Hum Sab Chor Hain (1956)

1956

Directed by: IS Johar

Music: OP Nayyar

Lyrics: Majrooh Sultanpuri

Starring: Nalini Jaywant, Shammi Kapoor, Pran, Ameeta, 

IS Johar, Badri Prasad, Rajendranath

When I posted my quiz on Raj Kapoor, the 'prize' for the winners of the quiz was a post on whatever they wanted me to write on. Winner Anupama sent me a request for a review of Kaala Patthar, which she believed deserved to be better known than it was. I had to haunt first runner-up Harvey to give me his request. He had correctly answered more than most people even attempted. He gave me choices. P.O. Box 999, Hum Sab Chor Hain or a post of songs - he even gave me a theme. Well, that theme was far too interesting to pass up, but I will need to do some serious research before I can post it. So I have filed it away for future reference. Thank you, Harvey. :) He was also kind enough to say that if I couldn't get my hands on either of these movies, I could surprise him with any post. 

Unfortunately, I couldn't get my hands on his first choice - P.O.Box 999. It had lovely songs, but I'm not too sure that the film was all that great. I have a vague recollection of having seen in the dark ages, but not enough to review it from memory. Hum Sab Chor Hain is a film that I not have seen before, but it was available on YouTube, and besides, it has Shammi Kapoor. I haven't watched a Shammi Kapoor film for ages, so this is as good an excuse as any. Harvey, this is for you, though I'm not too sure you will thank me for it.

I have to confess that IS Johar is not one of my favourites. I found him rather irritating to say the least, and having him pop up in the first scene was a 'Why do you hate me so much, Harvey?' moment. But I gritted my teeth and kept muttering 'Shammi Kapoor' to myself. Unfortunately for me, YouTube has a very decapitated version of the film. You can only imagine my frustration. That I persisted is because a) I'm stubborn and hate giving up and, b) Harvey,  tumhaare liye... (I hope you are seriously grateful!)

Anyway, to get to the film:

Budhram and Shudhram (IS Johar and Harold/Majnu [identified by dustedoff in the comments]) are conmen (and common thieves) who pose as social workers.  Apart from picking pockets, which is their occupation du jour, they cunningly, and rather innovatively, flick food from the restaurant next door for their meals.

They are visited by a private investigator, who has known them in their previous avatars as Messrs. Khatkaram and Bhatkaram; he is enquiring about a girl who used to work with them - Vimala. The two thieves are reluctant to answer, but the private eye is no pushover. When he threatens to reveal their secret, they quickly tell him what they know - they had given an orphan girl named Vimala refuge, but she turned out to be a thief. And  of course, bad actions have bad consequences - she was caught red-handed and jailed. The PI has no difficulty in parsing their statement - they committed the robbery, and she was framed. 

The conmen are shocked! They? Frame a girl who was like their sister?! The PI is not very impressed, and he leaves without telling them why he wants to find the girl. But he leaves his pocket watch behind. (Not voluntarily, of course.)

Vimala (Nalini Jaywant) is in jail. The CID inspector who is questioning her tells her they intend to free her, but they need to know something about Khatkaram and Bhatkaram. Of course they should free her, she tells the inspector; she is innocent! They are conmen, she says, who claimed to be sadhus. They had taken her in, as well. Under the guise of opening orphanages, hospitals and women's shelters, they had fleeced countless people, leaving her to face the music. 

(And now the movie jumped - it does that a lot so it doesn't do much for the review itself. I suppose one can only guess at what happens in the interim, but...)

 

Suddenly, Vimala is in the company of a rather dashing Shammi Kapoor. No, I don't know his name, and no, I have no idea how she came to be there, though it appears that he saved her. From what? From whom? No idea. (See my aside up there for the explanation for why I have no clue!) In any case, she is on the run from the police, but she is innocent. She must be hungry too? Yes, she is; she hasn't eaten for two days! So Shammi takes her to a rather palatial house (he is quite spiffily dressed as well), where he is quite taken by her innocence in asking him a) if he is a rogue as well and, b) to put on all the lights in the house before she steps in. After which, of course, she promptly forgets about being wary of him and tucks into food. So her statement about having been hungry for two days was probably true. 

While she is tucking in with nary a care in the world, Shammi's mother comes into the room and I realise that Shammi's name in the film is Nath. Ah. One mystery solved. She is not very happy to see a strange girl eating her out of house and home. Nath (as I shall now refer to Shammi) explains that she is a poor and hungry. Muzzer is not pleased. Is he going to bring all the world's poor and hungry hordes into their home? For all he knew, she could be a thief. No, no, expostulates Nath. How could she be? Look at her eyes, see how innocent they are? (And Vimala tries hard to look 'bholi'.)

