- On the surface, Payanam is chalk to Nadunisi Naaigal’s cheese, but they’re both refreshingly unformulaic films, they’re both unburdened by music-video interludes, they both dispense with romantic tracks, and they both tip a hat to Mani Ratnam. (If Payanam invokes the pan-Indian success of Roja, Nadunisi Naaigal recreates a scene with this dialogue: “Yengirundhu vandhadhu indha kai neetra pazhakkam?” The latter film, of course, does not need to be named, and if you think it does, I’m banishing you to a classroom where you will pick up a piece of chalk and write on the blackboard, one hundred times, “I will try to keep up with landmark Tamil films.” No, seriously.)
- Radhamohan is still a better writer than director. There’s no finesse to his filmmaking, no effort to go beyond what’s on page, and he doesn’t think film — but this is easily his best effort. Coming out of the sentimental-cinema mould may have been the best thing that happened to him. (The weakest portions here are the ones where a baby-faced terrorist softens in the angelic presence of a little Muslim girl. Awww, but no thanks!)
- Oddly enough, the trailer for Dum Maaro Dum appeared before Nadunisi Naaigal, and it was stunning. The hepped-up reworking of the opening bars of the older song (the sonic equivalent of subliminal visuals), the sun-ripened images, the shock cut to the girl in the bikini, the use of a ring of smoke to spell the title — forget our directors, forget our actors, just who are these unsung heroes who put together such stunning promos? Are they ad guys? I wonder if they’ll take to making films, like how David Fincher did. I don’t know how strong they’ll be in terms of narrative, but their visual grammar is stunning. At least they’re directors, in the sense that they think film.
- You could call Payanam a cross between a disaster movie (say, Airport) and a Mouli stage play. There’s such an air of bonhomous familiarity to those who grew up in the seventies and the eighties, reading Vikatan jokes about actresses named “Kalasri.” Yes, that’s a name brought up here, and in case you don’t already know, in jokes about actresses, the name of the actress is always capped off with “sri.”
- The film is brisk and never boring. But its biggest achievement may be in proving that it is possible to sneak various genres past the barbed-wire boundaries of Tamil cinema (okay, the hijack thriller is not exactly a genre, I know), and yet hew to the must-haves of Tamil cinema (namely sentiment, comedy, heroism). So if filmmakers continue to blame audiences for wanting the same thing, we now know where that finger really needs to be pointed.
- In a moderately effective moment of schmaltz, a priest reads out from the Bible and everyone listens to his Tamil translation of “The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want…” But why are all the names of characters and places, along with the dates and times, in English? It’s interesting that the non-Tamil dialogues are rendered with Tamil subtitles, but the captions remain alien to those who cannot read English. Or is the implication that there are no such people anymore?
- Radhamohan should consider making a full-fledged spoof on Tamil cinema next. There are some crackling one-liners that might have crackled even more had Tamizh Padam not stolen that thunder. (And let’s brush aside, for the moment, the not-insignificant fact that these ceaseless one-liners diffuse the tension that there are people, here, who could be killed. Baby steps. Baby steps.)
- Shouldn’t the same baby-steps logic be applicable to Nadunisi Naaigal too? Why, then, is it so much more difficult to overlook the problems with this film, which, if nothing else, offers the welcome sight of a big-name director shepherding a no-name cast in the service of utterly unpleasant material?
- Perhaps it’s because, after Vettaiyaadu Vilaiyaadu and now Nadunisi Naaigal, I’m not a fan of Gautham Vasudev Menon’s depiction of psychopaths. That whole OTT, look-ma-I’m-acting spectacle, replete with very odd pauses and inflections in the line readings – that just yanks me out of the story being told.
- It’s all for the better, then, that the actors are mostly unfamiliar faces, who come to us with little baggage. You don’t want a big star confessing to licking feet or peeking through bathroom windows – or do you?
- Speaking of baggage, I’m taken back to the scene from Dil Chahta Hai where Akshay Khanna first runs into Dimple Kapadia. He’s passing by her house, and she’s stranded outside with her luggage, helpless. He offers to help, she refuses, she tries to lift a suitcase, the handle breaks, he offers again, and she accepts. Now, did Farhan Akhtar just intend this scene as it plays on the surface – as in, this guy meets this woman under interesting circumstances? Or is there another layer – as in, this guy meets this woman under interesting circumstances, and she… comes with baggage?
- Anyway, back to this film, after that Brief Rambling (hey, what do you know, another BR™!), the best scene is the one with the first sexual act. After the discussions that unspooled here, I dare not label this rape or otherwise, but by focusing on just her face, a multitude of emotions is allowed to spill forth. She may not have looked at him that way ever, but did a warm body on a lonely night alleviate her other misgivings? Of such fascinating complexities are human beings made.
