Irandaam Ulagam

Director: Selvaraghavan

Selvaraghavan's films post Pudhupettai, for reasons best known to him, traverse between goose bumps inducing and vein popping moments. While the ingenious plot in the second half of Aayirathil Oruvan overshadows its shortcomings, Mayakkam Ena disorients me by juxtaposing between nerve wrenching silly moments and heart drenching emotional sequences. 

Over the period of these two movies, having observed the inconsistency of Selva's narrative grammar, I became prepared not to be bogged down by the leads' forced comic moments with their supporting casts. Accepting his narrow minded approach to acting for what it is, that which can be convincingly portrayed only by Danush, this time around I also didn't bother about the uniformly terrible acting his casts were going to display. Also, the incomplete backdrops, blind eye to details or shallow grandeur that goes in vain weren’t my concern. Because, I realised, in a Selva movie, the tools for conveying the emotions goes beyond the individual elements in the screen and transcends the skills of the artists, whom he only uses as a reference point in frame to communicate with us through visual artistry.

These minor sacrifices started to pay rich dividends as I plunged into Irandaam Ulagam - a story of two worlds. While, I grinded my teeth through the artificial acting of Anuskha's friend and the lazily written Goa portions, I was bathed in poetry during the sequences where both Arya and Anuskha struggle to get in terms with their love. But, the story being about love stories in two parallel worlds, while these wonderful moments were coming only from the 1st world, the 2nd world looked too bland. Though I could understand that the callousness of the 2nd world was by design, and while I could also appreciate the much hyped hunting sequence, the 2nd world couldn't break beyond the intriguing shell it was trapped in. As boredom started to seep in, by a master stroke, Selva raises all hopes on the movie when he ingeniously charts a map between both worlds; but only to fall short of that promise in the aftermath of the surreal event.

Once the Messiah of love is brought from the 1st world to inadvertently spread pure love in the 2nd world which is devoid of love, Selva squanders the opportunity to express in terms of visuals one of the best ideas in recent times. For a film that intends to infuse first love into a disoriented land, nothing much was done in the screen time to sow the seed of love and water it, only through which the roots could have spread and let the love seed blossom into a flower. Instead he is satisfied that some shots of tears and few photographs are sufficient to drive the point home.

Another film, 'The Fountain' which dabbles on similar waters, doesn't shy away from going the length to establish the depth of love. Ironically its success stems from the fact that the film concentrates only on the couple and nothing else. Whereas Irandaam Ulagam dilute the concepts with a lot of unexploited characters - especially the 'Amma' role – once again clearly showing the inability of Selva, a past master in handling complex characters, to handle complex environments.

Raja Rani

Director: Atlee

Formulaic films have always been the safe-bet for our filmmakers ensuring a breather for struggling stars and gateway for new entrants. Is it mainly because of the abundance of successful reference material to source from for formulaic masala film, or because of the difficulty to create formulaic structures in other genres, anything done besides action or comedy in films have always been termed novel attempt. While many feel-good films have attempted to serve a commercial potboiler, only few were able to please the audience, of which Cinematographer turned Director Jeeva’s films contributed a lot. After a long lull created by his demise, debutante Atlee, with his rom-com Raja Rani, has successfully filled the gap.

Adding himself to the list of new age filmmakers with great taste for visuals, Atlee creates pitch perfect backdrop for the film’s riches and lower-middle class portions. Moving further in, besides fleetingly touching the sensibilities of the well-off audience through the leads’ sophisticated lifestyle, he also plays to the gallery through the usual charades of Santhanam and Sathyan and through a surprisingly urbane version of Nan Kadavul-Rajendran. And yet, for someone who shows great command over every part of filmmaking, Atlee fails to understand the requirements of the content he has chosen. Instead of plotting the film around the romance in the three love stories and flavoring them with other crowd-pulling factors, the love stories seem to be excuses for the irreverence of the key artists in each segment to take the center stage. While I don’t have any issue over irreverent comedy, this movie diligently asks us to take the love stories to be heart wrenching while not giving anything substantial to make us invest in these characters. While Jai/Nayanthara and Arya/Nazariya pairs fall in love because they have to, Arya and Nayanthara have only sympathy for each other. If they are that weak at heart, I wonder why they treat their spouses inhumanly when we don’t even dare to do such things to strangers in real life. Clearly Atlee’s only intention is to entertain us in each frame by any means available. Sundar C and Rajesh who are pioneers in this kind of nonsense comedy never ask us to take the subject seriously and only ask us to enjoy the comedy. To top it, the funny lines aren't extraordinary to forget this serious flaw. Till Anniyan, even Shankar, who fills his screenplay with impractical comic reliefs to balance his serious subject, doesn't compromise the emotional undercurrent of the film for the sake of having popular entertaining elements.

