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!!!!
26 Reviews
Brilliant photography and songs but a flawed plot
kapilash5 June 2005
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.
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.
Phool for love...
ThurstonHunger17 April 2004
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
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
One of the two important films by Guru Dutt
javedakhtar19426 February 2006
Kaagaz ke Phool (KKP), along with Gurudutt's other film Pyaasa, stands for the film maker Gurudutt. It is more of a painting or a poetry in motion. These are films where story is the main actor each and every detail of which is done up to a fine precision. This film is now regarded by many as a classic and I wonder if it was appreciated as much when the film was released. Surely this film is one dimension less compared to the infinite dimensional Pyaasa; and perhaps this is a reason for its commercial failure. On the other hand, Pyaasa has impressed so many that it was also remade in Telugu (a south Indian language) by name "Mallepoovu" starring Shobhanbabu and Lakshmi. In comparison, the failure of KKP made Gurudutt further direct such artistry later. Of course, a film maker should make films close to his heart than worrying its saleability; but at the same time an appreciation would make him doubly sure that there are people supporting him in his works. Thus I feel that appreciating a work of art much later is no less criminal compared to killing the art itself. Sometimes people escape by saying "it was ahead of its times". My sincere request to anyone reading this review, is to appreciate things at the right time.
KKP is a film where director plays the main role; i mean the main character in the film is a director. It is easy now to guess that the story revolves around film industry. The story is set in the period where anything in the film industry was considered a taboo; particularly in 'high society' people. The director in those days is the final authority with respect to the choice of location, story and the crew (acting and technical) and the producer is limited to money matters. Our director in the film, Suresh Sinha is one such. He made lot of successful films that earned lots of money for the production company.
Suresh is now making a film Devdas and is looking for an actor for the role Paro. On one fateful rainy evening, he meets Shanti, an young girl shivering with cold. Suresh gives his warm coat to her and he leaves in hurry to Bombay. Shanti comes to Bombay to return his coat and is also searching for a job. He offers the Paro role to her and both get on well and they understand each other. They admire each other. Suresh is married and his wife stays away from him since he is a filmy person; also he is not allowed to meet his daughter, Pammi, who is in a boarding school at Dehradun. Once Suresh is hurt badly in an accident, on listening to this the reaction of his wife is "if he needs me,then send him to Delhi (from Bombay, where the Hindi film industry is based)" and this best describes their relation. Suresh sees her daughter in the doll belonging to her. Pammi's friends in school tells her that his father is involved with an actress (I wonder how small girls are even allowed to read such film magazines in those times! perhaps in boarding schools it is possible? keep my fingers crossed!). Then this small girl Pammi runs from the school and reaches Bombay. She meets Shanti and takes a promise from her that Shanti would leave all her work in Bombay and go away from Suresh's life. Shanti leaves Bombay, leaving behind her memories in a sweater that she made for Suresh.
With a suffering heart like the river longing for the fish that has been separated from it, Suresh has become a dried ocean. people refuse to give him any work and some of them say "you are not fit for direction!" Suresh loses all his wealth in next two years and his house auctioned and he leaves his house with two cherished things that he would not lose till he lost his life: the doll and the sweater.
The fate again brings Shanti to work, having lost the court case with the production company. She agrees to work provided Suresh is back as director. She meets Suresh and he tells her "I lost everything and I sold everything but not self-respect" and thus denying her proposal. But she bound by her contract continues. What happens later, should be seen oneself. I promise you that it is worth watching it.
The film is nicely supported by its music, the song "Dekhi zamaane ki
yaari" captures the theme of the film and "Waqt ne kiya kya haseen
sitam" captures the relation of Shanti and Suresh. Its photography is well-talked about and VK Murthy is responsible for it. If you are interested in knowing more about Gurudutt's works and this film in particular, then I have two suggestions. Get yourself a copy of any of Gurudutts films released by Yashraj Films. This DVD comes with a documentary taken by Nasreen Munni Kabir that was shot for a TV channel earlier. Otherwise, one could read a book written by Nasreen Munni Kabir (apparently,it is based on the work she did for the documentary) entitled "Gurudtutt: A life in cinema" published by Oxford press.
Finally an interpretation of the title Kaagaz ke phool (exact translation means "Paper flowers". Bees are looking for honey and hunt for flowers. The song "Dekhi zamaane ki yaari" says "Oh thirsty bees, fly away from here these are all Paper flowers (naturally they don't have what the bees are searching for!)". I interpret it as saying/requesting/asking the people not to look for wealth/success (in the popular meaning) and do not expect anything from this society in return of what you are doing. Do your job, simply!
KKP is a film where director plays the main role; i mean the main character in the film is a director. It is easy now to guess that the story revolves around film industry. The story is set in the period where anything in the film industry was considered a taboo; particularly in 'high society' people. The director in those days is the final authority with respect to the choice of location, story and the crew (acting and technical) and the producer is limited to money matters. Our director in the film, Suresh Sinha is one such. He made lot of successful films that earned lots of money for the production company.
