Each and every frame of Don2 is suave, exotic and exquisite but when all those frames are combined and run together, Don2 misses the plotline. The plot is very simple though: Five years later, Don(Shahrukh Khan)—after establishing his unchallengeable fiefdom in Asia—heads towards Europe to extend his drug-cartel. This expectedly does not go well into the European mafia and they consort themselves to ‘keel Don’. But Don apparently has some other plan and to pull it off, he needs his old-time ‘frenemy’ Vardhan(Boman Irani). So what does he do now? Simple: He surrenders himself to the cops: Roma(Priyanka Chopra) and Mr. Malik(Om Puri), and takes Vardhan out of Kuala Lampur jail. From there they head to Zurich and then to Berlin to steal “banknote printing plates” from the highly-secured central bank, which will make him, well, rich! Sounds simple? But Don has several sub-plans in the plans which make him con Vardhan again this time. In his sub-plans, his aides are Ayesha(Lara Dutta) and the hacker-guy(Kunal Kapoor). At the end of the story, Don has the banknote-plates and he manages to strike a deal with the police—remember the “disk” in the prequel? Yeah, he gives it to the cops and all the European mafia is behind bars—and Don, now, is a free respectable man!
Don2 begins with a slow and dragging first half and takes time to pitch in all the characters. The second half is much better and sharp. The movie is all about Shahrukh and he does not disappoint his fans a bit by pulling his character off with style and élan, though he sometimes go overboard with his baritone and pitch which diminishes the overall seriousness of the sequence. But full marks to the ease with he slips into negativity. Boman Irani, surprisingly, looks out of form here. And no matter how hard Priyanka Chopra tries, she does not look threatening et all and is a pain to bear. Om Puri disappoints and does not have much footage. Lara Dutta does her brief cameo with elegance and charm. Kunal Kapoor is okay.
Direction, costumes and background score is all where Don2 scores. Every single shot oozes style and polish. The fight and car-chasing sequences are engrossing and the shots of never-seen-before Berlin are breath-taking. But the plot, like a party-spoiler irritates, is hardly convincing (except the part where they loot the bank) and leaves many unanswered questions:
If getting out of jail was that easy, then was Vardhan waiting for Don all these years to get out? Why did Don need Vardhan? Didn’t he have his own men? Seemed so, given that in the opening sequence, he takes his own consignee!(In spite of being...well...DON, humility? )
After planning to ‘keel Don’, where was the European mafia partying instead of killing Don, he came to Berlin, right? We wanted to see someone apart from dumb Indian Cops chasing Don there!
Once bitten twice shy, right? Not so much in case of the cops (Priyanka and Om Puri) who are coxed by Don into believing in him. They repeatedly buy the fact that Don has got a change of heart and really want to help them!
As an insult to the viewer’s intelligence, the part where Hrithik (Yes, he’s there too to up the style-quotient) unmasks himself as Don, is well…very lame!
Apart from the flaws in the plot, Don2 is a visual treat and matches the panache of Hollywood flicks like Ocean’s11. Watch it out for Shahrukh, who undisputedly is the king of—like everything—the movie. All cheers to Shahrukh and his charisma.
Coronation Durbar Delhi 1911, Official Directory with maps
Printed at Superintendent Government Printing, Calcutta
Exactly a hundred years back, on 12th December 1911, the Coronation of King George V – who became the first British monarch to visit India – was held in the durbar of Delhi. And the Capital of British Empire was moved from Calcutta to Delhi without public knowledge. The conglomeration for the event witnessed every ‘Who’s Who’ of British Empire and their Princely Allies. The sheer scale at which the event was held meant that planning to the minutest of scale and resources to be used were detailed out as specifically as possible. The directory serves as the official document for planning and organization of the coronation and one sees the eye for details of the organizers. All ceremonies, receptions, parades, awards, routes, places and people involved, sports, and departure are precisely detailed out with maps where required. The document serves as an important resource to appreciate the planning and resource-management of British of those times.
PS: Indeed the centenary of the event is not even talked about – let alone being celebrated – in the country today. The Coronation Park in Northern Delhi, today, remains neglected, unmarked and locked.
