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.

Mr. Hammond welcomes us to the Jurassic Park!

To put it quite simply, to my mind, this is the greatest movie ever made. None of the concepts here were new. Everything this movie showcases, from the character backgrounds, the moral issues, the action and the suspense had all been done to death from the earliest rendition of The Lost World in 1925 to the first iteration of King Kong in 1933. But everything about this movie was NEW! it is, to me, the pinnacle of movie making, and nothing before or since has come even a mile close to what this did for movies and for movie audiences. It took the concept of movies to a whole new level.

The book was fantastic for its visualization of a world in which Dinosaurs roam free. It gave us the framework for a new kind of terror. A species so alien to us that it could have existed on another planet, but for the fact that fossils tell us otherwise. It showcased the visceral terror of these majestic beings. But apart from this, much of the ethical dilemmas were merely background filler for the real deal - the action. Characters were pretty much one dimensional and what you would expect. Greedy business tycoons, nerdy kids, skeptical scientists and evil saboteurs; the lot straight out a pulp fiction suspense novel. But it was the seed for something so much better than itself. Like a plant germinating to life from a pod, Steven Spielberg took that basic idea and had Mr. Hammond to Welcome us to Jurassic Park.

When you talk about the greatest movie ever made, you also have to think about the greatest director to have ever lived. For movies of this genre, that list is indeed illustrious. You have James Cameroon with Terminator and Avatar. You have George Lucas with Star Wars. You have Stanley Kubrick with 2001, a Space Odyssey. And you have Stephen Spielberg. See, the thing with James Cameroon is that he is all high concept, but quite condescending in the delivery of the message. George Lucas is about stunning set pieces that drive a story forward. And Stanley Kubrick is the king of style and little substance. Spielberg, in this movie atleast got the mix bang on target.

For an excellent and revealing discussion about the movie, please watch Confused Matthews video reviews. I am just going to focus on two scenes from the movie and the musical score. I think these taken together sum up the movie for me.

When John Hammond, the owner of the them park takes the Scientists out for the first time to see the dinosaurs, the sheer majesty of these beasts is staggering. To think that these giants once roamed the very earth we stand on today is beyond imagination, beggars belief. No matter how many fossils and computer renditions we may have seen, nothing could ever prepare us for the shock of seeing one in the flesh. How can someone hope to bring that awe to us, let alone on a screen? How can  someone transport us to such a magical place as this, the land of the last titans the world ever had walk on her? Well, it is a combination of brilliant animatronics, camerawork, acting or rather reacting by the cast and probably the best rerecording in the history of films. But mere words can do no justice to this, and for the first time ever in these blogs, I am going to stop writing and just ask you to see for yourselves:

In this scene, you see from Richard Attenborough's delight at his guests' reactions that he is not the TV trope evil tycoon. He is truly joyous of his creation, his baby, and wants it to be his gift to the world. You also see the lawyer ready to merchandise the crap out of this. You see the skepticism in Jeff Goldblum's eyes. And you see the culmination of their lives' work and the fear that comes when you confront giants from a dead past in the eyes of Sam Neill and Laura Dern. And you see the the leviathans themselves in their milieu, going about their day, naturally, uncaring of us puny little insect - like beings. This scene conveys so much of what this movie is about. Yes, there are special effects, but they are a backdrop for the fact that nature is so much more superior than man's machinations. No matter what you do otherwise, life doesn't care and it will continue to do what it must to go on, no matter who's watching or what they're manipulating. It is also a very nice teaser, the docility of these creatures now, for what is to come.

