First, I was put off by the trailer because there were no tommy guns in Mumbai. Second, the female lead was too skinny to be from 60's. N third, u can make out that it was heavily influenced or inspired by Martin Scorsese films. I was not in the mood to see Bombay velvet but my dad called me n asked me to book the tickets as he felt it will be nice to experience 60's n retro look. But we all were cheated as there was no retro feel to it. There have been much better gangster films in Bollywood which were copied but still better n more engaging than Bombay velvet. Saathi, Aatish, Footpath, Naam, Dewaar, Once upon a time in Mumbai, Parinday. Forget Robert De Niro or AL Pacino or Ray liotta, Ranbir did not even come close to Aditya Pancholi or Sanjay dutt. The screenplay was bad. I found the movie too long and boring n very very predictable. I think Kashyap thinks we are not watching Korean films. My grandfather was from 50's and he had bulkier build with big biceps. Ranbir did not look like a fighter from 60's. He basically carried the same look from barfi. Was anurag trying to show the prohibition era of the United States. As i stated earlier, my 70 year old dad was with us n even he did not enjoy the movie compared to once upon a time.

19 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

'Bombay Velvet', Anurag Kashyap's most ambitious project riding on 90 crores, based on the 'Mumbai Fables' by Gyan Prakash. It starts just after the Indian independence and tells the story of how the seven islands become Bombay, the reclamation, corrupt politician, organized crime, Jazz cafés and love story of Johnny Balraj and Rosie.
Balraj comes to Bombay with his mother and wants to become 'Big Shot' and he can go to any length to achieve his dreams.
We all admire Anurag Kashyap for the cinematic brilliance and he has taken the affliction of taking the Indian Cinema to the next level. We all have seen 'Black Friday', 'Dev D','Gulaal', 'GOW 1&2' and 'Ugly'. He is a man with panache and his movies deal with burning issues and fantastic subjects. However, 'Bombay Velvet' fell really short on all aspects, it never embraces you as a viewer and it never connects with you.
It has a world-class art direction, awesome sets of Bombay erected in Sri Lanka, fantastic cinematography and CGI. Every nuance of 60's Bombay has been put to the detail. The background score is mostly loud but some songs compliment the scenes. It runs for 150 delirious minutes.
However, the writing is never convincing, it tries to be 'Godfather', 'Goodfellas' and 'Scarface' altogether. The culmination is pretty sour as we never understand the sudden changes. There are many subplots which do not add anything to the story and left open.
Ranbir's character is powerful but it is confused between a gangster and a lover. Anushka Sharma doesn't have much to do except lip sync and some exaggerated scenes. Karan Johar looks phony as a slick and stylish villain but he is flat throughout the movie. Why did he laugh so much on the word 'Tender', it looked awful? Satyadeep Mishra has done a good job. Kay Kay impresses as always in a small role.
We could also see Varun Grover's stand-up comedy presentation in the café.
This could have been a way better film if some more time would have been invested in writing because it has some instances of being a masterpiece.

14 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Anurag Kashyap's 'Bombay Velvet' has finally arrived. But was all the hype & hoopla worth it? The answer, in my personal opinion, is a No! Reason? Well, despite a budget of early 100crs & all the visual splendor on display, this magnum-opus fails in its scripting level, which is its biggest disadvantage!
'Bombay Velvet' Synopsis: An ordinary man goes against all odds and forges his destiny to become a 'Big Shot'.
'Bombay Velvet' is visually terrific & the Art Design is truly remarkable. There is no doubt that 'Bombay Velvet' is highly ambitious & passionately made, but where this biggie falters is its Script. And no film, no matter how big your budget or how rich in treatment, can rise above a weak Screenplay.
'Bombay Velvet' which is based on historian Gyan Prakash's book Mumbai Fables, is a soulless exercise of the yesteryear's. Kashyap & his Team of Writers deliver a story full of loopholes. For one, you don't feel for any of its characters. Be it Johnny Balraj, the protagonist, or his lady-love, Rosie. You never feel ecstatic when they rise above the odds or feel sad when the powerful bodies intend to destroy them. The love-story is ordinarily treated, while the aspect of ambition & crime combined, is lackluster to say the least. The first-hour is a blend of love & creed, while the second-hour is twisted mix of thrills & grotesque action. Sadly, nothing really works!
Kashyap's Direction oozes dreamlike ambition, but its his Shoddily Written Screenplay, that spoils the fun. Technically, the film doesn't falter on any level. Right from the richly done Cinematography, the dazzling Art & Costume Design or Amit Trivedi's mesmerizing Score. Its all done with pure skill. How one wishes, if the Script was half as strong as its technicalities.
'Bombay Velvet' has one more ace & that's Ranbir Kapoor, who's simply superb as the power hungry protagonist. Ranbir displays rage, affection & helplessness, with remarkable conviction. He's doesn't fail to engage, even when the film fails too.
Of the rest of the cast, Anushka Sharma is strictly okay as Rosie. Karan Johar hams to the hilt as the villain, who openly leeches at Men. Manish Choudhary is as usual. Kay Kay Menon is wasted in a tiny role, while Vivaan Shah does a fairly good job as Rosie's chauffeur, who secretly loves her.
On the whole, 'Bombay Velvet' is a letdown in all respects. Body Beautiful, Minus Soul!

