I had been awaiting for the movie since I heard that it is 'Ramayanam' told from a different perspective. I was excited as I thought it had all the necessary elements for a reveling entertainer - a very interesting plot put together by Mani Rathnam and music by Rehman. I was looking forward to see how well Mani Rathnam captures in his adept way, the prejudice in the epic: the portrayal of Raavanan as a monster and Raman as the virtuous one who eludes reasoning for every immoral act of him, cloaked under the "for the greater good" appellation.
My anticipation got a little subdued after the music and trailer release - since it didn't quite harmonize with what I was expecting. Still with hope that it is a Mani Rathnam movie, I went to watch the movie with mustered excitement. What a let down. Everything was wrong with the movie except for the distinguished notion the title conveys and cinematography. Didn't quite expect this from Mani Rathnam.
Cons:
1) Dialogues: Mani Rathnam's movies are known for bad dialogues and this one is notoriously bad. Couldn't make out which part of Tamil Nadu the story is set from the mixed slang. And there is hell a lot of screaming. Someone or the other is always screaming their lungs out. What is the deal with Vikram's repeated phrase "tan da na dan" through out the movie - it was distressing. Very poor job done by Suhasini.
2) Aishwarya Rai: She just can't act. Period. She can look pretty. But not act nor dance for that matter. Her dubbing voice sounds counterfeit and is irritating.
3) Editing/Screenplay - The screenplay of the song 'Usurey poguthey' is profoundly bad. There is no presentiment to the "falling in love" part. There is also this other song sequence (I think it is another version of 'Kattu chirukki') where a old lady sings in the back ground with a high pitched irritating voice. I felt the screenplay throughout the movie was staccato and impetuous. The 'Keda Kari' song seemingly starts in the South but the wedding scene goes to some temple in northern India.(?)
4) Music - Songs if heard without the video are pretty good. But the background music is so out of place.
5) Rendition of the characters and the storyline: Karthik didn't really have to jump from tree to tree, for the audience to know he is Hanuman character, now did he? Also what is the point of characters like Prabu (Kumbakarnan) and the other brother (Vibhishanan, apparently) - they do not stand out nor do they do anything striking. Ranjitha, Vaiyapuri? Who are they and why are they in the movie? Is the police dude who gets the sister arrested and humiliated supposedly Lakshmanan character? So Raavanan kidnaps Sita to avenge his sister's death and plans to kill her in 14 days. But halfway he falls in love with Sita and forgets all about his revenge plan even after his brother gets killed in cold blood (in the Ramayanam I know, Vibishanan actually takes side with Raman and Vaali's murder is the menial act by Raman - but whatever) by Raman and at last actually saves Raman's life and lets Sita go. (Ok, now I am seriously confused).
6) Climax - When Prithviraj says he suspects Aishwarya after the rescue, on the basis of what her kidnapper told him, Aishwarya actually stops the train and goes back to the kidnapper to ask him why he said such things to her husband? I was expecting some fury there, towards her husband.
Why Mani Rathnam has stuffed some characters (though half-baked) from Ramayanam in the movie with no strong reasoning I don't understand. It very much seemed like Robin Hood story in tamil masala, with a hint of antihero aesthetics, an over dose of Ramayanam characters; with some overlay from the real story, but tweaked big time by Mani Rathnam.
Pros:
The original idea which is buried somewhere in the movie and cinematography is all the movie is worth. It could have also been Vikram if only Suhashini has not dwindled his performance with frivolous dialogues and the driveling "tan da na dan" phrase. Oh, to add one more - I thought Prithviraj looked really handsome and strong in the few scenes he comes when he is not screaming or looking like the evil incarnate. :)
See the movie as a movie and not as Ramayanam. A flim can have 2-3 main characters only. You cant reason out every people they show in a movie and question why they are shown. Asking for detailed reasoning for characters of Ranjitha, vaiyapuri etc,. is too much. Aiswarya rai did not act??
ReplyDeleteI felt most or rather all of the characters in the movie to be poorly framed, incomplete and thrown in haphazardly - it is too obvious to ignore. It is impossible to watch the movie without thinking of its semblance to 'Ramayanam', as the whole intent is the other viewpoint of the epic story - only it is not done tastefully or brilliantly. Also there are glaring dialogues, names and instances throughout the movie to remind you of the analogy. Even otherwise it is a failure due to the absurd dialogues and bad screenplay. It is my personal opinion that Aishwarya doesn't have the flair to be an actress.
ReplyDeleteYou voiced most of my thoughts about the movie. I have had this crib about Mani Ratnam that he takes weighty and serious themes and completely messes them up; he tries to hide his weakness in script and dialogue with the supposed technical strengths. Even the technical strengths are beginning to look old. Take for instance the emotional scene with Vikram and his sister as she is about to get married. The camera pans around them in dramatic fashion which adds nothing to the scene other than being an annoying distraction.
ReplyDeleteI did think Aishwarya did a fair job under the circumstances; I have not been a big fan of hers but since Jodha Akbar she has grown on me. The dialogues managed to look Vikram (who IMO is one of the better actors in Tamil today) silly in many places. If Vikram was made to look silly, I don't think poor Abhishek had a chance in the movie.
I am surprised that Mani Rathnam messed it up this bad. He did not give anyone a chance to act. Aishwarya - its not like she is not trying, but to me she looks so out of place in movies, especially in Tamil. She doesn't have the agility to be in motion pictures. I thought the role in Jodhaa Akbar suited her well. From the trailors, I feel that Abhishek doesn't stand a chance.
ReplyDelete