MovieChat Forums > Bajirao Mastani (2015) Discussion > Will not be remembered as another Heer R...

Will not be remembered as another Heer Ranjha


There is a dialogue in the movie, "From now on people will remember Bajirao Mastani in history" There are constant self-professed claims throughout the movie of how their love is going to be immortalized. Having watched the movie and then reading a quick blurb of the history of these star-crossed lovers it turns out that they were real people and Bajirao really did love Mastani and built a palace for her(like Shahjahan for Mumtaaz) and he really did come at loggerheads with the people of his own faith. The problem is on celluloid, the manner in which their love story has been presented is so stylized, artificial and choreographed, that I did not believe it was real. I was actually convinced by the end of the movie that it was all fictional and could not possibly have been real.

So what went wrong? The problem is Bhansali's own self-indulgences overpower the real life story of Bajiaro Mastani. Bhansali is notorious for his indulgences in Devdas, Saawariya, Black and Guzzarish, but I have always forgiven him for those indulgences and recognized the works of art he created. But since Ram Leela he has really fallen in his art and his indulgences are becoming gratingly apparent. In this movie he pays homage to his own movies in the lavish musical numbers, 'Kahe Ched Mohe' and 'Dola re
Dola" from Devdas, and this in itself is not problematic, what is problematic he lifted the same choreography styles, the same camera angles and movements, and in the case of 'Pinga' the same situation that leads to the song, of the two leading ladies meeting in a dramatic confrontation and then agreeing to celebrate a religious festival together dancing for the man they both love. But the difference here is, while in Devdas Paro forgives Chandramukhi, here Kashi and Mastani's resentment for each other remains. Furthermore, in Dola re Dola, the impropriety of a courtesan and an aristocrat coming together in dance caused a controversy and uproar, and here nobody bats an eye lid. And in this situation the backstory, the tension and the controversy of Kashi and Mastani dancing together was was much more intense, so it surprises me why Bhansali just glossed it all over. I can sympathize why the Peshwa descendents and historians are protesting. It was not necessary Mr Bhansali, not only did you mutilate history, but it was totally out of character.

The other indulgences Bhansali makes that ruins the story is in how he paces, directs and scripts the the meetings of Bajirao and Mastani. He is trying to make every meeting, every glance, every word shared sound like Shakespearean poetry, and to enhance the profundity, many of their shots are in slow motion and the actors emote with the precision of a puppet. From the moment Bajirao and Mastani meet to the dramatic climax, I did not at once find their love story believable. They were supposedly in love from first sight, a classic trope of stories of star crossed lovers. I think one of the reasons why it did not feel it was real, was because of Bhansali the filmmaker wanting to make his presence felt in every beat.

I consider Bhansali to be one of the best directors in Bollywood, because he has his own unique signature aesthetic that is felt in his movies. Every shot is immaculately designed, choreographed, lit and scored. Every sequence shows his craftsmanship. He even matches them to the mood, dialogue, sets and costumes. This is a hallmark of a great filmmaker, but when overdone, it is like seeing the mirrors during a magicians disappearing act. In this movie as a craftsman he exceeds himself -- oh what beautiful sumptuous imagery, gorgeous lighting, brilliant use of CGI. I had no idea Bhansali had such a deft handle on CGI. I found it even better than Rajamouli's 'Bahubali' the few war sequences looked much more realistic and polished. If you compare the volley of arrows sequences side by side from both movies, Bhansali's will come up
trumps. Technically, this movie is the best Indian production to date. Bahubali part 2 is going to have a high standard to beat.

Ranvir Singh, Deepika and Priyanka give it their all, and while proportionately Deepika and Ranvir get the most screen time, it is Priyanka that emerges the most competent actor, because her acting is more natural. I felt her character the most, in particular when she confronts Bajirao and says "I gave you my all, but you took away my pride" Priyanka nails every beat. Ranvir and Deepika, poor things were overshadowed by Bhansali's own indulgences.

Overall: Mr Bhansali the craftsman exceeds the Mr Bhansali the
storyteller.

reply

Agree with ur review 100%.
Don't know why some ppl are comparing it with Mughal-E-Azam.

reply

With so much knowledge about Cinema, why are you bothered about actual History?

reply

Mr Bhansali the craftsman exceeds the Mr Bhansali the storyteller.

This is exactly what I was discussing with my friends after watching the movie. His grip on art direction, costumes, cinematography is brilliant. If only he was half as good a script writer.

--
uh, what do I know ?!?

reply

I expected this movie to be like all Bhansali movie's where the first half is interesting and compelling but the second half can never hold the audience's interest.

There was also no way that the audience was going to connect to the love between Mastani and Bajirao when Kashibai's treatment was just so wrong. It was clear that Bajirao did not give two *beep* about her or even attempt to treat her with any respect. Neither did Mastani with forcing herself into his life.

They angered and inconvenienced so many people because of their "love" that it was nothing but destructive in the end. If that was the message of the movie it would have worked, but he tried to make it the "love is boundless/knows no religion" angle and it did not work.

reply

I agree with your views here. Kashi was completely sidelined. Mastani's character was destructive, she thrusts herself onto Bajirao and the Peshwa family even knowing that he is already married and has a large family and responsibilities based on a marriage that only exists in her head because they exchanged daggers. Then she drags him away from his own wife, drags him away from his mother and brother, drags him away from responsibility and almost turns him to going to war with his own kingdom. If the message was, as you say, love destroys all, then it would have worked a charm and Deepika could have been a sort of villainous character. But instead he went for the love conquers all theme, which worked well in Romeo Juliet, Heer Ranjha, Laila Majanu, even Veer Zara, but not here because our lovers are unsympathetic.

Having reflected on it more, I think the Deepika was the weakest link in this movie. Her face lacked expressions; her transitions between beats lacked grace; her Urdu diction was less than perfect. Watch Mughal-e-Azam and Pakeeza, watch the original Aaina mahal song "Pyar Kiya to Darna Kya" and it will become apparent how amateur Deepika's performance was. Even her classical dancing needs work.

reply

Abey ye Warrirspirit or whatever

Do you have any positive to say about talented movie maker or you just keep on pointing out sundry faults ??

Your all messages ( Even of Bahubali and Bajirao mastani ) are posted with prejudice mind. Never seen so much hatred for good art work. I am still thinking what made you like Bajrangi Bhaijan ?? Third grade movie which you liked lot.

What is wrong with you ?

Can you use brain if you have any please and write some good things as well.

Now come to your post

Kashi was completely sidelines ??
----------------------------------
Hufff Have you really seen movie or not. Screenplay have given her more scenes than Mastani. Her pain and anguish is shown in details. Her relation with her mother in law, Husband and with husband's second wife too are shown in proper manner. We don't see her character was sidelined at all.

Mastani's character was destructive, she thrusts herself onto Bajirao and the Peshwa family even knowing that he is already married and has a large family and responsibilities based on a marriage that only exists in her head because they exchanged daggers. Then she drags him away from his own wife, drags him away from his mother and brother, drags him away from responsibility and almost turns him to going to war with his own kingdom.
-----------------------
Request you to please learn what screenplay and characters. Story and script have given every single major character enough space to share their own views, be it Brahmin Priest, Bajirao's brother, Ambaji Pant ( Character played by Milind Soman ), Bajirao's Mother, Bajirao's wife and So does Mastani. Obviously in Mastani's scene it will be her point of view. How come it makes her villain ?? Same goes with Bajirao mother and brother. I don't see anything wrong in their reaction towards Bajirao's muslim wife. It was their point of view. No one is good or bad. All were simply human beings.