24 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

A day before watching Bombay Velvet i saw Brazil 2nd time. First time watching it was like okay something is happening on big sets and the director is trying to show me some world of his imagination and in the end i thought it is pretentious, the first time i saw it i was not exposed to much of cinema. So i was getting bored and had nothing to do so i thought lets watch it. The second time i was blown away and was like this one of the best films ever made. The same fate it had when it was released as i have heard.
Now coming to Bombay Velvet, let me be clear its not the usual narrative which is seen in Kashyap's movies. The narrative to be honest is like Brazil but its Brazil with historical contexts of Bombay the city of dreams as it is called in India, what it was, how it came to its current shape. It doesn't have dream like or dream sequences like Brazil. I mean Brazil how the characters are detailed, how the story moves forward and how the background and atmosphere plays a big role in the film With the historical contexts the film shows a person who has dreams and aspirations and how the people in his life are introduced and how in the changing shape of the city his life also changes and problems he starts facing and what he gets involved with.
Its a dream project of director and he has invested a lot of time in the film. But when it finally got released it was not able to connect with the audience as they were not ready with the sudden change and the new form of narrative which is not for everybody as Brazil cannot be liked by everyone. It has to face a lot of thrashing on the Internet.
This film is not flawless as i feel Brazil was. There are some flaws and a bit of exaggeration at the end but it's OK as rest of the film overpowers it. The performances are great but the film really gets you into the world like Brazil does and keeps you holding if you know what you are watching and have an open mind.
Right now as of 17-05-15 this film turned out to be a disaster and people wont like me for this review but in future or someone who has discovered Anurag Kashyap or will do and look at this film and maybe feels a bit let down as you have created an image of Kashyap's style or the narration, re watch it with an open mind when you get time, you will love it. I guarantee! Also who hated it and felt it bored them to death try it again but with an open mind, you will understand that you misjudged and misunderstood the film

26 out of 42 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Although Bombay Velvet has not been doing well, it is a movie that you must watch. The story is very interesting; you keep anticipating what will happen next. The movie is made extremely well; the characters are believable, and the sets make you feel you are in the '60s. The storyline is a bit slow in the first half, but the second half picks up speed. The love story between Anushka Sharma and Ranbir Kapoor is one of my favorite elements of the story. I was a little hesistant to watch this movie based on the reviews, but I do not regret watching it at all. This movie makes up for Ranbir Kapoor's last two flop movies, Besharam and Roy. Overall, this movie is a must watch and you will regret it if you do not watch it.

28 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Anuraag is an answer of Indian Cinema to the Hollywood. He has shown how to make a commercial and sane movie which has fine finishing, research, relevance, content and elegance. Ranbir is superlative and above excellence. Anushka is brave lovable and royal. Karan has given justice to his role.Kay Kay and Mishra are brilliant. Music composition fulfills the demand of the film. Amit Trivedi again has done great job. Overall the movie inculcates the jazz era, the world in 60's, the then prevailing virtues of certain sectors who are somehow responsible for today's Mumbai. The movie is a Great example of honest labor and Excellent Team Work. It has to succeed for the betterment of Indian cinema. Keep up the good work Anuraag, Ranbir, Anushka and team. All the very best guys!!

22 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Most of the people are blaming Kashyap for not maintaining 'reality' in this film. It is shocking to see that very few people are trying to grasp what Kashyap actually tried to convey, that nostalgic feeling. He could have easily made a more 'realistic' period drama like Ashim Ahluwalia's 'Miss Lovely', but he did'nt, why? Because he wanted the film to be made according to the structure of the films made in the period with which the film is concerned. On close observation we notice the close similarity of the background synopsis between Bombay Velvet and old age Bollywood mainstream cinemas. Kashyap recreates the atmosphere and the ambiance of the lavish sets in the films of 1960's through the set designs of the Bombay Velvet club in the film. Even in the opening scene Kashyap tried to convey this message by first showing actual scenes of clubs in Mumbai (of that period) and then slowly dissolving into the actual film (The poster of the film is also made in a vintage style). Based on the historian Gyan Prakash's book 'Mumbai Fables', Bombay Velvet connects many true events of that period, the character Rosie in the film is inspired by a real Jazz singer in the 50's and 60's. It is also loosely inspired by the famous rivalry between two newspaper editors D F Karaka and Russi Karanjia who published controversial weeklies Current and Blitz at that time.
Moreover it parodies the unrealistic approach of the concept of twins in the films of that time. Kashyap maintains minute details in the film from cars to shops to matchstick boxes, all belonging to that era. The film revolves around the political turbulence of Mumbai in the 60's regarding the domination of land by gangsters and politicians. It also deals with the illegal trade and smuggling of silver, drugs and alcohol (alchohol was banned in Mumbai in the 60's, giving rise to gangsters like Jenabai Daruwali, Haji Mastan and young Dawood). The background scores are perfectly juxtaposed with the film giving a heightened awareness of that period. There are many subtle hints of reference of the type of films made in that period, even in the scene where J. Balraj escapes the police in disguise. This film is being highly misinterpreted by many people. Instead of negatively criticizing it, people must try to see it through Kashyaps' perspective. From the set to story to characters, in everything we can discover a nostalgic feeling of the 60's. Kashyap's imagination dominates the film.

