Kartik Ayer
Farhan Akhtar dill chatta high Released in 2001. i was 3 years old. I went to see it with my family. they took me Watching this movie is one of my earliest memories as a human being. I still remember my reaction to the movie.
I remember being in a theater in 2001 and being completely confused within the first ten minutes. I saw three people talking about something. I didn’t know they were Akshaye Khanna, Saif Ali Khan and Aamir Khan. To me they were just three guys. But suddenly I saw a car tire braking in front of my house. The old lady opened the door to her house and the two men who had just been talking on the phone in separate houses went inside asking who they were. I saw the face of a bald man. But what was he doing here with his paintbrush? What’s going on?
Kartik, age 3, opening dill chatta high It was completely incomprehensible. A few years later, three or four years ago, when I watched it all at once, I realized it was a flashback.
The opening shot of the film is an ambulance speeding down the road. That’s where Sid takes Tara to the hospital because she’s seriously ill. He waits in the waiting room and calls Sameer who calls Aakash. Then Samir drives to the hospital. That’s when the aforementioned tire breaking his shot came in. What I didn’t realize at the time was that perhaps this was Samir looking back at his past. Cut from the current timeline where Tara dies in the hospital and Samir is driving towards her, Saif cuts to an alternate timeline occurring entirely in her Khan’s head. Thus, the ‘memory’ is replayed at the same time as the ‘real’ event occurs. There is objective reality and subjective reality. Move on.
The scene inside Sid’s house ended with a sweet slow motion shot of the three friends jumping on top of each other before following Samir inside the hospital. He meets with Sid and exchanges pleasantries. Life updates are shared. Sid then asks Akash about the girl he fell in love with. he asks. So with a quick cut to a shot of the girl inside the disco, we can assume this is Samir telling him the girl’s name. But I see Sameer saying nothing. We are transported directly into space and time where girls exist, and so are all men. Is this the same timeline as the previous one where Samir was thinking about the gang having fun in Sid’s apartment? What exists in ?his memory?
this is important dill chatta high Because when you think of movies from this perspective, you begin to think that movies can be memories most of the time. It begs the question: whose memory?
For the next 90 minutes of the movie, we live in subjective reality. We are not in the in-hospital time slot that we were initially introduced to. We’re in another location where the gang goes to Goa and Sid meets Tara (usually the most fun part of the movie). Sid then slaps Arkash and enters a break. Samir says that he will return to the hospital soon after his break. Again, we can assume he was talking the whole time. He tells Sid what he did after the night Sid slapped Akash. Cut to other timeframes. We have been in Australia for a long time. By then, my girlfriend’s 3-year-old brain might have given up and fallen asleep.
I remember waking up around the time of the opera when Aakash had a moving moment. White people on stage singing something in a language I didn’t understand. And suddenly a strange image with different colors appears. Here we mention the sequence in which Aakash looks at her Shalini in her mind’s eye and realizes that he loves her.
My question when I saw this movie recently was this: Who the heck is telling the story at this point in the movie? I was in India following And then we see this strange series of shots of what Aakash sees in his head.
In summary, we stayed in Australia and lived that subjective reality almost to the end. Sid asks Sameer a question. And Sameer answers. Again, we can assume that Sid is reacting to his Sameer statement. Then, only for the second time in the film, in the film’s “real” timeframe, is he able to see Aakash in objective reality. He is at his home, drives, sees him mysteriously with Sid and Sameer at the college entrance during the day, and meets Sid and Sameer at the hospital. At that point, the alternate subjective timeline ends. I am particular about the one and only timeline after that. And then the movie comes to an end.
did you make it now dill chatta high Does it look like a very complicated movie?
I will now answer the question I asked. First, there are 3 major characters and 5 odd minor characters. Forget about secondary things. Looking at the way the movie is set up, it’s pretty clear that 95% of the time, nothing happens outside the hospital in real time. Simply because two people cannot be in different places at the same time. obvious. So what is going on? The first time we stepped away from the current timeline was when Sameer was reminiscing in his car. have understood. Thus, the first alternate timeline established was that of Sameer’s memory. Sid and Samir then talk about the past. After Sid asks his Sameer a question, Disco moves into his scene, which continues for the rest of his 90 minutes before intermission. Interestingly, Sid asks Samir a question before jumping into the disco. So did Sameer answer the question? why doesn’t he? The conversation must have progressed. But we don’t see them talking, do we? So how can we be sure? you can’t. But we can assume that it was. Because we (and Sid?) got the answer to our question in the form of that disco scene.
As I asked before, is this a different time frame? Or is this again an instinctive guess that Sameer is sharing his memories? The latter. Otherwise the movie wouldn’t have worked. Due to the question-and-answer nature of the conversation, in which it is Samir to fill in the details, and the fact that we are already inside Samir’s head, we see this reality as being inside Samir’s head. Automatically accept. Therefore, based on these observations, the conclusion is that dill chatta high It’s just one person’s memory. And that man is Samir, played by Saif Ali Khan.Samir is the narrator dill chatta high.
What makes the movie so confusing is that no matter what happens in the second half, especially throughout Aakash’s arc in Australia and Sid’s arc with Tara, Sameer isn’t with them. The first half is common. What we see and hear is basically Samir’s memory of what happened. Worse, whatever Sameer said. For example: his Aakash poignant moment within the opera. How did Samir know? Aakash must have told him. So Sameer tells Sid what Aakash told him about two years ago about what he saw in Australian opera in his mind’s eye. Rashomon my ass!
I mention all this for one simple reason. dill chatta high What is Samir’s memory and its narration to Sid? What if the rosy comforting feeling you get when watching a movie is because the least distressed man is telling the story? How much would he know what happened if he hadn’t been a part of most of his friends’ lives?
The big sad truth is that no matter what happens dill chatta high It probably didn’t turn out that way. How would the story be different if Aakash was the narrator? Or Sid? Where and how does the subjective timeline begin?
Suppose the ambulance and call scene at the beginning remains the same. As it stands, after the phone call, jump to Sameer to see his memory pop up on the screen. Let’s say we were with Aakash and watched his memories unfold. So the next scene that dives into subjective reality will be Aakash getting slapped by Sid? what does he think what do you see? dill chatta high It’s not the same without Sameer. Taking him out of the equation flips the whole movie upside down.
What’s so peculiar to me is that I’ve never thought anything of it before.i have seen dill chatta high 22 years already. I grew up with it. I have dreamed and longed for a life and friends like Sid, Sameer and Aakash.However, since this movie is basically the memory of one man, I have never thought that this movie could be fake, fraudulent. Souvenir.
Now that I think about it, it was dill chatta high Invent new forms of youth aspirations? No boring parts, definitely cool stuff. In the final shot of the film, the three friends and their partners are around a table having drinks and food. We all live that life today.or was dill chatta high Was it simply luck to be able to take advantage of what was happening on Farhan Akhtar’s personal and mass levels? Perhaps both. I think it takes luck for a movie to become iconic.
Is the romanticism associated with cinema threatened by this? But it certainly makes me think. It reminds me of the famous Don Draper quote. mad men: “Nostalgia – delicate yet powerful”.
