Zanjeer (1973)

This is the answer to the $100 question on Slumdog Millionaire's "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire," and since I just re-watched that, I had to see what this movie is all about.

Zanjeer isn't a person. It means "chain," and Vijay (Amitabh Bachchan) is chained to a never-ending life of revenge, or so it would seem. In that respect, I've got to believe that Quentin Tarantino loves this film. So to confirm that, I just asked ChatGPT to tell me what Taratino has said about this movie; according to ChatGPT, Tarantino compared its cultural significance in India to the cultural significance Taxi Driver and Dirty Harry had in the United States. That does actually give some interesting context to how important this film is in Hindi film history.

Tarantino also praised Amitabh Bachchan. Not a household name in the United States by any means, but IMDb lists about 250 film credits across his 50+ year career. And he's still active to this day.

In some respects, this film is incredibly bad. I mean, it just is. On the other hand, its plot and storyline are complete and relatively easy to follow. And I was not bored at any point.

What makes the film bad? The camera work. Either I bought a bootleg copy, or nothing stays in frame. Sometimes heads are cut off at the top, or other things come in and out of frames at odd moments. It's also a little heavy on the talk. Yes, there are chase and dance and fight scenes, but there is a lot of talk.

Some of the fight sequences aren't that bad, but you have the standard 1970s Kung Fu sound effects. Were these sound effects always meant to be a joke? I can remember watching Kung Fu in the 1970s as a small boy, and even then, the Kung Fu sound effects just sounded silly.

I didn't mind the four- or five-times characters break out into their dances. My copy didn't bother to subtitle the dances, so I have no idea what the characters were saying. What I did was simply watch the background characters, who all acted rather two-dimensionally, like background characters in a 1980s video game.

I guess a few of the plot points confused me, like why Sher Khan (Pram Sikand) simply closes all of his gambling clubs at Vinay's request. I get that they fought and found mutual respect for one another (kindred tiger spirits), but this was also Sher Khan's sole source of income, and when Vijay is framed and wrongly imprisoned, it's Sher Khan who has to borrow 5000 rupees to help out Vinay. (I assume he repays it, but how he makes his money when he goes straight is never explained.)

Mala (Jaya Bachchan), Vijay's love interested, is the other interesting character. She sharpens knives and has a nice little song and dance number. She is the one who convinced Vijay to give up his life of revenge. That almost kills Vijay -- literally and figuratively. Fortunately, Mala recognizes that, and she gives him permission to complete his revenge. It's funny. Vijay does eventually say "I love you," but most of the "courtship" and romance of Vijay and Mala is handled with close-up shots of their individual faces looking intently at one another as the way a dance sequences through the bars of the windows of Vinjay's house. Subtle symbolism, that.

So as cheesy and bad as it is, it's still a classic and desires its place as a "transformational film in Hindi cinema." And it's good enough that it does make me curious to watch other "important" Hindi films.

Rating: 3.5/5 stars