February 06, 2006
King Kong is Shrinking in Sion
This piece appeared in today's Mumbai Mirror.
Sometimes, to appreciate greatness, it helps to have something inferior nearby. Last Saturday, we finished watching John Guillermin’s 1976 King Kong version at home, and then the next day, we landed up watching Peter Jackson’s recent version at CineMax, Sion.
We hadn’t been to CinePlanet/CineMax for quite some time and were pleasantly surprised at the changes. They now check tickets at the entry to the foyer, the ground and first floor floyer arrangements for food and drink have changed and the place seems cleaner. More importantly, the staff has had an amazing make-over. Even after we spilt an entire popcorn bucket, they all just smiled, cleaned up the mess and to top it all, gave us another one for free. But some things remain the same. In Planet3, on the 3rd floor, they no longer have ice-cream and cold coffee, and you still have to trudge down to the first floor for these.
Peter Jackson is on his way to becoming an all-time great. With the pressure of having to do as well as the Lord of the Rings, if not better, it couldn’t have been easy. Unlike Ramesh Sippy, who after Sholay (which more and more seems to be a fluke) actually made turkey after turkey and movies like Brashtachar, Peter Jackson almost betters himself. Sure, he could have gone easy on the dinosaurs and the large insects and the overdone natives who look like leftovers from Lord of the Rings, but the rest of the film is rich, intense and captures the “It wasn’t the airplanes. It was Beauty that killed the Beast” ethos perfectly. And unlike George Lucas, who has serious problems getting his Stars Wars actors to emote, Peter Jackson is not only amazing with his CGI stuff, but also a good director, definitely more Spielbergen than Lucasan or Ramirezan.
And it helps to have someone like Naomi Watts. She plays Ann Darrow so well, you wonder how the script-writers and the director could have justified Jessica Lange’s floozy character in the 1976 version. Except for Jeff Bridges, who would have made a better Jack Driscoll than Adrien Brody, everyone else is better cast and better sketched as well. While John Guillermin’s version is cliched, in parts ridiculous and in parts a parody, Peter Jackson’s version takes itself seriously while remaining unabashedly emotional.
But I wish I could have seen this is a larger theatre, like Metro, Regal or Sterling. More and more, with multiplexes, our theatre experience is shrinking. Even though the screen sizes are the same as before, the smaller size of the halls almost makes you think you are at home, in front of your 42”. And though the recent King Kong film is better than the earlier one, Rupam, where CineMax now stands was more fun. I can still remember the collective sigh from all the girls (and their mothers) in the audience, when Kumar Gaurav first turns his face towards the camera, while in the aircraft, in Love Story. Or the frenzy of getting tickets for the opening day of Karz (Subhash Ghai, what has happened to you?) and standing in line from 8.00AM onwards on a Monday, just to see Rishi Kapoor, on Friday, prancing around singing Om Shanti Om, and then realizing what a great villain Simi Garewal could be.
Of couse, for the big-screen appearance, Aurora is still around, but with the large hall, come the large mosquitoes as well…but, that’s fodder for another story
Posted by bhavinj at 01:48 AM | Comments (0)
January 29, 2006
Rang de Basanti
Aamir Khan loves being in “coming of age” films, playing young men in their early 20s. And somehow, like Jeetendra, despite his growing age, he manages to get away with these roles. First, it was Dil Chahta Hai (DCH), probably the best film of 2001. Now we have Rang De Basanti, which seems to be DCH II, with a twist.
The film works at multiple levels. As a simple entertainer, the film is excellent. Though a little too long (as was the case with Rakeysh Mehra’s first directorial venture, Aks), it has a good story, the characters are extremely well cast and the cinematography is terrific. The sepia tones of the pre-Independence scenes help set the right mood and among many such scenes, the Jalianwala Baug montage actually sent a chill down my spine.
But the film carries a message as well and Rakeysh Mehra takes no chances with us not getting it. The whole analogy between the protagonists and the martyrs (Bhagat Singh, Chandrashekhar Azad, etc). is fed to us as if we are KG children, who might miss it unless it is delivered ad nauseum. And to make sure that there are other under-currents, the Hindu-Muslim and the “white girl with Indian romeo/stud” issues are exploited to the hilt as well. Too much allegory is sometimes like having rabdi with gulab jamun and rosogollas.
