अमू एक भारतीय अमेरिकी महिला की कहानी है जो भारत लौट आती है. फिल्म एक अंधेरा मोड़ लेती है क्योंकि काजू को पता चलता है कि बीस साल पहले हुआ एक भयानक नरसंहार उसके रहस्यमय मूल की कुंजी बन जाता है... सभी पढ़ेंअमू एक भारतीय अमेरिकी महिला की कहानी है जो भारत लौट आती है. फिल्म एक अंधेरा मोड़ लेती है क्योंकि काजू को पता चलता है कि बीस साल पहले हुआ एक भयानक नरसंहार उसके रहस्यमय मूल की कुंजी बन जाता है.अमू एक भारतीय अमेरिकी महिला की कहानी है जो भारत लौट आती है. फिल्म एक अंधेरा मोड़ लेती है क्योंकि काजू को पता चलता है कि बीस साल पहले हुआ एक भयानक नरसंहार उसके रहस्यमय मूल की कुंजी बन जाता है.
- पुरस्कार
- 1 जीत और कुल 1 नामांकन
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I was initially hesitant about watching Amu because movies with a backdrop of communal riots don't sit well with me. However, I had heard good things about the film and for that reason I also did not want to miss it.
Amu is a film about a young, adopted girl on a quest to find her birth parents. Kaju, played by Konkona Sen Sharma, lives in LA and is visiting India to be with her mother's family. During her visit she is also trying to get more information about her real parents, who she knows nothing about. The journey to find out her identity has her come across the characters played by Yashpal Sharma and Ankur Khanna, who help take her to each lead and finally to a point where she discovers her history. A history that is tied to the 1984 communal riots.
Amu is also about Kaju's relationship with her mother who is trying to keep the truth from her.
Shonali Bose does a fabulous job in telling the story and keeping the viewer glued to the screen. The cast was obviously selected very carefully. Konkona is completely believable as the young NRI. Brinda Karat as the mother puts in a wonderful performance, besides looking gorgeous! Ankur Khanna is perfect as the brooding, cynical Kabir, who gets exposed to a life he is completely unfamiliar with. Yashpal Sharma makes you laugh and makes you cry. The Bengali family as well as Kabir's parents are all people most Indians would have come across.
In conclusion all I have to say is that Amu rocks! It's a movie thats been made from the heart .... don't miss it.
Amu is a film about a young, adopted girl on a quest to find her birth parents. Kaju, played by Konkona Sen Sharma, lives in LA and is visiting India to be with her mother's family. During her visit she is also trying to get more information about her real parents, who she knows nothing about. The journey to find out her identity has her come across the characters played by Yashpal Sharma and Ankur Khanna, who help take her to each lead and finally to a point where she discovers her history. A history that is tied to the 1984 communal riots.
Amu is also about Kaju's relationship with her mother who is trying to keep the truth from her.
Shonali Bose does a fabulous job in telling the story and keeping the viewer glued to the screen. The cast was obviously selected very carefully. Konkona is completely believable as the young NRI. Brinda Karat as the mother puts in a wonderful performance, besides looking gorgeous! Ankur Khanna is perfect as the brooding, cynical Kabir, who gets exposed to a life he is completely unfamiliar with. Yashpal Sharma makes you laugh and makes you cry. The Bengali family as well as Kabir's parents are all people most Indians would have come across.
In conclusion all I have to say is that Amu rocks! It's a movie thats been made from the heart .... don't miss it.
I just went to screening locally as part of an Asian American Film festival. Amu was the opening movie for the festival. I liked the film a lot. Not your typical Indian movie by any means. After the movie they had Q&A with the director, producer, and lead actress. The discussion gave some neat insight regarding the movie. For example a lot of the filming / subject matter was done in fear of govt censorship. The version shown, as well as the one to be released later this fall in the US, is different than what those in India saw at the theater. For example in the scene with the widows discussing with Amu & Kabir the riots and how the government tolerated the violence, that the widows voices are left silent as Amu & Kabir sit in silence.
Let me start by saying I lived in New Delhi during the time of the riots, and had close Sikh friends whom we had to care for at the time of the mayhem.
That said, I went to watch the film with no preconceived notions. I was pleasantly surprised. It had its share of low spots, but that is the beauty of watching a first time director's work, you see them grow. Shonali is going to be a writer director to be reckoned with.
Like all good 'Films' that are based on true events this film walks the fine line of not getting too caught up in the heat of actual events. Instead it tries to dramatize or fictionalize the effects of the events on people lives. A fact that some audience don't seem to grasp. Especially, a substantial number of Indian audience (amply demonstrated on this site by the stupid review by ajaysaxena1960)! I sat through a Q&A session with the director where people wanted to know why the director did not name names of all the MLA's involved in the massacre. Or if the director could through her film, get the International tribunal to try Indian government for crimes against humanity.
SHE IS A FILM MAKER. NOT A HISTORIAN OR A CRUSADER.
The film took 8 years to fund and make (a crusade in itself), for that alone I admire the director. But of all the films done by writers and directors based in America, Shonali's film most certainly stands head and shoulders above the rest. She has a strong voice and a crisp sense of film-making.
A director most certainly worth watching!
That said, I went to watch the film with no preconceived notions. I was pleasantly surprised. It had its share of low spots, but that is the beauty of watching a first time director's work, you see them grow. Shonali is going to be a writer director to be reckoned with.
Like all good 'Films' that are based on true events this film walks the fine line of not getting too caught up in the heat of actual events. Instead it tries to dramatize or fictionalize the effects of the events on people lives. A fact that some audience don't seem to grasp. Especially, a substantial number of Indian audience (amply demonstrated on this site by the stupid review by ajaysaxena1960)! I sat through a Q&A session with the director where people wanted to know why the director did not name names of all the MLA's involved in the massacre. Or if the director could through her film, get the International tribunal to try Indian government for crimes against humanity.
