Kaagaz Ke Phool

Dutt's 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' (Paper Flower) very much reflects his own life story. It can be described as poetry on canvas as it's beautiful, lyrical, agonizing, heartbreaking and a treat to watch. The legendary Guru Dutt pretty much lived the life of the famous painters whose works gained appreciation only after their tragic departure. Dutt's other masterpiece, 'Pyaasa' parallels this. Sadly, 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' was a commercial failure after its release. Ironically this is also shown in the film as Sinha's last film is a commercial disaster. Both 'Pyaasa' and 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' somewhat parallel this genius's life.

The cinematography has always been a highlight of Dutt's films. The use of lighting is very good as it emphasizes the somberness. The light beaming on the screen during the premier of Sinha's 'Devdas' and the spotlight on the main characters during the interval song are examples of the skillful use of light. The overlapping images, the close-ups, and the long-shots all work effectively.

Among the songs, it is the unforgettable 'Waqt Ne Kiya', sung by the late Geeta Dutt, that stands out. It's both shot beautifully and the lyrics are magic as it expresses the silent emotions conveyed between the two protagonists. 'Dekhi Zamaane Ki Yaari' is also a good track. The rest of the songs range from okay to adequate. The Johnny Lever track could have easily been left out. The character itself was not really necessary.

The relationship between Sinha and his estranged wife seems a little hazy. Perhaps it was a good idea not too put too much focus on them as the film was mainly about Suresh and Shanti's relationship. The characters of Mrs. Sinha and her parents are very caricaturish.

The chemistry between the enigmatic Guru Dutt and the luminous Waheeda Rehman is electric. They convey so much without saying anything. As Sinha says, 'We have always understood each other'.

While 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' has its flaws (which I think are very few), it is essentially a beautiful powerful classic. The storytelling is simple without being too emotionally manipulative or preachy. 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' is a gift to cinema.

I'm still slowly developing my appreciation for "Bollywood" although this film certainly does not fit the prototype for what I've seen and expected thusfar. Instead of sassiness and splash, this epic traverses seriousness and shadow.

I'm certainly glad that I saw it, but truth be told I'm happier having seen it, than I was while actually watching it. By renting the DVD, I was able to watch a 3-part special on Guru Dutt that I highly recommend. His colleagues still speak so fondly and insightfully of him, very touching. It might be worth watching that special before the main feature. The film is from 1959 and thus has elements that are timeless, yet also elements that are quite dated.

First off, it is in black and white, and several scenes (not only those involving knitting) screamed for color, but alas what can you do? Is there a Ted Turner in India?? Kidding!! The camera work and shots however are often remarkable, shadows just don't look as stark in color. On the extras, V.K. Murthy discussed the light beams and lenses he created for Dutt. Speaking of Murthy, he was so very compelling on the DVD extras...why does IMDB list him working so rarely? I suspect it is just an incomplete filmography??

Dutt and he also used overlapping images that I still enjoy, but I don't think anyone uses these now since they were probably overused at one point in the 60's. Bring 'em back, the sliding limelights and later sliding martinis worked very well. There's a great scene of a throng of adoring film fans where the camera takes on a boat-like rocking that caught my eye. The camera often moves, and shots usually are not interrupted with so many alternative angles as we are used to today. Personally that's one of my favorite aspects of older films, the lingering shot.

There was a pivotal scene where I guess they needed two different takes, spliced from nearly the same location after the "sofa" reunion of our two starcrossed lovers. It may be footage was just lost there (other moments during songs for example it was clear this has happened). The sudden change in that scene almost right at that abrupt camera perspective change in the takes used, didn't translate to me in the US in 2004. But I'm usually one to encourage lovers to "requit," damn it!

Another significant problem comes with what we an audience, and Dutt/Sinha as a character, allow his daughter to get away with. Again, I'm nothing more than an acolyte in appreciating these Indi films, but it seems a common theme is the man is with one woman, but in love with another. How to construct this barrier in a sassy film that will hypnotize with eye-popping dance scenes over ear-popular music is very different than how to construct a barrier in a serious film such as this.

I don't really care in the first case, but here the impudence of the daughter just put me off, and made the unrequited love seem sort of senseless. One of Guru Dutt's contemporaries talked about how in real life, he could love...but not state his love. This is a more interesting divide, and it is presented somewhat here, generally with the enchanting Chanti saying "Listen..." (well that's what the subtitles said...) Three times at least... Winds also pick up at key moments.

The film is well constructed with devices like that, and the aforementioned beams of light. The ingenue and the auteur love story works well, a Pygmalion with another pigment. Naivete and innocence are not only what draw Sinha to Chanti, but they are also what some people will like about this film quite a bit.

For me, I might be a bit too jaded. The "Rocky" comedic relief (is his name really Johnny Walker...that's like a character out of "Alien Nation") while sorta funny in ways, at the same time got on my nerves a bit. Although for a moment I thought he was going to be well ahead of time and be a gay character on screen in the 50's. Indeed any scene involving any one from his family tended to bring the film down in a broad fashion. We get it, the aristocracy are horrible to the poor and lowly millionaire film mavericks, not willing to give them the compassion they shower upon their dogs. Another clue to dislike them, the fact that they use the English language.

