Spoilers ahead…
In an early scene in H Vinoth’s Sathuranga Vettai, Gandhi Babu (Natraj, who’s quite good) sells a businessman a snake. What he’s really selling, though, is snake oil. He’s a conman, and the film – inspired by true events, we’re told at the beginning – is a series of cons. Vinoth employs a series of tricks to amp up his narrative, to make us feel we’re watching a really cool movie. He breaks the film into chapters and slaps a tongue-in-cheek title on each one. He uses animation to narrate a flashback. There’s a goon who, when he feels like it, speaks in pure Tamil. There’s a cobra that’s christened “Ilaya Thalapathy” Vijay. And there’s a lot of jittery editing, always in a rush to drag us to the next scene. What we don’t get is the pleasure of being conned.
The con movie is a curious genre. We’d hate to be in the victims’ shoes in real life, but on screen, we want the conmen to perpetrate the most elaborate frauds and get away with it. It’s vicarious wish-fulfillment for the id. We don’t see too many of these films in Tamil, so the newness keeps us watching (this is one of those not-bad-for-a-first-film films) – but the cons aren’t shaped well. They seem too easy (except for the last one), and the victims seem too dumb. And the director makes at least one very odd choice. When Gandhi Babu is apprehended by the police, we see that he’s used a variety of disguises – but when the first two cons play out, he looks the same. We want to see him in those disguises. We want some panache. We want those slo-mo shots of a beard coming off, a mask being ripped off. And we want some tension. We’re constantly aware of the nuts and bolts of the con, so we’re two steps ahead of the victims. We never watch these episodes wondering how something was pulled off; we just watch events reach their logical conclusion. Predictability is not something you want in a con movie.
The crispness, the crackle is lost when you filter certain Hollywood genres through Tamil-film sensibilities. Sathuranga Vettai is filled with talk. There are some funny, clever lines, like the one that goes “Kuttra unarchi illaama pannradhu edhuvume thappu illai.” (“If you don’t feel guilty while doing something, then it isn’t wrong.”) But a lot of the time, the characters seem to be speaking to us, the audience – they keep feeding us existentialist punch lines. Then there’s all the sentiment. Changes of heart occur too conveniently and by the time we see a character turn into a labourer, it’s downright laughable. We need to be eased into these developments, not pushed into them. And why the moralistic streak? Why should the hero (even when played by someone who’s not a big star) always have a tragic backstory, a reason for why he became who he is? By the time the love angle begins to play out (the heroine is Ishaara), the sandpaper-rough protagonist has all the toughness of butter. I suppose this was done to create sympathy for the leading man, but how about some sympathy for the genre?
KEY:
* Sathuranga Vettai = chess hunt
* snake oil = see here
* a mask being ripped off = see here
* existentialist punch lines = see here
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2014 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
MANK
July 19, 2014
Brangan: He breaks the film into chapters and slaps a tongue-in-cheek title on each one. He uses animation to narrate a flashback
Hey this sound like ripped from Tarantino films, especially Kill Bill.
LikeLike
Vasanthan
July 21, 2014
At last someone has said it loud what I felt about the movie. Having read all the rave reviews by one and all, I was left wondering what was all the buzz about after done watching the movie. “Con” genre as they would like to call it is a tricky genre. The director and team’s hard work shows in bringing to the screen all the scams we have come across in recent years, only if these cons were a little bit more detailed and executed in an unpredictable tone. The cons and the happenings were quite conveniently presented. One more movie which suffered from similar set of problems for me was Special 26. But at least the fact that the said movie was set in 80s worked in favor for the movie there. Also the movie could have used some help in the acting department, yes Natraj is good and its refreshing to catch a 30 plus actor in a protagonist role but still he just doesn’t have the dynamics range required for the role here. He doesn’t come across convincing in all the emotional scenes. You really are confused whether he s really terrified, scared there or is he acting(read conning) there too.
LikeLike
venkatesh
August 4, 2014
What an absolute missed opportunity ?
Of all the times to get moralistic – in a con film really ?
LikeLike
slum dweller
August 26, 2014
Mr.rangan , these were ponzi scams which actually happened , so ur line the victims r dumb does not hold good , people have been duped by these schemes , this is a very dumb review according to me. Never I am going to read ur reviews hence forth , who gave u national award for review , go first learn how audience enjoy movies and write review , time to retire bosss
LikeLike
Pady Srini
September 2, 2014
Finally got to see this movie. And it was just awesome. Same ( or worse ) stuff from tarantino and it is ok. No double standards please. If this is a original movie ( not a korean remake ), this is just too good a movie.
LikeLike
vpjaiganesh
September 8, 2014
i loved the moralistic streak. that alone saved this movie from becoming a jigardhanda or naan avanillai remake.
LikeLike
Sriram
October 12, 2014
Baradwaj Rangan – IMHO, this movie is better than Jigarthanda. You did not even get the main message of this movie… Hate will not help you, only Love will. The hero hates, manipulates the society and he is being hated back by everybody (including his associates, who ditch him at a critical point). But the heroine is able turn her assigned killer to life saver.
Go watch the movie again and rewrite your review!!
LikeLike
Ashok
August 15, 2015
I can’t believe that this movie is being compared to Jigarthanda. Jigarthanda was much better than this film. This film wasn’t as inventive, or fresh as Jigarthanda. Siddharth and SImha were much better as their lead roles and the bgm, editing and camera work was simply top-notch. Jigarthanda is a landmark film in the history of tamil cinema. In the 1970s, we saw a breakthrough in tamil cinema with films such Apoorva Raagangal and others breaking barriers. In this generation we are seeing the same, from shifting from masala films to more realisitc and quality-made films.
LikeLike
kaizokukeshav
January 21, 2018
I just saw this movie and thought of answering one question.
Why should the hero always have a tragic backstory, a reason for why he became who he is?
IMO, the back story in this film was not established as if to simply evoke sympathy but to give an idea about why the hero became a con-man and not a criminal. This is a solid character establishment (like how writers create backstories of characters) even though there no need of showing so much of it. Without backstories there are inconsistent characters.
And for the question why lead actors have a tragic backstory, the reason is quite simple, the story choses a lead guy who has a tragic story.
LikeLike