Spoilers ahead…
Let me begin by saying how intensely jealous I am of those of you who haven’t seen Drishyam, the Malayalam movie that inspired Papanasam. Most times, it doesn’t matter whether we’ve seen the original film or read the book the screenplay is based on – because, as the cliché goes, there are only so many stories, and most of what we see involves permutations and combinations of the elements in those stories. And we watch these remakes for, say, the freshness the new cast brings to the material, or what the director does with it. But once in a while, you get a premise so gobsmackingly good, so fresh and audacious, that nothing anyone does can recreate your first time. I experienced that when I watched Gone Girl after reading the book. Something similar happened with Papanasam.
But those of you who haven’t seen Drishyam, I’d imagine, are in for a white-knuckle treat. Jeethu Joseph, who directed Drishyam, is in charge of Papanasam too, and, wisely, he doesn’t try to fix something that ain’t broke. The film opens with a shot of a lake whose smooth surface is interrupted by ripples – the image prepares us for what’s to follow, the increasing turbulence in the placid life of Suyambulingam (Kamal Haasan) and his family (wife Gautami, daughters Niveda Thomas and Esther Anil). But first, we see what a placid life it is. The early portions are leisurely paced – the scenes seem to be cut to the rhythms of a small town. It’s like strapping yourself to the time machine from Indru Netru Naalai and setting the dial to an era when cinema meant more than breakneck editing and the conviction that every audience member is a three-year-old suffering from ADD.
The details (save for a bafflingly fake-looking moustache that Kamal sports) are pitch-perfect. On top of a TV set, we see a model airplane – we know instantly what kind of household this is. And again and again, we’re shown what a loving, tight-knit family this is. We see them frequently around the dining table, and no one is staring at a smartphone. Suyambulingam chats with his wife, his daughters. He chats with the owner (MS Baskar) of a restaurant he likes to frequent. These aren’t plot-oriented conversations. They’re the kind of things people talk about when they have a long history, when they’ve exhausted every topic on earth and now muse about earthworms and agriculture. Suyambulingam’s father-in-law (Delhi Ganesh) speaks of selling his house. Suyambulingam doesn’t want to hear about it. Suyambulingam is a mite too careful with money – he’s the kind of person who keeps switching off the lights in the house. This annoys his wife. That’s about the extent of conflict in these lives. We’re being shown paradise – before it is lost.
The fall comes about when… no, I won’t tell you. With most thrillers, the suspense is based on what happened or who did it. Here, the question is: Will he get away with it? He, of course, is Suyambulingam, and we’re on his side, of course – but the director is canny enough to muddy our emotions, by showing us another set of parents (Asha Sarath, who plays an Inspector General, and Anant Mahadevan) who love their son as much as Suyambulingam loves his daughters. At one point, you may feel the IG is going too far for the sake of her son, but then you remember that Suyambulingam has possibly gone further for the sake of his daughter. It’s no surprise that, by the end, we hear the word kuttra unarchi (guilty conscience) from both families – there are no winners. It’s a masterstroke to make Suyambulingam’s adversary a woman, a mother. Papanasam is one of those rare films in which the amma sentiment doesn’t make you regurgitate your breakfast.
Another thrill is watching the good guy do the kind of things the bad guy usually does. Lying. Covering up. Manufacturing alibis. Tampering with evidence. It’s a spin on the classic Hitchcockian scenario of an innocent man on the run. Only, Jeethu Joseph is no Hitchcock. We watch the latter’s films over and over, without tiring of them, because of how cinematic they are. Once we know who did what to whom – that is, the basic plot, which is what grips us the first time we watch a movie – we observe, during subsequent viewings, the elegance of the filmmaking. We notice the camera casually eyeing, from the upper floor, the guests at a party, and then craning in to peer at the key in Ingrid Bergman’s hand. We notice a murder as reflected in a fallen pair of spectacles. Set to carnival music. Joseph, on the other hand, relies on reaction shots to tell us what to feel. I haven’t seen this many cutaways to “pointed” expressions on actors’ faces – we might as well be staring at subtitles saying things like “this man is afraid he’s caught in a lie” or “this woman is suspicious.”
Still, that plot is so strong that all this, ultimately, matters little. Plus, there’s the leading man. Suyambulingam is a cable-TV operator. And a cinema fanatic, like… Kamal Haasan. This seems to be the season for meta reflections on the actor. Uttama Villain was practically a meditation on the Kamal Haasan persona. Here, we get a reference to his 1975 release Cinema Paithiyam, as well as a reminder of the actor’s indifference to politics. And let’s not forget that, like Suyambulingam, Kamal Haasan has two daughters and is starring in this movie with his real-life Significant Other.
And like Kamal Haasan, who’s often accused of ghost-directing his films, Suyambulingam watches films and offers commentary on what he would have done with the scene. Later, fittingly, he actually turns into a “director,” recreating a day in his life with “props” and (unwitting) “actors.” Cinema is a running subtext in Papanasam, which employs cinematic tools like the zoom-in (every time Suyambulingam thinks back on a movie) and the flashback (the entire film is one). Even Suyambulingam’s emotions are dictated by the movies. Pasamalar makes him cry. A song from Siraichaalai makes him hurry home to his wife and enact what he jokingly calls a “rape scene.” Elsewhere, the wife, fed up with his talk, accuses him of spouting the same “dialogue.” There’s a scene of “filming” on a phone. There’s a discussion about film versus digital. And like in the movies, a moment of high drama occurs just as rains break out. Earlier, there was non-stop sunshine – now, thunder and lightning.
My favourite bit was a reference to Padikkadha Medhai. At first, it’s just a pun, a Crazy Mohan-lite joke. Later, we see that it’s an allusion to Suyambulingam himself, someone who’s hardly educated and yet has the street smarts to… no, I won’t tell you. Kamal takes a cue from Sivaji Ganesan in that earlier film. Not only does he say his hairstyle is like Sivaji’s, he also pitches his performance at a more “cinematic” level than Mohanlal did in Drishyam. Future film scholars are going to tie themselves up in knots about who is better, which approach is better, but for now, let’s just say Kamal Haasan is terrific. And it’s terrific to see him play a “normal” part, something that doesn’t ask you to view it through special Subtext Revealing Glasses. As fun as that is, sometimes, more of this, please.
KEY:
- Papanasam = the name of the place (see here) where the characters reside; though also used for the literal meaning of the word (papa + nasam = destroyer of sins)
- Gone Girl = see here
- Indru Netru Naalai = see here
- Padikkadha Medhai = An uneducated genius
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2015 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
MANK
July 3, 2015
he also pitches his performance at a more “cinematic” level than Mohanlal did in Drishyam
I didn’t understand that comment BR. do you mean its less realistic than mohanlal or that its more subtle. care to elaborate?
LikeLike
Nivazr
July 3, 2015
The first two lines itself explained the whole review.. loved it.. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Nivazr
July 3, 2015
Reblogged this on Perceptions Of A Movie Reviewer and commented:
Nicely Written BR.. not because its Kamal or anyone else.. the way the review flows was brilliant..
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 3, 2015
Mohanlal and Kamal – both fantastic actors, except that I haven’t seen Mohanlal do anything really worthwhile in the past few years except play superstar. I haven’t watched Drishyam yet, though I’ve heard very good things about it. Now, after this review, I want to watch both Drishyam and Papanasam. Not to see who did better than the other, but to appreciate (and wonder at) what these two men can do with their craft. From what you say, this must be one of those rare films where Kamal (in recent years, at least) is not playing at being larger than life.
(p.s. I wish they had let Jeetu Joseph direct the Hindi version as well. I don’t see them doing anything good with this script there, do you? And Tabu is the only person in the cast who can hold her own there; I can’t see either Ajay Devgan or Shriya Sharan matching the leads in Malayalam or Tamil.)
LikeLike
Ram
July 3, 2015
Found Kamal do Tamil version as naturally, subtle and resraint as much as possible without losing Nellai Nadar authenticity.
Mohanlal has been a disappointment for several years except few Blessy films and this being lone exception. Kamal has always been more interesting with variety of subjects for past decade and him doing this, further reaffirms my belief that he will not quit acting and he will continue to make films with him, and be in films that interests him.
LikeLike
Ananthakrishnan Suresh
July 3, 2015
he also pitches his performance at a more “cinematic” level than Mohanlal did in Drishyam.
@BR: Sir, are you saying that kamal hassan was better than lal??? Lal had some really subtle expressions throughout the movie. His occasional ‘chammals’ and those innocent smiles plus the voice modulation. Is there a necessity to compare 2 legends?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sam
July 3, 2015
I’d chanced upon Drishyam a year back and loved it. I really do envy the ones who get to watch papanasam without having watched the original. Kamal brings his own flavour, and I enjoyed the initial portion of the movie better than the original. I felt the comedy scenes were better may because I didn’t have to rely on subtitles to understand them and it always hard to put apt subtitles for comedy, especially for play on words in native language. For me, Meena-Mohanlal chemistry worked much better than Kamal-Gauthami and I really wished Meena acted in the tamil version too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Supertramp
July 3, 2015
Why is this one 17 minutes longer than ‘Drishyam’?, hoping to catch this one soon. And wanted to recommend Mohanla’s ‘Bhramaram’ during the time of Drishyam’s release itself. I think only these two films were of any worth in the last 5-6 years of Mohanlal’s career.
LikeLike
rejath
July 3, 2015
I agree when you say that its a faithful remake and that its a solid thriller…true… but Kamal Haasan has overplayed that crucial scene in the climax when he is asked whether their son exists or not…. may be because i have seen drishyam many a time…and loved Mohanlals portrayal of Georgekutty very much… still its for the first time that Kamals emotional performance didnt go down well with me… or may be had i not seen drishyam , i would have loved it… but for now i wont say that Kamal Haasan was terrific in Papanasam
LikeLike
Reuben
July 3, 2015
Agree that I would have enjoyed Papanasam better if I hadn’t watched Drishyam.
To me the slang was a bit of a distraction. It was like Kamal making a statement : See I can do this also.
I had to do the inevitable comparison and found that I liked Mohanlal’s performance better. Much more restrained and nuanced.
LikeLike
Arun
July 3, 2015
After watching Drishyam and going into the theatre to watch Papanasam, that final scene with the delivery of the husband, the silence of the mother (versus the loudness of the IG) Kamal actually made me to tear up a little. THAT and THAT alone made me wish he stops taking on all the burden and starts just acting for other directors. What a performer. To offer such a contrast to Mohan Lal in a film which Lalettan aced, shows you the powerhouse he is.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sriram
July 3, 2015
BR, this film does not have your favourite ‘puttu’ scene 🙂
LikeLike
vijay
July 3, 2015
why is Kamal even remaking these films? Maybe the issue here is “important” to him the but the product isn’t as fresh enough for the crowd and that also leads to comparisons like the above, especially when the original has had a decent run close to home. Same with A wednesday remake. His next film also seems to be a ripoff off some Belgian thriller. Jeyamohan, Suka.. all these writers and their biggest task is to translate Mallu to Nellai tamil?
LikeLike
Jk
July 3, 2015
Mohanlal doing Suyambulingam would be another unmitigated disaster. Thanks that he stick to George Kitty and Nair Chettas.
Film needed a remake as dubbed Malayalam films seem bland and unlike Tamil nativity.
LikeLike
darkknightraises
July 3, 2015
Reblogged this on darkknightraises.
LikeLike
Sai
July 3, 2015
By Kamal Hassan standards a lightweight film indeed.
LikeLike
Deepauk M
July 3, 2015
Suyambu and George Kutty are different people. While George Kutty’s perseverance has caused him to be somewhat internal, Suyambu seems like someone who achieved success because of how extroverted he is. Take for example the scene where Suyambu/George Kutty meet the contractor. George Kutty keeps it semi-professional almost talking about what he does etc… Suyambu on the other hand goes an extra length making good natured jokes about his attire and accessories etc… Not something I can see George Kutty doing. As you mention film historians may compare the two, but it will be an exercise in apples and oranges.
LikeLike
Siddarth
July 4, 2015
@supertramp: Oh you should watch Spirit by Ranjith. I thought Mohanlal as the chronic alcoholic was brilliant.
LikeLike
Supertramp
July 4, 2015
@Siddarth Yea Mohanlal was good in it, but Spirit is a terrible film and Ranjith is a terrible film maker.
LikeLike
srktugga
July 4, 2015
In Drishyam, Mohanlal is uber cool like Dhoni. He didnt show any emotion/panic when he comes to know of the murder which is not quiet believable. But Kamal did show some emotion. He cried when he comes to know of the murder. But after that both their performances were quite similar. But Kamal again stole the thunder in the Climax scene with IG and her husband.
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 4, 2015
BR: “and it’s terrific to see him play a “normal” part, something that doesn’t ask you to view it through special Subtext Revealing Glasses. As fun as that is, sometimes, more of this, please.”
Amen to that.
LikeLiked by 2 people
MANK
July 4, 2015
Spirit is a terrible film and renjith is a terrible writer, but I would call him an above average filmmaker
As for recent lal films, he was really good in Grandmaster- a very age appropriate role for him as well and although not very age appropriate, I liked him in run baby run. both of them were well made films.
LikeLike
Prasanna
July 4, 2015
I have watched Drishyam and when I heard Kamal is doing George Kutty in Papanasam, I just pushed my close circles to watch Drishyam, before Kamal makes a UPO out of it. I haven’t watched papanasam yet (takes time in Scandinavia). But for me Mohan Lal set very standards for that role, (Tea shop scene after the car episode is just one example of ML’s sutle and natural acting. Again Tamil movie goers and reviewers prefer more melodrama for protagonist and antagonist and allocate the “living the role” type for supporting casts like Delhi Ganesh kinds.
LikeLike
venkat ramanan
July 4, 2015
Ok @Br can you explain what that “cinematic” means. Now that i have seen Papanasam, I dont think there is any point in talking about whether Lal’s approach or Kamal’s approach is better. Cos Suyambulingam and George Kutty are different characters. I found Suyambu more emotional. No offence to any body, i found kamal in the final scene bit over the top as if he had seizures or something (when he almost confesses). I would prefer a cold and less emotional george kutty any day. Secondly, i felt the whole Papanasam angle makes it even more dramatic. Especially, the dialogue “let me slowly wash away my sins”. I know, but comparison is inevitable especially if you follow both tamil and malayalam equally well. But this also points towards what works for different audiences and definitely IMO Tamil and Malayalam audience sensibilities are different, Apart from that core of both films are same, though I missed the long opening steadicam shot of Drishyam. On the whole i felt Papanasam, is a drishyam made bit more dramatic.
offtopic: @BR have you watched Memories by jeethu joseph, if not do watch, i felt it has few scenes that could be defined cinematic. Especially a chase sequence involving Prithviraj.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A
July 4, 2015
What does the title mean please?
LikeLike
brangan
July 4, 2015
MANK and others: Well, the character is a fan of Sivaji, and it made sense to me that he’d live in a slightly heightened zone of emotion. I like to think of this performance as KH’s Sivaji homage 🙂
Like Sivaji, Kamal is capable of the gamut from subtle to OTT. And here he goes the gamut. If the last scene is OTT, then there are several scenes earlier that are marvellously restrained. Just like it was in Mahanadhi, a mix of “invisible” and “show-off” acting.
Also, I am not comparing KH and Mohanlal here. I’m just saying that there’s bound to be people (like film scholars) who do such a comparison — it’s bound to happen, given that it’s the same film, the same role.
Sriram: Was that the scene where Mohanlal grumbles about Meena collecting kitchen utensils? Oh, I love that scene 🙂
vijay: But the average Tamil film viewer has not seen Drishyam. So why not a remake that looks like a sure-shot hit?
A: Have added the title to the key section.
Sam: Reg. Gautami, I agree. She looks too — for lack of a better word — urban. Or maybe I think of her as urban. Even when she used to prance around with Ramarajan in various villages, I was never convinced that she belonged there. Meena, though, convinced me that she belonged in Drishyam. I’m not a great fan of her as an actress as such — but sometimes looking the part goes a long way.
Speaking of Gautami and Ramarajan, was reminded of this piece of magnificence…
LikeLike
rajandr
July 4, 2015
I understand Kamal likes to sprinkle lots of meta references in his movies and his fans like to pick those and enjoy unravelling them. Metaphorically I believe meta references should be like raisins and cashews in payasam one here one there. If there are too much of it would spoil the taste.
Papanasam is remake of Drishyam and writing that Kamal having two daughters in the movie as being meta reflection of his real life is over stretching meta finding exercise. This is a remake of a movie with such characters present in original and important characters which cannot be done away with. I don’t think this has good anything to do with Kamal’s real life except a strange coincidence. Metaphorically this is like saying they even have almonds in payasam when there is none.
The subtle intelligent meta references Kamal or say director or say Jeyamohan has introduced in Papanasam were the photos of S. P. Adithanar and Kamarajar hanging in his house and his neighbour mentioning he doesn’t mingle much with him due to his non veg eating habits. I didn’t read the airplane on table too much.
Also one more thing which I think deserves a mention is the dialogues of Jeyamohan. If Tamil adaption and rooting it in Papanasam made it look real it was entirely due to the authentic Nellai slang and lingua franca excellently brought out by Jeyamohan for this movie. If you would have watched the slang and sparse usage of English words the characters spoke were bang on target and it made to fit the roles in the region and look real. Compare this with the fake slang the characters of Raavanan spoke where Suhasini thought it was good enough to just add a la in the end and it would sound Nellai Tamil slang. Credit is due and Jeyamohan deserves it.
LikeLike
Ashwini
July 4, 2015
Found Kamal doing a nuanced portrayal while being subtle and restraint. He’s both Lal and Sivaji Ganesan, that’s why he is the best.
LikeLike
brangan
July 4, 2015
rajandr: writing that Kamal having two daughters in the movie as being meta reflection of his real life is over stretching meta finding exercise.
I am not saying that.
I’m saying: ” And let’s not forget that, like Suyambulingam, Kamal Haasan has two daughters and is starring in this movie with his real-life Significant Other.”
Let’s take a Sivaji film where Prabhu plays his son. There’s a certain resonance this casting brings — which has nothing to do with the screenplay. That’s what I’m talking about.