Suresh is now making a film Devdas and is looking for an actor for the role Paro. On one fateful rainy evening, he meets Shanti, an young girl shivering with cold. Suresh gives his warm coat to her and he leaves in hurry to Bombay. Shanti comes to Bombay to return his coat and is also searching for a job. He offers the Paro role to her and both get on well and they understand each other. They admire each other. Suresh is married and his wife stays away from him since he is a filmy person; also he is not allowed to meet his daughter, Pammi, who is in a boarding school at Dehradun. Once Suresh is hurt badly in an accident, on listening to this the reaction of his wife is "if he needs me,then send him to Delhi (from Bombay, where the Hindi film industry is based)" and this best describes their relation. Suresh sees her daughter in the doll belonging to her. Pammi's friends in school tells her that his father is involved with an actress (I wonder how small girls are even allowed to read such film magazines in those times! perhaps in boarding schools it is possible? keep my fingers crossed!). Then this small girl Pammi runs from the school and reaches Bombay. She meets Shanti and takes a promise from her that Shanti would leave all her work in Bombay and go away from Suresh's life. Shanti leaves Bombay, leaving behind her memories in a sweater that she made for Suresh.
With a suffering heart like the river longing for the fish that has been separated from it, Suresh has become a dried ocean. people refuse to give him any work and some of them say "you are not fit for direction!" Suresh loses all his wealth in next two years and his house auctioned and he leaves his house with two cherished things that he would not lose till he lost his life: the doll and the sweater.
The fate again brings Shanti to work, having lost the court case with the production company. She agrees to work provided Suresh is back as director. She meets Suresh and he tells her "I lost everything and I sold everything but not self-respect" and thus denying her proposal. But she bound by her contract continues. What happens later, should be seen oneself. I promise you that it is worth watching it.
The film is nicely supported by its music, the song "Dekhi zamaane ki
yaari" captures the theme of the film and "Waqt ne kiya kya haseen
sitam" captures the relation of Shanti and Suresh. Its photography is well-talked about and VK Murthy is responsible for it. If you are interested in knowing more about Gurudutt's works and this film in particular, then I have two suggestions. Get yourself a copy of any of Gurudutts films released by Yashraj Films. This DVD comes with a documentary taken by Nasreen Munni Kabir that was shot for a TV channel earlier. Otherwise, one could read a book written by Nasreen Munni Kabir (apparently,it is based on the work she did for the documentary) entitled "Gurudtutt: A life in cinema" published by Oxford press.
Finally an interpretation of the title Kaagaz ke phool (exact translation means "Paper flowers". Bees are looking for honey and hunt for flowers. The song "Dekhi zamaane ki yaari" says "Oh thirsty bees, fly away from here these are all Paper flowers (naturally they don't have what the bees are searching for!)". I interpret it as saying/requesting/asking the people not to look for wealth/success (in the popular meaning) and do not expect anything from this society in return of what you are doing. Do your job, simply!
Wonderfully introspective and tragic- a masterpiece
kunalsen_768425 May 2006
Why is Guru Dutt hailed as one of the all time best directors in the world? See this film and you'll get an answer. Guru Dutt never got his due from the audience or the critics when he was alive. After he died, he was suddenly hailed as this best thing to have happened to Hindi film industry. And today, he is universally regarded as one of the best Hindi film directors. This film too is resplendent with that same irony, hypocrisy and tragedy. There are films and then there is this. 'Kaagaz Ke Phool' is Guru Dutt's extremely personal and almost poetic take on the trials and tribulations of a life of fame and glamor; and especially the aftermath of it. Guru Dutt plays a successful director Ajay Sinha who is looking for a new face to cast as the leading lady in his next film. In the midst of all this, he has a strained marriage wherein his wife leaves him to live with her parents along with their daughter. On a certain rainy day, he meets a girl (Waheeda Rehman). They meet again in the studio.
