Harish Film views

The adventures of Tintin

2011-11-14T00:36:00.002+05:30

Director: Steven Spielberg

I always felt Spielberg is a unique filmmaker who bends his style for the genre he wants to create. While he could make an emotional, yet witty drama in the form of ‘Catch me if you can’ & ‘terminal’, he wouldn’t bring that genre defining theme into his sci-fi thrillers like ‘AI’ or ‘War of the worlds’; or for that matter, he never mixes the grandeur of ‘Jurassic park’ & ‘Indiana Jones’ with his emotional ventures like ‘Munich’ or ‘Schindler’s list’. So when he decided to make a film out of ‘Tintin’ I felt he would go into the ‘Indiana Jones’ theme with a little more serious tone tossed in. In other words, one should be prepared for kickass nonsensical fun.

Indeed, the movie felt like another misadventure of Mr.Jones, placing it well as a prequel to the 'Last Crusade', concentrating on how the boy Jones turned into an adventure seeking man. But with it comes the unnecessary grandeur that Harrison Ford seemingly pulled off with his infectious screen presence, which the two dimensional character of Tintin, even after transforming into a three dimensional cardboard, couldn't do.

But what can a single character do if the screenplay is more inclined towards ‘grandeur’? Where Snowy, just happen to break the mast of the Unicorn in the comic, Spielberg had to bring in a visually captivating cat & dog chase for that to happen; where Sakharine happens to be a mysterious collector of model ships, Spielberg had to make him a strong villain with a surprising past, played by a big star, adding to the ‘grandeur’. Be it the aircraft sequence or the bike chase, where ever the comic book is stretched to create a visual bonanza rather than a great movie experience, the outcome could only reach the eyes and not the mind. While those sequence do come off as visual treat, some like the encounter between Haddock and Sakharine in cranes screams to be edited out of this 1 ½ hour long exhibition of technological show-off. Even the re-imagination of the tale for the movie by recreating Captain Haddock’s character & how he regains his freewill and esteem, though smartly written, turns out only to be a superficially emotional drama.

On the hind side, the lush background information that Spielberg creates in almost every scene puts up a tough fight to seek our attention from the boring center stage. Who would bother to see if Thompson & Thompson were successful in chasing the pickpocket thief after he bumps into a lady & get dizzy, when the birds that fly around his head – a comic book usual to depict a dizzy person – is being caught by a shop owner to be sold. It’s a pity such genre (animation) defining creations and some wonderful re-imagination of the tale stands wasted because of the weak center stage & its dull presentation.

Rockstar

2011-11-14T00:24:00.002+05:30

Director: Imtiaz Ali

With a title like Rockstar, it is elementary to expect a movie on rock music. But, similar to the remark that a character gives to Jordon, ‘tum gaane baja rahe ho, ya gaane pe baja rahe ho?’ (Are you playing music or playing on music?), Imitiaz has used Rockstar only as one of the many layers (a wonderful layer at that) to wrap his painful, soul stirring love story. His concentrations are more towards the relationship that his lead pair share, which will still be strong, even if this movie were to have a software professional as lead, instead of a musician.

Like the character of Jordon (Ranbir), Rockstar is a film which never submits itself to be understood; instead it treads a path that brings out joy mainly by what it shows as an aftermath of the events that cause the characters to behave that way. It doesn’t care about the character’s whereabouts or how a character ends up bedridden. In other words, it has immense disregard for any and every background information which film-makers use to connect with the audience and to justify, under the realms of conceited rationality, the events that sprawl the length of the film. Instead, these details are pushed to the background – a dense background in that, so that the film can concentrate on the emotional game that plays as a result of the twists that come about, throughout the film. On the flipside though, the film with its disregard for making it explainable, tends to get submerged in its own world at times – which again is what the film is trying to convey.

In a scene, Heer (Nargis) waking up, finds herself in compromising position with her lover Jordan in his bed. Shell shocked, she sprints to the outer world, away from the love trap of Jordon, only to be chased by him to the streets. Maybe because she was gone too far or was he tired of chasing her or was he that confident in getting her back, Jordan stops short of running behind her. But, immediately after he does that, Heer turns back, only to be back in his arms. This fiery yet painful love that takes control of their actions and conscience, akin to Rumi’s quote: ‘away – beyond the worldly rules of right and wrong, there is a field; I will meet you there’, based on which the film is based, could probably define Rockstar.

7aum Arivu

2011-10-26T00:30:00.003+05:30

Director: A.R.Murugadoss

With a title like 7aum Arivu (7^th sense) if you thought the movie is going to be insanely smart. You are partly correct: it is insane, although it is not bad.

A film is a piece of art that captures your imagination and holds you in its control till you are watching it and even beyond it at times. It need not have logic to convince you, but it should create a perception of having logic. In plan words, the film should make sense even in its craziest moments. But in order to make sense some writers forgo the novelty and freshness in approach that is needed to grab the attention of the audience. If a film can do away with these two perils any movie can connect with its target audience regardless of what the writer tries to convey.

7aum arivu is one such movie that was marketed to be made with the same intent, that of creating a perception of logic without forgoing the novelty and fun part. But till intermission one couldn’t find enough interesting material to be captivated or for that matter stay connected to the happenings. Starting with the poorly researched documentary on Bhodhi Darman, to the unromantic couple, to Chinese villain who hypnotize people with a mere glance for a fleeting moment akin to Imperius curse, till the well-intended tamil patriotism, the events that play out till the intermission cries for want of creativity and freshness.

But on the flip side as the film gets into its groove, as one accommodates to the mumbo jumbo of the chinese and Bhodhi Darma, as one buys into the research of Sobha (Sruthi Hasan), the movie drags you back into the happenings as the cat and mouse chase begins. This chase, that runs the entire length of the second half, fitting into the shoe of a well-executed commercial caper, is the saving grace of the film which otherwise is bland.

At best, 7aum Arivu should only be seen as a film that acts as a reminder for what we (tamizhians) were and not as a piece of art.

Mankatha

2011-09-01T22:22:00.002+05:30

Director: Venkat Prabhu

Probably the biggest star to have a worst success ratio, Ajith has always been at the farther ends of the needle: success & failure. He could give the biggest hit of the year and the biggest flop of the year, (which he attributes to the intelligence of his fans to like only his good films) yet his star status always rests on the positive side of the needle.

The problem with any Ajith film is it needs to cater to a wider range of audience, regardless of its content, to become a hit. I could easily get away with saying that he didn’t select proper scripts but some of his films would eventually prove me wrong. Because, when he played to the ‘gallery’ with films like ‘Attagasam’ it wasn’t well received by his ‘style requisite’ fans & the ‘thinker’ fans; and when he came up with ‘Kreedom’ his ‘gallery’ & ‘style requisite’ fans let him down. Both were equally tolerable films but unfortunately his reach is too large to be constricted to a particular sect. As for as Billa is concerned: there are always exceptions to any theory. Yet, in a broader perspective, cinema & in particular commercial cinema in India can’t succeed by concentrating only on pleasing a particular audience while making a film. It goes without saying that even if you stay true to the concept you have in hand, you need to make it understandable for everyone out there. In short, there needs to be some compromise so that the disinterested audiences belonging to the other sect aren’t bored. We may call this as inclusive viewing – give some quota for every sect; & with the pleased audience, deliver what you wanted. Venkat Prabhu has taken this risky & yet safe route to make the 50^th movie of Ajith: Mankatha.

