FEB 7 - Has there been, in Tamil cinema, a filmmaker like Myshkin? With his yellow-sari seductresses, with his men with their torsos sawed off by a pitiless camera, and with his Zen-koan approach to shot-taking, where the ugliness of the universe cohabits peacefully with beauty, he’s undoubtedly anointing himself an auteur. But why do his films come with so many “buts”?
He casts faces from real life, faces unaccompanied by star (or even previous-cinema) baggage – but these performances don’t come with the polish, the finish you want in scenes with so much quietude. He does wondrous things with his camera, and he even justifies his inverted compositions with a flashback that plants this gaze in the viewer’s mind – but there are times you feel he’s simply showing off: look-ma-I’m-a-filmmaker. The mostly excellent initial portions unspool in quiet dread, playing games with the audience’s patience and attention spans – but once the game is given away, things become unintentionally comical, the apparent work of someone who’s made a first half that he wants to make and a second half that he feels will go over well with the sensation-seeking Tamil-film viewer.
To me, he’s a fascinatingly restless filmmaker – an amalgam of artistry, ambition, and amateurishness – whose flawed works I’d rather watch over those with fewer “mistakes,” fewer risks, fewer qualms about audience-pleasing whorishness – but damned if he isn’t a canny audience-pleaser as well.
PS: In the finest moment of the film, the one that encapsulates its nihilistic philosophies, Myshkin cuts from the “villain” approaching an unseen victim, dismembering power tool in hand, to the “hero” slumped in his chair, his arms splayed out in the exact fashion of one of the villain’s many victims. This cut – and not the showy naming of the protagonist as J Krishnamurti (yes, that J Krishnamurti), or another character as Judas Iscariot (yes, that Judas Iscariot) – tells you why this director is the real deal.
PPS: Thoonganagaram, a not-bad CineMadurai entry, has villains whose heinousness is established through the exact means employed in Yudham Sei. When was the last time two films released the same Friday played host to the same act of perversion?
Mojo
February 7, 2011
good one
But I expected a few more words on Thoonganagaram.
Just Another Film Buff
February 7, 2011
Yes, I’d love to see Myshkin cut down on some of the “director’s director” stuff. For one, I would like him to replace most of those tracking shots – even if it is his trademark – with pan shots as much as possible.
Also, I feel the film would have done better with a rewrite. Wife instead of the sister, a more subjective approach to the mystery, JK a part of the police, and, if guts permit, a part of the scheme himself. Part of thereason why some find this movie to be slow is that truth is always deferred, always at an arm’s distance, just when the threads come together, Myshkin cuts to a new event that triggers other possibilities. But this bravura is only until the tetrapak flashback (poor segment) beyond which it is almost totally downhill.
MumbaiRamki
February 7, 2011
Despite his established visual cliched compositions, i like yudham sei – i felt it was better social version of EEsan seen through Myskin’s anjathey lens . What do you think ?
In the final scenes, giving a copy of victor frankl’s ‘ Man’s search for meaning’, (which is about a person who comes out of holocoust )to a person who has undergone a similar trial was nice .
Somehow i felt an imagines passion in the 24 frames , even if sometimes it bordered silliness like the cheran’s stunt sequence with the nail cutter ! We need more such film makers ..
( Also , i think Mysskin is the only film maker after mani rathnam that a layman can identify immediately, within 2-3 seconds !)
MumbaiRamki
February 7, 2011
“his arms splayed out in the exact fashion of one of the villain’s many victims”
I think this was done in many films and a very trivial scene. ( Is it exact fashion ? It brought me images of Aboorva sagodhargal first kamal ) .
I was waiting for one character who would stop blinking for 10 seconds and finally that happened in the flash back ( i guess thats the inverted gaze u had referred )
Vishnu
February 7, 2011
The first half was wonderful.. The second half tests the patience and things fall apart quite rapidly after the flashback.. The camera work was innovative and the BGM was pretty good, even though its totally out of character for a murder mystery..I guess that’s what made it tick..
Anjaathey was a much better effort and more engrossing, despite being 30 mins longer..
Rakesh
February 7, 2011
Myshkin also mentioned in one of his interviews about how his regular “partner-in-crime” Cinematographer Mahesh Muthusamy refused to work with him this time around.. no wonder towards the end.. he names one of the characters “Mahesh Muthusamy” ascending an elevator towards……
Rakesh
February 7, 2011
Apparently noted Tamil writer Charu Nivedita also had a blink and miss role in the “yellow Sari” song.. could not even find anyone resembling him in that sequence !!
Rags
February 9, 2011
He is the harmonium plyaer in tht song.. He is shown jus once, I think.. I wish they shot the entire song with Charu instead of Amir..
mohan
February 7, 2011
“Thoonganaragam, a not-bad CineMadurai entry”
Rangan Sir, enna sir “not bad”nu sollittu Thoonganagaram oru Thoonga naragamnu adhae breathla solliteenga.
Venkatesh
February 8, 2011
Is he Myshkin or Mysskin ?
bran1gan
February 8, 2011
MumbaiRamki: Reg. “In the final scenes, giving a copy of victor frankl’s ‘ Man’s search for meaning’, (which is about a person who comes out of holocoust )…” That’s is the exact kind of symbolic overstatement that doesn’t work for me. It’s the kind of thing KB used to do, and I’m not a fan at all.
And reg. Aboorva Sagotharargal, I’m talking about the cut from YG Mahendra to Cheran — not the victims tied up.
mohan
February 8, 2011
Hello Mr.Rangan, Typo Alert:Thoonganaragam???
bran1gan
February 8, 2011
mohan: lol. saw it. thanks.
MumbaiRamki
February 8, 2011
Thoongaa Nagaram : Nicely done . Nothing much to write i guess , its your standard ordinary people in cliched extraordinary situation with turn of characters , done in an intentionally comical way ..
Kiruba
February 9, 2011
Excuse me if wrong but isn’t JK Jayakrishnan and not that J Krishnamurti?
Goodness Elliotness
February 9, 2011
i think i noticed that Cheran says “thats’ not my name” when Judas calls him J Krishnamurthi, so its a reference and not the protagonist’s name.
Goodness Elliotness
February 9, 2011
agree on the man’s search for meaning, totally uncalled for; suddenly everybody is a philosopher.
bran1gan
February 9, 2011
Kiruba/Goodness Elliotness (?!!) — didn’t catch that “thats’ not my name” line. So it’s not his given name, then? As in, his given name is “JK Jayakrishnan” but Judas makes a “J Krishnamurti” dig based on those initials? That’s actually even more bizaare
Gradwolf
February 9, 2011
Yeah Judas says something like “But the name suits you” when JK says “That’s not my name”. Is there an explicit reference to JK Jayakrishnan? Guess I missed it.
Venki
February 9, 2011
Just saw the film. Will agree to most of your observations; the overstated symbolism with the Man’s Search for Meaning. And what about that Rashomon reference? Thought it was contrived and a see-i-am-the-filmmaker stunt just as you had mentioned, the girl with the blood in her dress (realism okay. But why such manipulation?)… It did have bursts of class; Lakshmi and YGee’s reaction on seeing Cheran’s sister, the head with the parakkum panthu song… On the whole middling
Kiruba
February 10, 2011
Gradwolf: JK is Jayakrishnan according to the judge who places the four under suspension. No reference elsewhere.
Hemanth
February 11, 2011
Kiruba, not that it’s going to change anyone’s perception, I heard the Judge say “J Krishnan”. No big deal, just for the record
Just loved the movie.
Goodness Elliotness
February 10, 2011
its a good film, very good in parts but the only problem for me with the film is that Mysskin tries to show off what his bookshelf and dvd collection is stacked with, i mean it may mean a whale of things for others but thats not what real directors do, subtle references would have been better, no references is also fine.
rameshram
February 10, 2011
I think the sollathan ninaikiren kabalam was somewhat like mysskin. this was a period when Sridhar ran out of things to say, MGR was infighting, and the drama-server sundaram days were behind him, he briefly experimented with avant garde cinema. naangu suvargal, arangetram,Naan avan illai,even pattina pravesam..and then Kamal and rajini happenned and annathai became a “star maker”
hope mysskin quickly discovers his kamal and rajini and stops torturing us with his version of “international cinema”.
Niranjan
February 12, 2011
I was looking forward to some comment from you regarding this
I seem to remember your disenchantment with how he talks big but delivers poor. This comment (particularly the last line) was extremely funny!
rameshram
February 10, 2011
while on the subject of C.V Sridhar
http://rameshram.wordpress.com/2011/02/10/c-v-sridhar-film-songs-post-nenjil-or-alayam-kathalikka-neramillai-kalyana-parisu-etc/
Rohan
February 10, 2011
So we’re ok if Quentin Tarantino litters his scenes with references but Mysskin not? Or is reference-dropping an earned luxury allowed only to those of a certain pedigree?
@
“the only problem for me with the film is that Mysskin tries to show off what his bookshelf and dvd collection is stacked with, i mean it may mean a whale of things for others but thats not what real directors do”
Anand
February 10, 2011
Once again a good Tamil film is being torn to shreds! Namakku Velayudham dhan gadhi
Goodness elliotness
February 11, 2011
I didn’t say so, it didn’t look natural atleast the man’s search for meaning thing. I’m not a fan of tarantino and i’m not in a position to say whether his references are natural or contrived because wholly his films are alien to me. This film on the other hand is very good except where the director tries to infuse his interests on the audience, no one really likes the friend who keeps suggesting what is best etc. That’s my view atleast to each man his own.
KP
February 12, 2011
@rameshram
KB was never a star director Rajini never acted in KB movie after he became superstar. He only produced them. Kamal aspired but never had the same box office pull.
KP
February 12, 2011
Rajini did do a small song with suhasini in Kb movie
rameshram
February 12, 2011
avargal, mundru mudicchu ninaitale inikkum, thillu mullu,
not to mention the kavithalaya produced sp muthuraman films: aadu puliattam, priya, netrikkan , puthu kavithai,naan mahaan alla,sri raghavendarar, annamalai and muthu.
Kabalam should be calling rajini “meal ticket”
bran1gan
February 15, 2011
Rohan: reg. QT, he’s a very elegant filmmaker who folds his references into his scripts. His films never stop to tell the audience: “take note of this reference here.” It’s done with a wink, very casually, and there’s always a narrative aspect to that moment beyond the reference, so the film keeps moving. I don’t find that with many others.
MumbaiRamki
February 15, 2011
I thought the victor frankl reference wad quite apt,even if it was done with some high ‘volume’ . Esp , with reference to a kid whose mind was subjected to a situational holocaust ( even if he commits murders), it was nice..
Hemanth
February 16, 2011
BR/Others, agreed QT may not thrust such references on the audience, but he has recourse to “Director’s Commentary”, which unfortunately, our Directors are unfairly denied (except for Gautam Menon, who should be applauded on this count).
MumbaiRamki, yes it was apt, but question is what difference does it make? How does it alter how we view these characters?
iba
February 16, 2011
I think most of this guy’s shots are as gimmicky as gvm’s usage of english and as someone had said above he should stop thrusting his version of ‘world cinema’ on us. He might be anointing himself an auteur, but how good is he? And the way he drops references so explicitly! turns me off. Regarding his nandalala, i thought it was one sentimental pethal through and through, steeped in its ‘tamil’ sensibilities. And I wonder what he really saw in the original jap movie that inspired him to make this…..
Rohit Ramachandran
May 21, 2011
“He does wondrous things with his camera, and he even justifies his inverted compositions with a flashback that plants this gaze in the viewer’s mind – but there are times you feel he’s simply showing off: look-ma-I’m-a-filmmaker. The mostly excellent initial portions unspool in quiet dread, playing games with the audience’s patience and attention spans – but once the game is given away, things become unintentionally comical, the apparent work of someone who’s made a first half that he wants to make and a second half that he feels will go over well with the sensation-seeking Tamil-film viewer.”
Exactly! I don’t understand how people couldn’t see through all of this. I personally HATED the film. I felt it was commercial garbage masquerading as art.
http://premiercritic.blogspot.com/2011/02/yudham-sei-2010.html