Immediately,Guru Dutt realizes that Waheeda's is THE face he had been looking for and promptly casts her in his next film. Eventually he falls in love ith her but she doesn't reciprocate. Meanwhile, he isn't allowed to eet his beloved daughter too through a court order. As a last straw, his next film is a colossal failure and he suddenly finds that the ones who pretended to be his well-wishers and friends now seem to hate and ignore him. Thus Waheeda, his discovery, goes on to become a successful star while he begins his downward spiral into the deep darkness of ignominy. Subsequently and ironically, after many years, he dies on the same director's chair It is not a perfect film by any means. The screenplay is sometimes indulgent and probably isn't as good as say Guru Dutt's 'Pyaasa' (his other classic). Plus, the whole track involving Johnny Walker is somewhat irrelevant to the film and hence could have been shortened. However, it was incidentally, India's first film to be shot in Cinemascope and hence makes good use of technique but essentially KPK remains a very humane film which moves us without being preachy or overtly sentimental. SD Burman's haunting music and Kaifi Azmi's poignant lyrics add to the mood of this film
Ironically, the film was a commercial disaster upon its release (eerily similar to the protagonist Sinha's last film). So, the claims of it being an Autobiographical film also started being made. But, I think it is a case of life imitating art than vice- versa. Having said that it is a fact that Guru Dutt died shortly after making this film and thus KKP remains his last masterpiece and I think its commercial failure can be attributed to one of those rare occasions when the AUDIENCE got it wrong as the film may have been ahead of its time and has since been widely considered to be one of the best and most important films made in India The obvious comparisons with Fellini's 8 ½ are to be expected but to my mind they are unwarranted. Both were different films made for very different audiences. This is a great film in its own right- one of the best Hindi films ever- a bona-fide masterpiece by the prodigiously talented albeit flawed genius called Guru Dutt
Immediately,Guru Dutt realizes that Waheeda's is THE face he had been looking for and promptly casts her in his next film. Eventually he falls in love ith her but she doesn't reciprocate. Meanwhile, he isn't allowed to eet his beloved daughter too through a court order. As a last straw, his next film is a colossal failure and he suddenly finds that the ones who pretended to be his well-wishers and friends now seem to hate and ignore him. Thus Waheeda, his discovery, goes on to become a successful star while he begins his downward spiral into the deep darkness of ignominy. Subsequently and ironically, after many years, he dies on the same director's chair It is not a perfect film by any means. The screenplay is sometimes indulgent and probably isn't as good as say Guru Dutt's 'Pyaasa' (his other classic). Plus, the whole track involving Johnny Walker is somewhat irrelevant to the film and hence could have been shortened. However, it was incidentally, India's first film to be shot in Cinemascope and hence makes good use of technique but essentially KPK remains a very humane film which moves us without being preachy or overtly sentimental. SD Burman's haunting music and Kaifi Azmi's poignant lyrics add to the mood of this film
Ironically, the film was a commercial disaster upon its release (eerily similar to the protagonist Sinha's last film). So, the claims of it being an Autobiographical film also started being made. But, I think it is a case of life imitating art than vice- versa. Having said that it is a fact that Guru Dutt died shortly after making this film and thus KKP remains his last masterpiece and I think its commercial failure can be attributed to one of those rare occasions when the AUDIENCE got it wrong as the film may have been ahead of its time and has since been widely considered to be one of the best and most important films made in India The obvious comparisons with Fellini's 8 ½ are to be expected but to my mind they are unwarranted. Both were different films made for very different audiences. This is a great film in its own right- one of the best Hindi films ever- a bona-fide masterpiece by the prodigiously talented albeit flawed genius called Guru Dutt
Work of a great team!
indigshai-112 May 2007
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!
Not feared of dany!
projectcreation1 December 2022
Warning: Spoilers
I am just writing after watching chups,and I got inspiration to watch this film. The film is like a flower. I really liked it. I now find its worth for the fight or revolution of danie. He was right. This film does not underrated. It must be top rated, a great classic and a big master piece. We surely get immersed into the film on the first half. But what dany done is not correct. He himself rated his film poor. That was in compensate. Why he is torturing nila. Nila doesn't done anything wrong. She already told police that its against the critics. But she was not ready for writing it. Poor dany.
Pales in comparison to Dutt's previous film, Pyaasa
zetes1 August 2004
A huge disappointment! Dutt's Pyaasa is one of my all-time favorite films; few have moved me so greatly. I didn't think he could top that one, but I also didn't think that his next film would fall so low. I mean, it's a fairly good film, but it really failed to resonate with me. Where Pyaasa was an archetypical plot that aspired to myth, Kaagaz Ke Phool is more along the lines of melodrama. Completely lost is the previous film's visual and aural poetry. The story of Paper Flowers concerns a film director, played by Dutt, who discovers a poor woman, Waheeda Rehman, to star in his new film. The two of them develop a special relationship that approaches love, but is not quite there. Then the director's daughter, Baby Naaz, enters the picture. The director's wife separated (not divorced) from him because her upper class family did not approve of a man involved in the film industry. But the daughter cannot stand to see her father fall for another woman, so she convinces Rehman to quit after the film is done. Disaster ensues for everyone. For this film to work better, I think the characters really needed to be better developed. They are mostly pretty generic. The daughter especially needed a more fully written role, because she basically ruins two lives and we only hastily see how she is affected by this. The movie pulls together a bit by its end, and its last couple of sequences are good, but nothing comes close to the cinematic magic of Pyaasa. Even the songs are far below Bollywood standards; they're too few and far between, and they tend to sound alike. Sometimes I wasn't sure if one song was a reprise of another. I liked a few of them, especially those sung by the actress character (sung, that is, by Geeta Dutt, as the actors tend not to sing in Bollywood). 7/10.
Most mature movie ever produced by India
simplycrazyaboutmovies29 November 2009
Everyone especially my mummy used to tell me as how great is this picture but I realised it today after watching it that none of the adjectives used in the appreciation of this film is an exaggeration. It is a milestone movie as far as Indian Hindi Cinema is concerned.
Every aspect (acting, direction, music, cinematography, script ) of this movie is top notch. It's very few of those Indian pictures in which melodrama has no place.
Pyasaa, another master piece by Guru Dutt, was my all time favourite movie but after watching Kagaz Kee Phool, I have no option than to downgrade Pyasaa to number 2.
A must watch.........highly recommended...
Every aspect (acting, direction, music, cinematography, script ) of this movie is top notch. It's very few of those Indian pictures in which melodrama has no place.
Pyasaa, another master piece by Guru Dutt, was my all time favourite movie but after watching Kagaz Kee Phool, I have no option than to downgrade Pyasaa to number 2.
A must watch.........highly recommended...
much more mature than pyaasa
ravikumar-mandadi25 August 2012
saw pyaasa first which sorta disappointed me but then i watched this one just for the song 'waqt ne kiya'. for a modern day movie goer there is no sanctity attached to this stalwart of yester years, it follows that no offense whatsoever is intended in my casual language. about the movie, it is difficult to realise that so many scenes seem 'old' because these have been excessively used/copied/parodied/improvised/destroyed in the past 50 years in various languages. but there are so many scenes where the intensity of the passion of Guru Dutt as a film maker is unmatched. Waheeda Rehman was blissful in pyaasa and is even more so in this one..one word 'love her' !! if you were to watch this movie as a critic, you will appreciate it well but if you were to watch it as a casual man, it is heart wrenching. yet, i prefer the latter.
Disappointed with Ending . .
LanternSwapnil20 July 2020
Like Poetry On Canvas
Chrysanthepop7 March 2008
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.
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.
Citizen Kane comes to India -- A masterpiece by Guru Dutt
Barev201330 November 2014
Kaghaz ke phool ~ Dutt's Paper FLowers Is Pure Gold ... Guru Dutt, the troubled genius who committed suicide in 1964 at the age of 39 is a legend in India but little known outside of the subcontinent. In several other films films Dutt as actor/director played a semi-loser from the wrong side of the tracks who finally wins out against all odds to get the hand of a beautiful woman, but In "KAGAZ KE PHOOL" ("Paper Flowers") , now generally regarded as Dutt's masterpiece, he plays the role of a gigantic loser, a famous film director --something like a Bombay Cecil B. DeMille -- who junks his career and loses the great love of his life due to his own self-destructive tendencies, falling all the way to the bottom in a morbid tale with many echoes of Orson Welles' "Citizen Kane".
The parallels with Kane" are more in the feeling, the overarching tragedy of the film told in flashback, and in certain visuals (eg. Shafts of heavenly light falling upon figures in a darkened room) than the actual story line, but also in Dutt's restrained flamboyance and versatility as an actor. Just as nobody but Welles could have been Kane, nobody but Dutt could have been "Suresh Sinha" the star director of Paper Flowers. In the film within the film Sinha is directing the famous Indian tragedy "Devdas", itself the story of a precipitous alcoholic fall from grace by a self-destructive lover.
Everything is set when the actress for the key role of the heroine "Paro" drops out. In a driving rainstorm at a bus stop Suresh offers his coat to a drenched young lady (Waheeda Rehman) who turns up a few days later on the set to return the coat and inadvertently walks across the set while shooting is in progress. Viewing the rushes of this accidental exposure Suresh has an epiphany and realizes that he has found his Paro. He has also found a fantastic beauty who will soon outshine him with her own light -- exactly what happened in real life when the actress Waheeda Rehman, discovered by Dutt, went on to become a superstar as Dutt's own career plummeted in the wake of their shattered love affair. Much of what was actually going on in Dutt's private life is woven into the fabric of the film as it practically prophecies his own doom five years later. Dutt was evidently a driven and bedeviled man when Paper Flowers was being made and his personal pain pervades the picture, which was a great box office flop when it came out despite its compelling star power. (Note: Kane was also not a hit when it came out, although it is now regularly cited as "The greatest motion picture ever made"). The commercial failure of the film so discouraged Dutt that he stopped directing although he continued to appear as an actor in other films, notably "Sahib, Bibi, aur Gulam" (Master, Wife, and Slave), which was a big hit and won all kinds of awards in1963 including a Best Actor nomination for Dutt himself in the role of the servant in love with his master's wife.