When I saw Kamal with Gautami and two daughters, it was impossible not to think of the actor’s real-life persona. That’s what I’m writing about.
Maybe this resonance didn’t happen with you — so be it.
See, these things aren’t cast in stone. What this means, what that means, what is meta, what isn’t meta — it’s all a result of your personal filters.
The subtle intelligent meta references Kamal or say director or say Jeyamohan has introduced in Papanasam were the photos of S. P. Adithanar and Kamarajar hanging in his house…
Why is this a meta reference? Has this got extra-textual meaning — as in, is (real-life) Kamal known as a fan of Kamaraj? I’m genuinely curious.
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
July 4, 2015
Brangan, you are right about gowthami. kamal always used to cast her wisely whether its in tevar magan, apoorva sahodarangal or nammavar, I think this time the emotions got the better of him
Reg: your favorite puttu scene- I believe its that scene in meena’s house in front of her parents – that’s very very good scene, what I would call a Howard hawksian scene, an extended dialogue scene that brings out hidden attributes of the characters. We get to know a lot about lal and meena’s characters in that scene alone- her spendthriftness is inherited from her mother, her habit of showing off by putting the kids in a more expensive school and that she has poor opinion about her husband in those matters, who has really conservative and cautious attitude towards money and their children’s education. It also shows lal’s penchant for winning at any cost even throwing in the delicate matter of dowry to win his argument with his wife, much to the embarrassment of his in laws. A quality that comes to full display when he goes all out in saving his family. we usually don’t get to see scenes like that in Indian cinema.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rm
July 4, 2015
It’s interesting to note how when majority of people have loved and appreciated the final ‘act’ (including myself), another group of people think that it was uncalled for…
Spoiler ahead:
We are talking about closure here. It’s a little unsettling to see the boy’s parents merely walking away after vaguely being told the truth about their son’s disappearance, especially after having taken such ‘extraordinary’ measures in their investigations. Now considering an alternate scenario where the boy’s parents did find a solid convincing evidence to prosecute the protaganists (and also after knowing what their villain son did) , would they have taken a fair stand ?There are no ventures into this. Both the parties are selfish, and both needs our empathy, but we are allowed to root for only one.
So, IMO it is only fitting to see Kamal emote here (rather than taking a cold and stern stance as his predecessor), because he expresses, rather not with words, that what he did was unjustifiable as well. It’s rather more fitting, albeit not so convincing, in the scheme of things..
LikeLike
Anand Sethuraman
July 4, 2015
BR,
Is this Sivaji movie you are referring to, “Pudhiya Paravai”, because there again a perfect ‘Hitchcockian’ murder is the puzzle! Another point that I came across was the cheeky naming of Kamalhaasan as Suyambu Lingam & his prime antagonist, the masterful Kalabhavan Mani as Perumal – the classic Saivite – Vaishnavite tussle yet again, only with a role-reversal this time!
I have also written a column on the above points and how Papanasam treads the thin line between Restraint & Dramaticism! Do read & let me know your thoughts.
http://pipinghotviews.com/perspectives/on-papanasams-tight-rope-walk/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sriram
July 4, 2015
“Was that the scene where Mohanlal grumbles about Meena collecting kitchen utensils? Oh, I love that scene :-)”
Ya ya 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
July 4, 2015
Anand Sethuraman: What Sivaji movie? The one with Prabhu (in the comment above) is just an example.
LikeLike
venkat ramanan
July 4, 2015
“Apart from changing some sensibilities to suit local audiences, we’ve made Papanasam more emotional as Kamal sir felt Tamil audiences like to be emotionally piqued. The core of the film hasn’t been changed, but what forms the core has been treated differently,” said Jeethu Joseph.
http://www.thehindu.com/entertainment/papanasam-more-emotional-than-drishyam-jeethu-joseph/article7366745.ece
LikeLike
Ravi K
July 4, 2015
Anand Sethuraman, I too had issues with the ending. If Suyambu had kept mum about the murder them walking away would make sense. However, their reaction to his admission made no sense, even taking into account their son was a would-be rapist. He was still their son, and I would think they’d want to see justice served. Perhaps him making that confession was itself unrealistic in the first place, given that he was airtight about everything until then.
LikeLike
Saurabh
July 4, 2015
i haven’t seen Bharamaram (though I liked him a lot in Thanmathra), but Drishyam aside Lal has only been doing crappy films in recent films. OTOH Mammooty has balanced his career far better. Incidentally as much as I liked Drishyam and Lal’s work in it, I will easily take Mammooty’s “Munnariyippu” (both the film and the performance) over it. Munnariyippu, alongwith Adaminte Makan Abu, Artist, Manjadikkuru and Annayaum Rasoolum, is one of the summits of contemporary Malayalam cinema as far as I am concerned. And the best part, apart from the fact that it is extremely strong on the cinematic front, is that it is almost an art film made in mainstream space.
LikeLike
vijay
July 4, 2015
“But the average Tamil film viewer has not seen Drishyam. So why not a remake that looks like a sure-shot hit?”
That is just a commercial justification. (Even there, a remake of a hit doesn’t guarantee a hit) But my point is different. With all the writer friends he has and himself at his disposal why this remake business? Making a low budget quick film like this or Unnaipol Oruvan off of an original script isn’t expecting too much from Kamal I think. But then Kamal has always shown a penchant for getting easily inspired.
LikeLike
brangan
July 5, 2015
Ravi K: Actually, I had issues with that arc in general (of the IG and her husband). Given that they are not just antagonists/villains, given that the story is about them as parents too, I’d have liked to know what they felt about the revelation that their son had done such a thing.
We see the son’s friend tell them what happened. They seem to be shocked. And then she walks in and says she knows all about the video. How about a moment or two grappling with this knowledge about their son? Surely that wasn’t unwarranted in a nearly three-hour movie — especially given how much in detail we get into Kamal’s feelings.
Of course, given that this is primarily a thriller, it doesn’t really matter, but…
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anand Sethuraman
July 5, 2015
******Spoilers*******Spoilers*******Spoilers*******Spoilers*******Spoilers*******
@BR, Guess I missed that Sivaji’s “Padikkatha Medhai” reference on first read. Got it now. I thought we were meaning the same film – “Pudhiya Paravai”. My bad!
@RaviK, I believe the movie had to end that way because it wants to not be a showcase of brilliance like say Arya’s #Vattaram where again a body is hidden in a construction & he gets away with it, nor a #NooravadhuNaal where the murderer is caught. It wants to focus on guilt – the guilt of a god-fearing common man committing a crime for the first time and the guilt of affluent parents who have failed in their duties as responsible parents, so much so that the aggressor i.e. the mother is absolutely mum at the climax while the father who has forever been questioning the privacy/freedom given by her to their son, takes charge.
LikeLike
MANK
July 5, 2015
Brangan, I have not seen the Tamil version, so I don’t know how emotional and detailed it gets. But reg. The point you made, yes they are shocked to see the video and the true nature of their son, but even then I think her feelings as a mother takes precedence here- as its airways been- and she is convinced that her son has been killed – as she now has clear evidence of motive for the family to get rid of him- which I believe will be a more dominant emotion at that moment.so it didn’t feel that jarring in the Malayalam version
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
July 5, 2015
Reg:the confession in the climax, I have doubt’s about how well it works in the papanasam milieu, because in the Malayalam version, its just not about the guilt of common man, the character is a Christian and the confession takes a very religious dimension as its a key aspect of their beliefs regarding atonement from sins. Its also interesting that he makes the confession to the husband- who is perhaps the only uncorrupted person and closest to a priest in the entire film. that’s what I really liked about the climax.
LikeLike
Rm
July 5, 2015
@Anand
It’s still a little hard to accept the mother’s radical ‘transformation’ and the father’s stance that he will go to any extent to protect his family, even if that means potentially covering up a crime and putting other people at distraught, especially after considering the movie took so much efforts carving out their character to show they are what they are..
LikeLike
venkat ramanan
July 5, 2015
Yeah, exactly papanasam in the end points towards the guilt suymbu has, he says he feels let down by teaching his children to lie, he almost confesses, almost apologizes saying i will wash away my sins slowly, that is what i found different. Because in Drishiyam George never says he feels let down for teaching his children to lie, all he says to his wife is, we had to do what we had to. and also in the end he remains composed and replies just enough (at the same time remaining careful that he still wont get caught) to make sure that IG and her husband need not wait for their son anymore. Translated somewhat to “we had an uninvited guest in our family, we had to send him away, so that he never returns” which i felt was a class touch.
LikeLike
Pady Srini
July 5, 2015
I felt Mohanlal ‘s expressionless face suited better to the character than Kamal. Kamal even when he tries to put up a straight face is sort of acting – his eyes are moving. Whereas Mohanlal seemed to put up a stone face. And that fits well with this character. But a well made remake nevertheless. First timers seemed to have really enjoyed the movie.
LikeLike
brangan
July 5, 2015
MANK: the confession in the climax, I have doubt’s about how well it works in the papanasam milieu
Oh, it does. It’s no coincidence that the movie is set in Papanasam, which carries the connotation of sins being destroyed. So the religious angle is there in this version too.
About the point with the mother, I still think they could have devoted a minute to the processing (by the parents) of the information about the son. Agree this doesn’t kill the narrative flow, but still…
he makes the confession to the husband- who is perhaps the only uncorrupted person and closest to a priest in the entire film.
Lovely reading. Thanks.
venkat ramanan: papanasam in the end points towards the guilt suymbu has
Yes. But also, a little more. It points towards the guilt that both parents have (i.e. the IG too). Which is why, as I’ve said in the review, the same term “kuttra unarchi” is used by kamal as well as the IG’s husband. Both have let down their children — Kamal, by teaching them to lie, and the IG, by spoiling the son.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 5, 2015
BTW, got this by mail. Iswarya, here’s some incentive for you to join the discussion 🙂
Loved the review. I saw Dhrishyam and now wondering if I should watch papanasam too.
By the way. Unlike you to use ‘save for ….’ reg moustache. Was taught ‘save this’ or ‘save that’. I liked your review ‘save’ that little usage… Not ‘save for’ that…
Pardon the criticism. I could be way outdated given the growth/ evolution of language today. English. Tamil. Tanglish et al
I know my Brit eng teacher would have protested.
LikeLiked by 1 person
kg
July 5, 2015
Dhrishyam’s Lal was not in top form. I would compare Kamal in this form to Lal in Dasharatham. Last few minutes especially. And it worked more convincingly to film’s favor.
Interesting comparison to Sivaji. Sivaji’s acting style and detailing could be directly seen in Kamal here as well as Lal in Dasharatham.
BR, did you have to come up with the review in less than an hour? 🙂
LikeLike
kg
July 5, 2015
And to a certain extent in all Mammootty films as well. Amaram perhaps (been a while) but I foud him closer to Sivaji in certain gestures than Kamal or Lal.
LikeLike
A
July 5, 2015
Irrespective of the number of and gender of kids Kamal Hassan would have in reality, the film calls for the protagonist as one having two daughters. The family still lives in a village / town and at a time when being a daughter and wife called for some kind of docility to be had. KH’s character is the male whose primary function vis a vis his family is to bring bread home and protect the members. The elder child had to be a girl for the plot would not move forward (populist this is, for those who come barging in saying its need not be) . The younger one could not have been a son because he then , even though his age is what 11 or 12 yrs would not be a mere, meek participant to the father’s concoction. It would be opening a Pandora’s box, “how much of the father does the son have in him? How much is he influenced by his ‘hero’? The daughter , on the other had, can easily be rendered helpless, as she is. Never ever does the question arise if the children would go on and get very wild ideas , in the future, if need be. Why? Because they are girls. A boy would raise a whole different set of questions and the director, writer did not want to go down that route at all!
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 5, 2015
Rm: It’s still a little hard to accept the mother’s radical ‘transformation’ and the father’s stance that he will go to any extent to protect his family
I assume you’re talking about Kamal and Gautami? What “radical transformation” did she undergo?
kg: did you have to come up with the review in less than an hour?
May I know why you ask? 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tambi Dude
July 5, 2015
SPOILER ALERT:
Yesterday I saw Drishyam. I think I spotter a blooper. When Mohan Lal inserts the SIM card in an old Nokia used phone and after few minutes he gets a call, the phone shows “Mom” in the caller id. How is that possible? SIM card do not store contact list, unless the contacts were transferred from the destroyed old phone to the new one, it could not map the number to Mom.
LikeLiked by 1 person
aparna
July 5, 2015
Loved revisiting those “Notorious” and “Strangers on a train” scenes and understanding the concept of “cinematic” vs “plot based” movies
kg asks because it does not give one time to see the movie before the review 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 5, 2015
Tambi Dude: But SIM cards can store contacts, no?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anantha Krishnan
July 5, 2015
Sad that Ranjith, who I consider a superb director and scriptwriter (Pranchiyettan, Indian Rupee, Thirakkadha, Kaiyoppu, Palerimanikyam, Summer in Bethlehem, Devasuram, Aaram Thamburan, Mayamayuram) is discussed as a ‘terrible’ and ‘above average’ filmmaker by people… Even Spirit wasn’t that bad… I know I should respect others’ views, but sometimes they are so shocking!!! and most of such comments come from this blog
LikeLike
MANK
July 5, 2015
Brangan, a related question – since you brought in all those Hitchcock references – do you have a favorite hitch film (and why?) and do you like the Hitchcockian method of suspense, you know where the criminal is revealed to the audience fairly early as opposed to final reel twist and revelation.
LikeLike
Drunken Monkey
July 5, 2015
Dont exactly remember if mohanlal’s character was speaking to the father in the climax scene.. but suyambu spking to the father with no guts to look at IG is such an amazing touch.
But the parents walking away is kind of an easy way out for the director isn’t it? (Not being cocky. Just trying to look deeper with love.)
Am intrigued by the possibilities of what all that 1 cut-away could have done to the climax.
As the boy’s parents, after looking at everything this man has stood up against one would just come with merely no hopes of hearing a confession. But this is the first time they hear an abstract explanation(cum kinda confession) against the ‘ennaku edhuvum theriyaadhu’ they were used and annoyed off.
At this moment Suyambu has almost killed their hope of the boy showing up someday. I am still guessing what this rational man, once-angry (frustrated) officer and the helpless parents would have felt like? Wouldn’t it have been a another strong layer of parental suffering especially as a closing scene?
P.S: My wife rejected this argument saying ‘this is a thriller!’ but..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rm
July 5, 2015
@ BR
No Mr.Rangan i was not talking about Gautami. Sorry i did not make it clear. I was mentioning the IG mother and the fact that she merely walked away teary-eyed knowing the truth after having been so ruthless earlier – a ‘radical’ transformation.
I subscribe to your view that they could have allotted a scene to show the processing of the information about their son. And on the same topic, i would have loved to see the scene that showed Kamal’s expressions, how he would have processed the previous night happenings as Gauthami and her daughter related that to him. Instead we saw a brief flashback of the previous night and it moved directly to the scene where he was standing on the mound in the garden starting with his enquiry.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Arun
July 5, 2015
I think my favorite Mohanlal scene was in the classy film Kreedom (remade in Tamil in a very silly manner possible) was the one involving him and the heroine. She says in anger” Since you have turned into a rogue, I hate you. I do not wish to see you again”. In the very next scene, we see Mohanlal’s character walking in the fields with his head low feeling dejected. In the nearby area, we see a marriage procession carrying the heroine. Mohanlal sees this and moves on. The difference between Mohanlal and Mamooty is that Lal internalises the character and lives the character whereas others like Mamooty or Suresh Gopi just play it. I think Kreedom is the best film of Lal. I was mostly in shock and awe while watching it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Tambi Dude
July 5, 2015
Rangan you are right. Only iphone does not store contacts in the SIM card. Sorry
LikeLike
Mangalassery
July 6, 2015
Anantha Krishnan: Ranjith is a great writer! In fact, one of the greatest writers we have now, though of late, his form has been underwhelming! He has scripted classics like ‘Devasuram’, ‘Aaram Thampuran’, ‘Nandanam’, ‘Thirakkadha’ as well as commercial extravaganzas (with classy touch) like ‘Johnnie Walker’, ‘Narasimham’, ‘Valyettan’ and ‘Black’.
A great writer need not be a great director! Direction and writing are wholly different departments! Direction is an intricate craft. That’s why in Hollywood, you rarely see a screenwriter turning into a director (Except those who consistently do both).
Ranjith the director dwarfs in front of Ranjith the great writer! Ranjith the director is a WRONG example that film students should avoid following! Instead they should study Ranjith the great screenwriter, the inexplicable depth in his characterizations and dialogues!
Coming to Drishyam and Papanasam! Though I personally prefer Mohanlal’s calculated restraint over Suyambulingam’s emotional confession, I suggest that film students watch both versions, just to know how the protagonist of your story can be given completely different characteristics, to react differently to the same situations!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Anu Warrier
July 6, 2015
@Anantha Krishnan – I share your sentiments about Ranjith, and he is one of the Malayalam filmmakers today whose movie I watch based solely on his name.
LikeLike
an
July 6, 2015
For those of you who have issues about the pervert kid’s parents keeping mum about Suyam’s abstract confession, what could they have done, especially when they’re not in power anymore (she resigned her job). I think they’ve given up hope on extracting evidence based confession from him at that point, knowing Suyam is a tactical person. All they wanted is a confirmation if the son is alive or dead so that they need not harbour hope that he’ll turn up one day. Or they need not take further initiative to search for him if he’s not alive. In my opinion the parents were being practical.
LikeLike
Santosh Balakrishnan
July 6, 2015
I feel the boy’s parents almost prepared themselves for the eventuality of not seeing their son again.. father’s monologue does somewhat indicate this.. hence their quiet/dejected walk away at the end post kamal’s part confession.. (think was the same in drishyam also if I remember correctly)
also I believe director wanted to provide a closure by focusing on the victim (from audience viewpoint) rather than the parents of the guilty.. easy way out..? may be yes but also understandable…
I felt suyambu talking only to the father, was cos he believed only father was deserving of any explanation (as he was the only good soul left)
LikeLike
Krish
July 6, 2015
BR, if you thought Gautami is too urban, I shudder to think what will you say after seeing the Hindi version where Shriya Saran is playing that role!!