9 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Bombay Velvet, with a whopping budged of INR 80 crore (800 million), marks a departure for Kashyap who over the last decade has succeeded in carving a niche for himself in Hindi cinema with low budget, highly unconventional and genre-transcending films like Dev D, Gulaal, and Gangs of Wasseypur. Based on historian Gyan Prakash's book 'Mumbai Fables,' Bombay Velvet stars Ranbir Kapoor, Anushka Sharma, Karan Johar, Kay Kay Menon, and Manish Chaudhary in major roles. The movie presents the larger-than-life tale of a small-time but ambitious gangster Johnny Balraj, who would stop at nothing in a bid to realize his dream of becoming a 'big shot' in the elite social circles of the 1960s Bombay, and his lady-love Rosieâ€'an aspiring Jazz singer with a heart of gold.
While it would be a bit far-fetched to describe Bombay Velvet as a cinematic success, it would also be unfair to deem it a failure. Yes, it's a mess of a film but a mess that's way more alluring than the trash that Bollywood churns out day in and day out. Then why complain? Well, because we expect better from Kashyap! This critic for one is devastated by the very thought of what it could have been had a filmmaker of Kashyap's caliber brought his a-game to the table. Kashyap's love for cinema and his ear for music are praiseworthy. The tone of Bombay Velvet is set from the word go: it opens up with some stock footage showing the early days of the city of Bombay (now Mumbai) which is immediately followed a jazz number featuring Raveena Tandon donning the '60s retro look. In the view of this critic, the movie touches it highest point during the early scene that shows a young Rosie, in Goa, hum a melodious song in Portuguese. The combined effect of the very song and the mystical background music (reminiscent of Krzysztof Kieslowski's films) created a sense of magic for a few fleeting moments that, alas, couldn't be recreated in the latter scenes.
Bombay Velvet features several exceptional shots but there are as many bad ones as well. Perhaps, Kashyap seems to have forgotten about the legendary American filmmaker Howard Hawks' saying that 'a good movie is three good shots and no bad ones.' In order to truly appreciate Bombay Velvet, one needs to be madly in love with movies, for it pays endless tributes to yesteryear films and stars with Film Noir and Classic Hollywood influences abound. Kashyap's fascination for all things cinema is evident in each and every frame.
Ranbir Kapoor looks daring and a bit over-the-top as Johnny Balraj. But, if it were Cagney he was trying to imitate then he certainly got it spot on. Of all the actors from the Hollywood's golden age, Cagney is the most unique mainly because of his over-the-top acting style. It's something that the great Stanley Kubrick took a note of when he made Jack Nicholson essay the role of Jack Torrance in his psychological horror masterpiece The Shining (1980). It certainly caught Kashyap's attention as well. Anushka Sharma is a natural when it comes to playing bold feministic roles and in Bombay Velvet she plays a jazz singer to a tee (she seems to have perfected the act of lip syncing). As Rosie she is a treat for the sore eyes and those responsible for her wardrobe certainly need to be commended. While Karan Johar's menacing portrayal of the business magnate Kaizad Khambatta is the movie's real highlight, Kay Kay Menon is solid as ever in the role of a no-nonsense cop.
Overall, Bombay Velvet is a sprawling period piece with an excess of style over substance. The film suffers from poor market segmentation and targeting for it may prove to be a bit too overwhelming for the masses and at the same time the aficionados may not find it too appealing to their palates, despite all its merits. The movie captures the period detail with painstaking accuracy. Kashyap's morbid obsession for the grotesque and the macabre just doesn't seem to let go of him. The movie gives us glimpses of the evolution of Bombay into the financial capital it is today and the scandalous roles bureaucrats, politicians and businessmen played in shaping up its map. Bombay Velvet is far from being a quintessential Anurag Kashyap but given its commercial scope it will certainly be able to reach a wider audience than most Kashyap films. The music, sets and costumes ooze with a hitherto unattained degree of resplendence, especially in the context of India cinema. Bombay Velvet is not an easy film to appreciate for the masses, mainly because of its excesses. It would take a die-hard cinema enthusiast to truly enjoy it. The movie is quite high on violence quotient and those with weak hearts would find certain sequences quite disturbing. Nonetheless, as a mere exercise in style, Bombay Velvet is a commendable attempt but its prospects at the box office appear to be rather bleak. Recommended only for cinema enthusiasts!
(This review was first published at A Potpourri of Vestiges)

7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Imagine the worst movie you have EVER seen. Now multiply that by 1000. Now put chilly powder in your eyes. The result will be this ridiculous excuse for a motion picture! Watching Ram Gopal Verma Ki Aag twice back to back would be a more acceptable behaviour than liking this film! Watching Karan Johar trying to act all tough was like watching a poodle with one of those ridiculous fluffy haircuts, trying to act like a German shepherd! Vidya Balan could have played a better gangster than that fruitcake! I am sorry but a gay gangster is not acceptable. And just exactly what was Ranbir Kapoor thinking before signing a film like this is beyond comprehension! Maybe he needed money for his upcoming wedding. He is a good actor, there are absolutely no doubts about that. But his acting in this. this. thing. was like a cross between his acting in rockstar and besharam. Anushka Sharma was OK, probably because she had limited dialogues. A sheer waste of talent like Kay Kay Menon. The fruitcake's wife was hot! Like really hot! After making films like the Gangs of Wasseypur Duology, Gulaal etc. this was definitely not expected from Anurag Kashyap. It makes one wonder what compelled a sort of genius like him to come up with this suicide inducing film! A very sad attempt at neo- noir. To sum up. PLEASE DON'T WATCH THIS MOVIE. DONATE YOUR MONEY. BUY A RIDICULOUS SHIRT FROM JABONG. BURN YOUR MONEY IF YOU HAVE TOO MUCH AND DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO WITH IT. BUT DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE.
I have never ever written a review (except the ones on flipkart) because I don't think I have the right to judge other people's work, but I just had to write one for this, because I feel that it is my duty towards mankind to stop y'all from wanting to give yourself a Columbian neck tie! And I just had to vent out my frustration somewhere otherwise you would have seen my picture in the papers tomorrow followed by the caption 'Deranged man kills 2 cats, tries to run over at least 12 people with cars from his hotwheels collection, before trying to swim to Australia. Friends say he was OK till Friday evening'.
Peace V

