Akshay Kumar got the genre definition of Bhool Bhulaiyaa right in an interview when he said that it is India’s first psychological thriller with an element of comedy.
Well that itself creates a positioning problem. People want to deliberately either associate this movie with the “oh it’s another Priyadarsan madcap multi-character comedy” or “oh it’s a scary bhoot movie” types. And since the promos never made it clear like Akshay Kumar, cinegoers with the above expectations are bound to be disappointed.
But therein lies the beauty of the original movie. Yes, make no mistake, Priyadarsan sticks scene by scene, dialogue by dialogue to the Malayalam original Manichitratazhu , the movie where he was once an assistant director.
Manichitratazhu is regarded as a cult classic in Malayalam movie cinema of the late 80s, for its well differentiated unique screenplay, a thrilling climax and a superlative National Award winning performance by Shobhana. Not to forget Mohanlal who makes an entry one hour into the movie and really enlivens proceedings in an endearing manner to make up for an otherwise slow-moving movie.
Now remaking Manichitratazhu(1993) is fraught with these dangers,
a) Can it still be a good story for a caramel popcorn/corn chat eating audience who would not even appreciate certain terms and rituals in the movie?
b) Can the intelligent screenplay which is not so straightforward and not so funny appeal to the common masses?
c) Will the slow first half and the late entry by the hero slacken audience interest?
d) Can Akshay Kumar and Vidya Balan deliver the performances that can really match upto Mohanlal and Shobhana?
There are answers to the above. And those answers can be found in the Tamil adaptation Chandramukhi starring Superstar Rajnikant. Staying true to the original premise, the movie was brilliantly spiced up with an early entry of Rajnikant and a faster first half due to the romantic track/more songs and rib-tickling comedy. So Chandramukhi turned out to be a complete entertainer with a twist in the end.
To be fair to Bhool Bhulaiyya , it is a very honest effort for a different kind of story telling. The setting is perfect in Benaras with cinematographer Thiru and art director Sabu Cyril brilliantly capturing the ghats and the holy atmosphere. The casting could not be better given the limitations. (Of course I still believe a better remake would have been with Madhuri Dixit and Amitabh Bacchan 10 years back).
The story goes like this. Siddharth(Shiney Ahuja) a royal descendant comes from America to Benaras with his wife Avni ( Vidya Balan) for a project in India. He decides to stay in the royal palace instead of his uncle’s (Manoj Joshi) haveli. Now the royal palace is supposedly haunted by the ghost of a Bengali dancer who danced in the court of a former king. She fell in love with a dancer who stayed in the neighbourhood and the king killed her for this betrayal. So the legend has it that she (her ghost) would not allow any king to stay alive in the palace.
Hence the care-taker (Paresh Rawal), his friend (Asrani) and the uncle keep the third floor of the palace locked with a bhairav kavach. Avni and Siddharth refuse to believe the ghost stories and continue to stay at the palace. Avni in her enthusiasm breaks open the door of the third floor to find a lot of royal ornaments and a fascinating courtroom. But a series of unfortunate events happen, the locksmith who made a key dies mysteriously, people sight the ghost at night and more spooky events happen. Moreover the extended family starts getting frightened at the smallest twitch leads to funny moments with Paresh Rawal as Batuk Prasad taking the cake. There is also a village tantrik , a brilliant Rajpal Yadav who has no clue of what is happening but is trying to preserve his job. The suspicion falls on the uncle’s daughter (Ameesha Patel) as the one who is possessed by the spirit. Who is responsible for this? Is it really a ghost? Or is it someone else?
To answer all these questions enters Dr. Srivastava (Akshay Kumar) a renowned psychiatrist and Shiney’s friend. The entire extended family is mistrustful of Akshay and his weird antics. How Akshay Kumar solves the problem in his unique way is the climax of the movie. Given anything more would be a spoiler.
The movie’s climax song is a BIG disappointment. It lacks the intensity of the Malayalam and Tamil versions and is a very ordinary composition for a movie that demanded a superlative effort.( Give me Oru morai or Raa Raa anyday)
The performances of the lead cast are good but not great. Vidya Balan despite all her talent is a tad disappointing in her ability to live the complex character she plays. Shiney Ahuja is a mixed bag. Akshay Kumar tries his best to enliven proceedings but its unfair of Priyadarsan to make him imitate some of the mannerisms that Mohanlal did in the original like the studied rotation of the spectacles. The shuddh Hindi dialogues are “karnapriya” sometimes but are not outrageously funny.
Overall as a Hindi movie, the movie would evoke mixed reactions. It would get a watchable tag but nothing more. It is sad that Priyadarsan wanted to stick to the Malayalam original so much and not achieve a middle ground between Manichitratazhu and Chandramukhi. That would have been a smarter strategy in hindsight.
