Welcome Guest, Login    Vancouver Olympics 2010
 Home |  World | India | Sports | Business | Technology | Entertainment | Lifestyle | Potpourri | Reviews | Press Releases | Interviews | Citizen Journalism
Home > Reviews > Article
Fashion or phuss-ion
Fashion - the word brings to mind images of popping flash-bulbs, luscious-lips pouting, models striking a pose, the cut-throat rivalry, page 3 and the sordid coke-laced parties. Does Madhur's Fashion move beyond these cliched fashion jagron. Read on.
 
Thu, Oct 30, 2008 12:34:06 IST
Views:
1898
   Comments:
2
Rate:  1 out of 5 2 out of 5 3 out of 5 4 out of 5 5 out of 5 5.0 / 4 votes

FRANKLY SPEAKING, I had very high expectations from Fashion as I rate Madhur's Chandni Bar and Page 3 as superlative work in contemporary cinema that were both commercially successful and critically acclaimed. Page 3, his last success was followed by Corporate and Traffic Signal; both highly pretentious movies.

With Fashion Madhur is back; the question is - is he really back?

Fashion tells the story of a girl from Chandigarh, Meghna Mathur (Priyanka Chopra). She wants to be a super-model against the wishes of her father; a typical middle-class family-head.

She reaches Mumbai where she meets her 'contact' Rohit (Ashwin Mushran) whom she had met at the local 'Chandigarh' beauty-contest.

It's a different world for her in Mumbai altogether; for she finds that becoming a super-model is no cake-walk. Apart from the callous attitude of people on top; she also has one big task. To replace the reigning super-model Shonali Gujral (Kangna Ranaut).

They say that for the top-spot to be vacant; two things to have concurrently. One, rise of the person in waiting and two and the most important decline of the person at top-spot.

In the film, Shonali is on the decline owing to her self-destructive streak - drugs and an abusive boyfriend.

It is only natural that Meghna very soon takes over the place of Shonali; but in the process, she ends up being the next Shonali.

How she puts her life back forms the climax.

On the paper; Fashion sounds a perfect 'award-winning' material film; but the execution leaves much to be desired.

Take the basics of writing, characterisation for example. Meghna comes from a middle-class background and in the film she is shown with her middle-class background in-tact. Her relationship with Arjan Bajwa is understood - love; but what about her relationship with Arbaaz Khan playing Sareen?

A scene was very necessary; establishing Meghna's decision to get into a relationship with Sareen - more so, because she has had two showdowns; one with the top-designer Khosla and second with her boyfriend - on the same issue.

Also, the downhill journey of Priyanka going down could have been more plausible because of the sleazy lingerie-ad she did. A supermodel in a sleazy lingerie-ad is a 'breaking-news' and the stigma attached is still very huge in Indian society.

This is just one of the glaring loophole; there are many in the writing.

For instance, Kangna's character of Shonali - the character is not based as the media reports say, but inspired by the real model Geetanjali Nagpal.

I recall, Kangna was added to the cast of Fashion after the story of Geetanjali broke. Was the character Shonali added later on? Seems so, because Shonali's character seems a botched-up job. Audiences should feel for the character, such is the real-life story of Geetanjali that I have personally seen of my model-friends crying for her. In the film too, Priyanka's character cries - the only difference audiences neither is moved nor cries. Shallow characterisation, again.

A friend watching the movie commented that Geetanjali's story in itself has the power to touch the audiences heart. The question is where does Fashion touch you. Nowhere. The only two scenes worth a note are:

Harsh Chhaya blasting Priyanka on the draping of his show-stopper dress.

A stoned Kangna telling Priyanka about the nemesis she is heading to.

In nutshell, it's fuss on Fashion. To cut a long story very short, there was a movie Gia where Angelina Jolie played a super-model on the road to self-destruction; just watch that movie. Simple sequences, like Angelina breaking in the shower still sends a chill down my spine; that's execution.

What rocks the movie:

Performances mainly by the supporting cast - Ashwin, Harsh and Mugdha Godse. Ashwin  cast as Rohit is first-rate; in fact, his is the best and most natural act in the film. Harsh cast as ace-designer Khosla, speaks with a lisp and brilliantly underplays his shrewd part. Mugdha makes a very confident debut and frankly speaking, I never thought she could act this wonderfully. Where does this leave Kangna and Priyanka?

Kangna, without mincing any words is a mere glorified extra - there is no meat to her role - still in this unbaked role only she could have infused life. Bravado. Priyanka is good, but could have excelled - Aitraaz - is still too fresh in mind.

What chucks the movie:

While the first half is still bearable, the second half is a real test of patience and the physical well-being (bums and the back!). It goes on and on and on. Yawn!

Verdict:

Only for hardcore Madhur fans, and yes, if Traffic Signal can win a national award; Madhur can be rest assured of yet another award.

 E-mail | Print | Post comment
 
Post your comment
Post
Posted comments (2)
 
A deep analysis, it seems...extremely critical!
 
 
|
Reply to Comment | New Comment | Report Abuse
 
 
 
I agree with the writer that the film is nowhere near Page 3, but it is better than Traffic Signal. Yes the duration is too long, the film should have ended when Priyanka returns to Chandigarh.
 
 
|
Reply to Comment | New Comment | Report Abuse
 
 
Loading
Latest in Reviews