Having reflected on it more, I think the Deepika was the weakest link in this movie. Her face lacked expressions; her transitions between beats lacked grace; her Urdu diction was less than perfect. Watch Mughal-e-Azam and Pakeeza, watch the original Aaina mahal song "Pyar Kiya to Darna Kya" and it will become apparent how amateur Deepika's performance was. Even her classical dancing needs work.
------------------------------------------------
Well I agree on this as Deepika needs hell lot of improvement in acting skill. Infact Priyanka Chopra have overshadowed her totally.

reply

Abey ye Warrirspirit or whatever


It is my forum ID, like yours is "Ruth-less" We choose our ID's because it reflects something about our personality. Mine is Warrior spirit because I have a warrior like spirit, in the sense that I am a fighter and I keep fighting for the truth, and I am not phased by others in expressing my truth. You don't know me in real life, but if you did you would know I have a common trait of going against the grain. If I think something is true I express it, even if it will upset my friends, family and well wishers. I do not go with the herd. It is because of this trait I alienate a lot of people and lot of people hate me, but at the same time the friend I do make are great people who are with me through thick and thin. I guess your ID "Ruth-less" reflects something of your personality, which is coming cross as rude, obnoxious and vulgar. A wise man(Socrates) said "Speak, so I can see you"

No, I do not work in the industry and nor am I aspiring to work in the industry or to be a film critic. I have a hobby in filmmaking and watching movies. I have some limited knowledge of filmmaking because I have studied it formally for a year, so I can recognize more of the technical aspects of a movie from a professional point of view. I am also an avid film watcher and I watch films from all around the world and all time periods since the advent of cinema. So I apply the same standards of criticism to every movie. What I am looking for when I watch a movie is technical accomplishment and storytelling. There are some movies which are extremely well-made, but have poor storytelling; some movies are extremely good in storytelling but technically not so well made. Great movies get both right.

Do you have any positive to say about talented movie maker or you just keep on pointing out sundry faults ??


Yep I do in fact:

I consider Bhansali to be one of the best directors in Bollywood, because he has his own unique signature atheistic that is felt in his movies. Every shot is immaculately designed, choreographed, lit and scored. Every sequence shows his craftsmanship. He even matches them to the mood, dialogue, sets and costumes. This is a hallmark of a great filmmaker, but when overdone, it is like seeing the mirrors during a magicians disappearing act. In this movie as a craftsman he exceeds himself -- oh what beautiful sumptuous imagery, gorgeous lighting, brilliant use of CGI. I had no idea Bhansali had such a deft handle on CGI. I found it even better than Rajamouli's 'Bahubali' the few war sequences looked much more realistic and polished. If you compare the volley of arrows sequences side by side from both movies, Bhansali's will come up
trumps. Technically, this movie is the best Indian production to date. Bahubali part 2 is going to have a high standard to beat.


How could you miss an entire paragraph?

Your all messages ( Even of Bahubali and Bajirao mastani ) are posted with prejudice mind. Never seen so much hatred for good art work. I am still thinking what made you like Bajrangi Bhaijan ?? Third grade movie which you liked lot.

What is wrong with you ?

Can you use brain if you have any please and write some good things as well.


I think you and I have different definitions of hate. If I hate something I do not give it a rating of 6. This is how my rating system works

10 - Masterpiece
9 - Excellent
8 - Very good
7 - Good
6 - Average
5 - Below average
4 - Bad
3 - Very bad
2 - Terrible
1 - Atrocious

Hence as per my rating system Baahubali and BM are average movies. I did not hate them.
I considered Bhajranji Bhaijan to be a very good movie, in fact many people have considered it a very good movie. It has good storytelling, it is well paced, entertaining and funny and it gets the emotional aesthetic correct. It is not because I am a Salman Khan fan, in fact this is what I said in my BB review:

It has been a long time since I have enjoyed a movie so much, and this too a Salman Khan movie. I am not really a Salman Khan fan. I did not enjoy the Dabang movies, I thought Kick was a time-pass and generally I find his acting to be a bit OTT.So