"Genetic power is the most awesome force the planet's ever seen, but you wield it like a kid that's found his dad's gun." This scene serves three purposes. One to get the exposition of the far reaching issue of the morality of creating a world that is not supposed to be. To be playing God. Without being condescending or pedantic, it lays bare the issues the movie is trying to address. Two, it gives us a glimpse of the motivations of the central characters. Man seldom manipulates science with disaster as the end goal. But lazy science - by which I mean, science removed from fully understanding its consequences - has, well, consequences not fully fathomable. And these consequences are invariably bad even with the best intentions. Hiroshima and Nagasaki showed us that. What stock do Stem cell and DNA manipulation research have in store for us? And three, it sets up all the carnage to come in an ethical framework. These are the hallmarks of a great sci - fi action movie. The movie begs us to think about what we are seeing. Again, mere words may elucidate the scene, but the mood of people discussing Darwinian concepts in a relaxed setting that diffuses the ferocity of nature's raw savage should be seen. That this kind of a scene even features in a movie like this is an indication that this is much, much more than just a sci - fi thriller. Watch:

A great science fiction tale is one in which moral questions are asked to which we as a society have no clear cut answer. The tale puts these in a context of a situation far removed from personal experiences so that we may objectively try to approach them without being invested in them on an emotional level. And through the answers we find, we might hope to learn something, and maybe apply them to our own lives. And the role of action and special effects are to show us the consequences of choices made in this fantastical setting. They are not the be all and end all of the tale. That is what this movie does so well. Action set pieces and stunning visual effects that changed the face of CGI and VFX forever are found aplenty here, but they are all part of the grander scheme. That's what I meant about the director balancing his tray.

And finally, the music. As far as I'm concerned, the background score of this movie is everything it needed to be. It captures the thrill of seeing impossible beings walking amongst us. It adds to their majesty. It is suspenseful and awe inspiring, but in a soaring, uplifting way. It tells us that no matter what, life will find a way. Be it the dinosaurs, or the humans who erred in making them in the first place. Life will always find a way. And to add to all this, its haunting tune always brings a tear to my eyes. It is quite simply,  to my mind, the best soundtrack ever composed for a movie. But don't take my word for it. Listen:

Even after 20 years, with all the budgets and technologies at out disposal, no one has seemed to have understood the role of visual effects. No one has seemed to be able to balance a truly great sci - fi tale with adventure. No one has seemed to be able to show us the real adventure, that of life itself in a more majestic way than this movie has. To take a dead civilization alien to us in every way and make it come alive again... oh God, what a treat. You may have not seen this in a long time. If so, you must watch it again. Because when you do, you, along with Dr. Grant, and dear Dr. Suttler, will be "Welcome to the Jurassic Park."

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.

What is DRS

I have wondered many times about the quality of F-1 fans. I mean, you talk to a Cricket fan, and he would be able to run you to the ground with his explanation of the cover drive, the role of the sweeper, the "Dilscoop" - although it pains me immensely to use that term - or on how to get Sachin out in the most statistically probable fashion (thank you, dad). Ask a Football fanatic - there really weren't any "fans" to being with, because they actually KILL for their teams, and sometimes their own team members - and they'll go into a brass tacks argument on why Poland was wrongly denied a goal against Russia early this month on a questionable offside decision. A Tennis connoisseur will be able to tell you why he believes that the rain actually didn't help Nadal with the French Open this year because he already possesses superhuman stamina and superb base play.

The common thread in all this is that the rules are simple and the skills are tangible. All it takes for a fan or fanatic - I'm not judging - is to place oneself in his idol's shoes and imagine that they got game to make the right call.

F-1 is slightly different though. After you've sifted through the glitz and glamour of saying you like a sport in which your favorite diva was seen at a page three gala hobnobbing it with other favorite divas and wondering why you weren't born rich enough to afford the five thousand dollar paddock entry cover, or after you've stopped seeing red everywhere (Ferrari, after all, is the most glamorous of all), and after the cool factor of boasting to your friends that the only way to see an F-1 race is on that brand new HD TV you got, there remains one little niggle: what do you really know about how it all works? I mean, how do the little bits fit together?