43 out of 86 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Firstly, I am a neutral movie buff and I am not giving this movie 8/10 only as it is an Anurag Kashyap film. I am a big fan of Kashyap all the way from Gulal to Dev D and appreciate that he makes movies from his heart and not for box office earnings.
Now coming to Bombay Velvet.
The movie: A gangster film with some bit of inspiration from Fight Club, Slumdog Millionaire and likes of various gangster movies such as Scarface made in in Hollywood. However, let down by force fitting all of this in one 2.5 hour story - didn't go well, but didn't go bad either. The movie has colors of old school Bombay, it gets the characters right - Ranbir is great as Johnny and Anushka's role couldn't possibly have been performed better by any one else (only if Madhuri still acted). And now the punch - Kay Kay Menon and Karan Johar both fit in perfectly as the good cop and mastermind criminal lobbyist. The movie has blood, filth, emotions and music in perfect combination.
Overall, a must watch for off-beat cult movie fans for sure. You will take some scenes with you. And you will start appreciating this when you either see it again, or start thinking about it a bit more deeper than 'just another film'.
8/10 from me for the effort overall. 6/10 in story 9/10 in casting 10/10 in direction
Watch it with open mind and preferably without reading random reviews and talking to people who don't understand cinema critically.

20 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

The film, that's set in the era of 1949, welcomes the audiences with a track by Raveena Tandon Thadani (special appearance). On the other hand, while a young Balraj (Ranbir Kapoor) is busy taking his baby steps in this man-eat-man world, he also spends his time in the red light district nursing frustrations of seeing his mother getting slapped and abused. Youth throws him in the boxing ring of free-for-all fighting to earn some ready cash. He then comes across Chiman (Satyadeep Misra), who not just becomes his partner in crime, but also his friend for life. As they march ahead in life, they, gradually land up becoming the henchmen for Kaizad Khambata (Karan Johar), editor of the tabloid 'Torrent' and also a top wheeler-dealer. Impressed with his dare devil attitude, Kaizad appoints Balraj to manage his club named 'Bombay Velvet'. In addition to this, Kaizad also entrusts him with the task of wiping out the 'Communist's opposition to this 'Capitalist' plan. But he meets with a roadblock called Jimmy Mistry (Manish Chaudhury), editor of pro-labour class tabloid 'Glitz'. It is then, that the beautiful jazz singer Rosie (Anushka Sharma) is sent as a honey trap to lure Balraj by Jimmy. But the duo consummate their passionate romance and become inseparable. The henchman wants to have his share of the pie in the new money-order and that's when the drama turns bloody and what-happens-after. Meanwhile, Kaizad tries to adopt the policy of divide and rule between Balraj and Chiman. Does Rosie become successful in her role of a honey trap, does Kaizad become successful in separating the Balraj-Chiman duo and what ultimately happens to 'Bombay Velvet'.. is what forms the rest of the story.
Pros - Film is visually stunning. The music and special effects are outstanding. One liners are outstanding and to be apllauded.
Cons - No matter how glamour or class you show in movies, it should have a script, screenplay and a climax which is important! BV's climax is just as awful as Roy. I was and always will be proud of Anurag K's films like Gangs of Wasseypur and Queen. I was proud to say that i'm his fan but this film has turned it down.
Last Words: *If you want to see for Ranbir, please go because his acting is outstanding. The way he delivers his role and dialogue - 5/5 stars! *If you are Anurag Kashyap fan and want to continue to have faith in him, go at your risk or please avoid!

24 out of 48 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I would have given it a 1, but the cinematography and music were good. That is why I gave it a 3. Well, I am a big fan of Anurag Kashyap. In fact, he is one of the few directors in Bollywood who make good movies. I loved Black Friday, Dev D, GOW and Ugly was nice but with this movie he has disappointed me. It started with a good premise but soon turned itself into a really slow film. It seems like he didn't know what to do with the rest of the film. First of all, the story is clichéd. We have seen this thing many times where a guy wants to do something big and he gets all the necessary help from a guy who is big. It takes bits and pieces from Hollywood classics like Goodfellas, scarface, Godfather 2, Mean streets etc. Most of these are directed by Martin Scorsese who is an inspiration for Anurag so it can be assumed that he did it on purpose. The good things about this movie are Cinematography, Music by Amit Trivedi and the set design. Ranbir is OK, and Anushka plays her character nicely, but the surprise here is, Karan Johar. In the end, I would like to say that don't spend your money on this film. Go and watch Mad Max: Fury Road instead which is one of the best movies I have seen this decade.Anurag should do small budget films and that is what he does best. I don't want him to make money with this film otherwise he will start making sh*t like other Bollywood directors and I don't want that to happen.

