User Reviews

I doubt that many in the Indian Community will like this movie because they tend to like "Cookie Cutter" movies in general. Boring. This movie was not "entertaining" and I doubt it was meant to be. For some reason moviegoers expect this. People should do some research and don't have expectations before entering the theatre. The movie progresses through scenes in play format. Each character represents a role in life and the importance of interaction between them. See for yourself, if you like something a little more sophisticated than surreal singing in the "snow-covered hills of Switzerland" by sari-clad lip-sinkers.

it has no story,no plot,it isn't a film either,it is a miniature of greatest artpieces togather. deeply symbolic,and highly aesthetic. no one can criticise it,if they watch it,not just through their eyes,but soul instead. it requires heavy knowledge and deep aesthetic ability to understand and interpret the symbolic scenes.u can understand it only if u lend your soul and watch it through eyes of the painter.choreography is outstanding and art direction is amazing.every aspect is perfect, it never appears to be shot or filmed,rather inscribed naturally out of memories. it took me several months to understand it partially, i bet no one even hussain himself could understand it completely, because it has multidimensions,some of which remain hidden every time,and thats the beauty and mystery of every great artpiece.since its not part of popcorn culture it is expected to be criticised by dumb,loud masses and classes even, because it is made only for artlovers.if u r not one don't watch it and die in darkness of ignorance away from beauty of life.it is the greatest art creation ever made on planet.

MF Hussain, India's best-known painter (and former collaborator with Satyajit Ray, and illustrator on the movie Henna), brings his painterly eye to the creation of the stark and simple set on which events unfold, and creates memorable imagery in the film making. Like his Meenaxi (2003) Gaja Gamini produces a series of indelible images. What this film does not have is a plot in the conventional sense. This is emphatically not a film designed to appeal to the common man, but a painterly meditation on men's fascination with Woman. Those prepared to exercise their minds, and who share Hussain's infatuation with Madhuri Dixit , will find much of interest here.

Gaja Gamini is structured as a series of segments, featuring the Woman of beauty and fascination who has enchanted men from the dawn of time until today. Philosophical discussions between figures representing the two approaches to understanding Woman – through reason and through imagination - frame each segment of the film. The segments themselves feature among others the woman who inspired the artist Leornado Da Vinci's Mona Lisa, and the beauty who inspired the poet Kalidas, in his Shakuntala. Woman in her various avatars is played throughout by Madhuri Dixit.

The film works on one level as a tribute to woman through the ages and on another level as Husain's tribute to his personal muse, Madhuri Dixit. Madhuri herself is an inspired choice to represent Woman through history since she personifies all the most desirable female traits and characteristics, with her beautiful face, shapely form, awesome smile, the grace and fluidity of her dancing, together with the exquisite femininity of her movement and gesture, already showcased in films like Beta (1992) and Koyla (1997). In Gaja Gamini we are invited to contemplate Madhuri's beauty and dancing, backless in a choli, highly stylized hand gestures, hips swaying from side to side as she walks, and her sensuality as she dances around (and into) a large musical instrument , in one of the songs - all as delightful as the philosophical discussion is elevating.

MF Hussain may not convince you with his philosophy, but will certainly seduce you with his imagery in this bold attempt to both honor, and solve the mystery that is, Woman.

A lot of times, a movie review might say that the movie is not that great but if the actor is your favorite, then you can see it. This movie had three of my favorite actors, Madhuri, Shabana and Naseer, and I would not recommend it to anyone. Suffice it to say that I was extremely disappointed. This movie had no plot and it did not make any sense. It was essentially a collage of scenes with nothing but the characters in common. I would classify it as an expression of M. F. Hussain's obsession with Madhuri Dixit. It was just a "modern art" painting with film as medium rather than canvas. There were a lot of songs, hardly any memorable, all were barely tolerable. If you consider yourself an intellectual and like good dialogue, then perhaps this movie is for you. But it has absolutely no entertainment value.

After Uday Shankars' Kalpana of 1948,a long gap,& at the begining of Y2K Gaja Gamini arrived like a magic ,those Indians who think Art house movie means the random display of poverty,Gaja Gamini's not a movie for them,neither Gaja Gamini 's movie for potboiler type movie lovers. Why this pure Filmy Art form made by MF Husain didn't wave the box office circuit is still a debate.&if the debate continues,many flaws connected with Indian cine audience will come out. Kalpana made by a genius dancer & Gaja Gamini tells the story of a lady predominantly in dance form. Gaja Gamini certainly hugely relied on the calibre of Madhuri Dixit.& this movie showcased the massive potential of Madhuri Dixit Nene( in predictable but not in cheaper form) for the 1st time.

I had high hopes for this film until I actually saw it. Beneath the beautiful photography and technical brilliance was a poorly acted film. Apart from "do sadion" and "meri payal bole.." the rest of the soundrack is just a plain strugle. For a movie that heavily relied on its soundtrack. they could have done a far better job. AS for Madhuri the star of the show could have been anyone. Madhuri's glamourous prescence was not felt. Naseer's role seemed to make a fool out out of leonardo da vinci. Frankly speeking this film was just a piece of compicated nonscence without any meaning or sense. It felt like the movie was exclusively disigned for the directors viewing pleasure.IE only the director knew what this lifeless nonsense was about. Hardly intelectual viewing....

What worked: The movie, as described in the synopsis, is an ode to the woman throughout the centuries. Honestly , I was very curious to watch the movie, did not bring any preconceived notions or expectations about the movie. It took me a while to grasp the theme of the movie. I would say it is one of the daring movie from India for its way of execution. That does not not mean the main agenda of the movie was not conveyed. At times, the movie is inspiring and bold, and at others it is vocal and real. One of the plus point of the movie is casting Madhuri for the lead role, I was impressed by her acting, though conventional. Also casting great actors like Mohan, Ashish, Shabana and Nasurdin added the needed flavor. I was more impressed by the acting of Mohan and he stood against others though all were good. Also, I was heavily impressed by the dialogues because I felt that I was perceiving something extraordinary; something that has been running for generations and will run for generations to come. The movie had one of its strength in the use of color and music. The set design, the use of colors and their physical and symbolic representation was too heavy for me to fully understand. The background score with the use of classical Indian music was a very plus point. The movie is obviously a bit sophisticated in the use of symbolism and metaphors, as a result failed as a disaster in the box office. However, it made me curious to watch the movie multiple times because I believe the movie has a lot to offer in terms of the philosophies and meaning behind each scenes. What did not work: I would say the movie somehow lost its credibility, in my personal opinion, by the use of too many songs. I would have been glad if the songs were less represented, chopped or not presented in the movie. They somehow diluted the mood and climate of the movie. What I kept thinking multiple times while watching the movie is the movie should have been a theatre play. I am very optimistic that the lead actors like Shabhana, Nashurdin,Ashish and Mohan , all with their profound experience working in the theatre, would agree with me on this regard, and would have done better in as a play. As an avid lover of both theatre and cinema, i would have definitely produced it as a play. Firstly, the set design, costume design, stage acts and even the acting by the veterans all looked like a theatre play being captured in a video. Of course, some of the scenes required a grandiose set design, they were not impossible, and also considering most of the set design could have been presented in a theatre, I would have wanted to see it as a play. I think many will agree, and I think this is one of the reasons the movie was a box office disaster in the movie theatre. We have seen many experimental movies and this is not one of them that the mass audience would be able to grasp visually, audible and philosophically. Having said all these, I am still glad that this movie was made. Final verdict: recommended, if you are really in the mood for something very unique