If one were to rethink T S Elliot’s illuminating article with cinema as the pivot and ask “Who is the classic actor” within the realms of Tamil cinema, a couple of names would immediately spring to mind. Following old industry practices, the names in the order of their appearances are Sivaji, Nagesh & Kamalji. The slightest mention of the names immediately brings to mind the vivid characters they have played. Before we immerse ourselves onto the screen persona of these performers and clutter our logical mind with dramatic images, I would like to lay down the bounds within which we want to find our classic actor. The finite contours are an imprecise way to assess the infinite qualities of art. Also, the performance arcs of these actors are so wide that each one could be termed as a classic within distinct silhouettes. Nevertheless, the endeavor shall begin and remain sacrosanct until another parallel has been found to identify our ‘classic actor’. It is important to clarify, though, that all these actors are great performers and have significantly enriched the acting school of thought.
As we embark to understand the meaning of ‘classic’ from an acting standpoint, the word that closely relates is ‘Diversity’. Diversity (by its nomenclature) has to be diverse and has to represent an embodiment of several facets. The facet that I would like to focus on is roles. Diversity of roles that an actor gets to perform defines his/her canvass. There could be three primary roles that we could think of –
- a) Leading role also known as the hero in a formulaic sense or protagonist in the literary sense
- b) Antagonist role – the role that purportedly obstructs the protagonist
- c) Character role – the supporting roles that aid the protagonist or the antagonist in achieving their objective
The type of roles serve as useful indicators to lay the bedrock of the ‘necessary’ attributes of the classical actor hypothesis. While the necessary part can be broadly applied to all actors, there needs to be a search for sufficient attributes that fulfill the Tamil classical actor arena. The two distinct ‘sufficient’ attributes are comedy and dance. Comedy and dance has been an integral part of Tamil cinema and it would be a grave injustice to identify a classic actor who does not possess these traits.
The focus on the next part of this article would be to subjectively pass certain performances of the actors through the established necessary-sufficient prism.
Sivaji
Sivaji made his entry with a bang delivering his dialogue as if Parasakthi, the goddess came to life. The leading role brought to light an actor who could not only shift the tone of his delivery but also his Tamil diction to various roles – the rich elegant businessman in Motor Sundaram Pillai to the rowdy in Bale Pandiya to Shivaperuman in Thiruvilayaadal. There has never been an actor before or after (till now) who has been able to speak Tamil with such nano-nuancing clarity at giga-breaking speed. Sivaji’s leading roles have always produced strong performances throughout his career, though some (as witnessed in Gauravam, Thirisoolam to mention a few) bordered on the lines of theatrical acting reaching unwarranted decibel limits. He excelled in roles that had a tight family story that represents sacrifice and sympathy.
The antagonist roles (Bale Pandiya, Navarathiri) did what was needed but could not outweigh his excellence in solid sacrificing family roles. His collaboration with Bhimsingh on the ‘Pa’ series stands as a good example of melodramatic cinema delivering balanced performances. Much of the character roles came during his later years with the then popular heroes (Devar Magan, Padayappa) where typically a significant portion of the first half of the movie was devoted to Sivaji. These roles had a leadership aspect that could be compared to the upright roles he essayed as the leading protagonist.
Though Galatta kalyanam was a comedy feature, the humour section was taken care more by Nagesh, Cho & Thangavelu. His best comedy performance came much earlier in Bale Pandiya where Pandian’s interactions with M R Radha (one, his caretaker and another his would be father-in-law) produced one of the most delightful sequences in Tamil cinema. Dancing might be a loaded word to use for Sivaji and style walk might be a better term to describe his movements during song sequences. Sivaji would be poignantly remembered for two types of roles – affectionately family & authoritative upright.
Kamal
A child prodigy. It seems acting was his destiny though his early aspirations to become a technician manifests clearly in some of his movies on screen. It would be just to refer K. Balachander at the start while talking about Kamal who was instrumental in making him deliver the most romantic performances till the end of 1980s (Ninaithaale Inikkum, Manmadha leelai, Punnagai Mannan). His leading role in masala(I mean, in a nice way) movies such as Sagalakala Vallavan, Thoogathe thambi Thoongathe, Kalyana Raman, Kakki Sattai catapulted him to stardom. It had to be Kamal’s charisma that did the trick in these movies since we are not able to find anything significantly different in terms of acting prowess. His leading roles became more varied after the ‘Nayakan’ era – Aboorva Sagodharargal, Mahanadhi, Kuruthipunal & Hey Ram.
Sigappu Rojakkal was a leading antagonistic role effortlessly played by Kamal that glued us into his mesmerizing smile only to be frightened by his menacing looks towards the climax. A much smaller negative role played later in Dasavatharam as Fletcher had a lot of style but no substance.
One of Kamal’s unique contribution to Tamil cinema has been one in which he has played the comedy role as the leading protagonist. His performances in Michael Madhana Kama Rajan, Sathi Leelavathi, Avvai Shanmughi, PKS, Panchathanthiram (and the list goes on…) are antidotes to dull and sorrowful minds. He had a wide variety of skills in his dance armory – Salangai Oli & Viswaroopam (Unnai Kaanaadha) for the purists and Kadhala Kadhala for the proletariat.
Rather than referring Kamal as a diverse actor, it is best fit to revere him as a complete film maker (choreographer, singer, make-up artist, lyricist, script writer, and director).
Nagesh
Starting in the cinema industry with small roles, he rose to great heights in Server Sundaram (the movie had a similar theme of an anonymous guy’s journey from hotel light to lime light). The hallmark of a great actor in a leading role is the ability to translate into that character completely such that the audience forget the actor and remember the character for ages. This is what Nagesh accomplished in Ethir Neechal & Neerkumizhi. It would be difficult to not imagine Madhu when you see someone living with their belongings under the staircase of a foot over bridge.
I find it extremely difficult to demarcate Nagesh performances as distinctly supporting or comedy or antagonistic roles. He danced with grace, danced with joy & danced with sorrow. Look at the way he slides, glides & jumps in Neerkumizhi – Kanni Nathiyoram and then later gently hip hops towards the end of the movie in a solid philosophical song (Aadi adangum). If you gently shed a tear for this, he broke you down with an amazing stretch in Nammavar (A performance that deserves a separate writing piece) when he finds about his daughter’s death – It starts with a sublime explanation of keeping a pillow under her head. He follows up with a brilliant rendering of this dialogue “Inime ethukku doctor..Ohh….enakka” and then dances at her funeral and collapses. A Nagesh stretch where a series of emotions (Helplessness, love & sorrow) were portrayed that you did not know where one ended and the other began.
It is important to mention his negative shaded roles (Thillaana Moganaambaal, Aboorva Sagodharargal) since there was something new and fresh in it. I believe this is where Nagesh was different – he took the acting template for leading role/comedy/antagonist roles infused with his acting skill that the resultant performance on screen cannot be defined as nothing else but art – the art of Nagesh.
If Sivaji and Kamal’s acting canvass are considered as breath taking tall towers with illuminating lights, Nagesh’s oeuvre is that of a hand sculpted ancient statue with subtle curves. Kamal is carrying on the mantle that Sivaji held for decades. The space that Nagesh occupied is still void. It is with a pleading wish to the nature to fill this space that we conclude the classic actor in Tamil cinema is Nagesh – the stylish dancer, the villainous comedian, the comic villain, the character protagonist or to briefly put it, the “classican”.
This post is written by Jose Ranjit.
Anand Govindarajan
June 11, 2017
Nagesh! Such an underrated artiste. And I am so glad Jose Ranjit mentioned the Nammavar sequence. In Nammavar – Nagesh acts and dances brilliantly, and the chemistry between Nagesh and Kamal is so genuine and you can really buy into their respectful bromance. Just brilliant. Also in MMKR, Nagesh has a comical negativity which is somewhat unique – no the thuggery kind of comical unique. Nagesh’s body language in general was a lot more visible and would catch your eye. KH and Sivaji had their body language tweaks but they were less obvious.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sanjana
June 11, 2017
Interesting read.
LikeLike
Madan
June 11, 2017
Interesting perspective. I was in fact watching two Kamal films where Nagesh has a substantial role (without really being one of the leads) – one of course, the aforementioned Aboorva Sagotharargal and the other being Panchathanthiram. He was very effective in both; the former gives him more width to express himself. Maybe the problem for him during his youth was there was no space for ANOTHER dramatic actor in family movies with Sivaji’s looming presence.
LikeLike
Kishore
June 11, 2017
Kamal Hasan is just an overrated actor. He is unidimensional.
