Year – 1953

Language – Hindi

Country – India

Producer – New Premiere Films

Director – V. Joglekar, H. Ahluwalia

Music Director – Robin Chatterji

Box-Office Status –

Cast – Rama, Anoop Kumar, Geeta Bali, Om Prakash, Lalita Pawar

DIRECTED by Vasant Joglekar and Harindar Ahluwalia from a screenplay by D. N. Madhok, and produced by M. S. Ahluwalia, New Premier Films’ “Firdaus” is a poor essay at motion picture making weighed down by an outworn theme and inexpert handling.

The picture opens in the Hotel Firdaus at Lahore—whence the title “Firdaus”!—on a honeymooning couple (Anoop Kumar and Rama Sharma) of newly-weds very much in love with each other, and moves on to their parting the very next day. The young wife goes to break the news of her marriage to her family which, one gathers, had opposed it, and the husband goes to Delhi on business.

Upon this peaceful impression bursts the news of the Partition and the horrors of the murderous riots which broke upon it. The unfortunate bride of a night, repudiated by her people, becomes a refugee adrift upon a spate of panic-stricken people, moving in a nightmare of terror from camp to camp.

The husband, after affording one or two glimpses of stunned wonder and grief at the turn of events by which he has been parted from his beloved, acquires a trunk filled with someone’s valuable jewellery and cash, and quietly makes off with it, cleverly evading a rascally fellow-traveller who suspects it isn’t his property. Next you see the erstwhile refugee and grief-stricken husband living in luxury in a mansion he has purchased in Delhi, complete with car, servants and all—a state of prosperity achieved with the aid of the stolen wealth. While mooning around, he meets with a luscious cabaret-dancer and proceeds to court her with gifts and an ardour surprising in a husband recently bemoaning his lost bride.

At this point the long arm of coincidence begins to operate. Before it finishes, it is stretched practically out of its socket. The lost wife with her babe-in-arms meets the blackmailer who suddenly displays a heart of gold, takes her in and treats her like a sister. Next she meets her brother who turns out to be a tongawalla in Delhi. He in turn knows her husband’s address and agrees to take her there. But the husband, instead of welcoming his lost bride, eyes her with disgust, asks whose child she has in her arms and violently turns her off. At this moment the girl friend turns up. Not a whit embarrassed by the situation, our hero bundles his wife and child into an inner room and proceeds to entertain the girl friend with a lover’s warmth and hospitality.

There is more in this strain which should not be shown on the screen. It is not moral or constructive, and makes a contemptible character of the hero. Then coincidence has another go. On the eve of the hero’s wedding to the girl-friend, his old mother, who has been travelling half-demented from refugee camp to refugee camp in search of him, is discovered in his kitchen! The hysterics over this reunion are hardly over when the golden-hearted blackmailer, having discovered that his protegee is the wife of his trunk-lifting friend and that said friend has disowned her, turns up in a towering rage to demand her instant rehabilitation. In the middle of this scene the police turn up to arrest the trunk-thief and march our hero off to jail amidst the wails of mother, wife and child.

In case you think coincidence has done its stuff by now in, this picture, the court-room scene comes on to confound you. While counsel; have a high old time yelling their pleas at the Judge in a shouting match such as no court ever knew, the owner of the trunk and the plaintiff in the case, who has been demanding the maximum sentence for the wicked thief, is suddenly recognized by the disowned wife as her father. He discovers from her, as he embraces her, that he is also the father-in-law of the trunk thief. The old man begs forgiveness for the accused and without further ado the court frees the accused and they all march out to live, one supposes, happily ever after.

Based upon a plot as thin as tissue-paper and a deal more transparent, the picture loses most of its appeal on account of the hero’s role—a drab character drably portrayed by Anoop Kumar, whose lack of personality and expression is accentuated by a deadpan face and an histrionic innocence utterly sublime.

Geeta Bali as the dancing girl friend turns in the best performance in the picture in a role which is greatly enriched by her personality.

Rama Sharma as the abused and maltreated wife handles her part very confidently. Om Prakash, Lalita Pawar and Randhir are good in important supporting roles. Poor direction and the outworn theme are the chief defects of “Firdaus” and between them they spell its box-office fate.

It is refreshing, after all that criticism, to be able to say that the photography, decor, costumes and mounting generally are good. The background music is indifferent and often poor. The songs are much better and they are well sung.

The dances, designed by Vinod Chopra, are not remarkable and what attraction they have is derived entirely from Geeta Bali’s graceful dancing.