A disclaimer: By now, you're thinking to yourself - wait this has nothing to do with Tamil Movies. All of this is a rant against casual F-1 viewers. You're thinking either, hey wait a minute... I get what this guy is on about, or hah, screw this know it all, I have a HD TV! Well, the way I see it is this: F-1 is a complex sport - a blending of Science, Engineering and high performance high endurance Sportsmanship. I have seen too many people claiming to be fans who don't have the slightest clue that for every Schumi or Alonso or Vettel or Hamilton, there is a whole team starting with Brawn or Fry or Newey or Michael that is solving often seemingly insurmountable Engineering problems offscreen. Just like how a true cricket fan must know the intricacies of a reverse swinging ball or the difference between a dilscoop - aww that word again - and graceful a pick-up behind the keeper to enjoy the game, so too should a real F-1 fan know a little bit about what's going on to really get into it. Otherwise, you'll be left with an inane observation like "shiny red car... me like it win. Weeeee....."

But in order to get what's happening, a little scientific know-how is required, and the casual observer is not necessarily versed in this regard. I hope that with this series of articles, I can try to explain some of the basic science of the cars and thereby make it a richer experience for you next time. Remember, HD looks a lot better when you can see that pass from nowhere and say, "ahh, I know how it happened and thank god that I could see it crystal clear!"

Unfortunately, science is hardly accessible to the common man, couched as it is in Greek symbols and esoteric terms. Hopefully, with this series, I could introduce you to some of the truly fantastic things that make the F-1 car "go" by simplifying the science without loss of generality (a supercilious jargon phrase used to say that its ok to call a spade a spade, even when it has tassels on the handle).

Also, I'm setting up shop this time, so hopefully the coming articles won't be as long winded.

Back to the point.

Rather than the science being an intimidating put-offer, understanding this witchcraft will put you one up on your guests in an after race conversation. It will make you the exalted one in circles that invite people to see races on HD TVs. If you don't own a HD TV, your pure racing knowledge will get you invited to the homes of those who do. Ofcourse, the trick once you've got yourself invited over is not to make it sound like a boring Physics puzzle from IE Irodov and never get asked back ever again, but that's one instance where personal flair is called for if there ever was.

I'd like to take the science and distill its essence for anyone prepared to spend five minutes on its minutiae - practically rhymed, Jeeves. What? I'm Chaucer, who got language to the masses.

I'm starting off this series with DRS - no, not the Decision Review System, you Dhoni-hater-cum-BCCI-seditionist. This is the sinister sounding Drag Reduction System. Over the next few posts, I'll talk about tires and balance, the front wing and its distant cousin, the rear wing, bottom effects, and finally, the big daddy - aerodynamics. By the time I'm done with you, you'll be able to tell your hot date why Alonso won in Valencia and why Schumi was able to hold off Webber till the bitter end. Yeah! Like that's what she wanted to talk about. Exercise flair and use restraint as applicable.

Simply put, DRS is a system that gives a driver hot on the tail of someone in front a speed advantage offering him an overtaking opportunity provided he is within a second behind the leading car in certain parts of the track. This is very different from another kind of advantage which a trailing car has that's called a tow. But that topic is for another day when we talk about wings. And in F-1, tow comes with its own can of worms.

Before I tell you about DRS, there's a couple of voodoo terms that are good to know: dynamic and kinematic. If you're looking at how things work, you're also probably wondering what drives them. A dynamic thing is something you define with both its function and the driving force for that function. So, a dynamic knife is a knife that cuts the cabbage because you pressed down with it. A kinematic thing one the other hand just does what its doing, but we don't talk about the driving force. The force is still there, but we don't really care what it is. A kinematic knife is a knife that cuts the cabbage, period. With a kinematic knife, you have no way of knowing how deep the cut is going to be, what size the pieces are going to be, and what the knife will be doing once its done cutting the cabbage. But with a dynamic knife, you can tell how deep its going to cut because you know how much pressure you're applying. You can tell that the knife is going to be put away, because you also know what your action is going to be after you've cut your cabbage.

A neat example is a car on cruise control. If that car is doing sixty five on the freeway, you don't have to worry about the accelerator pedal for a while, and the car is going to continue to do sixty five. So, the speed of the car is kinematic. On the other hand, if you've just taken the ramp onto US 101, then you have to start flooring it. The speed of the car is no longer a kinematic entity. Now, you're accelerating at a rate determined by how hard you floor it. In order to determine the speed of the car now, you also need to know how much gas you're giving it, so this is now a dynamic thing.

