With just a handful of movies, Selvaraghavan has announced himself a major filmmaker, and it falls on us to look at his latest venture, Irandaam Ulagam, as the (worthy) next installment in a thematically connected oeuvre as well as a (problematic) standalone film. The former, first. At least for a while, the love story here has its polarities reversed. Earlier in this director’s career, the men drove the movies. They were the actors – the women merely the acted upon. And there’s a hint of that quality – sexism? Misogyny? – here when we alight on a faraway world where, a voiceover informs us, the women get no respect and are treated like objects. (The film keeps cutting between two love stories, one on this distant planet, the other on earth – it is, in short, both sci-fi and chick flick, spiced with a dash of action-adventure. Is there another mainstream filmmaker who stomps across genre boundaries as boldly as Selvaraghavan?) There’s no love in this other world – only lust. It’s no surprise, then, when we’re introduced to Varna (Anushka Shetty) and we note that her face is perpetually clenched in a scowl.
And yet, the film provides her the “heroine introduction shot,” a mini-action sequence where she bests a fantastic and fearsome creature of the wild. In the process, she even executes a somersault. No such flourishes await the hero (Arya, who plays Madhu on earth and Maruvan on the other planet). We meet Madhu as he fulfills the traditional heroine-duties. He may not be shepherding schoolchildren across the road by halting traffic on either side, but he comes close – he volunteers for blood drives and spends his spare time with patients in a hospital. Even on earth, it’s the heroine who makes the first move. Ramya (Anushka Shetty again) falls for Madhu’s soft and kind-hearted nature and decides to tell him she wants to marry him. And like the heroine in one of the early Selvaraghavan films, he shrinks away – he says no.
At least Maruvan aligns himself somewhat with our expectations of a Selvaraghavan hero by falling for Varna. He spies on her as she bathes in a river, and, later, pounces on her from behind – only, she turns around and knees him in his man parts. And when Madhu lands up on this planet, she makes him her slave and calls him maadu, cow. She proves she’s better than Madhu when it comes to shinnying up trees and performing tricks and wielding a sword – and she’s the latest addition to Selvaraghavan’s recent gallery of strong women, a turnaround that can probably be traced back to the prostitute in Pudhupettai whose emotional blackmail ensured that the hero conferred legitimacy on her child. Thereon, we’ve had the ass-kicking expedition leader in Aayirathil Oruvan and the steely caregiver of Mayakkam Enna, who bore her husband’s eccentricities with the patience of a saint and determination of a pit bull.
The men, by contrast, are emotional fools. Selvaraghavan really makes the most complicated love stories. (Even when his films aren’t quite “love stories,” they lay out long and torturous routes to happily-ever-after.) After rejecting Ramya’s proposal, Madhu falls for her – and this time, she says no. She’s engaged to someone else now, but she doesn’t fail to tell Madhu that she’s going to Goa for a medical camp (she’s a doctor) and that her bus will leave at 8 a.m. Without these nudges, he’d be nowhere. And unlike in earlier Selvaraghavan films, they’re peers. They’re both educated, they’re both fair-skinned, they’re both “civilised,” and they belong to the same socioeconomic class, as does the man whom Ramya is going to marry. (He backs out eventually due to a shameful reason that does his gender no favours.) This is a drastic change for this filmmaker, this former bard of the brutes. The obstacles to love are different – death, distance, perhaps even destiny. He’s steering away from his comfort zones, and it’s thrilling to watch.
But some things haven’t changed – thankfully, in my opinion, and your mileage may vary. The frankness, for instance, with which we appraise the objects of our affection (and in Selvaraghavan’s films, they’re sometimes really objects). But again, the objectified, this time, is the man. In the film’s most quintessentially Selvaraghavan moment, one of Ramya’s girlfriends notes that Madhu may turn out to be the kind of guy who burns her with a cigarette on their wedding night, and then goes on to evaluate parts of his anatomy, eyes and lips and thighs (thighs!). Though in this respect, Maruvan returns the favour by coolly eying the contents of Varna’s splayed skirt. This film too has a lovelorn dirge sung by Dhanush, and a messianic character like the protagonist of Aayirathil Oruvan. (Here, he’s a prophet of love.) And once again, Selvaraghavan gives us a glimpse into his obsession with father figures, combining this with his obsession with fecal matter. If the protagonist of 7G Rainbow Colony described himself as “therula kadakkara saani,” and if the characters in Mayakkam Enna kept referring to “aai,” we get a scene here where Madhu cleans his wheelchair-bound father’s bottom.