22 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

While a lot of reviews have talked about Bombay Velvet being a disappointment (it is considering Anurag Kashyap's stellar filmography), I want to discuss what it could have done to have fared better. The biggest problem - Romance, easily the weakest aspect of the film, the story of Bombay Velvet is overambitious and tries to do a lot of things and romance spoils the entire dish. There is good in Bombay Velvet, the story of a small time crook trying to rise up the ranks to become a 'bigshot' is endearing but what's irritating is that while Johnny Balraj wants to be a bigshot he is illogical, falls in love with wrong woman and doesn't realize that it's bigshot or the girl. Romance plot between the wrong woman and the young crook rising up the ranks is so clichéd and badly done it leaves a bad taste in your mouth, you can't help but think that AK could have done better because HE HAS DONE BETTER. AK has done better gangster films than this (Gangs Of Wasseypur) and even better romance films (Dev D) how can such a master of both the genres fall so flat on his face while integrating romance into the gangster genre? Crime aspect often gets clumsy too but the romance is dead weight and should have been a side story not the entire film. I liked the corporate-crime aspect of the film it was interesting, I would like to mention that Johnny Balraj's awe while watching with the classic Roaring Twenties was easily the best scene of the film, the sets are gorgeous, JB's frustration at being nothing more than a hired goon is also well done, Karan Johar's gay villain would have been better if there was no Anushka Sharma and he was more blatant towards his attraction towards Blaraj that would have made him the romantic tension and the villain which would have led to a far better film. The actors are all decent, all do well but are let down by a messy almost borderline 1980's cheesy plot which was not too bad till the interval and then it takes a big nosedive in quality. This could have been a bigshot so much failed potential because there are scenes which are well done and show the brilliance of AK but the ludicrous and predictable plot let it down, while better than most Hindi movies it's not bad but it's still a disappointment. I think AK is more suited to non commercial cinema with smaller names I think there was pressure on him to turn BV into a romantic film first and a gangster film second which ultimately led to it's demise. Second Hindi period film after Detective Byomkesh Bakshy which was a letdown as far as I am concerned. P.S.- I was very angry with how they wasted Kay Kay Menon, easily the best actor in the entire cast and one of the best actors in the country and he gets such a small role.

2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Sometimes a movie comes around that is so specific to a certain time and place that a little background info. helps the understanding (or at least, the appreciation) of the movie. 'Bombay Velvet' (NR, 2:29) isn't difficult to follow, but it is a movie that makes me feel like I should devote the introductory paragraph of my review to a very brief history lesson – or maybe just a few relevant facts: Long before it was renamed Mumbai and even before it became the largest city in India, the city of Bombay was actually a series of seven main islands off of India's west coast. By the middle of the 19th century, the Indians had made Bombay into one contiguous city by reclaiming the land between the islands using earth from large hills. As Bombay's population grew, this reclaimed land became very valuable and the local government had to make plans for the land's orderly development. This process opened the door to lots of wheeling and dealing, political corruption and the growth of organized crime. By the late 1960s, when ground was about to be broken for a number of large-scale building projects, the situation had become messy and violent. Complicating matters were India's localized and loosely enforced alcohol prohibition laws. Add a few 'tommy guns' (which the Indian gangsters did) and living in Bombay in the 1960s was a lot like living in Chicago in the 1920s.
That interesting but little-known set of circumstances in the newly independent nation of India makes up the backdrop, and drives the action of this film. But rather than giving us a history lesson, this movie makes the situation very personal – telling the story through the eyes of a street thug turned gangster named Johnny Balraj (Ranbir Kapoor – looking very much like a young John Turturro). As Johnny works out his anger and frustrations (and makes some money) in backroom fist fights, he dreams of being a 'Big Shot', as he says it. The toughness he displays in the 1960s version of cage fighting and the boldness of his petty crimes brings Johnny to the attention of various men who can help him move up in the shady world of organized crime, even if only for their own personal gain.
A local gangster named Khambatta (Karan Johar) brings Johnny and his childhood friend and partner-in-crime, Chimman (Satyadeep Misra) into his operation. Khambatta gives Johnny the nightclub of the film's title to run – and uses it to launder money. That's about all Khambatta thinks Johnny is worth, but Johnny thinks that this is only the beginning of what he deserves. Johnny wants to be a player in those big real estate deals that are about to be finalized. He doesn't have the influence of the others involved in this high-stakes game, but he does have two crucial cards to play – Khambatta's backing, and an incriminating photo of an important politician.
But Johnny's not just trying to claw his way to the top for himself. He's deeply in love with Rosie (Anushka Sharma), his club's new singer, a woman whom he once lost to rival gangster Jimmy Mistry (Manish Choudhary). Johnny wants and needs to believe that he has finally won Rosie's affections, but her loyalties may be divided. Johnny would do anything to keep Rosie safely at his side – and to be the big shot that he believes he's destined to be. But as the tension rises, and all the characters resort to more extreme means to get what they want, a Bombay police detective (Kay Kay Menon) seems to be getting closer and closer to figuring out what's really going on.
If certain aspects of this story are sounding at least vaguely familiar, it's probably because you are a true Movie Fan. I was having frequent moments of cinematic déjà vu while watching this film. The movies that I flashed back to most often were 'Goodfellas', 'The Godfather', 'L.A. Confidential', 'The Cotton Club', 'The Fabulous Baker Boys', 'Rocky', 'Fight Club' and a certain 1983 Al Pacino classic. That's right, fellow cinephiles, 'Bombay Velvet' is best described as India's version of 'Scarface' – but with a distinctive Indian flare. No, this is not a typical Bollywood movie with lots of singing and dancing. There's no dancing except for during the stage shows in Johnny's club and the singing is all from Rosie, but her song choices serve as clear, yet subtle commentary on the movie's action.
If this movie reminds audience members of certain American films, that's more of a commentary on the fact that this is a genre movie than a criticism on any lack of originality. There's a lot going on in this movie, but co-writer / director Anurag Kashyap and his editors do a great job of moving things along. The scenes that teach us about the story's setting and about the characters before they interact with each other are short but important. As the action builds and the stakes rise, the scenes grow longer, but are still judiciously edited. There's a lot going on in this movie, but never too much. The film's long running time is typical Bollywood, but each scene either provides important back story, character development or some contribution to the ultimate resolution of the film's interconnected and ultimately intersecting story lines. The result is an intricate and well-developed story that is wonderfully acted and exciting to watch. 'A'

