Is it the lure of easy lucre, the siren call of more fame or just the pitfalls of plain stupidity.
Hey, who is it that can tell with certainty why Bollywood star Aamir Khan is embracing a foul-smelling thieving swine like Ghajini movie director A.R. Murugadoss.
Why, oh, why is Aamir Khan so enthusiastically willing to ignore the overpowering stench of the pig’s blood pouring out from Ghajini director Murugadoss’ various orifices and now seeping into Aamir’s own body. After all, Murugadoss is also the director of the Hindi version of Ghajini (a remake of the Tamil Ghajini) featuring Aamir Khan in the lead role.
To refresh our memory, we recently re-watched both Ghajini (Tamil) and Memento (If you live in the U.S., both are available from Netflix).
Now, hear our verdict:
Unless you are a blithering idiot, suffer from short-term memory loss, an unabashed apologist for stealing or sand-blind, it’s completely clear that Ghajini is nothing but yet another instance of the Tamil thieving swines (yes, we mean you Murugadoss) filching a fine Hollywood plot and claiming it as their own.
Murugadoss claims credit for the story, screenplay, dialogs and direction for Ghajini (Tamil). Yeah, right. And we are Lawrence of Arabia. And you dear reader are Ashoka the Great.
Ghajini – Crude, Ugly Copy
No ifs and buts here. Ghajini (Tamil) is nothing but a crude, ugly copy of Memento.
Well, here is the long list of similarities between Memento and Ghajini:
1. Both movies deal essentially with the story of a young man suffering from an unusual disability – the inability to form new memories for longer than a few minutes (As Leonard Shelby explains in Memento to the motel clerk: If we talk for too long, I’ll forget how we started).
2. Both movies focus on a young male protagonist who is extremely focused on extracting revenge for the murder of his loved one (wife in the case of Memento and girlfriend in Ghajini).
3. Both movies have a male protagonist whose short-term memory problems are caused by a violent blow to the head as he rushes to save his wife/girlfriend from a brutal attack.
4. Both movies highlight the use of tattoos by the protagonist on his body as a technique to remember important facts because it’s a permanent way of keeping a note (as Leonard says in Memento).
While the above four points indisputably demonstrate the major similarities between the two movies, there are similarities galore between Memento and Ghajini.
By the way, similarities in plain English means copying by Murugadoss because Memento (2000) came much earlier to Ghajini (2005).
Keep in mind that these are not coincidences but carefully planned and executed theft by the thieving swine Murugadoss. All for a few silver coins.
Here is more evidence of theft by the makers of Ghajini (Tamil):
5. Both movies have the protagonist using a Polaroid camera to take instant pictures of people and objects to aid his memory and organize his life.
6. Both movies highlight a striking and unforgettable tattoo on the male protagonist’s chest – Find Him…Kill Him.
7. Both movies display a protagonist who photographs the people he kills.
8. Both movies have a protagonist who keeps the camera on the left side of his body inside a coat.
9. Both movies feature a woman who helps the male protagonist in ultimately killing the murderer (Natalie in Memento and Chitra in Ghajini).
10. Both movies feature a bloody murder by the male protagonist in the first 15 minutes or so.
11. Both movies show the protagonist shaking the Polaroid picture with his left hand after it comes out of the camera (after the first murder).
12. Both movies present the protagonist using an elaborate paper chart on the wall with photographs to keep track of the bad fellas involved in the death of his loved one.
13. Both movies include a scene in which the protagonist trusses up a person with duct tape and hides him into a closet
14. Both movies showcase the constant use of Polaroid photographs by the protagonist to distinguish between friends (Natalie in Memento, Chitra in Ghajini) and enemies (Teddy in Memento, Lakshman in Ghajini).
15. Both movies make it clear that the last indelible memory of the protagonist is the murder of the wife/girlfriend.
16. Both movies have a pointer on the left thigh of the protagonist reminding him to shave. Yes, the protagonist does shave the left thigh in both films.
17. Both movies show the male protagonist explaining early in the movie to a key person near his place of residence (to the apartment security guard in Ghajini and to the motel clerk in Memento) that he has a memory issue. Yes, both the security guard and motel clerk are already familiar with the protagonist’s peculiar condition.
If after reading all of the above, you still think Ghajini is not stolen from Memento then you have a short-term memory issue like Leonard Shelby in Memento or Sanjay Ramasamy in Ghajini.
No, sir. This scene-by-scene copying in Ghajini goes far beyond inspiration and is nothing but theft.
Who is Aamir Khan trying to con with his drivel that Ghajini (Tamil) is not a copy of Memento?
We dare you to not only check out all that we’ve said above but if you intend to watch the Hindi Ghajini check if these similarities repeat in the movie as we expect it will because the Hindi Ghajini is after all a remake of the Tamil Ghajini.
Sure there are some differences between Ghajini (Tamil) and Memento.
First and foremost, Ghajini is a crude, ugly piece of shit compared to Memento.
Simply put, Memento is a masterpiece while Ghajini is a monsterpiece.
We’d go as far as to hail Memento as a classic example of the film noir genre and Ghajini as a crass example of the unschooled buffoon genre of movies.
It’s the difference between solid talent (Christopher Nolan, director of Memento) and shameless thievery (A.R. Murugadoss, director of Ghajini).