I still don't know why at one point the estranged Mrs. Sinha says "If he needs me, put him on the next flight." If she were too sickly to go to her husband in his need, or if a monsoon made it prohibitive to go to Bombay...that might have been better from my point of view.

The fact that this is a film about the film industry may put some folks off, but like Altman's "The Player" this film I think benefits from such self-reflection. The notion of a director's struggle for art and control, when the bets are switching to the actors and actresses as workhorses evidently paralleled Dutt's own struggles. Ultimately I think Dutt's own life is more interesting than the role he created and portrayed here. It seems in the artificial cinema sunlight, he felt rootless and never blossomed amidst all the paper flowers.

Back at school, I saw some of Sergei Eisenstein's films as part of being a Rhetoric major, I wish we had seen and discussed this film. I'd be curious to know if others found some of the women when speaking looking awkwardly askance? In today's era of reality TV and hand-held documentary style film fiction, I sort of miss stylized movies as an art ...although I'm certainly glad car footage can be shot on real roads and not sound stages these days. ;>

Overall I think "Kaagaz Ke Phool" has as much going for it as other film school classics (and being appreciated with a sense of history would help). Although even as a "stand-alone" film I found it entertaining. Not sure I would have said the same of "Battleship Potemkin" sitting at home on a Thursday night.

7/10

Apparently Guru dutt stopped directing movies after the failure of Kaagaz ke phool at the box office. What a pity! If only he had considered the holes in the plot, being the perfectionist he is, he would definitely have made at least one more film. And Indian Cinema surely needed more from a director of his calibre and taste.

Kaagaz Ke phool ( paper / artificial flowers ) is the story of a brilliant director who gets trapped into a downward spiral of self destruction. As soon as the titles roll down to the tune of "waqt ne kiya", we hear a poignant background song by Rafi , written by Sahir Ludhianvi and composed by S.D. Burman. An old and battered Suresh Singh is seen looking at the studios forlornly. And soon ensues the flash back about how this brilliant director goes through a roller coaster ride, suffers the pangs of a bad marriage, misses his daughter, discovers a star, meets an understanding friend and companion, and how he becomes a victim to the whims of society and loses everything.

There are a few flaws in the plot, especially around the events related to the turning point in the life of the protagonist, which may put off some audience.There is a comedy track, which may not gel well with the present day viewers. However, if the viewer is willing to be generous with his suspension of disbelief, he is in store for an audio-visual treat of a kind that is rarely seen among the annals of Indian Cinema. Guru dutt and Waheeda Rehman do well in their respective roles and most of the cast give good support. But what stand out are the music, the songs and the cinematography. Lyricist Sahir Ludhianvi is a master and "waqt ne kiya" proves it beyond any doubt. And what to say about S.D. Burman? He is an acknowledged genius and here he composes music that captures the spirit of the movie so wonderfully. The cinematography is a lesson for photographers. Some of the scenes,where conversation between the actors is picturized with the actors alternately fading in and out of the focus, have a wonderful effect on the feel of the film.

On the whole, be kind towards a few flaws, and you will not regret watching the movie.

This is really a milestone in world cinema - not just Indian cinema. The story, the lyrics, songs, music, photography, editing and above all class act. Everyone has poured their heart in this film. This indeed is a poetry in form of a film. Though the topic is very depressing it but reflects reality from eyes of a defeatist, maybe the only flaw I see in the picture, and perhaps the reason why the film never saw a good box office record. However, it may have a lot to do with personal struggles of Guru Dutt at the time of making of this film. Only if the film had been about triumph of human struggle to overcome all odds, outcomes could have been different. A lot of credit is given to Guru Dutt alone, however I feel the classic nature of this film has a lot to do with contribution of everyone - the music is touching today as I suppose it might have been then. One who has never seen Wahida Rehman in younger days is dazed at her beauty and innocence. Guru Dutt himself looks rather handsome. Kaifi Azmi's lyrics are just inimitable. Photography is great - considering it was done in 50a. I came up with the DVD by chance and I'm now going to see more of Guru Dutt's work. I not for a moment want to deny Guru Dutt his share of glory, however one must also acknowledge other geniuses who made this movie a classic!

This movie sums up the genius of Guru Dutt. A reclusive and introvert man portrayed in the movie was Dutt himself. Too bad the movie went over the heads of Audience in the 50s, however, its charisma has given it the status of a cult classic. Waheeda Rahman was beautiful as ever and acted much better than she did in Pyaasa. I rate this movie better than Pyaasa personally. Kaifi Azmi's lyrics are at their best with "Waqt ne kiya" song topping everything out! I think the beginning is extremely maudlin and same for the ending. He enters the studio as an old and broken man, only to be jeered at by his ex colleagues. A must watch with outstanding Music!!!!