Spoilers ahead…
It’s night. It’s raining. A mystery man steps out of a car. He’s outside a house. Inside, we see a man, a woman. They’re in an embrace. The man enters the house. A lifetime of movie-watching tells us that he is a psycho killer, that he’s going to leave behind a couple of corpses, and that the rest of the film – Dhuruvangal Pathinaaru – will detail the hunt for this man and the twisted reason for his crimes. But writer-director Karthick Naren (who’s 22!) has other ideas. The first line of dialogue we hear is “Life can be unpredictable.” So can this film. When a cop tells a father his son is dead, we brace ourselves for the inevitable reaction shot. Shock! Rage! Grief! What we get, instead, is a shot of the poor, numbed man shuffling out of the police station – in other words, we go forward in time. But the soundtrack echoes his words that were uttered earlier, when he felt shock, rage, grief – in other words, the same stretch also takes us back in time. Karthick Naren hasn’t just made a film. He’s announced that he’s a filmmaker.
You can say a lot about the sensibilities of a filmmaker by looking at the fonts he uses. But there’s more than just surface aesthetics. There’s always something happening in the background – someone unloading a truck, someone looping a garden hose. Life goes on even as the investigation goes on. Most of our filmmakers think in terms of words. Karthick Naren thinks in terms of visuals. You can almost imagine these instructions in the script. At the end of the flashback, the camera hovers on the cop, and then it swoops down on him in the present day, one close-up giving way to another. Of course, all this would be empty showboating without a good story fleshed out into a good script – that’s exactly what we get here. A couple of revelations are underwhelming, but I was so gripped by the goings-on that I didn’t care. Plus, the film keeps pulling rugs from under your feet. You cannot afford to care, not if you want to keep up.
An understated Rahman plays Deepak, a retired cop who is pulled into his last case by a man who wants to know what happened. This isn’t just a tiresome device to get the story going, the man isn’t just the human equivalent of a PLAY button. He’s one among many devices the film uses to parcel out its plot points. Sometimes we get footage from a video camera. Sometimes we get confessions. Sometimes we even get lies. I’m not sure it all adds up – I found myself more enthralled by the dizziness of the script than interested in how each jigsaw piece locks into place. Also, this is a cold film. I wished for a bit of warmth. But I loved how the film breathed. The slow accumulation of detail isn’t just in the way the mystery comes into focus. It’s also in a cop realising he’s forgotten his cap in the house he was conducting an investigation in. Dhuruvangal Pathinaaru is, finally, a first-rate procedural that understands that it’s not just about a hit-and-run, an apparent suicide, an instance of blackmail, but also about hatred, love, anger. These existential undertones aren’t oversold, but they remind us that the acts we consider inhuman are born from the most basic human emotions.
KEY:
- Dhuruvangal Pathinaaru = literally, 16 pillars
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2016 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
brangan
December 30, 2016
And… the last review for 2016.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan
December 30, 2016
Exactly what I thought after watching the movie. This was so gripping, oh-so-wonderfully written. Solid filmmaking and he never looked like a first timer who’s just a year older to me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
December 30, 2016
Dhuruvangal, ‘literally’, means poles. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Abejith Sr
December 30, 2016
Sir
I am looking for your review on manal kayiru-2
Any chance…?
Sent with AquaMail for Android http://www.aqua-mail.com
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
December 30, 2016
Abejith Sr: I did not have the courage.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Prakruthi Burra
December 30, 2016
>
LikeLike
rejutm
December 30, 2016
Any chance of reviewing Malayalam movies released in 2016 ? Can recommend Maheshinte Prathikaram, Kamatipaadam and Guppy for starters. Would also recommend Mumbai Police, another fine procedural
LikeLike
Yuvaraj Jeyasankar
December 31, 2016
BR – I loved the film n the way it was made…but have few questions about the plot here.. why do the girl wants to file a case abt her friend missing in first place.. as both culprits r killed and no way police could have reached their doors to question abt d murder…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sampath Vinayak
December 31, 2016
Baradwaj, I saw a rating for this movie on ‘The Hindu’ website. When did you start rating movies?
LikeLike
Iswarya
December 31, 2016
****SPOILER ALERT****
Yuvaraj: That point is fairly straightforward, I think. The girl in question has no family or guardian. But there are neighbors and so her disappearance has to be explained in some way, right? They want to turn it into a simple stalking and abduction case.
But there are several things I have difficulty still in piecing together. Will get back after a while and list out the doubts. Sadly, the audio in the crucial scene after the girl is raped was so muffled and the movie hall acoustics so bad that I couldn’t make out really why these people go together in the same car. I was also pretty confused about the actual events that lead up to Rajeev shooting Krish
End of spoilers
LikeLike
brangan
December 31, 2016
Iswarya: Thanks for chipping in with that clarification. As for the events that led to the shooting…
SPOILERS AHEAD
The girl thinks Rajeev is Mano, and she registers a complaint in his name. Then he reveals he is actually Rajeev. This following part is the weakest part of the film for me — that everything happened because he wanted to sleep with her. But then they all head out in the car. One gets shot trying to escape. One comes under the car with the three boys (including the real Mano).
Is this what you are asking?
LikeLike
Yuvaraj Jeyasankar
December 31, 2016
Actually girl thinks Krish is Mano… Rajeev is her boyfriend.. since both the offenders r killed and no outsiders knows anything about the rape n Rajeev killing Krish. what is d need to disappear and why should Rajeev insists victim’s(Shruthi) friend Vaishnavi to file a missing complaint.. they could have just left for Nashik or ooty wherever they want.. why they bring it to d police’s notice
LikeLike
Yuvaraj Jeyasankar
December 31, 2016
****Spoiler Alert****
And why Rajeev track the boys’ car and retrieves d body from the trunk.. When there is an eyewitness (paper boy) to the incident.. why he went all d way to drag the body out.. n put it in his car and drive it all day.. and waits to meet his dad (Rahman) and finally dumps it
LikeLike
Chandramouly
December 31, 2016
Sir … u got the character names wrong … it was not Rajeev as Mano … It is Krish as Manohar … and his point is very simple … Rajesh has killed the person and why he wants Vaishnavi (Shruti’s frnd) to raise a complaint which would eventually reveal that he is the killer … If u kill someone … will u ask someone to investigate the case ? Isn’t this weird ?
LikeLike
brangan
December 31, 2016
Sorry, yes. I mixed up the names.
LikeLike
Iswarya
December 31, 2016
Okay, BR’s comment left me so confused that I started wondering if it was the same film we watched! Thanks for clarifying about the names. My understanding is that the woman has been traumatized by rape and the other guy with Krish has filmed it on his mobile to blackmail them into silence. When the rapist is shot, the boyfriend Rajeev sees his chance to take the girl away from the city to Nashik where he lives. In order to avoid the incident becoming public, he goes to the house of the three guys and recovers the body (Very Papanasam style happenings here). I think he is shown digging into the pocket of the dead man, and I guess this is how they get back the phone on which he shot. Remember that this phone is brought to Rahman later on by that Vaishnavi.
So, the boyfriend Rajeev and that girl Shruthi are alive and relatively well now, living in Nashik. The cop being the father of the killer has covered up the tracks by making it look like the girl has been kidnapped by the stalker ‘Mano’ after her ‘boyfriend’ Krish has been murdered. Nowhere does his son’s name appear in the picture. Similarly the three guys and the man they accidentally killed don’t get mentioned anywhere. So far, so good.
But there are a lot of points that get murky
(1) I take it that the white car belongs to that Krish who got shot. So, is it his own gun with which he gets killed? If so, how will it be a police gun (Rahman earlier mentioned a .9mm bullet)? It can’t be the boyfriend’s gun, I assume, because nobody turns up to his girlfriend’s birthday party with a gun.