As for "Paper Flowers" which has finally found its place in the pantheon of great Indian films, Philip Lutgendorf, of the University of Iowa sums it all up in his extensive review as follows: "Flaws and all, KAAGAZ KE PHOOL deserves to rank-with Fellini's '8 and a Half'. among the all-time great films about filmmaking and life".
The parallels with Kane" are more in the feeling, the overarching tragedy of the film told in flashback, and in certain visuals (eg. Shafts of heavenly light falling upon figures in a darkened room) than the actual story line, but also in Dutt's restrained flamboyance and versatility as an actor. Just as nobody but Welles could have been Kane, nobody but Dutt could have been "Suresh Sinha" the star director of Paper Flowers. In the film within the film Sinha is directing the famous Indian tragedy "Devdas", itself the story of a precipitous alcoholic fall from grace by a self-destructive lover.
Everything is set when the actress for the key role of the heroine "Paro" drops out. In a driving rainstorm at a bus stop Suresh offers his coat to a drenched young lady (Waheeda Rehman) who turns up a few days later on the set to return the coat and inadvertently walks across the set while shooting is in progress. Viewing the rushes of this accidental exposure Suresh has an epiphany and realizes that he has found his Paro. He has also found a fantastic beauty who will soon outshine him with her own light -- exactly what happened in real life when the actress Waheeda Rehman, discovered by Dutt, went on to become a superstar as Dutt's own career plummeted in the wake of their shattered love affair. Much of what was actually going on in Dutt's private life is woven into the fabric of the film as it practically prophecies his own doom five years later. Dutt was evidently a driven and bedeviled man when Paper Flowers was being made and his personal pain pervades the picture, which was a great box office flop when it came out despite its compelling star power. (Note: Kane was also not a hit when it came out, although it is now regularly cited as "The greatest motion picture ever made"). The commercial failure of the film so discouraged Dutt that he stopped directing although he continued to appear as an actor in other films, notably "Sahib, Bibi, aur Gulam" (Master, Wife, and Slave), which was a big hit and won all kinds of awards in1963 including a Best Actor nomination for Dutt himself in the role of the servant in love with his master's wife.
As for "Paper Flowers" which has finally found its place in the pantheon of great Indian films, Philip Lutgendorf, of the University of Iowa sums it all up in his extensive review as follows: "Flaws and all, KAAGAZ KE PHOOL deserves to rank-with Fellini's '8 and a Half'. among the all-time great films about filmmaking and life".
art ahead of its time
nadjacs4 July 2012
Reading some of the reviews makes me think that this film needs more context for an American audience and may not be fully appreciated if it is the first classic Bollywood movie one watches, but if you are interested in classic cinema (not just classic Bollywood) it really must be seen.
Yes, Sinha's wife and her family are caricatures, yes Rocky's character is ridiculous, yes the beginning and end are melodramatic (no more so than many other classics, though), but everything else is artistry. Sinha and Shanti both have excellent, minimalist dialogue and express themselves well through body language and facial expression without becoming caricatures themselves. Maybe I'm reading too much into it but I think perhaps the contrast between the flat portrayal of the anti-film characters and the realistic portrayal of the main characters is more than just an attempt to please the audience and is rather an attempt to focus on the true drama. As if to say, yes, the protagonists are suffering because of these problems, but it is their suffering that we want you to look at, not the situation that caused it.
The technical quality of the prints available (both picture and audio) are somewhat poor at times but for me this did not detract from my experience.
I can see why it was a failure in the box office at the time. It wasn't the type of story the mass market generally wants, and especially not at the time it was made, but it is also clear why it is now considered a masterwork.
Yes, Sinha's wife and her family are caricatures, yes Rocky's character is ridiculous, yes the beginning and end are melodramatic (no more so than many other classics, though), but everything else is artistry. Sinha and Shanti both have excellent, minimalist dialogue and express themselves well through body language and facial expression without becoming caricatures themselves. Maybe I'm reading too much into it but I think perhaps the contrast between the flat portrayal of the anti-film characters and the realistic portrayal of the main characters is more than just an attempt to please the audience and is rather an attempt to focus on the true drama. As if to say, yes, the protagonists are suffering because of these problems, but it is their suffering that we want you to look at, not the situation that caused it.
The technical quality of the prints available (both picture and audio) are somewhat poor at times but for me this did not detract from my experience.
I can see why it was a failure in the box office at the time. It wasn't the type of story the mass market generally wants, and especially not at the time it was made, but it is also clear why it is now considered a masterwork.
Watch a copy of "Devdas" first....
planktonrules2 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
While I am VERY far from an expert on Indian films, I was lucky enough to have seen "Devdas" recently. It really helped me with "Kaagaz Ke Phool" because within "Kaagaz Ke Phool", the characters are actually making a version of "Devdas"--and, as the film progresses, the plot of "Kaagaz Ke Phool" begins to mirror that of "Devdas".