- At a theoretical level, there are interesting subversions in the telling of this story. Instead of a gradual revelation of the miscreant’s motives, for instance, we are dealt the dope right away. The why comes first, then the what, and it’s usually the other way round.
- And yet, the structure – part cat-and-mouse chase, part interior monologue – doesn’t hold up well enough to offer an immersive experience. We are always on the outside looking in.
- And it also becomes fairly predictable after a point. Even I — notorious in my circles for never being able to second-guess anything before it’s actually shown on screen with a big, fat ta-dah — was able to deduce the truth about the burn victim in the Jedi-council robes. (I’d name a film I thought about here, but that might count as a spoiler, and as you all know, I’m such a non-spoilery writer.)
- That entire Eyes Wide Shut-in-Bombay segment was bizarre (as it was probably meant to be), but I was intrigued by the fact that, for a while thereon, there were curtains everywhere – spangly curtains, bead curtains, plastic curtains in the ICU, the gauzy sheets on the four-poster bed…
- An eight-year-old stands outside a gate. The camera pulls back from him, above the gate and to this side. The gate opens and a 13-year-old enters. Simple. Nice.
- An obsessed man has the object of his obsession in front of him — cowering, available — and he wants to strip down to his trunks and dive into the pool? Uh, excuse me?
- Despite having to face, on the big screen, the sight of Vadivukkarasi in a yellow miniskirt, Sigappu Rojakkal mined this material with a lot more skill. It had two exquisite Raja numbers to boot. (Yes, there’s a woman here named Sharada as well.)
Copyright ©2011 Baradwaj Rangan, The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Posted in: Bullet-point Report
Just Another Film Buff
February 19, 2011
I will try to keep up with landmark Tamil films
I will try to keep up with landmark Tamil films
I will try to keep up with landmark Tamil films
I will try to keep up with landmark Tamil films
[… and many more deleted]
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 19, 2011
JAFB: It’s soooo easy with cut-and-paste, no? :-p
LikeLike
Just Another Film Buff
February 19, 2011
Naalu pera sirikka vekkanumna edhuvum thappilla…
LikeLiked by 1 person
prakash
February 19, 2011
no not kalasri. it must be jiginA sree
LikeLike
Anirudh
February 19, 2011
It’s Nayakan, right.. 🙂
LikeLike
complicateur
February 19, 2011
“Ellaam namma kaththu kuduththathu thaan” is a lovely rejoinder. Noiselessly delivered and underlined the subtext in that scene so well! That and a shot of Charu sitting huddled on the terrace are two of my favorite scenes in a film that I like a little less than some others.
And what is this, you ‘didn’t mind a Radha Mohan’ film? Maybe even preferred it to a Goutham film? Ufortunately unable to watch either as I’m not in Chennai. An old school acquaintance had a small role in the film (the junior artiste who plays the double). Will probably catch both (and Yudhdham Sei) in theaters next week in Chennai.
LikeLike
Raj Balakrishnan
February 19, 2011
“Yengirundhu vandhadhu indha kai neetra pazhakkam?” – Nayakan?
LikeLike
Shankar
February 19, 2011
@JAFB….you are kidding, right? You do know the leader…:-)
On many levels, Vettaiyadu felt like Dirty Harry to me…it will be interesting to see how NN plays out. But I agree, the depiction of the psycho in VV was a bit OTT.
LikeLike
Ramya
February 19, 2011
Saw the Telugu version of Payanam, and really enjoyed it. For a Telugu movie, its a refreshing change. While the priests Bible reading and the little girls dialogues were cringe-inducing, Radhamohan was remarkably restrained when you think of the opportunities for melodrama – for example, with the reactions of the passengers relatives, or even a rant on the ways of the media.
And for all the fun the movie makes of the lack of logic in mainstream cinema (in the movie, there’s a bit where the director of a mainstream cinema is ridiculed because the Muslim terrorist speaks in Telugu in his movie) this movie makes some of the same logical errors – including the Muslim terrorist
AND all the IAS officers and NSG commandos speaking in Telugu. People in glass houses…..
Nevertheless, good effort.
LikeLike
Harish S Ram
February 19, 2011
*the thing with gautham & his psycho scripts is that he feels serene in that field but poor him, that he can’t realise that he is chalking out cardboard characters which we are done to death in the by-gone era.
*These psychopaths somehow resemble frankenstein’s monster.
*the action sequence in vinaithandi varuvaya, the villains in vetaiyadu, gothika of pachaikili. maybe he is just stretching the plot of jeevan’s with every attempt of it there on.
