Namesake - Zwei Welten, eine Reise

As a fellow Bengali and Jhumpa Lahiri fan, I had low expectations for a movie adaptation of her poignant novel (though I think The Interpreter of Maladies was better written). However, I was pleasantly surprised when I finally saw the movie at today's NY Times Arts and Leisure Weekend screening. The movie addresses all issues with care, and makes a non-Bengali audience understand the nuances of Bengali culture. The movie captures the hustle and bustle of India, sets the tone of the movie from the very first scene, and, overall, is heartwarming and true. It is humorous at all the right points, and the transition from a loud, vibrant and colorful life to a lonely, cold, and snow-white New York is breathtaking. You can feel Tabu's (Ashima's) loneliness. Jhumpa Lahiri's cameo is well-appreciated, though many in the audience did not catch it. The movie is respectful of Indian culture and uses small instances as canvases for large messages. Everyone is well-cast. Kal Penn shows himself to be capable of more difficult roles than the college-boy stereotype. Tabu and Irrfan Khan do not disappoint, since they are some of the highest-esteemed actors in India today. I felt like going back to Calcutta during all the Indian scenes. Starting the opening credits with the characters of the actors' names replaced with American characters was witty. "Everyday has been a gift, Gogol," Irrfan Khan (Ashok) tells Kal Penn (Gogol) in the movie, but truly, The Namesake is a wonderful gift for its audience, especially since I saw this movie 5 days before my birthday.

This film begins in India in 1977. A young woman meets an eligible man in her parent's home and then, after approving the match, they are soon married. However, he lives in New York and so the bride is soon pulled into a strange new culture. The rest of the film revolves around this marriage and the two children from this union (in particular, the focus is on the son).

I love Mira Nair's films, so I was favorably disposed towards this movie at the outset. However, while I am glad I watched it, I have two strong misgivings. First, because there is so much ground to cover (about 30 years of a family's history), the film comes off as very, very episodic. At times, the film jumps many years at a time and I found this disconcerting and I wanted to see more--because what we saw, I liked. Second, and this is related to my last complaint, is that because the film bounces around so much, the overall effect comes off as very cold and disconnected. Too often, I felt like I really didn't know the people at all. In other words, while the viewer learns about things these people do, who they are down deep is often an enigma. Plus, since you don't really get to know people, too often I had a hard time connected to them or caring about them when bad things occurred to them. Now perhaps this WAS the purpose of the film--the sense of emotional isolation and disconnect these people had, but still I wanted so much more.

I guess my complaints are probably more severe than some viewers might have because I have already seen several films about Indians, Pakistanis and Chinese families living in Western countries (such as the US, Canada and UK), so the idea wasn't so novel. As for me, I know what I would have liked. Instead of a two hour movie, it would have been great to break this into two or even three films or perhaps a miniseries. Really--there's just so much stuff and so many wonderful moments that are missed otherwise. For a somewhat similar experience, try watching "Bollywood/Hollywood", "Bend It Like Beckham" or "Double Happiness"--all are excellent.

On the positive side, however, it does give some insights into Indian culture and how tough it might be to live in a foreign culture--both for the first and second generation. Nice insights and some very touching moments.

Overall, not a bad film at all and well worth seeing--just don't be surprised if it leaves you wanting a lot more.

*Minor Spoilers*

I have wanted to watch this movie from the very beginning, but never actually got around to it, and now, after watching this last night, I wish I had watched it earlier. But better late than never.

The film starts with Ashoke Ganguli, (Irrfan Khan) a bookworm, marrying Ashima (Tabu), a trained classical singer. The two then move from Calcutta, East India to Queens, New York; essential as Ashoke must continue with his engineering career. The change is difficult for both, especially Ashima, and she strives to adjust to her new life and the new culture she is now living in. Soon after the couple have two children, Sonia (Sahira Nair), and Gogol (Kal Penn). Gogol was named after Ashoke's favourite author Nicholai Gogol, and we learn that the name means a lot as the film progresses. The film then shifts perspective to Gogol's life. We see Gogol as a teenager, his battles with his name, neither Indian or American, and the ridicule he suffers as an adolescent. We then see Gogol pursuing his career as an Manhattan-based urban architect, and his personal struggle to find his own identity without letting go of his inherited background.