Well that itself creates a positioning problem. People want to deliberately either associate this movie with the “oh it’s another Priyadarsan madcap multi-character comedy” or “oh it’s a scary bhoot movie” types. And since the promos never made it clear like Akshay Kumar, cinegoers with the above expectations are bound to be disappointed.
But therein lies the beauty of the original movie. Yes, make no mistake, Priyadarsan sticks scene by scene, dialogue by dialogue to the Malayalam original Manichitratazhu , the movie where he was once an assistant director.
Manichitratazhu is regarded as a cult classic in Malayalam movie cinema of the late 80s, for its well differentiated unique screenplay, a thrilling climax and a superlative National Award winning performance by Shobhana. Not to forget Mohanlal who makes an entry one hour into the movie and really enlivens proceedings in an endearing manner to make up for an otherwise slow-moving movie.
Now remaking Manichitratazhu(1993) is fraught with these dangers,
a) Can it still be a good story for a caramel popcorn/corn chat eating audience who would not even appreciate certain terms and rituals in the movie?
b) Can the intelligent screenplay which is not so straightforward and not so funny appeal to the common masses?
c) Will the slow first half and the late entry by the hero slacken audience interest?
d) Can Akshay Kumar and Vidya Balan deliver the performances that can really match upto Mohanlal and Shobhana?
There are answers to the above. And those answers can be found in the Tamil adaptation Chandramukhi starring Superstar Rajnikant. Staying true to the original premise, the movie was brilliantly spiced up with an early entry of Rajnikant and a faster first half due to the romantic track/more songs and rib-tickling comedy. So Chandramukhi turned out to be a complete entertainer with a twist in the end.
To be fair to Bhool Bhulaiyya , it is a very honest effort for a different kind of story telling. The setting is perfect in Benaras with cinematographer Thiru and art director Sabu Cyril brilliantly capturing the ghats and the holy atmosphere. The casting could not be better given the limitations. (Of course I still believe a better remake would have been with Madhuri Dixit and Amitabh Bacchan 10 years back).
The story goes like this. Siddharth(Shiney Ahuja) a royal descendant comes from America to Benaras with his wife Avni ( Vidya Balan) for a project in India. He decides to stay in the royal palace instead of his uncle’s (Manoj Joshi) haveli. Now the royal palace is supposedly haunted by the ghost of a Bengali dancer who danced in the court of a former king. She fell in love with a dancer who stayed in the neighbourhood and the king killed her for this betrayal. So the legend has it that she (her ghost) would not allow any king to stay alive in the palace.
Hence the care-taker (Paresh Rawal), his friend (Asrani) and the uncle keep the third floor of the palace locked with a bhairav kavach. Avni and Siddharth refuse to believe the ghost stories and continue to stay at the palace. Avni in her enthusiasm breaks open the door of the third floor to find a lot of royal ornaments and a fascinating courtroom. But a series of unfortunate events happen, the locksmith who made a key dies mysteriously, people sight the ghost at night and more spooky events happen. Moreover the extended family starts getting frightened at the smallest twitch leads to funny moments with Paresh Rawal as Batuk Prasad taking the cake. There is also a village tantrik , a brilliant Rajpal Yadav who has no clue of what is happening but is trying to preserve his job. The suspicion falls on the uncle’s daughter (Ameesha Patel) as the one who is possessed by the spirit. Who is responsible for this? Is it really a ghost? Or is it someone else?
To answer all these questions enters Dr. Srivastava (Akshay Kumar) a renowned psychiatrist and Shiney’s friend. The entire extended family is mistrustful of Akshay and his weird antics. How Akshay Kumar solves the problem in his unique way is the climax of the movie. Given anything more would be a spoiler.
The movie’s climax song is a BIG disappointment. It lacks the intensity of the Malayalam and Tamil versions and is a very ordinary composition for a movie that demanded a superlative effort.( Give me Oru morai or Raa Raa anyday)
The performances of the lead cast are good but not great. Vidya Balan despite all her talent is a tad disappointing in her ability to live the complex character she plays. Shiney Ahuja is a mixed bag. Akshay Kumar tries his best to enliven proceedings but its unfair of Priyadarsan to make him imitate some of the mannerisms that Mohanlal did in the original like the studied rotation of the spectacles. The shuddh Hindi dialogues are “karnapriya” sometimes but are not outrageously funny.
Overall as a Hindi movie, the movie would evoke mixed reactions. It would get a watchable tag but nothing more. It is sad that Priyadarsan wanted to stick to the Malayalam original so much and not achieve a middle ground between Manichitratazhu and Chandramukhi. That would have been a smarter strategy in hindsight.
Comments