(2) Does Rahman actually cause that road accident in order to protect his son? Is that the ‘guilt’ he is talking about or is it just about having covered up the case?
(3) Is the other corpse he dumps somewhere accounted for in the cop’s version?
(4) And.. Who’s actually in control of the scene after the rape? Why do they all assemble in the same car? When does that Rajeev who was earlier dazed after a knock on his head wrest control? That’s the bit where the audio was messed up..
LikeLike
Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan
December 31, 2016
@Iswarya Ma’am, for your first question, I presume i have an answer. Delhi Ganesh is Keith’s father, who says that he was in service at Delhi. So, Krish might’ve acquired that gun from his dad without his knowledge and brought it with him for his safety. Because he had this gun even before Rajeev came inside the house. I think that answers the question because Rahman, having retired from his service, was still possessing a gun.
LikeLike
Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan
December 31, 2016
*Krish
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yuvaraj Jeyasankar
December 31, 2016
Iswarya – Thanks for clarifying about retrieving the phone.. but still he could’ve walked away after acquiring d phone.. why drag the body out from trio’s car ..
(1) Gun belongs to krish’s dad (Delhi Ganesh – playing a retired cop)
(2) Rahman n d new joinee just sees d driver’s face while chasing.. don’t think Rahman could’ve caused d accident..
(3) not sure
(4) Both the rapists drives away with the girl.. Krish stops d car near d park n steps out to light a cigarette (!!)… rajeev follows…
But still why Rajeev insists on filing a police complaint unnecessarily.. after both the rapists r killed n mobile phone recovered.. wat purpose it serves..
LikeLiked by 1 person
n vasudevan
December 31, 2016
Mr. Balasubramanian is right. But, the question by Yuvaraj on why Vaishnavi, shruthi’s friend wants to give a missing complaint is a big vacuum!! And next point is why Rajeev wants to take the body from the Car and dump it in his car, when he got the mobile phone in which the video is recorded. He could have left the body in the car itself??
LikeLiked by 1 person
VivAK
December 31, 2016
Long time lurker, commenting for the first time here.
The actions by Gautam (climax portion) seem somewhat unjustified. A few of the conversations felt too ‘cinematic’ and contrived.
Overall though, it was a gripping narrative. Had the feeling of ‘reading’ an edge of the seat thriller at times.
LikeLike
Subhash
December 31, 2016
When Baradwaj Rangan gave such a positive review (bordering on overselling as well), I was like this film should be a good one with unanimous praise. But, before jumping into conclusions, I wanted to check with the ever-cynical Gautaman Bhaskaran. And, he didn’t disappoint me. 2.5 out of 5 :
http://www.hindustantimes.com/movie-reviews/dhuruvangal-pathinaaru-movie-review-a-whodunit-with-many-unanswered-questions/story-53DJd5OGTzZ6D5YwYTav2J.html
I ever wonder whether this man gives a positive review for a film in general. Weird tastes: Visaranai, Dharmadurai (especially the latter which indeed was too good to believe and verbose to digest).
LikeLike
Sathya
December 31, 2016
Yuvaraj has raised an interesting question. I think I have an answer for that. What if the investigating cop (Rahman) starts checking the call records and social media messages of Krish (good investigating officers must do this!)? This could be expected because the cop was unbiased in his investigation till he meets with the accident, which we can infer by the shock shown on his face when he sees his son driving white Dzire. If so, the call records would have shown Shruti’s name repeatedly. It is natural that cops would have suspected Shruti’s hand in his murder. However, Shruti herself missing will not make cops doubt her (at least for a while). Hence the complaint, I guess.
But a still larger question is: why did the cop or anyone in the department did not care to know about constable Gowtham after the accident? Rahman should have been keen on this because he clearly caused the accident to save his son and knows Gowtham knows it. If so, he should have been bothered about eliminating Gowtham, further to save his own son. He does not care about Gowtham for five years, knowing all the inherent dangers. Is Rahman such a fool?
LikeLiked by 1 person
karzzexped
December 31, 2016
BR, in hindsight would D16 enter your best movies’ had it released a little bit earlier 😝
LikeLike
Iswarya
December 31, 2016
Thank you Yuvaraj and Balasubramanian. I think those are pretty valid explanations. There’s also the fact that they were all not acting in a cool, level-headed way, something that comes up even in the closing lines of the movie. So, yes, some of the rash decisions are just emotional responses. Maybe at that point, it would have felt important for that boyfriend to take her away from the whole place to help with the healing process. It’s not a planned crime, you see..
LikeLike
Iswarya
January 1, 2017
Sathya: Finally, one more person shares my belief that Rahman somehow caused the accident. I think the explanation is that by the end of five years, you tend to stop believing that anyone would recover from a coma. The department had probably given up on Goutham judging his chance of recovery to be zero!
LikeLike
brangan
January 1, 2017
It isn’t shown that Deepak caused the accident — but the final revelation — and the slowness of the shot, where he realises it’s his son — makes a good case for reading the film this way.
As for not checking up on Gautam, it is a BIG hole, IMO. But not one that bothered me WHILE watching the movie. I call it the Kahaani brand of cheating. As long as the holes turn up only after watching the film and not during, the film experience remains intact.
I did say in my review: “I found myself more enthralled by the dizziness of the script than interested in how each jigsaw piece locks into place.”
The breathlessness of the making was so good that after a point I just took every revelation as granted. In other words, my brain had stopped working and the film had become a purely sensory experience for me.
That’s when you know the direction is really good.
LikeLiked by 6 people
Shankar
January 2, 2017
Spoiler**** the start of the movie says “five years later” .. but the first event was narrated as happened on July 2016 which seems to be technically incorrect if we consider the other events of the movie… Am I missing something here
LikeLike
Rahini David
January 2, 2017
I call it the Kahaani brand of cheating. As long as the holes turn up only after watching the film and not during, the film experience remains intact.
There is a name for it. Fridge Logic
LikeLiked by 4 people
pady
January 2, 2017
I have not seen this movie. But I see so much discussions on the logic here. And in general movies should not be illogical because humans for the most part are not. But when pushed to a corner, we do make silly mistakes. So appears for a complex film such as this, the characters themselves can make mistakes. Maybe a discussion by itself. But I liked BR’s last comment –
“The breathlessness of the making was so good that after a point I just took every revelation as granted. In other words, my brain had stopped working and the film had become a purely sensory experience for me.
That’s when you know the direction is really good.”
So however illogical (or improbable) the story might be in hindsight, if the movie making is good where you stop thinking while watching, the movie maker has achieved what he set out to.
Cant wait to watch this one…
LikeLike
Balakumaran Kamaraj
January 2, 2017
****Spoiler Alert****
My attempt at some of the unanswered questions:
Rajeev has killed the person and why he wants Vaishnavi (Shruti’s frnd) to raise a complaint which would eventually reveal that he is the killer … If u kill someone … will u ask someone to investigate the case ? Isn’t this weird ? Why Rajeev insists on filing a police complaint unnecessarily.. after both the rapists r killed n mobile phone recovered.. What purpose it serves..
Rajeev understands that his father being the area inspector (Rahman )will have significant influence in manipulating the case to let him off the hook. Case has to be solid enough to never have Rajeev under the scanner ever and it needs a solid story esp with Krish being son of an ex-cop. Rajeev helps his father build a story.Let’s assume Vaishnavi and Shruti just disappear with Rajeev. How will Rahman build the case? More senior investigating officers will be appointed to build the case.. Considering the obsession of Rajeev with Shruti , with a deeper probe ,there will be few friends of Krish talking about Shruti to the investigating officers and Shruti would have absconded & unavailable for questioning ,raising suspicions and eventually Shruti/Rajeev would have been tracked down and made to confess in all probabilities.By filing a police complaint ,you have the power to build a strong story from a scratch as if this was a crime of passion owing to romance between Krish and Shruti , and naming some sacrificial lamb (Mano) as the perpetrator of the offence with existing evidences(Both circumstantial and eye-witness) ,the whole thing sums up better and neater than any other plan.