So, before talking about "Kaagaz Ke Phool", let me quickly summarize the plot of this other film. Devdas returns home to his parents home. One of the most happy people to see him is his neighbor Parvati--a girl that Devdas grew up with but who suddenly catches his eye. They wish to get married but his family insists that he cannot marry her--his family wants him to marry a richer lady. Devdas is a jerk and marries this other woman and immediately regrets it. Then, for most of the rest of the film he pines for Parvati and drinks himself to death. And, with his dying breath, he returns to see Parvati one last time...then he dies. It's a VERY depressing romantic film--and as I said above, the film eventually begins to mirror "Devdas".
"Kaagaz Ke Phool" begins with Suresh Singh already a very famous and successful Bollywood director. Despite his successes, though, he's sad and alone because his wife has left him and she took their daughter with her--and they now live with his snobbish parents and they often refuse to allow Surresh to see his daughter. He is sad but manages to suppress his feelings and keeps directing films.
One day, Suresh is caught in a rain storm and meets a nice young lady. He gives the woman (Shanti) his coat and thinks nothing more of it. However, when she returns the coat, he gets another look at her and realizes she looks perfect to play Parvati in his upcoming production of "Devdas". She ends up being wonderful in the film and she falls head over heels for Suresh. But, since he's still married and she might get in the way of a reunion with the daughter, Shanti drops out of films and disappears. However, at this point, Suresh is smitten with Shanti--and has tried (in vain) to get his daughter. So, he resorts to drink and soon becomes a has-been and severe alcoholic (sounds familiar?). And, by the end of the film, he manages to gather up the strength to come to see Shanti one last time...before the end (again, a total parallel to "Devdas").
All in all, this film is one of the better older Indian films I have seen. It's deeper and more introspective than most and gives an interesting behind the scenes look at their movie industry. It is also the nicest film I've seen from 1950s India when it comes to the film work--some of the scenes are really artistic and well composed. It also is sweet and exciting to watch--but makes much less sense if you haven't seen "Devdas". It's easy to find a copy of this other film, however, as they seem to have made a bazillion remakes of the movie! Well worth your time. Unfortunately, however, the print has LOUSY sound--so bear with it as you watch.
So, before talking about "Kaagaz Ke Phool", let me quickly summarize the plot of this other film. Devdas returns home to his parents home. One of the most happy people to see him is his neighbor Parvati--a girl that Devdas grew up with but who suddenly catches his eye. They wish to get married but his family insists that he cannot marry her--his family wants him to marry a richer lady. Devdas is a jerk and marries this other woman and immediately regrets it. Then, for most of the rest of the film he pines for Parvati and drinks himself to death. And, with his dying breath, he returns to see Parvati one last time...then he dies. It's a VERY depressing romantic film--and as I said above, the film eventually begins to mirror "Devdas".
"Kaagaz Ke Phool" begins with Suresh Singh already a very famous and successful Bollywood director. Despite his successes, though, he's sad and alone because his wife has left him and she took their daughter with her--and they now live with his snobbish parents and they often refuse to allow Surresh to see his daughter. He is sad but manages to suppress his feelings and keeps directing films.
One day, Suresh is caught in a rain storm and meets a nice young lady. He gives the woman (Shanti) his coat and thinks nothing more of it. However, when she returns the coat, he gets another look at her and realizes she looks perfect to play Parvati in his upcoming production of "Devdas". She ends up being wonderful in the film and she falls head over heels for Suresh. But, since he's still married and she might get in the way of a reunion with the daughter, Shanti drops out of films and disappears. However, at this point, Suresh is smitten with Shanti--and has tried (in vain) to get his daughter. So, he resorts to drink and soon becomes a has-been and severe alcoholic (sounds familiar?). And, by the end of the film, he manages to gather up the strength to come to see Shanti one last time...before the end (again, a total parallel to "Devdas").
All in all, this film is one of the better older Indian films I have seen. It's deeper and more introspective than most and gives an interesting behind the scenes look at their movie industry. It is also the nicest film I've seen from 1950s India when it comes to the film work--some of the scenes are really artistic and well composed. It also is sweet and exciting to watch--but makes much less sense if you haven't seen "Devdas". It's easy to find a copy of this other film, however, as they seem to have made a bazillion remakes of the movie! Well worth your time. Unfortunately, however, the print has LOUSY sound--so bear with it as you watch.
Ambitious, breathtaking, and a tragic masterpiece!
MisterAugust25 September 2022
Much has been said about Dutt's Kaagaz Ke Phool that it's impossible to add something new to its tower of glory. Yet, it can be said that Dutt intended this film to be an exercise on self-reflection and morality about a filmmaker or an artist as much as it hinted towards the viewer's own life lenses.