How does this father turn up on a scooter in a later scene, around the midway point? This nicely surreal moment sets into motion the quotes we saw at the beginning, about there being many worlds and that we inhabit many selves. The crux of Irandaam Ulagam is frightfully poignant: it deals with a love lost and the efforts to help this lost lover gain love. We should be weeping buckets – I sat there dry-eyed. Which brings us to Irandaam Ulagam as a standalone film. It’s a love story without a shred of genuine passion. We keep hearing about this grand, exalted emotion that will make flowers bloom, and we see those flowers bloom, but we don’t feel a thing. It’s all abstraction. Or put differently, everything’s on paper, not on screen. A teary-eyed Madhu says, at some point, “Naanga romba sandhoshama irundhom,” that he was very happy with Ramya. The line makes you think of years of bliss, while what they shared were mere moments, and even these moments aren’t quite built up to.
She falls for him, and distances herself from him, and then drops hints, and when he picks up on those hints and comes calling, she calls him a porukki (though he’s far from a loafer in the sense the word usually conjures up in a Selvaraghavan movie), and a few minutes later, he’s her “Madhu baby.” As for Varna, she remains indifferent to Maruvan’s overtures and then she comes to hate him for clipping her wings, and then, without us really seeing why, she begins to refer to him as her husband. Selvaraghavan acknowledges this confusion. He writes a line for Varna about her fluctuating emotions, and he offers visual cues for falling in love (rain on earth, snow on the other planet). But we, the audience, need to feel these things, not just see them or hear about them – and that doesn’t happen. Everything is low-key. The scenes don’t land hard enough. Maybe this is how Selvaraghavan wanted it, without the purple poetry that seeped through his earlier romantic tracks. But I, for one, felt the loss. (And it’s not as if this is a subtle movie, exactly.)
We get purple skies, though. Along with neon green and orange and yellow. We get exotic birds of prey that keep flitting across the landscape. These special effects are nicely done, especially the lion with the head of a Rasta rapper and the tail of a scorpion. But otherwise, we don’t seem to be in another planet, just another country – and not that different a country, either, given that the people there (a bunch of Caucasians) speak the most “local” Tamil, calling each other anney and mouthing such cautions as “Dei innikki nee saava pore.” We could be hearing lines from Pudhupettai, and the Chennai connection is (inadvertently? Deliberately?) underlined by this group of Tamil-speakers that worships a powerful woman they call… Amma. This Gaia-like being is played by an actress who looks too young to be assuming Earth Mother duties (or maybe that was the point) – and the rest of the casting doesn’t work either (though it says something that these foreigners, at times, end up doing better lip-sync than most of our heroines). The king with the silver crown and the velvet-curtain robes kept cracking me up. Everyone looks like they’re playing dress-up in a school play. Did no one giggle on the set? Was no one aware of how far from the writer-director’s vision on paper the film had crawled?
And the leads never catch fire. Anushka Shetty does the warrior-princess duties well enough, but given the vagaries in her character(s), her emotional scenes with her hero(es) just don’t connect. (Some of that class warfare might have infused a bit of push-pull chemistry, without which we’re left with nothing.) And Arya, with his bland urban-boy looks (and with chalk-white vampire makeup in the role of Maruvan), is the most unlikely Selvaraghavan hero – imagine Aadhi from Kaadhal Kondain as that film’s protagonist. When a character returns from the dead, you’d think he’d be surprised (I certainly was) – but he plays the moment as though it was inevitable. He certainly brings physical heft to the part of Maruvan, and I could see why Dhanush, Selvaraghavan’s in-house repertory theatre of one, wasn’t cast, but I missed him terribly in certain scenes, like the one where Madhu pretends to be in love with Ramya’s professor. Dhanush would have made it a golden “porukki moment.” Love it or hate it, the film would have come alive. Here, the scene sits still on screen and quietly dies.
An edited version of this piece can be found here.
Copyright ©2013 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Varun
November 23, 2013
Mr. Rangan, what a brilliant review! I have been tossing the movie around in my head all day, trying to come to terms with my own complicated reactions to it, and here you have managed to put it in words so beautifully..