Does Rahman actually cause that road accident in order to protect his son? Is that the ‘guilt’ he is talking about or is it just about having covered up the case?
This is open to the viewer. In my opinion I don’t think Rahman caused the accident wantonly.Because, firsttime when Constable comes to visit Rahman , he is neither angry nor upset with Rahman suggesting that Rahman didn’t do it deliberately. He merely acted on a reflex to prevent a head-on collision.
Is the other corpse he dumps somewhere accounted for in the cop’s version?
No. But the version could be Mano killed Krish’s friend as well who probably protected him from the murderer and threw him under the bridge.
Why Rajeev wants to take the body from the Car and dump it in his car, when he got the mobile phone in which the video is recorded?
This is a weak link in the storyline. Possible explanation is ,We don’t have a doctor confirming the death of this guy (Krish’s friend). He might be unconscious. Kids were almost caught when traffic police suspected them. If the kids change their mind and admit him to a hospital or if police track them down before morning, and if the guy somehow survives , the whole plan will go haywire. He might have more than one phone with him or any other evidence in him. To rule out all such possibilities, Rajeev takes the body out in his car and probably examines it thoroughly ensures no other evidence and ensures Krish’s friend is indeed dead .
why did the cop or anyone in the department did not care to know about constable Gowtham after the accident?
Iam sure Rahman tracked Gowtham for few days , few weeks, few months and few years and then got tired. Unless someone is your close blood relative you wouldn’t track someone for years together on a daily basis. Rahman is anyways not in the police department. He is living reclusive life in a hill station avoiding all sort of contacts. Very remote chance the news reached him. And Constable Gowtham didn’t see anything except a face and he is clueless as to who it is. For some undisclosed reason, Rajeev remains a secret son of Rahman. Not even Rahman’s long time neighbour recognizes him. So , it’s not that Rahman is expecting the moment Gowtham wakes up from coma , he will immediately come after him and his son.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sravishanker1401gmailcom
January 2, 2017
Great that you could sign off 2016 with this gem
“The breathlessness of the making was so good that after a point I just took every revelation as granted. In other words, my brain had stopped working and the film had become a purely sensory experience for me.
That’s when you know the direction is really good.”
More than 20 years ago there was a dude named John Singleton, all of 21 years, who made his debut with a scorcher called “Boyz N the Hood”.
Hope we are witnessing something similar here.
LikeLike
Iswarya
January 3, 2017
Thanks Balakumaran. Everything you said makes sense. 🙂
LikeLike
gm
January 3, 2017
Thanks everyone. Without your help, my little brain would not have understood the movie this evening, need to drive 40 minutes in the Chicago rain to see the movie. Funny, first scene was raining too. I put the director under Christopher Nolan type. Thanks BR for helping me to manage my movie times. Too many movies, too little time.
LikeLike
Abishek
January 4, 2017
I saw this movie on a monday afternoon to a packed house. Really glad I watched it on theater. I have never seen so much detailing in a tamil movie before.
LikeLike
Nivaz
January 4, 2017
“Why Rajeev wants to take the body from the Car and dump it in his car, when he got the mobile phone in which the video is recorded?”
This is the question rings in my mind, thanks for the explanation 🙂
for me, There is no need to take the body out and he can easily let the boys take care of it. If he wanna confirm whether that guy is dead or not he can easily checked it within fab house itself.
LikeLike
Rahul
January 4, 2017
Super Movie….
LikeLike
kamleshkuduvaKamlesh
January 7, 2017
How does Gautham comes to a conclusion that Deepak knows who the killer is?
LikeLike
brangan
January 8, 2017
One of the happiest things about this review is that it seems to have spurred a lot of people to watch the film.
On a related note, I got a mail from a reader, and it had this line: “Your deconstructionist approach to move reviewing has influenced my own movie watching experience over the years.”
I know this sounds like an ego-massaging exercise (and maybe it is in a way 😀 ), but have others felt this way?
I’m talking not just about “I read your review and went and saw the film” but the “deconstructionist” word. Because from the comments it appears that a lot of people who comment here are already… well, deconstructionists. I mean, they seem to be already wired that way, and they surely did not need my review to open them to this approach. But are there others. Just curious.
LikeLiked by 2 people
ramvaradan
January 8, 2017
I watched the movie after this review. Enjoyed it. And, I heard 2 more guy & a girl muttering about Rangan’s review … I guess they did’nt care about your first name or were just respectful 🙂
1) Dead/Killed/Suspended/Retired cops don’t carry home their official gun as a badge of honour. Ofcourse, they can still own a gun with license. But it cannot be same as Cops’ 9mm.
2) Most of the “findings’ aka investigations seemed to me as happenstance than real sleuth work. Such as : somone confessing the truth, them running into one of the 3 friends @ sidewalk, . If anything the real sherlockholmes came out during the “theories” of the two cops… more of conjectures,
3) When the newspaper man was found @ the 3 friends house, the Cop just disregarded it without asking why he was there?
4) At what point did Deepak actually start misdirecting the investigation? When did he exactly know his Son’s involvment? I thought the theory of ‘psycho’ killer was just uncalled for… That’s when I thought that he was leading Goutam the rookie cop into a blind alley.. although he seemed to have taken him under wings.
5) What’s the Goutham’s (the rookie cop) big beef with Deepak? Is it just that Deepak let the rapists be killed rather than put in a trial under law… Just reeks of cookedup immature altruistic vendetta.
LikeLiked by 4 people
vijaymay8
January 8, 2017
Thanks everyone for your inputs which spurred me to watch the movie again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan
January 8, 2017
Deepak never misdirected the investigation till he was met with that accident. His theory was the killer might be a psycho killer, which many people resort to think when they feel there aren’t any proper ideas and motives found. Even after the accident, the police direct the case towards Mano as the two persons who know all the details have become bedridden, and Deepak, while waking up, finds about the real theory behind all this and lets the case go that way. And, regarding another question “How does Gautham comes to a conclusion that Deepak knows who the killer is?”, Gautham sees the murderer just milliseconds before the accident happens. He assumes that Deepak must’ve seen him, too. Also, when Gautham wakes up from his coma, he finds that Mano has been named the murderer and that the case is till not closed. This leads him to Deepak, and when he sees Deepak with that murderer, his amorphous doubts start gaining proper form. That’s how things unfold to make that ending possible.
LikeLiked by 2 people
gm
January 8, 2017
BR, your work helps me a lot as to how to watch a movie. I do not know what deconstructionist means, all I can say is, my movie watching IQ is going up. You also, introduced me to go to Hindi movies ( I read subtitles). This evening, I am taking my wife to Danbal (second time for me). Without you, I would not have seen PK movie. This morning I was talking to my friend and somehow PK movie came up, he thanked me and I told him that thanks goes to Mr. BR. You and WSJ Joe Morgenstern are the one I rely on. Meanwhile, I am back to NFL Sunday, Go Giants.
LikeLike
Rahini David
January 9, 2017
I suppose I have been using movies to deconstruct human behavior rather than see it as an Art form and I have been doing this for as long as I can remember and am still stuck in the “Hare and Tortoise” world. What this blog gave me is the realization that Cinema means a HELL lot to plenty of other individuals.
I deconstruct by default, and what these reviews gave me is validation. And I don’t mean the validation that goes “Ah, He did not like it too”, but the validation that goes “So It is ok to not turn my brain off during watching movies.”
Thank you for that.
LikeLike
Rahini David
January 9, 2017
Spoiler Alert
The Hindustan Times review says,
“On a seemingly dull morning six years ago, Deepak is called in to investigate a suicide of a young woman that later turns out to be a case of homicide.”
Is that not a young man who supposedly shoots himself? If I am not wrong, both women are alive and living elsewhere, no?
“But he cannot nail anybody. Or, maybe, he does not want to.”
Is that not a spoiler?
Did anyone suffer from confusion on who is who? The boy friend and the rapist looked quite similar in my eyes.
And the initial psycho killer who wears black, he did not exist, eh? Is that not cheating? Because we are shown that as if it is real, not that it is a hypothesis or anything.
LikeLike
Anand Govindarajan
January 9, 2017
Off track, but Baradwaj Rangan is known as Baddy in our circles. Just a nickname that sounds cool. We often discuss what Baddy has written about the movie before making up our mind. It helps in two ways – either spurs you to watch the movie (read before), or tells you that you watched a solid movie (after watching).
LikeLike
Nishanth Krishnan
January 9, 2017
i found the film to be rather childish with fantastic editing. I am wondering if we have started placing average films among the great ones because of all the filth around us in the name of movie making
LikeLiked by 1 person
praneshp
January 10, 2017
Spoilers ahead
@Rahini David: I thought the psycho killer bit was well done. The police thought they were behind one, and the director just gave that idea flesh. That’s what set this movie apart from the 100 other movies with a psycho killer idea (like another one I watched one recently, Arathu Sinam).
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
January 10, 2017
praneshp: If that part is only when the policemen discussed their hypothesis, I would not have minded. Maybe there were a few words in some voiceover that I missed. Don’t know. They show it as a prologue, no? It is also possible that something crucial was edited out.
LikeLike
Jagajaga
January 10, 2017
Spoiler Spoiler see below (read to the tune of – twinkle twinkle little star!)
The best part of the movie is that, we are all still not convinced if there are loopholes or not. Not a single comment here I presume points out to a convincing loop-hole. And the genius of the script-writer/editor lies in the fact that, eventually Deepak knows what had transpired. He knows his son is involved. And it is also not clear when he knew his son was involved – was it when he checked all those missed calls from his son or was it when finally Gautam sees him too – it has been left pretty open?? So for all we know, Deepak may have well been complicit, and this does justify Gautam’s anger. But more importantly, it keeps the plot so open and therefore, the answer for most of the questions can always be “but Deepak knew of it all, and let his son go away unpunished”!!!
LikeLiked by 4 people
ramvaradan
January 11, 2017
also importantly, why would goutham be so mad at deepak? he knew the baddies are killed. is it that the coverup that motivated him to kill deepak? what could he do — other than the coverup – just let his kid go through hell rest of his life? if 2 innocent lives were wasted, then we are talking .. maybe we can call that injustice.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Rahini David
January 11, 2017
ramvardan: I think what Deepak did in covering up is not wrong at all as even his son was a victim. He just wanted to drop into his gfs apartment to celebrate her birthday and the villains drop in and rape his gf and the rest just kind of happens. The gun was villain’s and so it can be considered self defense. The other dude was run over by the trio’s car and that blood wasn’t in his hands anyway.
But Gautam’s and Deepak’s own car accident was caused by that son and that seems to be his beef. That sent him to coma and rendered his life null and void so to speak. So that is the personal anger. Not righteous indignation.
Also not too sure if I am getting this story right. I MAY be totally off. Also very soap opera-ish to be quite frank. In soap operas people get their faces and their lives rearranged for them all the very time. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Altman
January 11, 2017
The opening psycho killer scene was rather a clever move from the director as it makes us believe, from the very beginning, that we possess more knowledge about the murder than the characters do only to realise it’s the other way around at the end. Had it not for this scene from Deepak’s hypothesis, the audience would assume it must either be a boyfriend or a stalker, once a missing girl situation arises. It resembles a trick where the magician distracts us with something inconsequential while hiding the obvious in plain sight.
While Deepak and Gautham are conversing in 2021, (5 years from 2016 which explains the advanced plastic surgery procedures) Deepak asks ‘Climax therinjukitu padam paakradu bore adikadha?’ Gautham replies ‘Adhu neenga solra vidathuladha iruku.’ This line sums up the movie for me. Strange events, underwritten characters, perplexing plot line, jarring logic, unanswered questions yet the making is so effective I tend to overlook all these as minor shortcomings.
LikeLiked by 3 people
ramvaradan
January 11, 2017
yes, me too thinks that there is some sense of “cooked” up feeling .. rather than a natural flow. the dialogues were just a bit unnatural such as when cop explains cctv to the security person, he goes like “such as in parking lot”… what kind of explanation is that? not homegrown. … misplaced emphasis on certain scenes, such as when deepak is at his house, the camera hovers around as if there’s going to be an intruder… no such luck. and, more importantly this film is really not an “action” flick to have such scenes.the main thing that movie does to audience such as us is : “keep wondering what actually happened..” even heard a couple of friends argue about it in men’s toilet 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
bart
January 11, 2017
A very decent thriller. Well made! A hearty welcome to the second Karthik..
Spoilers Alert:
Will try to answer few of the queries and point out a few gaps from my pov:
a) If Shruthi did not go “missing”, they could have continued as though nothing had happened. Then Krish’s “suicide” and the missing Krish’s accomplice will come into picture and Krish’s car in Shruthi’s apartment would come into picture. As per the older man in 3A, Krish was her “fiance”! So, she would be brought into the picture and hence will get into trouble hiding facts or creating stories.
On the other hand Shruthi had to go missing to get along with the fiance story and a third person to kill her fiance and make her go missing for which a “Mano” was there (whom they know now that is actually Krish). Rajeev’s name would never come out that way. Hence the “missing” had to be reported to build a story the way Balakumaran has put earlier.
b) One theory could be that Deepak knows of his son’s presence in town that night when he switches his phone “on” and hears from his neighbour of a young man waiting for him that evening. He might not have known that he was the culprit as he goes along the investigation of finding whose car it is and who is dumping the body on highway. He gets to know only then.
His son’s blood group should have been B+ve which was Krish’s as well (coincidence) which was found in Shruthi’s apartment. That might’ve raised a suspicion in him.
Another possibility is that the actual fiance who got introduced to the 3A neighbour could have been Rajeev. The elderly man was doubtful on confirming against Krish’s photo. Deepak could’ve known this all along and might have directed his son to do what he did after the shooting incident. He had a new “landline” from the previous night.. But then why would he go hunting for the white car with the “newbie” Gowtham alongwith.. So might have to reject this possibility..
The gaps that remain are:
a) The Krish’s accomplice is conveniently ignored in the investigation with none reporting his missing
b) Phone call checks of Shruthi’s and her friends’ number would’ve given them more clues which wasn’t done
c) The white car number was never asked to be tracked until that reporting happened by chance in control room
Also, what is the significance of the movie’s title? Why Dhuruvangal 16? I couldn’t make the complete significance.
A bit of googling gave me this:
“The number 16 is a karmic number, and people under its influence need to keep their feet on the path of higher learning. Number 16 denotes that many will experience trials and defeats throughout their lives. Unforseen events may seem to follow people with this number, and possible manifestations of this energy include illicit love affairs and/or money losses.
A number 16 person is outspoken and their strong beliefs give them the energy to keep going for many hours in the day, yet still find time for home and family. They have the capacity to love deeply and passionately and are very conscious of their responsibility within the home, and make very loving partners and parents.”
Since Deepak starts telling the story with reference to “Karma” and ends saying that in his version Goutham is the villain and that he could be villain in Goutham’s story, they should be the dhuruvangal (poles apart) who are linked by the number 16 (birth numbers?!).
Thats all I can add to the soup for now 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
ramvaradan
January 12, 2017
the whole case rested on the vaishanavi’s final confession touted as the “real incident” … what if the vaishnavi was again lying to the cops, the only evidence she had was the video shoot of the rape… and, ofcourse that was not scrutinised well because deepak had no intentions to make it public. and gautam found this out, and realized that deepak was actually sided with the bad guy, his son. then gautam’s rage would have been well meant 🙂
LikeLike
Blasta
January 17, 2017
By accident or design, T16 is a movie that stays in your mind a couple of days more than the average movie can accomplish. In T16 film making takes precedence over logic, and whatever logic there was initially, in script form, is overwhelmed by the presentation.
And a relentless presentation it is, never letting you drift away from its material, and the surprises, (twist in local lingo) many of them real, (Murugadas, take a cue) keep popping up at regular intervals.
Despite all the commotion on screen (the music is appropriate even when loud) the guy next to me slept blissfully through the first half and woke up for the second. I asked him if he could make sense of the movie, he looked incredulous, everything is clear, he said, sheepish me.
I once asked an assistant director if he watched foreign films and his response was that he hadn’t finished watching the native ones. Ruing on that I happened to walk into a producer-directors office, in Kollywood..3 cubords of DVD’s, and CD’s…presumably to learn how movies are made.
Discounting the other obvious question, this must surely be the most central question on the Internet, how to make movies. The Internet is chock a block with movie making videos, instructions, and most importantly opinions. For one interested, and willing to learn this is heaven. Kartik Naren, and his team look like they have dipped generously into the buffet.
They have learnt well too, they really understand that despite the magic of the story line, the script, the characterizations and its stars a movie is MADE. T16 is the lessons of Hollywood making distilled to its essence, this as BR put it, is FILM MAKING.
In retrospect, their elders, even when they were being good story tellers, look diminished, and outdated. Even the Kartik Subburaj types. Compare T16 to Pizza, T16 is so well accomplished that it is almost porn.
The only negative that could be said is its almost perfect Barbie doll finish, which makes you suspect that it is team work rather than one man’s vision, so rather like wedding organizers it is always Kartik and team rather than Kartik per se.
What is 2 x 2. What is 2 x 2 + 34 + 42 x 12 – 39 + 42. Continue to ask questions like this and most of your audience will quickly lose the impetus to calculate. Agatha Christie understood this, despite the pace, the clues were really there. It required many a reading to connect the dots.
T16 wants to make you watch it again, but then it is like opening that dreaded math text book, again. I suspect that but for those who relish the challenge of the intellect very few walked in for a second viewing. Unlike Thuppakki, howdoneit appropriately dummified that everyone was glad to have understood it.
This time they made the book a little too thick, and this is perhaps a lesson that the team should consider as learnt. After all the movie business is also a money business, second viewings double up into profits.
LikeLike
Sesh
January 18, 2017
“It’s night. It’s raining. A mystery man steps out of a car. He’s outside a house. Inside, we see a man, a woman. They’re in an embrace. The man enters the house.” Isn’t this scene misleading? Things don’t unfold this way in the actual series of events. In story telling terms, why else did this scene play out if not for misleading the audience?
LikeLiked by 3 people
blurb
January 18, 2017
I am dying to watch this one — any suggestions on how to watch it overseas? Just want until it’s released on YouTube? 😥
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jaga_Jaga
January 19, 2017
@Sesh – Great point! However that scene was shown even before the title of the movie and the credits were put-up the screen. So it can be argued that this scene was the equivalent of a “preface” (and not a “preamble”) to a book. And it is not at all necessary that the preface of a book needs to spill-out the contents. Was it contrived – yes definitely! But what I feel as such a special feature of this movie is that, the narration was so awesome that the contrivances SEEM so natural.
Moreover, every red-herring adopted in every single novel/movie is always misleading, and they are part of the story itself! But in this movie, since this first-scene (the one you talked about) is not even a part of the movie, it can definitely be argued that it is not misleading.
Makes me wonder if this is the best Tamil (maybe Indian) thriller I have seen ever?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sesh
January 19, 2017
@Jaga_jaga – Precisely the explanation i was looking for. No one seemed to have raised this point and I was wondering if I missed something! The best aspect of the story/screenplay is, none of these questions came up during the movie watching experience and that says a lot about the strength of the narration!
On good tamil thrillers of late- I felt Thegidi was another brilliant movie.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jaga_Jaga
January 19, 2017
@Sesh -fully agree with you on – “The best aspect of the story/screenplay is, none of these questions came up during the movie watching experience and that says a lot about the strength of the narration!”
Guess Brangan said the same thing too!
And I am saying that even much after you’ve seen the movie, all these questions can be answered. With some contrivance, but nothing in the movie ever seems clearly illogical or impossible or existing as a loop-hole.
About Tegidi – A very good one, but per me doesn’t even come near D16. A glaring hole as I see in it is, how come Ashok Selvan who is after all such a clever sleuth throughout the movie, join that fraudulent company just because his teacher (whom he reveres) recommends strongly. A loose-bit of screen-play at an important point in the screen-play. Further, it had some masala moments – which I am not at all a fan of in such serious movies. So for me, Kodi, Tegidi all fall under the very good movies which would have been outstanding had they been de-masalafied it and taken care of a few minor but critical points more seriously.
LikeLike
Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan
January 25, 2017
//The white car number was never asked to be tracked until that reporting happened by chance in control room//
@bart- Sir! It didn’t happen by chance. At first, Deepak considers the newspaper-wallah’s scare about the White Swift as a rather unimportant one. But, when he’s looking at the short film video, he finds the car’s existence during the time of the crime scene and immediately asks for the details of the car to be traced down from its registration number. Since they didn’t get any news, Deepak and Gautham approach the control room people in person. Then they get to know that a message was sent to Rajan and it wasn’t delivered. Only then they get that car’s details from the control room. At the same time, Rajeev dumps the body of Krish’s friend and a witness gives an information about this (along with the car’s registration number) to the control room. That leads to the chase which transforms the story.
LikeLiked by 2 people
ArvindSivakkumar
February 4, 2017
Hi All!
It took me a good 5 minutes to read the review and an interesting half an hour to read all the comments. Loved the movie, the discussions in comments are the evidence that it IS a good film. Below are my answers to a couple of questions –
The operning scene denotes how the case was presented. The guy was in her house, an intruder walked in, killed the boyfriend – hence the blood splash, took the girl away.
Why so much rage for Gautham to kill Deepak? a) He found out that Rajeev is Deepak’s son before meeting him in Ooty and he wanted to hear it from him before he shot him dead. The writer leaves an open end for viewers to decide the reason for the rage – IMO Deepak caused the accident and Gautham knows this.
And this is my only concern with the film –
Why did Krish and his friend take Shruti along after the rape – after Krish rapes him, his friend claims for his turn and Krish responds by taking her with them. This is the only place where I felt the plot loose. Moreover, the dialogues in this scene are not very clear due to poor sound arrangements. I heard the friend asking for his turn only on the second watch.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Say Something
February 4, 2017
——– S P O I L E R ——–
For me
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deus_ex_machina
killed the movie. Can’t introduce a character almost towards the climax and close things out.
——– S P O I L E R ——–
LikeLiked by 1 person
Say Something
February 4, 2017
Here it’s not even one. Some 3 new characters? And changing names? Amateurish.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Concerned3rdParty
February 5, 2017
Did anybody catch the reference to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fregoli_delusion
that Karthik Naren makes, in his cameo as the short film director?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Aadhy
February 5, 2017
Just got to watch this movie, courtesy Herotalkies. A character in an initial scene sums up the whole movie, one trippy ride! All the questions I had during the watch has been discussed and answered extensively, thank you all for that. A few more points to add (even if some might be redundant):
1) The fact that Krish and Rajeev look similar has a payoff. Shruthi’s neighbor is not sure if who he saw was Krish, but he thinks so (who he actually had seen was Rajeev).
2) I did not feel cheated by the first psycho killer scene because, as Deepak says in the end, the story is told from his perspective. What is shown in the first scene is Deepak’s theory, as it plays out again later. From his POV, the psycho scene is very much integral to the narrative, as in whose perspective the narrative is going to unfold.
3) Some of the writing was amateurish, like the way policemen discuss about the case within themselves, how and where they do it. I mean there was a scene where Deepak asks Gautham to report about his investigation right in front of those students, who Deepak had just found out to be key witnesses in this case. Also when some stranger who is supposedly Rajan’s son meets Deepak for the first time, wouldn’t he ask “Rajan oda paiyana?” and introduce himself, before going on to talk about himself and the case.
4) All the arguments above explaining Rajeev’s actions to be consistent with the Mano-Kidnaps-Shruthi story made sense. But still not convinced that Rajeev, a supposedly unassuming visitor, who’s come to celebrate his Girlfriend’s birthday, would so easily get over the shock from events that transpired that night, and could think of such an elaborate plan of action.
5) A lot of contrivances. The characters in the movie bump into each other too easily. Also apart from Krish and say Rajeev, none of the young characters seemed to be having parents/ Guardian or family around. Fabian, Melvin, original Mano, Vaishnavi, Shruthi, Gautham. Maybe any backstory would have slowed the film down, fair enough. The one that felt the most far-fetched was the camera having recorded so much of footage with the crime scene in the background – the house, Shruthi’s friend, the car and the number plate with such clarity of digits!
6) A special shoutout to the director/music composer for using Naak pe gussa from Bombay Velvet, as the trip-enhancing song. One of the most underrated songs of 2015.
All in all, it’s been a while since a movie required so much of attention right from the first frame. All the flaws struck only after the movie ended. The way the scenes were edited, alternating between confessional flashbacks and speculative hypothesis, I just couldn’t pause and think. No pandering, no jarring tonal shifts, no self-righteousness, and solid craft. Here’s another Karthik whose movies we can all look forward to.
LikeLiked by 1 person
jox2jox
February 5, 2017
Finally watched the movie yesterday….and as the climax played out, the first thing that came to my mind was KARIYILAKATTU POLE ( Malayalam 1986) which starred Mohanlal, Mammooty and Rahman. The malayalam audience is well famiiiar with this murder mystery of Padmarjan sir.
It is like a full circle for Rahman of sorts. Watch this puzzle of a thriller that dazzled audience 30 years back. And probably once you watch it, you could find the sort of relation between that and Dhuruvangal 16, of course besides the common factor being Rahman.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sriram
February 9, 2017
I watched this movie yesterday with very high expectations due to lot of positive and raving reviews. It is a technically well made movie with a very tight script. It is a great achievement for a 22 year old director.
But the complete story feels very fake and many if not all characters in the movie behave like robots with out any human touch. Having watched few episodes of CSI, this type of story telling is not very new to me. (CSI also feels fake to me most of the time). Here are couple of thoughts.
1) A police officer tells a father that their only son is dead and let him go back home all by himself? Does he want to see the body to confirm if it is his son? Does the police officer instruct someone to take him home in police jeep? At least call someone else from his household or neighbor to take him home?
2) A police officer wakes up from Coma after 5 years and his face has been transplanted. His first duty is to find out what happened to the case he worked for less than 24 hours as a junior police and revenge of the senior officer. He does not worry about his family, friends or career. (BTW, who kept him alive for 5 years, who paid his hospital bill?)
It feels like all these characters are there just to support the plot. They are very inhuman and artificial.
I think for most people this type narration is pretty new and they are way more excited to see all these big holes. After watching 3 or 4 movies like this, they will move on.
Manikandan’s Kutrame Dhandanai felt much real, much more believable. (Rahman was in that movie too)
LikeLiked by 2 people
Marsant Gerephio
February 11, 2017
Well, excellent discussions leading to finally render completeness to the story:
Apart from misleading trailer and heavily flawed hypothesis of Serial Killer which was all alluding to story appearing much intense and curious than a simple solved-in-no-time case.
And this is where director deserves praise for building up such a simple story.
Despite the holes and logical inaccuracies; absence of which is a mandatory tick for any Mystery Suspense film, the director has to recieve his credit for excellent debut.
But after watching 100s of Crime Patrol episodes [and likes], I have a major doubt here that if Gautham had acted a little smart [than showing of his unnatural keeness] and tracked the phone location of Shruthi and that of Krish and Vaishnavi, he would have known that at that fateful night, all three were at same place and from thereon he could have easily investigated Vaishnavi and got out the facts. Mobile phones have helped so much in these days about which the director forgot [may be the Police not tracking phones and potraying extreme Advancements in surgeries [face morph] seems bafflingly contradictory.
The beginning itself is in a bit of slope because Deepak narrates this to someone whom he did not know! How come he did not ask who he was or why he did not listen to his father etc?
Also, when someone is pointing a gun to a police officer, why immediate action was not taken remains an evidence of delaying of neccessary action of police, why did they take the loudspeaker and yell when they were so near. I think it was all uncessary to kill Deepak and reasons were very meek. Asides, It was Gautam who was driving when accident happened and he survived at the end without any loss of limbs or vital organs like Deepak, and even when he found Deepak and Rajeev together there was no need to get angry enough to kill his senior.
Also lots of people have guessed the killer to be Deepak’s son, so no surprise there especially when families of Lead Cop are not shown!
Moreover, such direction style is refreshing for hardcore tamil cinema fans and not for people who watch TV shows and hollywood movies. It just appears that director has deliberately confused us to give a Nolan-Hitchcock like Movie and made a honest and good attempt at it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Marsant Gerephio
February 11, 2017
In no way, there is need of a second time viewing.
Another thing that I don’t get is how come Deepak believes Vaishnavi’s story to be true without any investigation and we are not even seen verifications of truth in her story. How come the phone is still in hands of vaishnavi and why would Rajeev give that to her [of all] remains a big question mark.
And if Deepak knew that it was Rajeev who was the murderer[accidental and self-defense] of Krish, why would he drag Gautham [a smart fellow] into it and lead him till the Dzire? Deepak should have been wary of Gautham and kept him away from it atleast deepak could have alone chased the Dzire and explained or helped his son.
Phew! enough of it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Selvin
February 12, 2017
Finally watched it, D16 was like reading a book with a mandatory rule of 100 pages to accommodate the proceedings. Decent narration but good writing. How I wish more people saw kuttrame thandanai. Only Manikandan (In current crop of filmmaking) apart from Karthik Subbaraju and Kumaraja have managed to crack the code of filmmaking. It isn’t how cleverly u shoot or make the human talk. It’s more about how you make the visuals unfold the story. Subtle, make the audience interpret the proceedings. Cinema in other words.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
February 16, 2017
Saw this finally. No doubt, a visually impressive one but had quite a few “look how good the frame is” moments. Also, agree with Ramvaradan’s point about the conversations being too cinematic.
Aadhy: Also when some stranger who is supposedly Rajan’s son meets Deepak for the first time, wouldn’t he ask “Rajan oda paiyana?”
Remember the scene where the Gautham character meets Rahman for the first time? The latter’s “intuition” – that Rajan’s son is set to arrive exactly two hours after the phone call – comes into play at this point.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 16, 2017
Honest Raj (formerly ‘V’enkatesh): had quite a few “look how good the frame is” moments…
Yes, perhaps. But is this really a problem, when 90% of Tamil directors are merely writers and not “directors”?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
February 16, 2017
BR: Umm, but in this case I doubt the director really had a voice – the closing credits list some five names under “Associate Cinematography” and “Assistant Cinematography”. Maybe, the relatively inexperienced crew was overenthusiastic?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuja Chandramouli
February 16, 2017
I watched this film because it came so highly recommended. Did not read this review or comments so went in with a blank slate and I found it to be hugely disappointing.
Karthik Naren shows a lot of potential and knows how to create mood, I’ll give him that. But his script just did not work for me. Rahman turns in a superlative performance but the rest of the cast had precious little to do and it did not help that the characters were so generic.
Like Karthik Subbaraj before him this guy is all about the twists and turns, not really seeming to care or understand that a twist works only when it is led up to with solid detailing, not just thrown in for good measure. In a good script a character’s actions and motivations need to make sense. That just did not happen here.
Deepak is supposed to be a smart/good cop but given his ability to walk past a clue that is smack dab in his face he could easily be a stupid/bad cop. The good boyfriend of a rape victim who turns out to be Deepak’s son is bloody perplexing. As a few others pointed out, why on earth did he retrieve the body of his girl’s rapist and keep it in the boot of a car the cops are on the lookout for till his slow on the uptake Dad comes haring after said car? Why were his instructions to Vaishnavi so senseless? Even the bad guys seemed an unconvincing mix of rapist/stalker/ sociopath. And the scene where the victim is raped again in a parked car was super contrived… It seemed squeezed in just so perp 1 could get shot and perp 2 run over. Boo!
Don’t even get me started on the convenient coincidences… How nice that one half of an evil duo got run over by the terrible trio of a residential neighborhood? That a fake name (used by evil duo leader) is the real name of a guy, belonging to terrible trio, who spoke briefly to a girl who was Eve teased by mr. fake name and reported the same… No way Jose! And don’t even get me started on that ridiculous climax! Besides I promised PraneshP not to go on and on and on…
LikeLiked by 3 people
MANK
February 16, 2017
Honest Raj , so you even count the number of associate Cinematographers, huh
well i do agree with the larger point you make there about overenthusiastic guys showing off just for the heck of it , but there is other side too you know
well citizen Kane was also a relatively inexperienced crew being overenthusiastic 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
February 17, 2017
MANK: It caught my attention because ‘Associate cinematography’ is a very unusual position in Indian films. Unlike the west, most of our DOPs (even the arty ones) do a one-man show. Among the popular ones, PC seems like an exception in this regard. Perhaps, this must be the reason why majority of ISCians come from his school. Being overenthusiastic is not an issue as long as there exists a strong sense of coordination.
Btw, respectfully disagree with those who think this is the most detailed Tamil film ever. 🙂
http://web.archive.org/web/20150508135317/http://www.mangojoos.com/10-mindblowing-trademarks-indias-experimental-director/
LikeLiked by 2 people
Aadhy
February 17, 2017
Honest Raj : Remember the scene where the Gautham character meets Rahman for the first time? The latter’s “intuition” – that Rajan’s son is set to arrive exactly two hours after the phone call – comes into play at this point.
I get your point. But this is more like what a young enthusiastic filmmaker would think a cop would do, rather than what a cop would actually do. The way he tries to make Deepak appear suave and sophisticated, to the extent of Deepak not caring the least about basic protocols, smacks of naivety. Deepak’s intuition, Gautam’s intuition, I mean you tend to think ‘does no one in the police bother with evidences and reason?’. I agree that it’s this cop, who behaves this way, in this context of the movie. But there seems to be a pattern here, with GVM equally guilty of doing this. I still remember a close family member (who’s in police) cringing at Kamal eloquently articulating case details and his hypothesis at a public telephone booth in VV, when he’s not sniffing out corpses with his instinct. Policemen could be stylish and do have hunches, but they definitely don’t carry out an entire investigation trusting these hunches AFAIK. It comes across as faux when cops are made to look highly qualified and classy, but don’t (are not made to) follow basic procedures during an investigation. Going a step further, I would say this is as preposterous as ‘Universal cop’ Mr.Lion saying he believes in emotions and not evidences.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
February 17, 2017
Aadhy: Agree the film has a few logical holes, but in this case the ’emotional’ logic takes precedence over the ‘logical’ one. Simply put, given the emotional connect between the two characters, I don’t think this one wasn’t handled without care – unlike say Krish carrying a 9mm pistol, or Rajeev tracking down the trio only to retrieve the corpse.
LikeLike
Nandakumar
February 19, 2017
துருவங்கள் பதினாறு
இருட்டில் தாறுமாறு
கோணங்கள் பலவாறு
நரேன் இயக்கப் பழச்சாறு
பின்னணியிசை தேனாறு
ரசிகக் கூட்டமே சான்று
ஓடிடும் திரையில் நாட்கள் இருநூறு!
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
February 20, 2017
Honest Raj , I think the technique was alright, i wasnt taken out of a movie because of framing or camera move, even when i look back at some of the frames – like the one where Rahman is framed from inside a fish tank, i thought it was keeping in with the rain\water theme running throughout the film or even his predicament at the time of conducting the investigation.so i have no issues with that, and also i am a sucker for style
the immaturity of the makers does show in scripting side. i would say that the over-enthusiasm on the technical side saved much of the movie as it covers up a lot of loop holes in the narrative.but i do feel – like you did- that the film wasn’t the sole voice of the director and it felt more like a committee written script and a lot of people in the editing room
Thanks for that Mysskin link. it was fun reading it :). no one can beat Mysskin at detailing. i think that the makers of this film was heavily influenced by him. The rain drenched opening of this film seems to be inspired by the opening of Yuddham sei
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
February 20, 2017
MANK:So what I’m saying is that the film is gripping DESPITE the (at times) underwhelming writing — and that’s because of the direction. I am talking about direction as a CRAFT — not just orchestrating every department but the intangibles, like adding mood, adding some air/atmosphere, sketching out background action/activity.
What impresses me about this director is that he’s done so much to announce himself as a FILMMAKER despite this writing, despite this budget. So it’s exciting to imagine what he can do if he gets a bigger budget, better actors…
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
February 20, 2017
What impresses me about this director is that he’s done so much to announce himself as a FILMMAKER despite this writing
That i agree, because on the filmmaking side – as you put it – it is flawless, things have gone majorly wrong both scripting and editing. on that level it remind one of Anjaathe, where we know that there is a singular vision of a really brilliant director behind all of this, but the quality of whats on the screen oscillates wildly between brilliant and amateurish. i think it took Yudham sei for Mysskin to really come in to his own. so i will watch out of Karthick Naren’s next film and hopefully there will be a next.
So it’s exciting to imagine what he can do if he gets a bigger budget, better actors…
And more importantly total creative freedom, otherwise it would end up like Mysskin directing mugammoodi
LikeLiked by 1 person
pato
February 20, 2017
MANK: No need to worry. karthick naren’s next movie is titled “naragasooran” and apparently aravindsami is playing one is the leads.
LikeLike
Aadhy
February 20, 2017
MANK : There is a next and it’s called “Naragasooran, The tale of a fallen demon” , touted to be an intense drama starring Aravind Swami. I hope this one’s more character driven with stronger conflicts, as it’ll put his screenwriting to the acid test. In D16, he got away with underwritten characters and plot points by having a strong visual style. especially the intelligent use of low-key lighting and shadows. But it’ll be interesting to see how he would handle a more spaced-out movie dependent on character arcs, without having to ride on the mystery/intrigue factor alone.
