Aparajito

The Unvanquished

The Unvanquished

After having watched and fallen in love with Pather Panchali, I immediately rented its sequel, Aparajito. I did not get around to watching it until around a month later. Now I have, and I am a little disappointed. It is a very good film, to be sure. It's often moving and it is extraordinarily directed and acted. But I think my problem with it is that it had less fluidity. It seemed more like a collection of events than a complete story with an overriding theme. The beginning of the film works the best. Apu is still a child, and he enjoys his life. There are some great scenes of life in a Bengali city and it is always interesting to watch. After tragedy strikes, Apu and his family move to work for a rich woman. This part contains one really great scene, where Apu enters a school and is given books to read. It is an absolute joy to watch the boy learn and try to teach his mother what he has learned. Then there is a flash-forward to Apu as a young man. Now here is where I began to lose interest. First of all, the actor who plays the older Apu is downright ugly. Sorry to complain about such a petty thing, but this guy is just hard to look at, where the young Apu is the cutest child you're ever likely to see. The third part of the picture takes place in Calcutta, where Apu has gone to college. Unfortunately, although they ring true, the events in this part of the film are somewhat formulaic. Apu's mother experiences empty nest syndrome, and tries to make Apu feel guilty about it. Apu tries his hardest not to feel guilty about it. You know, the kind of stuff that does actually happen between a mother and child when college comes between them. Another tragedy strikes at the end of Aparajito, but by this point, having watched four death scenes in the first two films of the Apu Trilogy, it did not affect me very much. It should have, since the character who dies at the end of Aparajito is a well established and very well written character. I cared for this person, but was not affected at all when they passed on. Oh well. It still had some great moments. And I will definitely rent The World of Apu sometime soon. Maybe the main problem in Aparajito is that it feels like the center of a trilogy. It doesn't introduce anything new and it doesn't solve anything. I'll see soon how it all turns out. 8/10

After watching Pather Panchali, I watched the sequel Aparajito the next day. My only criticism with the first film was the slow pace, but it looks like Satyajit Ray improved on this aspect for the sequel and thus eliminated any pacing issues I may have had with the original. This time the story moved along at a fairly quick pace, as we see months and sometimes years go by in a matter of minutes. Although I often hear about Pather Panchali being regarded as the best in the Apu Trilogy, I personally liked Aparajito even better than the first. The story was gripping throughout the entire film, Karuna Bannerjee gave a truly Oscar-worthy performance as Apu's mother (even though it was only her second film) and the ending was just as powerful as the original (although Pather Panchali had a more powerful theme music). In fact, I might even go as far as saying Aparajito could possibly be my favourite film of all time. 10/10

An ultimately depressing film by Satyajit Ray, Aparjito is the 2md in the Apu film, which covers Apu's adolescence and his emergence as a young adult. With a soundtrack by Ravi Shankar, the movie itself flows alright, with many significant points of Apu's life highlighted. Things like Apu's relationship with his Mother and Father, his education, his employee and other factors, are all richly dwelled upon, while of course, Ray fills the screen with the country that he knows so well. While the movie itself is quite explanatory, it does tend to be quite dull at times. The movie takes it's own sweet time setting itself up. There's no REAL plot, it's essentially a character study. So, if you're into Indian movies like that (you know who you are) then this movie is for you.

I am always a bit dismayed by the attention that Pather Panchali and Charulata command in discussions on Ray because while they are fine films, they do not account for Ray's cinema as a whole. In fact, I would resist from picking one or even three films that 'speak for Ray'- but I would be lying if I said I didn't have a favourite. Aparajito is a wonderful work of art, an extremely moving melodrama and a remarkably accurate portrayal of adolescence. Of course, it would be shameful to give all the credit to Ray. Bibhuti Bhusan Bandhyopadhaya's novels (Aparajito is adapted from the last part of Pather Panchali and the first half of Aparajito) are meticulously descriptive and Ray's success with the film owes much to the simplicity and honesty of his source. But there is something in Aparajito that belongs exclusively to the cinema - something that has to do with the the mixture of distance and intimacy in the movies, of identification and unfamiliarity. You want to feel like Aparajito is a film about you, but you secretly admit that it isn't, it cannot be - because you experience it outside yourself, in Ravi Shankar's beautiful music, in the photography that oscillates between banality and the deeply metaphoric, in the wonderful performances (especially by Karuna Bannerjee), and finally in Ray's masterful vision in putting it all together. I couldn't say much else - you must experience it for yourself!