The movie moves back and forth through time, capturing scenes from the past, where the protagonists (Aamir Khan as DJ, Siddharth Narayan as Karan, Kunal Kapoor as Aslam, Sharman Joshi as Sukhi, Atul Kulkarni as Laxman Pande and Soha Ali Pataudi as Sonia) agree to act in a documentary that Sue (Alice Patten) has decided to make in India, based on the diary left by her grandfather Mr. McKinley, who was a jail-warden at the time when Ram Prasad Bismil (played by Laxman Pande) and Ashfaqullah Khan (played by Aslam) were executed. He was a “bleeding heart” warden and sympathetic to the Indian cause and Sue, despite being turned down by her bosses, wants to bring this story to reel. She comes to India without money, befriends Sonia, her Indian contact, and the two start casting and shooting. Disappointed with the quality of people who audition, Sue suddenly finds her perfect cast in Sonia’s friends, who are currently at loose ends, studying in University, and gathering around bonfires at night to drink beer and to dance to boom-boxes.
As the documentary progresses, so do the lives of DJ, Karan, Aslam and Sukhi. They start internalizing their roles and though thoroughly disillusioned with life, specifically life in India, slowly start believing that they too can do something positive and maybe bring about some change. These scenes, especially the one in the lounge bar, with Ajay Rathod, Sonia’s fiance (played by R Madhavan), work really well, stopping just short of becoming sermonizing sessions. Prasoon Joshi’s dialogues are much above average and really kick-in during these scenes, adding to the already tight ensemble acting. DJ's line about how we, as Indians have one foot in the past, and one in the future and then piss on the present, instantly and spontaneously brought the house down.
Things reach a flashpoint, when an MIG-21 plane flown by Ajay Rathod crashes and the defense minister blames it on Ajay’s irresponsible flying, trying to draw attention away from a growing scandal regarding spurious and low-quality Russian spare parts for these planes. In the end, the protagonists take the law into their own hands and the finale as with most of our films, goes way over the top.
Eventually, despite its posturing about India’s optimistic future, the film still remains extremely cynical and insults our intelligence. It reinforces the usual Hindi film credo, that no change can be brought about in the Indian system, except by taking the law into your own hands. It negates the very real small and large changes that are slowly but surely, making a real difference to our lives, which countless individuals, such as IT professionals, doctors, engineers, police officers, journalists, etc, are bringing about, while working within the system.
Aamir Khan’s presence lends crackle to a film, which otherwise like Hazaaron Khwaishen Aisi, may have languished as art-house cinema. Atul Kulkarni is dependable as usual. K K Raina, Om Puri, Kiron Kher and Anupam Kher play their small cameos well, though their talents seem a tad wasted. Alice Patten has obviously worked at her Hindi delivery and is above average, though not great, but the surprise packet of this film is Soha Ali Pataudi, who shows that she has what it takes to be an actress to be reckoned with in the future.
In the end though, you wonder what the controversy with the Indian Air Force and Maneka Gandhi was all about. It helped get this otherwise low-key film, good publicity, especially since the issue about the MIG-21 planes points fingers at the politicians, not the Air Force and the only animals I can remember seeing, are horses, which were used for the scenes where the soldiers were running after the fugitives.
It is a film definitely worth seeing once, as long as you see it as an entertaining, well-crafted film, and then keep away at arm’s length all the messages that it tries to send across about what we can do to improve our “corrupt” system.
Posted by bhavinj at 06:41 AM | Comments (4)
July 03, 2005
No Duvidha - Batman Begins Pounds Parineeta & Paheli
After a long, long time, I actually managed to squeeze in three current films within one week.
My wife and I saw Parineeta at the Wadala IMAX late Saturday night. The next Thursday, I went with a gully friend of mine to see Batman Begins, at CineMax in Sion, and the next night, a few of us went to see Paheli at Central Plaza, in Girgaum.
I remember going to Eros to see Batman, in 1989/1990. We didn’t have tickets that day, but since we usually managed to get extras (all my wife had to do was to put on a “hopeful” face, outside the entrance), we took a chance. I specifically remember that day, because we first got extras for the stalls and then held on for balcony extras, which we eventually got as well, and then sold the stalls extras to some other hopefuls who had been milling around us.