Sometimes a lack of strong love can be overcome by stellar captivating performances. While it’s overwhelming to see the actors completely surrendering to the director’s vision, except for Sathyaraj and Nayanthara’s roles, Atlee has only been able to give to most of his artists roles that they have become famous for. While Arya carry forwards his happy-go-lucky guy role, Sathyan reprises his overconfident-frail guy role, Santhanam his guide/philosopher/best friend role, Jai though continues where he left-off in Engeyum Epodhum, effectively captures the attention of the audience with an innocent portrayal of Surya. Meanwhile, Nayanthara though fails miserably in her college girl portrayal, becomes the main asset of the film in her matured girl segments. It is also a pleasant surprise to see Sathyaraj look and perform well especially after abysmal back to back performances in Chennai Express and Thalaivaa (I haven’t seen Varuthapadatha Valibar Sangam).

While these were my reservations, like for any well marketed masala film, the audience with whom I saw the film seem to believe they have witnessed a masterpiece in terms of entertainment, completely moved by the ‘heart wrenching love story’. Maybe they are the people who were moved to tears on seeing the epilogue of Thuppakki. As far as my allegiance is concerned I will go back to re-watch Mouna Ragam and Rhythm, films that largely stayed true to its theme.

Thandavam

Director: A L Vijay

A movie is often considered a symphony of the audio & visual medium; and sure enough the auteurs have always striven to tread on a path between the said & the unsaid in order to keep us in a trance. To achieve that feat in Thandavam, a self-proclaimed unusual revenge saga of a blind man, A L Vijay employs everything in the rule book & that could precisely be the reason for its inability to interest us.

Looking at Thandavam on the whole, the crucial problem with the film clearly lies in its immature treatment. Sure the premise of the action thriller is something even an infrequent film viewer would appreciate of. But when the film sets out to express itself, what clearly could be and had been registered through the visuals gets re-registered again and again till one feels nauseated by the events. As this redundancy gradually distances the audience for the silver screen, the age old formulas to invoke emotions becomes too tiresome & juvenile to warrant our attention.

Close to the release of the film, a trailer was released by the Thandavam team. Splashed all over the media, it started off with a song sequence followed by a caption stating ‘a love story’. It was then followed by snippets of the film’s different scenes with subsequent captions like ‘a story of friendship’, ‘family story’, ‘revenge story’, ‘fun story’, etc; and at the end of the trailer, they claimed it to be ‘a complete entertainer’. As any Actor Vijay or Salman Khan film goes by, the trailer simply shells out varied ideas and values like how the 27 states displays its props during the Independence Day parade. As demeaning as it could be to call it entertainment, the trailer otherwise is a perfect showcase for what the film stands for.  The film begins as action thriller interlaced with unintentional comedy, at the midpoint of which it discards that & becomes a complete romantic film. Long past the expiry date of the romance when the movie limps towards the end, it suddenly gets the urge to be a revenge saga again. All this while the main selling point of the film that the protagonist is a visually impaired person, is used only as a second rate prop. With such obscurity looming large on the screen, one wonders who really is the visually impaired – the writer or the protagonist.

Mugamoodi

Director: Myskkin

On surface level, Mugamoodi (Mask), from the acclaimed director Myskkin, sure poses as a bland name for a superhero movie.