You said I did not write good things about them BM or Bahubali. Well I have already posted an entire paragraph of the good things I wrote about BM. Here is what I wrote about Bahubali:

First, I will begin with what is good, before I start deconstructing it. The cinematography and colour grading is stunning, I love the location shots, the waterfall and the sweeping epic vistas. The use of CG mattes mixed with live footage is the best I have seen in an Indian film, they are somewhat LOTR-esque. The hugely talked about battle scene in the end are amazing. The nods to 300 and LOTR are clear, but it does not copy them, and comes up with some creative shots, especially a sequence where huge stone boulder carry a massive silk cloth that falls over the enemies and then it is set on fire. I think here Bahubali has set the standard not just for India, but Asia in general. It compares favourably to Hollywood.


I really should be asking you what is wrong with you? You miss out entire paragraphs in my reviews where I say good things about movies you like, and then complain that I did not mention anything good? You complain I hate those movies, and do not look at the rating I gave for the movie which is far from 1.

Hufff Have you really seen movie or not. Screenplay have given her more scenes than Mastani. Her pain and anguish is shown in details. Her relation with her mother in law, Husband and with husband's second wife too are shown in proper manner. We don't see her character was sidelined at all.


I was agreeing with Nikhil's opinion, who you ignored also felt the same that Kashi's character was sidelined. It is not so much about screen time(although I am fairly sure that Mastani got more screen time, but I was not exactly counting how many minutes each character got) but it is the fact that Kashi's character played second fiddle to Bajirao and Mastani's relationship. The movie itself is called Bajirao Mastani, so it is all about them anyway. Bajirao is already a happily married man when he meets Mastani. If he was not happy then there would be some justification for his adulterous relationship with Mastani, such as in Kabhi Alvida Na Kehana. We are shown that the Peshwa family is a happy family and Bajirao is a highly respected and successful prime minister. Then, as soon as he meets Mastani, it is Mastani who thrusts herself onto him and his family despite knowing he is happily married. She goes to the extent of actually inviting herself into his palace and then she causes conflict and feuds in the family turning a previously happy family into an unhappy one; and a previously respected and successful PM, into a disrespected and unsuccessful one. Ultimately she is also the cause of him going insane and dying. Thus her effect is more of a villainous character than a heroine. I have seen countless Bollywood movies where this kind of character is always portrayed as a villain with the same story arc -- happily married family, other woman comes in, everybody becomes unhappy and start fighting with each other --- resolution in the end the other woman is ousted. In these movies the heroine is always the married woman and not the other woman and the audience feels sympathetic for the married woman and resents the other woman. Bhansali actually made the other woman his heroine, effectively making an unsympathetic character his lead.

The problem with making unsympathetic lovers your hero and heroine is you do not get the sympathy of the audience and the audience will not be able to connect to the love story. This is what has gone wrong with BM according to many critics and viewers, and hence why most people are sympathizing with Kashi's character. But as far Bhansali himself he sidelines her character to make it all about Mastani, and only because she is Muslim. He tried to make the audience feel sorry for Mastani just because she is Muslim and is being persecuted by Hindus. But Mastani's character is otherwise the villainous other woman in traditional stories. But now she becomes a heroine just because she is a persecuted Muslim? Typical sickularism.

