- All the scenes involving Ra.One - except for the climax - are well executed. Sadly, the movie has other scenes too.
- This has to be one of the worst opening sequences in any film, ever.
Its official; SRK should not ever do long hair again (unless he plays Lizardman or something similarly reptile-like). - The special appearances are yawn inducing. Rajnikanth looks old and haggard – did Red Chillies run out of money to apply the Photoshop touchups ;)?
- What is it with SRK and Tamilian spoofs? He did a terrible one is OSO, and the one here is only marginally better – at least, in terms of Tamil dialogues (expecting the right accent is too much, I guess). The noodles scene was gross, though.
- The child acts reasonably well; just the fact that his emotions registered under that hideous wig says a lot.
- Kareena is terrible here – reminds one of her Khushi days. The sole saving grace is the “Chammak Challo” number. She still delivers that one moment, where she turns and smiles with the red in her eyes.
- After Cash and Ra.One, it is evident that Anubhav Sinha should stop doing any kind of humor and concentrate only on songs & action sequences. Designing video games would be a good career option as well, IMHO.
- As for SRK, he tries hard to make the movie work, but succeeds only to some extent. As the bumbling game developer, he is a bit endearing despite the hamming and the Tamil stereotyping etc – especially in the sequences where he tries to reach out to his son. However he screws up G.One by playing him as a mixture of Terminator II and Rahul.
- It is when you watch the forced humor here that you get to appreciate what someone like Karan Johar can do with his screenplay and dialogue-writing skills.
- SRK seems to be alluding to the rumors of his being bisexual as he cups Kareena’s breast and Arjun’s balls – both scenes were downright silly.
- To me, Ra.One was marginally better than Krish and Drona, as it seemed to be spoofing itself most of the time. However, it isn’t even in the same planet as Enthiran. To put things in perspective, Ra.One is sort of the like the mosquito episode in Enthiran.
Showing posts with label Films. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Films. Show all posts
Thursday, December 01, 2011
Ra.One – Bullet Point Report
Wednesday, May 16, 2007
Uttharam (The Answer)
'Uttharam' was a movie that I had seen when I was in school, and yet I remember that the movie fascinated me. I'd been waiting for a chance to re-visit it, and when the opportunity occurred, I grabbed it with both hands.
On the face of it, 'Uttharam' is much like the very, many investigative-series movies that adorn (and litter, in many cases) Mammootty's career. The wife of a close friend Matthew (Sukumaran) takes her own life, and upon his entreaties, Balu (Mammootty) takes it upon himself to dig deeper into the reasons for her sudden decision. And sudden it did seem, for by all accounts Selena (Suparna) lead a comfortable life, had a husband who doted on her. and was a noted poet highly regarded in all literary circles. The camera faithfully follows Balu as he goes about unraveling the mystery behind the untimely death of Selena.
The adapted screenplay by the renowned M.T.Vasudevan Nair elevates the movie to another realm altogether. 'Uttharam' does feature many of his pet muses, like the throwaway references to the displaced feudal patriarch (Sukumaran, in this instance), and the well-read, modern but nostalgic Mallu male (Mammootty). However, unlike some other movies scripted by MT (Midhya for instance), this does not form the central premise of the movie. Purportedly inspired by a Daphne Du Maurier short story (I haven't been able to find out which one, but its fairly obvious if you know what you are looking for). 'Uttharam' has a very carefully crafted screenplay, and it does the reputation of the great writer no injustice.
**** Spoilers Ahead *****
Mammootty plays Balu straight, as a man with no roots anywhere. There are several hints as to this aspect of his personality - conversations about the frequent switching of jobs and cities, his wandering nature etc. All he really cares about is this family, really. Balu's initial hesitancy to accept the task of prodding into Selena's untimely demise, and his later sagaciousness in not giving up are subtly brought out by the actor. The only odd note in this performance is the scene he creates at the orphanage. Mammootty reverts to type there, and the scene sticks out like a sore thumb.
Parvathy plays the disturbed friend of Selena. Although she is introduced as a normal character, it soon becomes clear that she is a bit strange, and very much a loner. However, the reasons for this demeanor come out much later in the movie (though not as much of a surprise). The actress is strictly ok here; I felt that Parvathy could have played her character in a much more enigmatic fashion.
Suparna is hopelessly miscast as Selena. For one, her escapades in 'Vaishali' are much too familiar to accept her as an intellectual of any kind. Moreover, she doesn't look the part either. However, the screenplay wisely decides to just speak about her, rather than show a direct flashback. This is much like the technique adapted in Nelson Demille's 'The General's Daughter', and is surprisingly effective. Despite the actress, you do empathize with the character, which is a phenomenal achievement of sorts.
The biblical allusions in the movie really work, and there are quite a few in the movie. The reason for the suicide hardly strikes one as superficial, despite the central premise being flimsy - full credit to the screenplay-writer, and the director. There are a few loopholes (where would you find a schoolgirl who believes in immaculate conception in this time and age, even if she is the overtly religious daughter of a priest?), but they really are largely ignorable by the time you reach the finale of the movie. A must-watch for lovers of good cinema.
On the face of it, 'Uttharam' is much like the very, many investigative-series movies that adorn (and litter, in many cases) Mammootty's career. The wife of a close friend Matthew (Sukumaran) takes her own life, and upon his entreaties, Balu (Mammootty) takes it upon himself to dig deeper into the reasons for her sudden decision. And sudden it did seem, for by all accounts Selena (Suparna) lead a comfortable life, had a husband who doted on her. and was a noted poet highly regarded in all literary circles. The camera faithfully follows Balu as he goes about unraveling the mystery behind the untimely death of Selena.
The adapted screenplay by the renowned M.T.Vasudevan Nair elevates the movie to another realm altogether. 'Uttharam' does feature many of his pet muses, like the throwaway references to the displaced feudal patriarch (Sukumaran, in this instance), and the well-read, modern but nostalgic Mallu male (Mammootty). However, unlike some other movies scripted by MT (Midhya for instance), this does not form the central premise of the movie. Purportedly inspired by a Daphne Du Maurier short story (I haven't been able to find out which one, but its fairly obvious if you know what you are looking for). 'Uttharam' has a very carefully crafted screenplay, and it does the reputation of the great writer no injustice.
**** Spoilers Ahead *****
Mammootty plays Balu straight, as a man with no roots anywhere. There are several hints as to this aspect of his personality - conversations about the frequent switching of jobs and cities, his wandering nature etc. All he really cares about is this family, really. Balu's initial hesitancy to accept the task of prodding into Selena's untimely demise, and his later sagaciousness in not giving up are subtly brought out by the actor. The only odd note in this performance is the scene he creates at the orphanage. Mammootty reverts to type there, and the scene sticks out like a sore thumb.
Parvathy plays the disturbed friend of Selena. Although she is introduced as a normal character, it soon becomes clear that she is a bit strange, and very much a loner. However, the reasons for this demeanor come out much later in the movie (though not as much of a surprise). The actress is strictly ok here; I felt that Parvathy could have played her character in a much more enigmatic fashion.
Suparna is hopelessly miscast as Selena. For one, her escapades in 'Vaishali' are much too familiar to accept her as an intellectual of any kind. Moreover, she doesn't look the part either. However, the screenplay wisely decides to just speak about her, rather than show a direct flashback. This is much like the technique adapted in Nelson Demille's 'The General's Daughter', and is surprisingly effective. Despite the actress, you do empathize with the character, which is a phenomenal achievement of sorts.
The biblical allusions in the movie really work, and there are quite a few in the movie. The reason for the suicide hardly strikes one as superficial, despite the central premise being flimsy - full credit to the screenplay-writer, and the director. There are a few loopholes (where would you find a schoolgirl who believes in immaculate conception in this time and age, even if she is the overtly religious daughter of a priest?), but they really are largely ignorable by the time you reach the finale of the movie. A must-watch for lovers of good cinema.
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Bleeding Bond
You know what struck me 10 minutes into the new Bond flick, Casino Royale? Bond bleeds; he's almost human, dammit!
Daniel Craig plays a very different Bond from what's been the norm so far. Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan etc were mere clones of the sheer force of personality that Connery originally brought to the role (and pretty poor clones at that; I liked Connery so much that I've not seen most of the other Bond movies since, except for a couple of Roger Moore ones). Bond here is relatively new at being 007, and Craig brings alive Bond's desperation to succeed. Despite not looking t
he part, Craig has enough vitality to pull it off. I guess it helps that this Bond is not the suave, confident and one-liner spouting cool spy we are all so used to. Instead, Craig's Bond is a blonde athletic man with an arcebic wit to boot, who gradually grows into Bond (this might be something that the director Martin Campbell actually devised; if so, more credit to him).
The story is pretty simplistic; in a corny, corny scene Bond even wakes up from the dead (literally!). The Bond girl (Vesper) here is pretty alright, and the character provides some kind of insight into why Bond goes on to treat women the way he does. Its probably good that Aishwarya Rai was not picked for this role; she'd have fluttered her large eyelashes through the role. Eva Green does a neat job of it, bringing in quite a bit of intrigue to her character.
The bleeding-eyes villain is rather lame. The card-game, which could have been so good, is very poorly done. The action scenes are excellent (particularly the grainy opening scene inside the bathroom, and the chase until the Embassy), but the Bond car (with all the gadgets) was desperately missed. The movie could definitely be trimmed down by at least 30 minutes.
Worth a watch, at least to see Craig as Bond.
Daniel Craig plays a very different Bond from what's been the norm so far. Roger Moore, Pierce Brosnan etc were mere clones of the sheer force of personality that Connery originally brought to the role (and pretty poor clones at that; I liked Connery so much that I've not seen most of the other Bond movies since, except for a couple of Roger Moore ones). Bond here is relatively new at being 007, and Craig brings alive Bond's desperation to succeed. Despite not looking t
he part, Craig has enough vitality to pull it off. I guess it helps that this Bond is not the suave, confident and one-liner spouting cool spy we are all so used to. Instead, Craig's Bond is a blonde athletic man with an arcebic wit to boot, who gradually grows into Bond (this might be something that the director Martin Campbell actually devised; if so, more credit to him).The story is pretty simplistic; in a corny, corny scene Bond even wakes up from the dead (literally!). The Bond girl (Vesper) here is pretty alright, and the character provides some kind of insight into why Bond goes on to treat women the way he does. Its probably good that Aishwarya Rai was not picked for this role; she'd have fluttered her large eyelashes through the role. Eva Green does a neat job of it, bringing in quite a bit of intrigue to her character.
The bleeding-eyes villain is rather lame. The card-game, which could have been so good, is very poorly done. The action scenes are excellent (particularly the grainy opening scene inside the bathroom, and the chase until the Embassy), but the Bond car (with all the gadgets) was desperately missed. The movie could definitely be trimmed down by at least 30 minutes.
Worth a watch, at least to see Craig as Bond.
Monday, November 20, 2006
Another Look at Virumandi
'Virumandi' is one of Kamal's serious movies that did not impress me much. Upon first viewing, it hardly seemed to be in the class of other gems such as 'Mahanadi', 'Anbae Sivam' and 'Hey Ram'. Granted, the film featured at least a couple of awesome performances (which seems to be a standing feature of most Kamal movies, which is why the standard accusation of onemanship against him is not completely justified IMO) courtesy Pasupathy and Abhirami, as well as an unusual screenplay. But the movie fell well short of my high expectations. Which is when another look at the movie presented itself, I had my eyes out for some redeeming features (I just hate hating the Kamal movies!).
First, the positives:
The relative newcomers, Pasupathy and Abhirami turn in masterly performances. Pasupathy oozes menace and deceit, and Abhirami delivers a knockout of a performance as a vivacious willage lass with a strong mind (a performance largely ignored by most of the awards, strangely). In fact, both of them out-act a strangely out-of-form Kamal, who looks really old and jaded in the flashback portions. Perhaps the onus of being the screenplay-wrier, stunt-director, director, singer and hero got to him! Though Kamal manages to showcase his method-acting skills in a couple of scenes (notice how his fingers twitch when he is nervous), he is listless for the most part - well, as listless as a Kamal perormance can be, I guess. Napolean looks dignified, and deadpans a few lines. Rohini does a neat cameo, in which her confrontation scene with Kamal was just AWESOME.
The screenplay is another laudable aspect about the movie. Opting for a two-pronged narrative adds many a layer to the movie, and each layer unravels only upon the re-telling of the tale. Masterly (though not entirely original)! The manner in which the movie unfolds - like a documentary, thru the eyes of a human activist, portrayed by Rohini - is impressive too.
The village ambience is yet another huge-plus for Virumandi. A typical TN village has been painstakingly recreated, and everything is just apt. Ilayaraja provided some outstanding BGMs as well - some of the more impressive pieces being during Pasupathy's narrative, Kamal's courtship of Abhirami etc.
However.
First of all, the violence: now, I am not exactly squeamish about violent movies; I just loved the 'Kill Bill' series. But certain movies warrant certain kinds of stunt direction. In incorporating the same 'Kill Bill' style of action sequences for 'Virumandi' that he did for 'Aalavandhan', Kamal falters. The sub-standard graphics don't help either. It does seem to me, a keen observer of Kamal's cinema, that Kamal has a fixation for a certain kind of violence on screen - blood spraying, limbs getting chopped etc are getting to be increasingly repetetive.
The implied message - that of capital punishment not suitably deterring crime - also seems half-hearted. Virumandi is not exactly the most innocent guy around; he's just gone around murdering half a dozen people, and stabbing another dozen - not exactly the best candidate for clemency, I'd say. Putting that bit in was Kamal trying to be rather a bit too clever for his own good - attempting to elevate the film from being merely the tale of a happy-go-lucky villager to a socially relevant fable. However, it backfires, making the movie seem half-baked.
All in all, a brave attempt by Kamal to balance the sensibilites of the front-benchers and of his own niche audience - he doesn't entirely succeed, but that won't stop him from trying again, I am sure. And that is exactly what makes me admire the hell out of the man.
First, the positives:
The relative newcomers, Pasupathy and Abhirami turn in masterly performances. Pasupathy oozes menace and deceit, and Abhirami delivers a knockout of a performance as a vivacious willage lass with a strong mind (a performance largely ignored by most of the awards, strangely). In fact, both of them out-act a strangely out-of-form Kamal, who looks really old and jaded in the flashback portions. Perhaps the onus of being the screenplay-wrier, stunt-director, director, singer and hero got to him! Though Kamal manages to showcase his method-acting skills in a couple of scenes (notice how his fingers twitch when he is nervous), he is listless for the most part - well, as listless as a Kamal perormance can be, I guess. Napolean looks dignified, and deadpans a few lines. Rohini does a neat cameo, in which her confrontation scene with Kamal was just AWESOME.
The screenplay is another laudable aspect about the movie. Opting for a two-pronged narrative adds many a layer to the movie, and each layer unravels only upon the re-telling of the tale. Masterly (though not entirely original)! The manner in which the movie unfolds - like a documentary, thru the eyes of a human activist, portrayed by Rohini - is impressive too.
The village ambience is yet another huge-plus for Virumandi. A typical TN village has been painstakingly recreated, and everything is just apt. Ilayaraja provided some outstanding BGMs as well - some of the more impressive pieces being during Pasupathy's narrative, Kamal's courtship of Abhirami etc.
However.
First of all, the violence: now, I am not exactly squeamish about violent movies; I just loved the 'Kill Bill' series. But certain movies warrant certain kinds of stunt direction. In incorporating the same 'Kill Bill' style of action sequences for 'Virumandi' that he did for 'Aalavandhan', Kamal falters. The sub-standard graphics don't help either. It does seem to me, a keen observer of Kamal's cinema, that Kamal has a fixation for a certain kind of violence on screen - blood spraying, limbs getting chopped etc are getting to be increasingly repetetive.
The implied message - that of capital punishment not suitably deterring crime - also seems half-hearted. Virumandi is not exactly the most innocent guy around; he's just gone around murdering half a dozen people, and stabbing another dozen - not exactly the best candidate for clemency, I'd say. Putting that bit in was Kamal trying to be rather a bit too clever for his own good - attempting to elevate the film from being merely the tale of a happy-go-lucky villager to a socially relevant fable. However, it backfires, making the movie seem half-baked.
All in all, a brave attempt by Kamal to balance the sensibilites of the front-benchers and of his own niche audience - he doesn't entirely succeed, but that won't stop him from trying again, I am sure. And that is exactly what makes me admire the hell out of the man.
Monday, September 25, 2006
VV and Keerthi Chakra: Reviews
'Vettayadu Vilayadu' has been a much-awaited film in most of South India. Starring the versatile Kamal Hassan and directed by upcoming director Gautam, the movie promised a lot. Does it deliver? Well, it does - at least partly.
VV is a classic cop-hunts-serial killer tale - nothing more, nothing less. Thankfully, there are none of the usual Kamal-touches in the movie - no smooches, no hints at child abuse, no high-pitched wails of misery, no atheist expositions and what's best, no high-funda makeup. Instead, we have a rather fleshy-looking Kamal - receding hairline and paunch in tow - play his age (well, almost!), and that certainly was the best aspect about the movie for me. Discarding the usual conventions of how a police officer in the movies has to look like, the hero looks like how any middle-aged policeman would look. There's nothing much in the role for an actor of Kamal's stature, and he doesn't disappoint in what he's been given either (would have been a challenge for somebody like Surya or Vikram, though).
The serial killer - played by Daniel Balaji, who was there in Gautam's earlier venture 'Kakka Kakka' was well - hams too much. Though he is menacing alright, he fails to convey the intelligence/cunningness the character seems to possess intuitively. As a foil to Kamal's character, he fails miserably. Thankfully, most of the time the taut screenplay hides his inadequacies. Jyothika is good in her role - Gautham certainly writes interesting characters for her.
The pluses? Well, it is a decent thriller, and has Kamal playing his age. It has a mature romance (which does not mean Bachchan and Hema Malini grooving to 'Chali Chali' for a change!), something that is so rare in Indian cinema. The little touches Kamal and Prakash Raj add to their characters when they meet are wonderful (it is so true that great actors enhance each others' performances). And of course, the technical aspects are superb.
Of course, VV was so amateurish in a lot of ways. First of all, it has the same old cop's-wife-killed-by-goons flashback. When will we stop doing this in our movies? If you have to show it, at least do it decently, like they did in 'Ab Tak Chappan'. The whole flashback portion was the worst aspect of VV. And pray, why did they add that miserable special-effects scene - the one showing Kamal zooming on a bike? The whole 'Raghavan instinct' thing was embarassingly and uncharacteristically voluble. And that bit about Jyothika having a kid - completely irrelevant! To top it all, the movie (especially the climax) had a huge 'Kakka Kakka' hangover.
Like most of Kamal's non-comedic movies, this one too is watchable fare.
VV is a classic cop-hunts-serial killer tale - nothing more, nothing less. Thankfully, there are none of the usual Kamal-touches in the movie - no smooches, no hints at child abuse, no high-pitched wails of misery, no atheist expositions and what's best, no high-funda makeup. Instead, we have a rather fleshy-looking Kamal - receding hairline and paunch in tow - play his age (well, almost!), and that certainly was the best aspect about the movie for me. Discarding the usual conventions of how a police officer in the movies has to look like, the hero looks like how any middle-aged policeman would look. There's nothing much in the role for an actor of Kamal's stature, and he doesn't disappoint in what he's been given either (would have been a challenge for somebody like Surya or Vikram, though).
The serial killer - played by Daniel Balaji, who was there in Gautam's earlier venture 'Kakka Kakka' was well - hams too much. Though he is menacing alright, he fails to convey the intelligence/cunningness the character seems to possess intuitively. As a foil to Kamal's character, he fails miserably. Thankfully, most of the time the taut screenplay hides his inadequacies. Jyothika is good in her role - Gautham certainly writes interesting characters for her.
The pluses? Well, it is a decent thriller, and has Kamal playing his age. It has a mature romance (which does not mean Bachchan and Hema Malini grooving to 'Chali Chali' for a change!), something that is so rare in Indian cinema. The little touches Kamal and Prakash Raj add to their characters when they meet are wonderful (it is so true that great actors enhance each others' performances). And of course, the technical aspects are superb.
Of course, VV was so amateurish in a lot of ways. First of all, it has the same old cop's-wife-killed-by-goons flashback. When will we stop doing this in our movies? If you have to show it, at least do it decently, like they did in 'Ab Tak Chappan'. The whole flashback portion was the worst aspect of VV. And pray, why did they add that miserable special-effects scene - the one showing Kamal zooming on a bike? The whole 'Raghavan instinct' thing was embarassingly and uncharacteristically voluble. And that bit about Jyothika having a kid - completely irrelevant! To top it all, the movie (especially the climax) had a huge 'Kakka Kakka' hangover.
Like most of Kamal's non-comedic movies, this one too is watchable fare.
At the outset: 'Keerthi Chakra' ('Aran' in Tamil) is poorly, poorly directed. In fact, were it not for the sheer presence of Mohan Lal in this amateurish attempt, it could pass for one of those Vijaykanth flicks (substituting Pakistani terrorists with Al-Qaeda would be about the only change required). Mohan Lal must have been sozzled to have accepted this movie.
First of all, there's not much of a story here. Its the usual tale about a bunch of patriotic armymen trying to thwart terrorists from harming the country (male-bonding goes with the territory). Lal leads the pack. Lal, like Kamal in VV, is grim most of the time. Yeah, you guessed right: his wife too was killed by Al-Qaeda. Lal's hawaldar is upcoming Tamil actor Jeeva (who turns in a competent performance). The terrorists are a bunch of perpetually scowling, screaming and ranting Muslims who keep saying 'jihad' that and 'jihad' this. And then there's the 'Indian Muslims are Indian first' moral, shoved into our faces first by a vile rape scene, and then by the lunatic sole surviver screaming curses at the dead bodies of the terrorists.
Lal and Jeeva are about the only positives in this farce. Though Lal is a bit too - (hmm..how shall we put this?) rotund - to essay the role of a commando, he makes no mistakes in the histronics department. Once again, its not much of a role, but Lal stands up and delivers. In fact, he ends up saving the movie from becoming an outright disgrace. Jeeva acquits himself honorably in his scenes with Lal, and that's a fine compliement by itself. The commando scenes are well-shot as well.
The negatives? You must be kidding me. Clueless direction, unimpressive music, listless camera work, terrible acting, a gruesome rape scene, inane & hackneyed dialogue - where do you want me to start? You'd be better off watching a Vijaykanth flick - at least, you can laugh!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