The document can be downloaded from archives.org here
Every Friday, e-invitations to parties and gatherings at some or other club, pub or any such place swarm my inbox. I hardly peruse through these invites for the idea of shaking my hips on a week-end does not appeal to me (what? People can hate to be among people!); what mostly occupies me is reading - for it does not necessitate the need of moving one’s butt for several hours; and next to browsing web, it is the easiest act I can pull off with my eyes open. So I never bother to check what they are about, but this weekend, boredom curiosity overtook the better of me and I ended up reading all such invites in my inbox. Now you know what such invites offer but one particular line, which was emboldened, caught my attention: Strictly no Stags; and it ran common in all invites. For a moment I ended up empathizing for a particular class of harmless and shy animals; but logic united consciousness in no time and I realized: it demeans animals and humans alike, words are deceptive – the phrase has a rich and impressive etymological background of porn, animal psychology, and Scotland – and most importantly, it throttled any chances of me making at such events. That one line threatened me that unless I come accompanied with a member of the fairer sex, entry would be denied! I did not sleep during school social-science lectures and I can vouch that it is very unconstitutional (ha! But no pun intended!); and most importantly, it is utterly sexist for it accents the very existence of a man to woman. It is demeaning to assume that a stag single-guy would look towards a gathering of this kind as an opportunity to breed. Being with a woman is anything but exclusive and a single-guy is not a stag that would compete with other males to substantiate his masculinity. But my intellectual musings will be all Greek to those dumb hedonists. Let them promote sexism while I sleep, eat, and sleep this week-end. I may also listen to Nicole Scherzinger’s I don’t need a (wo)man…
A Narrative of the Siege of Delhi,Charles John Griffiths
Comprising mostly of a journal entries of around four months by a high-rank official of British Army of Ferozepore regiment during the times of “Mutiny/First War of Independence” in 1857, it gives a general perspective of the attitude of a British of that time; important insight towards the disregard of natives, expectedly racist, biased, overtly-bragging account of the capture of Delhi. The first chapter describes the flippant attitude of the British during the first few days of the rebellion. The blowing-off of rebels with cannons describes how British used religion as a strategy (blowing off the body unfits both Hindus' and Muslims' religious requisite for the proper last rites). The book drags over the next three chapters accounting the days at war-field and loss of men on both sides. The last two chapters describe the occupation, loot, and riches of the city. The writer admittedly smitten by the grandeur of the city, rebuts the plan to blow off Jama Masjid merely as a rumor (it has been at times theorized that the British had prepared to detonate the masjid unless they were compensated by the Muslim populace for their losses at war); decent book which should be read with skepticism.
Reviews200 is my attempt at documenting the readings I do, without going into too many intricacies; keeping it simple and short, in less than 200 words.
Twilight in Delhi, Ahmed Ali
I probably read of this book in William Dalrymple’s City of Djinns. After much searching around, thanks to Flipkart, I finally got hold of it last weekend. First published in 1940, it was banned by the British for being subversive. But hardly any portion of the book is so and disappointingly, the book is more about a family who are descendents of Mughals than it is about Delhi. But Delhi remains an important character in the background though and the writer’s description of the city is flawless. Surprisingly some of descriptions still can be very closely related to the old Delhi of these times. The writing is poetic and the book serves as an important document revealing the times and culture of city during immediate preceding years to independence. The coronation of King George V in Delhi durbar is well described. Apart from that, there are hardly any descriptions of British in Delhi.
Of so many other things, the British have to be credited again for coming up with the practice of postage stamps. Sir Rowland Hill, knighted for reforming British Postal System, is called Father of Postage Stamps. Prior to postage stamps, postmarks depicting the charges were imprinted and the charges were to be paid by the recipient. Charges, exorbitantly high, were levied according to the distance and number of sheets used. And many a times; the receivers would refuse to pay. Rowland Hill’s famous pamphlet on Postal reforms suggested few novel but presumptuous changes: that charges be levied according to weight rather than distance; that postage be paid beforehand by the sender. For pre-payment of the postage, he suggested that small adhesive pieces of paper of various denominations be used those could be affixed on the postal materials. His proposals were accepted in 1839 amid skepticism and thus were stamps born.
An exhibition cover commemorating Sir Rowland Hill
Postal correspondence increased dramatically by over cent per cent in the first few months and in 1840, the world’s first postage stamps were introduced: Black Pennnies. They were imperforated. The system was a success and later replicated in various colonies of British and over the world. Stamps were first introduced in India in the province of Sindh in the year 1852. Scinde Dawks, as they were called, were of ½ Anna denominations each and were the first stamps to be used in Asia. These became obsolete in the year 1854 and were succeeded by Red Lithos of ½ Anna, 1 Anna, 2 Anna, and 4 Anna which could be used throughout British India. Red Lithos derived their name from the printing technology used, namely: lithography and were printed and designed in Calcutta. Present day India stamps are printed at Nashik Security Press.