The film opens with some of the most gorgeous shots I've seen in hindi film industry and it's the first ten minutes that compelled me to watch it in one go. Not only it made me explore the dingy lanes of early hindi film industry, but also exposed the vulnerabilities and social sensibilities that might have prevailed in that era. It's so well shot that I quickly forgot I was watching a film, that has been created by a bunch of artists, playing around a camera, and rather felt like a slow walk in the troublesome past of India and her socio-political nuances.
We don't make such films anymore. We don't dare to and even if someone dares, the audience will see to it that it meets the same fate as Kaagaz ke phool. This was probably Dutt's bravest attempt to expose us to our own selves and what art truly means to us. His constant bickering about perfection and the producers insistence on keeping the film entertaining for masses tells a lot about what we wish to consume. It reflects the vast pit between the commerce and the art of the film. Was art or cinema in particular really meant to entertain us? To put us in some kind of illusion where we could forget the miseries and tragedies of our own lives and spend a few moments in oblivion? Away from reality? Or was it destined to make us more aware about our surroundings and subconsciously develop our understanding of the world?
It's hard to answer and probably impossible to choose for others. That's why this film is not a film of masses but individuals. Masses ensured it bombs at the box office and individuals ensured it reaches to a spectacular glory.
10/10.
The film opens with some of the most gorgeous shots I've seen in hindi film industry and it's the first ten minutes that compelled me to watch it in one go. Not only it made me explore the dingy lanes of early hindi film industry, but also exposed the vulnerabilities and social sensibilities that might have prevailed in that era. It's so well shot that I quickly forgot I was watching a film, that has been created by a bunch of artists, playing around a camera, and rather felt like a slow walk in the troublesome past of India and her socio-political nuances.
We don't make such films anymore. We don't dare to and even if someone dares, the audience will see to it that it meets the same fate as Kaagaz ke phool. This was probably Dutt's bravest attempt to expose us to our own selves and what art truly means to us. His constant bickering about perfection and the producers insistence on keeping the film entertaining for masses tells a lot about what we wish to consume. It reflects the vast pit between the commerce and the art of the film. Was art or cinema in particular really meant to entertain us? To put us in some kind of illusion where we could forget the miseries and tragedies of our own lives and spend a few moments in oblivion? Away from reality? Or was it destined to make us more aware about our surroundings and subconsciously develop our understanding of the world?
It's hard to answer and probably impossible to choose for others. That's why this film is not a film of masses but individuals. Masses ensured it bombs at the box office and individuals ensured it reaches to a spectacular glory.
10/10.
One Of The Amazing Movie Ever Made....
ravisinger8625 March 2014
Kaagaz Ke Phool Was Directed As Well As Produced By Guru Dutt...Written By Abrar Alvi...This Was First Indian Cinemascope Film.. Story Revolves Around Suresh Sinha A Famous Director....He Is Looking For A Lead Actress For His Current Movie...Meanwhile His Married Life Is Not Going Well...Wife Has Left With The Daughter...He Is Not Allowed To Access His Daughter....One Day He Meets A Lady Shanti...After Few Days He Realize... She Is The One Whom He Was Looking For ...So He Casts Her In His Movie ....Shanti & Sinha Come Close ..They Built A Liking For Each Other....Which Leads To Various Situations Which Changes The Life Of The Director Sinha....
Guru Dutt Was Amazing Director ...But A Fine Actor Too...He Does Well As Director Sinha...Waheeda Rehmaan As Shanti Gives Better Performance.....Johny Walker Is Good ...Baby Naaz Is Fine But The Character Is Not Well Written...Script Of The Movie Is Good ...But It Gives More Importance To Sinha & Shanti Chemistry...
Music Of The Movie Was Composed By S.D.Burman ....It Has The Most Beautiful Composition "Waqt Ne Kiya Kya Haseen Sitam" By Geeta Dutt...One Of The Best Song By Her...We Have "Dekhi Zamane Ki Yaari" By Rafi Is Again A Classic ...Altogether Music Is Good...
Everything Was Fine...But Movie Was Such A Disaster At The Box Office...That Guru Dutt Decided Never To Direct A Movie ...Hence It Was The Last Movie Directed By Guru Dutt...People Never Understood The Concept...So It Was On The Cards....Now The Movie Is Considered A Classic ...One Of The Best Work By Guru Dutt & His Team....
Overall A Excellent Movie ....Must Watch For Averyone...:)
Guru Dutt Was Amazing Director ...But A Fine Actor Too...He Does Well As Director Sinha...Waheeda Rehmaan As Shanti Gives Better Performance.....Johny Walker Is Good ...Baby Naaz Is Fine But The Character Is Not Well Written...Script Of The Movie Is Good ...But It Gives More Importance To Sinha & Shanti Chemistry...
Music Of The Movie Was Composed By S.D.Burman ....It Has The Most Beautiful Composition "Waqt Ne Kiya Kya Haseen Sitam" By Geeta Dutt...One Of The Best Song By Her...We Have "Dekhi Zamane Ki Yaari" By Rafi Is Again A Classic ...Altogether Music Is Good...