Anand (a) Lee (Jiiva) the man, who would adorn the coveted mask in the movie, is a loafer to his father’s eyes & the world which consists of his eye candy girl. But according to him, he is a dreamer who wants to make it big in the world by doing something that would require his complete soul to be involved & not just 9~5 of his time. Ironically his only defense against the society is his love for Kung Fu. When his Master, who he reveres, abstains him from showcasing his talents, all he could do is wear a scarf around his face and break the knuckles of his unworthy opponents. These righteous acts lead him to Gaurav (Nasser) a police officer, one among the many perplex characters in the film. On his trial for safecrackers, Gaurav fills the screen with seriousness and it does feels right when people fear him. Yet, the veteran, who is addressed as a commissioner at times, still has to answers a bunch of younger officers who seem to have more authority than him. The antagonist who is the head of safecracker’s team has an odd characterization as well. He breaks into houses with allegedly hi-tech gadgetry, wearing a mask, only to unmask it in front of his victims, as though it is his real face that they should fear. But the strangest of them all is the Kung Fu master Chandru (Selvaah). He does fit well for a man with an untold past, but whenever he is asked to take the mantle of a Kung Fu master, it feels as though that is his fake identity – one that keeps him functioning in this world.

From these characters and the other unlikely ones (especially Anand’s grandfather scientist), one could sense a pattern of sorts emerge from the way they behave. It is as though when Myskkin wanted to make a super-hero flick, his dystopian characters (the ones that we associate him with in his earlier ventures) decided to wear a mask and fill in for the requisite roles of a super-hero flick. This could well be the real purpose of naming the movie as ‘Mugamoodi’, the mask that Myskkin’s world wears to enter the super-hero world; the point  being so extensively explained in the song 'vaayamoodi summa iruda'. As Anand's friends start to sing the song which would advise about his dazed state of mind after love at first sight, Myskkin just lets his hero jump into Swiss alps, ripping away from his roots and make it into a mere romantic number. Unfortunately, though he stands in a picturisque location, his heart still thinks and talks in a way only people in his world do.

For a super-hero movie to stay in our mind, it needs that extra special writing, which Myskkin somehow managed in the first half by borrowing elements from his Hollywood counterparts. Albeit being able to accustom to the 'what if Myskkin's brand of characters were set in a super-hero plot', as the movie moved-on from the build-up phase and stepped into serious 'super-hero' action, I couldn’t stand the travesty. From being an inspired effort, the film became a spoof of the American heroes; especially at the fag-end of the tale where we are confused whether to laugh or shout with anger over the happenings on the screen. Looking back, the warning which Anand’s friends gave him during the 'vaayamoodi summa iruda' song, could actually be for Myskkin, who intentionally deviated from his roots, then on, into a field he couldn’t penetrate.

Julayi

Director: Trivikram Srinivas

In every mass hero film’s opening shot, as the hero poses in his immaculate signature style, the camera zooms in to capture the gushing zeal of a no-nonsense hero accompanied by an earth shattering buildup of tempo; all for the thundering response it would get theatres all over. Eons have passed and yet we aren’t sure whether the response is for the signature pose or the mere appearance of the mass hero or the wonderful build-up to the fitting coda. But, when Allu Arjun (the mass-hero of Julayi) comes into the frame as suddenly as a dog crossing the street, we are left with none of the three factors to cheer for the mass-hero. However, the past master that he is, Trivikram (director) compensates for that by conjuring an enticing bank robbery as the next scene to show the acumen of our beloved hero.

Julayi, its mass commercial formula notwithstanding, is the story about the clash of intellects. While the protagonist is an impatient youth, who can't wait to climb up the ladder of riches, the antagonist is a self-conceited criminal. While the former tends to bend any rules to achieve his dream, the latter exudes passion for his art of robbery. What binds them together though, is their willpower and unorthodox and yet street smart brain.

With such an alluring concept, Trivikram starts off as a crazy entertainer with some wonderful witty lines thrown in - dialogues have always been Trivikram's strong hold. Unfortunately, as the game progresses, the dialogues become its own shackle in the incoherent script. Where there should be riveting action & pertinent lines, there is exorbitant action & brimming lines. Not just there; from the songs & their dance sequences to the overzealous comic relief portions till the exaggerated de-glamorization of Ileana (the love interest alias dream girl), every other ingredient thinks itself as the talking point of the film and eventually irritate us.