Even as the middle segment of a trilogy, this was my introduction to Satyajit Ray, turning me into an instant fan, and is one of the greatest films I've seen. The neo-realist leanness the film is completely absorbing & is perfectly matched to the characters. Not having been to India, I'll admit to being unsure of how true to reality the look of the film is, but Ray's gift for detail is in a league of its' own - I consider the opening scenes (establishing shots from Benares intercut with shots of young Apu running through narrow lanes) to be among cinema's most memorable moments, and a great example of allowing images and rhythm to tell a story. I don't want to overstate it, but this is a really beautiful, haunting film - from it's warmest to it's most tragic elements, I was thinking about it for quite a while afterwards. APARAJITO is obviously the work of a genuinely enthusiastic filmmaker, and also a great thinker as well - every cinephile should see it. Would love to see all of Ray's work available in the US, and on DVD.

Each of the three films of the Apu Trilogy exhibit the extraordinary quality of a documentary film on the conditions of life in India at the time they are set. I think this is what I like best in them through numerous viewings. The films are shot in locations that appear untouched by any art department - remote countryside in Bengal, the great cities - Benares and Calcutta. The characters eke out an adequate life in their sufficient poverty - a life sustained by their faith and simple devotion to one another. At the same time there are moments that are pure cinema. There is an exquisite swish pan cut from Kurana (the mother) leaning against a tree, full of emptiness as Apu has just left for Calcutta, to the swift dynamo of the train crossing a bridge with the trestles a blur. At the moment Kanu (the father) gives up his soul a flock of birds alights over the Ganges. Later as Kurana is gradually sinking into the depths of loneliness - a sickness unto death - she has a vision of fireflies swirling around in the falling darkness. These films traverse the drama of life and death touching gently on all of the salient points along the path. They put us face to face with the challenge of living in a world, which constantly gives us disappointment. At the same time there is a celebration of that ineffable quality which gives life meaning.

This isn't a bad film by any means. It's well made, often beautifully shot (though not exceptionally so compared to many others before, during the 1950s, or after). For me it just doesn't have that interesting of a directorial or filmic vision: nothing that is exciting as the depth probed by the exploration of inner states and torment of characters in Bergman's films, the poetic cinematography and atmosphere of Tarkovsky, the excitement and technique of Kurosawa, or even the warmth offered by Ozu, another director who made rather simple films focusing on family life. It's similar to the first film in the trilogy in many ways, and my review of that would probably be about identical. Pacing is arguably better, the first and second halves are more varied, where the second half has a more traditional plot leading the film, instead of characters just wandering around and talking, merely showing how the characters live from day to day. My ignorance of Indian culture may play a part in my indifference, but I've also seen films from many cultures that were unknown to me and was enthralled, so I don't think it's necessarily that. The characters don't have much to act on, they never say anything that is interesting or insightful about the world around them, even (granted the family did not have a high level of literacy, and Apu knew very little before the headmaster took an interest in him). The central characters are the mother and Apu, and neither say or do much. It's all so simple and linear- there's little that adequately stirs the thoughts or emotions in a way that compares to other great films or literature. While the cinematography is good, it never reaches the height of the fantastic scene with the train in the first movie. The locations, especially early on, are beautiful. And the acting is naturalistic at many points, especially for the 1950s. However, It appears to me that this, and Ray's career, were outliers in Indian cinema, mostly known for Bollywood films. Ray was an auteur who intended to make more realistic and intimate films in a country that primarily churned out very commercial films, with little room for independents. To me, while this is a well made trilogy, the only reason I can find that it's regarded as highly as it is in the history of film is because of its unique place in history more so than the contents of the film.

This is a sequel to a Pather Panchali. I did mot like the first film at all, I hoped this sequel will be a lot better and it was. The first half was very boring. Not much happened, but in the second half the story became much more interesting. Sadly, the film ended at what I thought was a middle of a story which felt as if it was just cut. I'm not sure what this film is supposed to mean. It truly felt like to be continued. I hope the third film will bring a true ending to the story.