Kalyana Samayal Saadham (2013)

Kalyana Samayal Saadham (KSS) picks an aspect of marriage that usually goes undiscussed in our cinema - impotency. Whether or not it is a permanent medical complication, a matter of sexual compatibility or a stress-induced temporary state can be attributed to detailing, but one could sense that the movie shunned away from topic through out its course the typical tamil cinema way. KSS chooses to instill humour into all the situations arising out and comically dismisses Raghu's (Prasanna) problem. When Meera (Lekha Washington) delivered the "Let's assume you are impotent, so what ?!" line, she appeared as if she was receiving the Tamil-culture-girl baton directly from Vadivukkarasi of Kanni Paruvathile (1979). The detailed procession of the wedding through the second half of the movie is probably a black critique on the system of arranged marriages - the unimportant modus operandi taking the center stage while nobody seems to care about important aspects such as the one presented in the film - impotency of the bridegroom.

 

One can observe that the movie assumes an elitist and urban setting with the tamil brahmin wedding and a complete song featuring facebook template etc, but the issue addressed is definitely universal. I definitely felt a bit let down with the way the script tackled Prasanna's problem with no honesty or intensity, expecting a psychological study of the problem in the context of a relationship. But the movie still deserves credit for bringing such topics into discussion, considering the mindless escapist stuff dished out in the name of mainstream entertainment in tamil cinema.

Deutschland Bleiche Mutter (1980)

Some spoilers ahead !

Deutschland Bleiche Mutter (DBM) as a film has to be placed firmly in context. The viewer has to be aware of a little bit of history - the Nazi Germany, post-war trauma and the Vergangenheitsbewaeltigung - for instance. The film was made in 1980 - the German unification was still a decade away and the east-west division was fully in place. DBM is directed by a female director, Helma Sanders-Brahms and that adds a different dimension to the film's perspective concerning agony of the war and motherhood.

The film is not objective at all and thus is very slow paced. The first half of the film extends as a road film with Lene (Eva Mettes) walking through the forests & seasons with her new born infant. While on a casual stroll, my actual connect with the film came when Lene gets raped by the allied soldiers and when she remarks "the victors' right, little girl". From that point on my entire perception of the film had a whole new notion that, Lene (as the mother) is the metaphor for Deutschland herself. While I am not sure if it was intended, the film made much more sense on an abstract level after that point. Lene's paralysis on one side of the face, Lene losing all her teeth to avoid the spread of the paralysis, Lene covering one side of the face with a dark veil, her troubled relationship with her husband, her unexplained anger on her daughter - all suggested the disarmament, the east-west division and the mental trauma that the war brought to the society.

Eva Mettes' stupendous performance stands-out and she obviously carries the film almost single-handedly. Her face conveys an infectious gloominess right from frame one preparing us for that epic tragedy - the climax.

Samsara (2011)

A poem need not be an explanation, it should be able to paint a much wider and deeper canvas than what is being presented as words. A good poem inspires imagination, evokes soul search, kindles an intellectual discourse - all much larger than the poem itself. Samsara is one such poem on 70mm film and to say that it was stunning to experience Samsara on the big-screen is just an understatement.

Samsara's idea of aesthetics mostly relies on the "Stop motion" and "Motion capture" techniques, so to state - finding an order in all randomness, finding the beauty in all chaos. It transcends the audience into a particular psychological state whereby you are forced to concentrate on the patterns and the topography than the individual discrete units that make up the pattern.

Samsara with all its calmness and soul-embracing music is an expression of contempt in all rigour. It sounded like a harsh critique on the perils of the human civilization, for me. The footage covers arms industry, the adult toy industry, electronics recycling, plastic rag picking, automobile wrecking, car manufacture, African tribals, the skyscrapers, the Buddhist monks in Asia etc, portraying a real comprehensive worldview. Wherever (the fewer times) the human faces look into the camera, they do so with so much rigidity or discernible anger or compassion or self-pity, it looked like they are making a profound political statement.

Several juxtapositions resonated hard in me - the entire sequence about the meat (animal flesh) industry is followed by prostitutes with number tags exhibiting their bodies, the operations in the dairy industry (machines milking the cows sequence) is followed by a lot of piglets feeding on a pig all raised for slaughtering, the symmetrical/shiny bullets is followed by an army general with so many medals and a disfigured face. 

It will all sound like a philosophical rant but Samsara underlines the human greed, lack of compassion, the human idea of conquest, religious & ethnic chauvinism, exploitation of human labor, war, hunger, death and so on. The footage interspersed with the actual nature - skies, deserts, waterfalls, volcanoes - shows us all the kind of harmony that is expected of the human beings as a part of this wonderful system. May be somebody else who saw the same movie in the same hall would have looked at the brighter side of things - beauty, harmony, symmetry, patterns, love, music, peace - with Samsara. And hence is Samsara's greatness, vastness, prodigiousness and rhythmicness.

Good Bye Lenin! (2003) - Iconography

"Good Bye Lenin! (2003)" is one of the most studied German films (along with "Das Leben der Anderen (2006)") of the last decade. Identified as an important work for its "Ostalgie" theme, it has a distinct grief perpetuating through out. Its narrative is strewn with details about life in the erstwhile GDR, which I have tried to present here with screenshots. It uses a lot of real footage concerning the fall of the Berlin wall followed by the unification. On a casual first viewing, the following images (the "trabant" as the GDR icon and the "Coca-Cola" for the political transition in the region, for example) struck me. It is a very sad film, hiding all its regretfulness with an ironic comic face.

Madhubana Kadai (2012)

Madhubana Kadai (MK) transcends the conventional tamil cinema narrative, as in it doesn't have a form - it holds no premise, no beginning, no building-up of a plot, no interval cut and no climax. The characters emerge from nowhere and then they are lost in some time, of course apart from a few who occupy the entire script. The script works more like, the dirty wine shop with its alcohol supplies, is the central character and the people who visit it are peripherals at the most. In the hindsight, it looks like it could have worked only this way. 

MK had a lot of Bala-esque scope for instilling emotions and drama, but it decided not to. It takes no moral stance and it's no propaganda engine, the most it did is to disperse several satirical elements which can be labelled "political" statements. The film is set in Erode-Perundurai locales and shows in heart and blood, a single day in the life of a TASMAC wine shop. The wine shop is visited by people from all walks of life and occupations and is the center of a lot of political discussions, social skirmishes, drinking as social status elements etc. 

The tamil society (big cities should be exceptions) with all its self-righteous moral-policing is still devoid of genuine social hang-outs. That is where the relevance of so many cinema halls and TASMAC outlets emerge. Cinema theaters and toddy shops are the only centers of catharsis (in the sense of emotional outlets) for the working class (Women are limited to only cinema and neighborhood gossips I suppose). Hence these are centers of social equality, that even the all-pervasive casteistic hierarchy has to stay away from them. The film quite correctly references this as "Samarasam Ulaavum idame". MK is the confluence of cinema and liquor in that sense.

For me, the last three minutes of the film made a huge impact out of nowhere. It featured the social angst of a dalit sewage drain cleaner in quite some details. I mean, I don't remember the last time a main-stream tamil feature film spoke about this issue. The scene was quite inconsequential from the script's POV but it did make a profound political statement. That is why this film is special, it didn't attempt to have an agenda but then made a spontaneous go at issues like this. A second viewing would certainly help I suppose.

MK makes a mockery of the drinking culture in a typical tamil society. TASMAC is one of the largest money spinners and is a source of humongous revenue for the state. When the state handles the alcohol industry, it becomes just another object of political & monetary greed and the film rightly presents the case of "duplicate liquor" and gross mismanagement of the infrastructure of the industry. Drinking is thus not a source of bacchanalian pleasure here as it should be.

PS: The film is inspired by this Nanjil Nadan essay (as in the credits), which offers a brilliant read.

Lisbeth Salander - a few gender perspectives

Lisbeth Salander (played by Rooney Mara in "The Girl with the Dragon tattoo (2011)") is easily one of the most powerful and hence impressionable female protagonists I have ever witnessed on-screen. She displays a disrespectful attitude towards almost every man and woman she encounters. She doesn't really care about morals or conventions - thus outwardly anarchic in every activity she does. She doesn't crave for love and is utterly unfriendly. Her gothic physical appearance with rings, tattoos and extravagant eyelashes would mark her as a countercultural symbol (of the 60s/70s punk culture).

Lisbeth's sexuality (she does appear nude in many a sequences) is characterised with a specific macho-ness and hence is devoid of the "tickling" sensuality presented usually with eye-candy ladyleads on-screen. This aspect of Lisbeth's characterisation should be a feminist film theorist's delight - as Lisbeth, in my opinion, counters the "gaze", quite successfully.

The gruesome and detailed presentation of sexual assault on Lisbeth, in a way, prepares the viewer to take the "righteous" side, that of Lisbeth's, late in the movie. The stylised vengeance with which she bounces back was reminding of Uma Thurman of the "Kill Bill" series, but the uniqueness of Lisbeth's cult is there to stay. Her vicious stares and actual physical assaults on many a men present her as the agent of destruction but as viewers, we approve her action as we have been made aware of what she has endured.

In light of the blatant sexism with which a woman's intelligence is portrayed in general in movies (the hollywood "blonde stereotype" cinema, for example), this movie presents a refreshing take. As Lisbeth hacks into Blomkvist's computer and Blomkvist brags about his "encryption", Lisbeth spurts out a condescending "Please" - You get the dynamics there.

The film also presents a really interesting sexual politics with the woman-on-top lovemaking sequences. While her "controlling" of the activity is more demonstrative of the idea, her disinterest in romance would remove any last traces of the "usual" femininity associated with a woman.

Motorcycles and computers are a kind of modern phallic symbols - the former representing physical valour and the later, intellectual superiority. Lisbeth, not just simply masters them but approaches gadgets with a ridicule in her body language - it just looks as if she is too fast for them. Her intellectual dominance on Blomkvist (played by Daniel Craig) in solving the actual case presents another perspective. Daniel Craig has been playing James Bond 007, who is quite an alpha-male, both physically and intellectually. Though Craig's performance in this movie was not reminding of Bond, it was somehow interesting to have a female character which counters Mr.Bond himself.

Myshkin's Yudham Sei

Myshkin is consciously working towards positioning himself as an auteur (atleast semi-auteur) in the tamil filmdom. All his films so far, were able to garner a decent commercial as well as critical acclaim. His films, though are flawed in several aspects, are constructed with a conscious rationale. His storytelling with "symbols" and innovative (read as abstract) shots only resound his potential. Even with flawed cinema, the relevance of his works is very much justified in the present day tamil cinema.

Tamil Cinema's confrontations with issues related to love and lust are here to stay. Myshkin however supplies a novel theme to this filmdom to exploit & abuse the already-pounded-to-death female sexuality - the peepshow. We are not exactly sure if this so-called "peepshow" is so much rampant in a normal Indian society but, when people (film directors) are on a search to bring in a new act of sexual perversion/ sexual deviance to garner that ever-important exploitative value to their films, days are not far, for Necrophilia to be treated in a tamil cinema. With so many films on gender, sexuality, exploitation, rape, karpu - so much of opportunity has been lost in communicating any kind of mature feminist perspective and again & again, it boils down to adultery - justification-for-revenge - lectures-for-audience dramas.

Yudham Sei is a crazily convoluted movie (probably with an intention). For about three-fourths of the runtime, you are anxiously trying to assimilate the big-list of names, facts and details that are thrown at you - Rajamanickam, Thirisangu, Isakimuthu, Moorthy, policemen, commissioner office, auto-driver, dance-class etc. Is everyone in the audience a CID officer ?. Cinema works with the audience as they identify - the character, his/ her name (if neccessary), the actor who play the character - all the three. When you get introduced to a character via a dialogue only, that "association" goes missing and hence, instead of getting involved with the narrative, you keep thinking who-is-who ?. There is a difference between "gripping" and "confusing", In both the cases, the audience will follow the narrative closely. There is simply so much of action going on - A couple of crime investigations are on, several pairs of amputated hands were displayed in public places on carton boxes, girls go missing, Cheran is roaming around like a loser, his sister is also missing, film is shot in the night time, auto drivers, several oldmen discussing "show" etc etc. "Yudham Sei" is confusing (before everything will be clarified in a flashback and you have to correlate all the facts in a jiffy).

Cheran who started out as a very reluctant actor in his "Autograph" has grown comfortable in front of camera these days. The characterization of J.Krishnamoorthy (with an obvious reference to philosopher Jiddu Krishnamoorthy) as a CID officer tries to break every possible aspect with which such characters will be stereotyped in our cinema. He is not athletic, he doesn't walk with a robotic precision, he doesn't deliver lectures on his commitment to the "department" and more importantly he is not thrashing the baddies in air. Infact, in the only opportunity that J.K is provided with to "fight", he uses a small nail-cutter to outsmart about eight people who were armed with daggers and jacksaws. That was one wonderful action sequence, one to remember definitely. The build of J.K's character with so much of emotions has come out spectacular - J.K is an ordinary man, he walks and feels like a loser, he is crestfallen in most of his screen-space, he speaks little, he runs instinctively, he is so much attached to his sister - so many dimensions - Cheran just performs with a definiteness.

Dipa Shah (Thamizh) who plays an assistant to J.K., looks more like Andrea Jeremiah (in the movie). Thank God, she hasn't fallen in love with J.K in the movie. Infact, there is a dialogue in the movie which will state that J.K is still a bachelor and so you will naturally expect her to "fall" in love ... luckily, she didn't. Jayaprakash, who is identified as the nextgen Radharavi/ Nasser/ Rajesh overacts and spoils the broth in many a places. As he (Judas) harangues at you with an artificial aggression (in a close-up), "What would you do, had your sister or your girl been sexually assaulted like this ?, will you not chop him into pieces ?", you only want the credits to roll on and the curtains to fall down. 

YG.Mahendran and Lakshmi Ramakrishnan are unbearable with exaggerated emotions and according to me, are terrible miscasts. Shaved heads, black uniforms, open-wide eyes, machine-like walks after getting stabbed and shot - irritation all the way - violence is something that these two people (YGM and LR) can't communicate. Simple.

A few more things I would want to mention:

- The victims are tortured in a Saw-esque fashion

- The victims are "selectively" tortured - either eyes or hands or xyz - Garuda Puranam ?

- Judas (Jayaprakash) call "them" Devadhaigal .. why ?

- All Myshkin's item-song sirens are dressed in a yellow saree .. why ?

- the peepshow - Waterbed, Rose petals, BDSM, Grape pool, bondage - so much creativity !

Easan - some thoughts ...

So many spoilers !

Easan, for the most part, expresses the wrath and fury of Sasikumar towards the city youth and the pub/ discotheque culture. We couldn't quite ascertain if it is "personal" but the kind of turbulence with which the title character Easan is charged with, stands proof for the above. As Easan clobbers Chezhian's (Vaibhav) head and spine with a huge jack hammer/gear rod or whatsoever, you feel that chill down your spine and that moment summarises the movie for you. Sasikumar's eye in detailing blood/gore/flesh finds an expression in Easan too. 

There is a very natural dimension to the political/capital power - the contagiousness. A mere existence in its environment is sufficient enough for one to fancy power. Yes, I am very much referring to that tricky and elusive feeling - being the son of a big-shot, be it a big businessman or a politician, affordable only by the Mallyas and Marans though. It's something that has been exploited to a good extent in rendering a dramatic value to the script, with the characterization of Chezhian and his dudeism. That said, the acting and the dialogues in these areas are pathetic - the dudes are not cool and the dialogues are very artificial. The dudes could only manage constipated looks on their faces, trying to project themselves as ultramodern studs. 

Easan, in the first half, exhibits a lot of promise, picking up a lot of engrossing stuff on it's way - business lobbying, corporatisation of politics, politicization of business, the night life in Chennai, a helpless and desperate policeman etc but when it all boiled down to an individual vendetta in the second half, you just feel a bit let down. Many a scenes hang in the air when you try to sync the first and second halves of the narration - especially, the Vijay Mallya stunt. Still, the aspiration itself, to depict the nexus between business and politics, is very much valid and appreciable. A couple of interesting diaogues were floated upon, during the conversations between Deivanayagam, the politician and Shivaraj, the businessman.

Abhinaya - being a handicapped woman, there has been (or will be) an intentional bias with which Abhinaya's performances has been (or will be) approached, which kinda makes sense. There will always be a "constant of integration" summed up with her personality while evaluating her performances. She plays a mute girl who becomes a rape victim in the movie. There is always a serenity and gloominess in her face even during the "happy-family" sequences. There is a fundamental dynamics based on which the anti-hero/villain & victim characterizations are constructed in movies - the differentiation in characterizations - they will be portrayed as completely alternate psyche's. The victim, who is a woman almost all the time, will be an embodiment of good virtues and will be associated as somebody who is pure, divine and beautiful.  The anti-hero/villain will be presented with a sharp contrast with the former - with an unconventional/ awkward face, stern/rough voice, drinker/womaniser etc. To put it simple, the victim is 100% good and the offender is 100% bad. This is very important so as to invoke an intrinsic sympathy from the audience and to justify the hero's final combat with the villain. The victim's character need to be very strong to reinforce this and the quintessential examples of this phenomenon are Sridevi in "Sigappu Rojakkal" and "Moondru Mudichu", Ashwini in Uthiripookkal, Shobana in Mahanadhi etc. Abhinaya's character in Easan is one such portrayal.

There is an age-old sacred rule in tamil cinema - with respect to the physical assault on the female protagonist or any female character for that matter - Any degree of verbal or physical   aggression on the rapist is simply justified by itself. In a patriarchal society, where all the socio-economic powers are vested with the men, men intentionally attached a "larger-than-life" importance and sanctity to the virginity of a woman. It not only helped men confine women within the houses but also let men free of these rules. Easan is the latest entrant reinforcing this social psyche - all those horrendous flesh-mashing by Easan on Chezhiyan is justified by itself.

That Sasikumar is severely critical of the pub and discotheque culture is evident at many places in the film. During the first half, the camera spins into a pub every tenth minute and it's a kind of condescending outlook that Sasikumar stamps on the western way of life and the modern youth. DJ, drugs, lust, moral degradation is all he portrays. Contrastingly, in a true Mahanadhi style, he shows how the life in a village is so calm, peaceful and satisfying in a flashback narrative. And, the "Nattar theivangal" are to be seen extensively in tamil cinema these days. It provides ample scope for detailing in a village atmosphere for the film makers. Vamsam did a whole lot of it recently and Easan budgets a good deal of time for the same.

The film also reinforces the healthy chemistry between Samuthirakani and Sasikumar. Still, what Easan lacks, for me, is that clarity in narration and good performances. For atleast the first half of the film, you keep yourself engaged in trying to identify the direction of the drama - you simply can't single out a protagonist-antagonist pair. Though its not mandatory to have the same, it has been the way our cinema has worked all these years and on the negative side, it will only diminish the curiosity that the audience has on the narration. You follow the engrossing drama on-screen and realise that Chezhian is a dude, Sangaiyah is the frustrated but helpless policeman, Reshma is a good looking babe, Deivanayagam is a kingmaker politician etc. But, that "so-what, what-next" feeling lingers. 

Sasikumar commands a good fan following for himself which itself is a healthy trend - fans for a film director sounds good .. right ?. Of late, he is being viewed as the Midas of the tamil filmdom - all his previous ventures - as director, producer and actor are all stupendous successes both commercially and critically. Easan would be a tiny speed-bump on his otherwise illustrious career so far. 

Rajinikanth and his Endhiran

Not a complete Review.

Rajinikanth is not a mere mortal cinema actor - he is a fantasy, he is an emotion, he is an impact, he is an impression, he is an experience, he is a perception, he is a sensation, he is a marvel, he is a mystery, he is a phenomenon in himself. His movies are not mere 24 frames per second shot with a digital video camera - they are an event, they are a festivity, they are a celebration, they are a detailed revelry to be relished. The moment a Rajinikanth project is announced, Tamilnadu tunes itself for an extravaganza. Everything "Rajini" makes news - still releases, trailer release, audio release - anything Rajini is consumed upon with a reverent devotion and authentic enthusiasm, which only Rajinikanth commands. The fanfare and the mass adulation submitted at this particular individual will be relevant at only one context - Rajinikanth. The fundamental rules of cinema, its narrative structure, its impact on the emotional system of the audience, its effect on the psyche of the spectator - all these seem to work different in this context - Rajinikanth.

"Cinema from an Idea" and "Cinema around a star" - each work in a distinct manner. During the studio days, when independent cinema was a distant idea, the studios required some kind of assurance and minimum guarantee at the box office. This is where the relevance of the "star system" emerges, the idea of the fan clubs and fan devotion arises. In the panorama of the "star system", the way a film works with its audience is altogetherly different. The audience, first of all tries to establish a one to one relationship with his favorite star and only after this, the settings of the story and the actual cinema walks into him. The production houses encouraged this idea with mass publicity campaigns and the actors endorsed the "fan activity" in large scales. There is an important drawback with the system though - How-much ever effort a particular actor invests in his performance, the audience will always perceive the personality above the performance. Thus, the idea of "fantasy acting" packs the final punch and the actual acting in a puristic sense - the "method acting" loses out in the race.

Rajini's collaboration with Shankar has marked a significant departure from the star-fan dynamics that Rajini has set in motion somewhere at the dawn of his film career. Rajini as a star was an altogetherly new phenomenon in the tamil social milieu. Stars who garnered mass adulation in the previous generations like M.G.Ramachandran and M.K.Thyagaraja Bhagavathar had "attractive" physical appearances (in a conventional sense), their roles were tailored in such a way that at no point of time the audience will develop a sense of aversion or uneasiness with their behaviour on-screen. More importantly, MGR and MKT had a huge following and popularity amongst women. Rajini broke all these conventions when he emerged - he had a rough angry man look, his complexion was dark, he smoked on-screen for almost 100 movies, he did spine-chilling villainy when he set out as an actor - Still, he naturally was the toast of the town with his active prompts and charismatic styles. But, it was the subalterns and the masses who initially were the patrons of the Rajini phenomenon, his popularity and stardom among the elites and women was something that happened at a much later stage. Coming to the star-fan dynamics - it was a totally different ball game those days - Rajini mostly played an angry young man who stood for the people, he fought for the poor in a simulated feudalistic society, he smoked lavishly on-screen, his characters were developed with cues of misogynistic and male chauvinistic behavior (in many movies). The audience enjoyed everything he did on-screens ... those were the audience who inculcated a sense of loyalty and integrity in them towards their "Thalaivar" and were the first generation fans of Rajinikanth. 

Shankar has brought about a whole new shift in the way Rajini is perceived by his fans. Rajini stopped smoking on-screen (for a different reason though), he has started doing roles of a software engineer and Robotics scientist these days, he wears wonderful clothes, lives in rich bungalows - In all, he is portrayed as somebody whose standard of living is very high. This is in stark contrast with what Rajini has been doing all  his career. How many times before "Sivaji" have you seen Rajini trying to woo a girl in all those details ?, How many times before "Endhiran" have you seen Rajini running away with his girl as somebody (Kalabhavan Mani) chase him ?. We all knew Rajini who used to say, "A Man shouldn't be in pursuit of a woman" and "Thaedi vandha kadhal" etc, we only saw him thrash tens of baddies. This is the "image makeover" I am trying to convey. "Endhiran" was an all new standard towards this particular idea - "Endhiran" carries no identity of a "Rajini movie", no styles, no punch dialogues, no intro song with the message to the audience, no freaking introduction scene. Its a Shankar film, its a Sci-fi film, Period.

Over to Endhiran: More than Vaseegaran - the scientist it was Chitti - the Robot who garnered all possible attention and applause. Wickedness and Villainy are the real "bread and butter" of Rajini's histrionics with which he started with. He does villainy right from his instincts ( "Mottae boss" of Sivaji is one more example on this light ). It is because of this intuitive performance, Chitti's character has come out so well that it looks almost effortless. Mufflers, pronounced collars, bandages - the costumes to hide Rajini's ageing neck serve the purpose but still, Vaseegaran does look older especially when he is seen alongside with the vibrant Chitti.

In Sivaji, we had Vivek seen with Rajini all the time which kinda irritated. This movie is full of Rajini - the presense of either Vaseegaran or Chitti is guaranteed in almost every frame. After Chitti Version 2.0's arrival, there are more Rajini's - 100s of them all through the frame - Satisfaction. The dialogues discussing Fibonacci series, Neural schema, medical terminologies etc provide a scientific feel but the songs' lyrics were over-stuffed with science tit-bits, I feel. The train stunt sequence and the final animation spectacle were real long - warrants choppings. 

Though the film looks rich, I still can't find 160+crores on-screen. The "Machu pichu" song - "Kilimanjaro" was the most visually appealing. Resul Pookutty, AR.Rahman, the animation experts from the west, Rathnavelu - all are felt. 

The commercial value of Rajinikanth, the star seem to be on a rise, there's no waning of his star value in the recent future - If an individual can set in motion so much commercial activity, If a cinema star can guarantee so much excitement to so many people, why should he ever retire from cinema ?

One important critic on the big budget productions involving stars of the stature of Rajinikanth is that, it heralds the arrogance of "Capitalism" in cinema production. Just observe - one or two weeks before and after the release of "Endhiran", you won't find any high profile film releases - Who wants their film to be washed away in the frenzy that "Endhiran" generates. Calculations are on - 2500 prints * 4 shows a day * 150 rupees per ticket - How many days does it take for the "Sun Pictures" to gross all the money that they have invested in. With all the media under their control and the kind of intense promo campaigns that they can manage, its a juggernaut of influence that "Sun Pictures" manages over the creativity industry of the state. And, it is the small scale productions and indie ventures that are promptly crushed on the way. Arguments discussing "consumer driven economy" will ultimately project capitalistic undertones only - Quoting Rajini himself from Sivaji - "Rich get richer and poor get poorer".

Vamsam - Review

After delivering a path-breaking film as "Pasanga", Pandiraj would have indulged himself in a stream of thoughts if he should pick a so familiar one-liner for his next film. The sheer confidence that he would have had with his script and the kind of homework & research that has gone into it are apparent in the output as "Vamsam" stands apart way ahead of the films of this genre, with the fresh perspective it brings in. If the film's line has to be expressed with minimum spoilers, it would be - A clash between two individuals (belonging to two different lineages of a particular community) in a rural setting. 

The film is set in a rustic & rural upcountry in southern Tamilnadu, which has a significant population of the "devar" community. There are eleven lineages in the village each of which is supposed to have a distinct occupation or skillset. The film's script is mostly engrossed with the antipathy & vengeance that  brews between the descendants of two lineages (Arulnidhi, the protagonist and Jayaprakash). So much detailing & specifications are presented in depicting the 11 day revelry (thiruvizha held on an annual basis) and the murders that are meticulously planned & executed during the gala. There's a social dictum in place at the village that any death that happens during the above period shouldn't disturb the festivities and hence if somebody is unfortunate enough to die/to be murdered during the period, they will be cremated without the last rites and ceremonies, earning them a bad reputation after death.

The film opens with the display of various cultural mores in a thiruvizha setting (much similar to that of "Paruthi Veeran") with a hint of hostility between Arulnidhi and Jayaprakash. There is so much details left with the thiruvizha itself that Pandiraj chooses to narrate the entire proceedings (of the thiruvizha) via a police constable to his chief. The way the romantic sequences are narrated (with Asin) and the picturisation of songs are applaudable. The flash-back episode with Kishore as the rekhla specialist was a cracker of a sequence. The comedy track with the mobile conversations on the rooftops and treetops are interspersed well through the script.

The focal selling point of the movie, in my opinion, is the exquisite "anthropological detailing" that has been interwoven throughout the movie. Various social and cultural aspects of the community life are brought on screen in a vivid manner. Efforts worth a documentary on the ethnography of the community has gone in and the movie was an interesting ride on this aspect. The names of the lineages, thiruvizha sequences, arrack & pork, the aloe dagger, varieties of "Silambam" offer some examples of the details depicted. One another movie which can be discussed here with respect to the "detailing" part (only) is Selvaraghavan's "Pudhupettai". "Pudhupettai" presented various first-on-screen details on the life in the Chennai underworld and the ascendancy in the political stature of the Mafioso.  

One concern which may require a consideration is - the celebration of Casteism and violence seen extensively in our movies these days. In a modern day context where we are discussing whether or not to include "Caste" in the Census, movies featuring explicit names of the castes and communities may collaterally create a "halo" around it, glamorising the whole idea. I can certainly remember the impact that the titles of the movies like "Chinna Gounder", "Devar Magan" etc had in me and my friends during the school days. So, it (caste politics in cinema) actually matters !. Ofcourse, cinema mirrors the society (in a way) and casteism is something so deep-rooted that cinema can't quite manage to keep it off-topic. And, the movie certainly underscores the folklore surrounding the bravery of the Devars and Maravars, connoting a profound charm around the physical chivalry which carry little or no significance in a post-feudalistic society.

Speaking about the performances - the debutant Arulnidhi, if not way too impressive, will certainly pass the ordeal. Sunaina, the village belle looks in perfect sync with the character. The characterization has been impressive with all the gallantry it is coded with. I  somehow couldn't conform with all those roles of an urban-modern chic which she had donned in her previous movies and this role looks tailor-made for her. Jayaprakash and Kishore are shaping up well as the next-gen character artistes (with men like Nasser & Radharavi  in the twilight of their careers) - stellar performances from both of them. Ganja Karuppu and Anupama Kumar were also impressive. 

The music was by the debutant Taj Noor. Two songs "Maruthani Poova" and "En Nenje" were impressive for me. The cinematography and editing departments were also handled by debutants, Mahesh and Yogabhaskar respectively  - Inspiring effort from both of them especially the editing with the "thiruvizha" sequence deserves a special appreciation. 

Dialogues - not too much effort has gone in presenting the dialect of the region ... The leads were both Botany graduates and that explains it though. The celebration of agriculture as a profession was stressed at more instances than one and kudos for that.

One criticism that has to be lodged with Pandiraj's scripts is that they tend to become so much "cinematic-n-filmy" towards the end. The entire hospital hoopla of "Pasanga" and the one on one duel here at "Vamsam" both share this very weakness. With all the novelty in storytelling he tries to employ throughout the movie, the build-up towards the climax loses the punch and becomes way too predictable. Pandiraj somehow yields to the sacred rules of "masala cinema" that prevail, as the film draws a close.

In an industry where one-film-wonders are not scarce, there will always be a considerable "pressure-to-perform" irk on a director (unless your dad is a producer). On those lines, Pandiraj has definitely lived up to the expectations, displaying a genuine ability in filmmaking with his latest offering. 

Vetty Post #1

Free Free Free !!!

I found myself engulfed with a "WTF" question mark as I bought this week's issue of the tamil magazine "Anantha Vikatan". Well, the reason is there for yourself.

The caption stated thus, "இந்த இதழுடன் ஸ்டேப்ரீ செக்யூர் அல்ட்ரா தின் கேட்டு வாங்குங்கள்". 

A mainstream magazine that is typically targeting people of all age groups of both the sexes, offers a freebie (i.e) Sanitary pad. 

Have they gone insane ? Had this been a women's magazine like "Aval Vikatan" or "Mangayar Malar" or "Penmani", I can understand the intent. While I am not trying to bring in here any sexist or gender connotations (with respect to the popular culture), I am trying to understand the very "purpose" of the product offered for "free". Has Vikatan received any statistical information that the "only" subscribers of their magazine are women of the age-group 15 to 45 ?

##########

Got to view Anand Patwardhan's riveting documentary "Prisoners of Conscience", which features interview footage with some of the "Political prisoners" who were imprisoned during India's Emergency  (1975 to 1977). The visual imagery and the credibility it offers (for only 41 minutes though) is definitely no match to volumes and volumes of print literature that may exist.

You actually find it difficult to understand and accept the facts that are presented - the kind of gross disenfranchisement of civil rights, the devoidness of social justice, political and social unrest, arrest without trials, MISA, "Tortures" in the prison etc. 

Is this India ?, Is this the country which is hailed the Greatest democracy ?.

While the cinema and press of the period have remained largely "silent" (Or they were silenced ?), the original archival footage this documentary offers will stand as an important political record of a traumatic period in India's history. While the film has limited it's scope largely by just presenting a series of edited montages featuring interviews with the "victims", it has an interview with Jayaprakash Narayan and hence for me, is worth the time and effort. That said, the presentation of the documentary is neither lucid nor cogent and will not serve somebody to actually understand the whole mess (i.e) India during Emergency.

A tiny photo essay with the screenshots from the documentary.

Indira Gandhi, the Ironhand

JP.Narayan, the firebrand

As long as there are "Prisoners of Conscience" or the "Political prisoners" in jail, the expectations from the Janata party haven't been fulfilled and I think there should be a continuous pressure on the Janata party government .. Also, I believe the time might come when some kind of a mass movement (of the people) might become neccessary ... the public opinion, young people, Sarvodaya movement, the press - all these should help in this process.

- Jayaprakash Narayan (in 1978)

Vintage Madras

Madharasapattinam – Review

Period films are not a usual fare in the Tamil milieu. If we can survey the entire annals of our cinema, we would most likely end up with less than 20 pieces. History as history films like "Siraichaalai" and "Iruvar", Biopics like "Periyar", "Bharathi" and "Kamaraj", Period fictions like "Hey Ram" and “Kanchivaram” are some of the "serious" period flicks that we had. Films like "Vaaranam Aayiram" and "Subramaniapuram" used the period settings only as a part of their narrative veins. And, (with no disrespect to the film, per se) “Subramaniapuram” only required 80s Ilayaraja songs on loud speakers and the cinema wall posters of "Kaali" and "Murattu Kaalai", to evoke a period sense. The most recent of the list, Cheran's "Pokkisham" (2009) is a very important work from Madharasapattinam's point- of-view, because it shares a lot of similarities (in terms of the plot) with "Pokkisham".

Genre - This is not a "patriotic" film that is going to preach you those "truisms of Nationalism" and offer those goosebump moments. This is romance and romance only set in a different period, as India was getting ready for her "tryst with destiny". Even as the whole country was devotionally chanting "Vande Maataram" and "Bharat mata ki jai" on the night of 14th August - 1947, the protagonist is actually running for his love & life and for that of his ladylove.

The storyline - is not blasphemically novel. A Brit lady (daughter of the governor) falls in love with a tamil washerman, as she visits the pre-independent India (Madharas). All those obstacles and impediments for her love from her cruel and un-understanding parents - 100% present, her engagement with a Brit Nobleman - No doubts, In place. Secret meetings and troubles with communication - naturally present. Inspite of so much cliches, the movie definitely appeals and engages you. And, like “Titanic” - the movie opens on the present-day life of a british old lady and narrates into a flash back from her Point-of-view.

The seamless narrative structure is something I liked so much. Its definitely not a "love-at-first-sight" between Parithi (Arya) and Amy (Amy Jackson) - the first half of the movie was so loooong even for the Indian cinema standards, almost 100 minutes. Ample time and a good number of scenes were spent to register that they were in love. The second half features an interesting and racy chase sequence, as Parithi and Amy elope to escape from a whole police battalion - very professionally done. Parithi is also a "Kusthi" expert and there's a particular scene featuring a "one-on-one" combat with a English police officer. It is definitely a scene (or the only scene) that very well feeds our Anti-British instincts.

Cast - Arya is the post-"Naan Kadavul" fella who does act. I always have some problems with his tamil deliverance (but, let it be with me only) and it was more a "measured" performance - Not great. Amy Jackson is beautiful and immaculate, personifies innocence. wow, what a graceful screen presence she holds ! .. Special note - for the "Aaruyire" song, she does some amazing lip-syncs with the lyrics. The support cast is again amazing - hosts a good variety of characters. The "Kusthi" teacher (Nasser) and "school" teacher, Parithi's friend-faction, his sister, the English officials - all deliver. Nasser (Is there a character on the planet that he can't do) and Cochin Hanefa (who died as the movie was being shot) deserve a special mention.

Period - The film is set to happen at Chennai of the yesteryears, circa 1945 to 1947. The Art director should be very thankful to the film's producer who should be gracious enough in sanctioning all the finance, that Madharas in all its ancient pristine glory is brought live on screen. The Tram vehicles, coovam (the actual clean canal in which boating was possible then), the washermen "thurai", vintage cars and guns, policemen's uniforms etc - the period props were all in place. Even "Sudhesa Mithran" newspaper carrying the news of India's independence was used.

The conversations were written in a way that encompasses the spirit and culture of the period. Japan's bombing of Madras (1942) and Netaji's death in a plane crash etc, are covered across everyday colloquial conversations of the people. One thing that kept me thinking was the absence of the "Dravida naadu demand" during the period, by the Dravidian politicians Periyar and C.N.Annadurai in the movie. While I completely admit that it will have no room in the script, I just wanted to register my preoccupation with these ideas, at the cinema hall.

Vijay, the director - proves that he's got some "serious" talent - after "remaking" the scripts (that should have been "alien" to him) two times before, he comes up with his "original" work and does it laudably. While at the cinema hall, you can't really avert your mind lingering back to tested blockbusters like "Titanic" and "Lagaan", yeah - "Pokkisham" also. But, the good part is that, it doesn't last long. I was actually happy in attributing this "reminiscence" to the commercial popularity of the above ventures and would like to grant the whole credit to Vijay. With the kind of professionalism portrayed by him with respect to the "handling" of the script, you can actually say, Vijay should have consciously tried (with his film making) manipulating the audience that he is really not inspired by the above films.

G.V.Prakash Kumar matures as a composer. His BGM and scores for the songs were definitely admirable. Nirav Shah is awesome yet again – captures the period with “that” special eye. Indian Cinema will always be oozing with master cinematographers !

The film is not completely devoid of flaws - there are a good number of stereotypes in characterization, coupled with hackeneyed & predictable scenes. Computer Graphics (CG) used in certain places expose themselves that they are not "real" and are "engineered" by Graphics professionals. The period props falter at certain junctures such as, the "fresh" black and white paintings on the platforms and zebra crossings. Add to them, Arya can't speak good tamil but thankfully there's no lengthier chunks of dialogues that he has to recite. But, you only wish to forgive them all and admire all the hard work that has gone into the conceptualization and production. Must watch !

Mani Ratnam and his Raavanan (2010)

When Mani Ratnam makes a new movie and you don't like it, there are various layers of practical constraints in voicing out your honest concerns on the movie. Mani, being the favourite film-maker of this generation's audience (including me), in the limits of tamil cinema, you will be literally swarmed with his aficionados ridiculing you and your taste for cinema. Well, "No artiste stands above the artistry itself" and hence "Raavanan" is a bad piece of cinema, exhibiting (only) the technical expertise towards cinematography and art direction, while showcasing some stunning & exotic locales. You easily find them all in the movie, Santosh Sivan - the ace cinematographer from FTII - Pune, A.R.Rahman - the master musician and Samir Chanda - the art director but Mani Ratnam - the filmmaker and his stamp is an abysmal miss in his latest offering. And, yeah - Vikram can act and Aishwarya Rai Bachhan is stunning.

That tamil cinema churns out loads of trash through out the year and the scenario being truly devoid of inspiring film-makers, the onus naturally falls on the seasoned campaigners like Mani Ratnam or Bala in tossing up quality entertainment to an audience which literally craves in look towards good cinema. The expectations hit sky-high and alas, sometimes the film fails to strike a chord in the audience. For almost three decades now, Mani Ratnam, though not exactly a commercially viable filmmaker (his last big box-office success was "Alaipaayuthe" and before that it is "Roja"), has always delivered some quality stock that invariably offered enough fodder for the ruminations of a urban cinema audience and the film intelligentsia.

Into Raavanan now. The characterisation of Veeraiya should be one of the famous character assassinations seen in the recent times, that concerns me - more than all other possible insights that "Raavanan" offers.

Veeraiya (Vikram) sings in the songs,

"En Porappa Nee Kanda
En Paathai Nee Kadantha
En Yutham Nee Senja
Nee Raamandaen Raavanandaen" and

"Kodu Poata.. Konnu Podu..
Vaeli Poata.. Hey Vetti Podu..
Nethuvaraikum Unga Sattam Innaikirunthu Enga Sattam"

Sending across clear cues of the issues of Malaivaashis/Aadivaashis/tribal people, the lyrics are in turn suggestive of the Naxalite insurgency. That, Veeraiya is an outlaw and anti-state (as his men set fire the policemen alive) is only concretising this undertone. But, like all his previous attempts (with political contexts), Mani just touches and goes this political issue, jeopardising the mammoth potential the topic offers and exposing his superficial understanding of the Naxal politics. Mani has never exhibited any kind of satirical take on any issue he picks up and his political orientations are always well with in the lines of a Moral Science/Civics textbook. His movies, thus tone a presumptuous image and hence become outlandishly pretentious.

Who the people are, what their problems are, How they have been kept under a blanket of institutionalised backwardness for generations, what do they struggle for, what is the source of their hatred towards the state/police - Never touch these things and Suhasini anyways effortlessly condenses them all in one/two short monologue exchanges. Nothing but poor conception and poor execution. Over simplification of the actual issue to shy away the controversies works a bane for the movie. Centuries-long life of the tribes in the mountains, the mountains and the associated mineral wealth becoming a part of the Indian nation as India became a republic (refer "Kodu potta" song), Mineral ore mining, shackles of capitalism - Every damn thing is skimmed over and the closest idea that ever gets discussed in the movie is when Veeraiya calls himself "Odukkappattavan" differentiating himself with the privileged "Mettukkudi". I sincerely recommend some Arundhati Roy writings to Mr and Mrs. Mani Ratnam. 

And, attributing Veeraiah's antagonism towards Dev (Police officer played by Prithiviraj) "only" to the rape/death of his sister, should be the worst possible scheme that not only liquidates Veera's character but also alienates us all from the actual issue (the socio-political issues of the tribes).

"பல தலைமுறைகளாக ஒடுக்கப்பட்டமை, உரிமைகள் மறுக்கப்பட்டமை, மலைவாழ் மக்களுக்கான வாழ்வியல் ஆதாரங்களை அரசு கையகப்படுத்தியமை, சமூகத்தில் பிற்படுத்தப்படமை முதலிய சமூகக்கூறுகளை விடுத்து - தங்கையின் மீதான வன்புணர்ச்சி மற்றும் அவளுடைய மரணம் மட்டுமே வீரய்யனின் கோபம் மற்றும் போராட்டத்திற்கான காரணங்களாக காட்சிப்படுத்தப்பட்டிருக்கின்றது. ஒரு இனத்தின் போராட்டமாக, ஒரு வர்க்கத்தின் போராட்டமாக முன்னிறுத்தப்படவேண்டிய சமூக அவலம், தனிமனிதக்காழ்ப்புணர்ச்சியின் வெளிப்பாடாக சித்தரிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கின்றது, சிதறடிக்கப்பட்டிருக்கின்றது"

This only reminds us of the character of the terrorist (Liaquat) played by Pankaj Kapoor in "Roja". Liaquat, with all the builds of his character, finally renounces everything he can - his theological beliefs, jihadi basis and the ideology of his group - to figuratively surrender himself to the Indian Nationalism (to Rishi played by Arvindsaamy). All these inconsistencies and incoherences stem up because of Mani's attempts to oversimplify his narrative seam, presenting dishonest portrayals.

Much has been said and discussed in relation to the performances of the lead actors. That Vikram does all possible hard work (Be it Pithamagan / Kandasaamy) to present a character in a memorable fashion is well known. Astounding performance - his beasty looks and "dandandanaaanadan" cohere well. Aishwarya Rai, with all her bollywood assignments should have, by now, forgot "acting" ... she shouts her dialogues aloud and tries to pose a "Bharathiyaar's pethi", whenever and wherever she is supposed to be bold and brave. Her assignment is quite simple in a way, that she wields only two emotions in the whole of the movie - plain face (pensiveness and the love for Veera, sometimes) and the angry face (Bharathiyaar's lineage portions). A third variant could possibly be, plain face + glycerine. Prithviraj is an adoringly smart and cunning policeman. Prabhu and Karthik (carries all possible symbolisms for being the "Hanuman", except the tail) are talented and director-friendly character actors.

Dialogues - Suhasini has put herself in the context and penned down the dialogues. Her "Brahmin" lingo coupled with post-fixes like "la" is not providing a feel for authentic nativity of the tribals. Though Ragini (Aishwarya) is a suave, educated and brave lady - she will certainly not question - "Enna kolla unakku enna urimai irukku?" (what rights you own in killing me ?), when she is freaking kidnapped and gagged. Dissonance all the way and more research on the dialect would have sharpened the dialogues. 

Locations - Mani, sure has unearthed some of the fascinating locales and has picturised them all in an awesome fashion. But, still the inconsistency looms large actually - the actual living place of the tribals, the place where Vennila (Priyamani) is getting married, the marriage ceremony and the kind of culture portrayed in the wedding - the coherence is lost. 

The first five minutes of the movie will form a part of the lecture on "How not to edit a movie ?" - I don't know what kind of "non-linearity in narration", Mani wishes to achieve here.

Veeraiah getting ready for a dive - somebody creating a blockade for the police van - policemen beat somebody in the police station - Veeraiah pokes a stone into the falls, with his leg - a village festival - Veeraiyah's dive - policemen following a chic - sabotage of a police van - Veeraiah with the "parai" (percussion instrument) - Ragini on a boat

Yeah, we are not comfortable with fights and mass-opening songs for the hero - but still, what the above sequence intends to achieve is to simultaneously let us all know that Veeraiah and his men are anti-social, anti-state, cunning, powerful etc. And, the sequence with all its discontinuities in editing and poor placement of the montages, is quite amateurish. The movie is actually devoid of that "seamless" flow and technical finesse, trademark of Mani's films.

Rahman's score for the songs doesn't quite coalesce with the kind of culture (that of the tribals) depicted on-screen. That magical sync between the picturisation of a song and the musical score, is somehow missing. Santosh Sivan and Manikandan transcend you into a whole new site and it drizzles pleasant in the cinema hall.

On a final note, the film definitely keeps you engaged (during the first viewing, atleast) with all its technical grandeur and hence an aesthetical superiority is assured but it doesn't seem to work beyond this layer. The film, like some of his earlier political cinema, certainly lacks them all - an academician's depth in the study of an issue, a documentary maker's "detailing" in the presentation of a problem and a humanitarian's understanding of the issue. It just hangs as a vestigial piece of graphical images, mocking a sect of the society, still active on the fight for their survival.