The reason this is important is because the DRS is a dynamic thing. That will become clear soon enough.

Let's look at it word by word.

Drag. Its been a long drive back home and your bladder is suddenly full from all that coffee you drank along the way. You've stopped by a discrete hedge and you're tacking into the wind. Lo and behold, you're legs are getting wet. Why? Because the wind is blowing against you. You can't turn around... other motorists are tooling along. Maybe there's a cop. So, how can you compensate? You can lift it up a bit. This action has two advantages: one, fertilizing fluid would fly farther and not fall on your feet, and two, you would feel less air pressure on it. In technical parlance, the wind has just imparted DRAG on the stream of pee. It has dragged it down. It has exerted pressure on it. What you did when you lifted it up was to change the arc of the pee and make it look flatter to the air. So, the air exerted less pressure on it, and it flew further.

Drag has a nemesis, its evil twin, lift. Lift is harder to explain. Now you've come back home, but its a hot day. So you stand in front of your pedestal fan tilted up to your face. Your hair is blowing up. Why? Because the air is flowing upwards from the fan. The ceiling fan a few feet behind you is also in full swing. Now, your hair starts to curl upwards and forwards. Its doing this because its experiencing a different pushing forces at its roots and its tips. This difference is LIFT.

Its tomorrow, and you're on an airplane to Tegucigalpa because your boss hates you. Your airplane lifts off at 200KpH. An F-1 car stays on the ground even at 300KpH. What's the difference. A plane takes off because there is a way to make the air beneath it exert more upward force on it than the air above it. This is the shape of the airplane wings. Also, its more likely to take off if the wings don't have too much air pressure in front of them. So, what you want is your wing to have less drag on it, and generate upward lift. It would have look like a piece of paper curved downwards. Also, you don't want it to have much of a profile when facing the air, so you make its front as curved as possible. Its back has to be like a knife edge pointing down to suck the air above it and push it back up against its underside in the back. An F-1 wing one the other hand has to keep the car planted to the ground. So, it has to do everything an airplane wing does, but oppositely. So it looks like an upside down airplane wing.

Reduction. Just what it sounds like. To make your car go faster than your rival's, all other things equal, you need to be able to reduce the pressure of the wind in front of it. As you've probably noticed by now with all those hours if F-1 footage, an F-1 car is by no stretch of the imagination a sleek looker. It has bits and pieces sticking out, big fat uncovered tires, and a new nose job for 2012 straight from the Fiat Multipla design team. What all this does is presents to the wind a clunky profile that increases the drag on it. The only things that can go some way to reducing all this drag, are the wings. Now, the only way the wings can help reduce the drag is their profile to the wind becomes flatter.

System. A system is anything that gets a job done. In this case, its a transducer. What is a transducer, you might ask. I'll tell you. A light bulb tuns on when you switch it on. Electrical impulses travel through the tungsten filament which is heated and starts to glow. So, the electricity was converted to light by the release of high energy particles from the filament. So, in this case the transducer was the filament. A transducer is a device that converts one form of an input into another form of an output. In F-1, when the driver pushes the DRS button which probably activates a hydraulic piston or motor mechanism (which of the two options each team chose is a secret guarded unto death itself!) that flattens the wing by rotating it more horizontally. In this case, the transducer is either the motor or the piston. This thereby reduces the drag and makes the car go faster. But more importantly, being a dynamic system, the wing actually ACCELERATES the car while its being flattened, thereby giving the driver the extra punch over the guy in front. So, while he is going faster than the guy in front, he also able to increase his speed further, overshoot the competitor and make it stick. It has it Achilles heel though. It also reduces the downward lift that kept the car planted on the ground and makes it slide around a bit more (more on this when we talk about tires and balance).