What works best for Mankatha is that, it tries to bring out a reckless madman out of Ajith. Though it’s inspired by Heath Ledger’s take on the Joker (the bgm too – note the bgm that plays while Ajith interacts with Arjun on phone) it is refreshing to see Ajith let loose. As the central character, he carries us through the dullest moments of the film with his sheer presence & measured caricature. Yet, for someone who is attributed as the Kingmaker, Vinayak’s (Ajith) intelligence & smartness is questionable. Throughout the movie he seems to piggy ride on others, only by terrorizing them with his cunning looks & evil laugh. While this weakens the plot, the poorly executed & enormously stretched out action sequences takes a toll on the interest in the movie. Though these sequences have some dare-devilry, either from Ajith or Arjun, the songs & their poor placements are the culprits for people taking to smoking in the theatre I went. Warning: if you thought ‘tot-to toin’ in Asal to be the worst Ajith song ever to be pictured on him, you will be proved wrong. This clearly shows Venkat’s ineptness in dealing with situational songs & mass numbers – you don’t have to say everything you want to say- you know; like how you subtly touched on the meaning of the title. Having said that, there is a touch of class with the way he handles some of the sequences which otherwise are usually treated as mundane scenes. It is this classy act that rises above some gaping loopholes in the plot to paint poetry on screen – the chessboard scene is one such.

On the whole, Venkat Prabhu may not be creative enough to make a great con film, but he is talented enough to give an enjoyable Ajith film.

By the way, I was hoping Kamal Ekambaram (Subbu) will ask Ajith in the epilogue, “enada vilayadringa?” with Ajith replying “Mankatha da”, which would have been a bigger punch for the end. It’s Thala 50 outta 100.

Aaranya Kaandam

2011-06-13T00:23:00.002+05:30

Director: Thiagarajan Kumararaja

“I wandered lonely as a cloud
That floats on high o'er vales and hills,
When all at once I saw a crowd,
A host, of golden daffodils;
Beside the lake, beneath the trees,
Fluttering and dancing in the breeze…”

A cloud moves with the wind over picturesque locations and ends up seeing a lot of daffodils. But as we all know Daffodils is not just that. It is the experience of seeing/reading about the natural beauty which fills our heart. That being a poem, Aaranya Kandam is nothing short of a cinematic Daffodil to me. The movie sweeps the screen of any frill that is attached to our usual cinema and concentrates completely to let us experience the vision of the director. That is why a scene when a principal character jumps out of a police jeep, you get the high of watching a quality film – not because of the twist in the tale but because of the way the scene was handled (& pictured as well).

When we say arty film, people might think the film would have multi-layered screenplay which you can decipher only by being in the clique of the directors’. But here you get to see shots that play out before you – easy as cake. Yet the strokes – the vibrant colourful strokes, that the director makes with his characters, keeps us entertained till the very last minute. What is more striking is that, the director didn’t go for over the top or classy subtle touches to show his vision. Instead he casually lets his characters behave in their natural way, while he entwines them to a common thread. How many times have we stood on a street looking at different people going on about doing their chores, till we are distracted by the purpose of our visit? The success of the movie lies in the fact that, we the audience are back to doing what we enjoy the most; observing people, though we don’t get Yuvan’s marvellous tracks as bgm in real life.

All said, the movie does have the slow-motion camera works, or high octave music overtures played as the backdrop for this crime-entertainer. But the tongue-in check approach to these gangster movie usuals (new masala for making films) sustains the novelty. On that note, the movie can easily be accused of heavy inspiration from its Hollywood counterparts. Sure the idea is borrowed and so is a lot of taking styles, but the film being all about the behavioural science stands on its own.

Ko

2011-04-24T23:57:00.002+05:30

Director: K.V. Anand

When one ought to communicate through paper, he/she sometimes scribble few words (knowing that will make the point) or write in detail or go for pictorial representation. It is left to the discretion of the writer as to which form he/she should use given the content. Problem starts when the writer giving it all, tells the reader to filter what he/she wants to take: if you want photos – here they are, if you want hints – here they are, if you want long drawn explanations – here they are. Well, won’t that be a hindrance, you might ask.

Given the premise of journalism in the film KO, it is but natural for a journalist to analyze a point in every possible angle. But just because the journalist invested a lot of time in analyzing the various aspects of a single point should he/she publish it all? Won’t it hamper the flow and affect the scheme on the whole – just like how ‘he/she’ acts as a speed breaker as you read through this article. You can’t question the logic as it underlines the gender neutrality. Yet it sounds wrong as I could have stuck with any one gender for the sake of the article. That is exactly where Ko misses the mile race – you know this is not wrong yet you cant say this way of representation is good.

Cinema & in a broader sense the world today has shifted to instant gratification. One day we were cheering for the world cup victory, the next day we went gunghoo about lokpal until ipl wave hit us and tomorrow the election result as we leave behind yesterday. In this scenario it is but natural to skim over a lot of flaws & overlook for the magic that the director is trying to create over celluloid space. But should we struggle a lot to adjust to the pitch & mindset of the director, isn’t it his duty to arrest the audience – more so being a commercial director? It is not that Ko doesn’t engage you; it simultaneously drags you into the film while disturbs your attention here and there. Well we can’t always have a bed of roses devoid of thorns.

On a different note, after watching Ko one thing was pondering my mind: why was it named so? Is it because of the subject – politics - it deals with? Well that maybe the true intention. But on witnessing the daredevilry of Ashwin (Jeeva) in the film I can’t but think of a better correlation. Nevertheless it could have been named Spiderman and there wouldn’t have been any naysayer.

Mappillai

2011-04-10T22:36:00.003+05:30

Director: Suraj

It was not a race; there weren’t any freebees distributed, though it's the election season; there weren’t any celebrities spotted in the vicinity; yet people made beeline for the exit.

As Vivek, Danush & the team of Maaplillai bombarded us with PJ after PJ clubbed together with sentiment & action sequences, which even TR will squirm at, I was dozing off in my seat. I woke up to a heavy blow on my knees. Opening my eyes, I saw a sexagenarian running past me which I thought was to attend his call of nature: how wrong I was! As he opened the door, he let in a sense of awakening amongst the inmates. What followed was a mad rush to be freed.

The ‘unknown Anna Hazare' has shown us the path: a generation has awoken to protest against these haphazard films.

It was a proud moment, a feeling of patriotism gushing towards the only source of entertainment I have had, as I witnessed a radical change in approach to film viewing. It was like yesterday when the whole hall was arrested to the seat, entombed inside, till the end of Sura. How things have changed since then. Are we the same people that lapped up crass movies like Siruthai, Singam Puli? As I came out to join the crowd, a wave of intelligence swept me off my feet. Have we finally displayed people power, showing the middle fingers to these meddling fools who take us for granted while making such films? The future will answer. For now let’s cherish the happiness for having a good start to this long battle.

Nadunisi Naaygal

2011-02-19T01:50:00.005+05:30

Director: Gautham Vasudev Menon

How many times as a kid, have you stood in glee with a piece of scribbled paper in front of your parents/people you looked up to? The satisfaction that you would have felt in your face comes from the gratification in producing something straight from your heart. But are products that come out of passion (at whim though) good? Certainly not. Quality can be an act of luck which clicks for you or the area where you ventured would have been something that you are naturally gifted at. But when things fail to please; especially when it comes from your heart, it only means you have been lackadaisical in not rethinking against the flow. In films we can term that as sluggish writing. But isn’t that too harsh a word for something that was approached with so much gusto? Will you break the news like that when your kid shows you an incompetent work? You tell them to work on it and improve the substance. Gautham the kid here, unsure as he honestly accepts, has brought to an elite few his new piece of paper wanting to get his feedback and move ahead in his creative venture.

To be honest Gautham, you seem to be in a dearth of ideas pertaining to psycho thriller (??). At this moment a sincere fan that you are, you have tried to recreate the magic which enchanted you; akin to how a small kid tries to draw superman/action hero pictures to extend his stay in that world. Widen your horizon, strengthen your base, go back to the roots, its up to you – but come armed with a better film next time around. Unlike Sukanya (Sameera) we do want to see your vetted weapons.

Man Madan Ambu

2010-12-28T00:37:00.003+05:30

Director: K.S. Ravikumar

Regardless of the success/failure of his films, Kamal has always been raved for his efforts. Adversely it’s a double edged knife in that; it puts the spot light on the (sub) consciously narcissistic attitude of his. I need not say anything more than the term ‘dasavatharam’ in this context. In his latest offering though there is some respite in this regard.

After going through what seems to be the prologue for the movie Man Madhan Ambu, as we get acquainted with all the characters, there comes a sequence, where a malyali producer couple tries to evade the dreamy eyes of Ambu (Trisha). The Universal Hero who till then only had a calculated ‘fan patronizing’ introductory, silently creeps into the frame to form a picture perfect scene where each character is let free to behave on their own. This subtle setup speaks volumes about the command of writer Kamal over the star. With the stage being set, what could have been a straight forward tale of intercepting lives, sadly ends up as a cacophony of mismatched tales which as it reaches the crescendo becomes the mother of all priyadarshan’s disaster comedies(?!).

The issue is not about trying too many things or touching upon many a topic. It’s about how you coherently interlace your ideas with the life-thread. In one crucial scene, upon asking what happened to him after a tragic incident in his past, Mannar (Kamal) breaks down to reveal that, no one has asked that till now. Yet, as he starts to recite his tale, we get to see only a scene by scene (in reverse order though) narration of the incident. Though it does ties up few knots that were left intentionally hanging earlier in the movie, it doesn’t become anything more than a gimmick.

Had Kamal been clear that he only wanted to tell a simple tale of tit-for-tat, he could have ended the first half with the beautifully written scene where Mannar is left stranded in the streets hopelessly, with the later half dealing with the confusions as a consequence of his retaliation. But Kamal being Kamal, sets for an uncharted voyage hoping to widen the canvas only to venture into stereotypes, from which he initially tried to escape. Wish he had taken a cue from the (comical/irritating) debate between Mannar & Deepa (Sangeetha) over the motive of each character they have created & tweaked the script.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part I

2010-11-20T23:46:00.002+05:30

Director: David Yates

Harry Potter movies have been charming us from beginning of this millennium. With each passing year comes a film from the Potter stable, and with each film the movie experience has slowly but steadily stepped outside the shadow of their novels’ as the search for a better experiences continues in different dimension (of which 3D shouldn't have been a part though). There used to be the smug in the faces of the child artists that they are doing magic: there was even a dialogue in part 4 where Harry declares I love magic with an artificial smile that was so out of sync and cringe worthy. Performances apart, the screenplay was always weaved around the book with dire importance only for passing along all that was written in the book. Where was the setting, the aesthetics, the nuance, the wittiness? Oh there was wittiness all right- but it manifested the formulistic approach they took while writing. From part 5 there was a sea-change in the approach to tell the story and it got stronger in part 6. They didn’t delineate into the details of how Dumbledore’s army went about practicing; they didn’t ruminate over how the Order of Phoenix functions. But they brought alive the magic in the screen that was till then available only in their textbooks.

When they announced that the final part will be split in to two movies I felt it was done not to tell everything in the novel, but because the writers some how created a script that had a lot of captivating visuals to offer in a coherent story. To experience the movie as it is and not as an adaptation I decided against brushing up my HP facts and went straight ahead for the movie. After watching the film I am really glad I took a wise decision. Else I wouldn’t have enjoyed the narrative style taken by the writers for explaining the deathly hallows; I might have not been scared by the appearance of nagini in one crucial scene; I might have not glued my eyes to the screen when Ron was contemplating on breaking one of the horcruxes. These and many such moments in the films would have pleased the audience who had read the book, but they would have had just a smile in their face seeing their imagination come alive in a different perspective. But movies are meant to enthrall you with things you don’t expect. Only that can leave you spell-bound (literally in case of HP movies).

HP7-part1 doesn’t care much about educating you of the story; instead it dabbles with the plot to create the charming world; the world that any good cinema creates regardless of the theme or genre it deals with. There need not be magic deployed to cast a spell on the viewers; the chemistry among the three leads is more than enough to charm you. Once marred by poor screen presence coupled with fabricated dialogues, the same trio in this part engages us through out (be it their witty lines, their non-verbal gestures, the subtle conveyance of the matter, the mature acting) in a film which covers the dullest part of the 7^th book. This couldn’t have been possible without the swiftness in the screenplay. Sure there are few dull moments during the forest sequences. But this plot needs that for its own reasons. The way the screenplay steers the plot in the right direction every time they comes a slag is a pleasure to watch. One such scene is when Hagrid starts cribbing about the way he brought Harry to his house in London when he was a baby; Mad-E-Moddy cuts him short with his smart one liner. These kinda moments created by all the characters that occupy the screen liven up the whole experience and engage us with the happening till the credit starts rolling. For this unique experience of watching a Harry Potter movie for the first time, it is sure worth a trip if you couldn’t find any other reason.

Endhiran

2010-10-06T00:41:00.008+05:30

Direction: Shankar

People say an open mind and zero knowledge about a film will work wonders in terms of the viewing experience. It is in the blank mind where the director’s vision can be completely witnessed. But it is a dangerous path; a double edged knife for the so called masala capers that are produced everywhere. They try to travel on many shoes owing to the need for a wider reach and end up falling flat.

Endhiran suffers a lot because of the overloaded plate. It tries to be a triangular love story, a revenge saga, a sci-fi film, a moralistic tale and lot more. It sure does put up a dream show with all these metallic decorations (literally too) after the arrival of Chitti to Sana's home. Shankar sketches the 'larger than life image' of Rajini in this portion in ways that give goosebumps to any tamizhian. Not stopping there, with the help of the unemotional Chitti, transforms him to the almighty without any fuss. The scale then shoots higher, proportional to the grin that widens on our face when Chitti is awestruck by Sana. But when the film gets into serious business, it fails to justify each one of its sub plots due to the disproportionate blend; only to spoil the show. The narrative here stops concentrating on how each task is done and shifts to depict only the grandeur that occurs as a consequence of it. As a result we get to see a weak black sheep gaining entry into the forte of antagonist and with just the click of a button abolish everything.

That being the case of story-telling, lets move towards direction. The movie has great action sequences, magnificent visual effects, witty lines, aesthetically picturised song sequences, well crafted/executed sequences, Rajini’s charisma, Rajini’s acting style, the subtle difference he brings out between the two characters he enacts, the Alex Pandian avatar and what not. What else can we expect apart from this? But these intended highlights will turn out to be highlights only if they are coherently connected right? The ups and downs in the narrative and execution take two waveforms, distended by the interval between them. When the narrative reaches it crest, the execution falters bringing the sequence down and vice-versa. After a point, the shuffling between alluring set-pieces and dull, dragging sequences makes us frigid to the extent where even the would-be-engaging scenes fail to impress. Is it because of the orthogonal, on your face approach like the red chip for bad character, fall of apple for newton's law, guileful laugh of Sana while she deceives Chitti? These cringe worthy sequences sure does pull down the level of the film. Yet to the film’s credit, the crests of narrative and execution come together several times; and whenever they do, it’s nothing short of a firecracker. Maybe Endhiran should not be considered as a movie while watching. It is more than a film; an experience that can not be missed for the sheer pleasure it provides for the fans of all quarters.

Naan Mahan Alla

2010-08-23T00:50:00.001+05:30

Director: Suseendran

It is customary to show the demonic activities of villainous groups, so that by the time we loathe them, we not only feel comfortable when the hero stands in front of them; we think it is justifiable to admonish them. 'Nan Mahan Alla' would have had that thread when it was cultivated in the heart of the director. But tamil cinema having ripped that formula and pinched it in to the blood of every moviegoer, novelty is a must; especially if you are back after delivering a quality product like ‘Vennila Kabadi Kuzhu’. What better way to entice the audience, than spell binding them with the audacity of the illicit activities that the gang carries out; more importantly the sheer depth in details of them. But in doing that, Suseendran creates a film which meanders through the life of the hero half heartedly only to heighten the power of the antagonist. Half heartedly because, while even a phone call that one of the antagonist casually makes in the prologue aid to propel the story, there are no such details in the life of the hero. After a certain point in the movie it is evident that the director is inclined towards the antagonists, because while the hero’s life has the stamp of ‘seen it before’, even the scenes that transcends from the hero’s life to the antagonists’ are intellectual. One such example is the ‘crow scene’. To top it when the antagonists arrest us through every movement of theirs, the hero has scenes where he allures a girl with a ‘written for the sake it’ line; he gets a job because he happens to have a friend who is employed; he unravels the mystery of the antagonists because he happens to know the underworld don of Chennai. His trials & tribulations make him a true masala hero, who just for the sake of showing, faces all hardship but easily comes out of them in a jiffy without losing his chivalrousness. Wish we common people are well connected and lucky like him. But then we won’t remain the protagonists of our life.

It is not mainly the imbalance in treatment of the characters that keeps us at bay; the treatment too juggles between tested masala and sheer intelligence. The masala does tickle the funny bone; not to forget the immaturely crafted childish romance, which brings a smile to our face. But those are the fillers, while the crime and revenge sprawl the entirety of the movie. Would the movie have worked if the hero was less of an outsmarting person? We may never know. But how refreshingly unique it would have been, had for once the protagonist (and not the hero) died as a warrior?

Inception

2010-07-17T11:24:00.003+05:30

Director: Christopher Nolan

How wonderful it would be if people watch our movies with the attention they give while watching Inception. Gone are the days where people become restless and scream whenever dialogues take prominence & complexity sores to greater heights. It is intriguing how the people at WB had incepted the idea to make the audience digest every word uttered (& even the unsaid ones) and to process them. Is it peer pressure wanting to know it all – like a challenge to prove that they are intelligent enough to be esoteric; which is becoming the order of the day. Inception works on this aspect of the audience. It works only if you are willing to surrender to the idea. What we get from that is something as uncontrollable as a character in the film wants the heist to be. While movies are being made to entertain us through the viewing experience, inception treads a different path (which Nolan tested with his Memento) where the entertainment is by making our minds race to the speed of the dreams created on screen. Sure it tries to be convincing by making characters carry a briefcase containing a machine which allegedly can make people dream together the vision of one a many. But that just remains as a tool to get us into the dream after we all are abreast with the grounds rules. And there in lies the delivering part of Inception, the universal appeal; it challenges us to reprimand the dreams using those ground rules only to be invigorated, on being satisfied seeing the laws adhered to.

For a film that goes into dream, inside a dream and goes further more, like the two opposing mirrors concept envisaged by Ariadne (Ellen Page), the staggeringly simplistic depiction helps in not losing the audience anywhere. But in order to be understandable, the multitude of layers limits itself to the layers of dreams and doesn’t go beyond the “anti-bodyguard” concept. Wish they could have at least explored the fact that different minds act at different speed.

In Prestige (another offering from Nolan), Micheal Caine says that, the trick doesn’t lie in the disappearing act alone; what brings the applause is the reappearing act. In Inception, the ambiguity of the reappearing act (finale) works wonders for the film during the screening time but as the fog clears the complexity takes a toll on the ingenious screenplay as it tests the ground rules again letting the feeling hang in there unless Nolan comes up with a sequel. What do I mean by that? Before we get to what I intend to say let me brief you few things. While instructing Ariadne about a trick that needs to be employed while architecting a dream, Arthur (Joseph Jordon) says that, the complex maze of a setup should always have a back door in the form of a paradox which only the creator can sense. Similarly in a radically different method, Cobb (Leonardo) uses a spinning top theory to ascertain that he is in reality by setting a rule that it will continuously rotate when set to motion only in the dream – indicating the shift from laws of physics again. It can be called clever delusion by showing the spin of the spinning top only twice, but even for the conceit driven Cobb, reassurance of his reality never occurs by using the spinning top. Then again when in dream laws doesn’t matter when you don’t need them and does when you want to create a stunning stunt sequence. It is the power to mend the rules while making us believe that everything does fall in place, that idea incepted in us makes Inception a grand art.

Raavanan

2010-06-19T22:13:00.005+05:30

Director: Mani Ratnam

In an interview Mani Ratnam once said, I don’t care about the story. I would be happier if I were to just shoot. What he meant was that, the success of a director lies in manipulating the emotions of the characters and hence the audience with every scene. He meant the director’s scope lies in creating spell-binding scenes. But he failed to bring one more point to the table: without hampering the flow and purpose. A movie can’t be made interesting with just great visuals. How much ever you pan with your camera how much ever emotions you try to extract from the dedicated actors it will remain only two dimensional if there is a dearth of the third angle. The third angle, which not necessarily third in order, is the depth in the screenplay.

When you are going to be faithful to the epic (largely) and are going to just make them travel in time and station them in a remote jungle why not give them real challenges to portray what they are capable off. It can be a nice counter to Dev, as Dev asks Veera where is Ragini, by replying where is my sister. But it makes us wonder, where is the love for his brother, who was brutally murdered? Piling up scene after scene with retaliation in the form of dialogue or action is a format better left for the nether. Do we really need the age old witty lines by a police officer to identify the black sheep? Why resort to literal character depiction like: “look her nose was handled – she is Soorpanaga”, “look he is jumping trees – he is Hanuman”. But when Ragini sees Dev after FOURTEEN days she remarks “is this beard because of me – this is not how you should look - unshaven and unclean”, touching the subtle air of reference to the all clean God. In another scene as we are shown Ragini to be caged in - except from the top, in split second we are shown her to be shouting in wide open space, touching the undermining meaning that, be left out in the open or trapped in a pit, she sure is trapped. As much as this warrants appreciation, like any other Mani film the scene rises above the depth of the written words with the unwritten visuals as she speaks of weakness and tears in open space while she is shown as a brave girl inside the pit, symbolizing that she might actually be screaming inside and yet putting up a brave face in the real world. As the visuals make our mind to interpret that particular scene, a character commands her to stop screaming making us conclude that this is not how it should be understood. This constant battle between the different perceptions of a visual and then submitting to what the visionary had wanted to tell and lap it up; this creative process; is what makes me enjoy a Mani Ratnam film which is nowhere to be found in this 2hrs long movie.

The inception of Raavan being in hindi, I wanted to witness Abhisekh’s Beera first than Vikram’s Veera. Having seen the hindi version, a zillion questions ran in my mind about the director’s approach to the concept and the movie as a whole and that formed my review for Raavan. But after looking at Vikram’s Veera, the mist surrounding (literally too) the movie started to clear and I could understand what an actor can bring to the drawing board. The lamest of scenes in which Beera was hopeless has Veera instill passion and dedication. The climatic battle where Beera/Veera was meant to go berserk (as like many other scenes) Beera ends up as a caricature while Veera nears what we call – a league of ITS own. If that is not a glittering reason, the mere presence and charisma of Veera, the demonic physique is no match for the six footer, Beera. It is for Veera, Ragini and the Navarasa nayagan Karthick and for what they bring as sweet to the ordinary mini meal makes Raavanan a better viewing experience than Raavan.

Raavan

2010-06-19T00:26:00.005+05:30

Director: Mani Rathnam

Ramayan is a very bold story which along with many knots, put forth that both the good & bad when at fault pay for their sins: a knot worth to be inspired. When you are struck by an idea you start enjoying it in different ways, like how a guy who falls for a girl will go on creating and recreating the scene of submission. As these ideas continuously follow while the creator is envisaging, his analytical mind starts working on ways to connect these random hair rising moments. You know they excited you and you know now you have to connect those points to make it into a plausible screenplay. When you start writing you have all your notes ready and you work on ways to insert them; because these notes – hand outs are the very definition of each character and motive for each & every particular hair rising moment. But the mind has this treacherous power to be excited by the high moments alone that you will want to take great care in crafting them. When you are that creatively activated you will live for that moment alone and forget about the cues. Then when you realise that cues are missing you just go about including them in. Then you will remember you need character traits that you created to be portrayed too. On doing that you will feel you have said all you wanted to say and feel proud. But later on only will you realise that there needs to be a seamless follow of events; as events alone drives these characters to act the way the notes had instructed them to and events alone leads to those high moments through the path of the cues. At the end you will see that it has all been rushed up.

Raavan is the latest example for the aforementioned concept. The movie has the graph of the three characters correct; the sub plots and the incidents where they should react as the tide changes from familiarity to the unknown, perfect; the intricate details minutely sketched out for us to marvel. But why should they do it? Why should sub plots come because they are to be told? Why should the tribals list out qualities of Beera in bullet points like a power-point presentation? Why should there be so much importance to artistry at the sake of losing the purpose of the existence of the very same? Why should Sangeev be jumping trees just because he plays Hanuman? Why should the flow of events be controlled by the director rather than letting the events unfold at their own rate and speak out for them? We may never know why the storm alone was give center stage discarding the silence that should have come before it. And thus Beera, Raavan and Mani leaves us wondering like how Raagini looks baffled post the climatic battle. But if you are a person who care least about seamless flow and just want to witness great cinematography, background music and the unapologetic nonchalant character, Dev played with utmost dedication by the aging Vikram you will lap it up.

Raajneeti

2010-06-06T13:01:00.002+05:30

Most writers when queried confess that they get that knot, that idea, that concept when about to sleep or as dream. Prakash Jha must have slept with the idea of bringing the kingdom politics of Mahabharata to contemporary milieu. How great a concept it will turn out to be, with two families fighting for power at the cost of the people! He would have realized if we are to remove all the ethereal skin and flesh of Mahabharata and its politics, it all comes to that one word “Power”. This cinema fanatic turned politician would have turned back to his Godfather frenzy days when he knew it’s always about power; for the movie is filled with incidents from Godfather and the well inspired Sarkar. From the brother who a ruffian and weak with women by nature and yet genuine in his interest, the silent sibling who wages a war with just the commandeering blink of his eyes, his foreign love who seem to be the victim of his Rajneeti, it all comes to how these are deployed in this vast script. Then there is the sanctified Ganga and its son, a dangle between the families – a member of the union yet just a faithful stranger. Prakash Jha while in his blissful dream of scripting would have been so kicked up by then that before all these concocted to become another “Thalapathy”, woke up to document it. Thus it all ends up as just the documentation of this hair rising concept. Sure he goes a step further by painting the characters with the bloody colour of oldest political family of this country and yet it again stays a painting that doesn’t come alive before us. Consider the scene where Suraj’s mother coming to know of the truth, pleads to come home; a scene that should have cemented Suraj’s role in our heart. But, it ends up as just a formality thanks to the drooping eyes of Ajay Devgan. But we can’t just blame Devgan for this as his character is unsure of his stand himself. His attempts to be genuine with the people and work for the people seems to be again just a formality for he too is interested in power rather that the larger good. Having butchered the most honest character of Mahabharata nothing can be done by the magical Krishna played effectively by Nana patekar to bath us in the blood of Kurushetra which has been executed as the lamest battle to have ever fought even in a dream. The lonely, confident figure of Ranbir Kapoor and the distressed Katrina dressed up as incarnation of Indira/Sonia Gandhi are the saving graces of this film whose trials binds this cacophony of sorts into oneness to a large extent. But they again are left alone by the executers as they are shown to be too smart without doing anything.

Rajneeti can be best viewed and enjoyed as a recollection of the cult stories that still seem to be relevant in a strange way. No wonder it can be used as a film to quiz people: so from where did this scene birth? And this scene? And this scene?

Enervation Vs Vijay

2010-05-01T23:04:00.008+05:30

A peak at the so called energy of Vijay with reference to Sura.

It’s May day, a day dedicated to all the people who work. Logically it only caters to people who sweat it out, but let’s be more reasonable: everyone who works deserves recognition. On this day I witnessed the work of a person who is been working non-stop for 18 years. He has reached his 50^th film which released yesterday amidst great expectations, as people want to catch the last formalistic film from Vijay. All these years it baffled me that how can a person be so mechanical and be so absorbed in doing the same thing again and again. It’s like how we people go about our 8-8 work in air conditioned room where all the parameters are conditioned to not let us deviate from unanimity. I used to console myself that each work has its own twists and turns which makes it interesting (while challenging too). But then we get the chance to procrastinate and also experience those days where we don’t do any work, yet when the vigor comes back, we with the renewed charge get back at the lost time making sure the end product doesn’t get affected. These actors what with each move of their hair being exposed extensively can’t easily escape like us. Flops after flops, hits after hits, but nothing changed the zeal inside him for he knew it is where he belongs and it is what he knows. Like the advice he gives to his people in this movie, he knows he can’t back out just because he failed. When Vettaikaran came I was shocked: not because of the quality of work that was showcased, but the energy of Vijay: he looked enervated.We can’t blame him you know, for this Lion had to face enemies single handedly. After seeing Sura I can’t shake off the fact that boredom has hit him finally. From the high pitched punch dialogues to funny lines (intended to be) when MOUTHED by him it only came off as a formality; a way to pass the 2 ½ hrs of screen time. His disinterest scaled to greater heights when he just lands in the screen in his Audi, where he plays a fisherman. As a proof of the unquestioned stupidity that he supports, he tells his mother in the film that he will tell how he came in a car later. Disinterest being the main hamper, he even gets irritated at certain scenes (the suicide scenes of Tammanah, who seems to have caught in this net) and starts shouting at people around him. It looked as if he has lost it for these kinda roles and he desperately wants a change – my view attested by him in the audio launch of this film.

What ever criticism that surrounds him, no one can deny that, he has his own way at dance. He breathes dance with every movement coming as casually with no frills attached like how he sleep walks his ROLE (no S) in numerous boring films. After witnessing five songs, I can only get back to my wild streak of imagination where Vijay was forced to sign this film against his will; he not able to stand up against them succumbed to their demand; but on the day before the release Vijay had the last laugh by making sure his 50^th film is a damn-squib which even he can’t watch, reinstating the fact that good or bad, his free will is what that matters – A hero is born – THE END. But I was cast back in to the daymare, where the hero AGAIN raises from the ashes; AGAIN takes THE WALK followed by people – oh God. No! Not him, especially after the church sequence with Radha Ravi as priest – I lost faith!

My last hope was the action sequence. The tie, the round hat, the flying coat and what not to turn people off: all came in a fight sequence (the poor taste in costumes was like the bgm sticking everywhere, blinding my eyes). Direction is a very tough task, where you need to make sure what you wanted get done in the exact manner. Be it a plastic bag flying by wind outside your house or a blood stain on the shirt, everything needs to be done as planned. But what was the purpose of an earthmover dancing behind Vijay when he was trying to produce strange moves in air with his tuxedo (? – lol) all in the name of a fight. One thing is for certain, he successfully made sure the sidekicks don’t come near his Audi and only there did the semi-paralyzed Vijay who was moving, sitting in a trolley during songs, made brisk moves. Thankfully he didn’t show off his chest using a V-cut tops inside a coat (Yes he is capable of wearing that combination) which houses the source material for the wigs he allegedly sells in this film.

To increase the head-ache more, came another song. Vijay as usual walks the isle while Tammanah smiles. He starts his robotic movements in no sync to the guitar notes and goes down to the floor. When I thought he has literally gone down and he won’t get up after this in his screen career, he does a move that made me sit up straight. While still in floor, with every push-side, push-side move he grounds me from my high minded criticism. Still not to beat the dust, I look at his work with skepticism. He kicks his leg in front of me after the accurate ankle moves highlighted by the selection of shoes. Yet I don’t budge. When Tammanah does a somersault at the hands of Vijay the crowd gives a faint glimpse of a sound called whistle. Remember the last time you went all force to do something when someone else got the appreciation you deserve? I dono if he heard the audience, but after she does a circus act, he just breaks free and goes wild and wickedly utters the line “kannale kaatede enaku tata” but I could only see him gesturing, “don’t bid good bye to me”. From the cap to the flying tuxedo everything seems to be fitting now perfectly. The way Tammanah’s (in a chick skin hugging outfit) curly hair dances to the beats as she walks towards him, the way he runs towards her and stands close and with wonderful editing we cut close without any strain to our eyes and he puts a coolers while delivering a punch – I finally saw a portion of what I paid to watch. When he pushed the end of his coat back and screams “am a glimmering star” as the biggest star – Sun looks at him, while the crowd went berserk by then, am rest assured he hasn’t lost it as I assumed.

Painting the Screen

2010-04-15T01:24:00.002+05:30

All these years into socializing, I have observed one important thing. Whatever be the topic the allegory seems to fall on painting. Be it music, literature or any other distinct art you could name the comparison seems to be with painting at some point or the other. I for once off late in my thoughts, when I get awed by a piece of music started remarking in that way too – “the way he pulled up the vibrato and his strokes; gosh at times it seemed as if his hand had turned into a brush and he was painting a masterpiece with his magnificent strokes.” Like the art, creating an art itself is an art – it’s more of a visual spectacle. The beauty of the swift movements of the hand, the sway here and there, the bend of the brush to create the art in itself is a treat to watch. And that exactly is what this topic is about: Painting the screen.

Being a film enthusiast; a person whose religion if you may ask will always be films, I have come to look for the visual painting more importantly in a film. It is what many critics (reviewers to be morbidly true) call “form” “presentation” et al. This phenomenon is what dictates the amount of attention a person gives to the idiocy that is being displayed to him. As rightfully said by Mani Rathnam – film is all about how you show it and it should always be that way. Here I would like to point out that am not referring to Avatar and it’s “whatever it is” telling. Avatar was a display of tool and it stops there itself. It is an example of “showing” and not “how you are showing it”. For the skim-through readers I meant; while the latter has an idea and its all about appreciating the beauty in which it was shown the former remains only as a pretty doll.

A film need not have a strong baseline or what you technically call it “thread”, but the idea has always been about how you are showing it. This tool has been used in various forms: from showing allegory –what we off late call the directorial touch to beautification of the content. It wouldn’t have been mesmerizing had it was only about Devika playing the veena while singing a great song (Sonnathu neethaana) in Nenjil Or Aaalayam. It was about the swift movement of her hands the cry of her dry eyes the silence of Muthuraman and the excellent camera angles. This is what I call “how you tell it”. Recently I saw Paiya, a movie I knew would suck (okay people I do go into a movie hall with presumptions but it has got nothing to do with my opinion on a film – I make it a point to call a spade a spade) but I didn’t expect the visuals to be this bad. After conversing with few people, I was horrified to learn, they all loved the way the songs were picturised. Before you come to conclusion here – what I found bad about the visuals was that, the idea that sounded very pleasing, but it didn’t come out the way it was supposed to (for people who want to question: how the hell you do know how it was supposed to look – Get lost); and my shock was how come people couldn’t see that. In most of the songs I kept thinking – wow, had it been done well it would have looked great.

In musicals like Paiya, the choreography (not typical dancing) dictates the final output. The order of the present is going for the slow-motions and the beautiful arches and postures that the people display in them. The weak smile, the glimpse of her eyes, the dancing hairs are being concentrated more. This film falls under the beautification of scene and scenes to show beautification that I was talking about earlier. In “katrukulle” song from Sarvam, picturised by the most daring song visualizer of this generation, Vishnu Vardhan, he does what I would term it – painting the screen. The way how the camera turns in the opposite direction to Aarya as he slowly leans towards Trisha; the way how Trisha performs the blushing and turning towards us scene (intentionally to give a view of the obvious through her single strap top) as Aarya nears her, displaying great amount of intimacy that would only come if she is oblivious about her exposure; the way the sun glimpses between the pair as Aarya romanticizes the walk of Trisha towards him, clearly is a benchmark for others who wants to go in the path of “scenes for beautification”. While the example of “sonnathu nee thaana” is for visual poetry, “katrukulla” is a VISUAL poetry in strict sense.

With Paiya, Lingusamy apparently had tried to create VISUAL poetry. As “tan thane tan thane tane …” starts he wanted to show a guy breaking free and dance to the tune of rain but all we could see was the free-form movement of Karthi’s side packs. Even though Tammanah does a neat job in the same song with her chivalrous movements that showed poise, the amateurish act that will be up to display if a first timer like me were to dance is what comes on screen when Karthi performs – and they remark he has great screen presence. Okay, if you were to argue that the accolades were for his screen presence that doesn’t require dancing then what about the all important walk he does at in the interval block (or his introduction scene – another important scene for a masala movie)? It should have displayed fiery power and suave; but all I could see was the imbalance act that his father is infamous for. This imbalance act doesn’t stop with the talkie portion and continues into the song too. As the line goes “unn vizhiyaale …” in the song “en kadhal solla” were Yuvan climbs to another scale signifying the break free attitude of the protagonist, Karthi actually breaks the rhythm of the dance and does a tripping act that again reminds me of painting the screen aspect of a song. A good dancer is one whose body motion if drawn should depict a beautiful diagram (again reference to painting) even with the hell breaking lose ruthra thaandavam kinda dance. It is what dancers call “measured steps”. How else can I describe the audacious misadventure kinda dance at the beginning of “suththe suthuthe boomi”. To be true I wouldn’t have been surprised had someone got fainted seeing the ugly posture (yes that was indeed like that – I usually don’t insult actors and I feel Karthi was a revelation in Aayirathil Oruvan). This seems to be problems in almost all the songs barring, “poongatre”. However Lingusamy even if he gets the points correct, like –the location of the arc, or the curve that the dancer creates with his movements, he misses out with the unwanted placement, like in the filler shots of “thuli thuli mazhaiyai” song.

