== Now to the darkest corner I march,
Armed with memories of thus far,
?Tis my fear I may return not
But not slightest that I forgotten die!
For I am but one half of the fuller me,
The rest in my lover I have left,
For you to see!
--Laxman Phansalkar ==
MOHABBATEIN is yet another movie with a message to deliver. It is probably a disease among our moviemakers that drives them to believe their movies ought to have more meaning than mere entertainers. In their own shabby way, they create a movie full of brutal torture and violence of a landlord?s henchmen and morbid shows of their disrespect for women as their message against inequitable distribution of land; ending up with nothing but a tasteless piece of anger, violence and rape.
Or, then, they come up with a movie full of incoherent nudity in an attempt to give a voice to those women who have no other way of earning apart from trading their bodies; only to land up with a slightly mild version of pornography. Few movies have spoken their message out, and if they have, they haven?t been subtle. May be the future has something in it? that?s all we hang on to, isn?t it?
== The Review ==
Having had no choice but to watch this movie, because it was put up on the bus video, I did not have a favourable frame of mind before I began. To cap that, the movie ended up to be something that I find exasperating, repulsive, slushy and frankly atrocious! For furthering my three-hour rendezvous with hell, I was thrown into the co-passenger-ship of a funny female, not much older to me, who offered me paper napkins regularly during scenes that didn?t suit her lachrymal glands.
== The Story ==
To look at it from the point of view of a bored fellow in search of some entertainment is to search for an apple on a pine. Yes, the shabby humor of the last sentence was intentionally constructed as an example for the shabbiness of the plot. To look at it as a critic looking for a hidden social or philosophical message, however, could yield interesting results.
A large part of the movie?most of it actually?tries to explain the true meaning of love and it?s vital role in life. It wants to say something really important, but can?t find too many words. Prima facie, it attempts at commenting on our orthodox norms that discourage young boys and girls from getting emotionally involved with each other. The movie wants to show that the contempt the society has for children to fall in love with each other is not justified and unfair. It may be an idea a large people don?t agree with, but it is an idea of the so called ?new age? (an idea which is more or less a consequence of almost blind imitation of foreign behaviour) and therefore, so far so good? However, the movie employs dangerous methods to put the message forward.
The movie shows a young schoolgirl in love with one of her father?s students who, having found her father adamantly refusing to accept their bond, commits suicide to infuse some warmth and love in the old man?s otherwise dead heart. With its noble intentions of glorifying the power and agelessness of love understood well, I still say the story spells out a completely different message with that rather avoidable detail of the story. I prefer not to draw a conclusion myself here; instead, I would leave the conclusion making to the reader with this question:
Does the movie mean that the parental refusal to a child?s affair be answered with suicide? Does it mean a child, who finds his or her parents against his desires, should rebel? Does the movie justify suicide?
I simply believe that love has little to do with such things, as a parent would oppose. Love is not an attraction or an obsession towards a person, for, then, hatred becomes just another manifestation of it! Love is more about understanding each other, standing strong support to each other during trials and tribulations, seeking solace in one?s own troubles in each other, and responsibly preventing each other from being unwise. What is wrong with that? No parent thinks that is wrong, but what puts them off, and justifiably so, is the outward, physical manifestation of it and the obsessive mania that infects their wards. There is a time for everything and a responsible individual must remind himself of that. A matured young lad or lass is therefore advised to toe the line drawn by the parental authority.
== Cast Performance ==
AMITABH Bacchan, as the strong willed and stubborn father, was probably the only single standing pillar of this otherwise derelict stage. They say true talent can not be hidden and Bacchan shows how true that is! To say he was a class act may give his performance more credit than it deserves, but he very close to deserving that description! Playing the role of a fellow who has little heard and can stopper his emotions perfectly well in his mind, Bacchan was given a role that was delicate and he did a very good job of it, I daresay.
SHAH Rukh Khan was an unfortunate disappointment. To strike a probably controversial note, I believe he does not have it in him to play roles of a tragic hero: he is far better as a celebrated fellow who enjoys a good life (like in ?Main Hoon Na?) than he is as a tragic soul. It takes skill and art to play such a role, a talent which the King most unfortunately is short of. At least, in this movie, Mr. Khan was quite a shame to his reputation!
AISHWARYA Rai, often also read as ?manipulative shrew?, was given little time on the screen and a role that demanded little talent and skill. With her almost fairy-tale-like appearance, Miss Rai was watchable for more than one reason. I cannot say more.
JIMMY Shergil, UDAY Chopra and JUGAL Hansraj offered a fitting performance to their reputation, making their characters seem inconsequential bums, acting only as filling agents to make sure the movie stretches beyond half an hour. Mediocre actors as they are to begin with, I did not expect much from them. So, their performance comes to be rated as ?satisfactory? on a mere technicality.
== The Verdict ==
With a story that I couldn?t make out, an idea that seemed to collide with things I am appalled by, and with acting that can?t be called it, the movie could have made me loose my mind (add to the fact that the female beside me was sobbing and laughing during the movie as though it was her own creation). But that unfortunate plight was saved only, singularly, by the music which was, at it?s best, pleasant. I can give it no further rating. This is a movie of no great pretensions. Take my word for this: skip it, watch something else. May be News at Nine is more interesting than this!
== Question Marks ==
Would you justify a rebel? Would you side with the boy or girl who is out against his or her parents simply because they don?t want the affair to proceed? Would you, as a parent, think the movie has something good to say?