So Nath feeds her; but even he is taken aback when he realises that she has no intention of leaving the house that night. He tries to throw her out, but feels guilty at doing so. Of course, Vimala stays. And quick to take advantage, she asks him for a job at the theatre he owns and works in. (She also asks him whether he is married.)

(The next jump occurs here - in the last scene that I saw, Nath is shocked enough to vow that he is going to throw her out of the house the next morning. The very next scene shows her working in the theatre as his secretary, where instead of taking down notes, she is drawing romantic pictures of the two of them, much to Nath's discomfiture.)

But when he asks her who the people in the picture are ("Dakkan", in Bombay parlance! It is quite obvious it is meant to be the two of them.), she confesses that it is of the two of them. Why? he asks. (He can't be that clueless, no? Well, apparently, he is!) Because she loves him, she says. Why? he asks. (Aaargh. But I can't help liking a heroine who is that forthright.) Every girl in the theatre, including the lead actress, loves him, she says. And she hates all of them. Poor Nath. He manages to handle the situation by saying that 'good' girls do not talk like that.

Another jump later. There's some extremely graceful dancing going on, and Ameeta (one assumes she is the afore-mentioned lead actress) walks in. 

'Madam', as she is referred to, has all the nakhras associated with a lead heroine. Of course everyone caters to her demands, much to Vimala's fury. So when asked if 'Madam's' voice is good, she promptly says, no, not at all. And then, proceeds to add insult to injury by claiming that if this is the way she sings, the theatre will soon shut down. 'Madam' demands Vimala's dismissal. 

(It is not enough that the film is cut into bits and pieces, but the screen freezes here, and despite my best efforts, I have to skip to the next part. It is pretty obvious though, that Ameeta Madam is not a success. What happens to her, or to Vimala is a mystery. However, in the next scene, one gets to see Pran. Who he is, what he is doing there, and why he has a baby with him may or may not be answered in this review. Stay tuned.) 

Pran comes down a flight of stairs holding a baby. (Hospital? Hotel? Something.) He opens the doors only to find Vimala standing there. Does Kamala live here, she enquires. Pran is shell-shocked. She repeats her questions and Pran blanches, almost dropping the baby.

Vimala rescues the baby and is cooing over it, when a doctor passes them and congratulates them on their baby. Vimala is perplexed, but Pran, having a smidgen of intelligence, covers up the lapse, and escorts Vimala (now holding the baby) up the stairs. (By this time, I discover Pran's name is Deepak.) And in case, you have not figured this out by this time, Johar hits you on the head with the fact that Pran/Deepak is the "VILLAIN".

A-ha!

Deepak takes her up to a room (yup, hotel), and still leaving the baby with Vimala (Do I know why she is looking for Kamala? Nope. Not a clue.), goes away, ostensibly to call 'Kamala Devi'. Instead, he goes down to the lobby and begs the manager (Do hotel managers attend to the front desk?) to call a doctor - his wife has periodic episodes of madness, he tells him. The manager and others in the lobby are all sympathetic as they wait with Deepak for the doctor to come. Meanwhile, Vimala, tired of waiting in the room with the baby comes down to the lobby to find out what is taking so long. Unwittingly, she validates the lies that Deepak has been saying - that she is mad, that she doesn't recognise herself, much less that she is his wife, etc. By this time, Vimala, realising that no one believes her, is in a panic. To no avail. She is bundled off willy-nilly to the hospital and the doctor opines that it would be better for her to spend a few days in a mental hospital. Deepak, of course, is all agreement. 

(The scene jumps again. Perhaps I should just say SJA from now on?) Vimala is being dragged into the asylum where she protests vociferously. Again, no one really listens to her, and she is locked up.

Days have passed and one day, back in the mental hospital, Vimala has spotted an escape route. She escapes (How? No idea.) and lands back in Nath's house, where Nath, theatre shut down (Why? No idea.), is in dire straits. But Madame Fifi (So *that* is Ameeta's name! Sounds more like the name of a French poodle.) has come to visit, and if she sees Vimala there, she will commit murder. Nath begs Vimala to make herself scarce, but she manages to wangle a promise that he will give her a job. Clever girl. She also shows off her histrionic talents, infuriating Madame Fifi.

Vimala soon makes her way to a deserted railway carriage where she can spend the night. Only, the train is not destined to remain deserted. She is woken up in the morning by passengers complaining to the police about her. Not surprisingly she is arrested for ticketless travel. Luckily (or unluckily?) for her, they run into Shudhram and Budhram who are now two bawas (Parsi gentlemen). They claim she is their sister and the havaldar, after a stern warning, lets Vimala go with them. 

