22 comments

Articles linking here

1. Dostana reviews at Blogbharti
2. Dostana and Gays | DesiPundit

1. 1 On November 14th, 2008, Aditya Kuber said:

   Oh boy. What a waste of some crores. And now I’m going to have to endure this tonight. Maybe it would be a good idea to take a book and torch along? Or maybe an MP3 player. Or a portable movie player… I have a book… anyone care to lend the others?

   posted on November 14th, 2008 at 6:15 am

2. 2 On November 14th, 2008, Sumeet said:

   Havent seen the movie … but i like the review … especially the preparation part

   posted on November 14th, 2008 at 6:18 am

3. 3 On November 14th, 2008, urmilesh said:

   I think it is about time that you added a sub-section highlighting the inspirations of a director. I watched Dostana yesterday and was somewhat angry to see that a majority of scenes (setup/plot etc.) have been lifted straight from Englist sitcoms (primarily FRIENDS) and movies (Three to Tango, I now pronounce you Chuck and Larry). Almost made me regret my decision to go watch it.

   posted on November 14th, 2008 at 9:48 am

4. 4 On November 14th, 2008, meetu said:

   Huahahahaha Aditya, *evil grin* serves you right for buying those tickets before checking here. Like I said, with friends who don’t read wogma, who needs enemies

   Thanks Sumeet!

   Great idea urmilesh, I was wondering whether there was a demand for that. Will certainly work on that now that I know there’s interest. Yes, I noticed a few gags from F.R.I.E.N.D.S. The others I haven’t seen yet.

   posted on November 14th, 2008 at 1:27 pm

5. 5 On November 14th, 2008, Jay said:

   What else were you expecting from a Karan Johar film? Yes it is regressive and abounds with gay stereotypes but the makers should still be lauded for at least bringing the subject out of the closet. The first half is laugh out loud funny but the pace dips substantially in the second half and could have done with some editing. Abhishek rocks and these are the kind of real ‘chilled out’ characters he should stick to playing - hopefully after Drona he’ll stay away from playing larger than life characters. John is ample eye candy and is funny in a few scenes but by and large both the leads work better as a team. Priyanka looks like a million bucks and even though he role is nothing to write about she is disarmingly charming and chips in a fresh restrained performance. Kirron Kher rocks - I dont know why she didn’t appear in the second half. Bobby Deol was strictly average - I suspect someone like Akshay or Hrithik would have been a far better choice. The music is catchy especially Desi girl and the film as a whole is marvelously packaged. A good popcorn flick - go in without any expectations and you wont be disappointed. Far better than over-rated comedies Singh is Kinng and Golmaal Returns.

   posted on November 14th, 2008 at 1:39 pm

6. 6 On November 14th, 2008, silvan said:

   well Kj films suck always

   posted on November 14th, 2008 at 2:27 pm

7. 7 On November 17th, 2008, Seaweed said:

   To all who have issues with this film - for its crass depiction of an “0h-so-sensitive” topic in India, Karan Johar being the producer or Boman Irani’s role - lighten up a bit and reflect upon the message of this film at a more holistic level. At no point in the film do they degrade or joke about being gay. A few times when Kunal or Sam comment (negatively or ridicule) on being gay, don’t read too much into it. That is how any straight guy would react when assumed to be gay - in evolving and hopefully progressive societies such as India or even more evolved societies such as the US. This movie, in a humorous way, displays the modern world where sexual preference is a matter of personal choice, which should be as normal as preferences for movies, cuisines or any other. It shows that this topic is not something above and beyond any other in our lives, hence should not be treated differently. Any more stress or seriousness on this topic in the movie would do more harm than help this agenda in our society. Masses, with their blind faith, need to see this message in a way that can touch their heart and also bring a smile on their face. They definitely do not want a documentary. Just my two cents.

   posted on November 17th, 2008 at 1:54 am

8. 8 On November 17th, 2008, meetu said:

   Seaweed, I don’t think the movie had any agenda or social message to pass on. If it did, not all non-pretending gays would have been shown as effeminate. It might not have made direct jokes but such things clarify the intention.

   posted on November 17th, 2008 at 5:23 am

9. 9 On November 17th, 2008, neha said:

   That bit with TZP thrown in really pissed me off.

   posted on November 17th, 2008 at 2:12 pm

10. 10 On November 17th, 2008, chavanni said:

    http://chavannichap.blogspot.com/2008/11/blog-post_4010.html
    read it..

    posted on November 17th, 2008 at 4:31 pm

11. 11 On November 17th, 2008, gotohell said:

    hell review.. grow up. U n ur reviews are just all stupid. All of them really. ur just a person C-R-A-V-I-N-G for attention. By trying to be a oh-so-less-marks-giving critic. The movies u say are bad go on to be hits (Welcome) n those u think r gud become duds @ the box office (Umrao Jaan).