Apart from all the things you mentioned, I felt the movie also had a certain dream logic to it.. In fact sometimes the scenes in the other world made more ‘sense’ than the scenes in the ‘real’ world – the person Ramya is engaged to just walks in and says he’s going to marry someone else because the dowry is more; Madhu’s response when Ramya comes to his house.. I’m struggling to put a finger on it, but lots of it seemed a bit ‘off’, bordering on the surreal.
LikeLike
rajesh
November 23, 2013
Good review Baradwaj Rangan. This time, I made sure I don’t read any reviews in internet before watching the movie. Took a break and watched the film for matinee itself friday.
I personally liked the movie. For me, It was a simple love story. It was not complicated like how Selva generally does. Since it was simple it should have been subtle to give a word of mouth. Perhaps Selva doesn’t want it to be subtle and just remain simple. It could be that we expected many Selva Moments in the film. Perhaps he didn’t want to have such moments.
Personally I didn’t like Ramya’s friend describing about a men’s anatomy especially when she is seriously planning to propose at that moment. Do girls really describe about the whole body of a men ? Especially people in medical profession ? Arya’s friend asking her whether she is super figure is just not right.
Are bar’s, retro lighted club songs common across the globe ?
If Selva had avoided these, the film would still remain 200% the same.
The VFX was excellent in the film.
Arya was definitely a let down. Sometimes his vazhinji-fai scenes as Maruvan were silly. Wondering whether Arya is from Bala factory.
The film wholly rests on Anushka’s shoulders. She doesn’t disappoint.
And regarding the God, Amma. Why not as they have casted ? Many Indian girls became mother even before 19. And if NTR, Sivaji, Gemini, Sivakumar can become Krishna, Siva, Murugan at the age of 40 itself. There are numerous Ayyapa films in which the person portraying Ayyapa is just 20 years old.
Good effort by Selvaraghavan. But he missed few things in the film which didn’t provide the word of mouth from most / all (except his cult fans).
LikeLike
ramitbajaj01
November 23, 2013
Sir, 1st line- announce himself ‘as’ a major filmmaker.
I wish you appoint me as your support staff who gets to read your prose first of all.:-)
LikeLike
MANK
November 23, 2013
BR:Irandaam Ulagam, as the (worthy) next installment in a thematically connected oeuvre as well as a (problematic) standalone film
This seems to be a troubled period for auteurs After SLB ,now selvaraghavan. It seems that they have lost the ability to make stand alone films and their films needed to be seen as a continuation in their body of work rather than as an individual unit. i have the feeling that you are a selva fan,but after reading your review i couldn’t make out whether you enjoyed this experience, or consider it as a good effort or bad effort or you found it some kind of a flawed masterpiece like ayairathil oruvan(I think that was the term you used to describe it?).
LikeLike
MANK
November 23, 2013
@BR
Is there some problem with the site?. It is taking an enormous amount of time for comments to be moderated and uploaded
LikeLike
Prakash
November 23, 2013
@rangan
I came here from your edited(much?) take on the Hindu, in which they have mercilessly scissored your comments on the special FX. Liking the unedited review much more.
Last things first. “Maruvan” in the film, and then your Dhanush mention prompted me to do a quick google. Posting an interesting link here.
http://cinemasgallery.blogspot.in/2010/12/maruvan-movie-stills.html
Whaddya think? Not just about Dhanush but Andrea as well? I rather like her here. She looks more “alive” than Anushka(and prettier too, but maybe that’s just me) somehow, no? 🙂
And have I missed something or you seem to have skipped any mention of Anirudh or Harris Jeyaraj? Or perhaps you found nothing worthy of mention there? 😉
Coming to the review itself, you have(for once) pretty much encapsulated the feelings of the average movie-goer, reg. the White dudes talking “local” tamil, clowny looking “King”, and “Amma”(I am guessing the brief given to that actress was to keep smiling and wear that dreamy-yet-profound-font-of-wisdom look till the director says “cut”).
In fact, the whole “Second world” setup, other than the Special effects and brilliant camerawork(which, I feel, owe more to the guys in charge of the respective departments rather than to any grand design of Selva, notwithstanding directorial inputs), seemed corny and silly to me, especially when Amma started going “Indha ulagathila Kaadhal mottukkal pookanum”. WTF? Did Selva actually try to say these lines out loud to himself? Surely he would have started cringing/laughing(The crowds in my theatre did the former first but repeated tomfoolery on the parts of most of the white “local” characters made them switch to the latter soon enough. A special mention here of the hilarious “Amma naa summa illada” and “Amma Canteen” jokes, which came as welcome relief from the proceedings on screen 🙂 )
Even though I found the film a pain to sit through, I still find, as is usual with Selvaraghavan , that this was a film crammed with little details like the ones you have mentioned, which somewhat mitigate the overall feeling of ennui.
My grouse with Arya was that, knowing his woefully limited range as an Actor(the only films he shines are light rom-coms like BEB & Raja Rani or stony-faced character sketches like Naan Kadavul), he should have thought twice before taking up roles like these, which demand as much, if not more, work on his facial muscles as he has put into those of the four-point-something packs on his torso. It was indeed funny to see him trying to contort his face into some expression more complex but his face would keep simplifying into the same two-and-half stock expressions he has so far shown himself capable of pulling off.
Kind of like Imran Khan in Hindi, Rangan?
“most unlikely Selvaraghavan hero – imagine Aadhi from Kaadhal Kondain as that film’s protagonist. “
Right on the money. It was as if Selva has tweaked his standard first-hero-second-hero template into some weird story where both roles are played a Selva-second-hero type.
And what’s with the Hero seeing Heroine’s face everywhere. This is the sort of old Tamil Cinema cliches I wish Selva would avoid regurgitating. Surely a creative mind like his can think up something better than that.
And the lame name-calling. “Maadu”, “Kuppa Raja” et al. Well, I guess, the actual names aren’t that much of a consolation, either. Much of the audience in my theater sat there mind-fu*ked when Anushka went all berserk with the “I love you, Madhubalakrishnan” cries. Surely you shouldn’t be springing out-of-the-blue shocks like that on the audience, Selva 😉
I guess he felt a twinge of remorse there as well, seeing that he bumped off Anushka’s character almost immediately to spare us more of the nonsense.
Selvaraghavan is much younger(in terms of number of films) than Manirathnam Or Balachander, but guys like him and Gautham Menon are already feeling stale with the dialogue deliveries. There is a disturbing sameness to Selva/GVM’s characters, especially the way they mouth dialogues. Selva tries to mask this stale smell by rooting them in visually different settings and roles, but the scent remains overpowering.
When Arya started with his “Koosudhu” lecture to Varna towards the climax, it was like Kathir reincarnated from 7G Rainbow Colony. Similar voice, same tone, same modulation. Deja vu….. 😦
LikeLike
vk
November 23, 2013
This movie sucked big time. Lyrics, bgm , screenplay , graphics. Serves me right for watching this after being warned. Last few movies from this director show consistent deterioration.
If there is a producer willing to make another movie with selvaraghavan , please think long and hard.
LikeLike
DON Vito Corleone
November 23, 2013
Did u speak about the movie to selvaraghavan,brangan?…..
LikeLike
kk
November 24, 2013
I THINK YOU ARE A fan. the movie sucked big time.. give me 100 mindless masala action movies to this.,
LikeLike
lowlylaureate
November 24, 2013
Oh i must have seen a different Irandam Ulagam, then.
LikeLike
Udhay Sankar
November 24, 2013
pudhupettai review that appeared in the hindu…http://www.hindu.com/fr/2006/06/02/stories/2006060202350300.htm & your own review of pudhupettai…https://baradwajrangan.wordpress.com/2006/05/30/review-pudhupettai/
these two contrasting reviews can give a lot about how the same movie can reach out differently to audiences…..don’t they……
LikeLike
Rakesh
November 24, 2013
Harris Jayaraj has become the S.A Rajkumar of this generation, only with superior sound engineering, it is a miracle, his songs top the I-Tunes download charts, maybe this generation has retrograde amnesia when it comes to tune recognition !!
LikeLike
nivazr
November 24, 2013
There are lots of golden moments in the first half, second half was the failure which is completely annoying…
LikeLike
nivazr
November 24, 2013
This is mine 😉
Selvaraghavan, known for his magnificent way of conveying love stories is back with his new venture Irandam Ulagam, a love story but this time unfortunately he misses the term magnificent by miles.
Irandam Ulagam starts off beautifully without any hasten, Selva portraying two different love stories in different worlds brilliantly. The story commence with love struggles of two couples, Madhu-Ramya and Maruman-Varna respectively. The first one happens in the normal world and the later one in an alien world where no one knows what love is, including the couple. The rest of the story is all about how the parallel universe’s Jehovah shows them what true love is all about.
The lighter moments on love falling under the normal world and the fantasy action sequences were rolling all over the foreign world. Selva was so keen on developing the characters and the environment passionately in the first half where we could get a good expectation for the second half but when the second part starts it’s a complete chaos. Foreign people speaking in Tamil is a good thought but when hearing some dialogues even when their mouth was closed looks totally terrible and this happens even with the lead characters also. We can hear Selva’s voice for most of the characters in the parallel world, is there any scarcity for dubbing artists? Can’t bear to see such tiny flaws in Selva’s movie.
The second half jumps completely to the fantasy world and this is where the movie falls ridiculously, it was pointless to the core with lots of boring moments. Arya as the central character was a complete let down, Selva who extract phenomenal performances from actors like Ravi krishna fails to do it with Arya here. He is nothing but a six pack hunk tossing up the villains all over the place. Anushka as angry young women fits in the ball as angry but not as young. She scored even better as a humble doctor especially in the initial proposal scenes. Apart from Arya and Anushka it was completely a fresh crew and Selva is the only one who dares to do such things.
From technical side, it was Ramji the cinematographer who got the first prize with a tremendous job, the frames are colorful and lively. The Visual effects team has worked hard to display the creative visuals of the new world, this include each and every living and non-living things. Harris’s songs are good but Anirudh’s background score didn’t live up to the hype. Weak screenplay and illogical sequences are the major setbacks of the movie.
Verdict – It would have been just a fail for others but it was Selvaraghavan so it’s an epic fail.
LikeLike
thotsvandi
November 24, 2013
The interesting first world love lacked its real world sense after they started to Goa. May be Selva was trying a metaphor 😛 I felt Selva started THIS as a movie and then lost himself into this trajectory of other worlds. I guess that alone would have been a more lovely movie. Somehow Anushka in this movie reminded me of Sonia Agarwal. I remember how I liked the 7/G rainbow colony climax scene where Sonia visits Ravikrishna from other world, it had a sort of credibility to it. That I felt was missing in this movie. And the plains full of flowers was simply ROFL only. There was no aesthetic sense in it. And then Arya calls the goddess with, ” nee vaamma polam”, like a school girl. And then one scene where, amma sits on the enemy’s hands like a couch, ah, the experiments selva puts us through.
LikeLike
oneWithTheH
November 25, 2013
“recent gallery of strong women and…Pudhuppettai” – The movie before that, “7G Rainbow…”, had a strong female lead too. Did you miss that?
Ohh, I am loving Dhanush’s number from this movie. Anybody here think it’s “Hotel California” inspired?
LikeLike
Sabari Sridhar O T
November 25, 2013
IMO the problem with “Irandam Ulagam” is unlike Selva’s previous movies this time his screenplay is very loose and not engaging even in parts. The movie moves at such a sluggish pace that in spite of you trying to get yourself involved with the movie it becomes very difficult to do so.
One wonders whether Selvaraghavan has become tired or lazy but his regression is hard to phantom. Nothing wrong in thinking out of the box and having grandiose ideas, but whatever one does one should not compromise on the basics. If you do, then the end result will be something like “Irandam Ulagam”, half-baked, stale and almost repulsive.
Arya is a bad choice for this movie. He can’t emote for god’s sake and you wonder when the movie makers will finally realize it. The umpteen number of close-up shots that are intended to showcase his emotive skills are pure torture to the audience who are already under tremendous annoyance of having been taken for a royal ride by one of the most promising directors of recent times.
The most comical thing in this movie is its support cast. None of the foreign actors can act. And by making them mouth Tamil dialogues the director is playing a cruel joke on the audience. It gets so funny that even the so-called serious sequences end up being unintentionally comical. You will invariably end up getting the feel of watching a Tamil dubbed B-grade Hollywood movie that might have got a title “Murattu Kadhaliyum Muttal Kadhalanum”.
On the whole, “Irandam Ulagam” is for Selvaragavan what “Mugamoodi” was for Mysskin, “Rajapattai” for Suseendaran, and “Nayyandi” for Sargunam.
LikeLike
Arvind S Srinivasan
November 25, 2013
Its unbelievable to see a director with such bold ideas falter in stitching across a story with some coherence. I liked his Aayirathil Oruvan a lot. It wasn’t perfect, but I was intrigued by the premise. So I was looking forward to viewing this movie especially after the stills were released. I could see a lot of resemblance to the 2006 film, ‘The Fountain’ and me being fan of that too couldn’t resist going for this one. But alas all I was left was with just a few intriguing moments to take back. And a better actor would have done wonders in this. Like you said, Dhanush would have been perfect and would have added the required depth to the character. Arya was just not right for the role. I will definitely watch this movie again though. It is always very interesting to deconstruct a film that failed to get as to what the director/writer was trying to imply in the first place. Irandam Ulagam, is a failed film no doubt, but atleast we have a director who’s trying to tell us something visually and I think at least for that I need another visit to the theatres.
LikeLike
Naveen
November 25, 2013
Watching the criticism on this forum as well as others I am reminded of what Will Hunting said in the Havard Bar when some one tries to belittle him before Minnie driver’s character, “At least I am original”.
LikeLike
brangan
November 25, 2013
rajesh: Do girls really describe about the whole body of a men ?
Wow, I should really introduce you to some of my foul-mouthed friends 🙂
ramitbajaj01: This (without the “as”) is fine too.
Prakash: Selvaraghavan is much younger(in terms of number of films) than Manirathnam Or Balachander, but guys like him and Gautham Menon are already feeling stale with the dialogue deliveries.
I don’t see this as staleness. More like a voice. I don’t subscribe to the theory that the characters in a film have to talk like those characters. They can talk in the voice of the director, and that’s what happens when a strong writerly voice and a strong directorial voice come from the same filmmaker. This didn’t bother me as much as a dull storytelling here.
vk: Last few movies from this director show consistent deterioration
Actually, “Mayakkam Enna” has grown on me. The first time I was not *that* impressed (as I wrote here), but now I quite the film.
DON Vito Corleone: No man. I don’t go around talking to filmmakers unless there’s a book or an article in it for me 🙂
kk: Yes, I remain a huge fan of the filmmaker, which is why the first half of the review is about looking at the film in the context of his career. But I am not a fan of this film, as I’ve written in the second part of the review.
Udhay Sankar: That’s not surprising, no? It’s a surprise only if everyone reacts to a film the same way. And even after all these years, I find it odd that people expect a critic’s review to be in sync with the majority view, and if it isn’t, they’ll start looking for “motives” around why the critic felt that way. Sometimes he feels that way simply because that’s how he really felt 🙂
thotsvandi: And the plains full of flowers was simply ROFL only. There was no aesthetic sense in it.
I agree. There was no vision in the cinematography. I don’t know why everyone’s going gaga about it. The faces were flatly lit. There wasn’t a single instance of memorable framing. The “grandeur” came from the visual effects, mainly. Compare this generic work with the brilliant work Arvind Krishna accomplished in “7G” and especially “Pudhupettai.”
Arvind S Srinivasan: I will definitely watch this movie again though. It is always very interesting to deconstruct a film that failed to get as to what the director/writer was trying to imply in the first place.
Is there really all that much more than what’s already been talked about? I don’t think this is an especially deep film. It’s pretty much on the surface.
LikeLike
rajesh
November 25, 2013
“Wow, I should really introduce you to some of my foul-mouthed friends :-)”
– 🙂
LikeLike
kk
November 25, 2013
i mean you have let him go so easily because you are a fan.. i expected you to rip it apart. but you have been too nice
LikeLike
Prakash
November 25, 2013
“I don’t see this as staleness. More like a voice. I don’t subscribe to the theory that the characters in a film have to talk like those characters. They can talk in the voice of the director, and that’s what happens when a strong writerly voice and a strong directorial voice come from the same filmmaker. This didn’t bother me as much as a dull storytelling here.”
Well, I see how you look at it, but I am not sure I agree 100%. Sure, when we see a character on-screen, it is the director’s vision of that character, and hence an extension of his thought but, in my opinion, good directors(particularly in the earlier part of their careers) have a knack of striking a reasonable balance between this every-character-always-talks-the-exact-same-way-like-I-tell-you approach and try-to-imagine-how-each-character-will-speak approach.
I do believe it becomes distracting(and perhaps, even off-putting) for a lot of people when the director’s style of speaking is markedly different from generic lay-man speak, like Manirathnam’s ever-shorter dialogue bytes, or GVM’s pause-deliver-pause-again-deliver-some-hifi-yo-yo-english kind of lines. I could try this for Selva as well, but I think you get the point. 🙂
Speaking of good directors, Myshkin does it as well, but, it doesn’t grate on my ears as much since, again in my opinion, his style is more subtle and not quite as weird as these blokes and he exerts such precise control over the medium that when it does happen, it actually lends a kind of poetic flourish to the scene and enhances it’s mood.
And, one question, Rangan. What are your thoughts on the strength of “voice” of a director like Bharathiraja’s when you see two completely different(but very good) films like Padhinaaru Vayadhinile and Sigappu Rojakkal? In a nutshell, my position is this: excessive sameness of a directors ‘voice’ in the course of dealing with vastly different characters and settings actually contributes to a perception of duller story-telling for some people. The operative, and of course, purely subjective, word here is “excessive”. 🙂
“There was no vision in the cinematography. I don’t know why everyone’s going gaga about it. ”
The snow shots were delectable, on a purely sensory level. So were the eye-candy shots of alien sky and “Avatar” trees. And not many people here know/care for any difference between cinematography/photography/VFX anyways, so it isn’t all that surprising. And if Arya’s face wasn’t flatly lit, who knows, I might have gone away thinking that the fella’s non-acting was due to some trick of the cameraman. 😉 The mind shudders at the thought.
LikeLike
Arvind S Srinivasan
November 25, 2013
@rangan: Is there really all that much more than what’s already been talked about? I don’t think this is an especially deep film. It’s pretty much on the surface.
True…But I missed the first 15 odd minutes. More so I wished I watched the movie alone without having the trouble of my friends criticising me all through for taking them to this. And the crowd was raucous and grew impatient by the time the movie entered the second half.
LikeLike
MANK
November 26, 2013
BR:s there really all that much more than what’s already been talked about? I don’t think this is an especially deep film. It’s pretty much on the surface.
Well i was hoping that all this had some deep hidden meaning which i couldn’t comprehend. I was expecting you to help me in understanding that. If you yourself are saying that that everything is only on the surface , then the whole film appears to be totally pointless. Just another of those pretentious works that seems to be high art and in reality is totally shallow.Selva has been quoting everything from Sufism and Zen philosophy as inspirations for this movie and even with my little knowledge on these subjects , i just couldn’t make any connection. Did you see any of these ideas in the picture?.
@Arvind:my friends criticising me all through for taking them to this. And the crowd was raucous and grew impatient by the time the movie entered the second half.
Exactly my experience. Watching an esoteric picture with masses in a theater is a no go. It completely kills your interest and makes you hate the pic even if it might be something you could relate to.Better watching them at home
LikeLike
MANK
November 26, 2013
@Prakash:thoughts on the strength of “voice” of a director like Bharathiraja’s when you see two completely different(but very good) films like Padhinaaru Vayadhinile and Sigappu Rojakkal?
But isn’t the problem solved to an extend when you have actors of caliber of Kamalhaasan and sridevi.The contrast that Kamal brings to his 2 characters is amazing Also the technique that raja uses to shoot the pics are also markedly different. Much more classical and naturally lit for PV while much more hollywoodish,glossy , jumpcuts used in SR.I think the problem is much more pronounced for someone like manirathnam or GVM who uses pretty much the same technique to tackle different subjects. You can’t watch Bombay without thinking of Roja or Guru without thinking of Nayagan.I found NTPV a very tiring experience having already seen much of the courting complications in VTV, VA etc and pretty much done in the same style.One doesn’t really think of PV while watching SR even if some of his directorial trademarks are very much evident..
And if Arya’s face wasn’t flatly lit, who knows, I might have gone away thinking that the fella’s non-acting was due to some trick of the cameraman
LOL. Hope other cameraman also have the same sense of lighting him, Then perhaps the guy could have a great actor’s career by default
LikeLike
brangan
November 26, 2013
kk: What is this expectation to “rip apart” a film? IMO, I have not let the filmmaker go too easily, as you call it. I have said there are a lot of things that don’t work. But it is also my job to locate the film in his oeuvre and see what’s interesting about it when looked at that angle. Unless a film is absolutely worthless and gives me nothing to talk about, I really don’t see any point in “ripping it apart.” There are enough people out there in the social media who do that sort of thing.
Prakash: Yes, but that Bharathiraja example is across genres. If you compare “Padhinaaru Vayadhinile” to “Mann Vaasanai”, say, you’re still looking at a similar voice. The characters that Kanthimathi plays — Sridevi’s mom in the former, Ochaayi kezhavi in the latter — aren’t all that far apart. And that sort of thing is inevitable when a strong director shapes his films. Of course you may not like that sort of thing — and that has to do with your expectations of cinema, the way you are wired, etc.
MANK: Nope, didn’t catch much of philosophy here.
And someone posted this on my FB account, and thought I’d share 🙂
LikeLike
S. Prasad
November 26, 2013
“Irandam Ulagam” turned out to be an inter-planetary, amateurish disaster.
LikeLike
ruqayya
November 26, 2013
Mr.Rangan really liked your post..but hahaha Im afraid lowlylaureate’s was absolutely exquisite!!!
LikeLike
Prakash
November 27, 2013
@Rangan
True. I do have to confess I am hard put to find an instance of a good director giving two movies of the same genre having very different “voice”s to them.
Just asking, can you think of any?
And also, do you feel that this heavy stylisation or “strong voice” as you call it, leads to a stereotyping that eventually restricts these kind of directors to a niche audience when they run out of interesting settings to play them out.
Kind of like how most people hated Raavan(an) and Kadal but you(and a few others) liked them.
And does it make harder for them to sound in sync with rapidly changing times unlike, say, a very successful generic commercial film-maker like Sundar.C who has kept giving hit movies in the comedy genre across eras, from Ullathai Allithaa to Theeya Velai Seyyanum Kumaru?
LikeLike
sanjay2706
November 27, 2013
So the defenders will talk about the low budget. They would forever be in denial mode saying that only money was the reason behind this amateurish ,self indulgent and a laughable attempt.
Let me provide you an example of a simple, low budget movie named “Invention of lying”. The premise of the movie reads something like this ” In a world where no one lies, The protagonist tells the first lie which will forever change the world”. It’s a fascinating subject, and Ricky Gervais had done it pretty well. Now the movie wasn’t perfect in any sense, but the world that was created was imaginative, and the movie had plenty of “clever” moments.
Now smash cut to this “Irandam..” , and you find few birds on the lines of Archaeopteryx which keep flying around, blue and green tinted cinematography on the terrains of Georgia which make believe that there is a different world out there. Is that only a world is about? What about the social and economic conditions? Zilch. Absolutely nothing about those things.
New Zealand has an even more mystical look to it, and would have been a better choice. But the world where no one loves could have been an interesting subject to explore. However, Selvaraghavan does nothing to explore the other world. I went into the movie thinking that Selvaraghavan would have juxtaposed both the worlds and would give some sort of commentary on this world. In any attempt on “Fantasy”, there is usually a metaphor, without which the fantasy won’t connect with the audience. Selvaraghavan disappointed in that way as well.
I get a feeling writers should collaborate with other specialists to get some credibility into stories. An anthropologist, a psychologist could give great inputs that the director can use.
These directors are so poor in writing, and their unimaginative thoughts kill the film. Money isn’t an excuse, and shouldn’t be one.
Was there one good actor in the movie? The support cast was so amateurish that one gets confused if we were watching a serious movie. I got a “Monty Python” feel to it for the action sequences. Directing is also about choreography, where the movements of actors in the frame make a lot of difference. Some of the choreography was hilarious. The Art direction must be an attempt by school kids staging plays. It was that bad. I felt like killing myself with a “Hathori Hanzo” Sword while watching those sword fights.
@Brangan – You have gone soft on the works of established film makers. 🙂
LikeLike
nona
November 27, 2013
Let me leave this here…http://in.news.yahoo.com/is-selvaraghavan%E2%80%99s-our-most-under-rated-filmmaker–064539947.html
LikeLike
Rajeev
November 27, 2013
Adhanae parthaen. Ennada innum andha ” You’ve grown too soft ” comments varaleeye na parthaen. Ippo vanthutanga yaa, vanthutanga yaa. 😉
LikeLike
Arun
November 30, 2013
BR, I think the love story set in Earth had its moments. But somewhere Selva’s touch was missing.Lacked a bit depth. How do you compare this with Aayirathil Oruvan?
LikeLike
Amit Joki
March 3, 2016
If not for the physical aspects that the movie wanted its lead protagonist to have, Dhanush would have aced most of the screen time.
Selva is an enigma. This film didn’t interest me a lot, because I didn’t buy the romance for a second, or to say, it didn’t look like romance. But still watched it till the end, just because it was Selva’s film.
LikeLike