LikeLike
brangan
June 11, 2017
(gets popcorn)
LikeLiked by 2 people
Vidhya M
June 12, 2017
Kamal is neither overrated nor underrated. He refuses to be part of the rating system. Else why woukd someone who was at the top of his game in the early 80s with sure-shot hits, abdicate his position and take a leap of faith?
Unidimensional – now that he has long since embodied everything that’s required of an actor in him (acting, dance, comedy, script-sense, direction, linguistic abilities, singing etc), he has become one-note : well now what else can we expect from this guy? But wait – the climax scene of Papanasam was nothing like the one in Guna, right? Unless one brushes it aside as “emotional scenes” = “unidimensional”
LikeLiked by 2 people
Kishore
June 13, 2017
Acting wise, I don’t find Kamal’s acting excellent. He is just an average actor. He is not in the league of Mohan Lal.
LikeLike
Jose
June 13, 2017
Thanks BR for posting an anonymous (atleast till now) fan’s scribbles.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jamuna
June 13, 2017
”Rather than referring Kamal as a diverse actor” – you just named all the reasons why he is the most diverse. Kamal is half Sivaji, half Chaplin. Ah, add one quarters Nagesh, one quarters MGR. Wait, one tenth Brando, one tenth Sellers. Add action stars and romantic
Scratch that, Kamal is Kamal. Institution by himself. No wonder other actor fanboys keep downplaying his brilliance.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Naveen
June 13, 2017
Kamal is an excellent actor, but he pales a few shades before the livewire that Nagesh was. Kamal himself idolizes on Nagesh. apparently KB used to write all characters keeping Nagesh in mind and would choose other actors later. this used to irritate Kamal in a positive way. heard this in more than one interview of Kamal. there is no one to carry the baton for Kamal or Nagesh yet. i would consider Aamir Khan as the next generation Kamal. there can only be one Nagesh ever I think
LikeLike
Jamuna
June 13, 2017
KB also later made his mind up that Kamal is half Nagesh and half Sivaji, Let’s be honest, it’s an insult to put Nagesh in same pedestal as Sivaji or Kamal, no?
LikeLike
Jamuna
June 13, 2017
//Unidimensional – now that he has long since embodied everything that’s required of an actor in him (acting, dance, comedy, script-sense, direction, linguistic abilities, singing etc), he has become one-note : well now what else can we expect from this guy? But wait – the climax scene of Papanasam was nothing like the one in Guna, right? Unless one brushes it aside as “emotional scenes” = “unidimensional”//
Well said M Vidhya. Off late, I see this narrative developing. Uttama Villain was nothing like Papanasam where Kamal holds back emotional scenes, M S Bhaskar does a lovely tribute in 8 Thottakal to Kamal Jayaram scene in UV when he first looks at photos of his daughter (look at how both use their fists), Papanasam also came across entirely different to previous meltdowns, was nothing like Thoongavanam where there’s more sophistication involved.
LikeLike
Salim
June 13, 2017
Nagesh is the real meaning of unidimensional.
LikeLike
Syed
June 13, 2017
Well, listen to real film experts. https://youtu.be/aA8I1gaijdw
LikeLike
Naveen
June 13, 2017
agree. well, it would be unfair to all the three of them with this comparison. their core competencies are different and only overlapping, not same. Sivaji G and Dilip Kumar, Kamal and Aamir khan would be more charitable. cant think of anybody to compare Nagesh with. most of us would not have had the oppotunity to follow Sivaji or Nagesh so much as we would have watched Kamal’s work
sometimes it looks like this site creates/posts unnecessary stuff that would kick off a brainstorm of discussion, often moving away from the topic and taking a different spin. similar to the ‘adho megha oorvalam’ post which was quite uncalled for
LikeLike
Yogesh
June 13, 2017
Sivaji and Kamal are a different class. I think Nagesh has a bit more range thanks to Kamal’s films but still fairly limited.
LikeLike
Kay
June 13, 2017
“sometimes it looks like this site creates/posts unnecessary stuff that would kick off a brainstorm of discussion, often moving away from the topic and taking a different spin. similar to the ‘adho megha oorvalam’ post which was quite uncalled for”
And why is that wrong? I feel such posts encourage healthy discussions on aspects which normally we wouldn’t have thought of.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Kishore
June 14, 2017
People claim proudly that Kamal Hasan writes, directs, washes, cleans, etc., but the outcome is very poor and failed to please both mass and class. Also, I fail to understand Kamal’s inferiority complex. He remakes every hit movie from other languages to prove that he is no less an actor compared to them, but fails utterly. Take for example remake of Wednesday, he is no match for Naseer’s talent. Also, watch Drishyam and Papanasam and you would realize the difference between natural talent and buffoonery. Kamal is just a product of media hype and marketing. Mohan Lal is a true legend.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rohit Sathish Nair
June 14, 2017
‘Mohanlal is a true legend’
He seems hell-bent on making it ‘was’. Even Kamal can’t outdo what he is doing now
Having said that, few actors got to do roles so spread out across the gamut as these two, while being stars. Best or not, these two are perhaps the luckiest actors ever.
Sorry for the digression
LikeLike
Syed
June 14, 2017
Compared to aag where Lal looks crap compared to sanjeev kumar and amitabh looks clown compared to amjad khan, kamal in UPO feels like a masterpiece. Remakes are tricky. Dont always work but when it does like Papanasam, it’s masterful.
LikeLike
Kay
June 14, 2017
@Kishore: Your argument sounds hollow. Reading that I had these questions:
If Kamal has failed to impress the mass and class, what are those millions of people who call themselves his fans? Aliens?
Everyone who tries to remake a movie has inferiority complex and they try to prove they are the better actor? So that would mean the entire film industry, barring a few, feels inferior about themselves?
Kamal has been considered one of the best actors for the past few decades, so media is that consistent in hyping one guy’s acting abilities? I can understand when someone says Baba Ramdev is a product of media hype and marketing but, Kamal? No.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Vidhya M
June 14, 2017
Comparing Kamal and Mohanlal seems to be the favourite game in this comments-space. While it is undisputed that Mohanlal is a legend, the odious parallels drawn with Kamal seem off to me.
For a movie like Salangai Oli, a great actor like Mohanlal would not suffice – someone like Kamal who was willing to go through rigorous training and who had a natural flair for dance was the right-fit.
For movies like Kakki Sattai or Vikram or Apoorva Sago, a complete actor-star who could dance, sing (Raja kaiya vechaa – anyone?), emote, fight & look like Adonis were required. If acting is the only parameter, then SV Rangarao was perhaps the best actor ever. (I just love SVR, but just driving a point here)
Just that Kamal could do full justice to any movie of Mohanlal (including Drishyam – if you take Papanasam as a standalone movie, it garnered as much praise for Kamal’s acting) but the vice-versa cannot be said – especially for those movies that require a multi-talented actor. (As much as Kamal was compared unfavourably with Naseer, Mohanlal was with Anupam for A Wednesday- blame it on the affinity to the original movie)
That Kamal failed in screenplay, direction etc – what defines failure is the apt question. One – people say he ghost-directed his movies – if that is the case then his blockbusters were also helmed by him. Even his flops, barring the odd Manmadan Ambu or Nammavar have become cult-classics. A Puli-murugan becoming a blockbuster is certainly not on par with a Vishwaroopam becoming one, considering the complexity of plot, logistics etc. As I said, Papanasam was a sleepwalk for Kamal, and yet he chooses to do a VR-2! Off the beaten track, anyone?
Why he does remakes / inspired movies is because he has few collaborators who can think on his plane. Which by the way is Kamal’s weakness – his refusal to go beyond a certain coterie, restricts his scope. But apart from this, Kamal has consistently honed his skills in all departments, not just acting & it is difficult to find some one with so.much passion for this medium.
(Btw, Mohanlal always spoke Tamil with a tinge of Malayalam. Did Kamal do the same in his Malayalm movies – asking to understand, as Kamal’s major strong point is his diction)
LikeLiked by 4 people
Ikka
June 14, 2017
In Daisy, Chanakyan, I felt it was much better than his early films.
LikeLike
Ladida
June 14, 2017
M. Vidhya, how dare you? Mohanlal in 1971, Puli Murugan and Jilla are unbeatable. Not even Kamal or Mammoootty can dream, Lalettan is the best..
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 14, 2017
Jilla is actually a Vijay ‘starrer’!
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 14, 2017
Vidhya M: Btw, Mohanlal always spoke Tamil with a tinge of Malayalam. Did Kamal do the same in his Malayalm movies – asking to understand, as Kamal’s major strong point is his diction.
