Whenever I ask for feedback about a film from my friends, and if it turns out to be a negative one, I used to quote Kamal from Vasool Raja,
‘Nee enna solla pora nu therium, kadhaye illa nu sollapora’.
Our audience strongly consider ‘The Story’ to be the garbagriha of a movie and would consider their pilgrimage a waste of time if the garbagriha is closed or invisible. So let us ask ourselves the following questions. First, does The Story’ have to be essentially the garbagriha of a movie? Second, if we consider the presence of a story so indispensable to a movie, from where does our ‘story obsession’ come from?
To answer the first question from my limited knowledge of ‘art’, the story may or may not be the garbagriha of a movie. And the discretion rests solely on the film maker. Story, in other words, can merely serve as an excuse to make a movie. The most passionate of filmmakers make movies not only because they need money to upgrade their car from a Swift to a City, or to move their kids to an international school from a local matriculation, but also to realise the pleasures or pains of filmmaking. Film makers when they double up as writers have more to undergo, which essentially is the case with Tamil cinema. In many ways, film making might be an ‘arippu’ like how Ajith calls his ‘duty’ in Yennai Arindhal. So here comes another question, why should we audiences, reserving nearly three hours of our precious time and almost a day’s salary for a movie do so only to satisfy the itch of an unknown filmmaker?
I can’t answer the question quite convincingly but I will make an attempt though. Many of ‘the best’ movies we have seen, have been done only by those filmmakers who have had that ‘itch’. They had managed to satisfy it time and again over the years without completely getting cured of it. Let us take the case of Mani Ratnam and his Alaipayuthey. It was a done-to-death ‘boy meets girl’ story, they make and break and make again. Why did we, especially our middle class conservative women fall for the charm of the film? Was it because Shakti, so typical of our middle class womenfolk, met an Uber cool Madhavan, fell in love and gathered guts to cheat her family so as to elope with him only to face more trouble? Was it some kind of a weird wish-fulfilment for us? Certainly not. Look at the scene where Karthik’s (Madhavan) family meet Shakti’s for the first time.
Karthik’s father says, ‘Naan peria panakaran thaan. Aana yen pillaya ezhai maari thaan valathirken’.
Shakti’s father retorts, ‘Naan middle class thaan. Aana yen ponna naan maharani maari thaan valathirken’.
Please note how nicely the characters are defined using dialogue. A rich fellow takes pride in being outwardly ‘simple’. Whereas ask our fathers, who would have got us our first PC in the third year of our college after at least two years of pestering, how they grew us up. They would say we were born and brought up like ‘princes’.
The point I am trying to make is, Alaipayuthey, in terms of ‘story’ is neither new nor great. But why did we make a ‘hit’ out of it? Look at the scene where Karthik tries to pacify an angry Shakti. It doesn’t happen in a tranquil place like where Simbu and Trisha meet in VTV. It happens in a heavily crowded railway station like Mambalam. So many people keep crossing the over-bridge where the hero pleads with a reluctant heroine who wants to break altogether with him. It is a matter of ‘life and death’. A virtual battle. He fights that out amid hordes of people who, steeped in their own pursuits of survival, cannot keep off from interrupting him unwittingly. If anything, you and me would have gone through the most decisive phases of our lives only in places like these. You would have attended a telephonic interview for a high paying job inside an MTC bus. The driver couldn’t have helped honking exactly when you were trying to retrieve an answer for a crucial question from among the thick layers of your confused memory.
An ordinary love story, with characters so much resembling us, with episodes staged in places where we can easily relate to, with some good music and acting becomes an instant classic. So what really, is the role of the ‘story’?
Now let me shift to people who still hate Alaipayuthey, not because they hate love stories, but because I still have not proved that it has a ‘story’. There are people whom I know who would marry even their daughters to men without brains but won’t watch movies which don’t have a story. Specimens like them help me to examine the unanswered questions I have posed in the beginning of my essay. Why do we suffer from ‘The Great Story Obsession’?
Nobody in India, can deny the fact that the first story they came across in their childhood was either from the Mahabharata or from the Ramayana. Indians, just like we are obsessed with music, are in some ways obsessed with story as well. We like getting to know stories, admire and emulate the best characters inside them and love drawing comparisons of our real life events with those in the stories. But why are Ramayana and Mahabharata alone so popular among us while Meghdoot or Harshacharita are not? Given our rich heritage of classic literature, why do we know only very few stories?