SHE IS A FILM MAKER. NOT A HISTORIAN OR A CRUSADER.
The film took 8 years to fund and make (a crusade in itself), for that alone I admire the director. But of all the films done by writers and directors based in America, Shonali's film most certainly stands head and shoulders above the rest. She has a strong voice and a crisp sense of film-making.
A director most certainly worth watching!
I had the pleasure of seeing "Amu" during the launch of the first annual Asian American Film Festival in Pittsburgh this past weekend. Perhaps a fitting testament to the reason festivals such as this need to exist in the first place, the film deals with a subject I hadn't even known existed beforehand: the Sikh massacres in India over a three-day period in 1984, and the complicity of a corrupt government in facilitating and masking the events.
Director Shonali Bose, one of the producers (her husband, Atiya, I believe) and star Konkona Sen Sharma were all on hand to answer questions from the audience, and the political nature of the film led to a spirited discussion (and occasional debate) that, unfortunately, could not be condensed into the time allowed. Thus, given the film's stature and the importance of its subject matter, it's a shame to point out the shortcomings of its actual artistry.
As another commenter has mentioned, the film is generally well-directed but is not perfect. I agree that certain elements of its narrative (particularly the pacing, as well as a few contrived interpersonal moments) felt tacked-on or inauthentic, and were perhaps invented to couch the story in a modern-day milieu that could appeal to audiences before "surprising" them with the political content of the film in its second half, as the mystery of the main character's history is unraveled.
It's entirely possible the film would have worked better without the "mystery" angle, especially since it seems to come from left field midway through the film and then becomes all-pervasive, in direct contrast to the semi-documentary "romantic comedy travelogue" feel of the first half. What struck me most awkwardly was the disjointed nature of the "suspense" surrounding the eventual divulging of repressed information. The purposely vague ways in which Kaju's family avoids discussion of her past or, when confronted with conflicting information, seek to simply change the subject or stare pensively at the floor felt falsely melodramatic.
But all of my criticisms become quibbles when faced with the undeniable power of the film's few flashback scenes, which depict certain controversial events in an unflinching light. In those moments, Bose finds her true voice, and the voice of the victims in these unjustified atrocities.
Incidentally, one area the films succeeds in artistically is the casting of Konkona Sen Sharma as Kaju. Her accent and body language were flawlessly American on screen, as they should have been (Kaju is an Indian girl raised in America), but Bose explained after the film that Konkona has lived her whole life in India and was only given two weeks to immerse herself in Los Angeles's culture to prepare for the role of Kaju. Those who see the film will certainly agree that she succeeded.
Director Shonali Bose, one of the producers (her husband, Atiya, I believe) and star Konkona Sen Sharma were all on hand to answer questions from the audience, and the political nature of the film led to a spirited discussion (and occasional debate) that, unfortunately, could not be condensed into the time allowed. Thus, given the film's stature and the importance of its subject matter, it's a shame to point out the shortcomings of its actual artistry.
As another commenter has mentioned, the film is generally well-directed but is not perfect. I agree that certain elements of its narrative (particularly the pacing, as well as a few contrived interpersonal moments) felt tacked-on or inauthentic, and were perhaps invented to couch the story in a modern-day milieu that could appeal to audiences before "surprising" them with the political content of the film in its second half, as the mystery of the main character's history is unraveled.
It's entirely possible the film would have worked better without the "mystery" angle, especially since it seems to come from left field midway through the film and then becomes all-pervasive, in direct contrast to the semi-documentary "romantic comedy travelogue" feel of the first half. What struck me most awkwardly was the disjointed nature of the "suspense" surrounding the eventual divulging of repressed information. The purposely vague ways in which Kaju's family avoids discussion of her past or, when confronted with conflicting information, seek to simply change the subject or stare pensively at the floor felt falsely melodramatic.
But all of my criticisms become quibbles when faced with the undeniable power of the film's few flashback scenes, which depict certain controversial events in an unflinching light. In those moments, Bose finds her true voice, and the voice of the victims in these unjustified atrocities.
Incidentally, one area the films succeeds in artistically is the casting of Konkona Sen Sharma as Kaju. Her accent and body language were flawlessly American on screen, as they should have been (Kaju is an Indian girl raised in America), but Bose explained after the film that Konkona has lived her whole life in India and was only given two weeks to immerse herself in Los Angeles's culture to prepare for the role of Kaju. Those who see the film will certainly agree that she succeeded.
First of all it's a delight to watch such unselfconscious acting and to hear English (and Hindi, Bengali) spoken so naturally. First time director Shobnali Bose elicits wonderful performances from most of her cast - many of whom are 'non-actors'. The script, too, is deliciously funny in parts, which off-sets well with the powerful and serious message underlying the film. The locations chosen capture the actual places represented so that the whole has the verisimilitude of a documentary film, even while the spectator is drawn into the lives of the characters whose stories are being told. All in all a very satisfying film, and a great debut.
क्या आपको पता है
- कनेक्शनReferences कभी खुशी कभी ग़म... (2001)
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषाएं
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- В поисках прошлого
- फ़िल्माने की जगहें
- उत्पादन कंपनी
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
बॉक्स ऑफ़िस
- US और कनाडा में सकल
- $51,251
- US और कनाडा में पहले सप्ताह में कुल कमाई
- $8,480
- 27 मई 2007
- दुनिया भर में सकल
- $51,251
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 42 मि(102 min)
- रंग
- ध्वनि मिश्रण
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.85 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें