MovieChat Forums > Johnny Gaddaar (2007) Discussion > Superb Movie But Few Drawbacks (****Spoi...

Superb Movie But Few Drawbacks (Spoilers*)

posted 17 years ago by abhishelke123
36 replies | jump to latest

Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Acting : Over the Top
Humor : Great
Direction : Exceptional
Twists : Good
Neil Nitin Mukesh : Rocks

I enjoyed the movie but at the end there was rather an awkward satisfaction. All characters were potrayed beautifully and the problem is that, they are so lovable, you just cannot stand the way they were brutally murdered. Come-on who could see Dharmendra, Vinay Pathak dying for no reason.

There was no VILLAIN no HERO in the movie. Even it doesn't seem that Director wanted to potray an ANTI-HERO (he could have been done it more clearly).

Where the hell conscience and guilt of 'Johnny G' disappeares. Each time after he kills somebody, another few moments, and he acts just normally. Here all the emotional scenes after the death of each character become pointless.

There was lack of chemisty between 'Johnny G' and his girlfriend (Rimi Sen is the main culprit for this). Due to this both of them loose support from my point of view for there 'NOBLE CAUSE'.

In the end "Tit For Tat" resolution of the film is OK (no choice really).

[–] airabhinav 17 years ago

I agree with you regarding Johnny's emotions. Before killing them, he would ponder, think that he didn't want it to turn out this way. At that time, i would think that he will be emotionally stressed afterwards, but he seems very normal in the next scene. Maybe Mr. Raghavan wanted to portray him as "what has happened has happened and there is no point thinking about it now" kind-of guy.

I would say that there wasn't a hero in the film, but true villain was Johnny. After all, he started it.

Overall, very enjoyable movie and loved the direction. Also, i admire Mr. Raghavan's attempt to make it look like 70s Thriller movie...Bravo!

[–] HeadleyLamarr 17 years ago

As soon as he set up to double cross his partners he left the straight and narrow path. After than there was an inevitability to the whole progression juts like in a James Hadley Chase novel. It was for good reason that Neil always had a well thumbed version in his hands - this was a film right out of one of those books. Johnny, the protagonist, was a hero/villain. You wanted him to make it in the end as things kept going wrong for him, you had a little sympathy for him as he was not all evil. It was kind of like a survival of the fittest between animals in a jungle, often the outcomes are inevitable.

'A wed wose, how womantic'

[–] airabhinav 17 years ago

I actually didn't have sympathy for him in the end. I don't think he had a good reason to steal all the money. If his mother was in the hospital requiring some surgery that they can't afford (like old movies), or if his family member was kidnapped etc., i would understand his utmost desire to run with the money. Here, he stole from Pathak, Sheshadri who put almost everything into this deal.

[–] HeadleyLamarr 17 years ago

I know - that is why it is a different film. He thinks he will steal the money and that will be it, and his only reason is love I suppose. But the thieves in real life never steal to get they Mummy an operation!

'A wed wose, how womantic'

[–] airabhinav 17 years ago

Majboori mein aadmi sab karta hai. Waise real life mein yeh crime impossible hai, so shouldn't compare this fiction to reality.

[–] Noraabs 16 years ago

i loved the movie nevertheless, but seriously the best thing about this movie that he stole the money because he could. Not out of need to use it for something else(which would had ruined the movie for me btw), he supposely stole it for his girlfriend but he didnt tell her about it.

[–] Chrysanthepop 16 years ago

i don't find any fault in johnny's characterization. the other users have explained it pretty much. after all, he is a thief and the people he was working for weren't saints either.

the chemistry between neil and rimi was a little weak due to rimi's mediocre acting.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[–] Schmelie 16 years ago

I actually thought Nitin Mukesh's acting was pretty ordinary. I'm not saying he was bad (and maybe I'm being a bit harsh due to high expectations) I just wasn't overly impressed. That kid needs to learn about body language, there is more to emoting than voice and facial expressions. Physically I found him as wooden as John Abraham.

Over all I enjoyed the film though. The plot was good, I liked that none of the characters were all bad, and I felt the ending worked perfectly (even if it was a little predictable). I also enjoyed the camera work, very stylised, almost cartoon-ish; which fit in perfectly with the bold colour schemes used both in the set designs and costuming. One draw back for me is I felt the that film had the potential to be more than it was, so I'm left feeling just slightly disappointed.

I will be looking forward to Nitin's next film though, I get the impression that he is someone who will grow as an actor over time.

Shashi Kapoor: Frauenversteher

[–] Ihab_M 16 years ago

I saw the film. Nice thriller. Mukesh has to improve alot in his acting skills. He acted pretty well but there were some parts where his acting skills luked weak. But he did pretty descent job for a debutant. Bdw i want to knw who acted better - Ranbir Kapoor or Mukesh as i havnt seen Saawariya yet. NO fite over comparison plz! Who do u think will win the filmfare award for best debut actor?

[–] actionman81 16 years ago

Totally loved the movie. I chalked up Neil's acting wooden to Johnny/Vikram's hardened mentality after being in the gang/group. Dealing with stuff like that makes a person cold inside. Hence he loved Rimi's character, but was too calculating to really do the whole "fall in love" thing. The closest thing he does to being relaxed is the "who will help me finish the pizza" dialogue he does as an impression of Sanjeev Kumar.

[–] Chrysanthepop 16 years ago

i didn't find it wooden either. i mean u could see in his expressions where he's interacting with the other actors, that he has a hidden agenda.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

()__()
(=','=)
(")::(")

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 16 years ago

Superb movie indeed! I totally loved it! It is really well made, well directed, well shot, well edited, etc. In this sense, it reminded me of Khosla Ka Ghosla, another "new director" product which also was excellently directed and caught my attention for this reason! More importantly, Johnny Gaddaar is a film that tells the story in a great fashion through a very focused screenplay; as the film progressed, the thrill got more and more! I totally loved it. Liked it even more that Raghavan's previous movie Ek Hasina Thi! I also loved how they used that old style background music in this movie, mixed with some original background music.

The performances, wow. I must say the performances by Dharam-ji, Vinay Pathak (love this guy), Zakir Hussain and Govind Namdeo (loved his dialogues!) were absolutely great. Neil Nitin Mukesh gives a good debut; his acting quality was sufficient, but not impressing. You know, there is something about the expressions in his eyes from which you can observe that he has yet to get used to the camera. You know, a certain awareness of the camera can be seen in his eyes. Koi baat nahin, I think he'll improve by doing more (hopefully great) movies. It is commendable that he chooses this kind of a film as his debut! Rimi Sen and Vinay Pathak's wife were very good as well! I think I have seen the woman that plays Pathak's wife in one of those melodramatic tv-serials.

I have one question though: how come after Kalyan (played by Govind Namdeo) "disappears" no one wonders what happened to him, wheras he repeatedly said that he would announce within 2 days who the killer is, and the "gang" was kind of looking forward to what his findings were going to be? Or did I miss something in the movie? I recall only Vikram telling Mini that Kalyan went to Bangelore or something, but do they not show how the gang reacts to his disappearance?

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Chrysanthepop 16 years ago

That actress is Ashwini Kalsekar and she was indeed superb. Rimi was quite okay, nothng impressive IMO.

Sammo, Prakash didn´t know she shot Vikram. She thought she'd killed Shardul because Vikram was wearing his jacket.

Anwar, the gang did wonder where the police was but perhaps they were not AS concerned because the time passed wasn´t much and they sort of trusted him as he's a police. But yeah, that could have been better explained.

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 16 years ago

The garage was Shardul's. :)

[–] Chrysanthepop 16 years ago

She didn't know he would be there exactly at that moment. She was waiting for him as he obviously wasn´t home. :)

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 16 years ago

I disagree. That lone woman was convinced of the fact that Shardul killed Prakash. I do not find it strange then that she goes to certains lengths to take revenge. Waiting outside in the dead of the night is very believable in my view.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Chrysanthepop 16 years ago

I agreee with Anwar on this. Plus, she was shown to be a very strong woman and hey, she intended to kill him so why should she be afraid to wait outside in the dark?

(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(")

[–] HeadleyLamarr 16 years ago

She was a very strong lady and she loved her husband so after his death she did not care about anything else. Of course she was waiting at night to get Shardul.

'A wed wose, how womantic'

[–] hrishtoxic 16 years ago

I am so happy to see a movie like this can be made in so called bollywood!! The excellent plot, characters & very unpredictable story; with a Quentin Tarantino like touch!! & that is another reason why I love this movie! At the start credits I feel like tarantino movies but eventually the director is at his own!! (like he didnt used "Trunk-shot" pathetically) Yeah the script has flaws.. but I didnt think anything is made considering Box Office. The metamorphosis of Vikram to Johny G is may be little brief, but it does tell a nice story indeed!!