Everything Was Fine...But Movie Was Such A Disaster At The Box Office...That Guru Dutt Decided Never To Direct A Movie ...Hence It Was The Last Movie Directed By Guru Dutt...People Never Understood The Concept...So It Was On The Cards....Now The Movie Is Considered A Classic ...One Of The Best Work By Guru Dutt & His Team....
Overall A Excellent Movie ....Must Watch For Averyone...:)
Even after 60+ years ..ALways
ronitganguly-2352927 August 2021
I always thought the movies in the early era were mushy and just plain hero vs villain and just too much songs of great length. IT's the first time I have felt myself in the movie and the lyrics and music of songs are in tune with the script, To think that someone in that era can think of something so ahead of time that still resonated with a millennial born decades after.
Geeta Dutt's voice singing "Jayenge kaha sujhta nai, chal pade magar raasta nahi, kya tallash hai kuch pata nai, bun rahe hain dil khwab dum ba dum", so aptly describes current millennial mind and mine 60+ years back is mind boggling to me. Its rare that I have cried at any movies end. If there is a dictonary of great movies this movie is the definition of that. NO wonder it in 100 greatest movie of all time.
Geeta Dutt's voice singing "Jayenge kaha sujhta nai, chal pade magar raasta nahi, kya tallash hai kuch pata nai, bun rahe hain dil khwab dum ba dum", so aptly describes current millennial mind and mine 60+ years back is mind boggling to me. Its rare that I have cried at any movies end. If there is a dictonary of great movies this movie is the definition of that. NO wonder it in 100 greatest movie of all time.
Skip it
kim_singh13 July 2020
I was seeing the film after 20, perhaps 30 years. Somehow I recollect it being a masterpiece.
Today I found it terribly stilted, like a B grade production, replete with cliches of every kind.
I just could not go on after 10 minutes into the film.
It is sad, that I could not conjure up the determination to watch all of it.
devastating
nirav-322 August 2002
"Kaagaz ke Phool" (Paper Flowers) is an agonizing, self-reflexive look at a filmmaker who, because of martial, societal and economic pressures dissolves into alchoholism. It's a common theme among Indian movies, but in this film, there's autobiography to back it up. From what I understand, the course of this film paralells Guru Dutt's life who died by his own hand.
Geeta Gutt and Mohammad Rafi sing on the soundtrack penned by S.D. Burman, which is wonderful as can be expected considering the people involved (and, if anyone has a lead on where I can find it on lp or cd, be in touch!) The movie is beautifully shot, and the play of light on Guru Dutt's face (he acts in the lead role, as well as directing) as he enters an alchoholic stupor will bring a grown man to tears (I've seen it happen.)
There's more misery and abjection here this side of Fassbinder or Jerry Lewis, so this is perfect for a cold, rainy, lonely evening.
Geeta Gutt and Mohammad Rafi sing on the soundtrack penned by S.D. Burman, which is wonderful as can be expected considering the people involved (and, if anyone has a lead on where I can find it on lp or cd, be in touch!) The movie is beautifully shot, and the play of light on Guru Dutt's face (he acts in the lead role, as well as directing) as he enters an alchoholic stupor will bring a grown man to tears (I've seen it happen.)
There's more misery and abjection here this side of Fassbinder or Jerry Lewis, so this is perfect for a cold, rainy, lonely evening.
What a masterpiece! One of the top 10 movies of all time
rominp18 December 2020
All of Gurudutt's angst and provess in one movie! Too bad he retired from Direction after this... Masterfully depicted the class difference and near contemporary times. Fantastic cinematography for each frame. He was known as Orsen wells of India and you can see the inspiration from Mr Wells which in no way shape or form an insult to Gurudutt.
Text Book picture in black white film
dr_hgj-4823111 September 2019
A film director Gurudatt though being deprived of simple consideration attitudes from family and friends goes on in creativity. A most understanding co star heroine Waheeda develops extremely high CHEMISTRY between them. In conservative society their repo irks all. Waheeda exists the team and the director goes in depression agony looses self control and becomes rolling stone collapsing downwards. Ego "if you are a good actress I am not a bad director either" he refuses the celebrity favor wants only his reputation and talents to score. Looses the position in society, the down going journey is filmed with extra ordinary photography, direction, screen play, superb tender acting and as per Indian Cinema touchy, true lyrics, playback, music , songs. This film is a text book in India based film institute on film making. On re run it has won many awards including Inter National reputed. People see lot of his(Guru dat) auto biography. He in real life got this kind of depression and took pills to end his life. A must for all cinema goer. Some interactions, clips in the films are legend for world films creativity. Songs in particular have ecohed emotions to more than perfect level.
Masterpiece by Guru Dutt..
aussiemalwayi6 August 2018
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
