giving the film
a certain dignity,distinguishing it from other similar ones.Try comparing it with any other such movie and you'll see so many similarities.Aside from the Bacchan duo(who are quite incomparable,no doubt about that) and some good scenes,this movie doesnt make much sense.
Even if you dont consider the squash stuff,there are bigger and more outrageous flaws in the entire structure of the movie
First of all,it doesnt flow well.No matter how great a bachhan fan you are(i'm one too) the movie does get a bit boring at times.
Second where is all that money coming from?They dont specify it at all.He doesnt want to do drugs,doesnt go in politics,doesnt want to cheat the public,doesnt even do any legal business,doesnt have factories or fields........but is living in a great mansion,with so many servants and always helps the needy bountifully.The money is really a big mystery to me.
Moreover does RGV consider his audience so naive as to think that all the bad stuff from a city like mumbai can be wiped in one sweep.Are we so stupid as to think there are only a couple of gangs,or that the chief minister or some obscure swami can cook up such a big thing and nobody'll know about it?Even the CIA aint that good,even their secrets leak out to the public.
And lastly about Bal Thackerey(pardon the spelling),i dont know why you are so obssessed about him,he is goddamned politician afterall...Anyways I have an answer for that too.Have you ever heard the word charisma(look it up in the dictionary,i dont think you are acquainted with that word)Hitler had it,Stalin had it,Mussolini had it,Charlie Chaplin had itAmitabh Bachhan has it....the list is endless.It just means that to sway the public,to make the public love you,believe in you,its not necessary to have 'good' in your heart.The public may love you eventhough you may be a scoundrel.I'm not saying this for Bal saheb in particular,but I hope my meaning is clear.
These are just my opinions and I'm probably wrong but I just cant let a post of that kind go unanswered.........
Ya,i agree Sarkar is good and all,but its not the greatest.Have you ever seen Vaastav? If the glamour of the father and son duo were not in this movie,it would not be fit even to be seen once.
God Bless both ABs,they are brilliant......
Look at most logins , clearly Indian people. Some comparing, some praising, some loathing. Some desperate , frustrated people who think being American is superior and other such “emotional patriots” that they are ready to defend any crap that "bollywood" produces.
Bottom line, Godfather is a movie with vast audience, not just American. Its not an excellent but a very good movie, nicely written and produced. Any copy like this, even though an honest tribute by the director to the Godfather can NEVER be as good as the Godfather. After all its not original.
Its probably not comedy but useless if one is looking for a genuine movie. But considering that most Indians (actual people living in India, yup technically that’s most Indians) who haven’t seen Godfather and probably will never understand that movie, people who watch and adores movies with idiotic unrealistic setup (that covers almost all bollywood movies :)) , at least for these Indians if this and other nice Hollywood movies are made as an exact translation (lets say originality is dead in bollywood which is true by the way nowadays). These copies of the original then probably might develop some good taste in a cinema where KAL HO NA HO and DIL WALE DULHANIYA LAI JAYEIN GAY (yeah its gay ;) are movies which are awarded.
Bring it on!
well said uniprez-1.
i don't know when will bollywood start making films on its own
ya its a funny movie.
u see abhishek running fast in the trailer wondering why, you had already guessed watching the film.
If it is such a great movie, why RGV took such "stars" instead of other suitably good actors?