    Dostana is a fab movie from the viewpoint of an audience, not from some self appointed critic (who says i am like the audience) like u. Ppl, just ask for a word of mouth from ur friends.
    Good movie,watch it.

    posted on November 17th, 2008 at 5:31 pm

12. 12 On November 18th, 2008, meetu said:

    neha, i was actually shocked!

    posted on November 18th, 2008 at 3:40 am

13. 13 On November 20th, 2008, JM said:

    I agree there was a certain stereotype Meetu but it was just in light with the film and meant to be humorous. I am actually a gay man and I was rolling in the floors with some of the scenes. I actually agree a lot with what Seaweed says in his post.

    posted on November 20th, 2008 at 1:12 pm

14. 14 On November 21st, 2008, Crazy Sam said:

    Guys, my take on Dostana.
    http://samsbloginess.blogspot.com/2008/11/dostana.html

    posted on November 21st, 2008 at 2:57 am

15. 15 On November 21st, 2008, JM said:

    I read your review Crazy Sam. Okay I agree to a certain extent, but then you could also argue that Hollywood too is responsible for stereotyping homosexuality. If you look at all the random rom coms out there or heck even Sex and the City - the gay character is ALWAYS portrayed effeminately. I agree if it was a serious film then Karan should have been blasted for what he has done. But this never claimed to be a serious film and I wasn’t offended as such really. By that account you could also argue that Fashion was stereotypical about gays but then Sameer Soni’s character was actually quite straight acting and normal. And coming back to Dostana - there are only those one or two scenes where they pretend to be effeminate. The rest of the film they acted pretty normal I thought. Still. Point taken. We should still appreciate that at least the film brought the topic out of the closet. If it was serious then it would be classified as Festival film and never get the viewership it got. And for the scene where Priyanka asks the mother to accept them as they are - just for that one scene I’d pay to watch it again.

    posted on November 21st, 2008 at 11:08 am

16. 16 On November 22nd, 2008, Crazy Sam said:

    JM, I have no problem with the movie Dostana. Agreed it is a comedy, and I have also stated in my post why Sameer and Kunal tried to act effeminate and I’m really cool with all that. In fact, I was laughing my ass off during those scenes. I’m just pissed off by the way Karan is trying to parade that this movie doesn’t shy to talk about gays without stereotyping them. And did you see even one scene like that in the movie?

    posted on November 22nd, 2008 at 12:39 am

17. 17 On November 23rd, 2008, gaysforever said:

    Ha, ha, I read the comments above and tears come to my eyes! How can people be so stupid? One wonders. But wonders never cease!
    Most people seem to think that Karan Johar has done a great favour by bringing the topic of “gays” out of the closet! Whose closet is the first question that comes to mind, and who is Karan Johar, the messiah of the “gays” is it??

    This movie takes homosexuality and makes it humorous by reinforcing stereotypes thus dismissing it altogether. What we laugh at, we do not take seriously. Most mainstream cinema anywhere in the world including Hollywood does the same, they reinforce stereotypes which fit in with the prevailing patriarchal attitude on family, marriage, and relationships. Family means, man and woman plus children, same sex families are an aberration.
    Relationships means man and woman only, nothing more and nothing less and sex of course is meant only for procreation. By that understanding sex between people of the same gender would of course, not merit a serious consideration barring a few laughs. If it still persists, then moral condemnation is the order of the day.
    This movie goes all over town to emphasise how desirable both John and Abhishek are, as far as heterosexual relationships are concerned. Loving shots of John’s butt, chest and other parts are shot in sun tan lotion smooth frames. Ironically this could also appeal to the “gays” out there and not just the women! We have a scene where women bid for them and another where mod aunties nearly rape Abhishek.
    So there we have it, they are both hunks and studs, who have the women ripping their bodices and falling all over them.

    !!! Spoilers ahead !!!