I think there is a wider political commentary we can make here which has highlighted in BM, as, according to a great Indian politician Rahul Gandhi, "Politics is in everything, even in your pants" The problem with the Bollywood elite is that ideologically they have aligned themselves with leftist socialist ideology or Congress ideology. The recent protests by filmmakers and film students against the appointment of Gajinder Chauan, Award Wapsi and intolerance debate has put a spotlight on this. The "intolerance" is nothing more than the previous ideologues reacting to their ideology being challenged by a new political ideology of Hindu nationalism. This is why unfortunately even great Bollywood filmmakers like Bhansali and Gowariker portray historically unsympathetic characters like Akbar(he killed tens of thousands of Hindus in cold blood) and Mastani as heroes and heroines and Hinduism and Hindu history are Villainized, such as in the Rajkumar Hirani's "PK" or Ram Gopal Verma's "Sarkaar" or even in Slumdog millinaire. Bollywood film-makers have internalized anti-Hinduism. To the extent that even when mediocre movies are made such as PK but Hinduism is criticized, critics rave about it and the movie becomes a blockbuster hit.

It is time for a new wave of filmmakers driven by Hindu nationalist ideology which actually celebrate Hinduism, Hindu history and historical figures. This is now slowly starting to happen, certainly in the field of writers like Amish Triparti, but it is still not happening in the Bollywood elite, except for smaller animation movies. It is time for the domination of the Khans to end. We need a Hindu renaissance in Bollywood. Bring on the Shiva, Mahabharata, Ramayana movies. Bring on movies about Shiva ji, Marathas, Cholas, Guptas, Mauryans, Shankara, Bhakti movement, Tulsidas etc. India has a rich longer non-Muslim history, we don't have to put Muslims characters in every movie we make. And we should also not hesitate to portray unsympathetic Muslim characters in an unsympathetic light. There was a movie just a few years back called "Shahid" it is a sympathetic biopic about a Muslim terrorist who later become a social activist but is killed in an encounter by Hindu police. That movie had critics gushing with 4 and 5 star reviews and they all forgot that the hero of the movie is a terrorist. In fact the movie blames Hindus for why he became a terrorist. This is the warped sickular ideology we have had to put up with for decades.

reply

Chutye Warrior Spirit ???? What sort of ID is anways.

You are the one who was writing nonsensical things on bahubali movie forum right ?

Still you have not grown up ?

Bajirao Mastani is master piece in every way. I guess you are from industry and still a struggler and think that you might make it big if given a chance. Mark my words if it true stop dreaming you sucker.

Bhag yahanse bhosdike. Go and watch Bajrangi Bhaijan which is your fav movie.

reply

[deleted]

But the difference here is, while in Devdas Paro forgives Chandramukhi, here Kashi and Mastani's resentment for each other remains. Furthermore, in Dola re Dola, the impropriety of a courtesan and an aristocrat coming together in dance caused a controversy and uproar, and here nobody bats an eye lid. And in this situation the backstory, the tension and the controversy of Kashi and Mastani dancing together was was much more intense, so it surprises me why Bhansali just glossed it all over.


First of all it was already declared by the director the movie to be inspired by actual event not actual event. And here is the example of your narrow mindness. Why Kashibai have to forgive Mastani? Why Mastani needs to be forgiven? Love is not a crime , so for Mastani this is like "pyar kiya to darna kya". In kashibai's point of view the fault lies with Bajirao for falling in love with mastani inspite of having a wife. Why should we always need to blame the other woman rather than the husband? (see PC's interview regarding "Pinga" nd you will get the perfect answer regarding this).


The other indulgences Bhansali makes that ruins the story is in how he paces, directs and scripts the the meetings of Bajirao and Mastani. He is trying to make every meeting, every glance, every word shared sound like Shakespearean poetry, and to enhance the profundity, many of their shots are in slow motion and the actors emote with the precision of a puppet. From the moment Bajirao and Mastani meet to the dramatic climax, I did not at once find their love story believable. They were supposedly in love from first sight, a classic trope of stories of star crossed lovers. I think one of the reasons why it did not feel it was real, was because of Bhansali the filmmaker wanting to make his presence felt in every beat.


Of course this should be like that as it is a poetry in motion. If you do not understand that i don't think emotional movie is your forte. The whole movie is like a poetry in motion visualizing each line perfectly. This is an amazing movie almost catching up to Mughal-E-Azam.

reply