Spoilers ahead…
The Kaashmora team, in interviews, has been asking us not to compare the film with Baahubali. What a laugh. It’s not the budget that’s lacking. It’s the vision, the conviction, the ability to sell a tall story. Baahubali was a genuine epic. The only thing epic about Kaashmora is its running time: nearly three bloated hours. The film, directed by Gokul, is laughably written. Sridivya says she’s doing a thesis on occult practices, but what she ends up doing is really investigative journalism. Maybe they thought an audience whose brains are regularly ground into mush wouldn’t be able to tell the difference. She’s there only because a film where the leading man (Karthi) plays two roles is mandated, by law, to have two heroines. The Sharath Lohitashwa character needn’t have been there either. He’s there only because a film where the leading man plays two roles is mandated, by law, to have two villains.
And of course, the other villain is played by Karthi. When MGR played good and bad look-alikes in Kudiyirundha Kovil, it seemed like a function of the plot. When today’s heroes do this, it seems like a function of their desire to be Kamal Haasan, but without going all the way. Karthi shaves his head, sports a beard, and rolls his eyes as though mimicking the audience. The best portions come in a flashback, where this villain – a medieval warlord named Raj Nayak – tries to get his hands on a princess (Nayanthara). For the first time in the film, we see some ambition, some staging, some kind of proof that a cinematographer was present on the sets. Dozens of beauties fall on Raj Nayak as the camera hovers over a bed. Raj Nayak stands on a mound of slain soldiers. But the visual effects increasingly look like leftover screen shots from a Temple Run storyboard. The illusion is soon shattered.
Something tells me Gokul is a Harry Potter fan. A headless ghost. A car stranded on an ill-tempered tree. You wish he’d lifted the story wholesale too. At least, we wouldn’t have had to waste an entire first half following Kaashmora (Karthi), a fake godman who’ll soon find out that ghosts do exist. This isn’t a spoiler. This is inevitability. Otherwise, there’s no story. I kept thinking back to Selvaraghavan’s Aayirathil Oruvan. It wasn’t perfect, but there were glimpses of greatness. And it was one of a kind. Kaashmora is as generic as they come. Generic comedy. Generic strife. Generic sets that look like someone tried to make a Shankar movie with the budget of a Kanchana instalment. About the only thing I was thankful for was that there was no generic love. Neither heroine ends up with the leading man. It sounds like progress, until you realise that these films are all about the star romancing himself.
KEY:
Copyright ©2016 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Baradwaj Rangan 
Rakesh
October 30, 2016
Warning: Spoilers ahead.
That’s a tad unfair. Admittedly , it is not a perfect product. Those tacky visual effects does not make things more palatable either. But, you have to give it to Gokul for mounting an ambitious attempt. Santosh Narayanan’s rock infused score rouses even the dead ! Karthi as the lusty warlord Raj Nayak, did have those Chistopher Walken’s character influences from Sleepy Hollow, but his titular turn as Kashmora is a hoot, mining humor in even the most absurd of sequences, he showcases his natural flair for comedy, in complete contrast his brother, who appears forced in similar attempts(Venkat Prabhu’s Mass ? ).
LikeLike
brangan
October 30, 2016
Rakesh: you have to give it to Gokul for mounting an ambitious attempt.
No. If you liked the film for how it was executed, then good for you. But you cannot (and should not) like a film for what it “attempted” to do.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Karthick
October 30, 2016
The movie was a good entertainer with some poor CG ( which could have been avoided for the story ) and one doesn’t have to really care if Mr Rangan didn’t bother to care about any of the good elements the movie carried. Period!
LikeLike
edwardssammy
October 31, 2016
@Karthick, clearly you care, unless you wouldn’t have bothered to comment here otherwise.
LikeLike
Mohammed Noufal
October 31, 2016
Frequent lurker but first time commenting here but one sequence that kept coming to my mind as I was seeing karthi’s latest stab at “acting” was the one from gangs of wassyapur where Tigmanshu Dhulia tells his son “tujse na ho payega beta” which roughly translates to “son this is beyond you “…. Just hope at some point his dad does all a favour and tells him the same…. and no I have no answer how he pulled off paruthiveeran…. But I have a feeling it’s the same mechanism by which Bala gets great performances from seemingly average actors….
LikeLike
Naren
October 31, 2016
Karthi saved the film more or less for us
LikeLike
Sowmya:)
October 31, 2016
Have only watched the trailer and my first thought was – anyone attempting a fantasy movie after Bahubali is brave. Maybe Puli also suffered partly because of that.
Is it just that the movie didn’t live up to those standards or was it a below average fare anyway?
LikeLike
Mowgli (@vnambirajan)
October 31, 2016
Better (funnier) than Surya’s Mass. Tried remembering the story of Mass but couldn’t. Kashmora’s character will stay in people’s mind; well fleshed out/ played character.
LikeLike
Subhash
October 31, 2016
Comparing Kaashmora with Baahubali is a mismatch. Not about the grandeur/scale as well, but the conceptual difference too. This in fact is more close to Arundhati (Anushka’s film,. 2009) and Rajamouli’s Magadheera (villain-heroine track minus hero in the historic portions). Again, there is no such intensity here as most of the proceedings were intended to be lighthearted before and after this track. Despite the presence of a capable warrior guarding the anthapura duly in Magadheera, you feel pricky when the villain enters the heroine’s room in the night. Arundhati is even better in this aspect; Sonu Sood (despite having a hard time with the language) does manage to create a sense of danger, hinting something more than a woman at stake. And, surely behind this impact IMHO, the lion’s share goes to the writing.
Back to Kaashmora, well, I would not comment on the story and direction, but one thing I loved here was that neither of the hero(es) have a love story. No romance. That is kind of strange (positively) when people rant against films like Remo (understandably). Only if these female characters actually pose a real threat in the film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Diwakar Varadharajan
October 31, 2016
I loved this movie, I agree, it’s not perfect, but I found the movie quite unpredictable to be very honest, until the intermission you tend to place it in the Horror comedy genre, post intermission it surprises you by the transition it makes to a Fantasy flick, throughout this sequence u are looking for a connection between Raj Naik and Kashmora, as they are both played by Karthi, looking for an ancestral connection of sorts, and in the final sequence it jumps onto exorcism. This unpredictability coupled with a unique direction style (quirky, if I may call it) made me enjoy the flick thoroughly. I was disappointed with the climax though.
LikeLike
Aravind S
October 31, 2016
Why do these actors play dual roles that have no logic or foothold is beyond me. Irumugan was the worst (I also put Dasavatharam to this list). If they want to prove their prowess as actors who play negative roles, just do a negative role, why play the hero and the arch villain? Kaashmora I felt fell to the same trap. Even in Idharku dhaane aasaiptttai, Gokul’s screenplay was a tad slower, and Kaashmora was like a plate full of many dishes served with no connect to it. Yes, I liked Karthi’s acting, but I know Karthi can do roles, as a cinema it was a big disappointment! Unless the scripts are fine tuned before casting and making, to our painful fate, we as viewers are going to suffer! Disappointed.
LikeLike
Aravind S
October 31, 2016
On a lighter note, I felt Kaashmora was a Rajamouli script executed by Chimbudevan (the Puli version).
LikeLike
Thamarai Kannan
October 31, 2016
Very lazy screen writing.
The dialogues fell flat in fantasy portions. Mathan Karky should write a book on ‘how to write dialogues for a fantasy film in 2016’ for all these attempters.
Important characters are not established & no attempt of humor only comedy.
We don’t care, if you put sets like Baahubali if the content is not good.
Why Nayanthara? she has not even wore a Saree for being a warrior princess,(Though her Jewellery & look is a major hit among women) doesn’t help with the movie.
Disappointed!
Since I couldn’t enjoy any moment, all I saw was flaws.
LikeLike
kart03ik
October 31, 2016
Like someone commented why can’t our heroes just play the villain if they are so desperate to act in a negative role. Anyway wtf is a negative role . Does any other movie industry have this convenient tag for a villain which I guess makes our real and perceived superstars feel special? The biggest fuck up must surely be irumugan with a showy vikram in full flow which was unbearable compared to say dasavatharan which had kamal in orgasmic self indulgence mode but entertained in parts. Atleast kamal manages to make the characters interesting in most of his double/multiple roles . Bad make up and a terrible accent with a confused gender identity ( blame the director for that , dint have the balls to go through with what he wrote I guess ) with vikram hamming it like he wanted to justify every rupee in his paycheck ( shudder ). Recommend that the writing team and vikram watch sadak to see what a chilling transgender villain can actually do to even a mediocre script.
LikeLiked by 1 person
blurb
November 1, 2016
Hi BR, what’s with the “review coming soon” thing? Are you on a holiday? 🙂
LikeLike
julie
November 1, 2016
I love that you atleast put your take in a few words while the review takes time. It saves us money and quenches curiosity 😉
LikeLike
Rohit Sathish Nair
November 2, 2016
Generic performances too?
LikeLike
MANK
November 2, 2016
why why why?, why do these actors insist on playing these horrible double roles and triple roles when they cant even play one role properly. surya in 24, vikram in Irumugan, now this . is there some detox center where we can send these actors ,that they could be rid of this addiction.
Brangan, the trailer itself was so laughable that i didnt bother with this one at all.
LikeLike
MANK
November 2, 2016
*. I kept thinking back to Selvaraghavan’s Aayirathil Oruvan. It wasn’t perfect, but there were glimpses of greatness*
Brangan, now that was a movie. A filmmaker with ambition and vision and the skill and craftsmanship to execute them as well. To take a spielbergian adventure story and execute it with the panache and grittines of a sam Peckinpah. It also benefited from the fact that Karthi was a realtive newcomer then
If that movie was to be made today, then Karthi would have insisted on playing both his role and Parthiban’s role. that would have sucked the soul out of that movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
kart03ik
November 2, 2016
@Mank – And Selvaraghavan would have asked him to f**k himself. No pint in blaming the actors if the director cannot take a stand.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
November 2, 2016
So, Karthi does more for the role than the role does for him? 🙂
LikeLike
Dracarys
November 2, 2016
Brangan,
The last 2 sentences apply to RK in ADHM as well, no?!😆
LikeLike
Rohit Sathish Nair
November 2, 2016
MANK: Entha Chettaa, Suriya’s 24 triple still bothers you? The film hardly took itself all that seriously, and it was just making each Suriya do a different personality of Vikram’s in ‘Anniyan’.
At least, the younger Athreya was effective for me, him echoing Sethu’s pleading was creepy enough, and you are scum enough if you have the gumption to break Nithya Menen’s neck!
Sorry for the digression…it’s sad enough how epics (or films with any aspect done on an epic scale – thus including biopics) bite the dust again and again. You look at it this way – epics are in many ways as flexible as romances or comedies, and still needn’t have as much tropes or cliches . All that it has to do is not be GENERIC.
LikeLike
MANK
November 2, 2016
kart03ik, yes he would have wouldnt he ?, But i heard hat even GVM had to succumb to surya’s pressure of playing the double role in varanam ayiram. he wanted some one else, some one like Mohanlal to play the character of the father – which was based on his own father – to do that part. but he had to give in to Surya’s insistence.
Apart from the directors , its the media and the fans of these stars who make a big deal about these physical make overs and multiple roles that are to blame for this phenomenon.
Rohit, da mone anganalla. . i just keep looking at it as a missed opportunity. it was a kind of nice masala movie – with a certain level of craftsmanship – that i would have loved watching , maybe more than once, if it wasnt the star’s vanity. thats what rankles me. athu marikkunathu vare undyrikkum 😀
LikeLike
Rohit Sathish Nair
November 3, 2016
On a somewhat unrelated note, had recently watched the ‘Madura Michael’ teaser of AAA and the teaser of Vijay’s Bairavaa. Was thinking about how a teaser of a Simbu movie ,which looks like a spoof comedy, bothered to give a better mass moment than any of those in a Vijay movie teaser. Despite supposedly harking to previous STR and TR films, (and using the ‘Virgin pasanga’ line for the 3rd time), it looked more original than Bairavaa’s tired teaser, which basically recycled Vijay’s stock expressions and other bits from his old movies(don’t know most of them). The one bit that I took notice of was one with him playing with a coin, possibly a nod to both Sivaji and Kaththi (garnished with the gunshot that bookends the Kaththi theme). Even SaNa seemed to be exhausted here.
LikeLike
kart03ik
November 3, 2016
Mank. Yes I guess this is a systemic issue. What gets my goat is these guys saying ‘fans will not be okay’ which is a super convenient excuse for their self indulgence. But what can you say when a 65 year old Rajini plays a 30 year old version of himself. Would have been refreshing to see a sivakarthikryan or dhanush play the younger Rajini in Kabali. It would have set a precedent too. Just wishful thinking on my part.
LikeLike
Senthil
November 3, 2016
MANK: I have to agree with Rohit here. I thought Suriya in 24 was pretty good in all three roles. Same wth Vaaranam Ayriam. Though it would’ve been killer with Mohanlal.
LikeLike
Arun Rathakrishnan
November 3, 2016
I am somewhat baffled by some recent Tamil films that unintentionally showcase the primitive film making techniques of the period in which they were set. In Kashmora, Karthi goes on a lengthy dialogue in chaste Tamil “telling” something unrelated to the plot just for the sake of “telling”. It is likely celebrating the past by contracting plague or burning widows.
I was struck by the contrast between Aayirathil Oruvan and Kaashmora, how AO was an exhibition of craft – that relied on “showing” rather than “telling”, and how films like these get made in this day and age, while craftsmen like Selva continue to be stifled.
LikeLike
Nivaz
November 3, 2016
As far i believe, Kashmoora doesn’t deserve such a review from baddie, its an honest attempt.
LikeLike
Raj
November 3, 2016
@ BR: “But you cannot (and should not) like a film for what it “attempted” to do”
I agree that you should not like the movie for the attempt but feel should be acknowledged for trying something out of the box. Because I feel attempt is the first step towards change and some encouragement helps for better “attempts”/”execution” in the future.
However, reading your review, feel like the movie lacked the attempt part also.
Haven’t watched the movie but differed a bit philosopically 😉
LikeLike
jam bajar jakku
November 4, 2016
Hahahaha
The moment there is a “should” in a statement, you know there is some problem. Here you have Brangan saying one “should not” like a film for what it attempted to do. Very Nazi. Very Taliban. Very sad
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rohit Sathish Nair
November 4, 2016
He’s watched too much of mediocre cinema, and he has observed what mistakes we repeat
Not a bad thing to say, so
LikeLike
rothrocks
November 5, 2016
I think he is just tired of pointing out repeatedly that he has to judge the film that has finally been made, not what the director attempted to make. Is it not Nazi/Taliban by the same token to tell the critic to take this or that into account and thus try to get him to see the film your way?
LikeLike
Ravi K
November 6, 2016
“Do. Or do not. There is no try.”
Yoda
🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
sachita
November 8, 2016
I would take a rajni with wig playing a 30 yr old rather than non-acting siva karthikeyan.
LikeLike