Gumnaam (1965) v Jewel Thief (1967)

[zen]

A battle of the two classic mystery films from the 60s. Below is a short write up on the two films: 

 

Gumnaam (1965)

 

Based on the famous Agatha Christie’s mystery novel - “And There Were None”. Starring Mehmood, Helen, Pran, Manoj Kumar & Nanda. It also borrows elements from 1930s-40s Hollywood horror films, which add to the film’s atmosphere. Goa as the location suits the film. 

 

Pros

 

One of the pros of the film is the performances by Mehmood, Helen, & Pran.

 

An issue I have with many classic films is the “misuse” of comedy in trying to be formulaic. It is as if the filmmakers think that after making the audiences “tense”, they have to give them a break. The result is the insertion of unnecessary comedy. In many films, you would even find a Johnny Walker breaking into a song, an unwarranted change in tone.

 

Gumnaam is an example of a film where the comedy lifts the film. Mehmood’s character (the butler) is woven in such a fashion that it feels integral to the film. Because the characters on the deserted island are expected to be different, Mehmood’s comedy adds to the atmosphere of the film. He is the key star of the film.

 

Helen is another surprise package. Her coolness in the film makes her appears like a character from a Bond film. Her performance in the famous song “Hum Kale Hai Toh Kiya Hua” is exceptional.

 

Pran generates interest as the drunk lawyer. Both Mehmood and Pran aspire to Helen’s affections.

 

Apart from these characters, many of the songs are memorable. The location is attractive. And so on. 

 

Cons 

 

The lead pair of Manoj Kumar and Nanda is there to sing a few songs and provide exposition when needed, many times caught up where a body is. Both do the job but are not interesting enough.

 

When it comes to Manoj Kumar’s character, there is no compelling reason for him to be with the group. That is one of the loose areas of the script. If you are adapting “And There Were None”, you should look to tighten up the script as much as possible. 

 

Manoj Kumar is said to have tried to remove the song “Hum Kale Hain Toh Kiya Hua” from the film. Thankfully, the filmmakers did not listen to him.

 

Overall, it remains one of the notable Bollywood mystery classics.  In future, if anyone is remaking this or adapting “And There Were None” be sure to run its screenplay by me. 

 

Jewel Thief (1967) 

 

Starring Dev Anand, Ashok Kumar, Vyjantimala, & Tanuja. It uses concepts from Hitchcock films such as To Catch a Thief (1955) and North by Northwest (1959), while adding its own flavor to the mix as well. 

 

Pros

 

I like the way the mystery of Prince Amar is set up. The first 2 hours keep you interested. Dev Anand appears cool. Ashok Kumar works in stealth mode. The songs are memorable. The background score is nice. 

 

Cons

 

With a run time of over 3 hours, it would have benefitted from smarter editing. It is as if the filmmakers are trying to throw everything but the kitchen sink. A bit surprising as Vijay Anand delivered one of the best edited Bollywood films in Teesri Manzil (1966) only a year back. Teesri Manzil’s run time is close to 3 hours too but almost nothing in it feels redundant or out of place. 

 

It is as if a lot of effort was spent on setting up the mystery that tying the ends up was seen as a formality. Not surprisingly, when Vinay begins investigating Prince Amar, the film begins to loose steam. The last hour, the Gangtok segment, turns into a mixed bag when the film should have been aiming to hit a higher note. The segment to some extent is salvaged by the song “Hote Pe Aise Baat”.

 

It appears as if whenever the filmmakers were out of ideas, they relied on standard Bollywood concepts. For e.g. what is the motivation for the heroine to get involved? Well, her kid brother is being held up by the bad guy (we see that concept used in Johnny Mera Naam (1970) as well). And that leads to the more or less unnecessary kidnapping sequence in Gangtok at the beginning of the film (editing). 

 

The film also falls in to the trap of having too many characters, struggling to utilize many of them properly. And at times, making the film wander. 

 

Less said about the cinematic conveniences the better. For e.g. carpets in a room cover holes that lead to tunnels. Simply by cutting a carpet one can get into a tunnel. Additionally, maybe an interesting way could have been found for Vinay to inform the police about his plan (In the film, he throws a piece of paper at the police). 

 

Overall, despite the relatively weak Gangtok segment, it remains an enjoyable stylish mystery film. 

 

 

As Bollywood mystery films, I rate them at say 4-4.5/5. If the filmmakers had made more effort on “tightening” up the films, it could have landed them a perfect score.

 

These classics continue to remain among the best Bollywood mystery films. Which one do you prefer more?
 

PS If you haven’t seen them lately (say in the last 12 or so months), go check them out!

 

Edited August 23 by zen

[coffee_rules]

Haven't seem Gumnaam, but I don't like Manoj Kumar compared to Dev Anand. JT is one of the classics of Vijay Anand. I haven't seen it in the last 20 years, but will catch them both again. Just need some time or become self-employed  

[zen]

Btw, Gumnaam’s song “Jaan Pechan Ho” was used in the Heineken ad below:

 

 

[zen]

I voted for “Tie” but if I were forced to pick one, it would be Gumnaam. 

 

If you look at various English adaptions of “And There Were None”, Gumnaam competes well with them. Among the good ones that come to mind (without thinking hard) are Gumnaam, maybe the 1945 version, and the 2015 mini series: 

 

 

 

Edited August 24 by zen

[singhvivek141]

2 hours ago, zen said:

I voted for “Tie” but if I were forced to pick one, it would be Gumnaam. 

