Piku (2015)

Director: Shoojit Sircar

Story: Juhi Chaturvedi

Cast: Amitabh Bachchan, Deepika Padukone, Irrfan Khan

Music: Anupam Roy

Time: 122 minutes

Bottom-line: Hilarious all the way… Amitabh in fine form!

Earning his fourth National Award for Best Actor, Big B finds himself in superb form yet again, in this comedy drama, Piku. The film features Deepika Padukone (who won her second Filmfare award for Best Actress) and Irrfan Khan in the lead roles, with Balendra Singh in the supporting role.

Piku Banerjee (Padukone) is a Bengali architect living in Delhi, with her 70-year-old father, Bhaskor (Bachchan). Bhaskor has chronic constipation, and links every problem he has to bowel movements (“Emotion depends on motion!” he says). While Piku takes good care of him, she also often gets irritated by his eccentricities, nagging and complaining. Piku is a regular customer of Himachal Taxi Service, owned by Rana Chaudhary (Khan). When Piku plans to sell off their home in Kolkata, Bhaskor opposes the idea and decides to go to Kolkata. Not able to let him travel alone, Piku goes along with him, with their servant Bhudan (Singh), by road (Bhaskor’s problems making flight travel difficult), with Rana himself driving the taxi. The encounters the troop faces en route and in Kolkata forms the rest of the film.

 

Bachchan as Bhaskor

“… that is how I am: brutal and honest!”

Indeed, with his “brutal” criticisms, judgements, his constant disparaging statements, eccentric character, and stubbornness, Bhaskor’s character takes no more than few minutes to irritate those around him. At the same time, those same attitudes are what makes this performance of Bachchan so entertaining to watch! The accent, the tone, and his expressions of a typical “grumpy old man” are superb. Although his constipation jokes might be a tad over the limit, you can’t help but love this character! Deepika Padukone plays the caring daughter, caught up in her own world of work problems and what not. To see her handle her father’s tantrums is quite hilarious, but towards the end her acting is moving too. Irrfan Khan plays the role of “the man who sets things right”; unwillingly stuck between this father-daughter duo, he has to control his own anger in front of Bhaskor, and as the story goes he manages to influence both of them. Occasionally pulling off a bit of dry humour and sarcasm, he is responsible for a fair share of the comedy too.

 

Padukone as Piku and Khan as Rana

The story must be praised for its simplicity; dealing with ordinary people and situations, Piku still manages to generate effective humour (there is much more than just the jokes about bowel movement!). I like the way the dialogues have been scripted. Irrfan’s character so subtly changes the mind of Piku and Bhaskor in the course of the story. The ending is a bit unexpected, but nevertheless, it seemed meaningful. In many ways the film is similar to Little Miss Sunshine: a “weird” family going on an unplanned road trip, unforeseen accidents/surprises on the way, and a surprise ending (surprisingly enough, both Alan Arkin and Amitabh won the highest accolade for playing the grumpy old man - Arkin winning the Oscar and Amitabh, the National Award). Both movies have their own charm, and if you haven’t seen the English movie, do watch it!

Piku is worth watching just for Amitabh’s role. It is a refreshing comedy, with superb acting and screenplay. This is one of the good family movies of recent times; don’t miss it!

My Rating: 3.5/5

Chinatown (1974)

Director: Roman Polanski

Story: Robert Towne

Cast: Jack Nicholson, Faye Dunaway

Music: Jerry Goldsmith

Time: 130 minutes

Bottom-line: A tense, engrossing neo-noir 

Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.

Roman Polanski’s 1970 mystery thriller stars Jack Nicholson and Faye Dunaway in the lead roles, with John Huston, Perry Lopez and several others in supporting roles. Nominated for 11 Oscars and winning one for Best Screenplay, Chinatown is considered to be one of the best mystery films ever made and has been ranked 19^th in AFI’s list of the top 100 films of the past century.

Politicians, ugly buildings, and harlots all get respectable if they last long enough.

A woman named Evelyn Mulwray hires private investigator J.J. “Jack” Gittes (Nicholson) to tail her husband, Hollis Mulwray, Chief Engineer of the LA Department of Water and Power. Gittes follows him, hears him publicly oppose the construction of a new reservoir, and later shoots pictures of Hollis with another woman. Later, the real Evelyn Mulwray (Dunaway) confronts Gittes. The latter realises that Hollis and himself are being set up, and decides to meet up with Hollis, who is soon found to be drowned in a freshwater reservoir. Gittes notices several other incidents that don’t add up: Evelyn decides to drop the lawsuit against him, the reservoir releases huge quantities of water every night but the land is dry, the land of the entire Northwest Valley is suddenly being bought by people at one particular old-age home… As Gittes probes more, he discovers a plot far more sinister than just one murder.

 

Nicholson as Gittes

Chinatown would have been way different in its appeal if it weren’t for Jack Nicholson in the lead. Suave, sarcastic and charismatic, he fills his role with such energy and style – despite appearing with a bandage on his nose for nearly half the film! Gittes is no superhero, nor is he a mastermind; the detective’s character is made simple enough for us to solve the mystery with him, together. Faye Dunaway plays the role of a femme fatale. The charming lady we feel pity for following the death of her husband has a vast range of secrets behind that pretty face. And yet, if her charm, bravery and actions impress you, credit goes to Dunaway for putting on such an incredible performance.

The climax is not exactly the happy ending you would wish for as a viewer, but, like the climaxes of films like The Departed, The Town and Gone Baby Gone, it brings out the dark reality of the people and the surroundings of that period (as the Rotten Tomatoes consensus also agrees). The multi-layered story is quite effective for the mystery genre, and Chinatown is one of the best examples. New characters and plot twists are introduced at the right moments and the climax is fitting. The background score suits the atmosphere well; it has been considered the 9^th best film score of all time by the AFI.

Dunaway as Evelyn

With Towne’s solid script, and Nicholson’s first-class performance, Chinatown is one thrilling ride from start to finish. The only thing you may not like about the film is its climax, and it will certainly give you an uneasy feeling in the stomach. But, at a time when such events were part of reality, this ending adds flavour to the film. As the policeman tells the detective, “Forget it, Jake. It’s Chinatown.”

My Rating: 4/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 98%   

Iruvar (1997)

English translation: The duo

Director: Mani Ratnam

Story: Vairamuthu, Suhasini, Mani Ratnam

Cast: Mohanlal, Prakash Raj, Aishwarya Rai, Gauthami

Music: A.R. Rahman

Time: 159 minutes

Bottom-line: Near-perfect performances, and biting dialogues

The film that Mani Ratnam considers to be his favourite, Iruvar is the tale of two friends, turning into competitors, and eventually, rivals. Loosely based on the lives of Tamil Nadu politicians M.G. Ramachandran and Kalaignar Karunanidhi (though the film claims no resemblance), this film portrays several important incidents in both the men’s lives: marriages, romances, rivalries and friendships.

1950s: Anandan (Mohanlal) is a struggling actor, playing just the roles of extras in films. He soon gets an audition for a lead role, and while practising, he meets Tamizhselvan (Prakash Raj), an aspiring writer. As the two of them converse, a debate turns into mutual admiration for each other. Anandan requests Tamizhselvan to write his dialogues for him, and with the latter’s help, Anandan gets the role. As Anandan and Tamizh bond even more, Tamizh introduces Anandan to his party leader (Nassar), and Anandan also becomes an integral part of the party. As Anandan’s fame grows exponentially due to his stardom, Tamizh starts to have second thoughts of keeping Anandan in the party. This slowly starts to break the friends apart, till Anandan eventually starts his own party.

Mohanlal as Anandan, with his first wife,
Pushpavalli (Rai)

 From the first encounter between Anandan and Tamizh, where they discuss religion and tradition, the main strength of the film is revealed through the lines of Tamizh: his dialogues, exchanges, and of course, few powerful monologues – especially the last one directed at Anandan – Suhasini can take a bow! That last monologue by Tamizh – emphasising the friendship and the journey through thick and thin – will definitely touch your heart. I liked the use of continuous takes in the film; the technique using the revolving camera to shoot the monologues really enhances the effect. 

The film is lengthy, yes, but it is absorbing and engaging. Anandan’s journey starts with his struggling film career, to his gradual success, with emphasis on his love life, and subsequent marriages to a village belle (played by Aishwarya Rai), and a second marriage to Ramani (Gauthami), and his relationship with actress Kalpana (also played by Rai). In the last half hour of the film, we see how he forms his own party to contest against Tamizh. Tamizh’s story focuses predominantly on his political career, with considerable time given to his romantic relationships as well. Despite a lot of time given to Anandan’s film shoots (and I didn’t like the soundtrack, and they took up too much screen time too!), the other incidents are portrayed beautifully, perfectly highlighting the gradual rise and fall of the friendship between Anandan and Tamizh, with the added effects of romance, old age and other catalytic events.

Anandan and Tamizhselvan (played by Prakash Raj)

Prakash Raj won the National Award for Best Supporting Actor for his role in Iruvar, and there’s no doubt that he deserved it. The way he delivers his lines itself shows his talent, and all his subtle emotions that indicate his feelings – especially those towards Anandan. Mohanlal and Aishwarya Rai – Iruvar is her debut film, believe it or not – have done extremely well too, and of course, extra credits should be given for pulling off the roles without knowing Tamil. Prakash Raj also had to dub for himself. The film features a huge cast, with a lot of minor roles played by Tabu, Delhi Ganesh and Revathy.     

 

Rai as Kalpana

 Somehow, I feel that Iruvar is Ratnam’s most “perfect” film, considering the amount of detail he has given to the acting, script and direction. Despite the initial controversy the film faced, this remains to be one of the best political films in all of Tamil cinema history.

My Rating: 3.5/5

The Elephant Man (1980)

Director: David Lynch

Screenplay: David Lynch, Eric Bergren, Christopher de Vore (based on books by Frederick Treves and Ashley Montagu)

Cast: Anthony Hopkins, John Hurt

Music: John Morris

Time: 124 minutes

Bottom-line: Poignant, emotional and beautifully made

Receiving eight Academy Award nominations, David Lynch’s The Elephant Man is, by far, the director’s magnum opus, and a milestone film in Hollywood history. Based on the true story of Englishman Joseph Merrick, the black-and-white film stars John Hurt in the title role, along with Anthony Hopkins, supported by Anne Bancroft, Freddie Jones and John Gielgud.

I am not an animal! I am a human being! I am… a man!

In the London hospital, a doctor by the name Frederick Treves (Hopkins) comes to know about John Merrick (Hurt), a man severely deformed from birth (since his pregnant mother was knocked down and traumatised by an elephant), who is being used in a freak show by his “owner” Mr. Bytes (Jones). Merrick has an unusually large skull, thick lumps of skin, a paralysed right limb and several other defects. Treves decides to examine and try to cure Merrick, but is opposed by several of the hospital staff, who are terrified by his appearance and think he is incurable. Nevertheless, Treves takes care of Merrick personally, and it starts to work wonders: we see how intelligent, artistic and friendly the man actually is. The transformation of Merrick’s life from a “freak” to a “human being” is what the film is about.

 

Hopkins as Doctor Treves

Since I am one of those who hate the typical Lynch surrealist horror films, The Elephant Man was a welcome change. It still has some of his characteristic features: like the creepy, ill-ominous score and the visually unsettling imagery. However, the rest of the film is a work of art: the life of Merrick is so exquisitely portrayed on screen. From his life as a freak show act, to the patient in the hospital, and his slow transition to a civilised human, interwoven with his friendship with Treves, is a delight for the eyes.

 

Hurt as Mr. Merrick

The cinematography is a major highlight. I like the way the viewers are introduced to the Elephant Man: first his face is kept hooded, then we only catch a glimpse of his disfigured body in the dark, then we see his silhouette, and then for the first time, the face; the impact is so sudden and powerful, and despite all the “hints” we get about his appearance, the first real look is still a shock. The content is disturbing, not because of some grotesque imagery, but to see the poor man being tormented by the society and various others who use him to earn money is pitiable; the scene where he is shown as a public spectacle from his very room is extremely depressing. The other interesting scenes from the film are the ones where Treves introduces Mr. Merrick to the hospital Governor, and the scene where Mr. Merrick goes to the theatre.

The real life Joseph Merrick

John Hurt and Anthony Hopkins have given some of their finest performances in this film. The former really wins our empathy for his character, and the latter plays a character who sets many a benchmark for humanitarian deeds. To see Hopkins play a “good” doctor was a bit of a surprise, but he has pulled it off superbly. Hurt’s face is almost entirely covered in makeup, to give him the deformed look. An interesting piece of film history is that The Elephant Man is the film responsible for the origin of the Academy Award for Best Makeup, after viewers argued that the aspect wasn’t recognised enough in this film!

So, for this remarkable achievement, The Elephant Man has made its mark in Hollywood history. The acting, cinematography, score, makeup and of course, Lynch’s direction make this one of the most beautiful films I have seen.

My Rating: 5/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 90%

Asuran (2019)

English translation: Demon

Director: Vetri Maaran

Screenplay: Mani Maaran and Vetri Maaran (based on the novel by Poomani)

Cast: Dhanush, Manju Warrier

Music: G. V. Prakash Kumar

Time: 139 minutes

Bottom-line: Starts out well but fails to have an impact

Vetri Maaran’s fourth collaboration with Dhanush, Asuran, is a revenge drama for which I had high hopes. The film stars Dhanush and Manju Warrier in the lead roles, with Naren, Ken Karunas, Teejay Arunasalam, Pasupathy and Prakash Raj in the supporting roles.

Sivasaami (Dhanush), his wife Pachaiammal (Warrier), her brother Murugesan (Pasupathy), sons Chidambaram (Karunas) and Velmurugan (Arunasalam) live in Thekkoor village. A rich landlord from the Vadakkoor village, Narasimhan (Naren) wants to seize the lands of the Thekkoor farmers to build a cement factory. This begins a series of actions – involving public humiliation and brutal murders – taken by the families of Sivasaami and Narasimhan against each other, to “save their honour”. Sivasaami seems to be humble and peace-loving – and hence, decides to flee the village with his family – while his sons want to take the aggressive route. Soon, they get to know Sivasaami’s past – a tale revealing his true colours.

 

Dhanush as Sivasaami

Asuran can be thought of as a village gangster flick – it’s essentially a tale of two families pitted against each other. While the premise seems exciting, by the time you finish watching, you realise that Asuran is the same story twice – once in the flashback of Sivasaami and once again in the last 20 minutes of the film (except that Dhanush has a bigger moustache and a beard in the climax). The idea of the protagonist having a violent past followed by a “new life” is not new in Tamil cinema either; different films have portrayed it in different ways (like Baashha, Ramanaa, Ghajini etc.).

 

Warrier as Pachaiammal

The film does well in the technical aspects, especially the background score. The cinematography is excellent too, with good use of slow-motion. But be prepared to have a couple of stomach-turning scenes of graphic gore and violence. Dhanush’s acting is top-notch; he plays the saviour of the family who is willing to indulge in a bloodbath to avenge his family, he plays the humble and pitiable family man who prefers to be humiliated just to avoid violence. The way he maintains the balance between keeping calm but still protecting his family from harm is admirable – in terms of his character, Sivasaami, and his performance.

I don’t fancy the idea of one hero battling a dozen thugs simultaneously but there’s plenty of that here. If all it takes for the calm and composed Sivasaami to turn violent again is for the Vadakkoor folks to attack his son (which is anyway expected), then the film seems to give a message that violence is the answer to everything. However, the climax overwrote that message, with Sivasaami’s parting words to his son having a resounding effect.

Asuran is a pretty good entertainer, but there are a number of contradicting factors which make the story go off track. The portrayal of an ominous atmosphere is effective, and the rustic setting automatically makes you associate raw emotions with the characters. Watch the film for Dhanush’s performance, and take in the message given in the last scene.

My Rating: 2.5/5

Mom (2017)

Director: Ravi Udyawar

Story: Ravi Udyawar, Girish Kohli, Kona Venkat

Cast: Sridevi, Adnan Siddiqui, Sajal Ali, Nawazuddin Siddiqui

Music: A. R. Rahman, Qutub E-Kripa

Time: 146 minutes

Bottom-line: Pretty much a Sridevi show

Mom will most likely be remembered for two things – one, Sridevi winning her long-overdue National Award for Best Actress and two, this being her last big film – also her 300^th film appearance – before her unfortunate death a few months after the release. The film features Adnan Siddiqui, Nawazuddin Siddiqui and Sajal Ali in the lead roles, with Akshaye Khanna and Abhimanyu Singh in the supporting cast.

Devki (Sridevi) is a biology teacher who is popular among her students. She lives with her husband, Anand (Adnan), and is the stepmother of Arya (Sajal), who keeps calling her “ma’am” instead of “mom”, still unable to accept the fact that Devki has “replaced” her biological mother. On Valentine’s day, Arya goes to a party, where she publicly rejects her classmate Mohit’s proposal. Mohit and his friends take revenge by brutally raping Arya and dumping her in a drain, nearly killing her. Despite Arya’s statement accusing her attackers, the rapists are released due to lack of circumstantial evidence. Unable to digest this, Devki takes it upon herself to avenge Arya, with the help of detective DK (Nawazuddin) who feeds her intel about the rapists. Closely following the family is Crime Branch officer Matthew (Khanna) who soon starts suspecting Devki. What does the mom do?

 

Sridevi as Devki

While the bold attempt to make a woman-centric revenge drama must be appreciated, a little bit of pondering reveals several holes in the plot, some more obvious than the others. Of course, if Devki’s plan had been to go to each rapist’s house and clobber him with a cricket bat, then there’s no need for logic. But when she decides to take the smart route for revenge, I feel the plot could have been worked on more to fine-tune some aspects and give a cleaner tale. But again, when it’s Sridevi on screen, all these take the back seat; you ­want her to win.

 

Sajal as Arya

Sridevi’s performance is, undoubtedly, brilliant. Specifically, look out for the scene where she breaks down in the hospital when she is informed about the rape, and also her acting in the climax. Her National Award is the first time it has been awarded posthumously. Sajal Ali’s role is sublime as well, and the divide between mom and daughter in the film is just so painful on many occasions. After a point, you don’t know whether to pity Devki more or Arya. Nawazuddin Siddiqui dons a new appearance and accent for this film, making him almost unrecognisable at first sight. It seems like a needless gimmick but nevertheless, it is entertaining to see him having this look.

 

Siddiqui as DK

Mom ends Sridevi’s career on a high note, but as a film by itself, there is scope for improvement as far as the script goes. The technical aspects and the acting are of high quality (I liked the cinematography in particular, especially the way the rape is indirectly depicted only through ominous music and a top view of the car inside which it happens). However, if you are looking for just a thriller or a woman-centric film, there are better ones; if you just want to watch Sridevi, this movie will satisfy you but I would also strongly recommend the earlier work of hers, English Vinglish. 

My Rating: 3/5

The Truman Show (1998)

Director: Peter Weir
Story: Andrew Niccol
Cast: Jim Carrey, Ed Harris
Music: Philip Glass
Time: 103 minutes
Bottom-line: Tru-ly thought-provoking!

“All the world's a stage, 
And all the men and women merely players; 
They have their exits and their entrances...”

These are the famous lines from William Shakespeare’s As you Like It, and they lay the basic idea for Peter Weir’s The Truman Show. How would you feel if you find out that your entire life is a drama, being staged by some unknown person, and everyone around you has been instructed to play a role, and your whole “reality”, is nothing more than a set-up?

Good morning, and in case I don't see ya, good afternoon, good evening and good night!
Truman Burbank (Carrey) has his whole life videotaped, right from his birth. He is the star of this “show” about his life – being broadcast all over the world, 24/7 – called The Truman Show. The show’s creator, Christof (Harris) wants to capture Truman’s authentic emotions in certain situations and build a show around it by creating a gigantic set of Truman’s hometown, and everyone around Truman is a cast member. By the time Truman turns 30 he notices some abnormalities in his surroundings, because of the show’s crew members fumbling. As the story progresses, Truman decides to explore for himself and find out what’s really happening around him.

Carrey as Truman

The best part of life is that it is unpredictable; full of surprises. How would you feel if someone has scripted your entire life for you? Someone has taken care of the good and the bad that would happen, every detail, every incident in your life. Some of you may follow the religious belief that God has indeed scripted our life for us, but what if the writer is a human? In the film, Truman has no idea that he’s living an “ideal” life, but as a viewer, you wonder if Christof’s doings are morally right. In a way, he is protecting Truman from all harm and giving him what he wants, but is it right to force a man not to live life the way it should be lived? It is true that all of us want to live a worry-free life, but if we actually do, we miss out on its essence. The film also addresses the issue of privacy. Most of us are interested in peeking into the private lives of others... imagine how it would be if the whole world is watching everything you do. What sort of life would that be?

Ed Harris as Christof

The character of Truman is superbly played by Jim Carrey. The Truman Show is one of his more serious movies, for it induces more thought in you than laughter. The way he portrays innocence – because he’s the only one who thinks “something is fishy” around him – and determination to find out what’s happening to his life is wonderful to watch. Of course, Carrey gives us a fair amount of wackiness in his character to make us laugh too! Ed Harris plays the mastermind creator, Christof. His policy of, “We accept the reality of the world with which we are presented, it's as simple as that” defines his character. Through subtle facial expressions, he conveys all the emotions of his character – panic, anger, disappointment and so on. Harris was nominated for the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor.

With a thought-provoking message, and at the same time an entertaining story, The Truman Show is one of Carrey’s best films. It’s a new experience altogether and is definitely worth a watch for film lovers of all ages.

My Rating: 4/5
Rotten Tomatoes rating: 94%

Vada Chennai (2018)

English translation: North Chennai

Director: Vetri Maaran

Story: Vetri Maaran, Naren Siddharth

Cast: Dhanush, Andrea Jeremiah, Aishwarya Rajesh, Ameer

Music: Santhosh Narayanan

Time: 156 minutes

Bottom-line: A tense, gripping gangster film with plenty of twists and turns

The third collaboration between Vetri Maaran and Dhanush, Vada Chennai, showcases both of them in fine form. Spanning the time period between 1987 and 2003 (a timeline chosen so as to include historic events like the Rajiv Gandhi assassination and the death of MGR), the tale involves politics, local gangs, prison wars and last but not the least, carrom. The film features Andrea Jeremiah, Aishwarya Rajesh and Ameer along with Dhanush in the lead roles, with Samuthirakani, Kishore, Pawan and Sai Dheena in the supporting roles.

 

Dhanush as Anbu

1987: One night, four men kill someone in a hotel in North Chennai. They decide that two of them (Guna and Velu) will go to prison and the other two (Jawa and Senthil) will bail them out in a month. However, a year later, the duo is still in jail, which creates a rift between Guna and Senthil.

2000: Anbu (Dhanush) – once a skilled carrom player – is arrested after being caught in a brawl. He is sent to Guna’s jail block but is soon transferred to Senthil’s (who is arrested in 1996) block. Anbu becomes one of Senthil’s favourites and he gets Senthil to organise a carrom tournament amongst all the prisoners. As the tournament progresses, we see a surprising act from Anbu that makes us question his loyalty. We then get to know the whole story, starting from 1987, including what actually happened on the night of the murder.

 

Andrea as Chandra, Guna's wife

The tale is narrated in a non-linear fashion and is divided into four “chapters”, only at the end of which we get the complete picture (well, or you might have to watch the whole thing again!). The various well-timed twists and turns keep us guessing all the way, and in the end, everything falls into place. The narrative structure gives an interesting perspective to the characters, in the sense that with every twist, we are taken back to an incident in the past which reveals more about each person’s true nature. While films like Thegidi and Vikram Vedha have a huge twist in (literally) the last minute to give a “cliff-hanger” climax, Vada Chennai’s ending necessitates a sequel (which, apparently, is in the pipeline. I hope Vetri Maaran doesn’t disappoint).  

Aishwarya as Padma, Anbu's wife

I like how Vetri Maaran deceives us with his characters – the ones we think are just secondary actually turn out to be the drivers of the story. Dhanush and Andrea have both given some of the best performances of their careers, and their characters demand it. Ameer’s acting is likely to go unnoticed in the film because of his short screen time, but that’s a brilliant performance too. In a way, his character (Rajan) gives the reason as to why the film is titled “Vada Chennai”. The other thing I like about the characters is how they deal with their enemies on an intellectual level as well, and not just with fistfights.

 

Ameer as Rajan (front)

Vada Chennai’s cinematography and background score enhance the visuals a lot. The song sequences also continue to narrate the story as they are played, as opposed to the “dream sequence” songs that I don’t approve of. With strong performances by the leads and a taut screenplay, Vetri Maaran’s drama guarantees entertainment throughout the 2.5 hours.

My Rating: 4/5

Aadukalam (2011)

English translation: Playground/Arena

Director: Vetri Maaran

Story: Vetri Maaran, Vikram Sugumaran

Cast: Dhanush, Taapsee Pannu, V. I. S. Jayapalan, Naren

Music: G. V. Prakash Kumar

Time: 156 minutes

Bottom-line: An engrossing village drama

Vetri Maaran’s second feature film would go on to win six National Awards (including Best Director, Actor and Screenplay), equalling the record set by Kannathil Muthamittal (way back in 2002), for the maximum National Awards won by a Tamil film. The film stars Dhanush and Taapsee Pannu in the lead roles, with Jayapalan, Naren, Kishore and Murugadoss in the supporting roles.

 

Dhanush as Karuppu

Cockfights, a common feature in all the old civilizations, have a special place in Tamil history and culture. Right from the times of Sangam literature to modern writings, cockfights are mentioned in many epics and books.

Madurai: Pettaikaran (Jayapalan) is a veteran rooster trainer, whose roosters consistently win cockfights because of his secret technique of maintaining the birds. Two favourites in Pettai’s team are Karuppu (Dhanush) and Durai (Kishore). Karuppu falls in love with an Anglo-Indian girl, Irene (Pannu), who is initially repelled by him. Pettai’s main competitor is Police Inspector Rathnaswamy (Naren), who insists on having one last fight with Pettai to win, which Pettai initially refuses but is forced to comply with in the end. The events on the day of the rooster fight will change everyone’s lives forever, in a tale of love, greed, betrayal and survival.

 

Taapsee as Irene

Aadukalam’s main strength is the portrayal of the village lifestyle, including the rooster fights. As Vetri Maaran himself said, “I went to Madurai with a script in mind, but I had to change the script to accommodate reality. To make my film authentic, we had cast people who belong to the sub-cult.” The rooster fights were depicted using CGI of course (it’s not that great; don’t expect the stuff you would see in Hollywood films), but you’ll find that the entire “fight” time is only around 30 minutes at

Jayapalan as Pettaikaran

the end of the first half. The real story begins only after that. The first half is otherwise slow and boring, with too much emphasis given on Karuppu’s infatuation with Irene, with a couple of colourful and lively songs (which I didn’t really like).

The driving force for the second part of the story – which is also a common theme in Vetri Maaran’s later films – is pride. The film is essentially a tale of how everyone’s lives get affected when pride (or an insult to one’s pride, rather) takes control over your actions. Another aspect of Vetri Maaran’s films (this one and the three films after this) I like is the climax – they are never the “happily ever after” endings. Aadukalam’s climax is one hinting at an uncertain future for the characters, Vada Chennai is part of a trilogy anyway and Asuran has a bittersweet closing scene.

Dhanush’s role as Karuppu is easily one of his best – be it a love-smitten romantic or a skilled rooster fighter or a loyal friend. While Taapsee Pannu’s role gave her a big break, she otherwise has no value addition to the film. Yes, her character is a catalyst in a number of ways but certain others could have played that role. This is the film that brought Naren and Murugadoss to the limelight, both of whom have henceforth been credited as “Aadukalam Naren” and “Aadukalam Murugadoss” in all their future films.

Aadukalam makes you feel a myriad of emotions – sorrow, pity, laughter and so on – and it keeps you engaged throughout. It might not rank as the best village film in Tamil nor as Vetri Maaran’s or Dhanush’s best venture, but it is still worth a watch or two.

My Rating: 3.5/5

1917 (2019)

Director: Sam Mendes

Story: Sam Mendes, Krysty Wilson-Cairns

Cast: George MacKay, Dean-Charles Chapman

Music: Thomas Newman

Time: 119 minutes

Bottom-line: A thrilling war film and a technical masterpiece

Sam Mendes’ war epic is certainly one of the best films of the year, highly impressive in its narrative and technical aspects. Starring George MacKay and Dean-Charles Chapman in the lead roles – with several cameos by others – this (almost) real-time tale is based on the accounts of Mendes’ grandfather.

Time is the enemy.

April 1917: During WWI, General Erinmore (Colin Firth) briefs two young soldiers, Lance Corporals Tom Blake (Chapman) and William Schofield (MacKay). The Germans have strategically pulled back from a sector in France to their new Hindenburg line, hoping to ambush the British when they attack. With telephone lines being cut, the soldiers have to deliver a message by hand to call off the attack – which might cost the lives of 1600 men – and they have to do it by dawn. The journey of Blake and Schofield all the way to General Mackenzie (Benedict Cumberbatch) and the Second Battalion of the Devonshire Regiment is what the film is about. 

 

MacKay as Schofield

I hoped today might be a good day. Hope is a dangerous thing.

The most striking feature of the film is its cinematography. Roger Deakins used several long takes to make it appear as if the entire film is a single continuous shot. Now, even though continuous takes aren’t new (Alfred Hitchcock did it way back in 1948 in Rope), 1917 takes it to a whole new level. To shoot this much action and across various settings (you’ll notice that no location is used more than once in the story), being constrained to some level by technology and budget, is indeed a Herculean task. You can appreciate this fact much more when you see videos on the making of the movie – how much planning went into each scene, how the cuts were skilfully placed to help with the editing and so on.

 

Chapman as Blake

There is only one way this war ends. Last man standing.

Of course, the cinematography draws so much of your attention that you are likely to think the story was altered or “customised” to make it easier to film, but Mendes doesn’t compromise on the storyline at all. It is as gruelling as a war movie can get: explosions, plane crashes, burning buildings, corpses and even a waterfall – the film has it all. 1917 is essentially a tale of survival, and the fact that it’s narrated in real-time makes it all the more exciting – you experience everything along with Blake and Schofield as and when they happen. Look out for the dogfight scene and the one with the trip-wire.

George MacKay is the star of the show as far as acting goes, and he is aptly supported by Chapman. Pushed to their physical and mental limits, Schofield and Blake are men who go against all odds to do their duty. To me, it was also interesting to see Cumberbatch and Andrew Scott star alongside each other again, though they never appear for more than a few minutes and not together either. The acting holds the film together, while the action-packed story and cinematography build the wonder around the performances. 1917 is a film you shouldn’t miss. 

My Rating: 4/5

Rotten Tomatoes rating: 90%