The problem with Julayi, is not the lack of idea, it is the over-abundance of it without proper packaging – a pre-requisite for these kinds of movies. It is easy to say Julayi isn’t a good movie, but with enthralling set-pieces springing up now & then it becomes really hard to lose hope on the movie; albeit these highpoints aren't promising enough to say the movie is fairly engaging. Eventually, Julayi true to its name turns out to be an aimless wanderer, meandering over a lot of wonderful things for the sake of being a masala caper, but ends up being a poorly mixed cocktail.

This review was written for Wogma.

Maalai Pozhudhin Mayakathilaey

Director: Narayan Nagendra Rao

In the very beginning of the movie, an aspiring filmmaker gets money from a big-shot under one condition that he makes his aide (an old hefty guy) the hero of the film. Rejecting the offer, the protagonist comes to a coffee shop from where the story kicks off. At the end of the 2 hours long movie, I felt, with great potential to be the decade’s best unintentional comedy, had the film-maker went on to make the film with that aide, the director of Maali Pozhuthin Mayakathile would have spared us from the insipid tale of romance. For a film that is set in CCD where one would at least expect a cappuccino, the director takes a bean that is neither roasted nor dried out, brews it with rain water that floods the screen and serves with a teaspoon of salt.

Sometimes we make few decisions based on certain information. Many a times, they backfire; one such being my decision to watch Maalai Pozhudin Mayakathiley. I could go on blotting this page with negativity about the movie but I didn’t choose this film to do precisely that. There were concrete reasons that drew me to the silver screen. The symphony of the scintillating tracks by Achu & textbook beauty shoots of Gopi that looked glamorous in the teasers did appease the peeved mind. Though they occupy 1/4^th of the time space, song sequences alone can never make a poorly made film tolerable.

Maalai Pozhudin Mayakathiley is another example that unique concept alone can never carry a film to the podium; in this case not even to the cafeteria of the stadium.


This review was written for Wogma

Billa-2

Director: Chakri Toleti

When you have a successful franchise in your hand that had survived three decades of viewership, any maker would want to expand the frontiers. While his counterpart in the Don series moved forward with the story, the Ultimate Star of tamil films decided to tread on a different path, that of going back in time to tell the genesis story of David Billa (the tamil version of Don).  While an origin story usually stresses on the formative days of the titular character, with Billa, the urge to see the history of the much revered Don surmounts thanks to the insufficient material available on the reclusive gangster.

But five minutes into the movie, with the best dialogue of the trailer wasted terribly, I suspected dreadful times await me. As it happened, after 2 long hours, Billa-2 stood as a testament that any film, no matter how good a star you have in it, how tech-savvy & creative technicians you involve in it, will only be as good as the creative vision of the director at the helm of affairs.

The problem I had with Billa-2 is not that it couldn’t justify the hunger for violence of the protagonist; we have after all welcomed many a maniacs who just want the world to burn. I didn’t even mind the fact that the film was monotonously only about the escalation of a rampant man. Hell, I could even tolerate a plump hero whip and win over his masculine enemies in a jiffy.  But the issue really was about the convincing factor deployed in it. You really can’t make an action movie with the action sequences being its weakest link. From the opening sequence fight, till the much talked about helicopter fight scene, nowhere was the violent rage that seeps out of David Billa’s face could fill the screen space. As a result we are only able to see computer generated blood bursting out of the cadaver even before the knife touches it.

On the hindsight, with wonderful punch lines and some well-intended scenes that ebb out of the crevice, like a much needed crest after a long trough, Billa-2 did have it moments now and then, making me wonder why the writers couldn’t be more diligent in the work. Had the creators understood that taking the audience to the coda is as important as the coda itself, Billa-2 sure would have been an adrenaline pumping movie. Unfortunately at its present form, Billa-2 is nothing more than the 2 hours stretched version of its 2 minutes trailer with 1 hour 48 minutes of boredom. If at all the film answers something, it tells an origin story where a plump Ajith walks all the way to become the trim & fit Billa in the 2007 film.