Batman was and still is a great film. Tim Burton used Michael Keaton, Jack Nicholson and Kim Bassinger to give us an unexpectedly Blade Runnerish, dark, non-cartoonish film. Compared to the Superman movies, which were more bubble-gummy in nature, Batman was the first proper adult comic-book adaptation that I had seen…much like Daredevil and the Hulk in the last few years, it was brilliantly nihilistic. Batman II was pretty good as well, but when Joel Schumacher took over for the next two, he went the bubble-gummy way (Robin with nipples) and screwed up the series.
Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins is a tribute to Tim Burton’s vision. The last scene is a gem – making sure there will be a sequel, which however has already been made. I felt disappointed just once…when Bruce Wayne enters the Chinese house at the top of the mountain, I really thought I would see David Carradine turn around and talk to him. Liam Neeson is brilliant as well though, but Katie Holmes’ role could have been played by anyone. After a long time, with Batman Begins and Revenge of the Sith, in the last month, we have had two seriously great prequel films. Both films, especially Batman Begins, have extremely strong story lines and characterizations. Even better than Tim Burton’s Batman and the first two Star Wars prequels, respectively.
And there lies the problem with Parineeta and Paheli.
Parineeta is a film with lovely production values and music and a beautifully cast Vidya Balan. Equally miscast however is Sanjay Dutt. The biggest problem lies with the way the story is filmed. The whole movie hinges on a misunderstanding, which intuitively just doesn’t ring true. And in a serious film (we are not talking Amar Akbar Anthony here), even the slightest dishonesty in the story affects the credibility of the film. From the time the audience, along with Saif Ali Khan, understands the so-called goof-up that led to all the angst and tear-jerking, everything feels contrived. And from then on, it is a downhill slide to a silly, childish ending, completely out of sync with the film and more evocative of a Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander bicycle race ending. What were they thinking of!
Why do so many of our films do this? They start so promisingly, but then ejaculate prematurely! As Black did earlier this year and Devdas before that.
Paheli lives up to the Parineeta tradition. When a one paragraph story needs to be filmed,
obviously, the staging has to be colorful and grand. But the film is a half an hour too long with three songs too many – maybe with some really tight editing and a shorter length, like Black, it might have just worked. But, despite the really great ensemble cast (Juhi, Anupam Kher, Rajpal Yadav) and Shahrukh Khan in a double role, Amol Palekar, just can’t save the film. And it is his cross to bear.
Most importantly, the credibility issue rears its head here as well. The film’s basic premise rests on the fact that the husband is going to be away for five years in “pardes”. Pardes is eventually Jamnagar, which is really just that much far away or not, from any corner of Rajasthan. Do you really believe, that a husband who actually misses his wife and family would wait for four years, before going home, especially when he has received no news from home. Four years? Jeez! It is one thing to suspend belief in films like Main Hoon Na and Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, but in a film, which hinges on its story, discrepancies such as these, consciously or subconsciously, contribute to the film’s eventual demise.
Take Black for example, where Amitabh Bachhan is supposed to have Alzheimer’s but behaves as someone who has Parkinsonism. Or the fact that the parents who are rich and educated actually did not get special tutoring and rearing for their daughter from the first year? Honestly, do you really think this would happen in real life, in a family such as the one shown by Sanjay Leela Bhansali? Which is why, though Black is well made and has some terrific acting, it failed to get under my skin - it’s a good film, but highly over-rated as a great film!
In the end I will remember Parineeta and Paheli for entirely different things.
I overslept after Parineeta and woke up at 6.30AM for a 7.00AM flight to Nagpur. I made it to the airport from Matunga, within 12 minutes, having had just enough time to dump some clothes in a bag and pull on a pair of jeans. For some reason (and yes, we begged), Jet Airways really came through for me – we had called them on the way and they actually had the boarding pass ready for me at the standby counter, despite the check-in counters having closed at 6.30AM sharp.
As for Paheli, the couple we went out with, dropped us back in their new Toyota Innova, which I promptly thought we should get as well. If we do, Paheli’s place in my consciousness will be assured…if not…that’s not a “duvidha” to figure out anyway, is it!
Posted by bhavinj at 11:31 PM | Comments (0)
August 11, 2001
Dil Chahta Hai
This Friday we were again stuck in the stalls at Aurora in Matunga. Those were the only tickets available and that too scrounged from a friend who knew a friend who knew a friend... Wooden seats, a bad crowd of teenagers in the back row cracking inane jokes at the slightest provocation and an opening scene about cirrhosis and liver transplantation that didn't make any medical sense.