IMO Devgan is pretty much doing a thankless role here. There is no way he can match to Lal or Kamal. What hope does he have?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aman SM
July 6, 2015
I think Meena was a definite better choice than Gauthami (I don’t have to see Papanasam to say this). Even Shriya Saran can be deemed a better choice if you think about the plot. Gauthami looks old, tired etc and lacks MILF quotient ( for want of a better word) to allow the plot to progress with creepy mobile dude instantly lusting after her.
LikeLike
Sid (@Tweet2Sid)
July 6, 2015
Here’s an interesting analysis – How different is Papanasam when compared to Drishyam?
LikeLiked by 1 person
bhagat
July 6, 2015
@ Krish : I am thinking Devgn is gonna pull it in his own brooding way. I feel we shouldnt be comparing at all. Cant underestimate him too; he was brilliant in a few movies. Agree to the Shriya Saran part though. What were the makers thinking ? It wouldve been great to see Juhi or one of her peers do that role. And each time I see Devgn and Tabu in the trailer, for some reason, it reminds me of ‘Ruk Ruk Ruk, arrey baaba Ruk’ 😛 😛
@ BR : Being a mallu, I cant get to think Gautami as urban. We had seen her in this village belle avatar so many times (Ayalathey adheham, vidyarambham, his highness abdulla, etc.) that I actually had a hiccup when I watched her in ‘chikku bukku raile’ 😛
LikeLike
sanjay
July 6, 2015
as well as commercial extravaganzas (with classy touch) like ‘Johnnie Walker’, ‘Narasimham’, ‘Valyettan’ and ‘Black’.
@Mangalassery,
you are joking right. Classy touch, my foot unless you have a different definition of classy, Those are the worst movies made anywhere in the world, leave alone Malayalam. Crude character s crude melodrama,stupid idiotic plots that would put rajni films to shame
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 6, 2015
Nishikant Kamat is a good director , I suspect that the Hindi version will be more thriller-like rather than the more sombre tone taken by the Tamil/Malayalam versions.
Re: Tabu – she looks awesome in that uniform of hers.
LikeLike
Supertramp
July 6, 2015
One thing I am expecting hindi Drishyam to get right is the cinematography. Avinash Arun who shot and directed the gorgeous looking ‘Killa’ is the DOP. He also shot the Cannes FIPRESCI prize winning indie ‘Masaan’.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Prajith
July 6, 2015
@sanjay. That is very correct. Those 2 idiots shaji kailas and renjith destroyed mohanlal the great actor and Malayalam film. Mohanlal became superhero doing more stupid things than rajnikanth. then renjith became director and made comedy films which are not funny and serious films which are funny. anybody calling renjith great writer of Malayalam should say sorry to other writers or get treatment from kuthiravattam
LikeLike
doctorhari
July 6, 2015
Just saw the movie. Ur first few sentences summarised my thoughts. Only thing was this being a Kamal movie, I expected he would add a bit more to the original. Was a little disappointed as it was just an exact and faithful remake – save for a few subtexts kamal manages to squeeze in here and there. (Example – the full-black shirt he wears along with the sacred ash, the new inspector in the final scene named ‘Bhoomi nathan’ and so on.) But a worthwhile addition to Tamil movies though. One thing I wondered about was about the censor certificate of the movie. The violence in the enquiry scenes was much amped up compared to the original, and made me close my eyes. I’m not saying they were unnessary, but doesn’t the movie require at least a U/A? Not to take anything away from a quality film.. But just wondering
LikeLiked by 2 people
Prasanna
July 6, 2015
There is more discussion about ML movies than KH in the Papanasam thread. Does it tell us something about the impact of Georgekutty on Papanasam.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ram Murali
July 6, 2015
A couple of Spoilers ahead…
I absolutely loved Papanasam. Kamal’s performance was splendid, I thought. I especially loved the scene (after the guy is murdered) in which he fixes his older daughter’s unkempt hair and then, realizing that he raised his voice a little too much, gently pets the little one. I mean, while watching Kamal make these small, loving gestures, the first thought that came to my mind was, “No way that that was written into the script!” I’ll never know but I just thought that that scene was beautifully enacted.
Also, the climactic sequence where he confesses to Anant Mahadevan…
@brangan you mentioned that as an example of OTT acting. I didn’t find it so. Completely fine for the two of us to view it differently. But would you mind describing your opinion of that scene specifically and why you would characterize that as OTT? To me, Kamal’s confession seemed at the right emotional pitch, given his character and how he felt after having escaped from the clutches of the law but still feeling answerable to his own conscience…
“Just like it was in Mahanadhi, a mix of “invisible” and “show-off” acting.”
–> Could you elaborate a little further on this as well? By “show off acting” did you mean that there were scenes in Mahanadhi where you felt that you could see more of the actor than the character? I am asking because I thought that Kamal completely dissolved into Krishnaswamy for the duration of Mahanadhi. My favorite example of what I think you refer to as “invisible” acting is the sequence with Kamal and his daughter (and then his mother in law) in the wee hours of the morning. His tender interaction with his daughter and how she falls asleep on his lap continues to make me tear up every time i watch it…
Start watching at the 50-min point.
LikeLiked by 3 people
an
July 6, 2015
Aman SM,
Not all guys are alike, if an overweight Meena is a “MILF” for you, then a fit but slightly older Gauthami might appeal to another dude. Gauthami isn’t too bad for someone who’s perverted and in desperation!
LikeLiked by 4 people
apala
July 6, 2015
“Spoilers ahead”
BR, wonderful review for an awesome film with terrific Kamal and solid crew. Absolutely enjoyed the film and the Nellai tamil was delightful! I loved Drishyam too but this “all-heart” Suyambu worked better for me. Subtlety is fine but when you learn about a murder committed by your little one, you cannot be that stone-cold and call it “யதார்த்தம்”. Whereas Suyambu’s reaction was completely believable and natural. And again in the climax scene, unable to face the mother, Suyambu was all emotional with overwhelming guilt – I think that’s more in tune with a “common man” than the stiff George kutty!
So, even though both Kamal and Lal had their own style of presenting Suyambu and George with their own flavors, I think Kamal’s Suyambu was more emotionally touching and natural.
On the other comment that people say about him just acting in other director’s films (just because of few failures?), I do not concur. I think Kamal is one of the best screen writer’s out there. I wish he has the time and funding to direct all his scripts himself and not let watered down by somebody else handling the direction. This is just a Kamal fanboy’s humble opinion.
For Mahanadhi Comparisons: Mahanadhi Krishna was so gullible, innocent that he could be fooled by anybody. He also showed that you do not have to make blunders in life – when you say a hesitant “yes” where a solid “No” should have been the answer, is enough for your downfall. But Suyambu, as the name suggests, all self-made. He does not cheat anybody and no one can cheat him! He is funny, motor-mouthed and people’s person but still he will never let anything touch his family.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anantha Krishnan
July 6, 2015
You guys see only the negatives in a person… I am no fan of Narasimham (that mohanlal intro scene was idiotic)… But there are many other films that make Ranjith a great writer – Mayamayuram for eg was as good as a padmarajan movie… the way he writes the charecter ‘Mangalaseri Neelakantan’ in Devasuram is epic… And there are more-Kaiyoppu, Summer in Bethlehem, Thirakkadha, Pranchiyettan, Indian Rupee… There are terrible films too like Rock n Roll… and I find it difficult to watch Nandanam these days due to the melodrama sequences… but still comparing to shaji kailas and Rajni masala films… too much!!!
LikeLike
apala
July 6, 2015
https://m.facebook.com/Balagurunathan.u1/posts/799380473510071
Like! Like!!
LikeLike
Pranesh
July 6, 2015
I remember a discussion in the Kamal interview thread about how he chooses stupid co-actors these days (esp. Pooja Kumar and Andrea in his last two movies). I felt the solid cast really made a difference here. The only actor who distracted me was the IG in her initital scenes.
LikeLike
vijay
July 6, 2015
Talking of “looking the part” and “Gauthami looking too urban” couldn’t the same be said of Kamal as well? When has he ever looked like a villager?
Vairamuthu’s comment after watching Virumandi was that the casting was superb and the characters looked the part save for Kamal. I couldn’t buy Kamal as this Madurai villager, no matter how much he might have tanned/colored his skin or changed his accent to help belong to the crowd. In many scenes in the flashbacks one was constantly aware that they were watching Kamal and not Virumandi the character. In fact Nallasivam may be the only instance of Kamal disappearing into a character(thanks in large part due to the disfigured getup) in the last 10-15 years.
LikeLike
Aravindan
July 7, 2015
SPOILERS
Appalled at the way the scene is being discussed – not just here in the comments section but everywhere else. Very casually jokes are thrown at office lunch table to the effect that it is more logical for the guy to sexually harass if it had been a certain actor playing that role. Do we need a not-so-desirable woman playing the role to establish that he is a pervert? What about the daughter, then? I mean, really?
I also cringed when Suyambulingam says “rape scene” either romantically or jokingly – seemed totally unnecessary – and also out of place with the events waiting to happen in the film.
LikeLike
Srinivas R
July 7, 2015
I am probably nitpicking here , but I am a little queasy about the whole ‘enacting a rape scene” joke. Wouldn’t it have been better to say he wanted to enact a first night scene, been equally funny , probably conveyed the same meaning. Doesn’t matter in the larger scheme of things but just didn’t feel right and had to get it off my chest.
LikeLike
brangan
July 7, 2015
Srinivas R: I am a little queasy about the whole ‘enacting a rape scene” joke. Wouldn’t it have been better to say he wanted to enact a first night scene
See, you are not wrong in feeling queasy. But the characterisation of Suyambu isn’t wrong either. He is a small-town guy. He probably isn’t politically correct. Heck, I have seen colleagues who make jokes about these things.
We should not expect characters in film to hew to OUR notions of right and wrong. But yes, depending on the things they do, we are bound to feel queasy, etc. They are the way they are. We are the way we are.
MANK: Oh, I like practically all his films — except very few, like Family Plot. But have a special fondness for the films he made in his so-called “decline” phase — things like Topaz and Torn Curtain and Marnie. They have some amazing set pieces — makes you think “If this is what someone does when he’s in a slump…” 🙂
But of course, the 50s/early 60s phase, till about Birds, is tops. Especially North by Northwest, which James Mason simply owns.
Reg. do you like the Hitchcockian method of suspense, you know where the criminal is revealed to the audience fairly early as opposed to final reel twist and revelation
I do, actually. Because you then get to see the “how” (both in terms of the narrative as well as filmmaking) rather than the “what” or “who” or “why”. Because most times, the what/who/why is never strong enough to warrant keeping the revelation till the end. That’s why I thought Papanasam (as I said in the review) is Hitchcockian in a sense.
an: what could they have done, especially when they’re not in power anymore
It is not about being in power. It is about the film’s utter lack of interest in the revelations about their son.
Look at it psychologically. You go to the extent of torturing someone you suspect of harming your son. You are so convinced that you are right, they are wrong. Then, suddenly, you receive a body blow. You learn things about your son. You realise you are in the wrong too.
Surely that would take a minute to process…
Krish: Reg, the Hindi version, it does look like a more urban film — i.e. not a small-town film like the Tamil and Malayalam versions. I’m curious to see what they do with it, but don’t know if I can sit through this plot another time…
Aman SM: Oh come on, Aman. Even if you are going the MILF route, surely you have to allow that your MILF-worthiness criteria needn’t be the same as someone else’s.
venkatesh: Re: Tabu – she looks awesome in that uniform of hers.”
Aha! So now we know what rocks your boat 🙂
Ram Murali: I didn’t mean OTT in the negative sense –as in “unbearably OTT”. It was more like the pitch was much higher there, heading into Sivaji zone.
apala: Subtlety is fine but when you learn about a murder committed by your little one, you cannot be that stone-cold and call it “யதார்த்தம்”.
I’d disagree. It depends on the person. You can’t universalise one’s response to things. Some people internalise even the worst tragedies.
vijay: How many actors you know have really “disappeared” into a part after they’ve made a number of films? Whether Streep or De Niro or Pacino or Bachchan, it’s only the early years — i.e. till they exhaust their repertoire of emotions — that we are capable of being “surprised” by them, and we say things like, “OMG, look how he’s disappeared into the part.” (One of my greatest regrets is not seeing Kamal as Chappani at the time the film was released. I saw it after Kamal became “Kamal.”)
So after a point, the star/actor is ALWAYS present in the performance. We are ALWAYS aware that it is Kamal who’s playing the part — and this is NOT a failing on the actor’s part. This is just how it is.
So now, our criteria become different. We HAVE to be aware of the fact that a Naseer can never “surprise” us the way a Nawazauddin (for instance) can — though now, even with the latter, we seem to be aware of his bag of tricks, he seems to have exhausted his repertoire.
We now have to evaluate the performance not through the “does he disappear into the part” question, but through the “is he convincing?” question. (Or “is he fun?” etc.)
Again, that’s not Kamal’s failing. That’s just how it works. And not just in films. Even in writing, say. Rushdie can never dazzle you today the way he did with Midnight’s Children. Though he can certainly excite, entertain, etc. But that awareness that you are reading not “a book” but “a Rushdie book” — that’s always there once someone becomes known and has gone the gamut.
In a smaller way, I find this with my own writing. Long-time readers often say that I used to write better, and while that may be true, I wonder if there’s another reason for this comment — the fact that my writing no longer “surprises” them the way it did when I started out. Now, they are aware of my style, my tricks, my flourishes, the things I look for in films, the way I process films…
PS: I notice a “save for” in doctorhari’s and vijay’s comments. Hmmm…
LikeLiked by 2 people
MANK
July 7, 2015
Brangan, thanks for that detailed reply. It was interesting to hear your fondness for the latter day Hitchcock. I myself am fond of Frenzy, which I consider his last great film – its wonderful how he mixes humor and horror in that film, the predicament of the police chief who has to eat stuff like pig’s feet made by his over zealous wife interspersed with the brutal rape and murder by the serial killer. And by great set pieces, I believe that you are hinting at the murder in the farm in torn curtain by Newman with the knife, showing how hard its really to kill a man, that scene was copied directly by Spielberg for saving Private Ryan. It was a terrific scene, even though the film TC as a whole didn’t work for me.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rahini David
July 7, 2015
Srinivas R & Aravindan: Haven’t watched the movie yet. But regarding an using the words “I want to enact a Rape Scene”, I feel it is not different from “I have a thing for BSDM” or “How about some Role enacting tonight” or some such. You have to allow for a limited vocablary when you are painting a certain type of character. It doesn’t really look authentic for a small time cable operator to know all the right words. It is upto the viewers to paint his character in our minds with all the brushstrokes that are made available to us.
That said people who do subtitling should take such things to consideration. I am not sure if they really do it.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jala Bula Jungs
July 7, 2015
Despite the overall brilliance of P.Naasam, I see two glaring loop-holes:
The cell-phone which Kamal bought – During the police investigation, they did find that there are two cell-phones involved – with two different IMEI numbers. So, instead of tracking the newer phone which Kamal bought (which could have been so easily traced to the shop where Kamal bought it), they keep going through this cumbersome investigation!
The use of a lie-detector – Now, the IG does tell that she needs the court’s permission, to use the lie-detector. But she also tells that, she was already detaining Kamal’s family illegally. So, if she can illegally detain them, why not illegally use a lie detector test too??? I mean, we’re talking about an IG here, not some random guy on the streets. So, she could as well use the same extra constitutional power for using a lie detector, which she employed to detain them! Simple, and the truth is out!
Would have been a flawless thriller in the league of Manorama Six feet Under, had they paid attention to these two points, I guess!
Anyone else agrees/disagrees with me??
LikeLike
MANK
July 7, 2015
Reg: Hindi drishyam, everyone has had their say about casting of shriya – which I believe came about because no frontline actress would play the mother of 2 grown up daughters – but how about the casting of devghan, isn’t he rather young for the role especially compared with lal and kamal – and both of them has a solid track record of playing fathers. wonder someone like anil kapoor or irfan khan would have been a better choice, commercial feasibility of the project notwithstanding
And why is it called drishyam in Hindi, shouldn’t it be drishya? I never heard anybody using drishyam in Hindi.
LikeLike
Supertramp
July 7, 2015
@MANK I don’t think Drishya evokes the same kinda meaning as Drishyam (which is a sanskrit word I guess), I think it can be used in hindi as well. In fact Manmundra’s mumbai based production house which produces predominantly hindi based Indies (Ankhon Dekhi, Masaan etc) is named Drishyam films.
After reading some of the comments I am beginning to agree with Seinfeld on his rant about ‘how kids these days are too politically correct’. I think everything should be taken in context and that doesn’t mean you can get away with misogynistic or sexist overtones. Just that we should take context into consideration before going on with all the -ist accusations. Anyway it is a complex issue and can be argued in anyway you want. Like how there was this whole debate about whether Mad Max is feminist or is it sexist under the garb of feminism. As for me as long as it feels authentic and is in context like in this instance, don’t expect the guy to say BDSM or role playing (as Rahini David said).
LikeLike
Vignesh
July 7, 2015
To be fair, I do not think there was anything wrong with the usage of “rape scene” term by Suyambulingam especially in the context. It has to be seen in the context of the seen and also was a VERY PRIVATE conversation between the husband and wife, which goes like this,
Suyambulingam watches the Sempoove song, which urges him to go home to his wife. As he leaves, Sermathurai (assistant) asks him if Sempoove song is over. This clearly indicates that it is very usual of Suyambulingam to go home if he gets into the mood watching songs / scenes like those.
Suyambu reaches home and seeing him, the first reaction of Rani is “Ayyo, Naan sothu-la thanni oothittene” meaning she has poured water in the rice and there is nothing to eat.
Suyambu teasingly asks her “Naanga enna sothukka alayurom?” that should he come home only for food.
Rani now gets the context and asks him “Innakku enna scene, kulikkura scene-ah bedroom scene-ah”. Once again, this clearly shows that this is not the first time Suyambu has come home in the middle of the night after watching such scenes / songs. To this, the naughty husband says Suyambu “Rape scene!!!” Not even once does he indicate that “I will enact a rape scene on you”. Just like any naughty husband, in a private conversation, he was just pulling the legs of his wife with a naughty jibe.