The Namesake deals with loss, life, relationships and the main characters evoke a collection of emotions which vary from gaiety to misery, pain to love. We get a look into cultural clashes, traditional values versus Americanized, modern thinking. But I found the The Namesake is not a nationality war, but a mature and understanding tale, full of tolerance and experience. And just watching the movie, I was given an insight of what many people, including even my parents, must have been through. It was extremely moving.

The performances of the main characters - the Ganguli family, have been some of the most powerful performances for me to watch on screen. Irrfan Khan and Tabu, two of the finest actors in Indian Cinema, perfected their roles and brought life into their characters. They were, for me, the finest performances, the REAL stars. They also had a fantastic chemistry, which was subtle and pure. Khan was outstanding as Ashoke, this is the first movie of his I have watched, and I now see what makes him such a admirable, first-rate actor. Tabu was also brilliant. Her performance as Ashima was so realistic to me. I saw in her what I see in my grandmother, devotion, sincerity, and most of all, acceptance. I was endeared to her character instantly - "Ashima means without borders, limitless". A particularly memorable scene would be her and Ashoke waving goodbye to their family in Calcutta, a moment that had me spellbound at the reality of the scene. Kal Penn was extraordinary as Gogol. Being an Indian myself, also one not living in my homeland, I could identify with Gogol a lot. His performance was full of sensitivity and emotion and it really came through to me. We see his growth as a rebellious graduate to a fine young man, and I was not expecting this from Kal Penn at all, as his filmography is full of stereotypical, comical roles, but he proved me wrong.

Mira Nair's direction of this movie is a blessing. I thought it was miraculous of her to fit an entire 2 generations and 3 decades in two hours. And the pace of which she did it with is beautifully done. Her cast choice was great, and I found The Namesake to have a certain class, a certain sensibility to it. Her depiction of Calcutta and New York was one of the key points in the film, and I loved the way she made them both so real. She made a bustling, colourful Calcutta, and a dull, raging New York so genuine. They were both so similar, but again so different.

"We all came out of Gogol's Overcoat".

In 2003 days after its publication, I could hardly put down Pulitzer-winning Jhumpa Lahiri's novel "The Namesake". Lahiri was born in London to Bengali immigrants, raised in Rhode Island, and now lives in Brooklyn.

I was therefore excited when I heard that Mira Nair would be directing a film based on the novel. Readers may be familiar with Nair's films, including "Monsoon Wedding" (2001), "Kama Sutra: A Tale of Love" (1996), "Mississippi Masala" (1991), and Oscar-nominated "Salaam Bombay!" (1988); she is also in pre-production on a crime drama, "Shantaram", due in 2008.

Mumbai-based graduate of Harvard (where she met Nair) Sooni Taraporevala wrote the screenplay, as she also did on "Mississippi Masala" and "Salaam Bombay!" (incidentally, she is apparently directing her first film, based on her own screenplay, due to be released this spring). I don't know why, but the setting of the film version of the story is changed from Boston to New York and moved about a decade forward.

The story is that of the Gangulis - Ashoke (Irfan Khan) and wife Ashima (Tabu), Kolkata (Calcutta) immigrants to the U.S. in the early 1960s (1970s in the film), their son Gogol (Kal Penn), and his younger sister Sonali/Sonia (Sahira Nair). As a bachelor in India, Ashoke suffers in a train wreck, but his life is saved because, instead of sleeping on the nighttime journey, he had been reading "The Overcoat" by Russian writer Nikolai Gogol.

When Ashoke and Ashima's first child is born, they are surprised that they cannot leave the hospital without naming him; they prefer to wait for the great-grandmother's suggestion. The name of the Russian writer occurs to Ashoke, and he assigns "pet name" Gogol. The "good name" that the great-grandmother mailed never arrives, so the name Gogol sticks. As the boy grows, his name bothers him; it is neither Indian nor American, nor even a first name. He legally changes his name at college to "Nikhil".

The story follows Gogol/Nikhil as he goes to Yale University, is inspired to be an architect on a family trip to India when they visit the Taj Mahal, goes to graduate school and on to a job in New York City, and experiences several relationships. Wittingly or not, he follows the advice to "play the field" but to reserve marriage for a woman of Bengali origin.

How do the US-born children relate to India? Where is home for the parents and how do they stay in touch and perform their duties while geographically separated from their extended family? "The Namesake" is a story of the power of a name and of family; the immigrant experience; the search for love, context, and identity.