But then the film took off...and how! It is peppy, cool, hip, funny and entertaining. And though it is not in the Lagaan league, it is a bloody good film.
The promos over the last couple of weeks were promising anyway. Both Aamir and Saif sported new looks and this was the first film after a long time for Akshaye, who I think, is a good, but terribly underrated actor. I also quite like Preity, who I think is one of the better actresses of the current crop. This cast itself was enough to get me to the theatre.
The film is about three friends who are buddies from college. The first half is a montage of their lives while they are freaking out, having fun with girls, travel and pranks, having just graduated from college without definite aims in sight. The focus during the first half is more on Akshaye than the other two; he is a painter and the only one whose career is set. The second half gets more serious with all the three buddies finally trying to settle down in their lives and trying to find their true loves. The setting is urban rich all through with no regrets or explanations for this milieu. Everybody is rich, enjoying himself/herself and falling in love with each other; as would by and large happen in normal life.
The surprise packet of the film of course is Dimple, acting her age, a middle-aged divorcee who Akshaye falls in love with, an act triggering the split-up of the three buddies, just before the interval. Preity is seen mainly after the interval and is her usual bubbly self, but Sonali Kulkarni disappoints.
The buzzword here is style. Farhan Akhtar manages to do what Rakesh Mehra in Aks was aiming for. His use of colors, furniture, lighting, clothes and music sets the correct mood for each scene, making it instantly believable. The music is contemporary and very exciting. I hadn't really paid attention to it in the promos, but I promptly went and bought the soundtrack CD yesterday and the more I play it the more I like the sound.
The irritating parts? Dimple needs to get her teeth done; they are awful. Suchitra Pillai in the opening scenes is an unpleasant surprise, acting badly. Ayub Khan as Preity's fiancé is very wooden. And the use of the opera in Sydney to awaken Aamir's love just doesn't jell. There should have been a better way to work this out. And lastly, the length...it is just a little too long, as most Hindi films these days tend to be, stretching beyond three hours...a little tighter editing and shortening of the running time would have helped.
Interesting stuff? Saif! He is getting to be better and better and more and more interesting, ever since his small roles in Biwi No 1 and Hum Saath Saath Hain. I still haven't seen Love Ke Liye...but it is next on the list. Akshaye! He is so damn good. Aamir! What can you say about this guy who is probably now THE actor among his contemporaries.
The best part of the film is that it is fun; it made us laugh and feel good. Which is what films are for, aren't they! Give me this over tormented films like Gaddar and over-hyped, sentimental crap like Yaadein any day.
Posted by bhavinj at 05:01 PM | Comments (0)
August 04, 2001
Yaadein
At the outset, I must warn you that I am biased. About two months ago, I bought a large number of Mukta Arts shares assuming that if Yaadein became a hit, market sentiment would drive up the price and get me decent returns. As a result, I was desperate to see the film on the first day of its release - but try as I may I could not get tickets; not even scalper's tickets (or black tickets as we call them).
I finally managed to see the film the week after, two days ago; again I could not get tickets the regular way, but eventually managed to get extras at Cine Planet, the new swanky theatre complex at Sion. Despite the film having received bad reviews, people are still queuing up to see the film, possibly I suspect, to see how bad the film really is.
What was Subhash Ghai even thinking of! Pardes and Taal were tolerable, the former because of Shahrukh and the latter because of the music and Anil Kapoor. Both also had crisp editing and lush looks. But Hrithik is no Shahrukh; at least currently, he does not have the ability to rise above the role. Kareena is still very raw. Jackie Shroff, who surprisingly is the pivot around which the movie revolves, just can't act. The editing is clumsy, the rest of the supporting acts are average to worse, the cinematography is at places terrible, the dialogues make no sense, the story is patchy, the music is no great shakes...I could just go on.
And what is the story? Jackie Shroff is a middle-class restauranteur (with a swimming pool) living in England, a father of three daughters, who loses his wife (Rati Agnihotri, probably the only saving grace of the movie) in a shoot-out. They then move to India, because the only thing he wants to do, is to get his daughters married, which he does pretty fast, especially as far as his first two daughters (forgettable faces) are concerned. Hrithik is a foster son of his, who eventually falls in love with Kareena. Due to a crazy set of circumstances, they can't actually get together, but eventually in a silly, contrived ending, they do.