Only if the whole conversation along with the context is taken, the term will make sense. I loved the fact that a classy song like Sempoove was chosen instead of say, a “Kattippudi Kattipudi da” or a “Vallava enai Vellava”
In fact, there is another private conversation next morning where Rani says he need s to be careful using some words in front of the children. Suyambu says “Enakkellam antha vayasula onnumme theriyathu-tti” meaning as a teen he didn’t know a thing about it and Rani naughtily give a reply “Ippa mattum theriyumaakkum” indicating he is still a novice. Now, the naughty wife pulls the husband’s legs. IMO, This conversation concludes the whole episode.
P.S. Was the song used a silent tribute to Mohanlal?? and unwittingly a tribute to Tabu too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Neena
July 7, 2015
Since we seem to believe that a small-town/village guy would be authentically sexist and even internalised rape as legitimate sexual behaviour, would that not make it more dangerous for the film to casually peddle in those stereotypes, especially when it comes to its lead character played by Kamal or Mohanlal? An ‘urban viewer, whatever that means, would read the context and read grey tones into the character or translate it into more politically correct language as BDSM. But, a ‘common’ already-sexist viewer would read it as normal male behaviour and see no harm in perpetuating the same culture with his family, with women in general. It is not a film’s duty to change his worldview or educate him. But, if it can be avoided, then, I believe it should be.
IMHO, Art/movies or an artist doesn’t live outside his social mileu and cannot claim that what he does has no impact on society. If BR’s colleagues think rape jokes are normal, why would we think that it is a particularly small-town characteristic that adds value to the Suyambu character? How is it different from other films like Peepli Live which seem to exoticise the innocent villager? Would we still root for a lead character who made casually violent remarks about a certain religious group or Dalits? It is a question of what we normalise as a society.
Eg: these two art pieces in London:
http://www.theguardian.com/culture/2014/sep/24/slavery-exhibition-black-actors-cages-shut-down
http://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/jun/30/william-tell-nudity-and-scene-greeted-with-boos-at-royal-opera-house
And those were authentic depictions of reality too.
Those protests could hardly be dismissed as ‘kids being too politically correct’. It is people, who have been previously voiceless, denied agency, expressing themselves.
LikeLike
Ram Murali
July 7, 2015
“So after a point, the star/actor is ALWAYS present in the performance. “
Having read “CWMR” I have come to appreciate some of the thoughtful casting decisions that happen in the movies, esp. for supporting actors. For instance, in OKK, I loved the casting of Prakash Raj and Leela Samson. In Prakash Raj, that familiarity that you describe (in your comment above) worked very well since he (both the actor and the character) commanded respect instantly. And, in Leela Samson, since we hadn’t seen in her in the movies, you didn’t see an known face PLAYING an Alzheimer’s patient. It was easier to accept Samson as Bhavani instead of thinking, “Leela Samson is playing the role of an Alzheimer’s patient.”
I think Kamal’s films (even though he didn’t direct or produce PN, I’d like to think that he generally has a say in casting of his films) don’t always get the casting spot on (as you wrote in your comments on Uthama Villain) but when they do, the result is memorable. VMC Haneefa in “Mahanadhi” was a SUPERB choice since we weren’t familiar with him in Thamizh Cinema till then so, in the movie, he could convincingly be the ugly personification of all the crap that was happening in society. Similarly, I loved the casting of Anant Mahadevan here. I could just see him as a concerned Dad who wants to do things the right way. A more familiar actor would’ve not worked as well, I thought.
LikeLiked by 4 people
brangan
July 7, 2015
MANK: how about the casting of devghan, isn’t he rather young for the role especially compared with lal and kamal
But Kamal here is supposed to be in his 40s, so Devgn doesn’t seem too odd…
Neena: Since we seem to believe that a small-town/village guy would be authentically sexist…
No. This is the kind of generalising we should avoid. All I am saying is THIS PARTICULAR small-town/village guy happens to be this way.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Neena
July 7, 2015
Yes, BR, because the director/writer/actor made him so. They could have avoided it and still had a great characterisation without losing out on authenticity/reality/intrigue. I did not say “we believe ALL small town guys are sexist” either. Such portrayal in movies, without explicitly problematising it, normalise misogyny in real life, IMO.
LikeLiked by 1 person
vijay
July 7, 2015
BR, while I am well aware of how completely disappearing into a character can get difficult after a certain point of time (especially when the actor is also a star) from our POV, I could at least buy Kamal in Mahanadhi as this small town naive guy or even in Guna. But Virumandi was stretching it a bit too much. Did he really look like Pasupathi or Abhirami’s relation in the film, especially in the flashback scenes? Even when he nails the madurai accent, you end up consciously admiring his effort/talent and that takes you out of the scene for a moment. Like I mentioned sometime back, he could have completed the perfect casting job in that film by having had somebody else appropriate play Virumandi and sticking to just direction.
As for Naseeruddin, I thought he did the job just about right in say, Monsoon wedding and he was already well known at that time. Haven’t seen much of his lately.
In Hollywood, Daniel Day Lewis was universally acclaimed as unrecognizable in There will be Blood completely becoming his character. This, after he already had an Oscar under his belt and was well known. And then he did it again in Lincoln, even if I caught only caught a few scenes of it.
LikeLike
vijay
July 7, 2015
“PS: I notice a “save for” in doctorhari’s and vijay’s comments. Hmmm…”
?? Didn’t get what you meant
LikeLike
Kutty
July 8, 2015
Have to agree with Neena here. To put it simply, I find this to be double standards. If Santhanam in a crass comedy said something sexist, he will be called out. And we had an entire thread where people seemed to shrivel at the thought of Sada being paired with Vadivel exhibiting A level racism. Of course, we speak like that to friends. Yes, read that again.. to friends. Could we avoid that? Yes. But stopping yourself from saying something is much more difficult than not putting into writing. And writing it into a dialogue from a movie, not once but twice, given the overall cultural climate in this country is not the right thing to do. I am sure “first night” scene would have evoked necessary laughter. Someone like Kamal/Mohanlal saying rape scene so lightly may fit it in with the character, but does not justify it. It adds nothing to the characterization. And to think Mohanlal once wrote a long blog post in support of the kissing protests in Kerala asking people to less sexist. Not cool. The defense being laid out in this thread serves as a reminder of how even in the act of reviewing movies we reveal our classist selves.
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 8, 2015
Neena: I downvoted your comment , (I mentioned it because i never do that).
“Such portrayal in movies, without explicitly problematising it, normalise misogyny in real life” _
this is such a problematic statement. Where does it end? What is the line (visible or invisible) we draw when we portray characters? This is a rabbit hole with never ending steps in it.
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 8, 2015
BR: “Because you then get to see the “how” (both in terms of the narrative as well as filmmaking) rather than the “what” or “who” or “why”.”
What a great comment.
Or as Hitchcock himself said : There is a great difference between Mystery and Suspense. Mystery is an intellectual process , essentially a whodunit unlike suspense thats an emotional process. therefore you can only give the audience the suspense element by giving them information.
And another comment :
“We are ALWAYS aware that it is Kamal who’s playing the part “ :
I think Kamal mentioned this at some point as being the reason he likes to do extensive makeup.
Re: Tabu : yeah maan 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Drunken Monkey
July 8, 2015
I think these Mallu technicians are smoking something really sacred. Especially the cinematography and sound design is very simple but gets the core of the film right. This sense of how to pump in life into the screen is something totally absent in tamil/telugu movies.
Even the newer lot of bengali films are good with this(Ray’s soil! enough said). Happened to watch this film ‘Baishe Sarbon’ which had an eerie mood fed effortlessly into it. There is hardly anything plastic in it.
On that note..
I have always enjoyed when Kamal collaborated with some good writers and technicians against doing it all himself and picking the new gen ppl. Something like ‘south side of the north facing horse’ was totally ridiculous but with a good writer around, something like ‘padikaadha mezhai’ was really enjoyable. Think of the gems of crazy mohan’s against dialogues of manmadhan ambu & UV.
Even technically..
Thiru(cinematography) is an exception. Otherwise, the kind of immersive quality of Thevar magan & Mahanadhi is totally absent in all his recent films.
LikeLiked by 1 person
vipo
July 8, 2015
maruthi car, cell phone, rape, matter scene on tv – everything around suyambu lingam matters to the ‘moment’ in the film.
LikeLike
vipo
July 8, 2015
thought kamal was excellent.. he rarely goes wrong in village characters.. it’s the fake english accent (in films like UPO VV) that’s his problem.. both films before n after Dasa and Fletcher character..
LikeLike
brangan
July 8, 2015
vijay: Agree about Virumaandi — “look”-wise, Kamal stuck out.
As for someone like Daniel Day Lewis “disappearing” into his characters, you must also keep in mind that he has consciously kept himself underexposed. He’s very choosy about what he does — he doles out from his “bag of tricks” in bits and pieces.
So yes, even though I am aware of watching him, there’s an additional level of immersion in whatever he plays. But with most big stars, this isn’t possible as they are very overexposed. I mean, Kamal has been acting since he was five. How can anyone realistically expect him to “disappear”? 🙂
And reg. “save for”, see the earlier comment where I’d posted a reader’s anguish that I’d used “save for” instead of “save” (which she said was the correct usage). And then I found “save for” in your comment (and doctorhari’s).
Kutty: There is a big difference between what Santhanam usually does and what Kamal does in this film. Kamal is using this “offensive” term with his wife, with whom he’s shared many intimacies. This is a PRIVATE moment.
With Santhanam, these terms are bandied about as jokes with pals and casual characters — they become PUBLIC moments. This is why more people protest.
Drunken Monkey: This sense of how to pump in life into the screen is something totally absent in tamil/telugu movies.
Absolutely. Can’t speak for Telugu — but Tamil, yes. There was a time Kamal’s films, for instance, would guarantee good technical values — Mahanadhi, Guna, Sathya, etc. Post-Nayakan, he seemed on a mission to make Tamil cinema more than just about the script. But I’m shocked how this aspect has totally fallen off the radar in recent years. Dasavatharam, Uttama Villain — these are films you’d expect (if nothing else, at least) the technical aspects to be aces, but…
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
July 8, 2015
Off topic – there was this interview with this poet on the radio this morning, and he was reciting bits and pieces of his favourite poetry. This one really stood out.
Ilayarajavin isai kurippu pol thanthi kambiyil kuruvigal.
Awesome imagery, no? Wanted to jot it down before it slipped my mind 🙂
LikeLiked by 6 people
Kutty
July 8, 2015
BR : Not sure if the distinction between public and private conversations works for me. Let me put it this way – private or public, the key is the reaction it elicits from other members on screen. If Santhanam cracks a sexist joke and reaction is backslapping and laughter, that is terrible. Similarly, if Mohanlal.Kamal says this and Meena/Gouthami lets him get away with a smile, it is, in my mind equally damaging. Unless it is put down explicitly, people are not going to get the message. For a while, I thought this was perhaps intentionally left there. The character and the audience later get a feel for the havoc which can be wrecked by unrestrained lust. But if that be, a part of the character’s repentance should also revolve around how he seemed to trivialize this issue. There is a stark contrast when in the same movie have a character use rape playfully then seeks revenge when such an event almost happens to his family. Almost like, “if it happens to someone else (even if in a movie) it is fodder for humor but not when it happens at home”. Again, that is perfectly human behavior to not realize the gravity of something till it hits you hard. But at that juncture the tendency is also to repent on how you have been guilty of painting it with a different brush earlier. That is what is missing in this movie. I understand that the movie may not want to be seen as explicitly sending social messages, but at least don’t send the wrong ones, no?
LikeLike
Drunken Monkey
July 8, 2015
@brangan
I believe that it is mostly about Collaboration. Annachi-ku serkka sari illa saar.
Even post-nayagan, a small film like Nammavar had life in it. Sathi leelavathi, kurudhipunal.. and the list stops there. These are films that breathes.
Though I like the Heyram and Virumaandi, it is so evident that films directed by kamal are all glossy by taste. The lighting and art calls out to be noticed. What makes up for it is his brilliant staging of a scene. A staging like ‘kamal-atul meeting’, ‘ponnu paakura scene’-ku munnadi vara the establishment of the house with the urinating baby, small kids etc in Heyram is totally absent these days.
Virumaandi had less of these & Vishwaroopam.. I have promised myself not to get me started on that.
P.S: The sceptical send off scene with mythili-saketh inside the car, all the elders are worried about Saketh’s ‘Budhi swadhinathula irruko illayo?’, Ambujam passes over a ‘idlyum-molagapodiyum’ tiffin box and translates what Vasantha maami is mimicking from the other side of the lane. Just before you think the scene is over, bearded Bashyam appears on the window reflection calling out for mythili.. Miss him man! Totally!
LikeLike
vipo
July 8, 2015
daniel day lewis disappearing ah? sir lal irundh daniel day lewis varaikkum we see them appattama in their characters.. daniel day lewis accent, body language training kamal madhiri remba attempt theriyin.. athuve neenga spencer tracy/lal oda compare panna koodadhu pls.. diff styles
LikeLike
brangan
July 8, 2015
Presenting without comment this comment on the Hindu site (under the Papanasam review) 🙂
Order restored… A “normal” Kamal movie and a “normal” review by Baradwaj Rangan!!! More of both please … 🙂
Kutty: There are two aspects to this.
Is the “rape” remark squirm-inducing for the audience? No question — yes.
But is such a comment “valid” in the context of the character? That is, is this something he’s (not Kamal, but Suyambu) likely to say in this situation? Again the answer is yes.
So I think we should allow for the dialogue to remain in the film even as we express our concern about it. But saying that such dialogue should NOT be there is like saying Lolita shouldn’t exist because it deals with pedophilia.
Art’s only obligation is to be art. It cannot — should not — be asked to “mould” society.
LikeLike
Neena
July 8, 2015
@venkatesh: wow! of all the comments you have ever read anywhere, mine was the only one you found so problematic that you had to downvote it? Of course, you should if you don’t agree with it. But, I’m surprised it was that provocative for you! Where does it end? You could ask the same question of freedom of expression/art etc. Do we believe that art is so devoid of meaning in the social context that it should have absolute freedom and no responsibility at all? Where does it end for women if it is okay for the lead in a movie to crack a rape joke?
@ BR: But, doesn’t art mould society in ways that it probably doesn’t intend to? Sure, the dialogue fits the characterisation. But, did the character have to say that to be what he is? Art doesn’t have to have a social message. But, it can be conscious of what effect it may have on society.
I’m reminded of a famous scene from Mad Men, where the Joan Holloway character is raped by her fiance in her office. It’s her fiance; It’s after hours, so it is a private moment. It isn’t shared with any other character afterward. But, it is beautifully problematised with Joan simply looking disgusted and squirming under her fiance. That’s that and no one talks about it again. She goes on to marry him and all that. All that would have been necessary in Papanasam would have been a show of discomfort or embrassment by the Gauthami character, to ‘problematise’ it.
LikeLike
Neena
July 8, 2015
Lolita is actually another perfect example. Nobody says it shouldn’t exist – it should for the way it details the mechanics of child sexual abuse without ever making it voyeuristic or normal or trivial. That is of course a social and not a literary reading at all. There is a rising sense of revulsion you feel for Humbert Humbert as the book progresses. And that’s not by straightforward pontification.
LikeLike
Jeeva P
July 8, 2015
Rangan, taking the discussion a bit forward from your point on art, I have heard that the French people are the most politically and socially conscious among other nations in the world. Also reportedly, a majority of homes in France has a library and a critically well received book there sells more copies than a Sahitya Akademi winner here does, even though the French are significantly less in number than Tamilians. I can give you more evidences to support my claim that, unlike in India, there are things other than money that can interest the French. So do you see, like me, a connection between their love for art and the way they have evolved as a society? So if art can help evolving a society for the better, does your claim that art should not mould society lose some of its weight?
P.S . I too strongly believe that none has any right to dictate the artist keeping the welfare of the society in view. But my question is something that has been rankling inside me for a long time.
LikeLike
Bhavani
July 8, 2015
I saw ‘Poovarasam Peepee’ on TV a few days ago, and coming to think of it, this movie very subtly comments on the rape-as-titillation vs. the rape-as-horror narratives. The movie is itself centered around a rape (a gang-rape, as the newspapers report) and is very unambiguous about the rape-as-horror and rape-as-social-evil stand. But the boys who unwittingly witness the event, completely realize what they have seen only as they cluster around a teashack TV and gaze open-mouthedly at a ‘rape scene’, one of many that peppered our movies in the 80s and 90s. They are certainly transfixed by the scene (if not aroused, although a subsequent scene shows one of the boys ‘coming of age’ in a very interestingly staged manner). Surely, the very grown-ups (the likes of Suyambulingam?) who write, stage, endorse and enjoy such scenes in popular, free-for-consumption media, would have thought it their ‘moral obligation’ to shoo the boys away had they lingered watching the scene much longer. The same movie features a bunch of older characters watching straightforward porn rather furtively, knowing they would be punished if caught, further exemplifying the double standards that exist in our society. Yet, the eleven-year-olds are quite clear on the idea that ‘rape is not okay’. Their sexual awakening (they realize what their ‘kalyana saaman’ is for, if I remember the phrase correctly) coincides with the realization that the scene on TV and the scene they witnessed at the riverbank are absolutely not okay. As a society we live with these contradictions – a rape scene is fed as erotica, porn is frowned upon, we are sexually repressed yet most of us realize that sex without consent is quite horrible. IMO The scene in Papanasam was quite true to life and was another stroke in Suyambu’s character sketch.
LikeLike
Arun
July 8, 2015
Papanasam is a pretty good film. No doubts about that. But I think there were some small areas for improvement. Here are my thoughts about the film-
The IG s son character was a one-dimensional one. It was portrayed as a completely dark character. There is very little in the film to convey that some kind of lust made him to take the video.
Nellai tamil was difficult in some places that I was scratching my head. The conversation between Delhi Ganesh. What were they speaking?
Despite a taut screenplay, few initial scenes could have been done away with. Like for example, the bedroom scene/conversations between Suyambu and Rani. Also initial sequences were a bit slow compared to the later portions.
4.Apart from a few scenes between Suyambu and Rani or Suyambu or children, we do not get a deeper sense of a family .