The system of stamps was soon replicated in all the British colonies. The British stamps did not have name of the country imprinted — a tradition which continues to this day. Mostly the stamps would feature the face of the ruling queen or king of the British Empire. At the end of colonialism, several themes, important events, celebrities, monuments, flora and fan una et cetera were incorporated. Philately first emerged as a hobby in Germany. Britain, Germany and China caboast of most number of philately enthusiasts. Philately, once a passion restricted to elite, is now gaining prominence among everyone.
Black Pennies, 1840
Red Litho, 1854
Some important terms related to philately:
Definitive Stamps: are the general purpose stamps which one usually gets at postal counters. They are printed in bulk and are of cheaper paper and ink quality. They are printed over longer period of time. They are usually smaller in size.
India: First definitive Series
Commemorative Stamps: are used to commemorate important events of significance, important personalities, national resources et cetera. They are bigger in size, of glossy finishing, and of better paper and ink quality.
First Commemorative Stamps of India: Independence Series, 1947
Proofs: are samples of stamps prior to their printing, to check the quality of ink and design at various stages of production. Proofs are usually taken on hard cover of white paper and are dried and check-tested for results.
Proof to check the ink
Essays: are various designs of proposed stamps submitted to postal authorities. Not all essays are used. They are usually altered to better the quality of ink and design.
Essays to check various designs
Fiscals/Revenue: stamps are stamps used to taxation or bureaucratic purposes. If postal stamps are used, they’ll bear different cancellations.
Fiscal Stamps
Cancellations: the cancellation marks used on stamps. Various different types of cancellations are used and the value of stamps may depend upon the type of cancellation on it.
Used: stamps which are cancelled. Used stamps are usually of more significance to philatelists.
Mint: stamps which are not used. They gum is usually preserved else may decrease the value of stamp.
Watermark: the paper used to print stamps bears a watermark which can be seen against any light source. Same stamps may be printed on different watermark papers thus differentiating the value of stamps.
Catalogue: a book containing details of stamps in chronological order and stating the importance, valuations, and intricate details about stamps. Catalogues published by Stanley Gibbons are most widely used as a standard reference to valuations.
Denomination/Face-value: the value of stamps printed on it.
Catalogue-value: the value of stamps printed in a catalogue.
Perforations: are the holes punched to make the separation of stamps easy.
Perforation Gauge: is used to measure the perforation of the stamps. Same design of stamps may be printed with different perforation values.
Perforation Gauge
Gutters: are hardly used these days. These are spaces between blocks of perforated stamps to make separation of stamps easy.
A Gutter Block
Dyes: the die used to print stamps. Same stamps are sometimes printed using different dyes.
Shades: are again little color variations used to print the same design of stamps.
Maximum cards: are the post cards of the same design as stamps with the stamp pasted and cancelled on the picture sides, on the date of release of stamp. These are usually sold to philately enthusiasts.
A Maximum Card
First Day Covers: are colorful envelops on the theme of stamp with the stamp affixed an cancelled on the date of release; again targeted towards stamp collectors.
A First Day Cover
O.H.M.S: abbreviation of On His Majesty’s Service. Cancellations on government stationary during the time of British Empire.
OHMS
Omnibus: issue of stamps of the same or nearly same design by more than one country; usually, in the times of British Empire.
Omnibus: Same design of stamps used for different Commonwealth Nations
Specimens: are stamps sent to various postmasters across the countries to be used as reference so that forgeries and fake stamps can be avoided. They have ‘SPECIMEN’ imprinted on them.; practiced mostly in the times of British Empire.
Specimen
Hinges: are small gummed pieces of paper used to affix stamps on sheets by stamp collectors. Hinged stamps are valued lesser than unhinged ones.
Hinges
Mounts: are transparent plastic covers used to protect stamps from external environment and affix them on collector’s sheets.
Mounts
Tongs: are tweezers used to handle stamps as using hands may affect the design and gum parameters.
Tongs
Overprints: are texts printed on stamps. Princely states in India would use the British stamps with the name of their state overprinted on it. A country’s stamps may be overprinted for use in abroad.
Pairs: two stamps which are un-separated.
Square: a square block of stamps; usually four.
Stock album: An album with plastic strips to hold stamps.
A Stamp Stock Album
Some of the most famous stamps:
British Guyana 1 cent Magneta, 1856:
Said to be the most famous and rare of all the stamps by philatelist. Only one of its kinds is known to exist today. Several controversies surrounding the originality of the stamp, its estimated price (Stanley Gibbon catalogue price) is more than one and a half million pounds.