The reason is that the epics of Mahabharata and Ramayana do not depend upon written texts. Nobody can establish with evidence that the current version of Mahabharata that we all know is the one that was written by Vyasa, centuries ago. The stories of our great epics are mostly hearsay (Sevivazhi kadhaigal). Romila Thapar asserts strongly that the original texts of the Vedas and the grand epics of India, since they are almost old by a millennium, would not have survived to this day. Every mythological tale would have been modified either by hearsay or by the whim of the rulers who had dominated India’s history at various points of time. So my point is, stories that are hearsay alone have the potential to travel across time and distance and survive for eternity. In other words, we Indians, like stories only if they are accessible through listening or seeing. Our hunger for stories does not match our hunger for reading. If we feel like getting to know a story we always choose the easiest mode of imbibing it – either through someone narrating it or acting it out. This brings us to the point where we naturally expect movies, the biggest art form of our generation, to tell long stories for us or perish altogether if they cannot. We people want to learn a story as easily and painlessly as possible, either through a movie or a play, and like to impress others with our own narration of it. A man who knows a lot of stories, how much ever true or ridiculous they may sound, easily becomes the most sought-after man in a group. This phenomenon explains easily our tendency to spoil a film for our friends by revealing the most important twists in the story before they had had the chance to watch it. The viewer, by becoming a narrator, tries to claim credit equal to that of an author.
Authored by Jeeva P.
Shobha
February 6, 2017
Comment unrelated to post: Please review Captain Fantastic, would really like to read your thoughts.
LikeLike
Jyoti S Kumar
February 6, 2017
U r right. There is a great story obsession among our people. For eg, I still remember,my father disliking Dil chahta hai for two reasons – where is the story? It just shows three boys wasting their parents money and enjoying life… More recently in malayalam, Nivin Pauly took a risk by doing Action hero Biju. That is one movie where you can say there is no story and I heard so many people leaving the theatre dissatisfied – what movie is this? There is no story at all. Because Action Hero is more like a AJ Cronin or James Herriot recounting their experiences – some funny, some sad, some touching – but all entertaining. So not surprisingly it was a sleeper hit. A collective obsession cannot be overcome soon, so we can only hope that filmmakers who try to create an experience will be rewarded in the long term
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kay
February 6, 2017
I’m guilty of using that comment a few times but with good reason I believe.
And about Alaipayuthey becoming a hit, I think at that time that was one movie which treated love with maturity. Most of us could relate to that. The reluctant attraction, feeling guilty about betraying the loving parents, etc.
LikeLike
shaviswa
February 6, 2017
Kathaiyae illatha padam ellam oru padama? — I remember my parents asking me this when they saw Agni Natchathiram. The same parents loved Mouna Ragam for the story element 🙂
But I would not say Agni Natchathiram lacked a storyline. It did have one. IMO a movie is a movie only if the director is able to provide the viewer with a story that is backed by an innovative/interesting screenplay and comprising of interesting characters that one can relate to. A movie with no story – like Dil Chahtha Hai – is a wasteful experience. I liked DCH first half. But the second half was testing my patience and the cheesy climax made it even worse.
LikeLike
Srinivas R
February 6, 2017
“The viewer, by becoming a narrator, tries to claim credit equal to that of an author” – sums it up nicely
LikeLike
Rahini David
February 6, 2017
There are people whom I know who would marry even their daughters to men without brains but won’t watch movies which don’t have a story.
Less Tension. 🙂
I have often wondered why many people think a story should have a exposition, a conflict and a climax. Why not a smooth sailing of great moments and that is it? Hum Apke Hain Koun was terrific in that aspect and I have often wished that it did not have even the tiny plot of Madhuri’s akka dying. Why not just sing more songs and keep looking pretty? I personally would have loved it. But that wasn’t to be.
The older movies did have a definite story line. Think Alibaba or Anbe Va or any of MGR’s hits. But even during those times, Ethir Neechal and Navarathiri existed.
Ethir Neechal was more about moments and highlights in Nagesh’s life. Navarathiri was about the random people Savitri met who all turned out to be Sivaji Ganeshan. Both movies did not have stories (IMO) but framing devices but are still thought of highly.
Of course Alaipayuthe and Agni Natchathiram did have stories. I don’t understand why they come under “no story” umbrella. That awful Parthiban movie where people just sit around and discuss disjointed stories maybe counted as a movie without a story. But even there I don’t fully agree. Sudhish Kamath said, “If they are claiming there is no story there, they are either ignorant or lying. Both are equally disturbing.” and I agree with him.
Alaipaythey – A man and a woman meet, fall in love, get married secretly, it gets public, there is conflict with parents, then comes conflict within the couple, an accident, near death experience, realisation, they get back together. This is the story.
Not sure about Ramayana and Mahabaratha, but did the other epics really exist without stories?
https://madrasink.com/2014/08/24/kathai-thiraikathai-vasanam-iyakkam-50-50/
LikeLike
Thulasidasan Jeewaratinam
February 6, 2017
People ranting against this must have found films of Wong Kar Wai, Godard, Truffaut or Terrence Malick peeling their skins. Honestly, don’t know where this story obsession built up.
But, here’s a thing. Why must every film be about story, plot, and beats? ISN’T every story in the world almost same in one way or another? Hasn’t every story been adapted, featured and turned into films?
Judging a film purely on story merits robs the truly ‘cinematic’ experience of films. I recall watching Punch Drunk-Love by P. T. Anderson, where there isn’t exactly what you would call a “story”. There were plot strands (miles ticket, falling in love with a woman, blackmailed by a phone sex company) scattered, but I don’t recall smashing my head on walls, pounding for plot beats. It was SO smooth, I feel carried along. For once, I felt liberated, not having to care about the plot. It was moments. It was the concrete direction for which the Cannes award was fully deserved. It was the performances of genuine intensity that yearned for compassion.
There was Chungking Express. I mean, what the hell was that about? Two things – time and love. That’s all. The story has been told and dusted for decades. What elevates the film is what the characters do when they’re not CONFORMING to the usual expectations of plot beats. When Faye Wong begins cleaning Tony Leung’s house w/o him noticing, I realised it’s one of those films that hits you home run. By the end of the film, I can’t and won’t be able to express or narrate what the stories are about, but if asked about SCENES, MOMENTS, oh boy.
Jacques Audidard’s Rust and Bone is one of those. I love films that have characters that I empathise about, at which anything can happen to them. A film that’s truly unpredictable, because since when was our life all about stories, plots and beats? Isn’t what we recall on our bed at the end of our day the MOMENTS?
LikeLike
sanjana
February 6, 2017
All forms of films can coexist. There can be once upon a time, there lived a king as in Bahubali and there can be stories about 3 friends or 6 friends, Good script over story also works and simple story telling without flourishes wont work now. Sholay had such a charming story which can be enjoyed even today.
LikeLike
R
February 6, 2017
Art requires a starting point… for a movie its a story…can we enjoy a movie without a story?… why not ? It’ll be like the comments section of this blog… annoying and hilarious
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
February 6, 2017
A better example would be Thiruda Thiruda. Agni has many such “carefully handled” moments which the author is talking about.
Nobody can establish with evidence that the current version of Mahabharata that we all know is the one that was written by Vyasa, centuries ago.
Actually, the Mahabharata has many authors. Despite being popularly attributed to Vyasa, there’s no concrete evidence that a man called Vyasa existed. Also, these epics initially did not travel across generations merely as “hearsay stories”. The manuscripts were, in fact, periodically preserved by various clans (mostly the Bhargava Brahmins), who adulterated the epic by whitewashing the villains. These time-to-time interpolations resulted in a lot of inconsistencies. We do have an authoritative edition for both the epics, called the Critical Edition. The BORI institute at Pune undertook a painstaking research, which lasted 40 years, by carefully examining/comparing all the available versions to eliminate the interpolations/inconsistent verses. The resultant, approximated version (the CE) is perhaps as close to the original version of the epic.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ravi K
February 7, 2017
“Story” and “plot” are different, though they are used interchangeably. Plot is strictly about the sequence of events, but story is the greater picture, which includes characters’ feelings, motivations, a feeling about specific times and places, etc. Plot isn’t necessarily a bad thing, but it’s not the be-all-and-end-all to a film.
LikeLike
Ramchander Krishna (@ramctheatheist)
February 7, 2017
I’m guessing the author is in college. Cos that’s the last time I remember having such arguments. I don’t think Tamil audience suffer from story obsession. “The film didn’t have a story” is merely a way of saying “I didn’t like the film”. A good film reviewer can clearly express what didn’t work in a film. But people with arai gorai knowledge will mostly be the ones who don’t know what their gripe is with the film. They merely use “There’s no story” as an excuse to downplay it. Even if you use some narrative theory and prove to them that a story does indeed exist, their retort will be “Idhellam oru story ah?” or they’d say “What’s so new in this story?” Talk to them about a film that they like and they’ll argue until death what a great story it has.
It’s just arai gorai film knowledge. Nothing can be done bro. Best solution is to smile at them, then wear earphones and watch Mysskin videos on Youtube.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Chakraborthy
February 8, 2017
Why is it necessarily that we like to say movies were successful or hits because they were “relatable”? People said this about Premam and you said this about Alai Payuthey. I get that they are realistic, but more than these films were entertaining and had brilliant and natural lead actors. To me, beyond being relatable, they were just fun films to watch…and watch again…and then watch again. Maybe this is something older people say because I don’t know, it transports you back to your college days? But personally as a college student, I think I appreciated Premam immensely for how fun the film was. I literally did not want it to end. And Alai Payuthey I will simply never forget for the lead pair’s incredible charm. Madhavan, with his accented Tamil, and perfectly handsome looks and Shalini for her quiet dialogue delivery and some of the most beautiful eyes I have see on the silver screen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sanjay2706
March 9, 2017
Agree with Ravi K. In India, we confuse “story” with “plot”. Slightly disagree with Rahini on her points. “Ethir Neechal” had solid conflict. Stories can exist without a plot, but not without confict. “Gravity” had no plot. It’s basic plot is that the woman has to return back to earth. However, the inner conflicts of her, and the conflicts posed by space and physics built the story.
I believe that if you build great character conflicts and motivation, the plot will write itself. Once you start thinking on how to construct a plot, characters become forced and there is no grip in the story.
LikeLike