SOME SPOILERS: As some other reviewers have commented, this movie is like grand opera. That does not bother me at all--it is what I expect from Bollywood musicals of the grand, traditional type. (Better grand opera than fifth-rate-MTV cheeze.) I also wasn't especially bothered by some of the implausibility of the plot: I did think SRK's Veer was a bit too doddering for a man who is theoretically only in his early fifties, 22 years in prison or not. On the other hand, it didn't bother me that Saamiya knew his name. He had given his interrogators his name before he decided on silence, and presumably that name was in his files.
What some might consider a major, major flaw (or at least deeply disappointing) is the basic premise. After Veer sacrifices himself to save Zaara's honor, she throws her honor away. What is Veer's sacrifice for, if she doesn't marry and have children, if her family is destroyed anyway? But--whether intentional or not--this is what makes the movie interesting to me, because the pointless sacrifice is mutual.
"Veer-Zaara" is like a Bollywood version of the old O. Henry story, "The Gift of the Magi," which focuses on a young married couple who are very much in love. They are poor, and have only two possessions of value: she has her long, lovely hair and he has a beautiful pocket watch. Each wishes to surprise the other with a Christmas present that will reflect the depth of their love for one another. So what do they do? She sells her lovely hair to buy him a chain for his watch, and he sells his watch to buy her an ornamental comb for her hair. The mutual sacrifices cancel each other out, and are meant to ironically underline the over-the-top foolishness of their love for each other.
How much more pointless is it that Veer sacrifices 22 years of his life to save the honor of Zaara and her family, while Zaara sacrifices her honor and family in order to live Veer's life? I think the pointlessness of the sacrifice (that they cancel each other out) is deliberate, though, because we see it through the eyes of Saamiya, who says, "What century do these people live in? Are they human beings pretending to be gods or gods disguised as human beings?" It is up to each viewer to decide whether the sacrifices of Veer and Zaara are noble and romantic, or foolishly romantic.
The only problem I have with the basic premise is that Veer's choice is presented as either/or: Either he explains what he is really doing in Lahore and ruins Zaara, or he sacrifices himself. But what if he had said that Zaara's mother had sent for him, because she wanted to meet the man who had saved her daughter's life? Ideally, the screenplay would have allowed for such a choice, and found a way to close the door on it. This was not a great flaw for me, though, because Veer is not behaving like an intelligent young man capable of outwitting his captors. He has, after all, come to Pakistan in a state of mind where he is ready and willing, and even eager, to immolate himself on the altar of love.
The movie itself is beautifully filmed. There isn't much going on apart from the love story, but sometimes a grand over-the-top romance is worth watching. I did not find SRK embarrassing, as I sometimes did in "Kal Ho Naa Ho." He was very good, as was Zinta as a slightly spoiled girl who begins showing her actual determination and nobility of spirit and as soon as she is tested by her nanny's death. And I found all the cast up to their roles, especially Rani Mukherji. I didn't even know, when I first saw the film, that Amitabh Bachchan and Hema Malini were going to be in it. How delighted I was when I saw that they were! And how cleverly their roles in the film were designed: they are living the happy ending that Veer and Zaara will step into after they return to the village.
What some might consider a major, major flaw (or at least deeply disappointing) is the basic premise. After Veer sacrifices himself to save Zaara's honor, she throws her honor away. What is Veer's sacrifice for, if she doesn't marry and have children, if her family is destroyed anyway? But--whether intentional or not--this is what makes the movie interesting to me, because the pointless sacrifice is mutual.
"Veer-Zaara" is like a Bollywood version of the old O. Henry story, "The Gift of the Magi," which focuses on a young married couple who are very much in love. They are poor, and have only two possessions of value: she has her long, lovely hair and he has a beautiful pocket watch. Each wishes to surprise the other with a Christmas present that will reflect the depth of their love for one another. So what do they do? She sells her lovely hair to buy him a chain for his watch, and he sells his watch to buy her an ornamental comb for her hair. The mutual sacrifices cancel each other out, and are meant to ironically underline the over-the-top foolishness of their love for each other.
How much more pointless is it that Veer sacrifices 22 years of his life to save the honor of Zaara and her family, while Zaara sacrifices her honor and family in order to live Veer's life? I think the pointlessness of the sacrifice (that they cancel each other out) is deliberate, though, because we see it through the eyes of Saamiya, who says, "What century do these people live in? Are they human beings pretending to be gods or gods disguised as human beings?" It is up to each viewer to decide whether the sacrifices of Veer and Zaara are noble and romantic, or foolishly romantic.
The only problem I have with the basic premise is that Veer's choice is presented as either/or: Either he explains what he is really doing in Lahore and ruins Zaara, or he sacrifices himself. But what if he had said that Zaara's mother had sent for him, because she wanted to meet the man who had saved her daughter's life? Ideally, the screenplay would have allowed for such a choice, and found a way to close the door on it. This was not a great flaw for me, though, because Veer is not behaving like an intelligent young man capable of outwitting his captors. He has, after all, come to Pakistan in a state of mind where he is ready and willing, and even eager, to immolate himself on the altar of love.
The movie itself is beautifully filmed. There isn't much going on apart from the love story, but sometimes a grand over-the-top romance is worth watching. I did not find SRK embarrassing, as I sometimes did in "Kal Ho Naa Ho." He was very good, as was Zinta as a slightly spoiled girl who begins showing her actual determination and nobility of spirit and as soon as she is tested by her nanny's death. And I found all the cast up to their roles, especially Rani Mukherji. I didn't even know, when I first saw the film, that Amitabh Bachchan and Hema Malini were going to be in it. How delighted I was when I saw that they were! And how cleverly their roles in the film were designed: they are living the happy ending that Veer and Zaara will step into after they return to the village.