The audience reaction at Cine Planet was interesting. Everyone was just waiting for the next embarrassing moment, wondering how much worse the film would actually get. The cringing feeling was similar to the one I had while watching Toofan and Jadugar wondering whether Amitabh had lost his brains. And the use of brand placement for advertising is a joke. Coke as cokemohabbat.com and Pass-Pass (a mouth-freshener) are blatantly thrust upon the audience. I don't think I'll be having Pass-Pass for some time to come, considering that it will immediately remind me of Yaadein.
Subhash Ghai has gone or record saying that his target market is the foreign market where people pay 7-10$ for a ticket and he does not really care for the guy paying 10 rupees in a small town in Bihar. Which may make economic sense (though I doubt it)...but doesn't the movie still have to be good? Or is it that the desi crowd abroad is so film-starved that it will lap up anything thrust upon it? I wonder...on Friday, the Mukta Arts stock actually went up by 10%, because of market news that the film is a hit abroad, in the UK and US. If the desis abroad think this film is worth seeing, they are welcome to it; and if that helps me make up my current 30% loss in the stock, all the better!
Posted by bhavinj at 05:02 PM | Comments (0)
July 15, 2001
Aks
The promos started last month. Amitabh sitting on a throne, looking devious and menacing. Raveena doing a Demi-Moorish strip-tease. Amitabh cavorting with Nandita Das. A couple of weeks later, Manoj Bajpai's visage entered the promos and the prominent "fall-through-the-waterfall" scene featuring Amitabh and Bajpai was incorporated. News started filtering in, that Amitabh was playing a negative character. My expectations were heightened. Hoping to see Amitabh in something different, something interesting, made me actually want to see the film as quickly as possible. I hadn't felt like this about a movie for a long time; no, not even about Lagaan.
Aurora, a stone's throw away from home, was to screen the film starting day before yesterday. I went on Monday evening, when bookings open, only to be told that all shows were already sold out. On Friday, WFM and I decided on the spur of the moment to see the film. We got scalper's tickets for the stalls, at three times the regular price; balcony tickets were not available at any cost. I had forgotten that the stalls in Aurora still have uncomfortable wooden seats and mosquitoes, but what the hell!
I never learn. But from this time on, I am going to try and firmly stick to a resolution I had made a couple of years ago. I will never go see a Hindi film on the first day without assessing the reviews on Sunday or talking to people who have seen it. Time is precious and to waste it on a bad film is such a bloody tragedy.
Aks reprises the usual problems with Amitabh films of the last five-ten years. Amitabh is very good, he is in virtually all the scenes but the movie is awful.
To give the film its due (more like finding saving graces), the cinematography is excellent. The story concept is also very interesting. But the film is too long, drags in places and fails completely. In brief (and not to spoil things for those die-hard Amitabh fans who might still want to see the film), Amitabh (Manu Verma) is an aging cop, a la Clint Eastwood in "In the Line of Fire". He fails to prevent the assassination of a minister (Amol Palekar) by Manoj Bajpai (Raghavan), a paid assassin and psychopath. Manu goes after Raghavan and gets him well before the interval, in a brilliantly done montage in a forest and waterfall. During this time, we meet all the main characters; Raveena playing Raghavan's girl-friend, looking very sexy and appealing; Nandita Das playing Manu's young wife and K K Raina playing Raghavan's younger brother. Just before Raghavan is to face the gallows, Manu goes to him to offer him a life sentence in return for information about his contractors. Somehow, Raghavan gets hold of a police-officer's gun and there is a face-off (a la John Woo); both shoot, Raghavan dies and his soul enters Manu's, who starts behaving like Raghavan.
From then on the film goes into a free-fall. It becomes tedious, irritating and at times incomprehensible. I developed a headache and almost fell asleep a couple of times. The audience behind me was also so irritated that they actually booed the film at times, and in a scene when Manu starts crying on Nandita Das' shoulder, the audience laughed. These were the final nails in the film's coffin.
Maybe if Aks was a two-hour film, instead of the tedious 31/2 odd hours that it currently is, with at least three songs removed, and a little laid-back on the hysterics, it would have worked as a taut psychological thriller. As it stands today, Aks is yucks, Aks sucks, Aks...(you can find your own combination).