From what I’ve heard (from my Mallu friends), his accent in the above clip is nowhere near the native level. But then, it’s way ahead of the Tamil spoken by Mammootty and Mohanlal in our movies.
Also, this guy was quite a hit in Kerala; he had at least 30 leading roles in Malayalam as far as back as 1978 (mind you, this was a time when the two M’s were nowhere in the scene).
LikeLike
Kay
June 14, 2017
@Vidhya: You have articulated all that I felt and couldn’t express. Can’t agree more.
LikeLike
hidnana
June 14, 2017
Mohanlal in Dhrishyam and Kamal in Papanasam brought out two different flavours for the same role. Though the character they play are the same, their traits are different. Mohanlal’s Georgekutty was a family loving, protective, cautious, calculated and stoic person. Whereas Kamal’s Suyambulingam too was a family loving, protective guy but one who is prone to show emotions unlike Georgekutty. This vital difference in their traits brought out various shades of their acting prowess. And both were fantastic. Now why should Kamal with all his talents play the role exactly as Mohanlal played after choosing to remake the film. Its really appreciable he chose to play it differently and the setting in Tirunelveli district helped to showcase the slang too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 14, 2017
Speaking as a Malayali and as someone who thinks both Mammootty and Mohanlal have forgotten more about acting than most people will ever learn in their lifetimes, I have to confess that Kamal is in a completely different league. (And this, even though I’m a diehard Amitabh fan.)
I also agree with Rohit – Mohanlal seems bent on ruining his legacy. (Can’t say the other M is not – I’ve forgotten the last film of his that I really liked.)
That said, why does one have to preclude the other? Do we really need a ‘best’? It is the same issue I have with the never-ending Rafi/Kishore argument?
Aren’t we just lucky that we have so much talent to appreciate? Whether it is Mohanlal or Mammootty or Kamal or AB or (insert actor of your choice here), haven’t they all given us hours and hours of entertainment? Isn’t that something? Do we really have to reduce their talent to a zero-sum game of comparisons?
@Vidhya, great comment.
@Honest Raj, Kamal’s accent in that is very close to the Palakkad Brahmins’ enunciation of Malayalam. As far as I know, they identify as Malayalees, too. 🙂
LikeLike
Madan
June 14, 2017
“It is the same issue I have with the never-ending Rafi/Kishore argument?” – I will chime in here. I don’t care one way or the other who prefers which of the two or if they enjoy both equally. I do have an issue when some Kishore fans say Rafi is overrated. Really? After all the shouting over the rooftops about Kishore for the last several decades, Rafi is overrated? At least let Rafi fans celebrate his voice in peace. But when it comes to Mohanlal-Kamal, I don’t really understand the resentment. As a Mumbaiite, I can confidently say that Kamal is also not a big star here. Yes, he had a few hits in Hindi back in the day but that doesn’t mean he is revered here. That is, it’s not as if he appropriated credit that should have gone to Mohanlal. No, they all pale in comparison to the popularity Rajnikanth enjoys. Oh, but he’s the ‘humble’ superstar so we don’t even have to evaluate his acting while we will blast Kamal for being ‘one dimensional’, right? 😀
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
June 14, 2017
@ Madan: I don’t care one way or the other who prefers which of the two or if they enjoy both equally.
I agree. If pushed to the wall, I’ll admit to being a Rafi-bhakt. But there are so many Kishore songs I love. And for every ‘Rafi is over-rated’ there’s some idiot who’s shouting ‘Kishore can’t sing’. Idiots will be, well, idiotic.
I honestly don’t understand the comparisons. Even as a Rafi-fan, I will admit there are songs that Manna Dey has sung, that Rafi would find difficult. Or that Kishore cannot manage the range that Rafi can. Or that Mukesh was a self-admitedly limited singer. Saying any of these objectively factual statements does not take away from the immense talent that these singers have. However, I’m likely to be lynched for making any or all of these statements.
In short, I can idolise someone without wanting to pull everyone else down. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
June 14, 2017
@ Anu Warrier: Unfortunately, objectivity and idol worship don’t go together. So if you say Kishore doesn’t have Rafi’s range, they will be like “who needs Rafi’s range?” Which isn’t the point. Yes, I have many favourite songs of all these singers as well as Talat Mahmood. But I also love Mahendra Kapoor on Ari O Shokh, composed by Madan Mohan who was staunchly in the Rafi camp and was the least enamoured of MK from among the music directors who adjudged that ‘talent hunt’ in the late 50s (I think) but still gave him possibly his best song.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 14, 2017
Anu: Yeah, it should be obvious from the clip itself – she asks, Palakkad?
As for ‘In short, I can idolise someone without wanting to pull everyone else down.’, it’s quite obvious from this line: ‘Whether it is Mohanlal or Mammootty or Kamal or AB or (insert actor of your choice here) …’ 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 14, 2017
Not a big fan of MMKR, but I can watch it for over a hundred times for Nagesh. I also liked him in AS and Athisaya Piravi. Btw, has anyone seen Jayakanthan’s Yaarukaga Azhuthaan?
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 15, 2017
@Venkatesh – I have no idea what you meant.
As for Palakkad, if it was that obvious, then you shouldn’t have been saying ‘It’s nowhere near native level.’ As far as I know, Palakkad is, and has always been, part of Kerala.
LikeLike
sai16vicky
June 15, 2017
Adding my two cents to the Kamal vs Mohanlal discussion. In my childhood, I was a big fan of Kamal the actor but as I grew up, I started liking the writer Kamal more than the actor and became a big fan of Mohanlal the actor. Let me try strengthening my case now.
Kamal can never ever play the common man (except for say the odd ‘Mahanadhi’). He is always this hyperactive and hyper-intelligent actor, with a strong theatrical background. His best performances (‘Nayagan’/’Thevar Magan’/’Moondram Pirai’ and this list is way too long) have always something additional going for him (either in terms of the script or his role). Take for example the climax in ‘Moondram Pirai’. His acting style is always on the expressive side and there are too many instances where we catch him ‘acting’ (the son’s death scene in ‘Nayagan’). I am not saying this is a bad thing and he belongs to a different school of acting. It is just that this ‘hyper’ness (indulgence) makes his performances a bit redundant and he falls short of being a complete actor.
OTOH, Mohanlal is a different beast who can play basically any role with apparent effortlessness. He has played the common man so many times (‘Kireedam’/’Bharatham’/’Chithram’ to name a few) and gone on to pursue complicated roles (‘Sadayam’/’Thaazhvaram’/’Iruvar’ again to name a few). But Lal was definitely lucky, in the sense that he had the legendary likes of MT Vasudevan Nair and AK Lohitadas writing for him. Kamal had write to his own roles after a point (thanks to the writing-direction coupling in Tamil Cinema), which I feel contributed to the redundancy that I was talking about. This additional effort that he took (with great success) makes me appreciate the writer but leaves me wanting more from him as an actor (say a guest role like he did in ‘Manakanakku’ 🙂 ).
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 15, 2017
I am as big a Mohanlal fan as the next person but for this,
“Kamal can never ever play the common man (except for say the odd ‘Mahanadhi’). He is always this hyperactive and hyper-intelligent actor, with a strong theatrical background. His best performances (‘Nayagan’/’Thevar Magan’/’Moondram Pirai’ and this list is way too long) have always something additional going for him (either in terms of the script or his role). Take for example the climax in ‘Moondram Pirai’. His acting style is always on the expressive side and there are too many instances where we catch him ‘acting’ (the son’s death scene in ‘Nayagan’). I am not saying this is a bad thing and he belongs to a different school of acting. It is just that this ‘hyper’ness (indulgence) makes his performances a bit redundant and he falls short of being a complete actor.”
I’ll give you the most underrated example – Kamal in Sathileelavathi. I know someone will mention the “hyper” here is the Coimbatore accent but if you’re looking for “common man performance”, there are very few that come close. And it is a terribly underrated, underwritten-about performance.
Since everyone is so bent on lighting fires around here, this scene makes me laugh and think every single time:
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 15, 2017
Anu: I have no idea what you meant.
Good for AB fans, as long as they don’t get it. 🙂
As for Palakkad, if it was that obvious, then you shouldn’t have been saying ‘It’s nowhere near native level.’
I said, ‘From what I’ve heard (from my Mallu friends), his accent in the above clip is nowhere near the native level.’
LikeLike
Vidhya M
June 15, 2017
Sai16vicky: Valid point. Now could that be because of the kind of movies made in Tamil require their star-protagonists to be heroes, while Malayalam movies, tend to have a more organic and realistic mould – even for Mammooty or Mohanlal.