The lawmakers of F-1 have decreed that the driver may flatten his rear wing provided he trails the leading car within a second behind it. Why this one second rule? And why not keep the wing flat permanently if its giving the car so much speed? That we'll see when we come to the wings. As to a question I can answer now, why choose only certain parts of the track where DRS can be used? This is where the F-1 gurus were clever. Most F-1 circuits have dull spots where the race is usually processional. So, by putting the DRS zones here, they're likely to have more on-track action. The existing overtaking spots can then be left to sieve the men from the boys because driver skills becomes very evident in those places anyway.

That's it. That's what DRS is. So, why did Alonso Win and why did Schumi come third? Apart from the totally predictable retirements of Vettel, Grosjean, Hamilton and Maldonado (a big thank you guys, for putting my idol back on the podium), after the safety car period, Alonso was beautifully positioned behind Grosjean, close enough to be able to use his DRS and whiz past. Schumi, on the other hand, was able to keep Webber more than a second behind him through the DRS zones, and thereby retain his place over an ever more irritable Webber.

   

X vs God - Requests and Denials

Many people believe in God. And equally healthy is the number of people who vehemently deny His existence. But for all the debate about His existence, one thing remains certain. Everybody has asked God of something or the other atleast once. Oh, you may not call Him God, but I bet you've wondered to a higher power if something could be different. Well, I'm a firm believer in God, and I feel that no matter what your faith may be, there are many times that these requests get fulfilled, and many times when they go unnoticed. Let's take a look at some of the classics.

Nervous Urban X:

X: I've ben playing Super Ninja VI the whole night, and the exam's in two hours! I desperately need to pass. Also, I'd really, really, really like an iPad 2.

God: X, I gave you two hands, two legs, two eyes, two ears, two lungs and one each of everything else. Yeah, I ran out of spares. So do your own stuff on your own time. And iPad 2? I have a gazillion things to do, so I'm on the Xoom. Ask for a Xoom, and I shall giveth it thee.

X: Ok, Xoom then.

G: Buy it yourself.

X: But you just said...

G: No.

X: Please?

G: Get a Kindle, and stop calling.

Frantic Rural X:

X: God, my first born is a girl. I have to kill her. Will you get her five - star accommodations and middle - class Brahmin parents in the city next time?

G: Why, because she couldn't manage her gender? Because you'd actually have to do something menial like clean sewers rather than working in the field if you really wanted to earn for a change, and not whittle away every last penny you have on ratgut? Or is it because you'd prefer to have more unprotected sex and ruin the chances any future kid you might have as well?

X: Hmm ... maybe.

G: Ok, you go ahead and kill her. She didn't do anything wrong, so she'll be a big - shot next time. But you... you'll be a dung beetle eaten by a duck with swine flu when your turn comes.

X: But god!!!

G: [Click]

Desperate Xs:

X Good: I didn't drink, I didn't smoke, I didn't do anything bad, but I still got cancer anyway. Can you please heal me?

X Bad: I did all those things, and I got it too. But I still want to live.

G: X Good, sorry, that was my bad. Life sucks sometimes. But I'll make it up to you. Susie, do we still have the Tendulkar template? We do? Good. X good, I cannot do much for you, but your son will be the next greatest cricket phenomenon. Also, I'm working double shifts trying to put smarter people on the ground who can find a cure for this damn thing, so hand in there.

X bad, sorry to disppoint you, but I put these evil things there to tempt you, and make you stronger. But you failed. You get an F. Better luck next time.

Religious Xs:

X0: I believe in you 100%.

G: Good for you. Keep it going.

X0: But X2 here seems to think that you're just a hokey pokey guy, so I'm going to deface him. I'm going to make sure he doesn't have a prayer on anything social, political, etc. [Haha].

G: What's your problem. You like me, he doesn't. Grow up already.

X0: But, here I am, doing the good deeds in your name, and he's insulting you everyday of the week!

G: Listen, I'm glad you're doing my work, but you need to chill out. He'll know me when he sees me. And you have to stop blaming the tsunami and Katrina on him. Next call please!


X1: God, I'm building a temple in your name.

G: Cool.

X1: But its only open to people who believe that you look like a dung beetle, and who smear this special powder on their nose this way on the right side. If you apply it on the left side, you're not invited.