LikeLike
vivek
February 19, 2011
– engendhu vandhudhu indha pazhakkam
– ellam namma industry lendhudhan
– eppo idhellam niruthuveenga
– avana nirutha chol….naa yosikaren….
“indha rate la pona namla yaarum pudikka mudiyadhu. Pudhusa hospital katuvom. enna ila…..ellarkum free maruthuvam …. ulagathula saave irukkakoodadhu” – is the best piece of comedy a psycho can do……since that has already come in VV, I hope NN doesn’t have such rofl moments
BTW, you remember the colour of vadivukkarasi’s mini skirt??…seriously??? – What a man!!
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 20, 2011
vivek: Reg, the miniskirt, certain childhood traumas never really go away.
LikeLike
abinav
February 20, 2011
But it is the soft-hearted, “I love you” spewing Veera who dives in to the swimming pool, no? He wouldn’t want to hurt or force the girl he loves. All he wants is someone to love him back, protect him from the orgy that the world around him is. And is it not natural that he spend his time covered by water – for the purity it represents (it even rains!) – with his beloved?
Wasn’t the supposed ‘twist in the tale’ be a tip of the hat to Psycho? And it is only then you realize the power of Hitchcock and the simple fact that the lesser OTT the character is, the more chilling is the revelation. You, in your mind, expect an OTT character to do stuff that is over the top. The only way then you end up then chilling the viewer’s spine is by going gross on the ‘how’ rather than the ‘what’ or the ‘why’. It is exactly why I stopped caring about the ‘why’ of the cruelty, or even empathize for Samar.
And, surprisingly, you don’t mention The Great Indian Social Commentary that every director is obliged to serve at the very end. I mean, what was that?!
LikeLike
Shankar
February 20, 2011
@Vivek, That miniskirt was yellow in color…with a yellow + pink top to boot!! 🙂 As Baddy says, some traumas are here to stay!!
LikeLike
Shankar
February 20, 2011
And speaking of miniskirts, the mini dress (or however you call it) that is worn by Sridevi’s sales colleague (in the store) is so out of place in that store, that it is laughable. That poor girl, in the scenes that she appears, is constantly fighting to keep it from sliding up!! 🙂
LikeLike
Hemanth
February 20, 2011
“That whole OTT, look-ma-I’m-acting spectacle, replete with very odd pauses and inflections in the line readings – that just yanks me out of the story being told.”
Amen BR. I forced myself (so often) to ignore the “acting” and focus on what Gautam Menon was treating on the screen, but gave up after a point.
Got to give it to Gautam Menon. In an industry that tries to conceal it’s “source”, Mr. Menon tries to match detail-to-detail in the true sense of an homage.
LikeLike
Anand
February 20, 2011
I’d say NN is a neatly done film. The absence of BGM was never felt. That speaks volume of the film maker’s calibre.
“And yet, the structure – part cat-and-mouse chase, part interior monologue – doesn’t hold up well enough to offer an immersive experience. We are always on the outside looking in.” IMHO, that’s what the director intended to do – provide a voyeuristic experience to his audience!
As for Payanam, what do I say? It could have been a good DD play. Unfortunately, Radha Mohan’s opinion of a good film is one where the hero does not jump from top of the building to catch a helicopter. Fairly low standards – I’d say!
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 20, 2011
abinav: LOL on The Great Indian Social Commentary. Yeah! I’m baffled that movies as still seen as vehicles for messages. By the time that message started playing out, the entire theatre was up and filing towards the door and discussing the film. I doubt there was a single person listening.
LikeLike
maruramu
February 20, 2011
BR, if u don’t mind can u correct the typo “unpsooled”….thanks…
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 20, 2011
maruramu: Thanks.
LikeLike
Karthik
February 20, 2011
Completely unconnected – if her name was not ‘Vadivukkarasi’, would you have fondly recalled her in a miniskirt, I wonder!
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 20, 2011
Karthik: Actually Vadivukkarasi means the queen of shapeliness and the name is certainly not the problem 🙂 I think it has more to do with the fact that certain body types look odd in certain dresses. In an era where Zeenat and Parveen were setting the standard for sexy dresses, it’s certainly odd to see Vadivukkarasi being a glam girl. Just as odd as it would be to see, say, Savithri or Saroja Devi like this.
I thought Latha was one heroine who could carry off glam outfits very well. Remember her in that hot pink figure-hugger in the lovely Neela nayanangalil? (Couldn’t find the song on YouTube)
LikeLike
Nithya
February 20, 2011
A Bitty Ruminations or Brief Ramblings on Malaysia Vasudevan? Pretty please?