So much so, even in a movie like Thoongavanam, where the hero is shown vulnerable and getting punched by all, he needs to return the punch, if not to Trisha, atleast to one of the side characters.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 15, 2017
I said, ‘From what I’ve heard (from my Mallu friends), his accent in the above clip is nowhere near the native level.’
And… I’m saying that his accent is like any other Palakkkad Brahmin accent I have heard, and that is ‘native’. There is no homogenous ‘native’ Malayalam accent. The Syrian Christian in Trichur will speak differently from me, who will speak differently from the Namboothiri next door who, in turn, will speak differently from the fisherman who lives near the coast, who…
They are all native.
As for the gratuitous shot at AB and AB fans, you just proved the ‘I can’t understand…’ part of my earlier comment. I made no remark against anyone else’s heroes. The slam was unnecessary. (The smiley at the end is as superfluous as ‘It’s a joke’.)
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 15, 2017
I am always amazed by how confidently people compare actors. Because for me, acting is also about the face, the body, the way one uses one’s physical attributes. If the question is about one particular (and easily demonstrable) aspect, then this is possible.
Is Kamal a better dancer than Amitabh?
Most certainly, yes.
But is Kamal a ‘better’ actor? Here it becomes a bit of a problem because they are very different types of actors.
The way Kamal does an emotional scene is fabulously external. (And in this, he is also cannily aware of the expectations of his audience, schooled in the Sivaji tradition. He cannot do a niche and ‘internal’ Kokila all the time.) Amitabh, on the other hand, is an A-grade seether, a dormant volcano (and I am only considering the period of his finest work, the mid-70s to the mid-80s) — he internalises stuff, and when I say I cannot see Kamal doing certain scenes in, say, Deewar, I only mean that he’d do it very differently. Because his face and training and body and instincts are very different.
So while it’d be fascinating to see what Kamal’s take on Deewar would be like, it wouldn’t be something objectively comparable at all. (Unlike dancing.)
The most one can say with some certainty is that he or she prefers one actor’s physicality and performing style over another, and here no one can argue.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ladida
June 15, 2017
But isn’t Sigappu Rojakkal, and Kokila more internalized than Deewar. Virumandi, Mumbai Express and Anbe Sivam are more internalized then Black, Last Lear, Paa, Piku etc. No argument here. I’d carefully reconsider after revisiting all these films.
It is very difficult for me to shoehorn Kamal. Take Moondram Pirai climax, Balu Mahendra conceived the physical flip to connect to the early portions which wouldn’t work for any other actor other than Kamal, because it needs to be sold to normal audience as well as national award jury used to Naseer Shah, Om Puris. The more internalized moments in M Pirai are all a treasure. So why just limit it to the climax? Don’t we all love the operatic climax in Kireedam. Kamal had nothing to do with it Nayagan writing. As per Delhi Ganesh, Mani Ratnam insisted on the wailing in son death sequence as Velu has forgotten to cry, it’s a lovely nuance and not just ”playing to the gallery”, if so why does it appeal to international critic who isn’t used to Sivajis or Tamil cinema. Thevar Magan proves why Kamal as writer has much more refinement and control. I’d rate Thevar Magan and Kireedom as top 2 moments in Indian cinema of characters letting go with superior writing aiding it.
Why is Mammootty ignored? There are few roles only he could do justice to. Mohanlal is much better at comedy and effortless roles, but the ones that need more attention to detail, Mammootty is the king! If anything I’d say Kamal is lucky to be all alone in Tamil cinema, to also do varied characters needed methodical preparation like Guna, Virumandi, Hey Ram, as well do roles which needs playfulness and effortlessness like MMKR, Apoorva Sahodarargal. Where do we even fit a film like Pushpak? Come on people.
LikeLike
Salim
June 15, 2017
….there are more than just sophisticated city bred characters in Tamil nadu. Kamal has provided us that and more. He is beyond internal, external and peripheral, he has done a dozen films in every mode, so much so it is fair to say he IS Tamil cinema. We got him as the chosen one while other industries had got Amitabh, Shashi, Naseer, Om, or down South, Mohanlal and Mammootty.
Stop whining..
LikeLiked by 1 person
Abdul
June 15, 2017
Gradwolf,
Yes, Mohanlal converts a common man, dancer, singer, muslim, christian into a Nair. Mammootty does more justice.
Kamal and Mammootty are superior ”complete actors” than Mohanlal in that respect.
LikeLike
Madan
June 15, 2017
“So while it’d be fascinating to see what Kamal’s take on Deewar would be like, it wouldn’t be something objectively comparable at all.” – I’d argue that to some extent Appu Raja is kind of Kamal’s take on Deewar in that it has Appu playing the avenging angel and crossing over to the dark side. Of course, the avenging angel portion lacks the ambiguity of Deewar (with him trying to please his mother who is not comfortable with his methods, also the famous mere paas maa hai scene) because Appu carries out the final execution in full public view and willingly accepts punishment. But Appu’s characterisation has a villainous nature which wasn’t really there in Nayagan and so to me is closer to the angry young man of Deewar. Because he is a dwarf, he uses a sneering, casual high pitched delivery not unlike Nagesh’s in the film and this may not have worked if he wasn’t a dwarf. And he may not have been able to essay an angry young man role in the AB mould with the same power and authority (Rajni was probably better suited to that and most AB remakes went to him).
On the other hand, he was imo far more convincing than AB in out and out negative roles (cannot forget Sigappu Rojakkal there). I don’t think AB could have ever nailed that feline-like slipperiness which Kamal captured so well in Sigappu Rojakkal; AB is too commanding for such roles. Kamal has incredible range. It’s just that with his voice, he doesn’t have an easy, ‘natural’ flow in all of his roles and in some scenes can come across as pretty awkward. Maybe that’s why he is best in comedy and pure villain roles which are out and out acting. The more understated the role requires him to be, the less convincing he is. Or was. In recent years, like in Vettaiyadu or Viswaroopam (even Virumaandi to some extent), he has found a kind of coast-through-the-role mode but there people might argue that he simply appears as Kamal himself and doesn’t really act.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 15, 2017
Madan, two roles – Saudagar and Parwana.
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 15, 2017
Since we are at it, I’ll do a patha vechutiye paratta….
An anecdote about Kamal and a tall superstar
http://www.thehindu.com/features/friday-review/uttama-villain-kamal-haasan/article7180889.ece
LikeLike
Abdul
June 15, 2017
Nice to see the entire North amazed at Kamal. Salangai Oli was a bigger phenomenon than Nayagan.
LikeLike
sai16vicky
June 15, 2017
@Aditya(Gradwolf):Though I like Kamal’s performance in Sathi Leelavathi (especially the ending that is outstandingly hilarious), I am not sure if I would call it a ‘common man performance’. To me, the Kamal-Crazy Mohan movies like SL, Kadhala Kadhala and Tenali follow the same pattern for Kamal’s character: He starts off as this tubelight (or a lovable fool) and then as the movie progresses, takes charge of the proceedings and does something clever at the end.
@Vidhya M: That is a fair point. I think the industry dynamics also contributed significantly to how these actors shaped themselves. This is a fair question to ask BR actually. Had the Tamil cinema milieu been very similar to its Malayalam counterpart (with brilliant writers) and Kamal was at a position where he doesn’t have do a Sakalakala Vallavan (i.e. play to the gallery), would we be seeing a different Kamal?
LikeLike
brangan
June 15, 2017
sai16vicky: Of course. No actor acts in a vacuum. Okay, let me rephrase that. No popular actor acts in a vacuum.
But it is equally a fact the star cachet that Kamal earned with Sakalakalavallavan and the films of those times was what cemented his position in the industry as a star-actor, and without those films, he would not have been able to leverage that star-actor position to create his own brand like he eventually did with his writing/directing. He may have remained a “great actor for hire,” like, say, Naseer, and that’s a very dangerous position in Tamil cinema as there aren’t many art-house type directors here.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Syed
June 15, 2017
Sakthivel in Sathileelavathy, Pandi in Avvai, Lingam in KK, etc (Pesum padam to Anbe Sivam) – tubelight ? They are well scattered through out the spectrum. GradWolf, thanks for informative article!
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 15, 2017
They are all native.
Okay, will them.
Not going to get into the AB/fans part, but it’s interesting how you equated ‘putting a smiley at the end of a comment’ with “it’s a joke”. Smileys can have different connotations even within the same context.