13 out of 26 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I have always wondered how a brilliant movie like The Shawshank Redemption and Goodfellas be a flop at the time of their release and then turn out to be such cult classics. Well something similar, I feel can be said for Bombay Velvet. The film has received a lot of criticism from critics who have given it a 2.5 star rating which they have also give to Gabbar is Back. I don't know what methodology they follow. Coming to the movie, as a Anurag Kashyap fan, I was more than proud to see that the director has not lost his touch even while working with big stars. The reason I feel why people have not been able to connect with this movie is because he has been making contemporary movies only which usually contain a known character whom the audience can connect with. Here is a different case, it not the 60's of India but the 60's of Mumbai, unknown to most. So the way the story has unfurled I think is in the most natural form that could have been made. Even people who criticize the film will agree that it's a treat to the eyes when it comes to sets and costumes. No it doesn't blind your eyes like Bhansali flicks but it's what an elite club of the 60's demands.The story I felt needs a little more shots and time to unfurl it's full wings which is the only point where the film lagged but not the way it's treated by critics. You can always find a tinge of darkness associated with every character and the brilliant use of mirrors continues as with every Kashyap flick. The well researched music is a showstopper, All Hail Amit Trivedi. It'll take some time to sink in and some patience to understand. An absolute brilliance.

11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

There is a lot of unnecessary chaos and negativity trending on the internet around this movie. Perhaps everyone is already going in with some preconceived notions. Its a brilliant piece of work. Ideally I shouldn't compare. but just to give you a sense. if Gangs of wasseypur was a notch high enough to put Anurag Kashyap in the league of Tarantino, then Bombay Velvet is a milestone putting him in the league of Martin Scorsese.
From our young generation. I don't recall any movie in the last 10-15 years reflecting an authentic OLD Mumbai charm. Bombay Velvet captures exactly that.. and a lot more!
Do not listen to all the non sense. JUST GO AND WATCH IT FOR YOURSELF! AND THANK ME LATER

11 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

I can't believe this was directed by Anurag Kashyap. The entire movie is just plain boring and nobody seem to be emoting or acting including KK Menon. Anushka Sharma is wasted in a role with sucking music and songs.
If you want to watch a movie well made portraying olden days, go watch 'Detective Byomkesh Bakshi' instead - it is amazing.
Stay away from this movie if you want to save frustration and annoyance. Unless you are sleep deprived and want to catch a nap, this will give you a good nap. You will keep asking yourself, when it will be over.
One of the crappiest movies I've ever watched. Over 2 hours wasted that I can never get back. I can't believe people are rating this movie with 10 stars. Such people never watched great art movies in their lives.

12 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Visuals are outstanding. Credit goes to cinematographer #RajeevRavi and art director #SameerSawant . I wish movie could have complimented that. Starting few minutes promise to offer something new and interesting but then movie slips down and entangles in its complexity. It tests your patience in climax. You need director by your side to explain lots of things. Director shows the smoking warning signs throughout the movie to show his protest of Censor baseless instruction, which I support. Initially boxing ring intrigues you but after so many repetitions, it bores. Same happens to the songs coming between scenes. Surprisingly most of the times protagonist gets hurt on his right eye and left cheek as if all opponents know his weakness!? Film is been promoted as love story but I could not get this emotions in a single scene even. After all its lengthy and slow. Performance wise Anushka Sharma is very good and she easily fits herself into the character. Ranbir Kapoor is impressive. Karan Johar is surprise packet. In the scene where he controls his laughter, he is too good. Rest are just OK. Music is soothing but somehow its in overdose.

12 out of 25 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This is a grand film with a tight grip! As always, AK spends time explaining the characters elaborately and has brought the best out of the actors who play them. The film will grow on you slowly and watch it once, I bet you will watch it again! And apart from great direction and sets, music is the soul of this film and Trivedi has done an excellent job. you need to see this one in theaters.
Karan Johar plays the main villain of the film and is a perfect cast for this role (for obvious reasons).
It is difficult to understand negative publicity for this film, as everything about this film-screenplay, music, sets, is grand and is well thought of. It was a treat to watch and hardly we get to see such films with heart and soul. It was worth the wait. Bombay Velvet is indeed an Anurag Kashyap signature film and any of his fans won't be disappointed with this film for sure!

9 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

There just isn't any other explanation! Nobody in a sober state could like this pathetic piece of junk!! I am absolutely positive that the people who like this movie are smoking up or are being offered money to write positive reviews! I am open to both the scenarios! If I am offered either i'll give this movie 10 stars or a positive review too! And if that is not the case then to those people's families I say. please get them checked into an asylum! They (likers of this useless movie) are definitely out of their minds! this movie is 10 degrees of pathetic! nothing is right about this film! even for a fiction! It is so bad that it made want to hit something hard! made me want to pull my hair out or poke something sharp in my eyes! I wish i knew some curses or hexes to put on the makers and all the useless actors in this movie! I want my money back! In fact i want more than what i paid for!

