does ne1 agree wit me that the ending was total *beep* mean there was a gate a few metres away wat was the need to break down the wall? i kno they meant it symbolically breaking down the barriers between the families but does ne1 think it was totally uneeded. that part was the only bad part in an otherwise good film...i loved it.
sharethe ending could have been a littlwe more stronger, but i still loved the movie, one of the best indian movies i ever saw
shareya I agree, end was a bit of stretch. I mean, why the hell do u want to break that such a stupid and big wall and then it dint seem like it was really that serious or demanding climax and suddenly you see things happening and i was like gosh, throw me some bone here but anyways movie is good just that end could have been little more natural as compared to the movie.
share^Thats the biggest problem - how much of a stretch it was - being able to break down a cemented brick wall with a spade and then a water fountain(???)
Wow, Saifu must have been very strong.
Ashmi any question
One of the better movies to appear on the Indian celluloid. But in concluding a film, Indian film makers are never satisfied with subtlety. The endings always have to make an impact for impact sake…., with histrionics, lengthy monologue etc.
shareParineeta is a lovely rendition of another Saratchandra clssic. But, the ending was a bit far-stretched--- I was reminded of that 'tor do yeh deewar- boman irani' ad and could barely suppress the giggles. By the way- did the ad-man Pradeep Sarkar direct that ad??? just wondering....
shareThe father was very overbearing, therefore the wall had to be broken the way it was, to demonstrate in public that he had lost face, that even his wife was now publicly against him! Walking around and through the gate would have left the father still with his dignity in tact, and he would have fought back. Breaking the wall also broke his tyrannical back in public...............You have to live thru such a situation to understand what is involved.
Here are two real life analogies for all those too young to remember:
1. ronald reagan destroyed the tyrannical soviet empire by public humiliation, in the same manner. he did not meet four soviet presidents and they each died in office, he met the fifth one, gorbachev who capitulated, but gorbachev did win the nobel prize!!! tyrants and their enablers are very hard to beat, and they creep back up, be aware. (as a contrast, carter went and literally kissed breznev on the cheek as seen on tv, and sold out to him. The soviets conquered 27 countries while carter was president as his reward!)
2. The Berlin wall was knocked down by picks and shovels by ordinary citizena as a public humiliation of the soviet governing system. This wall was built to keep people in, as in a prison! Thousands were shot while they tried to break through this wall.
THE ENDING WAS HORRRRIBLE!!! but the rest of the movie still made up for it so i still loooooove the movie...i just wish they changed the ending
shareyep...Just when I thought I had seen one of the few hindi flicks that avoided a ridiculous plot twist, leave it to Saif Ali Khan to shatter my hopes with a cumbersome bird feeder. Ok, even if he was going to break the wall, did they really need to have him go after it by four different means (hands, shovel, pipe, and bird feeder). For a wall that took less than a day to build, it sure was sturdy. It would have been quicker if they just had him scratch away at it with the rock hammer from Shawshank Redemption.
And does his friend who's encouraging him yelling, "Tor!!!" even know what his is encouraging him about? Well, maybe the buddy figures it out. As another poster alludes, if the guy was a real friend he would provide better advice by yelling, "Atraaf se ja!!!"
Then again, the scene made me laugh harder than I had in quite a while. Aside from this silliness, the movie was actually quite good with subtle humor rather than the typical in-your-face lame comic relief.
Although he did a decent acting job, I thought Sanjay Dutt was miscast. He's getting a bit old and out of shape to play a potential leading man. He sort of looks like a bullet.
I personally think the ending was just fine, the whole wall thing was a metaphore, it was a perfect representation of determination, emotion and how you can do anything in anger. and plus it makes a good movie. I think that if the movie ended by him running around the wall and throwing himself in front of the car, it would have been a bit too plain and simple for me. you got to admit though it was quite funny to watch him trying to kick the wall down lol. so all in all i think that was a great ending! and parineeta is a top class, well good, im gonna buy it on dvd when it realeases.
peace out,
I agree with Prince_OD on this one.
How much ever far fetched or dramatic the ending looked, the story needed a strong ending like this.
In case you look at it from the point of view of the characters, for Shekhar to prove his defiance over his father's dictatorship it needed a strong symbolic action. For Vidya to get to believe that, the man she loved was strong enough to take on anything to support her was another necessity for next scene.
Anyway, all I'm trying to say is, how much ever corny those few frames look like, they were not entirely out of the way nor absolutely silly.
And taking up 4 different measures to break the wall actually makes the scene more believable. In sheer raze someone can take up a shovel to break a wall, while in reality it actually needs bigger stuff to make a crack in such a thing.
Anyway, I just loved the movie. Being a fan of Sharat Chatterjee's novel's I know the movie didn't meet the level of the book, but I didn't see many other movies getting that far as well.
Oh ya i agree with all users.
shareWhen a metaphor is too obvious, it insults the viewer's intelligence; A major problem with a lot of bollywood movies, albeit Parineeta has definitely come far. If it weren't for the ending, I would have considered it as one of the best movies I have ever seen.
The perfect ending would have simply been Saif running down the stairs, to the door and yelling out her name, then the camera closes in on the girl as she's about to enter the car. Then fade out. A lot of people might consider this to be a weak climax. But if you look at the storyline, its not really the climax. The climax occurs when Dutt enters Saif's room and the resolution is ofcourse the conversation that follows. It's not necessary to amplify the point that they make up in the end. That's understood.
If you look at a lot of hollywood movies, melodramatic scenes like this movie's ending are usually frowned upon/and/or reserved to comedic/B movies.
Pride and Prejudice is good example of how a simple ending can be effective especially when everyone knows what's going to happen. In fact, this book takes it further, and the climax actually occurs during the middle of the plot. You then have a story that is considered a classic without all the melodrama.
Critiscisms aside, this was quite a good movie, not just because of the plot, but also because of the background aspects such as describing the city, the atmosphere, and local culture. The local culture is the key here, as bollywood has been on a downward spiral with more and more americanized movies that clearly don't represent the average lifestyles of everyday Indians. This movie should be a good lesson for directors of plotless hindi movies where everyone lives in perfect tranquility with the exception of some superficial conflicts that are stretched to the maximum.
the filmmakers couldnt resist to put the 'bollywood' tag on the film.. hence the ending. I mean such a classic of a film, superb cinematography, and then they shoot the last scene... what i want to know is what was Amol Patekar thinking while shooting the lsat scene...
shareaherm...Amol Palekar did not direct this movie, he directed Paheli! The director was Vidhu Vinod Chopra and I must say, last minute histrionics notwithstanding, this was a fantastic movie from start to finish.
share
aherm...again... This movie was directed by ad-man Pradeep Sarkar. Vidhu Vinod was the producer...
'So if all of his Horcruxes are destroyed, Voldemort could be killed?'
LOL! You guys are funny!
Anyway, I also thought initially that the ending was quite strange. But after giving it a second thought I think it's just fine. I can understand him breaking the wall, as he was angry with his father and wanted to show that anger. But what I found too melodramatic were the friend and the mother and the other people yelling "Tod do, Shekhar!". Like someone said earlier in this thread, do they actually realise what they are encouraging him about? But I loved the film anyway.
those were also my exact thoughts about the ending. Shekhar needed to show the anger towards his father infront of everyone, so kicking the wall and trying to break it was understandable. But the "tod do shekhar" part was totally shocking and felt out of place considering the overall quality of the movie. If the friend, mother and other people tried to help shekhar break the wall, it still could've been less of a typical bollywood movie scene.
sharepersonally, i loved the ending. can u picture him just running around the wall to meet her? that would have been very lame. my only complaint is i would have liked to see the reaction of the women he was supposed to marry. maybe they showed her and i just blinked and missed it or something
"I don't see the point in living if I can't be beautiful." Howl
the wall was a metaphor
shareThe wall was indeed a shattered metaphor. And as a comment to another earlier thread, Saif didn't have the break the wall, or run around to meet his lady love. He could have just clambered over the wall,with his dhoti trailing behind. That would have been some sight! N'yuk! N'yuk!
shareI like the ending. It symbolises "breaking down the wall" between the two families Shekar's father has built. The two families can be reunited formally. I think the ending would be worse if he just walked over to the other via the gate !
shareHow many of you think that metaphorical endings like breaking up the walls accompanied by a crying mother, over-zealous friend and some over-acting could have been replaced by a raw scene in which he opposes his dad and stands up to him in front of his family and friends using some "Bold", "Real" dialouges?
I dont know why Indian movies always go too much on the drama. The worst part was that when the wall gets a hole, we can see the girl's face through the wall. Absolute rubbish! I cannot believe and tolerate a wonderful movie taking an amateurish twist in the end!
An otherwise wonderful film(by Bollywood standards) with breathtaking cinematography!
yeah im with cbifs...i would have liked to see the reaction of supposed to be bride. Was she serious about the after she marries him, she's gonna kill him bit? Or did I just miss the true meaning of that line...Or was it lost in translation(pun intended) because I was reading subtitles...and it said..i'm gonna kill him after we're married...or something pretty close to that..
shareUm what was the ending in the book? Maybe Sarkar opted for loyalty to the book instead of a subtler new ending. Also, they did neglect Gayatri in the end. But i think the line was in English snyway but I think she meant metaphorically. This is a romance not a psychodrama
share