Posted by bhavinj at 05:01 PM | Comments (0)
June 08, 1999
Biwi No 1 (Or...Khalid Mohammed Ko Gussa Kyon Aata Hain)
I am a great fan of Khalid Mohammed (KM). His reviews make a difference to me and chances are that I would rarely go out of the way to see a film that he has reviewed with two stars or less. But, he does tend to go overboard at times - like the five stars he gave for Kuch Kuch Hota Hai. His likes and dislikes are obvious - he always tries hard to find something redeeming in anything starring Amitabh, Sridevi or Madhuri, and he doesn't like Govinda, though he has come around to accept him and his type of films. And, he just can't stand David Dhawan and his films.
The Times of India this Sunday front-paged his critique (link no longer active) of David Dhawan's type of films. KM gripes about the lack of heroine-oriented roles and the obvious male chauvinism, both in the films and in the system that makes these films. The immediate reason for this critique is the film Biwi No 1, which according to KM, is an affront to women-kind.
So we went to see the film - one major reason was that it was in Aurora, which is less than a stone's throw away. We bought double-priced scalper's tickets and armed with Pringles, Sprite and microwaved popcorn settled down to the film. The film starts with a photo-shoot of Sushmita by Saif. Saif exits, leaving the way for Salman to enter Sushmita's life. The rest of the story can be read here (link no longer available).
The banter between Sushmita and Salman is good, the dialogues witty. They make fun of each other's heights and answer stupid questions with smart answers. For example, when Salman runs into Sushmita in a swimming pool and asks her "What are you doing here", she says "Playing football". You don't expect this in a Hindi film, especially in a "loud", "crass" David Dhawan film. By and large, the dialogues are nice and get cringy only when they talk about the wives being Biwi No ones. In fact there is none of the heroine-mauling and denigration that is usually seen in David Dhawan films starring Govinda. No heroine here is humiliated in public during songs and forced to fall in love with the hero.
The movie is a funny look at infidelity. Maybe because of the subject, it should have been given an A instead of the UA that Khalid objects too. But by that token, most of the serials on television, such as Saans and Hasratein should be aired only after 11PM. It is probably just a sign of the times that these issues are not considered worthy of an adult certificate. The film instead of being heavy-handed, is lightly handled most of the times. The songs of course could have been done away with, but it is such a relief that the real "rona-dhona" is restricted to about two-three scenes.
The film does not condone infidelity. It makes it pretty clear that this is not an acceptable form of behaviour. The problem is that while it defines infidelity as not acceptable, it also defines the fact that if you, as a husband, are contrite and sorry afterwards, your wife will generally accept you back - she is probably just waiting for you to come back and say sorry, so that she can forgive you. Probably, this is what Khalid objects too, otherwise there doesn't seem much to object about in the film. In fact, it reveals one important truth - that it is really difficult to have an affair, especially if the other woman is unmarried and has ambitions. It can be extremely tough on the man who has to contend with demands, counter-demands, emotional blackmail at both ends, lies, half-truths - and that itself should be punishment enough. I remember a joke where after the wife finds out about the husband's affair, she invites the girlfriend home and shows her the bedroom which is strewn with his dirty underwear and socks and asks her whether she is prepared for this - obviously the girlfriend walks away.
By going overboard on the front-page of TOI, KM however has made sure that people will see Biwi No 1, if nothing else, then to just check out what the hoo-ha is all about. Nice extra publicity for the film.
Stupid points in the film
1. A take-off to Switzerland in a TWA flight (TWA doesn't exist anymore) and return by Air-India, as if its cheaper to fly two separate airlines
2. Filling the Retreat swimming pool with firangs to make it look like Switzerland.
3. Salman's huge house with a lawn in Mumbai - who has such a place in Mumbai? And if he/shedoes, would it remain free from extortion?
4. Salman's other bungalow for Sushmita. In Mumbai ? Come on... No one is that rich, and definitely not an advertising agency owner.
5. The last car chase between Tabu and Anil Kapoor
Nice touches
1. Saif with short hair and long side-burns
2. Tabu with her Punjabi cameo
3. Tabu's son who sleeps only when the television is on and wakes up when the television is switched off.
Posted by bhavinj at 09:08 AM | Comments (0)