Suyambu is the lead character of the film, but he is not immensely likeable. Most of the times he comes across as an egoistic, miser and arrogant man. His repeated interventions into Perumal’s conversations made me half- empathize with Perumal. And when he brags about Thottam /material properties or telling his children telling “you eat this only because I work” when the concern point was his late-night work– he comes across as egoistic and arrogant. And when he feels annoyed with his wife’s shopping as in a song sequence, he is a miser. The director could have done away with a few of his negative points .
If the director had removed the thriller aspect and made it a routine crime drama, it would not have get this response. I was guessing about what’s next in the later portions. Which worked highly in favour of the film.
LikeLike
Ram Murali
July 8, 2015
“Ilayarajavin isai kurippu pol thanthi kambiyil kuruvigal.”
–> In Solomon Papaiya’s baashai, “Arumai yaa…arumai!”
My favorite imagery is, “Konjuginra Sevigal Rendum Kaelvi Aanadhu” I just loved that the lyricist (Kannadasan?) could liken a girl’s ear to a ?
LikeLike
Rm
July 8, 2015
On the ‘disappearing into the character’ act – as somebody rightly pointed out, I don’t think there came another Kamal film after ‘Anbe Sivam’ that showcased THIS ability of his. I think it has predominantly been about his performances and the variety of things he could do. Eventually his performances only played rightly to our premature pre-conceived notions of his characterisation, asking us to rate it against his performance in the end. Even if the character was evil, it was only a matter of how evil it could get, a sense of a ‘re-discovery of characterisation’ has always been uncommon in his films.
Piku did this beautifully – it threw up situations and allowed us to watch how its characters reacted to it with their quirks and flaws, in the process allowing us this re-discovery.
And in Anbe Sivam, with a true test of Nallasivam’s characterization towards the end, the admiration for this ‘character’ notched up ahead when he forsook his love for the honor of brotherhood without any fuss.
The ‘re-discovery of character’ of sorts in Papanasam will hopefully work for people who haven’t watched Drishyam. For the rest of us, I guess we need to wait with our fingers crossed for ‘Thoongavanam’..
LikeLike
apala
July 8, 2015
BR-sir, since you are sharing “kavithai”…………here is one!
LikeLike
Ravi K
July 8, 2015
Whenever I see people complaining that the protagonists of a film don’t conform to some ideal, I’m reminded of this Calvin and Hobbes strip:
LikeLiked by 3 people
Botched Plan B
July 8, 2015
Reblogged this on Botchedplanb's Blog and commented:
Here is the review of Kamal Haasan’s Papanasam, the remake of the Malayalam blockbuster by one of the best critics in the country, Bharadwaj Rangan. Jeethu Joseph scores again!
LikeLike
viggu12991
July 8, 2015
Hi rangan,
I am a regular follower of your blogs… I basically like your reviews… here there is a question… U have told about meta reflections of the actor when he watches Sivaji movies such as paasamalar etc… but I would say that those were stances to show that he is a emotional person… so in the course of his plan weaved by him to save his family, there is no time or chance for him to show emotions… as he is leading the plan… which makes him to break down on his emotions in final scene when the other parents call him and show the emotions… till then he is being alright and has been covering up…(acting )… and final scene is not a tribute to Sivaji… but the scene required that style of acting… I would say the theme of papanasam and drishyam are different… and the theme of drishyam has evolved more from the plot… but the theme of papanasam evolved more from suyambulingam… what do u think?
LikeLike
Ravi K
July 9, 2015
Arun, it is exactly those “negative points” of Suyambu that make him a fascinating, rounded character. If he was a perfect father and husband, he would have been utterly boring.
Overall his characterization is incredibly positive. He is a “padikkatha medhai” who cares for his family more than anything. How is he not likeable?
LikeLike
Deepauk M
July 9, 2015
It’s quite gratifying to see Jeyamohan confirm my hunch: http://www.jeyamohan.in/76712#.VZ1_fPlViko
LikeLike
venkatesh
July 9, 2015
@Neena: “wow! of all the comments you have ever read anywhere, mine was the only one you found so problematic that you had to downvote it?”
Hmm, no i obviously meant in the context of this blog. We are a group of regulars in this blog and the up/down arrow innovation is quite new here. I don’t really downvote anyone, if i disagree with someone i tend to use the old-fashioned @ and explain why i disagree with them. This leads to a discussion, usually, and to me that is one of the most joyous aspects of this blog.
So, no, i have found a lot of comments problematic before but in your case you seem to be missing the point of the scene entirely.
Irrespective of my personal opinions on Freedom of Expression, the entire context here is that of a playful husband teasing his “equally” playful wife in a very private setting. A word, in this case, rape, by itself cannot be judged to be offensive. I refer you to the excellent comment by @Vignesh who has walked through the entire sequence and to @Rahini David’s equally insightful comment.
The Mad Men scene setting was something completely different.
I am just surprised that this is even a point of contention. Has no one been in a relationship where words spoken in a private setting, taken out of context, could lead to a jail sentence?
LikeLike
kans345
July 9, 2015
To start with i felt the movie lacks imaginative film making. With such a good plot better film making and rising the production value might have given it the cinematic sheen and would have made it appear less like a plays that you watch on TV. However i just could not understand how you felt that Kamal Haasan’s acting was good. I felt he overacted to the point of hamming. Since it was a faithful remake of Drishyam it was pretty easy to differentiate Mohanlal’s performance, which was filled with naturalism, from Haasan’s overacting. I fail to understand how a critic as sensitive as you could have missed this one. My other qualm with this movie is that the film maker failed to cinematically potray the metaphorically tinged ending.
LikeLike
Karthik
July 9, 2015
The queasiness during the “rape scene” scene is directed more than just towards the character’s backwardness. As Neena argued, the writer/director made that choice and part of that falls on him as well.
I do see why he possibly made that choice. The family, in the first act of the movie, was shown as the innocent, harmless, self contained unit far away from social atrocities, and the choice of the phrase could be, from a screenwriting perspective, a reflection of the impending danger the family was to face. The fact that they were joking about it could be construed as a reflection of how distanced they were from the reality of sexual assault thus making the turning point more emphatic.
That being said, there is another angle here that I feel cannot be ignored. Unlike a book, characters in a movie do not exist exclusively in a fictional universe, by virtue of the fact that real actors play the parts. The parallel discussion in this thread about always sensing Kamal the actor is a testament to that. With regards to this particular movie, the fact that Kamal went out his way to apologize for riding a bike without a helmet shows that he recognizes this as well. This is a movie, where the protagonist, while not exactly larger than life, is a hero, whose voice automatically becomes the voice of the movie (by extension, the filmmaker’s). When this voice is amplified by the fact that this hero wins every single battle in the story, the political incorrectness is hard to dismiss as merely a character trait
LikeLiked by 3 people
Kutty
July 9, 2015
Ravi K : Touche! 🙂
LikeLike
Rahini David
July 9, 2015
Vignesh: I haven’t watched the movie yet. But you have summarised the scenes and the scenarios quite well. I am basically visualising the scenes based on what you wrote. Romba Thanks. And yes, choice of “Sempoove” here is pure class.
Neena/Kutty: I have a really weird feeling going on. You are saying most of the things I often say in these cases but I continue to disagree with you. It is almost as if I am disagreeing to my own arguments. If my mind is like “Inside Out” then there is a war in my brain. 😀
To begin with, I have huge problems with the B and the S and the D and the M of BSDM. I hate to think that anyone, male or female, like giving or recieving pain or humiliation and are actually turned on by it.
The last scene in Singaravelan goes something like this. Kushboo is shy about her first night and Kamal takes out a whip which he uses to whip farm animals. He says “Sonnapadi Kelu; Makkar Pannathea, Ennodaiya Aalu; Edanjal Pannathea”. Even after 20+ years I have not acquitted him for that. I could see why it is funny. The lyrics of the first song fits neatly with the last scene. But I think they could have had the song without the whip. In a pleading way maybe? He sooooooooo should not have taken the whip out. It is a private moment too. It is a husband and wife scenario too. Kushboo is smiling too. For all practical purposes the faults seem to be one and the same. Right?
But no, things are very different/ Singaravelan is basically a pro-stalker movie. It is also a movie in which the Taming the shrew moment is done by pointing out to her that she is an unfeminine woman who does not know to wear sarees, jasmine et al. So the movie sinks to a new low in the final scene.
But here things are quite different. He is not being all macho, he is not being chavinstic, he is being a creative role player and knows that his wife will gamely play her part. She asks him “Innakku enna scene, kulikkura scene-ah bedroom scene-ah”. So role playing is often done here. This is not the only thing that turns the couple on. I have already aquitted the dialogue writer in my mind for the choice of words but there is more.
Srinivas R says “Wouldn’t it have been better to say he wanted to enact a first night scene, been equally funny, probably conveyed the same meaning.”.
Neena says “They could have avoided it and still had a great characterisation without losing out on authenticity/reality/intrigue”.
Kutty says “Mohanlal/Kamal says this and Meena/Gouthami lets him get away with a smile, it is, in my mind equally damaging”
and “There is a stark contrast when in the same movie have a character use rape playfully then seeks revenge when such an event almost happens to his family”
No non-victim ever takes Rape as seriously as a real life victim(or her parents). That is an almost universal truth even allowing for human empathy and mirror neurons. There is a scene in Alaipayuthe where Madhavan considers an accident scene a mere inconvience when he is trying to go back to his wife. It is when she is missing for hours that the word “Accident” strikes dread in him.
In Anjali, the daughter gets slapped by the father for calling Janakaraj a “paithiyam”. Revathy does not see what the big deal is. “Ivalo chinna vishayathukku” she says. She will not say that after meeing Anjali.
We are all like that.
I don’t find the need to Kamal say “I only thought of Rape as yet another enactment scene for my role playing. I don’t feel that way when my daughter and wife may be real victims”. It is there in the screenplay. That is good enough for me. The dialogue writer earns his/her right to say “Rape scene” rather than “First Night scene”. For this is basically an anti-Rape, anit-Voyerism movie. Trivallising Rape is required there. It dramatises it later.
I hope all this makes sense.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Shankar V
July 9, 2015
@Arun
“Suyambu is the lead character of the film, but he is not immensely likeable. Most of the times he comes across as an egoistic, miser and arrogant man. His repeated interventions into Perumal’s conversations made me half- empathize with Perumal. And when he brags about Thottam /material properties or telling his children telling “you eat this only because I work” when the concern point was his late-night work– he comes across as egoistic and arrogant. And when he feels annoyed with his wife’s shopping as in a song sequence, he is a miser. The director could have done away with a few of his negative points .”
In fact, those are the traits that make Suyambu a regular, family man. If you had seen the original, Mohanlal’s character takes it a little further where he is shown as someone who relishes a quarrel or fight and will not give up till he wins.
This characteristic in him – fighting against odds, his ego in defending himself, his miserliness where his attention to detail is impeccable (the switching off of lights, the noting down of expenses, not letting go of even a rupee, etc) – help him in his quest to save his family from the murder charge.
LikeLiked by 1 person
KayKay
July 9, 2015
Neena: Ok, I’ve got to wade into the melee here. See, the problem with you using that Mad Men example is, that’s an entirely different situation. In that situation, the woman CLEARLY did not want the sex, only to have it forced upon her. Fiance or not, it was a reprehensible act and that’s exactly how her reaction should have been depicted.
You’re trying to compare that with a completely consensual banter between a couple who’s been married for years? Why should the movie depict the wife experiencing discomfort or embarrassment (and how should this be shown exactly? A harassed sigh? An eye-roll?) to this sort of “joke” by her husband (using that term loosely)?
What if this banter has existed between them for years? What if it’s something the wife practically expects of her husband by way of humor? This is HIS type of humor, and she’s accepted it, like THIS is their type of banter.
When I was a student in Melbourne, I had a friend, a dark-skinned Singaporean Tamilian guy who was having a live-in relationship with a Caucasian lady. When I was invited to their apartment for the first time, she opened the door and joked, “Welcome to my mansion” to which my friend added ” And I’m the house nigger”. During the course of the evening there were a couple of racially-tinged humor flowing back and forth between them with effortless ease (I believe there was a Mandingo joke at some point which I can’t remember).
My point is, this sort of banter probably exists between them when it’s just the two of them talking. As someone who was given a glimpse into their style of humor, I was free to interpret it any way I choose. I COULD have taken offense at the casual racism and stereotypical roles they had assigned to themselves, OR I could have taken it in the context of their relationship, which was one of ease, comfort and respect for one another. What THEY were under NO OBLIGATION whatsoever to do, was to tone down that humor or do away with it altogether just to placate any perceived sensitivities on my side. He was fine with it, she’s fine with it, if I have a bug up my ass about it, that’s my issue.
It’s the same principle with THIS character’s depiction in THIS movie, as B has said. (Thanks to Vignesh for transcribing the entire dialogue, as that really puts the whole scene in context).
“Art doesn’t have to have a social message. But, it can be conscious of what effect it may have on society.”….
it CAN, but at the same time it doesn’t NEED to in order for it to engage and entertain.
“Do we believe that art is so devoid of meaning in the social context that it should have absolute freedom and no responsibility at all?”
…I believe some lines need to be drawn (explicit and implicit condoning of sexual violence against women, paedophelia etc) none of which the script in this movie crosses IMHO, but it’s a slippery slope and if taken further, leads to a straight and smooth slide down to invasive censorship.
“Where does it end for women if it is okay for the lead in a movie to crack a rape joke?”
All leads don’t need to be a mother-worshipping, wife respecting, sister loving son of the soil who feed the poor on the way to donating blood for their ailing best friend before mortgaging the house to pay for a colleague’s sister’s wedding do they ?
Where does it end with the relentless stereotyping of Black characters as bling wearing, hip-hop loving, gun-toting gangsta rappers? Or Asians as fortune-cookie spewing, asexual kung fu experts?
I don’t have the answers, but I’m merely questioning the humongous responsibility placed on the shoulders of Art as this great Driving Force for Societal Change. Doesn’t Art mirror Societal Changes and not the other way round?
Let me leave you with a scene that is far more open to interpretation:
Seen Straw Dogs? Not the mediocre remake but the Peckinpah original? There is a scene of sexual violence that is truly disturbing in the way the heroine’s emotions are made to run the gamut of fear, to resignation and finally to consensual enjoyment. The fact that she’s being assaulted by a working class brute she had a prior sexual relationship with long time ago while being married currently to a dorky mathematician raises all kinds of uncomfortable questions.She’s a tease and that’s been set up in earlier scenes, but to imply an assault awakens in her a long-repressed memory of how good sex was with this brute a long time ago is truly distasteful, something I couldn’t forgive Peckinpah for, as much as I love his films.
This Papanasam scene by comparison? A storm in a teacup… but a storm you have every right to raise.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Bhavani
July 9, 2015
@Rahini David
Rasigar vinnappam 😀 Could I request a post on ‘Veiled BDSM in Tamil Movies’ on your blog? Every time the heroine gets turned on by Rajini slapping her, every time a whip makes an appearance, every time the heroine wears Madonna like sarees to show her submissiveness… I could go on. And has any society fetishized the ‘first night’ as much as we have?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Arun
July 9, 2015
@ Rahini David : Singaravelan was a pro-stalker movie, I basically do not think so. Perhaps if you see/ agree that the film OK OK( Oru Kal Oru Kanadi) encouraged stalking and to the next level even mental harassment of women, then SingaraVelan is a milder version of OK OK. I agree the whip thing was a shock though.
Perhaps in the recent Tamil films, I was more put off by Siva Mansula Sakthi. In the pre-climax scene ,the hero Siva and heroine Sakthi share some moments of intimacy. After a quarrel, Sakthi goes to her native place. After a few months, Siva(Jeeva) goes with his family to convince her. Then the truth is revealed to the family members. Siva’s mother Oorvasi instead of scolding him for this act just laughs it off telling for once you have done a good thing. Everything seemed so insensitive here.
LikeLike
Arun
July 9, 2015
@ Ravi K: Just reflect on his films like Vasool Raja M.B.B.S, Pammal K.Sammandam. You understand those characters had many rough edges because they served as a contrast to the film’s main characters or those edges served value to the film. Prakash Raj appears autocratic so when Vasool Raja challenges him you find him very much likeable and it is also a wonderful contrast. Similarly with PKS, the character is showing having various shades like being rough edged, being emotional or behaving in a certain way. In PKS,Kamal himself says to Simran’s character that he is local and perhaps did not understand certain things. That is the point I am making.You cannot insert certain negative shades in a character just for sake of it. Either it has to add value to the film like PKS or serve as a contrast to someone else character like Vasool Raja.
LikeLike
Ram Murali
July 9, 2015
To me, Singaravelan was more (unintentionally) funny than offensive with the whole “pottu vekka theriyuma? poo vekka theriyuma” episode…I laughed out loud when I saw Khushboo suddenly wear a saree and dream about Kamal applying kumgumam on her forehead. The pinnacle of unintended hilarity in Singaravelan was the “Thoodhu Selvadharadi” song!! Just to think that it was Devar Magan that released a few months later…what a contrast! I loved the way Kamal explained to Gowthami that he can’t take Revathi for granted…well, Panchu Arunachalam wrote Singaravelan and Kamal wrote Devar Magan…there you have it 🙂
LikeLike
Kutty
July 9, 2015
BR/Rahini/Ravi : Thanks for engaging in a wonderful debate. As someone pointed out, it is the opportunity to have such a dialogue which makes this blog space special. I give in to the argument that it is the character construct and that art should not always be expected to show the way.
What I still have an issue though is the double standards where the viewer is looking for a justification because Kamal is doing it while other less established names have to struggle with different expectations.
BR, I am copy pasting this from your “Vai Raaja Vai” review : “And two, when Karthik’s parents agreed to marry their daughter off to a groom who demanded ten lakhs as dowry. I know this sort of thing happens all the time around us. But the fact that a modern-day female filmmaker – someone with this kind of clout, someone from this kind of background, someone with the sensibility to make her heroine a plant pathologist – resorted to this Visu-era staple left me uneasy. Why not have, say, a truck hit the mother and bring on a crisis where the hospital demands ten lakhs? ”
At no point in time has the plot or the characterization suggested that any of the family members would be averse to such an idea or that they will see it as regressive. We, in the audience, see dowry as being regressive. For Aishwarya, this is just a way to move the plot. And that is the director/story writer’s prerogative. Why then is the burden of expectation put on her, because she is a “modern-day film maker” to choose a different plot point? Not for a moment am I disagreeing with your wish there, but why not apply the same yardstick here?
Apologies if I am dragging this out too long. But, for once I am troubled by the responses I have seen and hoping to understand things better from your perspective.
LikeLike
brangan
July 9, 2015
Kutty: No apologies needed. As long as people have the stamina, fire away 🙂
The answer is right there in that segment from the review… “someone with the sensibility to make her heroine a plant pathologist…”
Dowry and plant pathologist and slick con games and Yuvan’s “yo” music are an odd fit IMO. Things were far more organic in Papanasam. I don’t think I’d have mentioned the dowry aspect had Aishwarys made a movie like Papanasam. It’s not about the crime, it’s about the context.
kayKay: Another awesome comment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
kans345
July 9, 2015
BR Don’t you think Kamal haasan over acted tobthe point of hamming. I felt this partly made the movie’s progress seem less organic and more contrived. Moreover the movie was staged like a play most of the plot communicated in dialogue rather than images, there was much scope in this plot to layer it up with metaphors, i felt the director failed at multiple levels both in Drishyam and papanasam. This movie needed a hitchcockian treatment. Even a romantic comercial movie feels classy when it is framed and edited well.
LikeLike
kans345
July 9, 2015
Recently i rewatched certain mani ratnam movies such as Nayagan, Iruvar, and Ravanan after having read your book. I was amazed at the imaginative framing, editing. The movies talked to you in images not through dialogues. Moreover he has the ability to extract great performances from his actors. Since this review is about papanasam, i tried to compare the performances of Kamal Haasan in Nayagan and papanasam, there is sea of a difference. His acting in Nayagan is more subtle, nuanced and appropriate to the script. Even when he overdoes it you can see Mani’s intelligent use of camera angles, lighting, lenses and music to compensate for it. I really wish we had more directors such as Mani ratnam, Karthick subbaraj, Balaji Mohan, mysskin, Pa. Ranjith, bharathiraja, balu mahendra and mahendra. As an afterthought i wish the remake would have been far better if it had been one of these director’s hands.
LikeLiked by 1 person
apala
July 9, 2015
@KayKay
I agree with BR – another awesome comment sir!
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
Have u watched iruvar or vanaprastham
LikeLike
Aseema
July 10, 2015
brangan/kutty: You’d be surprised at the stories I know of dowry being demanded even today in urban upper/middle class families. I dont know how it was portrayed in the movie. But in reality families of girls with advanced degrees living in the western world and yet adhering to these outdated practices are more common than you would think.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
This montage of shots from Nayagan shows how a plot is conveyed visually with great psychological and emotional impact. However Papanasam and Drishyam lack this visual impact. Nayagan was true cinema, while I don’t think Drishyam or Papanasam qualify.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
Another movie in which I feel Kamal Haasan performed well was in Aval Appadithan by C. Rudriah. Once again if you see, it was shot by an extremely talented director.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
Guys before my comments receive more thumbs down I would like to mention that I am a patch Thamizhan from Madurai.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
@BR: “Well, the character is a fan of Sivaji, and it made sense to me that he’d live in a slightly heightened zone of emotion.”
My take on your point of view is that even if Kamal Hasan’s character is designed in such a way, as to be too expressive, I feel better cinematography, editing, lighting and framing would have made it appear less OTT and more realistic. Just as Mifune’s characters are staged by Kurosawa. Another point to be considered is that the movie is played out in a village, in minimalistic surroundings, in such a backdrop overacting and melodrama stand out in stark contrast. Just as overacting stands out in Bharathiraja films while subtle acting in movies such as Mahendran’s Uthiri pookal and mullum malarum merge with the relatively spare and simplistic backdrop and add another metaphorical layer.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
@MANK , @Reg and @BR “your favorite puttu scene- I believe its that scene in meena’s house in front of her parents – that’s very very good scene, what I would call a Howard hawksian scene, an extended dialogue scene that brings out hidden attributes of the characters. We get to know a lot about lal and meena’s characters in that scene alone- her spendthriftness is inherited from her mother, her habit of showing off by putting the kids in a more expensive school and that she has poor opinion about her husband in those matters, who has really conservative and cautious attitude towards money and their children’s education. It also shows lal’s penchant for winning at any cost even throwing in the delicate matter of dowry to win his argument with his wife, much to the embarrassment of his in laws. A quality that comes to full display when he goes all out in saving his family. we usually don’t get to see scenes like that in Indian cinema”
I loved the puttu scene and other scenes in Drishyam that contrasted Meena’s character with Lal’s. These scenes primed us for the last act, I missed these in Papanasam. Moreover I feel Jeyamohan is a better fiction writer than a screen play writer, i feel it is important for a director who is not well versed in his movie’s language to write it out in a language he is comfortable with and just get it translated and not reinterpreted.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
“Apart from changing some sensibilities to suit local audiences, we’ve made Papanasam more emotional as Kamal sir felt Tamil audiences like to be emotionally piqued. The core of the film hasn’t been changed, but what forms the core has been treated differently,” Jeethu Joseph
So is Cinema no more a director’s medium, cinema i feel should be the director or auteur’s creation. Letting an actor or the audience, who is but a tool in the hands of the artist, dictate terms reduces an art form to a commercial propaganda piece. Guys, people like KH should not be making comments such tamil audiences only like a particular kind of films. Kindly do not underestimate the tamil audience, we have produced some of the great directors in Indian cinema such as Mani Ratnam, Mahendran, Balu Mahendra, Bharathiraja, C. Rudriah and present day directors such as Karthik Subbaraj, Balaji Mohan, Pa. ranjith to name a few.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
@Saurabh and others : I feel malayalam cinema has come of age with some good commercial fare along with some valuable recent contributions from Shaji N. Karun such as Swapaanam and Kutty srank. Moreover I feel Mohanlal has performed very well in movies such as Vanaprastham, Iruvar, Bharatham, Thanmathra, Aakasha Gopuram. However of late people want to cash in on his popularity and are trying to make movies with contrived plots. I am not sure if he is being judicious by falling for this popular pit fall. Mammoty has been consistently doing good work. (Trivia: Did you know that Shaji. N. Karun’s swaham was nominated for the 1994 Palm de or, however pulp fiction won it. So much for all the hoopla behind Masaan being nominated for the uncertain regard category.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
A metaphor to ponder on:
A mediocre artist armed with a great plot, and an obedient tool, is able to synthesize a good art piece, though not a great one.
While the combination of a mediocre artist, a great plot and a recalcitrant tool only manages to result in a propaganda piece for the tool’s efficiency.
LikeLike
brangan
July 10, 2015
Sorry, all. Not able to address all comments. Just a few.
Aseema: Even in that quoted passage, I acknowledge this. This isn’t about whether this happens in society. This is about whether such a thing fits into the milieu of a movie.
kans345: You cannot compare a Mani Ratnam movie with this 😀 Even the most-vilified Kadal — seen as cinema and not just a script-expounding exercise — is leagues ahead of the usual fare.
About Kamal’s early performances, I love him in Kokila. It’s probably the first film where his Kamal-isms — say, his way of using props around him to accentuate his performance — began to truly solidify.
My take on your point of view is that even if Kamal Hasan’s character is designed in such a way, as to be too expressive, I feel better cinematography, editing, lighting and framing would have made it appear less OTT and more realistic.
True. Which is why I have mentioned both aspects in my review. I have pointed to the Sivaji-style acting pitch. I have also stated that the filmmaking isn’t great.
Which is why I’m very wary when an artist of the caliber of Kamal says “I did nothing. I just surrendered to the director’s vision” or whatever. So if the director isn’t great, that compromises the performance. As good as I think Kamal is here, for my money his greatest “just acting” performance in the recent past has been in Vettaiyaadu…
LikeLiked by 2 people
Srinivas R
July 10, 2015
I loved Vettaiyadu , after the success of that movie , I was hoping Kamal will work with successful contemporary directors ( Selvaraghavan , Bala, Myskin etc.) , alas he went to his favorite project manager , Mr. KSR
LikeLike
gowthamanmoviebuff
July 10, 2015
Totally agree with your point on Meena Vs Gauthami! Gauthami was looking out of the context throughout the movie otherwise which had an ensemble casting made the movie closer to original! Mohanlal was also equally good in the initial portions as well! The difference is that suyambulingam expressions were very expressive. He outbursts the emotions whereas Mohanlal is a cold guy! His responses were always subtle! Even in the pen ultimate scene that differed has been caught up !
LikeLike
gowthamanmoviebuff
July 10, 2015
The dialogue improvisations were phenomenal when compared to the original! For example, when kamal hears that the meditation is over from his wife, he would revert saying that oh well no one knows whether it was over yesterday / today / tomorrow? Just 3 words have been added but looked like it gave a piece of clarity as well as it looked like a trailer cut before the main one unveils! Those improvisations were really good otherwise a movie with no loop holes even in the original !
LikeLike
Shankar V
July 10, 2015
@kans345 Papanasam is a movie where many things are in your face. The director probably feels that the audience needs to be told explicitly on every move Suyambulingam takes. That is the reason for so many flash cuts to the past……detailing every aspect. Not leaving it to the viewer’s interpretation.
If there same movie were to be made by a more competent director, say Mani Ratnam, I am sure it would have addressed your concerns. But then, the movie would have flopped.
It is easy to say that film makers underestimate the audience. But when they are investing crores of rupees into a film, they will always be worried about the ROI. The end result is a compromising the end product.
I felt that despite the compromises, this was still a good enough product.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
@Shankar : I would like to respectfully disagree with you Shankar, many of Mani ratnam’s movies such as Nayagan, Thalapathi, including the latest OK kanamani where able to realize considerable profits. Even the new crop of directors such as Karthik subbaraj, Pa. Ranjith, Balaji Mohan, have been able to make movies that were able to make profits at the box office. Any kind of cinema irrespective of its mainstream potential needs a director equipped with the ability to visually create an original and sincere visual experience of the given plot. This is ofcourse just an opinion. Moreover in this day and age, a cinema needs to create quite some interest to convince the middle-class folk to leave their TV sets and the comfort of their home to go and watch movies on the big screen, this I feel is the reason for the recent failures of formulaic big budget & big star movie such as Lingaa and I.
LikeLike
kans345
July 10, 2015
Thanks a lot for your reply BR. I loved Kokila as well. Though I am a tamilian, I did spend considerable time in Davangere and Bangalore hence my knowledge of the language. I think it was Balu mahendra’s first film as a director. Even Mohan’s character was well written. Funny that you pointed out Kokila, I have always felt that Kamal’s best performances were in Kokila and Aval appadithan. I think then, he truly did nothing, and just surrendered to the director’s vision. Moreover I felt his approach to acting changed during all the time he spent with Balachander. It would have been great if he had done more movies with Rudraiah.
LikeLike
Neena
July 10, 2015
KayKay: The reason why I pointed out the Mad Men scene was because that is what a ‘rape’ looks like, between two people who otherwise enjoy having sex with each other. There is nothing erotic, playful or intimate about it. I totally agree that the scene does fit in with the movie, it is organic, it doesn’t seem out of place with the mileu, the character etc.
But, making a movie for all audiences in Tamil Nadu today is not the same as a house party with just your friends. I don’t know if a mainstream Hollywood movie can crack that joke about race. As Karthik articulated what I so well, by virtue of this being the actor Kamal with his many dedicated male-dominated fan clubs, the movie cannot simply exist in its own fictional universe. Unfortunate, but true.
Interestingly, despite many of us feeling that a movie character cannot be expected to fit into our own ideals, Suyambulingam is in many ways an idealised character – has only completed 4th standard but is capable of feeding his family and keeping them happy, will do anything when it comes to his family, his family is his whole world and so on. The everyman hero, not in the crass way a Rajini character usually is, but in his own way, Suyambulingam is someone many of us can identify with and feel good about. Unfortunately, again, many of us can also identify with the rape joke as something we might encounter in our own homes or workplaces. That worries me.
Rahini: I have also been deliberating whether the rape joke is indeed intended to be connected to the later happenings in the movie as you suggested. It is, in all probability. But, we do have the paradox of men being mother-worshipping, daughter/sister-protecting etc and treating their wives violently including raping them. As a society, we don’t believe that a wife could deny consent. This is why I think translating rape as merely BDSM is a problem. BDSM for all its strangeness is still done with consent, whereas the very definition of rape, however tender it is, is about lack of consent. I remember thinking about this reasing ‘Fountainhead’ as a teenager, where Dominique claims she wants to be raped. It isn’t a rape then, is it? Of course, the average Suyambulingam doesn’t and cannot be expected to see this distinction. Which is all the more reason that a film like Papanasam cannot just toss a rape joke into the mix casually.
LikeLike
Shankar V
July 10, 2015
@kans345 I agree that some recent films have been very good – those of Balaji Mohan, Pa. Ranjith, etc. But then, these did not involve a star as big as Kamalahaasan. The moment the film is star driven, the cost escalates, and this leads to compromises to ensure that they recover at least the cost if not make profits.
Mani Ratnam has been struggling too. OKK was a moderate success and mainly thanks to ARR and PC Sriram’s slick picturization. The plot was very ordinary and it survived somehow due to the performances and the fact that it appealed to the youth. I would consider Mani’s earlier romance films like Alaipayuthae or Mouna Ragam far superior to this. I did have some reservations about OKK too. The lodge where they sing Paranthu sellava puts Waldorf Astoria to shame. Their relationship was also too trivialized. All characters in the movie were too superficial.
So back to Papanasam now. While Papanasam could have been made better – there was plenty of room for that – I am fine with the current version. It still entertains me and does not make me cringe. I would not call Kamal’s acting OTT but a bit more expressive that Mohan lal was in the original. I am ok with that too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ram Murali
July 10, 2015
@brangan and @kans345 – among his early performances, I thought he was fabulous in Nizhal Nijamagiradhu. The flicking of his fingers (“Mannikanum…adhu en aachaaram!”), the stylish way of smoking, the graceful bharatanatyam dancing, the communist comments all added dimensions to his character…having watched most of his thamizh movies starting with arangetram, i felt that nizhal… was the first movie where I truly, truly admired what a well rounded actor he was…
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 10, 2015
Coming late to a very interesting discussion. Still haven’t managed to catch either Papanasam or Drishyam but the discussion on what constitutes ‘rape’ and how important it is for a director to draw boundaries around the definition (or not) is intriguing.
Neena, to a large extent, I agree with what you say, especially in today’s times. But I also feel that we are now looking at films (especially) with a very narrow viewpoint. If I, as a (hypothetical) script writer want to flesh out a particular character – not a bad man, per se, but someone who has his own flaws, if that character is a good provider, a good father but has patriarchal ideas where his women are concerned – what is my duty as a writer and/or film-maker? Am I allowed to show him that way, because there are plenty of ‘he-s’ who are that way in real life as well, or do I have to have another character perhaps balance it out by mentioning how bad it is that he is like that?
Secondly, rape as ‘role play’ has a lot of adherents. More than makes me comfortable, but they are there. It is a part of their sexual relationships, complete with ‘safe’ words et al. No one is under any delusion that they are actually being raped, but from what I’ve read, the women with this fetish don’t actually know they are not being raped, until the use of the safe word if they feel too uncomfortable.
From the context (which I gleaned from Vignesh’s comment), there is the element of role-play in this particular couple’s relationship. In that context, they are neither trivialising rape nor are they being cavalier about its usage. It’s all in the context.
Showing Gauthami uncomfortable with it would have actually had the opposite effect, because then the act would be, if not non-consensual, at least ambiguous enough to make us wonder about the man and his character.
@Rahini – your post about conversations with yourself made me smile. I tend to do that all the time, especially when something I can accept in one context is at odds with my views on the subject at others.
@KayKay, you raise a great point. I’m also beginning to wonder at how politically correct we have to be, and where that PC-ness crosses the line into censorship, self or otherwise. At this point, I have to be careful about cracking a Mallu joke because some other Mallu might be offended! (I’m a Malayali, by the way.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
kans345
July 11, 2015
@Anu Warrier: use of the word ‘rape” or rape itself in a movie, if it was integrated into the screenplay for artistic or cinematic reasons, i don’t think constitutes misogyny. I feel part of our identification and enjoyment of cinema is due to the suspension of disbelief associated with it. It is high time that we start treating cinema as pure art form and not just as an entertainment set piece that should always be politically correct. The ones that frustrate me the most is all the hoopla associated with smoking and alcohol consumption in movies. Guys, people do understand that cinema is a, pure art form/ entertainment, whatever you wanna call it, and not just a propaganda piece. This is one reason why films that are preachy tend to fail at the box office. Moreover has there been any study that has associated increased frequency of on screen smoking with an increase in the rate of smoking in the population at large.
LikeLike
kans345
July 11, 2015
I have been thinking about why KH is prone to OTT acting. Then I realized that people like KH, Daniel day lewis, Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Al Pacino, or Robert Di Nero have enormous screen presence their persona draws your attention to them, it is the same case even with Ryan Gosling. I feel these people would have to restrict and limit themseleves to a larger degree than others as their emotive enunciations are exaggerated by close ups and medium shots. Moreover it is important for the director to be aware of this fact so that the actor is directed accordingly. IMO Al Pacino’s acting appeared to be OTT in the Scent of a woman, while it was appropriate and appeared to be in fact subtle in God Father (part I & II). I also have a feeling that as men and woman age, and wrinkles start forming around their eyes, their emotional reactions appear exaggerated.
LikeLike
vipo
July 12, 2015
I agree with Gautami analysis on both actors. One is acting both heart and mind. Another just clinical and analytical.
I liked a preivous comment comparing Kamal here to Lal in Dasharatham. I thought that was spot on. Lal offlate has not performed well, I take it, that could be the reason for a more safe appraoch in Drishyam.
LikeLike
Neena
July 12, 2015
@Anu: “Showing Gauthami uncomfortable with it would have actually had the opposite effect, because then the act would be, if not non-consensual, at least ambiguous enough to make us wonder about the man and his character.”
That is the effect I’m looking for, making us wonder about whether this guy is merely a ‘good at heart, salt of the earth’ man or if what he does is problematic. It is the lack of the effect that I think makes this scene trivialising.
“…do I have to have another character perhaps balance it out by mentioning how bad it is that he is like that?”
Rahini’s example from Anjali, I think, does that very well. It is not preachy. It is a discomfiting scene. We see Raghuvaran disturbed and Revati concerned that her husband actually slapped their child (another politically incorrect behaviour, but totally not trivialised owing to Revathi’s reaction).
Not taking the effort to do that, I think, is lazy or easy writing, at best. Anjali could have stopped with simply showing the kids being cruel to Janakaraj. It would be fine because kids are like that. But, it went the extra mile to show the scene Rahini described.
@kans345: “It is high time that we start treating cinema as pure art form and not just as an entertainment set piece that should always be politically correct.”
Isn’t that asking society to fit into an idealised vision that we have? 🙂
Tamil filmmakers do work with a set of constraints – the film runs for 2-3 hours, mostly with a male protagonist and a female interest, mostly with a couple of songs and a bit of comic relief. We, in fact, routinely say how a certain film is refreshing despite adhering to commercial considerations or given the commercial set up, how much a director or actor has experimented and explored. To suddenly be all conscious of how ‘freedom of expression’ is being curbed by so-called political correctness, I think, is disingenous.
How long a history does Tamil cinema have of being called out for its insenstivities to the marginalised? Even the much maligned Anti-Smoking, Anti-Alcohol warnings came as a response to the way these acts were glorified in the 80s-90s films. Not that putting up those warnings is a good thing to do or even an effective thing to do. Just because insensitivity to rape is being called out doesn’t mean that one is calling for ‘jailing’ or ‘censorship’ or whatever, as seems to be the assumption by many.
As this writer says, sensitivity to political possibilities could in fact open up much more creativity and fresh material:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/09/politically-correct-jerry-seinfeld-comedy-marginalised-voices
I’ll stop here. That’s one too many Guardian links I’ve posted on this comments thread 🙂
Besides, I have to go comment on how Gauthami responded to BR’s question on this issue.
LikeLike
vipo
July 13, 2015
suyambu also casually talks about mobile phone, maruti car.. just like rape scene… all 3 connected to the episode obviously, shabba!
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 13, 2015
@Neena: That is the effect I’m looking for, making us wonder about whether this guy is merely a ‘good at heart, salt of the earth’ man or if what he does is problematic. It is the lack of the effect that I think makes this scene trivialising.
But why should she roll her eyes? She knows what he means. I don’t see the need for that at all given that the wife is a willing participant in this role play of theirs. I don’t see it as being problematic precisely because she knows that it is a private joke that we are privy only as inert spectators. Within that context, I cannot, nay, will not see it as trivialising rape – because as I said, rape as a sexual fetish has more woman adherents than male. Do I understand it? No, I don’t. Do I care that others find it sexually stimulating? Hey, as long as the dashed thing is consensual, whatever floats your boat. (Just don’t come and tell me about it!)
To take a word that is used in a consensual context (in this film) and to say that the use of that is problematic and is trivialising what all of us know is a very serious issue in real life is, in my opinion, trying to find offence where none was meant.
But I think we will have to agree to disagree. Because while I would absolutely call out a film that glorified rape or objectified it (much as a lot of a films in the 80s and 90s did), or even one that is particularly regressive in its treatment of women for no reason other than that is how a ‘good woman’ should be, I just do not agree that ‘rape’ as used here, is the sordid, violent crime that rape really is. Or that it trivialises it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
July 13, 2015
Ram Murali: Singaravelan wasn’t unintentionally funny. It is very intentionally a funny movie. Pro-stalker movies are pro-stalker movies even if the humour works for us. It worked for me. I love the “Ezhai Keatha Ezhurundai”
Joke by Gounder, “Sattaimel Evalo Buttons” by Vadivel and all the rest. 🙂 I just remain alive to the sexism in SV, that is all. You may like what Lavanya Mohan says here.
http://www.chutneycase.com/2012/10/oh-those-jerks-they-call-heroes_13.html
Arun: I didn’t watch OKOK. Watching SMS was quite more that enough I could take. The TASMAC proposal scene et al just did not work for me. That said, the scene in SMS were the hero cries saying that they had had premarital sex is not sexist IMO. He is not accusing her or insulting her. I don’t remember it much but he is confessing that they went the whole way and so he wants to marry her. He does not demand that he marry her, he does not wear it as a badge of virility. He feels that as he loses his own virginity to her, he should marry only her. That is how I remember his attitude in the scene but I had a mighty huge headache by then and may certainly be wrong.
Bhavani: A list making does seem in order. I will try to do it as soon as I can. Thank you 😀
Anu Warrier: I wish I could like your comment more than once. 🙂
Neena: I know the time has come for us to agree to disagree but I will give it one more go, if you don’t mind.
LikeLike
Rahini David
July 13, 2015
On Mad Men, you say It is beautifully problematised with Joan simply looking disgusted and squirming under her fiance. That’s that and no one talks about it again. She goes on to marry him and all that..
I would have huge problems with a scene like this. She is raped by her fiancee and she does not talk about it again and marries him instead? No fighting? No “Take back your ring, I don’t want an abusive husband”? What does this all mean? Joan doesn’t like being raped and squirms. Good, let us move on?
Then you say The reason why I pointed out the Mad Men scene was because that is what a ‘rape’ looks like, between two people who otherwise enjoy having sex with each other..
Yes that is what Rape looks like. But a Rape scene that exists with no comeuppence or a break up or even a fight is actually very sexist. Of course, I have nothing but your word for it. It may make sense in context.
On Hero worship and Internalising the Hero’s behaviour, I agree that our society has many uneducated people who hero-worship their stars. We already discussed it in “The misogyny in Rajinikanth’s cinema” thread. You also say We do have the paradox of men being mother-worshipping, daughter/sister-protecting etc and treating their wives violently including raping them.
Yes we do live in such a culture. We do not recognise Marital Rape as a crime yet. IHM discusses it here. I am not condoning it here either. But if some man internalises Paapanasam scenes, he would be requesting his wife to play out a scene, not violently raping her. There is a difference.
That is the effect I’m looking for, making us wonder about whether this guy is merely a ‘good at heart, salt of the earth’ man or if what he does is problematic.
You seem to think that Kamal is shown to rape Gouthami and she is shown as enjoying it. It is hence problematic.
If she says she is not in the mood, or not feeling comfortable with such role playing or has a head ache and he forces her to comply immediately, then I would have a problem with it. Even if he does not use physical force. It would mean that he is exerting force just because he is the husband and has ownership of the wife. But this is not all that. Rape is not happening. Enactment of Rape is happening. Happily.
Of course, the average Suyambulingam doesn’t and cannot be expected to see this distinction.
No. A big fat NO. An average Suyambulingam may not know the difference between the two words “Sex” and “Rape”, but our Suyambulingam knows the difference between a happy playful wife and an unhappy angry wife.
Anjali: You also say We see Raghuvaran disturbed and Revati concerned that her husband actually slapped their child, another politically incorrect behaviour, but totally not trivialised owing to Revathi’s reaction).
Imagine that Raghuvaran is pillow fighting with his daugther, should Revati show concern about the pillow fight? That is also a man hitting his daughter, right? But as long as the girl is laughing and playing with Daddy, the mom knows that the dad is not hitting the pillow too hard and will stop if the daughter is getting tired or cranky. And Suyambu’s wife knows that Suyambu knows his limits.
Just one more example: In Aboorva Sagothrargal, Appu kills a man using his pet tiger as a weapon. Unfortunately, Mechanic Raja is wearing Puli Vesham at the time. Both tigers have a roar, feline body language and a tail. But Appu’s tiger is a wild animal. Raja’s tiger is an Folksy Art Form. We know the difference. That is why when Janakaraj says “Konnutiyea da”, Kamal takes it as a compliment and says “Nalla Irunthatha, Sir” and we smile. So similar but so very different.
I rest my case. 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Neena
July 13, 2015
@Anu: “rape as a sexual fetish has more woman adherents than male”
We don’t know that. We may be getting the impression from popular media – books, television, cinema, porn. That is why a playful addition to that list is a problem for me. That – the movies that glorified/objectified rape – is the influence from which Suyambu seems to picture a ‘rape scene’ as a sexual stimulator as well. I am not suggesting that the ‘word’ is a problem because it refers to “the sordid, violent crime that rape really is”. I am saying it’s a problem because it doesn’t refer to the violent nature of the act, but reduces it to role play. Again, this may indeed be a bedroom reality for many couples. But, it is different what people do with their private lives and what an on-screen couple does in cinema.
But, yeah, agree to disagree… one way to keep the civility and the comments going 🙂
@Rahini: agree to disagree, yes. One more go?
LikeLike
Dhilip
July 13, 2015
Brangan
When everything fails you can just a piece on kamal and sit back. There is a visible trend here. 165 comments!
LikeLike
Neena
July 13, 2015
Btw, I vote for the list on BDSM in Tamil movies too 🙂
And the coconut chutney post’s comment on Singaravelan giving us a couple that we really wanted to get together makes me think – Kamal’s on-screen earnestness seems to make us accept stuff that we would find reprehensible in other actors? Singaravelan. The blatant objectification in the ‘Raja Kaiya Vecha’ song. The anti-divorce preaching in Avvai Shanmugi. And now, this rape scene joke.
Too many worms… please go back into the can!
LikeLike
Aseema
July 13, 2015
brangan: I understand what you’re saying. I have a related question (thinking out aloud here) – even in real life, when we hear such stories, our response is one of shock and disbelief, we more or less question the existence of such practices in today’s milieu. Why is the dissonance you feel when you see something “inorganic” in a movie’s milieu any different?
LikeLike
Ram Murali
July 13, 2015
Rahini David – yes, of course, there were a lot of jokes (intended) that worked for me in Singaravelan. Apart from the ones that you mentioned, my favorite was the one in the 5-star hotel’s restaurant…I just thought that Kushboo’s sudden transformation was unintentionally funny…
LikeLike
Iswarya
July 13, 2015
Gosh.. I realise what a lip-smacking treat I missed in that “save for” reference, all because I resisted scrolling down to the comments till I had watched the movie. BR’s reviews are spoiler-free enough for me, but I avoid the comments section till I watch the movie, considering how few I do watch. And since I had no decent company till today to watch it with, I caught it only now and landed here to catch up with all the comments.
BR: I don’t know why I was so pleased when you addressed that particularly to me. Is it vaguely flattering to have one’s obsessions remembered? 🙂 And it was nice to see that your “save for” had rubbed off on others (vijay, doctorhari) too. ** chuckle **
Actually, I didn’t feel the slightest jolt while reading that expression in the review, and the fact that I took no particular notice of it was the surest sign to me that it’s part of the usage I’m completely used to. I did the necessary research and here’s the answer – see the entries 3 and 4 for comparison. The person who sent you the mail is referring to the sense in entry 4, while you obviously using it like entry 3 there.
As for the “rape scene,” I think it was totally inoffensive within the context. There are so many people who use the word ‘rape’ as interchangeable with ‘sex,’ especially when they are not all that well-educated. In fact, even some of my older aunts use the word “rape” much more easily in the flow of their Tamil conversation, while they might never bring themselves to pronounce “sex” aloud. (I see that it’s weird, but not at all uncommon.) In that sense, I guess it was a pretty authentic presentation. And then, of course, many others have made really illuminating comments, especially Rahini, KayKay and Vignesh. Bit of a bristly feminist that I can often be, I didn’t find the expression objectionable at all while watching the film.
Note to self: Catch Kamal movies in the opening weekend if you don’t want to miss this kind of fun again! 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Iswarya
July 13, 2015
Rahini: I second the request for the list too! 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
aparna
July 13, 2015
Kans345, In reply to : The ones that frustrate me the most is all the hoopla associated with smoking and alcohol consumption in movies. Guys, people do understand that cinema is a, pure art form/ entertainment, whatever you wanna call it, and not just a propaganda piece. This is one reason why films that are preachy tend to fail at the box office. Moreover has there been any study that has associated increased frequency of on screen smoking with an increase in the rate of smoking in the population at large.
1)http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21933947
2)http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17768284
to quote just two
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 14, 2015
Rahini, thanks. 🙂 You blog? Where?
Thirding the request for a list. 🙂
Neena, like Rahini, I have a severe problem with the scene you mentioned, and for the same reasons. She marries a man who has sex with her without her consent? This is so close to marital rape and ‘conjugal rights’ that that is what would be incredibly offensive to me.
Of course, since I ‘agreed to disagree’, let’s just say that we both look at this particular scene differently. 🙂
LikeLike
Shankar
July 14, 2015
The whole “rape” issue is a storm in a tea-cup as KayKay mentioned. However, in my opinion, it is unwarranted. I have seen Dhrishyam but not Paapanasam. I’m assuming that particular scene is carried over from the malayalam version. I feel the whole discussion exists because that scene does not translate well from malayalam to tamil. From what I recall, there is no indication of role-playing as some have suggested. Georgekutty loves films and often stays late to watch films. When he comes home, his wife asks him what he watched that night. In this particular instance he does come home to have sex that night and when asked that question, playfully says that he watched a rape scene. Sure, to be morally correct, the director could have used “first night” or so. But in the malayalam context, this is perceived as a joke and nothing more. I say this because I recall watching a malayalam movie from a few years ago where Jagathy describes a character…”Avan villain aanello…moonu naalu rape scene kaanum”. It is not meant to glorify rape…but is just an attempt at humor. There are many other examples like this as well. But I do see the other side…in these times, from a director’s perspective, it may be necessary to be morally correct and not do anything that may be perceived as belittling women. Plus intentionally doing so is just so wrong. In this case, I think it’s just loss in translation.
LikeLike
kainattu
July 14, 2015
I have not seen Drishyam or Papansam yet. Saw the Korean movie “Perfect Number” two days back based on the “The devotion of Suspect X”. Just blew me over and reaffirming my belief that Koreans are the best in the business today
LikeLike
Rajesh Krishnan
July 14, 2015
In depth interview with kamal where he speaks about his interpretation, how papanasam is different , evolution of gauthami as an actress , role of music in movies etc
LikeLike
Rahini David
July 14, 2015
Anu: My blog is pretty new. That is probably why you did not know about it.
I have written what I remember here. I request you all to pitch in a few examples.
LikeLike
kans345
July 14, 2015
@Aparna: Thank you for quoting those studies. I did look them up and some others when i did a pubmed search. I do agree that there is preliminary evidence to show that there might be an association. However there is a basic problem with all these studies. Most of them were conducted on adolescent kids who start to experiment at about this age. In the US, as I practice here as physician, I am aware that the experiments peak between the ages of 10 to 17. If such a study is conducted on a population that is already prone to smoking, irrespective of the efficiency of the control population, there would be multiple biases that would be operating and hence I would be wary of trusting these results. Moreover none of these countries have resorted to the farcical way of putting up bulletins whenever a character smokes, on screen. I eagerly look forward to another study that addresses the effectivity of these bulletins. IMO health education of Parents and the population in general will result in a decrease in smoking. However i don’t think a cinema theater is the right place to offer that education, asthe audience are, already, in a state of suspended disbelief.
LikeLike
Neena
July 14, 2015
Anu & Rahini: In the case of Mad Men, one is free to judge Joan or any one of the characters for their choices because they are clearly not heroes and not meant to be identified with. In fact, one of the criticisms of the series is how its period setting and intense stylisation distances issues that are contemporary as well. The reason I find that treatment of rape superior is because it shows the gravity of the act without being sensational and does not make it playful, comic or romantic. Of course, the perpetual Mad Men discussion is about whether it is feminist, sexist, realist or voyeurist.
The analogies you give, Rahini, I cannot really agree with. I wouldn’t have a problem with Raghuvaran having a pillow fight with his daughter. But, it would be disturbing if he playfully joked about throwing her out the window. That sounds weird. But, analogies don’t work when talking about rape, I feel. That rape is reduced to something like a pillow fight is my problem with that scene. The Puliyattam – Konnuttiyeda scene…he he…brilliant humour. Hat tip to Janakaraj 🙂 But, I can’t relate it to rape. If I had to play with the analogy, I would say that rape, unlike a tiger, cannot ever be talked about in the tone of a folksy art form, in popular cinema.
Iswarya, it is interesting you bring up how rape is a word more comfortably used than sex, especially among women. I wonder if that has to do with how women wanting to have sex are morally judged whereas they are ‘helpless victims’ in rape and so can talk about it, until when they actually do become victims, that is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Neena
July 14, 2015
Oh btw, that whole response was to Rahini’s “You seem to think that Kamal is shown to rape Gouthami and she is shown as enjoying it. It is hence problematic.” No, big fat No!
LikeLike
Iswarya
July 15, 2015
Neena: As for what I said about my aunts (and what I can safely extrapolate to a large section of semi-educated women of a certain age and background), I think the word “rape” is much more common in their vocabulary because they read Tamil newspapers everyday, and the coverage of ‘rape’ cases in them with a sordid interest that I have always found inexplicable. (I know that the English equivalent is not used in the papers, but only in conversation because the Tamil version seems too graphic to be used in casual speech.)They belong to the sort of backward folks who continue to blame the victim and I can explain their prurient interest only by the sort of implicit moral preening that they do somewhere comparing themselves to the victim and flattering themselves that this would never happen to them. Whereas, the word “sex” suggests to them something merely physical (and viewed with the appropriate disgust they think the word demands in polite society), denying them the chance of experiencing an oh-I-am-so-clean one-up feeling over some unfortunate woman they read about. My granny would go further (lapping these news bits eagerly everyday) and then listing out what punishment must be given to the perpetrators as well as the victims. So moral judgement, I think, is not exclusive to “sex.”
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 15, 2015
Neena, they don’t have to be heroes to be identified with; for me, what is problematic in the scenario you wrote about (Mad Men) is not that her fiance raped her. Showing her discomfort doesn’t take away from the fact that then, there is no discussion of that incident, that she never talks about it, even to him, and she actually goes and marries him. Why? To me, that is very problematic. It suggests that even if she is shown to be discomfited (but not protesting), she is condoning the act because they had sex before this. That is a horrible thing to let stay up in the air like that.