[–] akaashvc 16 years ago

To answer the doubtful factor wherein why the gang did not worry about Kalyan's disappearance... if you remember in the movie, that all the 3 gang members got an SMS from Kalyan's mobile as a riddle message that "3 Donkeys (aka the 3 gang members) were waiting at the Dhobi Ghat (at Shardul's house) but came to know that the Dhobi (Kalyan) bought a cycle (which mwans Kalyan escaped from the scene). So they felt that Kalyan pulled a fast one on them and ignored his absence thereafter. But then again Shardul or Prakash could have called Kalyan on the mobile, but they were anyway willing to see the back of Kalyan and therefore ignored him. The message was actually sent by Vikram from Kalyan's mobile to mislead Shardul and Prakash into thinking that Kalyan had fooled them. Hope that explains it.
Raghavan has tried his best to make sure there are no flaws. Cool.
Some questions from my side are:

1) Why did both Sheshadri and Prakash lay down their guns that too within the reach of Vikram? My explaination would be that Sheshadri least expected that Vikram would kill him the way he did and Prakash never knew Vikram was the one all the way and trusted him.
2) It was a bit of coincidence that Vikram's car had to break down just when he was driving with Shardul. It could have been scripted better I felt. Something like, "In the state that Vikram was at that moment (while driving with Shardul), he would have been thinking of what would happen next, and in the process not see someone crossing the road and trying to avoid the pedestrian, the car would have collided with a pole or something. The radiator should have blown up with the collision and then both could have opened the bonnet to see what had happened only for Shardul to discover the sticker of "Das Automobiles".

Any better ideas are welcome? I'm sure Raghavan would like it.
Just an alternative. Coincidences do happen and hats off to Raghavan for this amazing thriller. I would love to see more of such movies which tread on unpredictability.

[–] aroop_d 16 years ago

Vikram was a borderline sociopath and if he had lived longer he will start killing for pleasure..he was starting to enjoy it..thats how it seems

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 16 years ago

Thanks for your post, akaashvc! Let me get back on your explanation after I have seen the movie for the second time, as I do not quite remember anymore how the gang reacted to that SMS.

[–] bhaskar_rahul 16 years ago

Johnny G is the first true anti-hero of Hindi Cinema.
People might say Ashok Kumar in Kismet, but then he was a thief only out of compulsions or Dev Anand in Kala Bazaar, but he needed money for his mother's operation or SRK in Baazigar, but he wanted to take revenge.

Johnny G is plain selfish anti-hero for whom the audience roots.

[–] HeadleyLamarr 16 years ago

Don 2006?

'A wed wose, how womantic'

[–] anexas 15 years ago

parwana amitabh bachchan

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 16 years ago

@ akaashvc

My reply is a little late, but your explanation to why the gang did not worry about Kalyan's disappearance is very plausible! Fact is that I did not really understand what was written in that SMS, but now you explained a possible meaning of that SMS, it is very plausible that the gang thought that Kalyan had just given up the case, or had something better to do. I also agree that the gang could've called him or tried to contact him, because they were really taken aback by Seshadri's murder, and they all cared about him. That is really the only flaw in the film I can think of.

[–] anexas 15 years ago

they didnt like kalyan or his being there as he was so cunning.. so they were sort of happy that he was not bothering them.. he was also in police

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] anexas 15 years ago

if shardul would have come and explained that it was neil who gave him the money neil would have been in a fix.. he calculated that he could handle prakash alone but not shardul and prakash both.. specially shardul who was a smartasz

[–] tanmaynd 16 years ago

No, I wouldn't call it a flaw. It's unlikely that Vinay Pathak would have killed Zakir Hussein without even giving him a chance to speak. And as soon as Zakir Hussein would have told that it was Neil who gave him the fake notes, Neil would have been exposed in front of both of them. At least this could be what Neil thought at the time, and so he killed Vinay Pathak.
And even if Neil wasn't thinking this, I would just call it a bad decision taken by Neil's character in nervousness, and not a flaw in the script. Remember, Neil isn't supposed to be like the smartest most cool headed criminal in the world. He had already made a number of bad choices throughout the movie.

Superb Movie But Few Drawbacks (****Spoilers*****)

Superb Movie But Few Drawbacks (Spoilers*)