I enjoyed the film but, as often is the case, I found it to fall short of the book, whose power made me an instant fan of Lahiri's (watch for a cameo appearance by her in the film as Aunt Jhumpa). Armchair criticism is easy, and perhaps more meaningful insight is gained by asking if the medium is effectively used to convey the story's ethos.

The answer is a gentle "yes". One of Lahiri's strengths is attention to detail revealed in a matter-of-fact style that doesn't belabor the obvious. But of course the film cannot fairly be expected to reveal all of the original's subplots, such as Gogol's first relationship with his college sweetheart Ruth, or the myriad details beautifully presented in the book surrounding multicultural birthday celebrations, for example.

The film effectively contrasts the chaotic vibrancy of Kolkata with the much more restrained, anonymous big city life of the States through foundational scenes of bridges – the Howrah Bridge over the Hooghly River and Manhattan's 59th Street Bridge. In New York, we can see the business of modern city life rendered mute through a small apartment's glass windows; in India, no such respite from daily life is readily found. Another effective motif is the recurrence of the "Travelogues" exhibit at JFK Airport, reminding us through changing holographic images about the transition in space and culture that the Gangulis experience traveling between America and India.

There are some particularly well composed, emotive scenes, such as the timidly uncertain wave goodbye of Ashima to Ashoke on their first morning in the New World when he leaves on dismal snowy streets for work. I wouldn't, however, characterize the film as a whole as having consistently memorable cinematography, though it is rather effectively subtly understated and helps the story's progress.

The soundtrack could have been more appealing. Perhaps I was too focused on fidelity to the book which of course can simply be an irrelevant distraction, but I didn't relate to the music of high school student Gogol as characteristic of either the late 1970s or 1980s. Strictly speaking, the JFK exhibit was installed in 2000, which is inconsistent in fact and technology with most of the trips that the Ganguli family makes through the airport starting in the 1970s.

All that said, Mira Nair has made a sensitive, touching, and interesting film that triggers an authentic collection of emotions from joy to despair, with dashes of convincingly real everyday humor and chance. I was happy to see in the closing credits two of the three best known Bengali filmmakers mentioned, "For RITWIK GHATAK and SATYAJIT RAY, gurus of cinema with love and salaams"; only Mrinal Sen is missing.

I recommend both the film (expected to be released on March 9) and, especially, the book for immigrants and their friends, as well as to anybody who has felt significant loss, detachment, or uncertain change in their life. It is a story that is remarkable in its subtle depiction of the flip sides of the coin of history and promise.

(I saw the film at a pre-release screening on February 16, 2007 in Cary, NC USA. My review is a version of one that I am publishing in the forthcoming March issue of "Saathee Magazine".)

I saw "The Namesake" at the 22nd October screening at the London Film Festival. Mira Nair introduced the film, along with Nitin Sawhney, who wrote the score.

I admit that I loved the book, and therefore have been looking forward to this film for a while. As a second generation Bengali Brit who was born in India and went to university in the US, I know something about what it means to feel displaced, to be a stranger in a strange land, though I have never felt like an immigrant. I also have the Bengali dilemma of having two names. So the book has a lot of resonance for me.

Fortunately the film does full justice to Jhumpa Lahiri's novel. Cramming a story spanning three decades into two hours without making it feel rushed or contrived takes some doing, and Mira Nair paces it beautifully. The cinematography, the editing (juxtaposing Calcutta and New York), and even the colours of the opening credits are all spot on.

The cast are by and large, superb. Kal Penn does really well as the central character, Gogol. Anyone who has seen him in Harold & Kumar and Van Wilder: Party Liaison may have had reservations about a comic actor (albeit talented) playing this part, but he portrays the character as a confused, vulnerable, and multi-layered young man who ultimately learns to become comfortable in his own skin.

But perhaps the main reason why this story appeals to me to so much is the similarity between the experiences of his parents Ashok and Ashima and what I imagine it must have been like for my own parents when they came to England. Both Irfan Khan and Tabu are excellent. They bring a mix of loneliness, hope and pathos to their roles, people who cannot let go of their past but are prepared to sacrifice everything for their future. Their innate ordinariness is what makes their characters so sympathetic and believable.

Much like Monsoon Wedding, this is a visual and lyrical film. It is an essay on home, and on going home, not the physical place, but the state of mind.