12 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

One feels slightly intimidated and/or browbeaten to review Anurag Kashyap's films. His films are like the songs of American rock band Coldplay - most of them don't make much sense and because they don't make much sense, they can mean anything. Bombay Velvet is one such product.
Set between the late 40s and the late 60s in Bombay, story of a migrant, Balraj (Kapoor), who lives his life to grow exponentially on his own terms is hardly convincing. He begins his life with the monies hauled through pickpocketing and starts living his puzzling dream when he falls into the clutches of a bootlegger called Khambata (Johar). The build-up is faint as the story picks up pace to set the theme, which is about greed for power and fame that fixates our little, glam-doll protagonist.
Fear of anachronism is visible from frame one, and the brutal attention to details - to recapture (one prefers 'reinvent' though) 50s'-60s' Bombay - is the greatest highlight of the film. This means the story is absorbingly clichéd.
The history of Bombay is heavily dealt with as the plot carves itself out, ending the crime drama with an epilogue that has a punctuation error in it. The touch of politics that drives the crime genre in the film is a cooler depiction of the developments that led to a city now called Mumbai, which became of Bombay and, is where I sit now and write this review. Now, THAT is fun to watch. Few familiar twists and turns drive the screenplay to a highly cribbed climax. Humor, if you can detect it, is wicked and forced.
Kapoor is phenomenal as the hero of the film, but my heart hardly ached for the lad as he went about gun-wielding to rip off men who denied his own way of maddeningly narcissistic life. The whole cast, including Sharma, Menon, and Basu do a beautiful job by staying in their characters. Debutante (that's what the intro credit says) Johar seems to have borrowed his natural effeminacy into the screen as he puts up a rather bad show at being a cool tycoon. His character is like a headless chicken who flounders (sic) after having pecked for cereals with other characters of the film. Pardon me for using a dialog from the film. If the makers can plagiarize (sorry, the right phrase is 'be inspired'), why can't I?
I am tired of watching rip offs of that Godfather gun-in-the- flushbin idea, and that is when the film starts to fumble. With a soundtrack for the climax that reminds you of the Oscar Best Picture Birdman (2014) and FX TV show Fargo (2014), one can confirm the imagination quotient of the film. But do watch out for the mildest anti-smoking statutory warning in the history of Bollywood.
All said and done and having used few superlatives to describe the film's richness, I cannot use the word 'original.' And at a time when people go and die by originality, and partake in copyright fights, does a film made from ripping off old cult classics and popular ideas work? The audience have to decide. And boxing, if you wonder, from the trailers and the posters, is a gimmick. Apart from that, it is exhaustive at 150 long minutes.
BOTTOM LINE: Bombay Velvet, as an ambition, can be lauded for its art setup, which it never fails to brag about. But, with a phony villain and an over-smart hero, their joint saga is as raw as the blood that glimmers off the bodies of the men they kill. 5/10 - average.
Can be watched with a typical Indian family? NO
This review was sponsored by ProdNote (www.prodnote.com)

7 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

If I try to draw comparisons between Martin Scorsese's 1990-blockbuster Goodfellas and our very own Kashyapish Bombay Velvet, they will look like twins, though born in different eras. While the former has already proved itself a masterpiece, the latter simply looks like a wanna-be to that classic.
No wonder that Director Anurag Kashyap credits Mr. Scorsese during the initial credits. He seriously attempts to replicate the master's magic in order to weave out a rather clichéd film. The 60's era looks spectacular; the jazz music (wonderfully composed by Amit Trivedi) throws in an indispensable nostalgia; the Italian costume designs nudge us back to the good-old mobster classics -- everything looks gorgeous in this fantastical post independence Bombay.
But how long you could stare at something beautiful without being talked back to. Bombay Velvet lays itself somewhere in that category, where a beautiful art fails to form a viable communication with its spectator.
The problem lies within the screenplay, oddly written and interweaved with no complex empathy towards the characters. The First Act seems to be the only good asset, where characters are build impressively; wonderfully focusing on traits and motives that build up the next act.
But it is where the narrative loses its pace. Writers -- Vasan Bala, Anurag Kashyap, Gyan Prakash and Thani -- fails to live up to our expectations of genuine conflicts (something Kashyap spectacularly created in the Gangs of Wasseypur duo-logy). We therefore face a regular Bollywood-clichéd tale, where twins arrive out of no where, murders get overdone, songs take over the impressions, and suspenses are injected for the sake of injecting.
Even the ride seems slow and boring at places, the actors make sure to impress us whenever they are allowed to. Ranbir Kapoor (as Johnny 'Big Shot' Balraj) conveys madness with style, never losing the grip of the character and giving us a memorable performance. Anushka Sharma (as Rosie) plays a perfect eye-candy amid the distasteful mafia wars. Watch her emoting a sad song with such conviction that it might have reminded Ranbir of his Jordan act in Rockstar. She owns the voice of her playback singer, literally.
Among the supporting actors, only Satyadeep Mishra (as Balraj's childhood friend Chimman) makes a long lasting impact. While other talents (Kay Kay Menon, Manish Chaudhary, and Vivaan Shah) amply justify their skills in their limited screen time. A special mention for Karan Johar for pulling out a calm and restraint act. The script however doesn't allow his Kaizad Khambatta to emote further than a relaxed homosexual mobster.
On whole, I do not want to call Bombay Velvet a bad movie; in fact it is far better than the regular nonsense we are served on most of the Fridays. But being a true Kashyap fan, I believe Bombay Velvet to be only an iota of his previous works, created to prey further on the mainstream audience, with only style but no substance.