Mauritius “Post Office”, 1847:
These stamps have legendary status among philately enthusiasts. Instead of imprinting “Post Paid”, erroneously, “Post Office” was printed. This error was corrected in later issues. The design was inspired from ‘Black Pennies’. Estimated price: one million pounds.
InvertedHead Four Annas, India 1854:
It is an error variety of first lithos of India. The head of the Queen was mistakenly printed upside down. A few of such survive including one in the Govt. of India collection, New Delhi.
Scinde Dawks, 1852:
First stamps of Asia.
Black Pennies, 1840:
First stamps of the world.
Inverted Jenny, US, 1918:
Image of the aero plane was accidently printed upside down. Estimated price: half a million dollars.
Mahatma Gandhi, Rs 10, “Service” Overprint, 1948:
The Rs. 10 stamp was among the commemorative stamps issued on Gandhi and was for a brief period a hundred stamps were used as revenue stamps by Rajagopalachari, Governor of India. Later, it was observed that commemorative stamps should not be used as revenue stamps. Only eight such stamps survive. Forgeries of ‘Service’ overprint are known to exist.
Azad Hind Series:
Stamps designed in Nazi Germany for Subhash Chandra Bose's. These were un-perforated and never used (after unsuccessful attempt by the army to get freedom).
Shahrukh! OMG! You can not contain him in words. Those eyes of love, solitude, longing, want, fear, hatred, and jealousy; that face of thousand honest expressions, as if possessed, conveys what exactly he wants to; that intensity of moves, which would make any tune sound good; that baritone of his voice, which would fumble, pause, and rise in exact sync with his majestic face; the fluffy mane of his past, which you would otherwise mock, but as noble, pure, and honest as his smile. You cannot describe the Colosseum to someone who is blind, you cannot describe an orgasm to someone who is a virgin, and you cannot describe Shahrukh to someone who does not belong to Shahrukhism. Shahrukh is not just a cinema; it is much more than that. Like Sachin is not just a cricketer and Beatles is not just a band. There come may better actors, but no one will ever replicate Shahrukh. Like no one will ever replicate Sachin and Beatles. He can die with his legs up in the air and it will look good. He can romance a cow on screen and it will look good. He can be beaten down to ground and it will look good. He can wear most atrocious clothes, and do most atrocious acts, but with his touch of an alchemist, everything which is him will be gold. He can be a loser and a failure, and you’ll love him.
You don’t need to write good roles for him, you don’t need to write good dialogues for him, you don’t need to design good clothes for him, you don’t need to create good songs for him; at the end of the day, it will be Shahrukh who’ll be enacting them, it will be Shahrukh who’ll be speaking those lines, it will be Shahrukh who’ll be wearing those clothes, and it will be Shahrukh who’ll be dancing to them. He’ll be the cynosure of everything, in perfect control of anything around him. It is easy to be a good actor. It really is. But it is impossible to be a Shahrukh. Try replacing anyone in any single shot of Shahrukh and you’ll know what I am talking about (Heck! You cannot chase the baddies on a rickshaw or haggle to buy a watermelon for the lead-lady and still manage to look that cool!). Shahrukh can pull off anything and make it real; make it believable. Sharukh always strikes the right chords. When you see him, you own him; you think he’s all yours; he’s someone you would want your father to be like, he’s someone you would want your brother to be like and he’s someone you would want your son to be like. Shahrukh is believable. Shahrukh is cool. Portraying the fallacies and weakness of a common man can only be Shahrukh’s forte. And he’s magical in that.
Shahrukh off screen is an equal delight. While the rest from his fraternity can carry off nothing more than a chuckle or giggle while looking dumb and annoying, Shahrukh knows, each and every time, what he’s talking about. Super-intelligent will be an understatement. He has wits which are genuine, and he has words which make others look illiterate. His brain and reactions work at the speed of light, and still all he’ll say will be meaningful and will have a right combination of philosophy, humor and sarcasm. He has what all his peers lack: a presence of mind. He’s the true off-screen show-man. You may hate his performances, but you’ll be overdoing if you hate him as a person.
Shahrukh is not perfect, and I would have not liked him had he been one. His imperfections are his charm, like the vulnerability of Sachin in his nineties. It adds to his awe. It’s like wondering for an instance how beautiful Michelangelo’s Pieta would’ve been without those broken pieces, and then thinking that the broken pieces actually add to the beauty of the sculpture. Shahrukh never gave his best; he always gasps you in want of more. I doubt he would be excited to give his all even in his swansong performance. Shahrukh is not about details, you’ve to appreciate the whole panorama. He’s a painting which you cannot absorb in a single view. You want to see it again and again.