LikeLike
Udhav
February 20, 2011
/////// Remember her in that hot pink figure-hugger in the lovely Neela nayanangalil? (Couldn’t find the song on YouTube)////////
You’re the best. You actually went and searched on youtube? On behalf of all your readers: We are so proud of you. 😀
LikeLike
rameshram
February 20, 2011
“ovely Neela nayanangalil”
I have always wondered if , when kannadasan(or was it vaali) wrote “pala kodi ninaivu vandhadho” , if he was (tamil) jumbling “pakkala nilapadi”
an aside, as long as latha was on camera, MGR’s fingers would go sticky from exploring dark places. that used to be one serious pastime , of where the nattai kaakum kai was going in each latha song…
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 20, 2011
Nithya: Holy crap, he passed away. I thought you were making a random request. He was the subject of the very first Bitty Rumination. May he rest in peace!
LikeLike
Rajesh Krishnan
February 21, 2011
Thanks for the brief Rambling on DCH . Never thought of the excess baggage scene before,but now definitely makes sense.
NN – coming to this movie , full marks to Gautam for going into an so called uncomfortable territory for film makers. And doing a thriller without BGM deserves full marks in in itself (hope RGV watches the movie too and realizes horror doesn’t mean screeching/ ear shattering BGM). Interesting to know that Meenakshi Amma’s character was first offered to Tabu , who wasn’t very comfortable with the role. The main reason the movie worked for me, was that character and the way it was portrayed . Would have been wonderful to see Tabu carry it off.
But after Easan,Yuddham Sei and now NN , Chennai seems so unsafe!! Can we have a happy Chennai movie plz !
LikeLike
vijay
February 21, 2011
You actually preferred a Radha Mohan’s film to GVM’s? what is the world coming to?
I have always thought Sigappu Rojakkal was ahead of its times. At a time when we had movies like Madurayai meeta sundara paandian and Pilot Premnath coming out at regular intervals, BR made something drastically different. Even in Hollywood, Silence of the Lambs came a good 13 years later dusting off the genre again and spawning a whole lot of wannabes.I guess GVM did’nt do himself any favor by dragging BR and Sigappu rojakkal into his promo shows and thereby inviting comparison. We know anyways that he is inspired more by Hollywood B-grade thrillers than anything else. So this sudden homage to BR(especially when GVM had already touched on this genre a bit in Vettaiyaadu vilayaadu) didnt do him anything good, it looks like.
LikeLike
bran1gan
February 21, 2011
vijay: Reg. “BR made something drastically different…” yenna solradhu! BR-nu initials irundhaale konjam trendsetter-nu kelvi 😉
LikeLike
ramc
February 22, 2011
The Psycho in Nadunisi Naaigal
http://mybiasedimpressions.blogspot.com/2011/02/midnight-dogs.html
LikeLike
kaminey
February 22, 2011
Is that the first (even if vaguely) self-appreciative comment by you ever? Success is getting to your head, eh? 🙂
LikeLike
Udhav
February 23, 2011
The guy was so pissed off and wrote this: http://www.clapsandboos.com/reviews/the-story-of-midnight-dogs
LikeLike
Suganth
February 23, 2011
With all this BR fixation, are you sad that you named your blog BC? 🙂
LikeLike
Ram
May 18, 2011
brangan, here’s what you’ve been searching for all these years 😉
LikeLike
bran1gan
May 18, 2011
Ram: Ungalukku oru aayiram e-porkaasugal 🙂 BTW, eppavo ezhudhinadha gnaabagam vachukittu… amazing dedication, sir! Now if you could find “Loving is a game” from this film…
And why does the YouTube link say Shankar Ganesh?
LikeLike
Ram
May 19, 2011
BR, denku denku. I had watched Yudham Sei last weekend, loved the movie and wanted to read your review. I couldn’t find the “loving is a game” song but came across some other MGR/Latha songs… and my morning’s work is gone 😉 The songs are composed by MSV, of course.
LikeLike
Pradyumna M
May 20, 2011
Hey BR did you catch the trailer for Zoya’s next? ZNMD? If not,here’s the link
LikeLike
rameshram
May 20, 2011
They should make this a WRITTEN rule in bollywood. you can’t play a 20 year old man unless youre a 40 year old man trying to take over super star hood from fifty year old men.
even if youre depicted as a 30 something, you must do things more appropriate to a college freshman on a spring break in pebble beach fla, than to someone who might have a mortgage(or export order of poplyne shirts) to worry about.
women are allowed to be very similar cardboard cut outs too.
LikeLike