6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

If you get a string of frames where crude ambitions with raw lust for opulence & perennial conspiracies interlace with impeccable crescendo of trumpets in the background, what do you create? That's right! An era of newly-independent India hustling with 'Influencers' & anti-socialists; an era where white collars outshone black deeds & an era where crime was more suave & sexy and less brutal & violent. Welcome to Bombay Velvet! The perfectly 'CGI-ed' backdrop creates a credible establishment to foster Johnny Balraj's big shot dream & offers a charismatic collision with Rosie's edgy life. What's probably missing in this mammoth movie is the tightening of the screenplay (specially in the 2nd half) which would have made it gripping and would've raised more 'oompphss' or 'yeaaahhs' in the minds of the audience. Ranbir Kapoor is nifty but misses out (by an inch) on the 'hunger' which Emraan Hashmi had in OUATIM. If you go without any pre-conceived notions, then Karan Johar makes a formidable acting debut. But the star? Amit Trivedi. Pure brilliance who has managed to add favourable taste to the moods. All in all, this high-budget experiment of Anurag 'Common Man's Scorsese' Kashyap is definitely worth a watch! ‪#‎bombayvelvet‬ ‪#‎bollywood

4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

This film is one of the honest films. Once I felt the stories from the feel, I was literally blown. This film will grow on you. You'll demand to watch it again later because the films is very subtle. This is one film which should have been praised however it is not. The most striking aspects of Bombay Velvet are its evocative visual texture and its lush and layered sound design. The Bombay Velvet plot is littered with street fights, shootouts and murders on the one hand, and jazz sounds, bitter tabloid wars, fierce political rivalries, deadly depredations of land sharks and labor unrest on the other. Please watch it once and watch is carefully before someone telling you not to watch the film.

4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

BOMBAY VELVET - Its a serious case of Anurag Kashyap trying to be commercial gone wrong. 'Dear Anurag Sir - You are such a great talent of of uniqueness in modern film making that you have got a different group of fans following your movies. You have given us hope that Bollywood is not just about only Nach Gana , beautiful foreign location and larger then life heroes doing anti gravity action sequence. So why did you tried to make a film using such a plot which has been already overused and doing nothing new with it just upgrading the technical department. But let me tell you , the brilliance of technical department can make a good movie brilliant but cant do anything good to an above average movie ' Speaking of the technical department the production design has done a brilliant job. The whole movie has been shot in Sri Lanka but right from the start the movie takes you to the era of 50s and 60s of Bombay. In fact after watching the Premiere Rishi Kapoor has tweeted that Anurag Kashyap has transformed Sri Lanka into the Street of Bombay he use to play in his childhood. Second department to be appreciated is the music department. Amit Trivedi has brought us the real Jazz alive in front of us. The drum beats of back ground music are still ringing in my ears. But i have a little complain with the genre of music chosen by him while making the songs. Trivedi has chosen the typical Jazz genre which is not at all famous in India and only can be appreciated by Die Hard fans of Jazz. Instead of this he could have used the soft romantic genre of Jazz which has been used in Bollywood and quite liked by the audience in 50s and 60s (For example - The FIFI song.). Leaving the Jazz collection there is a non Jazz song 'Beherupia' which has been sang and represented in a soulful manner.
Next we come to the screenplay which is the real enemy of the movie. Just because it tries to play too much safe , the movie doesn't even make you feel like it has been made my Anurag Kashayp. Anurag has a quality to dig out comic situations in serious and dark stories. And in spite being a light hearted film there were very few comic situation in it which you can count in your finger. Plot of the movie has a lot of element the movie doesn't describe any of them. That's actually shocking thing as Anurag has been a director of detailing , remember how he made us experience the evolution of Bihar and Jharkhand in Gangs Of Wassypur. The same doesn't happen is case of Bombay. The movie tells us that the base of Bombay has been put up on conspiracies and scams but the screenplay is such a haywire that you can't actually understand what is the conspiracy going on. Neither the actions of opposite parties clears any of their intentions. And how could you relate to characters if you don't know their intentions. Speaking of characters Ranbir is back after Roy , he always give his 100% and he does the same here. His madness for becoming BIG SHOT and his childish intensity in love are something to watch out. Anushka has been disappeared from Bollywood for 1 and a half year after Matru Ki Bijli , as she was working in 4 films together releasing in a time period of 7 months. She has given powerhouse performance in P.K and NH10 selecting unique characters not the usual glamorous characters of Bollywood heroins . In Bombay Velvet the character of Rosie is although glamorous but there is a grounded attitude in her. She knows her boundaries , she know this glamour life is not her own and is gifted by someone else . Also for an extra applause Anushka as a singer has done a tremendous job. In fact in a song called DHADAAM DHADAAM she has given such an intensity to it that you will forget for sometime that she is only lip-sing and not actually singing. That brings us to Kjo the debutant here. Karan Johar's character could have been a little better if he would have a real maniac which actually he is but in a gentlemen manner. He is not a kind of person who will beat his enemy to death by his own hand rather he will ask his man to do that job while watching it simultaneously eating his food. Some of the good comic scenes has been given to him related to when on using wrong English by the other person he goes out of the room to laugh and also some indications to his likeness of gender in sexual preferences(i hope you can understand what i am saying.) . K K Menon has been lost in the first half only comes in the second didn't getting much chance to do anything. Length of the movie is a question which actually feels long but the fact is that you will not actually able to detect scenes which are not required. So have get bored with the length. I would have liked if Anurag have tried to make the same kinds if movies he makes with a bigger star for gaining more audience(like Badlapur with Varun Dhawan) rather then making a commercial film which is not his kind of genre. With this film he has lost his touch. Hope he will come back. That too with a hard hitting effect. 6.4/10 By ANuP APu KuMaR

5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink