Viswaroopam - subtle high concepts

Why did he have to do Die Hard in Tamil? When its Kamal Hassan, the expectations are a Magna cum Laude at the very least. Not a solid 2.0 who wants to be an architect (George Costanza puts these things so matter-of-factly sometimes). This was my first take on the movie, and I even wrote a largely negative piece on it. Then I wanted to write a companion piece on the stupid ban of the film in Tamil Nadu. While researching for that, I realized that there are a lot of subtle messages in the film that elevate it from a mere Die Hard, to something much more important for the communally divided world of today.

Concepts
I am going to come at this from the angle of the ban because I think the movie adds a lot of value to a powder-keg issue when viewed from a stand of intolerance.

Viswaroopam is a big film. There's no doubt about it. Its not a Muslim bashing film. There's no doubt about that either. The ban demanded is clearly another attempt by some politically motivated groups at getting their two minutes' fame at the expense of someone who's clearly deservedly more famous than they are.

I ask you: what's there in this movie that showcases Muslims in a negative light? If anything, the story is about a devout Muslim officer who's a true patriot who's fighting against those who would desanctify that faith's true meaning in the name of a bloody Jihad. There is even a scene at the very end when the protagonist performs Namaz before breaking into a sleeper cell's hiding place to diffuse a bomb.

Isn't the fundamental tenet of any religion kindness to your fellow man? Isn't someone who reneges on that teaching an enemy of humanity, no matter what his faith, color or nationality may be? To showcase a fundamental Islamist group that trades in terror, the Al Qaeda is not a derisive commentary on the whole religion. It is infact an effective means of showing that to pigeonhole a people based on the cruel actions of a few is not only stupid at best, but damaging to mankind at worst. To show an indiscriminate military response going so far as to bombarding civilian centers is the essential example of this narrow-minded outlook.

The movie also goes so far as to show that not even people in the same environment of hate and anguish are likely to behave in the same way. There is a young boy who hates the concept of taking to arms like his zealot father, but instead wants to become a doctor. While the Pashtun tribes have been painted with broad strokes by the media as being backward with little women's suffrage, the movie gives us a mother and wife of a terrorist who is trying to fight this oppression in her own small way. She wants her son atleast, to take a different route to everyone else around her. There is a young man who wants to go abroad and become an Engineer, but whose goal is twisted for nefarious purposes by the religious zealots.

And the movie berates the violence of zealotry by showcasing children playing shoot with one another because gun culture has become so entrenched in that society. It is a scene that without any of the conventional norms of violence is heart-wrenchingly so. Where does a society go when AK-47s have become the playthings of toddlers? It re-blooms through the young boy who wants to become doctor. Hats off, Kamal Sir!

Horses for courses
Kamal himself has said on many occasions that he is someone who chooses characters based on his strengths. Sadly, characters such as the protagonist in this film are not for him anymore. He has grown beyond this both in stature and in age and physique.

The RAW/military officer needed to be someone in the prime of physical fitness. Unless you are a Bruce Willis or a Sylvester Stallone whose entire repertoire is tearing open your t-shirt and revealing six pack abs, so that no matter how old they get, they have to stay in peak shape, you are not expected as an actor to be required to fill these kind of uber - action oriented roles.

However, his ability to deliver a character's realistic response to his circumstance remain chanceless. As the infiltrator, he is convincing in his zeal, and even when revealed to be a RAW agent, he is still able to emote both a patriotism toward his nation and a grudging respect for the friendship he forged with the bad guys. After all, what is more telling about a human dilemma than being torn between the right thing to do and loyalty to someone you have broken bread with?

Having said that, this role is not particularly challenging as an actor for Kamal. There is no commanding screen presence required. If I could make a recommendation based purely on the physical attributes required (for I have no doubt about Kamal the director being able to extract the performance he needs from even a dead tree stump), horses for courses. I think someone like Jiiva or Vikram would have been much more apt choices for Wizam. Or, if you wanted to go with a more nominally priced option, why not pick Srikanth? He could use a big break like this.

But if ever there were inspired casting choices - I have to give Kudos to Kamal for casting Rahul Bose as Omar Qureshi and Jaideep Ahlawat as Salim. Both give stellar performances as multifaceted Jihadists. While Rahul Bose plays the more flamboyant zealot (he has to, given that his character is a top echelon player), he still loves his family dearly. But you can see where his cultural background is rooted, and where his priorities clearly lie. He brings out this slanted balance beautifully. Jaideep on the other hand is the more sophisticated, tech savvy front man of the cell. He is the recruiter, the handler. He has to be more pragmatic, more muted in his zealotry. Again, beautifully done. These two guys actually steal the show away from Kamal, and that's not something you might ever get a chance to say again.

Visuals
There is no doubt that the movie is on a par Hollywood standards. What is the benchmark for Hollywood standards? If its a strong story with a gripping screenplay, then your Thevar Magan had proved ages ago that you are beyond any Wood in film - making. If its character development and acting, then your Virumandi stands alone. If its jaw dropping new concepts, then your Apporva Sagodhirargal and Dasavatharam are striking opuses. And if its social commentary, then Hey Ram and Anbe Sivam are far left field than anything else.

So, what is the standard here? Visual presentation. Yes, its very nicely done. The photography is brilliant. Particularly impressive is Varghese's caution not to fall into the trap of portraying desert climes in sepia tones. Rather, he seems to have used the natural lighting to showcase what Afghanistan looks like realistically. I lived in a desert for four years, and let me tell you, it doesn't always look sepia! The action is well choreographed. The gratuitous chase scene is par for the course. All of these aspects have been seen in countless English movies before, but they are new to Tamil Cinema. As someone who is tireless in bringing the latest in cinema to us, I salute Kamal on his industry gold standard effort.

The standout is ofcourse the US attack on the Al Qaeda strongholds. This sequence really captures the futility of a lop-sided war. General Stanley McChrystal said in a recent interview that a 5.6mm round is supposed to penetrate the human body at 3000 metres per second, and the result is not pretty. Its not supposed to be. War never is. Kamal shows that in all its grit here.

Another excellent place in the movie was in the opening, with Kamal's brilliant dancing. The way this scene is shot is interested, because it brings Kamal and his brilliant steps to the fore every time he sings (by focussing on him), and sends everything to the background when Shankar Mahadevan's voice and the song proper takes over (by using area wide shots). The pretty girls, including second lead actress Andrea Jeremiah and part of the backdrop accentuating the beauty of the dance form, but never stealing the limelight. I particularly liked how Andrea is one of the others in the group with no more or less emphasis than anyone else. Score one for the thousands of nameless and faceless group dancers that have carried Tamil songs for generations! Unfortunately, I felt that this was waste of a great opener, as we never see or hear about Kathak or its implications to a maybe softer side of Kamal till the end credits.

Minor Pitfall
I generally hate pointing out loopholes in movies I enjoy, because if there is a strong story, with excellent characterization, you can usually suspend your disbelief and enjoy the ride.

My one gripe with the premise is that, if RAW knows about a dirty bomb threat to a major US city, would they not share this intel with them beforehand? In this case, even MI 6 apparently knows about it, and yet the NSA, CIA, FBI and NYPD are all unaware of this threat? Hell, even the Indian government was warned about the 2008 Mumbai blasts by the CIA well before they happened!

But considering that the movie delivers so much on high concept and packed entertainment, I can and will suspend my disbelief.

Final Word: Say no to the BAN!

Zealotry is prevalent in every faith. But calling a spade a spade does not diminish the fact that there are three other suites in the pack. These calls for bans on the premise that the movie would incite communal unrest are mere fabrications of diseased minds, who cannot see beyond their own immediate political gains. If a movie maker wants to be really brave, forget the Al Qaeda, I say. Make a movie about the evils of religious organizations with political goals (after all, there are several across the board in our country).

One final note: while it is important for minorities to work towards protecting their rights, crying wolf too many times may cause that very effort to backfire someday. What if one of these minority groups loses all credibility with the masses through these frivolous claims to fame and becomes a spineless husk when real oppression of our minority brothers and sisters occurs? Who will they turn to for help then?

And more importantly, a democracy is not an institution in which a single group can demand special disposition for their belief systems alone. I have for long been very strongly against the Unified Hindu Law for Hindus and the Shariat system for Muslims. We are a community of Indians. That is how we choose to represent ourselves. Therefore, our laws should reflect that oneness also. And so too should the creative freedom afforded to artists. That this movie hurts the sentiments of this caste, or that belittles that faith are all well and good if they are true. But political sops to community based vote banks through bans on movies that hurt no one are unacceptable in the world's largest democracy.

When a legendary actor, and now a legendary director as well, takes the pains to make a meaningful movie that delivers for everyone from the thrill seeking action movie buff to the thinking critic, enjoy it. Don't go and ban it!

Rajnikanth - Magic

You can be Hindu, you can be Muslim. You can be Tamil and you can be from somewhere else. You can be a cinema connoisseur or you could be a grindhouse goon. You could be straight, and you could be gay. But the one thing you could not be immune to is the magic of Rajnikanth.

Whether you smoke or not, you cannot be but amazed by the cigarette flip to the mouth. No matter how much you might abhor even the idea of smoking, with its malodorous stench or its unhealthy implications, touch your heart and tell me that if a cigarette has been flipped by Rajnikanth, your heart has not fluttered a teeny bit. If it hasn't, then its made of stone. There was a time in India, not 15 years ago, when smoking was considered the domain of the male, a cool and and the same time, disgusting thing, that no girl would even try, because it was "bad." Those days are long gone thanks to globalization. But I am not here to judge the advancement or degeneration of culture. I am merely stating that even then, those girls swooned for Rajni's style. Not so much for the cigarette, you see, but what it meant. The style.

And another thing. This may be a personal opinion or one shared by the masses. I don't know. I am attracted to Rajni. But judging by the whistles and the milk coronations, I would tend to believe that I am not alone in this total gayification whenever Thalaivar (leader - please not in the political sense) comes on screen.  Rajnikanth could be in the hottest song with the most beautiful heroine in the world - why it could be Angelina Jolie morphed with Aishwarya Rai along with the physical attributes of Venus, and all I would still see is Rajnikanth's stilted dance movements appreciating every second, how much our God has mastered the hours of input by a Michael Jacksonesque coreographer. I would little realize that the heroine is wearing the most revealing outfit; and I would like one self respecting male audience member to describe to me even with the most minimal detail, the color of her dress. And by the way, I would like anyone who reads this blog to touch their heart and tell me that i am not voicing their own opinion, my personal public image be damned.

This is not to say that the heroine in a Rajni movie is just eye candy. Far from it. In recent history, every Rajni film has been driven by a strong feminine character, and I am very thankful for that. Unlike other superstars, our REAL superstar has chosen to go in a direction that is new for Tamil cinema. To explore and utilize the power of the female lead. Straight from Muthu, where a love triangle between the always ephemeral Rajni and the ever so dung like Sarath Babu fought for the affections of a clearly Malayali Meena, to Padayappa, where the Neelambari character all but stole the show but for the superlative presence of the rural Churchill (he of the persistent cheroot), and to Endhiran just recently, when the female drove even a robot to distraction, (although, when you are dealing with an international beauty queen, nominal performance tolerances even from nickel bolts must be expected) it has been his way for quite sometime.

If you though I am forgetting Chandramuhkhi on that list, haha, think again. While Jyothika was a very strong female antagonist, P. Vasu is a terrible director. So no matter how good her characterization was in that film, and no matter how central strong female lead was to the development of that story, a flashlight beam played across Rajni's eyes to indicate the brilliance of some unnamed accomplishment is sloppy direction, so that movie is banned... forever! P. Vasu is dead to me!!!


Is it the man's humility then? There are some who are humble because they know they're not good enough. There are yet other, of the worse second kind, who know they make the cut, and yet fish for accolades. Rajni seems to be someone who's got this balance down pat. Why, every time you tell me he's too humble, I can show you Kamal Hassan sitting beside him, and when you have Brahma sitting next to you, you'd be pretty much asking for it if you said that you designed the human genome. And just about when you are about to tell me that he's just showboarding, he comes up with something like this... "Naan yaana illinga, kuthirai" (I am not an elephant, but a horse) stating that he knows exactly where he stands. Also, please name one superstar today with a bald head who's not afraid to show its phrenology to the masses (and if you can't get that reference to the dead science, then you were probably born around the same time he lost his hair). That's more than humility. That's willful abandon, the elder cousin of Mr. H.

He's not a perfect human being. No one is. Everyone knows about his rancid early days, about his addictions and his womanizing and his tantrums amd his traumas. But the thing that sets him apart is that demigods tend to be just that. They obfuscate the demi and promulgate the god. A god hides nothing. The purpose of a demigod is for you to respect him no matter what he may be. That is why Gaddafi had to be a general although he holds no military rank by right. A god on the other hand exists solely to teach you right from wrong. That is whay Gatothgaja is not in the Mahabaratha to just tell you that Bheema had another wife. He is there to tell, albeit metaphorically, to elicit that polygamy isn't a good thing (my sincere view, and if anybody objects, take it up him when your number comes up). God is an open book for us to learn from. Now, I am not claiming that Rajni is a god. But I am saying that to put the qualifier "demi-" in front of it if you are going to worship him as a god is a disservice to him.

One thing he said in his 12-12-12 birthday address was revealing, and truly shocking to me, as someone who's grown up with the somersaulting cigarettes. He said - paraphrased and translated - I am saying from personal painful experience, if you are a true fan, stop smoking. You know, he may be not be god. Hell, he may not even be the most perfect man to have lived. But, hell, he is the Thalaivar. The only one.

Nayagan vs Thalapathi

Life throws up so many curve balls that there isn't necessarily a logical progression from one state to the next.  Like a Markov process, cinema seems to be that bag of jellybeans from which your first pick might be a delectable strawberry while the next could as likely be a raw onion. This is precisely the case with Nayagan and Thalapathi. Mani Ratnam, having reached the high water mark in Indian cinema with a masterpiece of unparalleled storytelling, seemed to have deigned that he has done enough, and gave a squarely middling performance in his next gangster flick.

Everyone, including Time Magazine have heaped lavish praise on Nayagan, and for good reason. It is immense. It is a fantastic movie with a fantastic cast, fantastic music and fantastic camera work. It has mesmerizing dialogues, mesmerizing flow and mesmerizing character development. It has a brilliant story arc, brilliant scenes and brilliant continuity. That is why its on the all time greatest movies ever made list. Not just in Tamil, not just in India, but from around the world. Mani Ratnam the director shined through as India's Francis Ford Coppola, as our very own version of Martin Scorsese.

And then, suddenly, it all hit the fan catastrophically with Thalapathi. While Nayagan was like watching hot caramel sauce melting on vanilla ice cream, Thalapathi felt like being in a boiling sauna, under a UV lamp with an ice cream cone dribbling over your sticky hands. It was a mishmash of ideas, ill-conceived sequences and very very poor acting. It also had a stellar cast, fantastic music and a solid story. But, where everything fell into sonorous unison in Nayagan, this felt discordant, somehow. And the worst part? It was all yellow. Ugly, horrible, mucky yellow! Why, Mr. Ratnam, why did you have to use a filter on every damn scene? Why did you have to go from Coppola to Carrot Top?

Both movies have their ups and down, but for Thalapathi, sadly, it is in a stable equilibrium at the bottom of a deep ravine. Nayagan on the other hand, for all its overt homages to The Godfather, is fighting us every time we watch it and try to pick at it, to stay atop a tall hillock jostling to go back to the apex whenever it is shoved a little this way or that. True, they are both gangster movies. They both chart the lives of people from childhood through a troubling adolescence to their conclusions. They are both set in pretty much the same world of lawlessness and justice for the previlaged. They are both about how the protagonists tackle fire with fire, but are ultimately flawed but righteous individuals. But that is where the similarities end.

Story and characters
Nayagan is a rock solid saga set in changing eras of post independence India and spans nearly three generations. The journey of the hero also mirrors the greater journey that India herself undertook from the thirties to the late eighties. From lifting her people out of poverty to urban agglomeration to the formation of slums to the restrictions on development by a ham fisted government and recalcitrant masses, to the development of parallel regimes and kangaroo courts, this story itemizes all these issues through the eyes of the hero.

It delves deep into how the principle characters become the people they become. It thoroughly threshes out the reasons behind their interacting in certain ways. How Selva forms a lasting friendship with Velu is fluid. Not only that, but this relationship that moves from scorn to friendship to respect to love above life itself is a microcosm of the adoration the people of Dharavi heap on Velu Naicker. So too is the gradual development of resentment by his daughter towards him. Not only are the character interactions so logical, they are also surrogates for the grander scheme of a Don's life. This is where Godfather scored, and no wonder this is the reason why this story also shines.

Secondly, because it spans an entire lifetime, and because it elevates the life of one man to beyond his four walls, its scale is epic. It chronicles the history of a nation, and it teaches us something about right and wrong. It subtly answers questions about Karma, that good deeds cannot bury underfoot the evils that beget them. That is why Velu Naicker has to suffer in his personal life. That is why he has to die in the end. No matter what good the Lord Krishna did for the world, as a human being, he had sinned. He had cheated and he had enacted a protracted brutal war to teach the virtues of good to the world. With millions dead in the Mahabharatha's wake, Lord Krishna had to die a human death, and a painful one to teach the final lesson. Every deed has its comeuppance.

Thalapathi, which also borrows heavily from the Mahabharatha, had none of those things going for it. It is the story of two men set in a tumultuous place. That's all. There are no parallels to be drawn here. Yes both Deva and Surya are doing pretty much the same things that Velu did, but you don't get the sense that it is important. One could argue that the focus of this story is just the two of them. Okay, but I'm sorry, that falls flat too.

Where is the development of the relationship between Deva and Surya? In just one one scene? Is it possible for a man like Deva to shrug off the death of a valued and long serving member of his cabal and just embrace his killer? If he is so amenable to sudden change, then why is that trait of his not reflected in the rest of the movie? Why is he so hell bent on revenge against the collector when all the latter has done is only his job? Why, if he is so concerned about justice that he would even forgive the killer of his associate, is he hell bent on massive carnage over a personal gripe?

And talking about growth, sadly, nothing here. The bond that Deva and Surya form in the beginning remains without progression for the remainder of the story. Yes, its true that the relationship between Karna and Dhuryodhana was also stilted and one dimensional,  but that was not the focal point of that tale. It is here. Surely, for a man forged by cruelty and with so many bitter experiences in life as Surya, more conflict has to be in the offing, even with his best friend. Every character in this movie has only one face. Yes, Deva and Surya are hooligans. Yes, the collector is a virtuous man. Yes Karivaradhan is evil. But there is more to a human being than just what he is perceived to be. There are internal struggles, there are relationships, there are emotions and there are circumstances.

While Nayagan explored all of these in great detail, this movie does not. A white dhothi is a white Dhothi. There are no stitches, hell, even the border is not visible. There is no tapestry here. And therefore, that sense of grandeur is absent. This is one long tirade of violence, and pile driven good vs evil gospel.

Music and songs
In both movies, the music by Ilayaraaja was magical. Both movies had brilliant songs, and just to prove to you that I am not biased, I will openly state that Rakamma is one of my all time favorite songs. Not just mine, it is ranked as one of the top hundred songs of all time from around the world. The BGMs were outstanding and captured the mood of every scene. But the litmus test is this: if you are blind, and could only listen to the audio track, you would still get what Nayagan was on about. With Thalapathi, all you would get is a sequence of phenomenal tunes.

While the BGMs were muted and subtle in Nayagan, enhancing every facial expression and adding weight to the dialogues, in Thalapathi, they were there to substitute the lack of anything on the actors' faces on anything coming out of their mouths. Mind you, this not a crtique of Raaja's excellent work, but in Thalapathi, all you remember from each scene is how good the music was, and nothing else. Its as though the savage rumbling V8 soundtrack of a Formula One car was playing over the wheezing throttle of a Maruti 800. The visuals did not justify the BGMs.

The picturization of every song in Nayagan, even the gratuitous item number Nila Adhu Vaanathu Mele forthered the story. Every song came at the right place and did not distract from the larger picture. In Thalapathi, most songs, though pciturized beautifully, felt out of place. They were roadblocks to an already molasses like trickling pace. Rakamma was fantastic, and yet it was basically a standard hero Intro song. Suitable for Rajnikanth, but not for Thalapathi. Kaatukuyile, while being a brilliant technical achievement, did nothign but add five more minutes to an already bloated flim. Sundari Kannaal Oru Seidhi was again well imagined on a grand scale. But is there any time in the movie before or since that shows Shobana envisioning Rajni as her knight in shining armor? Has their love been developed in that vein? Or for that matter, developed at all?

Acting, Dialogues and Recall
Every single facial expression by every single character was appropriate in Nayagan. More importantly, every body language was captured. While there is no equal to Kamal when it comes to thespian prowess, all the others also did magnificent jobs. Janakaraj, Delhi Ganesh, Nizhalgal Ravi, Nasser, even the villains and the female leads had enough screen time and presence to justify their being in those roles. Every single character, even Velu's lowly minions are memorable. Their dialogues were so natural, and so well elucidated. They had so much power and conveyed the emotions so well. If you were reading a transcript of this film, you'd still be enthralled. If you had to shell out Rs. 1000 and go see this as a play, you'd come out with your money' worth of satisfaction. My close friend Ganesh once told me that his barometer for a good scene is if he can put himself in the actor's shoes, and if he can see himself reacting the same way, and saying the same things as those on screen. By that yardstick, Nayagan was an opus.

Thalapathi, regrettably started that irritating Mani Ratnam trend of qualifying every single line by the principle verb beforehand. What am I on about? Well, sample these gems:
Vittudunga, elaathayum vittudunga (Stop it. Stop everything)
Irukka. Indha oorulethaan irukka (She's here. She's in this very city)
Inge oruthen irundhaan. Uyiroda irundhaan. Ippo Ille (He was here. He was here and alive. Now he's not)
Thooki pututtaa. Yenna goods vandiyile thooki potuttaa (She threw me away. She threw me away onto a goods train)

Oh, here's one dialogue that should go down in the record books for the most stilted echange in film history:

Mamooty: Yeppadi? (How?)
Nagesh: Sandai.(Fight.)
Mamooty: Yethana peru? (How many?)
No name: Or aal. (One man.)
Mamooty: Yaaru? (Who.)
No Name: Surya. (Surya.)
Mamooty: Paakanam. (Must meet.)

Seriously, who talks like this? Seems to me that every one in this movie was high on weed or that it was studio full of attention deficit disorders and remembering long lines was going to be trouble from the start.

Where Nayagan made synergetic utilization of even minor extras, Thalapathi falied to provide any recall for  even its name actors. Nagesh and Charu Hassan were completely wasted in this movie. Bhanupriya was paid for just showing up. What about Amrish Puri? Such a talented veteran, reduced to a stereotypical Dick Dastardly role that they had to bring someone else in to dub his rotten lines for him. Mamooty was probably told to tone down his performance in keeping with the lethargic dialogues and allow more screen space for Rajnikanth to... well, come and stand really.

When I wachted Ayudha Ezuthu, I told my friends that Madhavan had merely shaved his head, and not really done much else. Well, Rajni shelved his style, and pretty much that was it. This was the one chance in a lifetime for a director to extrude Rajni's true potential as an actor. It was the once chance for a rabid audience drunk on style and action to enjoy a truly remarkable performance from a misused actor. And Mani Ratnam blew it by giving him the same pablum he calls lines as everyone else in the movie. Admittedly, Rajni did manage to salvage a few scenes, especially the one with Jaishankar and the one when his mother comes to visit him. But even these scenes are so BGM heavy, out of focus and YELLOW that they sap any performance out of them.

Perhaps the worst aspect of the spotty acting in this movie is evident in the climax. While Nayagan's climax was in perfect keeping with the tone of the rest of the movie, and Kamal's delivery of his last lines were true to the character built through the film, the last fight sequence in thalapathi was a complete anathema to Rajni's  persona in this. Outporing of emotion can be shown in many ways, but having asked your star to cheese every fiber of human emotion for two hours and suddenly requiring it to dial it up to eleven and ham it in the last scene is just plain dumb. I'm sure that the describe-your-friend-punch-villain-in-face rinse and repeat sequence must have seemed like pure inspiration to Mani, but sorry mate, to me it was all constipation. Seriously, how could anyone deliver staccato lines like that unless their bowels were ganging up every few seconds and refusing to come out?

Cinematography

Finally, Nayagan's camera work for scintillating. Every scene had its own hue that kept with the time of day it was, the mood of the moment and the state of affairs in the background. Sunrises and sunsets, pigeons and Gateway of India, nothing was allowed to come in the way of the cast's expressions and body language. It was a textbook display of how to create atmosphere.

The scene when Kamal takes a gang to the house of the factory owner to show him what it means to destroy a dwelling was ominous in the abscene of any life in the building complex. The scene when he meets his future wife near the Marine Drive was set at dusk, encapsulating the end of his bachelor life, but still with enough light left to bode a new radiant future for them. When his daughter weeps on the roof garden and states she is leaving his auspices for good, the lighting and background were sorrowful. And the final scene outside the court was bright and clear, essaying the fact that the verdict is a good one. No ominous grey clouds here to spoil the suspense of the climax.

Thalapathi on the other hand was yellow. Nothing more, nothing less.

So to sum up, Nayagan was the magnum opus of a gifted young director who showed the world that it was possible to take mainstream cinema to unscaled heights. The Mani Ratnam of 1987 gave us a riveting and emotional piece that was art and yet not dull. Every moment in this film flowed from the moment before, and spawned the one next like a harmonious raga. Truly, this was a five star film for the ages. Thalapathi, on the other hand, was yellow.

8aam Arivu - I'm Judging You, Murugadoss!

Yeah, that's right ARM, I'm putting you in the hot seat. But don't worry. This here's a Kangaroo court, and you just made the cut. Your movie rocked, dude, and you should just keep going on like this. Please don't ever change your style, coz whatever you've got goin' on for it, its working for me.

Your latest offering, 7aam Arivu, blew my mind. Your vibes penetrated my skull boiled off the intra - cranial fluid and fired my neurons to an all new sensory level (hence the title of this entry). And here's why :) Wait, there's a why not section too, because questions on opinion should always be why - or - why - not type (CBSE gold standard 101).

Q: Did your latest offering blow my mind? Why or why not?

A1: Your latest offering blew my my mind because:

India:

Being a staunch patriot, anything that shows us in a positive light makes me smile and brings a fuzzy feeling to the base of my ... (this being a wholesome family oriented blog, go watch James May driving a Ferrari 250 GTO on Top Gear to get the rest of it). And you've got it - patriotism - in spades, judging by what you showed us in this movie and in Ramana. God, how many Discovery Channel and NatGeo documentaries on ancient Indian culture have I watched vainly hoping to see the day when a fellow Indian lets us know that the genes we were born with are worth more than the jeans we love to "live in."

Message:

Science is a big deal and superstition sucks. Yeah, yeah, Galileo said it, Gauss said it, Gavaskar said it (not really, but isn't a picture perfect straight drive a science in itself?). But you had Surya say it - say that turmeric is an antibiotic.

[Aside: Boy that sentence had too many says and saids in it.]

And as far as desi science goes, why is it that the Native American wolf - man synergy has more media exposure than Sukra's limb attachment surgery techniques or the ZERO for crying out loud? For god's sake, Surya - our G2V yellow dwarf (available in in an exciting range of colors from yellow to orange; specify zip code to get a quote from your friendly local dealer, terms and conditions apply), and incidentally the nice guy in your movie - had dibs on our solar system way before Copernicus stole that idea from us. So, way to go on that advert for Indian science, my friend.

China:

I've only ever loved two things about China ... the Chinese circus when I was a kid and my Chinese friends a little later in life. But you showed me that the Bombay circus is just as good. Honestly, I think we did a better job with the forced sterilization thing; atleast we had the decency to put the kabosh on Sanjay, and our we - two - ours - one slogan makes a much pithier bumper sticket than their if - you - first - born - wins - an - Olympics - gold - you - can - have - another - one! As for communism we were clever enough to bofors out Rajiv from office before he mortgaged all our gold (that was the idea anyway, but the Tigers got to him first!). Seriously, between cornering the junk - for - a - dollar market in the US, selling guns in Africa and stocking up on our steel - who's advising your politburo? Rupert Murdoch?

[Disclaimer: I don't personally believe that the People's Republic would wage bio - warfare (except on their own athletes).]

Surya and Shruthi:

This item had IT. They were awesome together. Surya is one of my favorite actors, and he looks very refined. While we're on the subject of looks, Shruthi Hassan does a commendable job of being the scientist next door. She's cute, but not vampish, and she somehow seems to hold sway in that gray zone for non - six - pack guys between "look at Surya, I want to kill myself :(" and "Hey, maybe she would go out with me :)" That's another kudos to you for showing a heroine as a regular person rather than a size zero supermodel.

I have tremendous respect for Surya for putting himself through the rigours of circus training for this role. He didn't have too many opportunities to showcase his acting talents (what with this being Die Hard meets Vector, and all), but you managed to make him seem like the guy who will bowl you an extra over for gaaji, while at the same time letting you know that you have an extra tire to get rid off. Whatever that last brain - fart meant, his performance was top notch, as always.

ARM, let me tell you something about your choice for female lead. You are one of several (four) directors that actually encourages your heroine to act, and it shows. Shruthi did a wonderful job in this movie. The scene in which one of her friends "Allah ke pyare ho jatha hai" was reminiscent of the time when Kamal's son kicked it in one of those horrible petrol bunk explosions that slay six (RIP Nizhalgal Ravi). Kamal sir, your daughter has the potential to be the best heroine after Saroja Devi (see fun fact below).

[Fun fact: Shruthi Hassan is only the second lead lady in Tamil cienma to dub her own dialogues. Do you know who was the first?]

Although, I must say that being the daughter of Pammal Sambandham, Sakthivel Gounder, Singaravelan et al., I think her Tamil accent would be better served in Thenkasi than on the Thames. Seriously though, she is a multifaceted person and I'm sure that she can hold her own opposite anyone.

Story:

In two words - "a fantastic and original socio - political - economic - family - thriller."

Visuals:

We seem to be getting better and better portraying a world unblemished by the human touch. Not so good with the action sequences yet. We're getting historical locations right, but kinda suck on the physics of acrobatics... Hmmm, why is that? Global warming?

Music:

Knew it was Harris with the Martian interludes in the Ringa song. A word to Harris: dude, I love your music, but you should really consider using more ... er ... um ... oh ... WORDS in your songs!

A2: Your latest offering did not blow my my mind because:

China:

Dude, for a country that runs half the world's economy and practically makes all the shit we use (and has a veto at the UN), why would it resort to bio - wars on potentially its single largest consumer? Not cool! I have Chinese buddies I have to answer to, so cut it out!

Pandemics in India:

From the plague to dengue to malaria to chickungunya to AIDS, India doesn't have a prayer on dealing with pandemics (hell, we needed Mother Teresa AND Steve Waugh just for leprosy, and we still haven't shown that the door!). Maybe, just maybe, show one scene on how to deal with these killer unicellulars on a national level competently for once rather than a nation in peril ... we see that every monsoon anyway.

Dong Lee:

Best hypnotist ever! Nah, this really isn't a why not ... just forgot to put it in the why section. Coolest villain, man. He rocks!

Hitler meets Stalin and they have high tea with Mao:

Seriously, who kills 30 million in 60 days? It took Stalin almost 40 years, Hitler six, and Mao atleast a 100 days. Get real.

Jingoism:

Did you know that the gun has killed more people than cars and dirigibles combined? Stop supporting the Tamil Eelam already. They were a terrorist organization that eschewed the peace process, and they killed Rajiv (see reference above).

Hormones:

Jon Stewart's excellent thesis - Earth: the Book - states that 92% of all the male brain functions are oriented towards sex. Why, oh, why, Mr. ARM did you have to put a romantic dream song just after your protagonists escaped a bloodbath? This may yet be the conlcusive proof needed to authenticate Stewart's claim!

Verdict:

Hollywood in Tamil. Go watch it!!!

Ajith's 50th - Does Thala rule? You bet he does!

I've never been a big fan of Ajith as an actor. But, as a human being, its a totally different issue. He is an individual I look up to in real life. Why? He's everything I want to be and more. He's a self made man, a successful actor, someone who will stand to politics and politicians even when he has everything to lose, and ... and ... get this ... he drives Formula 3 cars in Europe! Talk about jet - setter. This guy is probably India's suavest multitasker, and judging by what his comrades say, he's not even a Casanova. What a perfect guy, but as an actor?

Well, I had my doubts till Mangatha came along, but watching it last night, those washed away too. All I have to say now is ... what a perfect guy!

I'll do a detailed analysis of this movie later, because I have some strong feelings about it and want to use it as an example about where I think contemporary Tamil cinema is headed. But right now, this one is for Ajith and his gazillion fanatics (of whom I'm admittedly one). So, an ode to the Ultimate Star... a eulogy to to the Thala...

There's a distinct vibe about this guy ... he polarizes opinion. you either love him or you hate him, and there's hardly any middle ground. There's no other actor you can really cross your heart and say that about. Nobody ever hates Rajni. Some like his acting, others die for his style and charm, and yet others will stand by hi his spiritualism. With Kamal, his only detractors are those who take offense at his social and religious mores; but even they cannot deny his thespian prowess. No matter what you say about Vijay, the ultimate formula - man, he's really got his boy next door appeal. There's nary a soul in this world who dislikes Surya, and much as Vikram can grate on your senses sometimes, none will say that he doesn't put his life and soul into everything he does.

So, we come back to Ajith. The things that polarize people about him are the same things that feed all these other demigods. Sure, he's stylish, but you'd have to be as elitist as he is to imitate him ... nope sorry, that cigarette trick just doesn't cut it, pal. As far as acting goes, admit it... he's no Kamal ... no one is. Yes, he's handsome, but is he someone you can see standing at the street corner chatting it up with you, like Vijay? Surya is about as likely to sport a paunch as Ajith is to bare a six pack. Finally, even though he's diversified his portfolio as an actor of late, there's no way in hell he's put himself through so many different experiences as Vikram has.

So, there you go. This guy's stylish, but not gimmicky, he's trying his best, but the game's a hard one to play, he's suave, but a cut above you and me (not Navy cut, which he's too sophisticated to smoke anyway), he's fit, but not in an I-want-to-kill-myself-when-I look-at-you kind of way, and he's versatile but not wed to that philosophy. What he is ... what he is is REAL. He's a human being with goodness in his heart, down to earth and someone who knows his limitations and can make the best use of what he's got.

For instance, he can drive ... boy, can he drive! And so he does those handbrake turns and drifts himself. He's got style, so he makes sure that all his movies have the oomph quotient times extreme. He's understated, so he makes sure he gets roles akin to Eastwood and Brando, rather than deNiro and Carry. And above all, its clear that he has a deep empathy for his fellow human beings (which is why he's one actor who enquires about the day - to - day affairs of everyone in his cast and crew), and a great zest for life. His fan base is not only the most vocal in the state (after that one guy ... superstar or something), but also the most giving. His fans love him more for his offscreen persona than for the things he does on it. They do good deeds in his name, and when they go over the top, he keeps them grounded. And they adore him for it.

All this brings me back to the role he essayed in Mangatha. Director Venkat Prabhu said that Ajith wanted a Heath Ledger's Jokeresque part to play. And he delivered with aplomb (or as much aplomb as is possible for a non - Nolan director). You see, to do a Ledgeresque Joker, you either have to be a real life psychopath, or be so confident in your inherent humanity that you can pull off pure evil without it scarring you forever. Ledger (rest his soul), literally gave his life for that performance, and while Ajith is no psycho, is badass enough to realise that his innate goodness can save him from a similar fate. He did a fantastic job ... bottom line.

And this choice of role brings me to my second point. Rajni did Sri Raghavendra for his 100th. Vijay did Sura for his 50th. And more power to them (I'd give my left ball to spend a day with either of them). Rajni did that role to say thanks for his charmed existence. And Vijay portrayed his to acknowldge his fans. Ajith, on the other hand, constructed sixteen titanium inlaid carbon fiber balls to do what he did in Mangatha. High risk and on the edge is clearly what this man thrives on.

That is why he'll do a baddie to end all baddies in hi s 50th, that is why he'll invest his life savings on 200mph deathtraps when he's 40+, that is why he's stand up to the CM, and that too in his own appreciation ceremony (of which there were admittedly many). That's why, as I say ... what a perfect guy!

Hollywood, move over, Tamil Cinema is here

In my 20 something years of watching and understanding movies, I don't think I've ever seen a non-Hollywood movie that had the chops to beat a Hollywood one in technical aspects. In areas such as makeup, visual effects, animation, graphics, cinematography, editing and stunts, no single movie has been equal to a Hollywood one in all these disciplines at once. The creation of a fantasia that suspends our collective disbelief has never been better accomplished than in a Hollywood movie. Movies such as Terminator, Jurassic Park, Avatar, Indiana Jones and Star Wars have had facets to them that simply could not be reproduced by a contemporary movie made anywhere else but in Los Angeles. Today, that world in which Hollywood ruled the science and technology of movie making changed for me. Well, it actually changed a couple of days back, on 1 October 2010. To appropriate a much bandied about quote from politics (thank you, sister Sarah for making it the slogan of wolf hunting hockey moms all over the world), "there is a crack in the glass ceiling." Endhiran has arrived.

What can I say about this movie? There's no way to put into words the accolades that a technical feat of this magnitude deserves. To talk about each behind-the-scenes area of movie making for this film will require an individual blog and more. So, I've decided that I'd rather talk about what this movie did for me, and I hope, for many more as well. If its a review of the film and its various facets you're looking for, I'd recommend this excellent video review: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL_55IVCCRY. Unfortunately, its all in Tamil, so you need to know the language. But hey, if you're already here having braved the blog's moniker, you would, wouldn't you?

There have been countless films in which robots, and more specifically androids - or a human looking bucket of bolts - have featured prominently. Mr. Sujatha's core story, while not unique in any way, is still a nice platform on which to build a colossus. You see, for a movie like this, where fantasy has to carry the underlying reality, presentation is everything. That is why a post-apocalyptic world in Blade Runner or a superhuman cyborg killer in Terminator carried us away, while Robin William's Bicentennial Man or Robocop have faded from memory. Okay, the basic story of an innocent entity gaining sentience and being manipulated by the fickleness of human nature with a love triangle thrown in (yennadhaan Hollywood padathukku yeedu kuduthaalum, Tamil sentiment iruukanomudaa!) is quite predictable. But the flow from scene to scene, the picturization of each event in the movie, and the visual effects that are used to show unrealistic situations with as much verisimilitude as possible boggle the mind and addle the brain. You are left with a look resembling that of a dying duck gasping its last - mouth agog and eyes bamboozled by the sheer grandeur of each shot. This movie works not so much because of the story, but because of the breathtaking visuals, sublime background scores and Rajni's superlative acting that all gel into a cohesive unit.

Suspension of Disbelief:
The Chennai city of 2010 that Shankar has created for us, replete with its opulent houses, buildings that are architectural marvels and roads cleaner than a baby's freshly powdered bottom probably only exists in some parallel universe where India has no politicians. Several times, like when looking at scientist Rajni's lab, or the fictional AIRD (the Indian Army's advanced technology procurement division) headquarters, I was left scratching my head, wondering where these places are supposed to be located...


When Chitti, the robot says that his processing speed is 1 terahertz and memory capacity is one zettabyte, you have to wonder. The World's fastest computer today has 225,000 processors operating in parallel, and has a speed of 3.4 gigahertz, with total RAM of 360 terabytes. That sits in a room the size of two football fields. So, Chitti, the size of Rajnikanth, with limited cooling options, has about 300 times the processing speed and three billion times the RAM capacity of this computer. Interesting that such a robot was developed in Chennai by one man.

Chitti's varied talents include technical wonders for which we simply do not have the know-how today to be able to incorporate into the space constraints of one average human sized body. As a simple example, his ability to become a high intensity electro-magnet would require roughly the same power as to run an MRI scanner.

But, Shankar asks us to take all this in stride, and reassures us thus: accept that this might be all be possible at some point in the future, that's all I ask. I'll give you a watertight explanation for every stunt, every action sequence and every superhuman action that follows. That is this movie's greatest strength.


Visual treat:
Without giving anything away, its impossible to describe the feelings the visuals in this movie evoke. Because, more than the story itself, its the visuals that, if I were to describe in any detail, will give away a lot of what you will see on screen, probably for the first, and maybe the last time in your lives. All I'll say is, while every visual effect is a treat in itself, watch the last 45 minutes of the film. There is a sequence in which thousands of cloned Rajni robots join electromagnetically to blitz from one shape to the next - starting with simple shapes like spheres and cuboids and finally culminating in... well, that last one has to be seen to really understand its magnificence! I will wager you anything that you won't be able to find another movie that was ever made that has anything that comes close to this sequence!!!

Asimov, Sujatha and Shankar:
Isaac Asimov gave the world the robots of dawn, the three golden rules of robotics and the first true romanticization of robots. Sujatha, I'm told, gave that romance with machines a distinctly Indian flavor with En Iniya Iyandhira and Meendum Juno, two novels on which the movie is loosely based. Shankar has given the concept wings. I honestly believe that there is no director in the world today with Shankar's imagination and selling power. In him, we have a bit of P.C. Sarkar, a tad of P.T. Barnum and a whole lot of P.G. Wodehouse. He can create new world on celluloid, snare us into it for those three hours the 20 dollar ticket is worth, and give us a ride in that world which leaves us with a warm and fuzzy feeling.


Rajnikanth:
What can I say about his performance in this movie. Playing characters like robots is usually described as very difficult, because the performance has to be muted. But, what starts out as such a performance, goes through the full gamut of thespian prowess as the robot changes from an emotionless machine, to one gaining sentience, to one exposed to the evils of human nature, and finally one succumbing to that same evil. His gear shifts from phase to phase are seamless, and when the final villainous being emerges, you can actually experience the definition of evil first hand. This is a very different Rajni that we see here, and I am in love with his performance. Many said that this being a movie originally intended for Kamal, Rajni would be a misfit. But I believe Kamal could have at best matched Rajni's performance here. No more.

So, as Vivek said in the music launch function, Endhiran, the mass. Ergo, watch it in the theatre with the mass. Like Haley's comet, this kind of thing happens once in a lifetime in Tamil cinema. This is its first occurrence, and if you think I'll wait until it comes on TV as a Deepawali or Pongal special, you'll probably die having missed one of the celluloid wonders of our lifetime.

Punch Dialogues - Summa Adhirudhu Illa

"Neenga nallavara kettavara? Theriyalaye paa"
"Naan oru dharava sonna, nooru dharave sonna madhiri"
"Naan sollardhadhaan sieven, seiyyardhadaan solluven"
"Yen characteriye purinjika maatengaringale"
"Por! Por! Veeravel! Vetrivel!"
"Odinen, odinen, Kumari munai yellai varai odinen"

And many more. What is a punch dialogue? When was the first time a punch dialogue ever uttered on screen in mainstream Tamil cinema? Which actor was responsible for starting this Freudian over compensatory trend? And finally, is it important today, and if so why? To quote trick questions in exams, "and if not, why not?"

First of all, a punch dialogue is any line that when uttered even once in a movie, implants itself onto the collective memory of the masses. It is a line or monologue that defines the character that is being portrayed by the actor who voices it. It may or may not necessarily contain a social message, but it is one which will evoke one of the following strong emotions in anyone who hears it: awe, anger, frustration or resolve. It is a dialogue that, for the better or for the worse etches the character, not the actor, the dialogue, not the scene, the theme, not the movie into the masses for an eternity.


What about the history of punch dialogues? I am not sure about its origins on its progenitor, but I can say with assurance that its been around for a while. In the early days, in movies such as Parasakthi and Nadodi Mannan, punch dialogues were specific to the role and even required by the storyline. For instance, the famous courtroom scene in Parasakthi in which Sivaji puts society on trial is one punch line after another. MGR and Karunanidhi successfully used punch dialogues to espouse the cause of the downtrodden and further his political agenda. For example - in the movie Ayirathil Oruvan, MGR says "Namadhu thevaiye pirarudaya nanmai dhaan." This is a classic punch dialogue because it extols the virtue of the character and at the same time delivers a strong message about him. Also, at the time it came out in 1965, MGR was a major political player. Cho's political satire Muhammad Bin Tughlak, for instance has a bevy of punch dialogues such as "The previous administration made government an ass ... I will make it a pig." The emphasis in these early incarnations, however, was not so much on the delivery as it was on the line itself.


Later, with the advent of directors such as K Balachander and T Rajendhar (people who know anything about Tamil cinema will be cringing at the mere mention in the same sentence of these two opposite corners of the talent polyhedron), the punch dialogue focused on the director and the scene rather than on the actors themselves. This is also true of directors such as Visu. A classic example which my mother mentioned is a line that closes a scene of estranged lovers meeting in an office in which one of the characters is searching for a file - "Naan thulaichadu file mattum illa, yen life" - note the permutation of the word file into life.


But these early examples are distant cousins to the flamboyant ones we see today. And the template for the modern version was probably introduced with the advent of Rajnikanth once he reached superstardom. The one liners devised for them are too numerous to list here, but rest assured that during the eighties and early nineties, nearly every other scene in a typical Rajnikanth movie had a pithy one-liner. And that set the trend for things to come with guys like Vijaykanth, Arjun, Sarath Kumar Vijay and Ajith. To be fair to Rajnikanth, the directors of the movies he starred in created an aura around him because he was stylish and had a rebel image. So, punch dialogues enhanced his image and made the scenes memorable. And the ploy stuck because for the first time, an ordinary person like you or me could repeat these one liners with ease and sound cool - what's a better hardsell than that?


To answer the last question, let's take a look at the state of Tamil cinema today. By and large, a majority of the films being made will be relegated to the crapheap by purists. They are for the most part hero-worship affairs that cater primarily to niche fan-bases, mofussul crowds and box-office requirements. Movies by directors such as Vikraman and P. Vasu, and those that star guys like Arjun and Vijaykanth are good examples in this category. There are also as many movies as there are new stars and movie-makers that are made specifically to create a brand identity for the players involved - any of Simbu's or Dhanush's movies are good examples. These are not essentially horrible and may sometimes even involve innovative stories, but are still run of the mill in terms of packaging and delivery. Finally there are movies that have star billing, and even though such movies may have a tightly woven script and good storytelling, they still need to cater to public expectations built up across several offerings spread over many many years. Rajnikanth movies for instance fall into this category.

To hide the defects of the first category, to boost the image of the players in the second and to cater to demand in the third, punch dialogues are not only essential, but can also be thrilling and fun if executed well. And I've tried to showcase here how the punch dialogue morphed from an essential element of the script or a delivery mechanism for a social message into an unforgettable or impactful line in the context of a scene and finally became something that will forever be associated with the actor who voiced it, and which is not contextual anymore. And hey, its not as though only Tamil Cinema dishes out the tacky one-liners... what do you call "I'll be Back!", "Asta la vista, baby", and "You gotta do what you gotta do and I gotta do what I gotta do"?

If you are interested in this topic, I recommend this excellent article: http://www.behindwoods.com/tamil-movie-articles/movies-01/06-05-06-punch-dialogues.html for well researched factual information on some of the most unforgettable lines in Tamil cinema.

Yaavarum Nalama?

Generally, Tamil horror flicks have tended to gravitate towards cheap thrills and ridiculous premises. They have either focussed on populist ideas such as the battle between a holy presence and an malevolent entity. Also, because the saleability of this genre is usually limited to a first and only time viewing by the audience on account of the suspense factor, these movies have a lot of vulgarity in them - sometimes in the form of several steamy bedroom scenes that leave a bad taste in the mouth, or in the mould of the typical 70s and 80s mofussal crowd pullers - a needless record dance or cheap item number. Not so in the case of Madhavan's latest offering Yavarum nalam.

Yavarum Nalam has a tight story and excellent performances by all parties concerned. A young couple and its extended family moves into a new apartment complex and all is well for a time. Then, strange things begin to happen primarily to the protagonist and an eerie television mega-serial which is shockingly parallel to their life story begins almost directly they move in. What is the connections between these supernatural occurences, the TV serial and their lives? Why is apartment 13B the epicenter of these strange happenings? What is the final resolution? As an edge of your seat thriller and social commentary on the typical urban household in Tamil Nadu, Yavarum Nalam delivers more that what is expected.

To divulge the story would do a great disservice to those yet to enjoy the flick (although the rank of my fanbase is woefully close to null and I don't even want to think about what would happen to it in an upper row echelon format), so we'll look at some of the more interesting aspects of the movie - such as how it manages to do what it cliams and its place in the horror genre.

With my next to naught knowledge of Hindu spirituality, I know that the athma or soul of a human being, or any living being for that matter is constant. The vessel it is contained in may perish, but the soul continues to exist. One widely held tenet is that after its release from the human body, the soul is restless if there is something incomplete in its past existence and tries to achieve some sort of closure. And since it is formless it cannot achieve the goal on its own accord. Therefore, it needs a medium - an impressionable entity that can fecilitate its objective. However, such entities are rare and in reality, may not even exist. But for someone who buys into the principle wholeheartedly, things like possession (the control of a human being by a metaphysical force such as an aspect of god), shamanism (the ability to be in contact with the spirit world) and seance mediation (to be a middle man between the world of the living and the world of the dead) are possible and true. This is the centerpiece of the movie. Madhavan is one such person, who without his own will, is a medium for certain restless souls seeking vengeance.

Is it possible for such a person to lead a normal life? Can someone who is your next door neighbour and normalcy itself in all walks of life actually possess such an ability? Or in classic movie extravaganza, should such a person be shrouded in mystery and darkness? This is the first major score for Yavarum Nalam. By taking the concept of a medium and applying it to a normal person with a normal lifestyle, it diverges from a formulaic approach.

Secondly, the movie is, contrary to popular opinion, not a typical haunting. One may argue that hauntings are not new. However, usually hauntings are portrayed are a group of people being scared stiff by abnormal events, or being rubbed off one by one. Its usually vegetates into either an excorcism or a last man standing kind of affair. Yavarum Nalam is about the plea for help by these restless souls, and the only way they can achieve this shout out is to do things that would pique the interest of an impressionable living medium. That is the intended objective of the haunting in Yavarum Nalam - and this fresh perspective is dealt with professionally here.

Thirdly, the idea of a television mega-serial with word for word similarity to the day to day lives of Madhavan's family is not only an excellent presentation of the plot, it is also an intentional or unintentional commentary on society. Many households are bogged down by these stereotypical mega-serials, even to the extent that normal healthy family life gets affected by the viewers being sucked into the action (or lack of it) on screen. People start associating themselves with the characters on screen and are glued to the idiot box for hours on end, five days a week. It is like a narcotic - and like every narcotic, it does not claim uniqueness, innovation or difference. Like crack, cocaine, marijuana, alcohol or tobacco, only the names such as Anandham, Vizhudhugal, Pidivaadham, Metti Oli etc. are different. Therefore ones these mega-serials get you hooked on, rehab seems to be the only way out. That the spirits in the movie cash in on this substance dependance to get their message across is a satirical take on the contemporary urban household. The sameness - oh! the sameness ...

And finally, the movie really does it for me because there are no cheap thrills. Since the story, the acting, the music and the editing are so crisp, there is no need for the sudden jarring noise, or the shadow round the corner, or the hand that slowly creeps up on you from behind. Gone also is the inexplicably stupidity of a character with a deathwish venturing alone into a dark room, or the insipid idea the haunted group gets to split up and go in search of what is most certainly their iminent doom. No, in Yavarum Nalam you get a proper mystery and the thrills are only in what direction the story will take in the next scene, and how things are going to pan out. This results in immense resale value for the movie - because you actually end up appreciating the effort that has gone into thinking this through, rahter than watching something that makes you jump everytime there a noise. The problem with the latter is, after the first time, you know exactly when the noise is coming. The difference is between reading an Agatha Christie novel and a Joseph Sheridan LeFanu type horror tale. Agatha Christie is so much more second-time-pick-upable.

So, please do Director Vikram Kumar and the entire cast and crew of Yavarum Nalam and go watch it. It is definitely a notch above the classics including Padhimoondram Number Veedu, Monalisa, Genmanatchathiram, Uruvam, Mayabazaar 1995 and so on. Since its not in theatres any more, you can get a DVD or CD (but an original one please). Piracy is a crime unless you are impecunious grad student living on the most expensive seaboard in the world!

Bommalattam - we are the puppets

Are you a fan of the novel of mystery? I am, and that's why Bommalattam disappoints. From the days of Arthur Conan Doyle's Holmes, to the queen of crime's Poirot and Marple, to our very own Byomkesh Bakshi and Feluda, a good mystery yarn has been rooted deeply in two important rules: (i) the plot must be watertight, and (ii) all the facts must be presented before the solution is outed.

Let us look at the first rule. There can be no obvious loose strings if your plot is to make sense. Usually, it is the case of committing a murder, or setting up a red herring, or creating an alibi, or some such, and in these cases, if there are glaring errors such as (i) impracticality, (ii) physical impossibility, (iii) uncharacteristic actions of the principal(s) or (iv) irregularities, then there is a leak somewhere, and on closer inspection, the reader feels let down.

Consider for example the following scenario - Mr. X needs to establish an alibi for his activities on the night of the murder. He thus claims that he was in Bangalore during the event. However, it later transpires that he purchased an airline ticket from Chennai to Bangalore at 6:43pm, boarded the flight at 6:45pm and landed at Bangalore at 7:08pm. He then proceeded to his office in Whitefield and was seen by the guard there at 7:30pm. Now, unless there is a prepped and ready rocket jet waiting to take him to Bangalore, and there is a super expressway linking the airport which is someway off to his office, this falls outside the realm of Physics. If later, the claim is made that the alibi is false, everything is "oojah cum spiff." But, if the author claims this alibi is true, then the reader is unaware of some new warp technology for sure.

Now, the second point - a good mystery is one in which everyone including the reader has an opportunity to think objectively about what has happened and arrive at a conclusion. If we are smart, we may hit the correct sequence of events, and guess the psychological tapestry to a nicety. The prowess of the author is then to show us that he or she is more devious than we are. For instance, A, B and C are in a room, and C has been murdered. So, the logical conclusion should be that either of A or B have committed the crime. But, if at the end, the author reveals a person D out of the blue who actually did it, then its no longer a whodunit, but a whatthehellisthis?

Unfortunately for Bommalattam, the movie fails on both counts. Without revealing too much of the plot, suffice it to say that impracticality, time dilation, new character introduction and physical impossibility have all been used in this movie.

But, I would have been willing to accept these major story faults, provided the direction and editing were top notch. Sadly, the movie fails to impress here too. The criminal investigation carried out by Arjun seems to be haphazard, and lacking in order and method. The investigative process is not at all showcased, and results seemingly appear out of thin air. Another way of looking at it is that this is a case where the investigator has a surmise, but he lacks solid evidence to prove it, and is forced to use unconventional methods. However, if this were the case, it is not portrayed logically. Sequence seems to be lacking.


While there is a surfeit of suspense, and the finger points to all the principals at one point or another, there seems to be a lack of interest in exploiting this element. For instance, I suspected Arjun himself at one time, but the motivation for him is built up in a single scene and then forgotten.