Aditya: The film is Khabardar. As far as I’m aware, the makers had to abandon the project because they felt it could stir up some controversy. I don’t think the author’s version is genuine because AB and Kamal went on to work together in Geraftaar (this is very much a Kamal film) which happened after this film.
Sai16vicky: I’m usually in agreement with your views but I don’t buy the ‘common man’ argument at all. By the same logic, one can claim that Vijayakanth (based on his cop roles) is best actor that Tamil cinema has ever had.
‘Bad’ films find a place in every star’s oeuvre. Even Mammootty and Mohanlal must have done such films during what’s regarded as the golden age of Malayalam cinema. The former, a regular contender for the Best Actor National Award, uttered misogynistic lines in a 2016 film. Kamal, on the other hand, has consciously avoided this territory since the 90s.
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 15, 2017
BR: Great comment. Idha sonna sila Kamal fans enna paithiyakaaranu solluvanga. 🙂 About Naseer, imagine him primarily being a part of Malayalam or Bollywood – he would be far more successful by now.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 15, 2017
Aditya, you just made my point for me – people cannot celebrate one person’s talent without knocking down someone else’s.
Khabardaar was shelved because the subject dealt with euthanasia. The producers developed cold feet because the subject of mercy killing was controversial at the time. So much simpler to assume that AB manipulated its shelving, because he was scared of Kamal, no? I realise it sells more copies to manufacture a to show how one ‘superstar’ is better than the other.
Fact remains that AB was the undisputed king of Hindi cinema then, and fact is also that Kamal was never able to establish a real foothold there. (Whether he wanted to, is a different question.) Other than Ek Duje Ke Liya which was a stupendous hit, and Sanam teri Kasam and Saagar which did reasonably decent business (the latter more due to being Dimple’s ‘comeback film;), no Kamal film was super-succesful. Not even Geraftaar, which incidentally starred AB in an extended cameo. In fact, Andha Kanoon,, which starred Rajinikant and AB in an extended cameo was far more successful.
Honestly, having been a journalist myself, I would have had more respect for the man if he had had the guts to say ‘Amitabh Bachchan’ instead of ‘tall superstar’ – that latter usage smacks of the gossip mags. I’d like to see his evidence to back that up – an interview with Kamal? With Poornachandra Rao? With T Rama Rao, the film’s director? Something? His saying so doesn’t make it so.
As one of the comments under that article stated: Not sure why you are belittling every other good work to appreciate Kamal’s movie. I would say, ‘Not sure why he has to belittle AB (or anyone else, really) in order to appreciate Kamal’s talent.‘
I ask you, does Kamal’s talent really need this sort of propping up?
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 15, 2017
Of course, I was just being cheeky when I posted the link (like I said, patha vechutiye paratta). As for veracity of the story, all of us here (except may be Rangan to an extent) can only hazard a guess and speculate.
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 16, 2017
Heh. Did not know people reacted like Rediff and YouTube comments space here. I thought I was clear enough that this was me being Naradar. I’ll continue to stay away.
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 16, 2017
Oops. My first comment above was to Honest Raj and second was after I saw Anu Warrier’s comment. Just to be clear.
LikeLike
Thamizh
June 16, 2017
Aditya,
It’s no secret that Amitabh had a problem with local hindi press after the sensation Kamal caused through out the nation with Ek tuje ke liye, Sagara Sangamam, Moondram Pirai/Sadma, Nayagan, Appu Raja and Hindustani.
Sample this.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Byc620ACUAAMtlX.jpg:large
LikeLike
Madan
June 16, 2017
@ Anu Warrier: I have watched Saudagar. I came away more impressed by Nutan. AB has enough acting chops to do justice to a role like that but I feel he is a bit like Al Pacino. He needs space to really explode, preferably a long monologue or two. On the other hand, I couldn’t care less for most Kamal monologues. He is brilliant at using almost every other acting tool – his gestures, body language, eyes – except his voice. And not that he doesn’t use his voice well per se but he just doesn’t have a good one. Had he delivered that Indha Naal monologue of Rajni in Annamalai, it would have been laboured and borderline amusing. Speaking of which, nobody ever seems to discuss Shashi Kapoor’s merits or demerits as an actor but he has done the whole gamut as well. Maybe he just doesn’t particularly stand out and grab the audience’s attention but I would say that is the essence of good acting. Even in New Delhi Times, with him hogging most of the screen time, he didn’t overpower it and was very smooth without being artificial or sterile.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 16, 2017
Did not know people reacted like Rediff and YouTube comments space here
Ouch! Really? And here I thought that was a civil response. My apologies. No one has to stay away because of me – I promise not to respond to any of your comments, even in jest.
@Madan, of course Nutan was brilliant in that role! But she was a seasoned actress, and AB was just beginning his career. But you’re right – he does need space to explode. Or he did, later. I think this was a glimpse of what he could have been if he had continued to work with directors like them.
Shashi ruined himself by signing every single film that came his way, and sleep walking through most of the commercial lot. However, he was a very fine actor and his sensibilities were on show in the films he made. I loved him in New Delhi Times and I thought he was the best thing about Kalyug. He wasn’t a Merchant-Ivory favourite for nothing, and he had honed his skills in theatre. It makes a difference.
LikeLike
MANK
June 16, 2017
Dilip Kumar and Mammootty are one hundred percent method actors. dont think they have a single spontaneous bone in their body. every movement, every gesture are planned and rehearsed to the minutest detail and executed. So thy score in films that require that detailing. Devdas, Mughal -e-azam,Ganga jamuna,oru vadakkan veeragadha, Vidheyan, Mrigaya. but fall flat when it comes to characters that require more spontaneity -Leader was one of the worst performances ever by a great actor
Lal is the exact opposite, all spontaneity , no method. Nobody can pull off a kireedam or bharatham, chitram or kilukkam as well as him , but he embarrasses himself in a role like Thanmathra which requires careful detailing and planning. even Vanaprastham, i thought he was just Ok. Kamal would have been terrific in that role.
Amitabh is the perfect mix of Method and spontaneity. one who is great in a serious, tightly controlled, elemental performances in Salim Javed films or the out of control improvised madcapism in Manmohan desai films
Kamal in his earlier part of his career was a more spontaneous actor but in his latter part he is more method performer.his outlook to cinema changed and he started acting more from a filmmaker’s POV than a performers. i like him in Mahanadi or tevar magan , but it no way as organic and enjoyable as raaja parvai or sagara sangamam which are my favorites
Both Amitabh and Mammootty (even Rajnikanth) are blessed with a towering personality and great voice. Kamal and mohanlal are not. so they had to work extra hard to make it as star actors . Kamal at least was considered handsome – and add to that his dancing skills – and had perhaps the biggest female fan following in south India all through the 80’s. Mohanlal had it even harder. he made it purely based on his talent. he is perhaps the most gifted of the 4, speaking purely about acting talent.
LikeLike
Naveen
June 16, 2017
@Madan, I would rather compare Sanjeev Kumar with Kamal though they were from same generation/batch. I think Shashi restricted ( by own choice or market force ) to a certain sophisticated type of roles which prevented him being a conventional lead hero in Hindi.
LikeLike
Kid
June 16, 2017
Madan:
“He needs space to really explode, preferably a long monologue or two”.
With all due respect, this is quite frankly a remarkably reductive assessment of Bachchan’s work and one which is completely off-base. Bachchan, in his greatest works, always implodes and rarely explodes. But even otherwise, from Saudagar (which is one of the titan’s best perforamances and where he runs rings around Nutan….also this is the his only performance which is in the vein of an 80’s Mohanlal work….this is the only Hindi which comes closest to attaining the 80’s Malayalam cinema sensibility…the themes and the overall sensuality of the film is very close to a Padmarajan work) to a number of great Hrishikesh Mukherjee films (Jurmana- a very underrated film and performance, this is also the only time Bachchan returns to the Saudagar persona in the sense that throughout the first half he is a selfish bastard; Mili- possibly the director’s best film…a middle-cinema take on the angry-young man; Bemisaal- My favourite Bachchan performance from the 80’s in what is the director’s most ambitious and morally ambigous work. Bachchan’s persona here is probably his most sexually agressive one….this is one of the reasons why his performance is much better than Uttam’s in the Bengali original. There is astonishingly great moment in the Khafa Hoon song where the lights go off and it is insinuated that Bachchan has forced himself upon Ruby Dutt’s character….that moment is truly the Conradian “heart of darkness” of the angry young man persona…a moment Bachchan revisits in another deceptively fine performance in Aks where his character rapes Nandita Das. There is Basuda’s Manzil, Hrishida’s own Alaap, very many other films as well) where he is hardly indulging in monologues. Again, even in the Prakash Mehra or Salim-Javed films, his best moments are those where he is simply remaining silent. Also one of Bachchan’s greatest strength is an actor is his very keen understanding of “space”(in his cinematic terms) and his finely-tuned on-screen interactions with his co-actors which allow him to convert even his monolgues into “dialogues” (in the famous temple scene in deewar, he is really “talking to” god. There is of course the great mirror moment in Amar Akbar Anthony…). This is contra-Dilip Kumar (or atleast “contra-latter day Dilip Kumar”…which is to say Dilip Kumar post Ganga Jamuna)….Dilip would often turns dialogues into monologues (one of my major issues with his latter day performances…he always came across as a very self-obsessed guy…though in his earlier days, in films like Amar- Dilip’s own Bemisaal moment- and Andaz- Mehobbob Khan and others really utilized that aspect of his persona.