 

If you look at various English adaptions of “And There Were None”, Gumnaam competes well with them. Among the good ones that come to mind (without thinking hard) are Gumnaam, maybe the 1945 version, and the 2015 mini series: 

 

 

 

Agree,

Though its of personal choice, Gumnaam has more suspense & surprise element than Jewel Thief. 

Dev Saab is a legendary actory undoubtedly, but Gumnaan has that charisma which keep you attached. (Though when I watched it I wasn't knowing it's based on "and then there were none").

 

[zen]

5 hours ago, singhvivek141 said:

Agree,

Though its of personal choice, Gumnaam has more suspense & surprise element than Jewel Thief. 

Dev Saab is a legendary actory undoubtedly, but Gumnaan has that charisma which keep you attached. (Though when I watched it I wasn't knowing it's based on "and then there were none").

 

 

Gumnaam’s run time of around 2h 30m helps v Jewel Thief’s over 3h.

 

Jewel Thief could have benefitted from smarter editing and maybe less characters, along with a better transition from one segment to the next. 

 

For e.g. the films throws in 4 actresses besides Vyjantimala. Where first Vyjantimala is said to be engaged to Amar. We meet Helen, who is his GF, then Farayal is his wife. On top of that, Anju Mahendru is thrown in. 

The Pune and Calcutta segments could have been done better (or even done away with). It is as if the filmmakers felt obliged to show a heist and maybe have Faryal (and Helen earlier) dance. 
 

After the theft at Vishambhar’s jewelry store, maybe the film could have benefitted from more focused and innovative writing by moving quickly to the Gangtok segment. 

 

Edited August 24 by zen

[coffee_rules]

18 hours ago, zen said:

 

Gumnaam’s run time of around 2h 30m helps v Jewel Thief’s over 3h.

 

Jewel Thief could have benefitted from smarter editing and maybe less characters, along with a better transition from one segment to the next. 

 

For e.g. the films throws in 4 actresses besides Vyjantimala. Where first Vyjantimala is said to be engaged to Amar. We meet Helen, who is his GF, then Farayal is his wife. On top of that, Anju Mahendru is thrown in. 

The Pune and Calcutta segments could have been done better (or even done away with). It is as if the filmmakers felt obliged to show a heist and maybe have Faryal (and Helen earlier) dance. 
 

After the theft at Vishambhar’s jewelry store, maybe the film could have benefitted from more focused and innovative writing by moving quickly to the Gangtok segment. 

 

Isn’t there Tanuja as well? 
Talking about Anju Mahendru, She had an affair with Gary Sobers when WI had visited India 66-67, she was rumored to be engaged to him as well. 

[zen]

12 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Isn’t there Tanuja as well? 
Talking about Anju Mahendru, She had an affair with Gary Sobers when WI had visited India 66-67, she was rumored to be engaged to him as well. 

Yeah, Tanuja is one of the 4 actresses besides Vyjantimala. 

[zen]

From wiki: 

 

The film stars Ashok Kumar, Dev Anand, Vyjayantimala and features four bond girl-like actresses portrayed by Tanuja, Helen, Faryal and Anju Mahendru, with Nazir Hussain and Sapru appearing in supporting roles. It was produced by Dev Anand's production house, Navketan Films.

 

So the filmmakers wanted to bring in elements from Bond films too!

PS

 

If I were to compare one of them with a Bond girl:

 

Tanuja = Bibi Dahl in For Your Eyes Only, which was released in 1981, many years after Jewel Thief. Bibi Dahl was the “yet to grow up” gymnast in the film. 
 

Edited August 25 by zen

[coffee_rules]

21 hours ago, zen said:

From wiki: 

 

The film stars Ashok Kumar, Dev Anand, Vyjayantimala and features four bond girl-like actresses portrayed by Tanuja, Helen, Faryal and Anju Mahendru, with Nazir Hussain and Sapru appearing in supporting roles. It was produced by Dev Anand's production house, Navketan Films.

 

So the filmmakers wanted to bring in elements from Bond films too!

PS

 

If I were to compare one of them with a Bond girl:

 

Tanuja = Bibi Dahl in For Your Eyes Only, which was released in 1981, many years after Jewel Thief. Bibi Dahl was the “yet to grow up” gymnast in the film. 
 

 

 

That was outright "pedo" act of Bond, she was definitely under-age even in the movie. 

[zen]

51 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

 

 

That was outright "pedo" act of Bond, she was definitely under-age even in the movie. 

What?! She was not Bond’s love interest!

 

I am not sure if you remember the film. Bond never encouraged her apart from being friendly with her. 
 

 

Edited August 26 by zen

[coffee_rules]

38 minutes ago, zen said:

What?! She was not Bond’s love interest!

 

I am not sure if you remember the film. Bond never encouraged her apart from being friendly with her. 
 

 

I know, but the whole interaction was very uncomfortable to watch, there is a scene where she gets naked in his bed, but he doesn't slip in.  

[zen]

8 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

I know, but the whole interaction was very uncomfortable to watch, there is a scene where she gets naked in his bed, but he doesn't slip in.  

Yeah, that character was probably not needed. Its key purpose appears to show Lynn-Holly Johnson skating (She was a professional figure skater iirc and about the same age as Carole Bouquet, who played Bond’s love interest, so she was not under age as an actress).

Edited August 26 by zen

[zen]

I took the opportunity to read “And There Were None”. It is a nice read especially the psychological aspects.