The psyche of the director and the heroine of the movie within the movie is delved into deeply, and clearly, it is Bharathirajaa's desire to make this the story's centerpiece. But this relationship is given to us not from the perspective of the principals, which would have been a position of strength, but as a series of conjectures and surmises by the bit players around them. This makes the whole endeavor seem a bit artificial.

But I will take my hat off for the plot twist at the end though. It is completely unexpected and new to Tamil cinema. But, for a mystery relying so heavily on the climax, this could have been integrated into the story in a different manner at a much earlier stage. Revealing more of what I have in mind would be telling all. Ask me in private if you want to know what I think!

And a bit about the editing. The movie moves so slowly in places, especially during the bits about the movie shooting, and the interrogation sequences, that you can cut the silence with a knife. This tends to ease the tension and loosen the grip in places where it is needed most. And whatever happened to the lip sync and the dubbing I will never be able to say. It was like watching a Hindi movie dubbed into Tamil. Totally unprofessional sums it up.


As for the acting, a weak rendition by Nizhalgal Ravi takes the intensity away from Nana Patekar's acting. Lackadaisical performances from Vivek, the heroines, and Arjun seem to indicate that the director has put his entire weight behind the story and has lost it everywhere else. The music, as is the usual Himesh Reshamiya fare, is nothing to write home about, although the BGM's were quite impressive, especially during the investigation sequences.

The puppet master is able to make dolls dance to his tune. Sadly here, although it is clear in the end who the real puppet is (which is a bit of an unexpected shock really), the audience have been made the puppets by being kept in the dark, and by having their intelligence assumed to be sub-par. In all, therefore, Bommalattam fails to impress and really has too many glaring flaws for it to be a good mystery yarn.

By the way, the reason this review may seem cryptic is because I don't want to reveal anything. After a decent amount of time has passed (once the movie has run its course), I will explain each aspect in an addendum.

Kuruvi - Responsible cinema

There are many heart-wrenching human issues in today's world which Cinema can, should and does focus on. Issues such as poverty, illiteracy, racial and sexual abuse, human trafficking and, state sponsored violation of marginalized people and suspension of even basic human rights by arrogant administrations. And all these tentacles are but parts of one ugly miasma - the medusa called exploitation.

We watch the plight of those human beings caught in this chakravyuham in network documentaries and the so called award films and cringe, maybe even shed a few tears. But rarely do we get to go to the movie theatre for a weekend bonanza with the family, have a wonderful time watching the hero kick the living daylights out of the bad guys, romance the dusky beauty, indulge in rib tickling escapades with the comical sidekick, and yet come back home with a spring in one's stride and with a social message implanted deeply in one's heart. To this latter category of core-value-deep impact cinema belongs Kuruvi. Let's look at the tentacles of exploitation this movie illuminates.

The plight of bonded labourers is probably the worst consequence of exploitation. From the time of his birth, the labourer is subjected to a life of very little haves and even smaller wants. He is forced into a viscious cycle to pay off his father's debts, which he can never accomplish in his lifetime. Married to hunger and hard toil day after day, exploited to the bone by unethical middle men controlled by politicians, he is living the life of a Gulag prisoner, only with a lower life expectancy and sub-zero hope. Kadappa is Kuruvi's Liberia, Chad and the Democratic Republic of Congo. The resounding message the movie conveys is that you and me, the end consumer seldom realize the blood we have helped spill for our little comforts in life. Be it rock salt or blood diamonds, the slavemasters and middlemen whose pockets we line are like parasitic weeds that block the sunshine out of the bonded labourer's existence. That Vijay does not know of his father's plight is just a metaphorical spin on this "see no evil, ask not of it," bubble we live in.

I used to wonder why Tamil moviemakers usually choose Singapore, the Middle East and Malaysia as their foreign locales of choice. This movie, maybe unintentionally, has opened my eyes to the glaring fact: the Tamil diaspora outside of Tamil Nadu and Sri Lanka lives there. In Malaysia alone, Tamilians form 8% of the nation's populace. Yet, their existence is not very different from that of the bonded labourers of Kadappa. A majority of this pupulace is poor and fulfills the critical yet unattractive professions shunned by society. They are subjected to racial abuse and communal discrimination based on their belief system. Their human rights are routinely violated and there is no semblance of secularism afforded to them. For such people, more movies should be made in such places, so that they may provide a window into their lives for the more fortunate world citizens. While this movie does not do this explicitly (but there is a token message in the title and dermal premise - the role of the "kuruvi"), it atleast provides a setting which influential people should sit up and take notice of. For that I salute Udayanidhi Stalin and Dharani.


I am a big fan of the Dharani-Vijay-Trisha combo. The on screen chemsitry between Vijay and Trisha is realistic because of two reasons: their common generational bracket, and their sense of comic timing. Vijay provides most of the aerobic moves, and has a face that is as malleable as martensite when it comes to comic reactions. Trisha is his perfect foil with her gullible belligerence that sets up the duo's next escapade. Dharani leaves us panting in avid expectation about what these two will be up to next. Ofcourse, most of Ghilli's success was based on this exhilerating exchange, so what could Dharani do that would not be old? Fuzz-brain: call in the king of comedy, Vivek. So, he adds a pinch of salt to Vijay's spicy chillies and Trisha's wholesome lentils, and what you have is a mouth watering vatha kuzhambu ready to eat.

Mannivannan's cameo is brilliant in that he is as usual very emotive and plays the role of a distraut father to perfection. At the same time, we should salute the story for being bold in giving Mannivannan more minutes in retroanalysis than onscreen. Vijay is not the lynchpin of the story. Mannivannan is. At every stage of the story, it is he, who in the background, drives it forward. For if he had not been in debt, Vijay would not have needed to race that deathtrap of a car. So, no dynamic entry. If he had not been in bonded labour, Malaysia would have just been another patch on the map for Vijay. So, no hero, no villians, no Kuruvi.

The roles of Ashish Vidyarthi, Suman and the other dadas are typecast, so there's not much scope for experimentation here. I'd have liked atleast one of them to be a suave Company style Ajay Devgan, or a brooding Sarkar style Big B, but I guess that would have sapped some of the on screen energy. For this kind of movie, this formula works, so well... bite the bullet.

The action sequences are as usual choreographed brilliantly, but what sets the stage ablaze is the background score by Vidyasagar. Anyone who buys a ticket for a Vijay flick is automatically a mover and shaker. So the apt medley of bass and dappankuthu adds flavor to the fold. The songs are, as in Ghilli, once again equal to Vijay's vibrations. There is one thing I have to say about Vijay's dance: after a point you begin to wonder if he's a Pinnochio boy transformed from a GI Joe toy with hinges for ball-and-sockets.

Most times in Tamil cinema these days, clever directors attempt to weave the song and fight sequences into the story, but face the pitfall of arresting or accelerating the tempo of the storyline. Dharani has shown in Dhool, Ghilli and Kuruvi that he is the past master of this tempo tuning. These interludes take you from the pantry car to your berth at the speed of the passenger, and basically leave you with the feeling that the signal was green and the scenery didn't blurr past.


The movie is not without its faults too, but these are more devils in the detail than ghosts in the machinery. Campy summersaults and non-physical flying baddies take nothing away from the movie's appeal, so I accept the sop to commercialism and move on.

Please don't come out of the theatre thinking that Kuruvi was just another Vijay flick - a dhoom dhamaka entertainer. It is also a sensible effort to educate the masses on an existing problem - that of blatant exploitation in our country. Whether it is the human trafficking in Kadappa, the salt mine agarias of Gujurat, the opium cultivators of Rajasthan, the bar girls of Mumbai, or cotton farmers of Maharashtra, the sad stories are the same. And even though directors form Satyajit Ray to Bharatiraja have dealt with these subescts before, Dharani scores because the manner in which he's gift wrapped this bitter pill ensures that this is not one more film that gets watched by forty self-acclaimed refined critics and recieves a national award, but one that reaches the millions of Tamilians around the world, be they the upwardly mobile urban middle class, or the B and C mofussuls. And ofcourse, Dharani has ensured that Udayanidhi Stalin's investment is rewarded well. It would be wishful thinking that U. Stalin would talk the message of the movie up to Tamil Nadu's first family, but I like to be an optimist.