Thursday, July 3, 2008

Via Darjeeling Movie Review






Movie Review : Via Darjeeling



 












 






 Via Darjeeling









 

Director :

Music :

Starring :

 Arindam Nandy

 Prabuddha Banerjee

 Kay Kay Menon, Parvin Dabbas,Prashant
Narayanan, Rajat Kapoor.

 














Via Darjeeling Movie Review



 

June 28, 2008 1:05:34 PM IST

By
Martin D'Souza, Bollywood Trade News Network

 







 









view VIA DARJEELING videos


 


This movie is an experiment that has come out with flying
colours. It intrigues, involves and thrills you as a viewer.
You are not just a mute spectator but are as actively
involved, as the friends are who are discussing the missing
link in the plot. At the end, it does not give you all the
answers but leaves you with a lingering feeling or what if,
or why this... Director Arindam Nandy ends the movie
cleverly as Sonali Kulkarni goes to open the door for Vinay
Pathak with a smile on her face. No easy answers here. But
if you have engrossed yourself in the proceedings, you can
draw an easy conclusion. But I'm sure every viewer will have
his or hers.



So what is the plot? Ankur (Kay Kay Menon) and Rimli (Sonali
Kulkarni) are on their honeymoon in Darjeeling. On the day
they have to return home, Ankur has a fight with the rash
hotel driver. He comes in fuming even as the hotel manager
tries to pacify him. Rimli is upset because Ankur lost his
cool. She then asks him to prolong their honeymoon at the
place. Though he initially agrees he tells her they cannot
prolong because he has an important meeting coming up. Cut
to Ankur switching on the television set and Rimli going in
for her shower. The phone rings and the next thing you know
is that Ankur has disappeared from his hotel room.



Rimli goes berserk, she request the hotel authorities to
call the cops. In comes Robin Datt (Vinay Pathak). Questions
flow, Rimli is asked to think with a clear head. The rash
driver is called in for questioning and in the process we
are told that Rimli was being stalked by a man.



Cut to two years later where Vinay Pathak is narrating this
incident to his friends who are having a drinking session.
There's Rajat Kapoor and his wife Simone Singh, in whose
house the party is, Sandhya Mridul and Proshant Narayanan.
Everyone wants to know what happened to Ankur. Robin does
tell his friends that he did try to find out more, but since
Rimli's father was an influential man, his superiors told
him not to bother as the case was closed.



What follows is an interesting twist where each friend tries
to narrate what could have happened to Ankur and Rimli not
knowing that Robin does know a little bit of what happened
to Ankur because he spotted him a few months ago with a
woman who is present in the room!



Kay Kay Menon is once again in his elements. Sonali Kulkarni
is a revelation. Displaying a wide range of emotions, she
simply rocks. The script has given this actress the license
to thrill. And she does it in style. Rajat Kapoor, Simone
Singh, Sandhya Mridul and Parvin Dabbas as the stalker all
combine well to complement the others. Proshant Narayanan,
to my mind, gives a powerhouse performance. His demeanor,
body language, dialogue delivery are all in sync with the
moment.



Kudos to Arindam for depicting the drinking session
superbly. The mood, the lighting, the dialogues, the
dancing... It's a lesson for anyone wanting to pull off a
scene with aplomb. Of course, that he has the support of
such wonderful actors makes it even easier.



To reveal a bit of the end would be cheating you as a
viewer. I suggest, if you are the one who likes to get
involved in the script, this movie is just for you. I'm sure
the producers know that this here is no box office bonanza.
They have ventured into getting their creative juices
flowing rather than raking in the moolah with a senseless
script and mundane performances.



However, there is one jarring line that does not make sense
to me. In one instance, Robin says that Rimli went missing,
when it was Ankur who went missing. Now, is this a flaw?
Robin is the cop, so how could he make this error. Even if
he did, the others could have pointed it out. Or did the
director overlook this blunder?





No comments:

vistor Number