Like how Selvaragahvan jumps from one theme to another in his past 3 films am jumping to painting the scene ie; visual spectacle in scenes. I mentioned Selvaraghavan intentionally because the best example I could come up with at this time of the day is the preclimax sequence of Pudhupethai (My favourite Selva film after Aadavari Matalaku Ardhalu Verule – which again was a full length example of how to tell). Everyone around me was complaining about the violence in the film but I could only see art in them. The mad rush to kill all the people at the entrance of the bungalow was captured concentrating on the emotions of Danush. If you remember he shows the place to be fogged and all white and as the fight ensues the blood paints the screen red and that at the end clears the air, symbolizing the violent path of those people. It certainly is not a message but, the directorial touch, the thought is what uplifts and shifts the focus from violence to art. In the scene before that, with nothing more than a camera inside a dustbin and Danush face popping inside the bin, for nearly 3 minutes Selva arrest us with the face expressions of Danush which you would really appreciate even if the language is unfamiliar to you. Such is the power of “how you tell”. For the same reason, I respectfully don’t like Dil Se; created by the man who perfected the craft of “screen poetry”.

PS: I haven’t watched the 1^st 3 movies of Mani Rathnam and Dil Se is the only movie I don’t like of his, closely followed by Bombay for its bull shit climax and village part – both (of Bombay) juvenile and half backed.

PPS: For they who know, I copied this format from Baradwaj Ranjan and hopefully this plagiarism ends with this post. J

Love Sex aur Dokha

2010-03-20T18:00:00.002+05:30

Director: Dibakar Banerjee

Remember the time you tried capturing those sultry eyes of your girlfriend with your phone, remember the time when a cherubic girl walk past you and your hand reaches out to freeze that heart breaking moment forever, remember the time you secretly filmed the “you know what” of “you know who” from the top floor of a mall, remember the time you were bent upon to download any video that starts with the “hot school girl …” “Indian girl …” to splash out your pent up emotions; an act of voyeurism, remember the time you were glued to the idiot box with wide eyes at the 5 minute coition of a long haired man draped (or rather not) in crimson red cloth with a so called “unholy” actress for 500hrs; now look at a collection of clips which peeps into the life of those people who were part of those videos through the same camera which entertained the eyes of the million you’s.

As inviting as it sounds “Love Sex aur Dokha” touches upon various genres in literally candid manner with layers that keep peeling off like an onion – here though not to activate our lacrimal glands. If you are to watch a story narrate in front of you then sorry boss this is not your kind of film. Love Sex aur Dokha is all about telling – either through words or visuals; which ranges from scintillating to gory (if not horrifying) and everything in between. We see a shot of a guy throwing away a long haired head to his servant and the next shot we are shown a lover capturing the shyness from face which had borne that head. The telling here doesn’t go about asking sympathy for the characters captured, its just settles to only telling, letting you observe and then disturb you with unsettling feelings.

Remember the time you wanted to capture the audio-visual of waves crashing on the sand which ended up as a video about a guy shouting “bhaiya garam pakode” in the background, remember the time you wanted to capture a music concert which ended up as a video in which d artist sings only “beep” because the guy next to you stood up for no reason and in turn hit the camera damaging the audio reception; now look at the collection of clips which meticulously reenacts these kind of scenes.

As bizarre as the beep sound, there is a scene where a guy – a failure, (who had developed an extra mole on his chest called camera) attempts suicide so that his camera could capture at least this sensational scene ending up saving another suicidee and another scene where a guy is beaten up with his camera on; as much as the scene in itself warrants appreciation the real beauty lies in capturing it candid, taking care to make the camera suffer all the trivialities that the people in both the situation undergo and pulling out a masterstroke of sorts in shots post these scenes with those candid visuals.

But after peeling away all these layers will it offer nothing else like the onion and will it remain as a film with only those enjoyable layers? The title of the film will explain you that. If you think “dokha sex aur love” will sound illogical and is okay with “Love Sex aur Dokha”, Dibakar shows illogical order of scenes which turns out to be arranged in descending order; an order which shows a chivalrous couple who calls themselves “deewane” (similar to the movie they try to craft), who were played with; which is followed by the story of a confused pair in which each one’s requirement is different where they finally settle to adapt the other’s requirement as their own, consequently satisfying the only requirement of the pair: sex; which is followed by the story of an unlikely pair – one failed because of “dokha” and other failed to “dokha” who join to “dokha” were the principle character of this film does the opposite of what is expected. Three stories – love, sex aur dokha, with each story having all the three, literally (characters) & figuratively (concepts) in different orders, all told through the eyes of the camera, which all meet up in one candid shot making everything sound simple as their smile.

Vinnaithandi Varuvaaya

2010-02-27T21:52:00.004+05:30

Director: Gautham Vasudev Menon

Karthik starts his film explaining with philosophical mindset about the girl he happened to meet and his journey with her, but only at the end of Gautham’s film do we get to know that he has not tried to understand his girl, rather he has gotten used to her. Call it male chauvinism or not, Gautham has created a mature character named Karthik, a guy who could empathize this girl Jessi whilst not forgoing his prestige even for her; at the expense of making her mad (in Karthik’s words) and elder to her, ridiculing the fact (?) that girls are more mature than guy’s of their age.

Starting from Jessi mouthing “mannipaya” whenever chance arises (even though that’s the theme song and not VTV) till making her speaks lines which any guy will want a girl to speak & lines which they would have seen girls speak but never understood, Gautham has potrayed Jessi as what a guy considers to be the complex mind of the girl and there in lies the only flaw of this well intended film. Jessi creates an aura, a wrap of suspense and it makes us want to know more about her mind her thoughts but we only see through Karthik eyes which doesn't go beyond it. Gautham did try to penetrate the veil only to see that she feels sorry for Karthik and nothing else. Is that such an important aspect of the film that could push down all the brilliance? If you are like Karthik who remains passive to all her rant and finally says “I think your car is there”; if you are bowled over by the passion that glimmers in Karthik’s eyes when his lover insults cinema (Karthik is an aspiring director) manipulating him to go berserk in one of their zillion breakups; if you understood why Jessi decided to break up with Karthik when he tells her to wait and also could sympathize his situation; if you love the way Karthik envisages his proposal to Jessi (and I could go on with the list) you would want to leave aside the weak life-thread and enjoy the moments in the life of Karthik and the ones that he scripts.

What is with Gautham and his semi-autobiographical mode these days? But then he had been like this from his Minnale days; attested by Karthik’s reply to Jessi, that he will tell the answer through his next film when she asks him how he found out her no. But he should stop advising his leads to out stretch their hands always which only returns to touch the actor’s heart recurrently. Like a dialogue in the movie, “love can’t be forced, it should come on its own”, “Aaromale” proves yet again that when Rahman gets driven by passion than commitment it creates magical scores for the ears as well as the eyes, through the songs & the background score captured aesthetically by Manoj who seems to have great command over the content that fills the screen (Ode Café scene, 1^st time at Ganesh’s place, etc). His handling of the close up shots capturing the emotions of the leads needs a special mention, where alone Trisha shines like she never (Maybe Aadavari Matalaku Ardhalu Verule is an exception), especially the scene where Karthik states when she smiled it was like poetry and Trisha did something close to that.

While Karthik’s film has music by Rahman, Vinnaithandi Varuvaya is an A.R.Rahman musical filmed by Gautham and in that order, without back staging the passionate effort of the latter; Vinnathandi Varuvaya is a soft feel good movie as commented by Jessie.

My take on the music here

My Name Is Khan

2010-02-14T00:09:00.004+05:30

Director: Karan Johar

Starting with the humming of “tum paas aye” at the beginning, slowly shifting to a serious mode with clever shots of a disabled protagonist that Karan had mastered through the benchmarking characterization of SRK in KANK, MNIK jumps directly into the story of a man on a mission, without attaching any frills (even the credits are pushed to the end of the film).

What starts as a mission to make a statement: “My name is Khan & I am not a terrorist”, and lets freeze it at this stage; seems to follow the path of Forrest Gump (& others) telling the tale of Rizwan Khan traveling unfazed by test of time and that of nature. He either moves us with his innocence in those situations or entertains us with his witty lines as he narrates his past every time he thinks of Mandhira.