As conversation ensues between them, it is clear that the two conmen know of all that has happened to her. (Why, how, what - are questions that the missing sections of film may or may not provide.) Their con jobs worked very well when she was their partner; now they want her back. She escapes from there by pretending to be mad.

(Warning: SJA) A wealthy man's car breaks down in front of the railway station and grumpily, he decides to travel by train. Unfortunately, he leaves his wallet behind, and with only change in his pocket, is forced to travel third class. When he finally seats himself, torn and dishevelled, he runs into Vimala, who for some reason known only to her (and perhaps us, if the scenes weren't so badly cut) is pretending to hold a baby. Her co-passenger is shocked to hear the baby's name (it is his, by the way).

Munhphat that she is, Vimala manages to not only tell him all about where she works (All India Theatres), but also to discover that the man had two daughters who were lost in childhood. (A-ha! Regular Hindi film goers will at once know what is happening.) She is full of sympathy for the old man, and assures him that, with god's grace, he will get his daughters back again.

(Warning: SJA) Sethji is very impressed with Vimala. He summons Nath and his manager over, and says he is willing to continue to bankroll the theatre (he is a financier), only if Nath will give Vimala a raise. Nath is willing to promise him anything. But he has not contended with Madame Fifi, who knowing nothing of the wheels within wheels, is furious to find Vimala back on the theatre precincts, and is prepared to take matters into her own hands to ensure her departure.

Matter do not proceed quite as Madame Fifi would have wished. Especially when Nath comes back to tell her that Vimala is going to be the new lead of All India Theatres.

(Warning: SJA) Madame Fifi now bumps into Messrs. De Costa and De Souza. Yup, our old sadhu/samaj sevak/Parsi gentlemen. Only, she is more than a match for them.

Very soon, the three of them are as thick as, well, thieves, and are picking their next victim - Seth Dhirajmal Shantidas. He is the financier who is backing All India Theatres, and Madame Fifi has her eye on killing two birds with a single stone. Messrs. De Costa and De Souza (or Kalidas and Tulsidas, or so they claim are their real names) are all for the heist. 

(Meanwhile, the entire next segment of the video blacks out, though I can see stills if I pass the cursor over the video. Looks like Deepak has come back to claim Vimala as his 'wife', much to Nath's chagrin while Vimala's tearful protests gain her nothing at all.)

The next segment opens with the two conmen (I've given up on how many previous identities/disguises they have/had.) in jail. In the women's wing. They are now Madam Khadki and Madam Bhadki. 

 They manage to con their way out of prison, but on their way out, they see Vimala in jail. What the heck? I thought Deepak had managed to take her away? Between the plot and the murder of the DVD that was uploaded on YouTube, I have a headache. But I will ask...

Where do Mesdames Khadki and Bhadki take Vimala? Who are Seth's missing daughters? (Well, we know *that*, but still...) And if Vimala is not really Deepak's wife, then who is? And who is the mysterious woman who a doctor has saved from drowning? Why do the two conmen rescue Vimala and then leave her midway without a word? Do they and Madame Fifi (who on earth thinks up these names?!) succeed in their plot to loot the Seth and ruin Nath at the same time? Where did Ameeta and Pran disappear off to? (Or should I ask that to the chap who uploaded the film, cutting it mercilessly?)

Why does the hero have less to do in the film than the heroine and the two comedians? (Poor Shammi, and poor us!) More importantly, which idiot decided it would be a good idea to upload a film cutting off all the songs (except for O Mr Banjo)? And important scenes? And most importantly, where will I now find a complete copy of this film?! Harvey, may I kill you? Please? 

This was Rajendranath's debut film as a comic sidekick and he is not as annoying here as he became in later years. This was also the film where Shammi first met Mohammed Rafi, who had playbacked for him earlier.   

This is a film I would definitely like to see in its entirety. It was pretty interesting masala film, and I think, would have been rather entertaining if only it had been complete. For one, Shammi looked gorgeous, mouche and all. He doesn't have much to do but look handsome, but he does that very well indeed. Dashingly, devastatingly, handsome. Nalini Jaywant, pretty as a picture, whom I have not liked much in the movies that I have seen of her, is fantabulous in this film. The film rests on her petite shoulders and she does a great job of anchoring it. I think I will go see if I can find some older movies of hers.  

Harvey, I apologise for this farcical review and will make it up to you, I promise, with a post on the theme you sent me. But if you really, really like me, you will find an uncut version of this film and send me the link.