An actor should be judged solely on the basic of his silver-screen performances. Not on the basis of awards, recognitions, fan-followings, and box office. His personal life and his background should be nobody’s business. But if you still want to use such parameters for Shahrukh, do your own mathematics.
Shahrukh’s success is a success of a common man. And it is the only reason you may hate him. It is a success which all of us dreamt of, but hardly achieved. Yes, people wonder how a mediocre looking guy coming from nowhere can storm the whole world. WHOLE WORLD! This observation fuels jealousy and hatred. You wonder what he has in him that took him that high. It makes you feel restless. Shahrukh is a winner any day. He’s not an underdog. People love when underdogs perform. And unfortunately, all his underdog companions have been surprisingly incompetent and that again is Shahrukh’s fault. When his peers succeed ephemerally, they are hailed and no one remembers their bulk serial failures of the past. Shahrukh’s success is taken for granted, but his failures are archived and more intensely mocked. Even in his success, dots of failures will be searched. When his peers promote their projects by giving haircuts to public and traveling in rickshaws across the nation dressed as jokers, they are lauded and termed innovative; when Shahrukh outscore them, it is just shameless marketing. When movies with no story succeed and shirts tear off by it selves, they’re cult-classics; but each of Shahrukh’s movies is sharply analyzed on the balance of logic. A sixty-year bald actor with his clownish acts is a demi-god on screen, but they never fail to count the forehead creases of Shahrukh who unlike his peers, thanks to his injuries, cannot take help of Botox to look young.
They have tried everything possible to match his success. Some have tried to pretend ‘different’ and act as the ‘art-house’ of Hindi-Cinema (it no doubt works, for people too need to fake their elitism by pretending to like such ‘art’). Others are desperately finding solace in remaking southern hits shot-to-shot. May they all succeed. They need all such tactics for they all are mechanical and expressionless. They all are insecure and it is perceivable how difficult it must be for them to hold their ground. But it was Shahrukh who first changed the laws of cinema well back when he started. He made the audience believe that heroes can be bad, heroes can cry, and heroes need not flex their muscles all the time. No matter what others say, Shahrukh changed all the conventions, truly as the first iconoclast of Hindi cinema. Shahrukh is the benchmark of everything. All accomplishments in Hindi-cinema are and will always be compared to that of Shahrukh! Does one need to say anything more?
Shahrukh is termed shallow because he wants to have all the money in this world. He unfortunately does not accept the morals we impose on him. But thank god he’s not pretentious. Thank god he does not sit for Medha Patkar’s causes without actually understanding what they are about (only to run away later when they vandalize and halt your movie screenings). Thank god he does not second Anna’s campaign just for the heck of him. We did not see him when the Olympic torch arrived in the country. He does not belong to there. But he’s always at places where he belongs to, and he challenged the so called tiger in his “own den” while reiterating his statement backing Paki cricketers. Shahrukh is shallow because he does not care what people think of him. He works day and night so that he can have enough money when he’s old and feeble. He’s an artist who now seeks commerce over estheticism, who now prefers glamour and indulgence over abstinence. He’s the Indian god for hedonism. We all the hedonists but hate him for the very same reason. Because he's excelling at it.
Millions of people across the globe cannot go wrong. Respect their judgments. And no one can argue that his name has transcended the barriers of nations, languages, and religion like no one else. It is, it is difficult and beyond the imagination of most of us, the fan-following he enjoys overseas. He’s unarguably, the most recognized Indian man alive in the world. The world knows just his face. But even if he hadn’t achieved all of this, he would have been this charismatic.
To me, cinema is nothing but Shahrukh. I’ve cried and laughed with him every time. I wanted to scream my lungs out when I was next to Mannat. I, unfortunately, don’t understand any other actors. I’ve tried, really, again and again but failed. But I am sure they all are good. But I just don’t get them. And it’s okay if you don’t get Shahrukh. Yes, each of you has your own taste of cinema. You may hate him to your core. You may make fun of everything which is him. You may think he’s ugly and not a hero in Hindi-cinema sense. I would understand all of that, but still pity that you would never experience the array of emotions we, the followers of Shahrukhism, experience every time we see him. Shahrukhism is not an elite cult, but still pity that you don’t belong to it. And more pity that you cannot convert to Shahrukhism for if you are not into it, you cannot be into it. And those who belong to it will know what I am talking about. For the rest, this post will mean no more than, a maudlin paean, a drama, a joke? To rest, all in the name of Shahrukh Khan, he has promised to entertain us as long as he lives. The milestone may say forty-six, but picture abhi baki hai mere dost…