Playing a man who couldn’t stand his name being mispronounced, SRK portrays Rizwan deftly with his quivering laugh. Even though it’s about a person suffering from Autism, the movie doesn’t become sympathetic & try to overdo it. From how it is shown, it could be an aversion to certain things or a sudden rise in headache when someone shouts near your head, making sure this film is for everyone; well apart from the indulgence in Quran: which could make this movie into a documentary on Islam.

But, once the loose thread reveals, the impact that was created kind of fizzles out, turning into a routine film saved only by the dire effort of SRK. If not for his seriousness I would have really laughed at his heroic acts & the portrayal of the President (People who had watched at least the trailer of “Tamizh Padam” will agree). When Karan could think of ingenious ways of portraying peace with all religions (scene with Rizwan & mom, Rizwan & Mandhira’s prayer session) why does he resort to on your face display of the same? From dialogues to scenes intended as a speech from the director to the audience (madhumakki) than between the characters, Karan may have lost the battle but when stars are there to back him everything can be covered up: for am sure people coming out of the movie will have the strange seriousness on their face unintentionally displaying the askew look that SRK carries.

Tamizh Padam

2010-01-31T15:40:00.004+05:30

Director: C.S. Amudhan

Spoofs are a rare breed of genre films which perfectly recreates the imperfections or cult scenes of other films for us to laugh at it. In Hollywood we have the Scary movies as cult while films like Epic movie end being trash for it only tries hard to make us laugh losing the spontaneity needed for these kinda films. Tamil Padam treads the path between these two with its ingenious concepts and also the forced comedies (mokais).

There is a scene where Shiva, the long lost son of his father Mokai, on learning his family song from Mac book breaks into english pop to meet his estranged family. Needless to say how this scene worked lets look at another scene or rather a concept: a guy gets kidnapped only to be a gift for the lady rowdy on her birthday where we are forced to laugh at the happenings there because in our mind this concept did evoke a smile. This imbalance and the lack of control over the larger picture are the things that reduce the level of this movie.

Wait a second? What am I talking – things like larger picture, intrusions of failed puns and over used gags; who needs all that?; the point that they have made or tried to make fun of something has worked to the direction of this film, letting people tolerate such trivialities to laugh out loud at things we had earlier tolerated or praised. Call it the conditioning of the audience or smart marketing, people wants to enjoy everything about Tamil padham. Who wouldn’t want to, after enjoying the gags, reminiscing the lollu sabha days (also for the standard of mokai that was dished out here), after seeing Shiva in his now trademark facial expression and dialogue delivery killing people in the oddest way possible and trying to justify it with his serious look and the buildup attached to it. This might not look like a complete movie but the experience is what matters. Enjoy before you get bored of it.

Goa

2010-01-31T15:24:00.004+05:30

Director: Venkat Prabhu

A melancholic hero perplexed as to accept that he indeed has fallen in love, and the aesthetically handled tension that the scenario brings with; a gullible hero (who hasn’t bored you yet with his now clichéd mannerism) standing in the backdrop deeply in love with a foreigner (so much he has done, wont he do this also) and coming often with fake buildup but rarely to entertain us genuinely; a colourful hero (note the allegory through the name too) evoking laughter through his mischievous smile (in sync with the cult bgm); a gay couple of which one is detested by infidelity of his partner; as different as characterization could get but the motive remained the same – to entertain us with a serious comedy. But did the team end up succeeding? Oh yes largely. Then what went lacking? Was it because Venkat took the tagline “Venkat Prabhu holiday”, seriously and went vacationing in the sets of “Nanayam”? That could explain the sore throat of sorts twists that comes in the form of Sneha; what with the protagonist of the latter making a special appearance here.

Apart from the cheap parlour tricks in that stretch, the film does feel a tad too long not because of the things happening on screen (as we could understand that a film dealing with four pairs needs those trivial answers as to what is and what had happened to them) but the excessiveness of them. That and the mile long songs interspersed to the movie along with the tiring “kangal irendal” song does test your patience, but if you could take them, then Goa is truly a “Venkat Prabhu holiday”.

My take on Saroja - Venkat's previous venture here

Kutty

2010-01-16T15:11:00.004+05:30

Director: Mithran Jawahar

Geetha holds Kutty’s hand; not due to fear of thunder, but fearing he will walk out of her life for ever. She holds his hand hoping he will “feel her love” which he has been asking her the whole movie; “feel my love”. If you are game enough to throw your practical mind that love complexities and want to be sucked in by old school of romance and just “feel the love”, Kutty is the movie for you.

With all the trivialities/clichés affixed, Kutty shows how simple love is; even with all the out of the world cinematic difficulties that tries to scratch Kutty’s back, which he kicks like the brick he breaks in the movie (oh yes! Danush is an action hero in this movie – that satisfies the comic element for the movie). The complexity there in lies with how Kutty every time handles or rather defends his one-side love from his lover’s boyfriend and celebrates it with the cult song “feel my love” (Now don’t think this is a complex triangular love story – it is as rip tickling and simple as Kutty’s replies).

If Allu Arjun was portrayed as a chivalrous action hero who serves as a romantic hero too with dance movements and demeanure that set the screen on fire, Danush here carries only the chivalrous part with over enthusiasm, without emulating Allu Arjun and even do away with the suave dance steps. He is only of the few actors who ask people to laugh at him as he falls in a song sequence losing to a small kid, repeatedly gets bombarded to the floor by Aarthi, to name a few; working well to increase the fun factor to the movie.

Remake-wise Jawahar has done a better job than his previous venture. Though comparison between his two outputs is inevitable, it should be borne in mind that their originals were meant for different sect of audience. You will hate, will loathe, will laugh, will smile but ultimately in this 2 ½ hrs odd movie you will at least once, like Kutty queers Geetha in his final confrontation, “feel the love” of Kutty.

Aayirathil Oruvan

2010-01-15T17:43:00.007+05:30

Director: Selvaraghavan

What remains of a thousand people after their Chola king dies of failure, carry him to sea, whilst (we have to guess) the Indian army (!!!) commanded by the last of the Pandiyas sleeps. They scarify their life to empower the only one (Aayirathil Oruvan), who had escaped the wrath of their tormentors earlier, to continue their battle; for Pandyas may have won the battle but not the war; ending the movie ala Dark Knight style.

The problem is not what Selva wanted to say, it’s how he has chosen to say. The Cholas on their escape had set up 7 traps, but those “traps” are shown to be a kid’s play which Reema like a superstar with just 2 pistols in stand-at-ease pose crosses. The frivolous execution continues, as sun’s ray hits a pillar creating a shadow that falls on the same side as sun, forming a Nataraj shape to reveal a map, leading us to more such juvenile attempts filled with songs that are meant to be concatenated with the flow, but end up being concocted due to the absence of cues. Only towards the end of a song could we guess (not realize) why it was inserted, excepting the brilliantly executed "Thai thindra manne" & "pemmane". The seduction scene following it, between the Pandiyan princess in disguise as a Cholan leader and the last King of Cholan dynasty; the intended to be cult scene laced with strong lines in chaste tamil too fails miserably, due to poor sword fitting, inept dance by the leads and inaccurate physical presence of Reema (she keeps saying she learnt the skill to win Cholas through her body which she hasn’t and nor does the old cloth she drapes over her intentionally revealing modern brassiere help her).

This rise of a chosen one tale, filled with scenes showing Pandiyas in bad taste juxtaposing it with the Eezha-tamizh controversy can only be liked, if you are bent upon to envisage the idea that is incoherently told by Selva, who is more interested in showing how females are tested for virginity than how CG should be used.

My take on the music of AO - here