G: Oh ...

X1: And they have to be fair skinned.

G: I see ...

X1: And they need to be born into a certain type of family.

G: Uh ... uh ...

X1: We will also be flogging anyone else in your name as an added incentive.

G: Listen, you piece of shit, you're going to lose everything you have! Hunger plague, pestilence, you name it, it will come to you! I try to be nice, and you spew garbage in my name! Screw you and your ilk.


Xa: God, there's this guy who seems to think that you're not the real deal ... that someone else is.

G: Did you kill any of his associates over this?

Xa: No, but I'm seriously thinking about it.

G: Did you know what happened to the last guy that did it? Susie, who's the ex - terrorist in hell wing D? Osama? He's burning in his own shit right now.

[Cut in ...]

Xb: God ... God ... I just bombed sixty kids that believed in the other guy. Are you happy? I did it for you! Are my virgins waiting for me in heaven?

G: What did you have for lunch?

Xb: Garlic pork with onion sauce.

G: Ohoho ... you're in for a world of pain.

[Cut in ...]

Xa: So ... um ... what should I do?

G: Be friends with the guy who hates me. You can both find middle ground, and agree to disagree civilly.

Politically Expedient X:

X: God, hi. Listen, I started a party in your name down here.

G: Okay ...

X: Yeah, yeah, I'm getting all these votes and people are fighting each other. Swamis and imams are starting up under my blessings. There's chaos everywhere, and the people are too stupid to realise what's happening. I just opened an account in Lichtenstein. My Hawala business is doing great, and I've already got 200 thousand investors for my Diwala Chit Fund Scheme. My son is going to be playing for India in the upcoming tour of Australia. So its all good.

G: How much money did you make?

X: 200 billion! And if I can just get this 5G thing going, I'm looking at a cool Trillion.

G: And how much power?

X: 5 terms in office so far. If only the that reform party guy will quietly take the Animal Husbandry ministry, then 3 more terms! Woohoo!

G: Multiply those two numbers. That's how many years I'm going to make you suffer in hell. Susie ... convert that figure to oil and firewood dear. Oh yeah ... enough fuel for 3 billion billion years. Burn, baby burn!

Reformist X:

X: Hey big G, I don't trust you. You're all lies, you know that?

G: Uh oh ... Here we go again [Sigh].

X: Yeah, you've got idiots calling themselves Hindus, Muslims, Christians etc. doing your dirty work for you.

G: What?

X: Guess what, superguy, I don't give a damn. I'm going to be fair to my fellow human beings no matter what. I'm not going to be judgmental. I'm not going to fight any wars for you. I'm not ...

G: Can I get a word in edgewise here?

X: Go ahead.

G: Ok, don't believe in me, fine. If you want to do something positive, bravo. If you want to end falsehoods about me, kudos. But get this, I'm not the problem. You don't have to question my existence to end all those evil things people do in my name. They are using me, just as you have been used by religious zealots all your life. And finally, whether you trust me or not, I'll still be here for you.

Real X:

X: God, I sincerely wish that the world was a better place, and that people respected one another. That there is universal peace, no suffering and happiness all around. We all have to live on this one planet anyway, and we don't have infinite resources to begin with. So, why waste what precious little we have? Help us all lead better lives and be kinder towards life.

G: Whoa ... Susie, are we on candid camera or something? Are we on a reality show? This caller ... is he for real?

Susie: Yes boss. He's the real deal. Actually, there are quite a few like him around. I think they call themselves human beings.

X: Well ... well ... Mr. X, you have echoed every sentiment I've ever had. Someone like you deserves to be known to the whole world. You don't have to be anonymous anymore. I'm going to give you a name. Gandhi.


So, friends, whatever your beliefs may be, we are all fundamentally the same. Not everyone is a Gandhi, but we can most certainly put our petty differences aside. Also, whether you believe in god or not, don't be a fair weather prayee. I think we can all afford to pray for the general good once in a while between asking for a longer life, new car, better business, more cash, and the new iPad 2.

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!!!