As long as movies are made, film students will talk in hushed tones about Memento director Christopher Nolan’s screenplay (based on his brother Jonathan Nolan’s short story) and its unusual and striking technique of juxtaposing two tracks in the movie – one in color (going backward in time) and the other in black & white (moving forward) and their eventual convergence. This is high art not low fart like Ghajini.
For sure, as long as movies are made, generations of serious film students will laugh loudly at Murugadoss’ buffonish screenplay.
Second, Ghajini director Murugadoss throws in the usual Kollywood staple of a bunch of inane songs accompanied by the usual hideous dances.
Third, the heroine (Asin in Ghajini) has more screentime compared to the wife in Memento because of the love angle Murugadoss introduces between Kalpana (Asin) and the businessman Sanjay Ramasamy/Manohar (Surya).
As we said earlier, Memento is a Hollywood classic while Ghajini is typical Kollywood garbage.
But for his post-injury memory retention issues and his idee fix on revenge, our protagonist Leonard (played with brilliance by Guy Pearce) in Memento is a normal individual.
Au contraire, Murugadoss makes Sanjay Ramasamy (Surya) look and behave like an unhinged character although he suffers from just the same memory retention issues as Leonard and the same obsession with revenge.
The principal villain of Ghajini is Murugadoss’ atrociously bad screenplay that plumbs the depth of nonsense compounded by the banal dialogs, mediocre music and the asinine dances that are an offensive assault on the eyes and ears.
Above all, it’s without doubt Murugadoss’ utter incompetence. This blockhead just doesn’t have the mental agility to mould a fine movie from the stolen clay in his hands.
Of the five songs in Ghajini, the only one that had any merit was Sutrum vizhi although its picturization was crappy.
Compared to his Tamil peers like Ajith or Vishal, Surya is a passable actor.
But the Surya we see in Ghajini is a shadow of the Surya who delighted us in the Gautam Menon directed cop story Kaakha Kaakha.
Either on his own or under the tutelage of the thieving swine Murugadoss, Surya turns his character of a memory-loss victim into a demented animal although his character is not one at all. If you are looking for proof, just look at Surya’s bizarre facial expressions, weird head movements, unsteady walk and other odd gestures.
Folks, short term memory loss is not the same as being off one’s rocker.
Is there no scope for subtle acting at all in Tamil movies?
Torturous as Surya was in Ghajini, he’s nothing compared to the agony inflicted by Asin on the unsuspecting audience or the brutal assault unleashed by that eternal, infernal nightmare of Tamil movies – Nayantara.
After watching Ghajini, we emerged from the ordeal in utter disbelief that such a thing as Asin also has a place in tinseltown.
How this freak-o-midget with little acting or dancing skills managed to find a foothold in the movie business is one of life’s little enigmas.
With a four-feet-like high frame reminding us that pygmies are not extinct, a hip wide enough to screen a wide-screen movie, a boyish chest more suited for Tantex banians than Victoria’s Secret lingerie, an asinine smile reminiscent of Downs Syndrome infants and dance steps that suggest waddling more than grace, this Asin thing in Ghajini is an inglorious triumph of brobdingnagian ambition over lilliputian talent.
Even if you whine that physical attributes are no more than God’s whimsical blessing or curse over which mere mortals have little say, on the things that Asin does control, stuff like acting, dancing or smiling pleasantly this abject Mallu object makes seemingly litte effort and stumbles through in a stupor of mediocrity.
From the moment Asin appears in Ghajini via that Rahatulla song till that welcome instant in her new apartment when the villain Lakshman (Pradeep Rawat) employs an iron club to dispatch this Lilliput to her maker with thunderous blows to the head, this freak-o-midget tormented us so much that we’re inclined to believe that she hails not from God’s Own Country but Lucifer’s Own Hades.
When Surya proposes to her in the bus after the New Year party, when she agrees to his proposal on the beach with that silly 1 AM, 2 AM, 3 AM monolog, when she hands over Rs 2 lakh to Surya on the street, when she dances like a retard in the four songs, when she hears from the villain that he’s killed two of the girls and dumped them in the sea or when she’s clowning around in that small ad firm, it’s all no more than a sinful performance xeroxed multiple times.
If Satan’s agents come in different degrees of depravity, then Nayantara, who plays a medical student in Ghajini, represents Lucifer at his angriest and worst.
With that ugly nose-ring and her horrid performance in every single frame she features in, Nayantara in Ghajini represents the lowliest lows in Tamil cinema.
In a hideous black dress showing off her elephantine thighs, Nayantara in the X Machi song inflicts death by a thousand cuts on the captive hostages (audience) in the theatre.
Historians tell us that when the Black Plague struck Europe around 1340, it not only killed millions but often returned to finish off those whom it had passed by on its earlier visits.
With the Hindi version of Ghajini, that recidivist Murugadoss has teamed up with Aamir Khan and Asin to see if he can deliver yet another savage blow to those who survived the first onslaught of his hideous pestilential attack.
With Aamir Khan’s Ghajini expected to hew broadly to the story of the Tamil Ghajini (a fact acknowledged by Aamir Khan in interviews), this signals a new low even for the thieving swines of the Indian movie industry.
What’s next? – A Bhojpuri version of Ghajini and then a Ghajini (Telugu) followed by a Ghajini (Kannada) and a Ghajini (Assamese).
Are there no limits at all to stealing by our movie-makers?
Ghajini is an appropriate name for the movie because the Ghazini of history repeatedly looted India, notably stripping the Hindu temples of their wealth.