To me, it doesn’t – at all – show the ‘gravity of the act’. IMO, that scene trivialises rape by showing her going along with it even though she is not consenting, and then keeping quiet and marrying him after all! What the heck? And this, in a society where a broken engagement doesn’t carry the stigma it does in India, say? You say that it is ‘not problematic’ because they showed her discomfort? But it was okay that she married her rapist because he was her fiance?
What does it say about a man-woman relationship then? And how gravely are treating rape? It is okay for him to rape her because she had sex with him before? Any woman would (should?) then quietly go ahead with the marriage because he is her fiance, and they had sex before? Ugh! And how is that not trivialising a crime?
And you still have a problem with a man coming home to his wife saying he’s going to enact a ‘rape scene’ and have the very consenting woman ask him – ‘Which scene are we going to enact today?’ – showing very clearly that this something that livens up their sex life?
shaking head in despair I am both woman, and feminist, but sometimes, I despair at us. It appears that everyone (me included, I’m bound to confess) are offended by something, somewhere, sometime.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Neena
July 15, 2015
@Anu: The short answer is yes. I have a problem with the Papanasam scene but not with Mad Men.
“they don’t have to be heroes to be identified with”
Do we identify with every murderer, rapist or any villain on screen? From what you say, it is not possible to show any kind of ‘immoral’ behaviour on screen coz that would send a wrong message. What if Joan were a straightforward Villain? She sleeps with her boss, has his baby and pretends it is her husband’s. She goes on to sleep with a client to get a contract. She retracts a sexual harassment case at the very end for a hefty settlement (far less than what the company actually owes her, though, in real payment). Would all of those be problematic because this character doesn’t confirm to how we expect a woman to behave on screen? At least according to the Mad Men universe, the 60s in the US was not a time when breaking an engagement was all that easy, as it still isn’t for many women because of the many choices they have to make. Another example, another TV series: ‘The Good Wife’. Joan makes her choices. She compromises constantly. But, she’s clearly shown compromising. Not making a joke about it.
“shaking head in despair I am both woman, and feminist, but sometimes, I despair at us. It appears that everyone (me included, I’m bound to confess) are offended by something, somewhere, sometime”
ha ha. But, why is that a bad thing? 🙂
LikeLike
Kutty
July 15, 2015
Anu : Disclaimer. I did not watch much of Mad Men. The reason why I stopped watching is because I found the sexism disturbing. But, I cannot judge others for liking it or watching it.
I understand that it was reflective of the times that it was set in. The fact is that it was just making no qualms about conveying the sexism inherent in that setting. In that I would take BR’s stance that the scene Neena describes (I haven’t seen that) and the actions that follow are in tune with the overall setting and therefore cannot be taken offense to. As Neena says, probably because the viewer took comfort in the fact that the whole series is set in the 50s/60s they may choose to ignore that most of it is still reality. It is a bit like how movies showing a live in relationship are set in a land foreign to the viewer. As if to say that this is not a fact of our times and avoid discomforting their target audience.
LikeLike
Rahini David
July 16, 2015
Iswarya: Yes, I have met women who use Rape as a synonym to Sex. I had a hostel warden who believed that women who bathe after dark where actually masturbating 😉 Her exact words were, and I quote “Avungalukku Rape pannanum nu irukkum bothu apadi pannuvaanga ma”. So even I believe it has nothing to do with women being scared of using the word Sex as it is consensual (gasp). In their mind, Sex is a bad dirty word that polite people do not use. But Rape is the word that polite people use. They have never heard of Fuck or its various variants.
I guess this is difficult to explain to people who never have discussed sex with semi-literate people. It is close to impossible to educate the semi-literate on correct usage. They protect their beliefs (and vocabulary) so strongly. This is very unfortunate as knowing the difference is very important in avoiding victim-blaming.
Kutty: I do agree that we have to cut plenty of slack for the time a period piece represents. I felt that in Vaagai Sooda Vaa. The heroine tentatively asks the hero if he has any morai-ponnu. Glad that he does not have any, she asks if his parents will demand a lot of dowry. He replies in the affirmative. What she does after that made me smile. She increases the price of Tea in her shop. She wants to make enough money to afford him. In a movie set in recent times I would never accept this. But in 1966, yes. If men can slay dragons for their fair maiden, then this girl can increase the price of tea for her own love.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
July 16, 2015
Do we identify with every murderer, rapist or any villain on screen? From what you say, it is not possible to show any kind of ‘immoral’ behaviour on screen coz that would send a wrong message.
And yet, you have an issue with a consensual enactment of a ‘rape scene’ between a husband and wife, just because of the words? Oh, the irony! 🙂
@ Kutty – I haven’t watched Mad Men. I’ve read about it, and I doubt it is a show I want to watch either. I agree that it reflected the times; I wasn’t so much as saying that one should take offense to it, as reacting to Neena’s example of that particular scene to show how ‘rape’ was not trivialised in it, yet it was trivialised and offensive in Papanasam. I still maintain, without having watched either! – that the scene in Mad Men is more offensive than the role-play in Papanasam because it gives a certain societal approval to the scene – even though she is discomfited, it is okay that he has sex with her without her consent; so much so, she doesn’t talk about it/goes ahead with marrying him. In Papanasam nothing is against the woman’s consent.
But anyway, this discussion has gone on long enough, so I think I’ll quit now. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Iswarya
July 17, 2015
Rahini: I’ve thought over it quite seriously and found there were several things in the movie to make the phrase ‘rape scene’ an inoffensive one. First, the word ‘enact’ doesn’t come up as a part of the dialogue. It might, as pointed out earlier, be only a question of what Suyambu had watched to turn him on. Secondly, after having come home at night clearly turned on, he tells about his self-control and how he can forgo sex if he wanted to. A ‘potential rapist’ is certainly not one to try controlling his urges. Later on, as time passes, both husband and wife betray their wish to make it up at the same time. Even then, he coaxes her with the offer of getting a new car and in nearly pleading gestures, gets her to turn around and lie facing him. She is the one shown as turning the light off. Throughout, not even a single suggestion of ‘rape’ even as role-enactment. For a minimum, he doesn’t even turn her towards him violently, as expressive of, say, passion (which couldn’t have anyway been misunderstood as non-consensual). What I’m saying is that, it is not even at the level of BDSM that they play out the scene. I think there has been quite a bit of misunderstanding here because the enactment idea has been taken for granted.
Of course, I’m explaining all this since you said you hadn’t watched the movie yourself. In fact, the enactment part may only be BR’s personal interpretation (which is of course valid for him and he is free to make it.) But taking that as the basis to find offence in the movie is first of all an act of rash extrapolation. Thought I had to explain all this to show how the words uttered in a certain context were actually contradicted by the actions that followed. Isolating the word there to pounce upon it seems so strained.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
July 17, 2015
Iswarya: BR did not start this. Some one else asked him what he thought of the usage there and he merely said “See, you are not wrong in feeling queasy. But the characterisation of Suyambu isn’t wrong either. He is a small-town guy. He probably isn’t politically correct. ”
Anu and I are only reacting to what is being said here. I do not even go to any other movie related forum or blog.
Thanks for your explanations. Now that you explain the pleadings and konjals, the BDSM angle itself sounds strained. But I could already see it when Vignesh mentioned the Sempoovea song that nothing rough was going on at all.
It certainly sad that I will probably not watch such famous movies in theatres but wait for a couple of years and then start my own rants. Still better late than never.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 17, 2015
Ishwarya, I’m the one who hasn’t watched the film yet. Of course, that hasn’t stopped me from giving my two paise worth of comments. 🙂
I was responding to Neena’s comment about how the ‘rape scene’ was offensive. Based on the context that someone else gave for that scene, I didn’t see how it could be offensive at all, and that was what I was arguing – that in context it seemed a very consensual scene, and to take a word or phrase without taking into regard the context in which it is spoken just seems to be looking for offence where none was meant. And in that regard, I pretty much felt the same response that Gautami gave to that question when BR put it to her. 🙂
Thanks for explaining the scene in context. Now, if I can only get around to watching it. 🙂
LikeLike
Radhika
July 17, 2015
In Papanasam, I was not offended by his rape comment. It seemed to me to be a playful joke between husband and wife. He is not shown to be violent in the least, or to force himself on her. In no way is Rani shown to be a doormat. She holds her own against him. There was no indication that there was any S&M role play either. I saw that comment as her pulling his leg and his reply as a joke in the same vein.
I watched Mad Men – and enjoyed it for its complex and layered storytelling, not just for its portrayal of a different time. Yes, the sexism, the boozing, racism are all difficult to wrap one’s head around, after having been conditioned to a more PC era, but apart from those shockers, there are some fascinating character sketches and no single character is purely heroic, all have shades of grey and exude moral ambivalence. Joan as a character is very interesting – how a woman who is strong and capable, yet trapped in a career that is far beneath her capabilities, is both exploited by, and an exploiter of, men, can find success through her relentless drive for self-preservation, her talent and ambition. That scene with her fiancé should not be written off as either trivializing rape or celebrating it – indeed, her marriage to the same guy, while disturbing in itself, should also be viewed within the context of the times and her particular needs. Here is a woman who has been objectified by all the employees in her firm, and she finds a doctor, a catch indeed, who wants to marry her and he is her escape route into respectability. Sure, she is horrified by his lapse into violence, but it is also understandable that she marries him, perhaps hoping that this was an aberration. It not so easy to give up dreams and her inability to dump him is not an indication that she is a doormat. Anything but. In later episodes she is shown to dump him, hit him even, and the series ends with her having found her own power as a professional, independent of all men. So the rape is one element in her evolution. To single that out as some kind of statement on feminism is too simplistic. And even if she were a regressive character, which she isn’t – writers have the right to depict characters in all their myriad complexities – it’s not incumbent on them to make a character stand up for an ideal, never mind how repugnant that may be to audiences. It’s not a writer’s job to be politically correct or to be inspirational by only depicting heroism – to show a rape could just be depicting that this happens, to show wives putting up with crap quite often just reflects reality, uncomfortable as it may be to watch.
There was a lot of graphic violence in Papanasam – perhaps it was necessary to show how united a family could be under trying circumstances – but it was quite ghastly to watch. Why is that not trivializing violence? The hero doesn’t fight back, does that mean the cop-violence has his tacit approval? Of course not – it’s another depiction of an ugly reality in India. In an ideal world we would have no rape and no cop would bash the living daylights out of a suspect to coerce a confession. But then our world isn’t ideal, so why do we expect filmmakers to show a sanitized version of it, with regard to rape? If the intent is to titillate, that’s one thing – neither this movie nor Mad Men had that objective. If the intent is to say – this too happens – well, then, that’s just a representation of real life.
LikeLike
Radhika
July 17, 2015
I remember – Pudhiya Paadhai where Parthiban is that thug who rapes the girl on her wedding night – and she lands up at his house and says now he is her husband, because clearly, after he has raped her, how can she be anyone else’s wife? And that movie got a National Award – now the award made me puke. The movie was an expression of someone’s vision, revolting as I found it – but when the powers-that -be give an award to something like that – no wonder we have judges telling rape survivors they should marry their rapists. Yuck
LikeLike
apala
July 17, 2015
Not getting time to respond in detail on this interesting discussion – including “stalking”
My 2 cents – for now!
This much PC would be injurious to health, I am afraid! Everything has a tag nowadays – racist, sexist etc., – we lost our sense of humor by being overly sensitive in reading too much into everything? All statements/jokes/comments are not fair to all. From Asian driver jokes to Sardar jokes – are they fair and PC? No.
Like BR said, “context” is what matters besides who says what. Donald Trump calls all Mexicans as rapists in his announcement speech for throwing his hat on the presidential bid. Amy Schumer makes a joke: “I used to date Spanish guys but now I prefer consensual sex”.
You have to condone and be angry with Trump but you should be able to laugh at Amy’s joke.
LikeLike
apala
July 18, 2015
Terrific Canonization comments from Trevor Noah:
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
July 18, 2015
And even if she were a regressive character, which she isn’t – writers have the right to depict characters in all their myriad complexities – it’s not incumbent on them to make a character stand up for an ideal, never mind how repugnant that may be to audiences. It’s not a writer’s job to be politically correct or to be inspirational by only depicting heroism – to show a rape could just be depicting that this happens, to show wives putting up with crap quite often just reflects reality, uncomfortable as it may be to watch.
Agree.
My contention about the Mad Men scene was without knowing its context. As I’ve said before, I was only responding to its comparison to the Papanasam scene, and then again, only as it was written here in the comment to which I was responding.
You have to condone and be angry with Trump but you should be able to laugh at Amy’s joke.
Sorry. 🙂 That ‘joke’ is anything but. You can laugh at Amy Schumacher’s jokes if you want to, but let’s face it, they are racist, and sexist. A man, saying something similar, would have been ripped apart in public.
LikeLike
Chris Abraham
August 3, 2015
http://m.huffpost.com/in/entry/7741326
LikeLike
tonks
August 24, 2015
Students Involved in CET Accident Were Dressed Like Nivin Pauly in Premam: Kerala DGP
By Online Desk Published: 22nd August 2015 06:34 PM Last Updated: 22nd August 2015 06:34 PM
A 20-year-old girl student at the College of Engineering in Thiruvananthapuram died on Friday, after a jeep driven by students mowed her down during the Onam celebrations.
Kerala DGP TP Senkumar who was speaking to a news website, said that movies were influencing students into behaving brash in college campuses.
Saying that we cannot deny that movies can have an influence on students, he said that students’ behaviour these days is similar to that of the actors in the movies.
Adding that movies are not the only factors influencing young people, he said that they still do play a role and good things influence us less but bad things influence us immediately.
Senkumar said that in Premam, the lead character played by Nivin Pauly is a college strongman donning a black shirt and white dhoti, who also sports a dense beard.
In the pictures and videos which have emerged from the CET campus where the accident took place, boys are seen wearing similar attire. He continued saying that the movie encourage college-going boys to drink and smoke.
He also said that students are also trying their luck on teachers as what was shown in the movie. In Premam, the hero falls in love with one of the young teachers and she reciprocates. Senkumar added that he had got a call from a person who said that his wife, a professor, was feeling unsafe in her college.
LikeLike
Madan
October 4, 2015
bump Just watched the Hindi Drishyam yesterday. Going by the foregoing discussion, it seems it was closer to the Malayalam version than Papanasam? I thought Shriya Saran leapfrogged my abysmal expectations; maybe it helped that she was mainly required to look frightened and anxious. Too much dialogue may have exposed her.
Whether Streep or De Niro or Pacino or Bachchan, it’s only the early years — i.e. till they exhaust their repertoire of emotions — that we are capable of being “surprised” by them
LikeLike
brangan
October 4, 2015
Madan: As a Streep fan (and I know you are avowedly not!)…
Not really. I loved her in It’s Complicated. It looks like a light film, but it’s only deceptively light — there are juicy dramatic issues in there. And Streep is quite marvellous, she locates a fantastic balance between the light tone of the film and the heavy-ish content.
In other words, fandom of (or exasperation with) an actor doesn’t mean that that’s ALWAYS the case. I like to take things on a movie-to-movie basis 🙂
LikeLike
Madan
October 4, 2015
I was just fooling around anyway.
LikeLike
tonks
October 5, 2015
Two things that stayed with me after watching ‘It’s complicated’. One, the beauty of the house and the locale they lived in (another movie where I coveted the house was Seven Pounds). And two, that the teenage children were amazingly shown as lovable and loving towards their mother (unlike most other Hollywood movies and contemporary Western books that show teens invariably as tortured, drug addicted, parent – hating brats : how different from the Indian teens I know. Are all Western teens like that or is there a selection bias because only tortured souls make good stories? Why do all adults in Western stories despise their parents?)
I really, really like Meryl Streep. In Kramer vs Kramer that I saw a long time back, her understated, subtle way of conveying powerful, strong emotions reminded me of Shabana Azmi in Masoom and stays with me till today. But lately, her characteristic expressions that she uses for most of her characters, that does take something away from her performance, for me.
LikeLike
tonks
October 5, 2015
I’ll probably have to watch Kramer vs Kramer again to find out if it’s Streep’s acting that has changed now incorporating all her typical mannerisms or just my reaction to it. Probably only the latter. How drunk were all of us on Shah Rukh Khan in his early Fouji days but now I could not endure watching a movie starring him playing himself again (except a little more shrivelled), even if I were to be paid for it.
LikeLike
Drunken Monkey
October 8, 2015
@madan
I understand where you are coming from and have felt that too. But I wouldn’t say exhaustion. It’s just exposure i suppose.
Take Daniel day lewis. Even with just under 10 films in 2 decades the minute you see him you pretty much know who you are looking at.
It’s true with Naseer, nawaz, irfan and 100 other non-stars too no? The minute i saw Kabir Nabi in Talvar I was like ‘Aai namba Kabeeru!’. It won’t be too long before someone even as careful as Sohum shah joins this list.
But then a great maker & a good actor can slowly sucks you into the film if they have got the magic. Look what Denis Villeneuve did with Hugh Jackman!
After Vettaiyaadu..Papanasam worked for me on that level. Unnai Pol Oruvan didn’t.
LikeLike
Madan
October 8, 2015
@Drunken Monkey
Did you mean to mark your reply to BRangan? Because my comment actually brought up examples of actors who are able to completely get into the role to the point where you almost struggle to recognise them. I remember when Dark Knight was playing on TV one day, my dad was thinking why did he find the guy acting as Lt Gordon familiar. I said he’s the guy you saw in Tinker Tailor and he was like,”Wow!” I haven’t watched much of Helena Bonham Carter but putting Fight Club and King’s Speech next to each other, it’s like two different women. The best actors can actually change accents…. without having to put it on, just unobtrusively shifting into a different accent. From watching Dark Knight, you wouldn’t know Oldman is not American. I am curious, has De Niro ever actually sported an authentic British accent? At least I am not aware of it.
LikeLike
tonks
October 23, 2015
Just finished reading the award winning, best selling Japanese novel “The devotion of suspect X” by Keigo Higashino, the original story that is said to have inspired the movie Drishyam. The alibi manufacturing bit and the theme of protection is very similar in both stories but otherwise the plot, especially the last part of it, is quite different. Both stories have unexpected twists at the end but the one in Drishyam was, I thought, the less far fetched of the two.
LikeLike