LikeLiked by 1 person
venkatk
February 21, 2017
Sir, did not understand one thing. Dont you feel he get a bigger punishment than what he deserved?
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
February 21, 2017
oh that’s good news. yeah hope he gets the script and characterizations right this time. he has proven his technical virtuosity , now he has to prove he has in him to be a complete filmmaker. Arvind swamy in his comeback mode seems to be a perfect suite for him as he will not have to compromise his vision to accommodate a more front line commercial star.something that was the problem with guys like Susheendhran and Pa Ranjith
LikeLiked by 1 person
ogivetech
March 14, 2017
I am surprised by the lengths you go to defend the movie with serious logical holes. You are willing to ignore (if not forgive) the complete lack of knowledge that Deepak seems to have about his blue eyed boy by claiming that it came so late in the movie that it did not matter. Unfortunately for my the gaps appeared too early into the movie.
I don’t know if you have ever done a late night show – the first and most routine question every constable in the state asks you is to produce the ticket for the show. Isn’t it funny then that a police investigation into a crime as serious as murder did not take the basic step of verifying the claims of the person who has reported the crime. No one asked her to produce her train or bus ticket.
The movie is technically and superficially fine. It has the pretensions of an intelligent flick, but is a big zero when it comes to being even remotely realistic. I am sure there are very many aspects of film making that I may not be aware or capable of appreciating, but assuming I was, I would still not have been able to do so in this instance since the very core of this film is hollow.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jeeni
March 20, 2017
I do believe that Rahman is what makes this movie tick and nothing very much else. An overrated movie that hasn’t really been written tightly. If it was really written tightly it would have given us those ‘twists’ that we never realised right under our noses and been clever enough to make us overlook them; the kind that makes you go OMG and makes you rewind and go ” wow why didn’t I see that before!”. Instead it hides chunks of information and then springs them onto us in the guise of twist after twist. It isn’t a twist it’s just coincidences that are way too in- your- face. So I do believe that this film has only Rahman to bring some emotion to it.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sundar
March 20, 2017
Jus watched this film. Terrific.Awesome Camera work. Eager to know how well it did in BO, considering so soon it is out in amazon prime.
BR sir your mention of this being a ‘cold film’ reminded me of Fincher who is the master of making such procedural films without that warmth. And then this … a cop working his last case joined by a new recruit for whom it is the first . A deliberate hat-tip by the writers to ‘Se7en”??
LikeLiked by 1 person
Navneeth
March 25, 2017
SPOILERS BELOW
Watched this today in the theatre, with subtitles. Really disappointed with the writing. I was becoming extremely aware of the plot holes & contrivances while watching, and this was taking me out of the experience. As a few others have already mentioned, the ridiculous deus ex machina that ultimately serves as the explanation took the cake. How can there be a payoff without the planting? You just do not dump something completely new into the plot at the climax! And that Kahaani-style cheating… Bah.
The policemen, their interactions and in particular their frequent lapses into English seemed Gautham Menon-influenced. Shouldn’t have been surprised a character was named Gautham or that his caller tune was ‘Thalli Pogathey’.
Speaking of which, the plot point involving Gautham’s surgical identity change seems to have been inspired from the Korean film ‘Confession Of Murder’ (2012).
That said, the mood created by the filmmakers was spot-on and the cinematography excellent; the way the scene between Deepak & the short film dudes in the former’s house was shot lent it great energy; good choice in opting for a long take.
Did anyone else notice screen tearing issues in the top part, in certain scenes when the camera was panning?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Gayathri Arun
March 28, 2017
Yesterday i watched this movie. The first preface scene is not a red herring. It is just a disjoint version of what actually happened. Two people were in embrace- those were kris & Shruthi. Except that its not an embrace, she had been violated. Rajeev entered. Shootout happened. But we didn’t know that time there were 4 people in that apartment. So we assumed whoever entered started shooting. It seems logical to me.
The real illogical thing is retrieving the friend’s dead body from the car.
Rahman after entered his house, switched on his phone and saw 10 missed calls from his son. He would have talked to him before the boys came to get their camera. Then why did he ask manoj to come immediately when he already knew his son was involved.
But having said that the narrative is taut. The unraveling happened in its own pace but you don’t feel it is slow. In fact without any fast paced scenes the director achieves swiftness entirely through the script.
When Rahman discusses with Vaishnavi about her staying arrangement, we can see the wife’s unwillingness to accomodate Vaishnavi through her sulky gesture while the husband agrees to Rahman’s request without showing it outwardly. There are plenty of such details in the background and it is really well crafted.
Tamil Cinema has shed its heroic fetish and especially the newcomers has embraced the nuances of the visual medium so well. Hats Off!! More power to them!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
rav
April 8, 2017
Watched the movie just now. Needless to say your review made me watch it (like most other movies :)) But the reviews for thrillers, I am always wary after watching Thegidi. It was a decent movie but I felt it was more like a telefilm. Anyway got over that and watched this.
For a guy who is 22, this is TERRIFIC movie. The sensibilities, the layered narrative its quite hard to believe actually that this Director is 22. I was thinking of Uriyadi(another young director first movie). There is a sea of difference in terms of execution and the finesse between the 2 movies.
Things that worked for me
1)Very taut.
2)The deliberate pacing.
3)Very well underplayed by Raghu.
4)The last few lines of how in the moments of rage/lust/attachment human being does unjustifiable acts…for a 22 year old its way too deep.
5) Totally agree with the visual sense.
6) Agree that there was a quite a bit of details.(One negative there listed below)
Some of the things which needled me was
1) the 3 college buddies hit couple of traffic cops. But that is never mentioned anywhere in the movie.Ideally the cops should have landed at their houses very early. Maybe they wont file a case but the cops just wont let these hooligans go free without a ‘good’ treatment. If that had added to the plot it would have made it more interesting.
2) One other thing which i felt was the reveals are too easy to come. There is no labouring to find the clues. For example they are stepping out of the lake to see who dropped what and immediately they encounter the car(TN 38 Aw 7436).That is way too convenient atleast for me.
3) The paperman in the 3 college buddies house when Deepak walks in again its never dwellt into as to why he was there. That was left as a open thread which is only closed in the end. Ideally he should have been grilled then and there.
4) The final reveal itself was a bit underwhelming as they are not discovering how it happened by investigation but rather a simple video clip solves the puzzle.
5) The cop forgetting the cap thing, that was a shot which seems to have been deliberately positioned.It dint happen in the background like as if he was talking and removing the cop(PCs usually dont remove it in front of Inspectors I believe) but there was a specific shot to show that he kept it there.I quite didnt get what is the reason behind that shot and why is he going back to retrieve it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
CM
September 5, 2017
I watched the movie yesterday only at home – the main takeaway from the film is the experience itself – brilliant cinematography and the ability to tell a story in a gripping manner by a 21-yr young director Karthick Naren. He’s only 22, so he has made some mistakes in the film. The Ooty backdrop also adds to the nighttime murder that happened and helps with continuity. The audio was not clear in the last few scenes and Iam going to have to watch again elsewhere some other time Also, it appears as though Deepak is dead at the end while the other cop with face surgery is likely to survive. Is that correct?
LikeLike
filmview
December 17, 2018
@Sesh @Jaga_Jaga @Altman @Navneeth @Gayathri Arun
As many here talk about how smart the opening scene is but actually it is totally wrong to a scene that never took place in 3rd person narrative. Misleading audience with red herring is another skill compared to this cheap trick. We see the same which occurs in when Rahman narrates the story. The problem he is a unreliable narrator who has the privilege to manipulate events but when scenes that are shown in 3rd person narrative has to be the exact way happens like a eagle view. The first lesson they teach when writing a Novel or Movie is this. Never feed false information to your audience.
LikeLiked by 1 person