    Of course, now they stay with Priyanka so they can only be friends with her even though they are so strongly attracted to her. All the hugs and kisses, and the intimate moments are only “friendship” moments, there is no hint of anything sexual there, God Forbid! It is only in the initial phase where they first meet her, that we see them getting aroused.
    Even when they arrange special dates with her, it is only about friendship and everyone goes dewy eyed about it.
    Then in comes Bobby Deol, and he is married with a kid, but his wife has left him. His character reinforces one end of the continuum of patriarchy, the “normal” married male, with Abhishek and John reinforcing the other, the “hunk studs”.
    In a patriarchal understanding of sexuality, hunk studs, ultimately end up getting married, and have a normal family.
    We do not really understand why Priyanka is attracted to Bobby, unless it is that he seems intelligent (he certainly does not look it) and earns well, compared to the other two. And also, very interestingly, he has a conventional job while the other two, are one, a male nurse, and a fashion photographer! Which sane girl would marry them?
    So when Bobby rejects her on the basis of his son’s dislike (another shot in the arm for the “normal” family over sexuality), Priyanka cannot marry the other two hunks because she has stayed with them for so long!
    This locates sexuality within the domain of a “normal” heterosexual family and not outside it. So even though she knows that the two hunks love her and are attracted to her, she does not end up with one of them, but instead riding on a very puerile and a so called sensational twist in the plot, the hunks have to liplock and beg forgiveness, and she is free to marry Bobby who then very understandingly says “they really are your best friends, I could never have done that”, thus sanctifying the fact that what existed between the hunks and Priyanka so far was only friendship and nothing else.
    Priyanka can only marry Bobby, as that is the only definition of marriage that “normal” patriarchal society would accept.
    Having stayed with the other two men, even though they were “officially gay” and then getting married to one of them, would challenge the mainstream understanding of sexuality, how can a woman marry a man with whom she has stayed outside of marriage? The film firmly locates sexuality in the domain of marriage, and that too of course a “normal” marriage.
    The whole thing is set in Miami, and not in our good old country as such things do not happen here.
    If this film is about bringing homosexuality out of the closet, then I am the Pope!
    It brings out alternate sexualities, and examines it in a most superficial way, reinforcing every known stereotype for laughs, and then dismisses it as irrelevant.
    Sexuality and relationships therefore can only be “patriarchal” which is right and decent, everything else is only friendship.
    If at all we encounter it is to be laughed at, like the poor soldier at the hot dog stand.
    And yes sensitive films which are very funny have been made about this topic, one could try Birdcage starring Robin Williams and Nathan Lane. Absolutely mainstream but a very sensitive and satirical look at non mainstream relationships.
    Philadelphia also comes to mind.
    There have been N number of Latin American films which deal with alternative sexuality, you could try some of Pedro Almodovar’s films.

    posted on November 23rd, 2008 at 5:57 pm

18. 18 On November 24th, 2008, meetu said:

    JM, Crazy Sam and gaysforever - thanks a ton for the discussion here!

    I strongly recommend Almodovar’s movies too on alternate sexuality! “All about my mother” - is awesome!

    posted on November 24th, 2008 at 4:07 am

19. 19 On December 14th, 2008, Longtime Friend said:

    Sorry this comment is coming so late ….

    I saw the movie about 2 weeks ago - I live in California. When I saw it I didn’t know it was set up as largely about the gay thing and I went in not knowing anything about it. I think you (meetu) were harsher than I would have been but that is partly because I have come to accept the treatment of gays in India. Maybe I should have been more offended. But then sometimes I think, well, whenever we make jokes about people there is someone who might be offended, so why is this different … like sardarji jokes etc. I think it is okay to make fun of people if it is understood clearly that “of course this is a joke”. I don’t think that is true about homosexuals in Indian movies. Unfortunately people make fun of gays because they actually think they are a completely different species or something and that, I think, is bad. I agree that the movie did not show gays as being normal people and it just portrayed the same stereotypes as usual.

    You seem to be disturbed by all the jokes about gays, but I think I would excuse that in itself since it was meant to be a comedy. If it was a serious movie, and they made fun of 2 gay guys, I would have issues with it.

    I was actually surprised Abhishek and John - very mainstream/popular actors - agreed to do this, and I am happy they did, even if they are not really gay in the movie. I hope this is a step in the right direction.

    Another thing I have to mention is the amount of (male) exposure in it. I didn’t realise Hindi movies had come this far - it is not like I watch Hindi movies much but still ….. last time I had seen John was many years ago, and he is much changed now. The short suits him by far, and he definitely has built a stunning body

    And, oh … if it is not obvious yet, I am Indian, gay and very normal

    posted on December 14th, 2008 at 6:35 pm

20. 20 On December 15th, 2008, meetu said:

    Good to see you here, Longtime Friend! We can drool over John’s physique together now!

    I think I have as much problem with sardar/blonde jokes. Oh well…

    And I don’t know if this is a step in the right direction. If all through most of the movie gay people were treated as if they are suffering from a contagious disease of some sort. That the mom accepts her son’s sexuality, albeit false, is sort-of a step in the right direction. Because it’s not really that easy for parents and I don’t see “maa da ladla bigad gaya” as acceptance “_

    posted on December 15th, 2008 at 5:49 am

And what do you think...