Incidentally, those who believe that Bachchan’s voice has no range should check out his voice over and narration in Mrinal Sen’s Bhuvan Shome where he actually matches the pace of the scene (and film) with the pace of his speech (it’s a very “flat narration” without any baritone). It’s a terrific example of voice acting…no wonder why Mrinal Sen specifically bought him to do the voice over.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Syed
June 16, 2017
Kamal voice and dialogue delivery – ilakiyam! Malai da annamalai pales in comparison to Sathya da sathyamoorthy! The original
LikeLike
Naveen
June 16, 2017
Kid, great examples of B’s best. i felt he was able to justify greatly in the movie with Rekha where they play couple ridden with financial problems. the day to day conflicts were brought out very well, with no airs by both of them.did you skip Anand and Abhimaan for a reason? though the characters were etched for drama, Big B played in a controlled manner. In Piku, he was really an old man who needs support from family members for the day to day chores. he made it as dramatic as a real life old man would do. it could not have been a subdued performance that Deepika’s role could do.
Big B’s ability to transform his career after a certain age is gr8. he knew when to stop after not knowing where to stop being a superhero. as a super hero he was SUPER. can we even imagine anybody else in the Namak Halaal song or Muqaddar ka Sikander.
it would be too taxing to compare him with Mohanlal, Mamootty, Kamal etc. these are fishes from a different ocean
LikeLike
MANK
June 16, 2017
Kid, aapne meri moonh ki baath cheen li. I really wanted to expand on Dilip Kumar and Bachchan but you have put it across much better. I like Dilip Kumar Up to ganga jamuna, after that his self obsessed narcissistic style became intolerable.watching Bairaag was like consuming slow poison.
And yes Bachchan did occupy the mohanlal space there for a brief while in those hrishida, basu chatterjee films. He was so good in Manzil , playing that selfish lazy character living of his friend. That was his greatness. He was both common man and he man in one package. A dewaar, trishul or Don works so much better because he is playing them.they wouldn’t have worked so well with any other actor.
LikeLike
rothrocks
June 16, 2017
@ Kid Madan here. I would say it’s your interpretation of my comment that’s reductive. But that’s ok, it happens on the net. I am not saying AB has NO range. I appreciate his acting in Namak Halal for instance though it’s a pretty lousy film imo. But IF I compare with Dilip Kumar or Sanjeev Kumar, no, I don’t think AB is that comfortable when the role reins in his explosive power. It is not a criticism of his acting as an attempt to show the difference in styles between actors (and the response was as Anu Warrier predicted!). I would not have liked DK in Deewar and don’t think he would have done as well as AB. Likewise AB could not have done Appu Raja. So on and so forth. Every actor has different strengths. A select few have incredible versatility which allows them to blend into any role but they almost always seem to lack the charisma of ‘stars’. And charisma is also a part of acting; somebody cast in a larger than life role must look the part too. If you have ever seen Ananth Vaidyanathan on stage, he is brilliant. But somehow this hasn’t translated to his cine performances. There are many dimensions of acting and the mythical Bradman/Laver who could beat every actor at their own game doesn’t exist in my view.
@ Anu Warrier: Agreed that his role selection did him in. I wonder how much preparation he did even for New Delhi Times or did he look the part just with a bit of bulk and a touch of grey hair.
@ MANK: Pretty much spot on, as usual.
LikeLike
Mahesh
June 16, 2017
Why dont we respect Indian diversity and recognize Kamal, Mohanlal/Mammootty, Mithun/Nasseerudhin Shah/Om Puri/Dileep/Amitabh for doing characters from different parts of the country?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 16, 2017
BR: Sigh, you meant Naseeruddin Shah? 🙂
LikeLike
Kid
June 16, 2017
MANK: Great comment and I pretty much agree with everything you have said here. Bachchan is pretty much the reason for me watching films, but Lal is easily the purest actor of the lot. He is also the only star-actor in modern cinema (and I am not limiting myself to India) who, atleast in his prime, was never really dependant on “star-gesturality” (infact, and even more remarkably, even his Masala works from that age are, more or less, are bereft of a pronounced masala-generality). I don’t think there is a single-actor in the world (atleast not since the likes of Raimu) who has actually developed a star-signature (and persona) by actually continously erasing the very concept of star-signature/persona. I don’t think that Lal, in his prime, “played” different characters or personalities. It always seemed that all those characters (and the range of characters is MIND BOGGLING….and I have only seen around 50 films of his from that particular period) have emerged out of his own self…they all seem to be an extension of his soul. Bachchan is a great shapeshifter, Lal on the other hand is the embodiment of all the navarasas in their purest form. Also he is the actor who seemed least bothered in “pleasing” the audiences (including in films where he is a charmer, I am thinking of films like Thoovanathumbikal). It looked like he was only loyal to his “craft” (even if this word sounds too mechanical for someone like him). There is certain humility in his art/craft that i have never seen with anybody. Again, I don’t know that before taking on a character different to the one which he has played previously, whether his more interested in “learning” a new type of acting or that he simply wants to “unlearn” whatever he knows beforehand. I suspect it is the latter.
I also don’t a more humanistic actor than Lal. And this is probably because he is more aware of his “feminine side” (or atleast the ardha-naari part) than just about any other actor in India (in admittedly simplistic terms, Lal can be the “woman” to Mammootty’s “man”). This is of course most apparent in the gracefulness of his gait, but also in the fact that he can lend a certainly poetry to the some of the man-beasts he has played (a Devasuram, a Sphadikam…he can be part man-beast, part teddy-bear in the very same role).
And the “economy” in performances….he just shows us what we need to know, not what we want to. I saw Anubandham some weeks back (what a fine little film)…this chap hardly has 3 or 4 scenes in the film and yet he completely owns the film (this inspite of the fact that the film already has two high quality performances by Seema and Mammootty. And Seema, in an I V Sasi film, becomes a beast of actor). He is so aware of his surroundings in the scene that he tells everything he has to tell by simply changing his position in the room. He is always able to convey something in between dialogues.
And yeah, Leader was a very mediocre performance. Even worse in the smae vein was that triple role in Bairaag. My favourite performance of Dilip Kumar would be Footpath (the darkest film in Indian cinema) followed by Amar and Madhumati.
Incidentally I thought that Lal was much better than Naseer in the Katha remake (I forget the name of the film). Though I still prefer the original film chiefly (but not only) due to Farooq Shaikh’s performance (what a great piece of casting considering Shaikh looked anything but a cad).
LikeLike
Kid
June 16, 2017
And that Lal film was Aalkkootthathil Thaniye and not Anubandham (in Anubandham he has a bigger role). The scene I am talking about is the one which takes place in the hostel room (between Lal and Mammootty..just look at his body language in the film). He also is incredibly good in his last scene when he comes to meet Mammootty and rebukes him for the kind of person he has become).
And I don’t know if there is another actor who can turn dice-throwing into an art (Idanilangal).
LikeLike
mohan
June 16, 2017
//Yes, Mohanlal converts a common man, dancer, singer, muslim, christian into a Nair. Mammootty does more justice.//
Bang on. Mohanlal Viswanathan Nair played himself really well and most of the Nairs back him over Mammootty.
Mammootty may not be spontaneous but he does more justice to other non-nair personalities. One cannot always be enamored by Nair personality in very difficult films.
LikeLike
mohan
June 16, 2017
Mohanlal’s stardom is mostly garnered by catering to casteism & sub regional chauvinism. His limited range and playing his own personality keeps his Nair base in tact.
LikeLike
mohan
June 16, 2017
Mammootty the real hero with great range and versatility in Malayalam.
LikeLike
sanjana
June 16, 2017
To make matters less serious, let us adopt unique way as to who is the best according to alphabetical order.
Amitabh Bachchan
Dilip Kumar
Kamal
Mammootty
Mohan Lal
Naseeruddin Shah
Om Puri
Rajnikant
LikeLiked by 2 people
brangan
June 16, 2017
sanjana: 😂😂
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
June 16, 2017
.And Seema, in an I V Sasi film, becomes a beast of actor
She’s got to be. She is his wife 😁
And I think Katha remake is mukundetta sumitra vilikkunu
Regarding mohanlal stealing the show with just few scenes, watch him play Mammootty’s amorous, stammering Brother in law in poomughapadiyil ninneyum Kathu. He has just 4 or 5 scenes, but man what scenes. This is his introduction scene in the film
Sanjana, alphabetically Aamir khan is the greatest actor in the country 😃
LikeLike
sanjana
June 16, 2017
MANK, I purposefully omitted his name. As his fan, I dont want to take his name and let him get bashed up left, right and centre!
LikeLike
Ram
June 16, 2017
My list below as Sanjana already included Rajini.
Akkineni nageswara rao
Anant Nag
Amitabh Bachchan
Chiranjeevi
Dilip Kumar
Kamal Haasan
M G Ramachandran
Mammootty
Mohan Lal
Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao
Naseeruddin Shah
Om Puri
Rajkumar
Rajnikanth
S V Ranga Rao
Sivaji Ganesan
Shashi kapoor
Sanjeev Kumar
Venkatesh
Vinod Khanna
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
June 16, 2017
Sanjana, good thinking. but when you look at his last 3 performances Dangal, PK and talaash – we’ll leave out D3- he has evolved in to a damn good actor. it can hold up to the best that Kamal, Amitabh or Mohanlal has done in the last half a decade or so. he was definitely robbed of the national award for Dangal. i was watching it again recently and was amazed how good it was. how subtly he plays the various nuances of the character.but due to the fact that the public spotlight was so much on the weight gain and stuff like that, his performance didn’t get the due it deserved.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Anu Warrier
June 16, 2017
MANK, in that clip, I must confess that Sri Vidya took my breath away. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
June 16, 2017
sanjana: Anuj would be forever indebted to you. You just made Hrithik a greater actor than Kamal, Mohanlal and Mamooty. Also Sanjeev Kumar, but he is too esoteric/self indulgent/pretentious anyway, I guess. 😉
LikeLiked by 3 people
MANK
June 16, 2017
Anu, oh she does, doesn’t she. One of the most beautiful -and beautiful looking -actresses this countryhas ever produced. Ah those lovely hypnotic eyes . Poomughapadiyil has one of her best performances, the over possessive suspicious wife, like a female Othello. She nailed it perfectly
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
June 16, 2017
Btw how about classic Indian actresses , at least the one’s that are alive
Sridevi would top the list easily having pulled off everything from mundram pirai to Mr India and having been a dominating force in at least three Indian languages for over 2 decades
Then shabana azmi being the queen of parallel cinema
And Waheeda rehman from the earlier generation can round off the top three
LikeLike
sanjana
June 17, 2017
http://www.reputationpoll.com/2017mrpoe/
LikeLike
brangan
June 17, 2017
MANK: When younger, I was a huge Sridevi fan. But after a point, I became… well, less of a fan. Her “style,” if you want to call it that, works brilliantly in films like Mr India / Chaalbaaz — less so in a Gumraah, where I want to see an anguished woman and only see a “type.” Somehow, joining Hindi films changed her performance style, and I vastly prefer her in her Tamil/Telugu films. Even in a generic drama like Premabhishekam / Vaazhve Maayam, she is so good in that zone, which could easily have slid into a theatrical-hamming mode. Her instincts are awesome.
As for Srividya, I am not so much a fan of her in her Tamil films (though maybe she was asked to “amp it up” a bit), but in Malayalam cinema, she was so, so good. I think film I saw her in was Adaminte Variyellu. Even if you compare Ente Suryapathrikku to Karpooramullai, she’s so much better in the former — though I am not a fan as such of either film.
But this again comes back to what I was saying about Kamal and the audience an actor caters to. Maybe directors like Balachander asked Srividya to pitch her performance at a certain level, and maybe that became her “reference point” for Tamil cinema. I am not saying one is “better” than the other — just saying what works for me.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Madan
June 17, 2017
As far as yesteryear actresses go, I though Jaya Bhaduri was incredible at her peak. Unfortunately, didn’t age well and I don’t know that that’s entirely her fault.
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
June 17, 2017
Brangan, sridevi was really good in lamhe. But you are right. Once she achieved superstardom in Hindi, she became repetitive and kind of artificial.
LikeLiked by 2 people
sravishanker1401gmailcom
June 18, 2017
I didnt know there were so many Srividhya fans hiding in the woodwork ! For years and years I thought I was ploughing a lonely furrow….my cup runneth over
LikeLiked by 3 people
Shriram Ardhanari
June 18, 2017
Sivaji starred as the antihero in Andha Naal, a movie set in the times of World War II. I presume this was before he achieved super stardom, going by the year the movie released. Sivaji, often known for his theatrical, borderline over the top acting, showed how subtle he could get if the role demanded. You should watch Andha Naal, if you haven’t.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Naveen
June 19, 2017
putting Sridevi and Shabana in teh same list on acting skills?! hope it was not a joke. Sri, like Aish or hrithik, was too good on the looks department that even she could not come out of the ‘see how good looking i am, why do you even want me to try to act’ syndrome. most of the directors just used for her looks and glamour. same would hold for Hemamalini.
give me Smita Patil, Waheeda, Rekha any day. i would rate Rekha as the best that happened to the bollywood industry. and her lfie story seems eerily similar to namma Jaya Amma. very similar childhood.
shobana, revathy, oorvashi, radhika can be in hte next gen list. will omit suhasini for her sense of artificiality
LikeLike
Naveen
June 19, 2017
i would rate Dhalapathy as one of the best of Sridvidya. very sensitively etched our characater. She stood her own ground amidst all the big actors and Mani and IR in that movie. tamil industry did not use many of those talented actors properly – Shobana, Geetha, later age manorama, Srividya et al
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 19, 2017
Glad there’re people who dislike Suhasini’s acting. 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 19, 2017
No doubt, Andha Naal was a great film, but it had its OTT (talking about performances) moments.
LikeLike
sivaji
June 19, 2017
sivaji ganesan ‘s acting skill in many films gave way to kamal haasan.. his effortless style, ex puthiya paravai gave way to Rajini.. sivaji is the best actor
LikeLike
Naveen
June 19, 2017
with Sivaji, it was more of being than acting. his non-period social movies are a bench mark no other actor can be compared with. in movies like bagaprivinai, paidtha mattum podhuma etc you dont see an actor performing you just see the characters being there. ofcourse he could breathe life into the period and mythological ones greatly as well. but then his age was more of theatre or theatre like. can we even compare the current gen actors with him
LikeLike
Srinivas R
June 19, 2017
Naveen – while i understand your dislike for Sridevi, I also think her acting or lack of it was due to the films of that time. I really liked her in Johnny ( and Rajini was brilliant too). If she had worked with such sensible directors more ( not sure she had a choice) maybe our perception would be different.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Badboy
June 19, 2017
naveen comments in this whole thread is all abt constant putting down.. just relax
LikeLike
Naveen
June 19, 2017
Srini, I actually like Sri’s terrific screen presence. i like her more in the Hindi avatar – Lamhe is one of my most fav films, she was very good in Khuda Gawah too. Chandni was a very textbook role. she was at her best in terms of glamor. in Tamil, she was very good in Meendum Kokila, Priya, varumayin niram sivappu, sigappu rojakkal, 16 Vayadhinile.
yes, she had limited choice after getting the glamor stamp through telugu movies.
ofcourse English Vinglish was hers totally. hope she avoids movies like Puli and rather take a Bahubali. in Hindi, my fav is Rekha and Waheeda. current gen it would be Anushka Sharma and Deepika
LikeLike
Madan
June 20, 2017
I have to agree completely with Naveen. Shabana is a different class of actress altogether. But whatever…
I thought Deepika was doing fine until I watched Bajirao Mastani. PC was comfortably better in that film. I think Anushka has it in her to be a better actress than either but something has gone wrong with her role selection.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Naveen
June 20, 2017
Madan, Deepika was lucky to have Imtiaz’s blessings repeatedly. Anushka was very good ( IMO ) in Ae Dil Hai Mushqil ( i liked the movie as I liked Tamasha too ). the Jab Harry Met Sejal is also Imtiaz’s. i hope Anushka does not get hijacked by Bhansali and put into those protoype movies he made with Deepika.
bolly is vey camped. you are either with johar or the chopra camp. junior stars have to toe along their dots, unless u r a Kangana who is defiant enough. Kangana and Anushka are the immediate future of bollywood. long time future seems dominated by Alia as she has strong industry lineage and backing
LikeLike
MANK
June 20, 2017
I am not bracketing sridevi or Shabana together, its not possible because
They are different types of actresses.
Sridevi is more like mohanlal, spontaneous, instinctive and very versatile and she is a full blooded Indian actress in the vein of a waheeda or savitri, which is less of a pure actor, more of a performance artist or someone who could be both and she definitely was
Shabana is a method actress who is very much influenced by the west. Someone who is more Meryl Streep and Liv Ullman than waheeda Rehman. She is a ‘pure’ actor who the best of that kind this country has produced but who was never comfortable with the performance artistry required for Indian mainstream Cinema
Sridevi had a great body of work with the likes of KB,bharatiraja,Mahendran, Balu Mahendra etc. She is someone who is really good in that space. On that basis I would say she could have worked very well with a benegal or Govind nihalani. Would she have pulled of an Arth,Nishanth,or Mandi as well as Shabana ? , Probably not.shabana is in a different league in those films. But Sri would still have pulled them off without embarrassing herself. I cannot say the same about Shabana in the mainstream space. Whether it’s Amar Akbar Anthony or Fakira or whatever, she always stuck out like a sore thumb. And there is no way in hell she would have been even one percent as good as Sri in Mr India, chaalbaaz or jadadeeka veerudu athiloka sundari etc
Again speaking of legacy , I don’t think there was another actress who has influenced more actresses and spawned more clones than Sri, whether from North or South- Madhuri, juhi, urmila, banupriya, Radha, Divya bharai, you name it, . She set the template for the modern mainstream indian actress who combined both glamour and performance. Earlier you could either be madhubala or meena Kumari, Mumtaz or waheeda,Zeenat or Smita. Sri proved that you could be both and be extremely successful at that.
So what I am saying is that if we are discussing screen actresses in the context of Indian Cinema, then I would put sridevi ahead of Shabana.
LikeLike
MANK
June 20, 2017
Btw, if someone was to bracket sridevi with Hrithik and Ash(may lord have mercy on your soul 🙂 ) and then say that Deepika is his favorite, then i would never take anything he says seriously
LikeLike
MANK
June 20, 2017
on a side note, i would say one perceives sridevi as one perceives Johnny depp today. because their current or final chapter in their career had them play a certain type , one immediately assumes that that’s the only thing they have done . Now everybody is hellbent on writing Depp’s career obituary, how bad an actor he is, boringly repetitive, crazy and stuff like that and a lot of that is true as well.But many tend to forget (or not even aware) that Johnny is perhaps the greatest and most original actor of his generation, with a body of work that redefines modern acting , but if you read the comments and articles that have been passed around on the web and social media, one gets the feeling that he made his debut with the first pirates of Carribbean film
Ditto for Sridevi. because she finished her prolific career with duds like roop ki rani or chand ka tukda, that’s all people remember about her. not someone who was so versatile and gifted as to do both sadma and Himmatwala at the same time
That’s were Kamal scores over the others. here was this brilliant performer who lost his way in the mid 80’s and most probably would have ended up like prabhu deva. ,the guy who was only supposed to dance in film after film. but he took control of his career and changed its course.so by the time Sridevi was drowning herself in roop ki rani and chandramukhi , Kamal was in full revisionist mode as an actor with Tevar magan and Mahanadi. of course it was much more difficult for actresses to reinvent rather than actors
LikeLiked by 3 people
Naveen
June 20, 2017
Mank, my intent of putting Sri with Aish and Hrithik on the stronger looks department compared to their performance, IMO. Sri reigned the glam world like nobody else before or after her in industries as diverse as Telugu, Tamil and Hindi. every top heroine after had to ape/imitate her at least partlyand most of them failed miserably. only madhurai could get commercial success but not a Queen Bee status that Sri could attain
Kamal and Sri gave life to so many mundane stories copied/remade between telugu and Tamil. she was exploited by the telugu financiers/producers in south as well as Bollywood for the glam power she could bring in with just her name. i would really like her to work with the Akthars, Shoojit Circar, Kashyap, Vingesh Sivan etc
yes, Deepika, Anushka, Kangana would be my fav in the currently active actors
LikeLike
Madan
June 20, 2017
@ Naveen Yeah Bolly has always been about camps. It basically drove Madan Mohan to drink himself to death. Anushka was part of a good camp, commercially, but Adi does not make the kind of films that would tap her potential. DP was smart that way to associate with more hip directors. Alia is very talented and with her industry connections will likely have a better career than the other young/young-ish actresses in Bolly.
LikeLike
Madan
June 20, 2017
” spawned more clones than Sri, whether from North or South- Madhuri, juhi, urmila, banupriya, Radha, Divya bharai” – Curious, in what way is Urmila a sri devi clone? Any particular roles of Urmila that remind you of Sridevi? To be honest, even Radha doesn’t remind me that much of Sridevi.
“And there is no way in hell she would have been even one percent as good as Sri in Mr India” – I agree with this but it could equally be argued that there’s no way that you could cast Sanjeev Kumar to play the twin Hrithik roles in KNPH. But does that actually mean the two actors are in incomparable slots? At least I am not too sure.
LikeLike
brangan
June 20, 2017
Well, Banupriya and Urmila aped Sridevi quite a bit… I don’t see much of her in Radha though.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 20, 2017
Not seen much of Urmila’s Hindi films, but yes, she imitated Sridevi (dating back to her Chaalbaaz/Chandini days) quite a bit in Indian. Interestingly, Bhanupriya had dubbed for her in the film.
About Srividya, none of the top directors in Tamil except KB and MR utilised her in their films. She had a memorable role in Punnagai Mannan. To me, the ‘arc’ between her character and ‘Chaplin’ Chellappa is the best thing in the film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 20, 2017
MANK: I don’t think Sadma is the correct example for a “Shabana type role.” It is still pitched very much in a mainstream space, as opposed to a Paar or a Khandhar. Maybe Shabana couldn’t do masala as well as Sridevi, but she was very comfortable in a general mainstream space — say, a kitschy drama like Thodisi Bewafaii or even the classier ones like Neerja or Masoom. She was simply spectacular in Masoom.
Basically, I’m just saying it’s not an easy comparison.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Ramchander Krishna (@ramctheatheist)
June 20, 2017
@Jose: I have a minor doubt.
// Following old industry practices, the names in the order of their appearances are Sivaji, Nagesh & Kamalji. //
In this sentence, did you refer to him as Kamalji so that it would rhyme with Sivaji?
@To all Drishyam fans: Seems mohanlal wasn’t interested in doing the film. Which is why his acting turned out the way it did. It wasn’t phenomenally layered & subtle acting. It was plain disinterest.
LikeLike
MANK
June 20, 2017
Madan, but SK and HR are mutually exclusive in each other’s spheres. One cannot by any means do what the other does. I believe that Sri is the best in her space and she wouldn’t do badly in shabana’s space.but vice versa is not possible with Shabana
Brangan I agree it’s not at all an easy comparison. But masoom is more in a middle stream rather than a hardcore mainstream like chaalbaaz. Yes Sri never did an out and out art film , so one can only assume.i do admire both actresses immensely, maybe I do have a soft spot for Sri whom I have loved from my childhood
Naveen, fair enough. Personally I wouldn’t put Deepika in the league of kangana ,Alia and Anushka, all of whom I believe are much more Superior to Deepika as performers
LikeLike
MANK
June 20, 2017
It wasn’t phenomenally layered & subtle acting. It was plain disinterest.
How and from where did you deduce that. Mohanlal can be lot of things, but never could be accused of being disinterested. And it was his home production
LikeLike
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 20, 2017
Isn’t 16 Vayathiniley (and its Hindi remake) an art film? The filmmaker thinks so. 🙂
LikeLike
MANK
June 20, 2017
Honest Raj, ha ha good one. But the film was such a huge Blockbuster that the producer had to go into hiding, fearful of the IT raids. So obviously it’s not an art film. Kangalal Kaidhu Sei perhaps 😀
BTW, you really liked Kamals Chaplin act in punnagai mannan?
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 20, 2017
Statutory Warning: People Who Make Loaded Comments About Kamal Circa 1980s (And Especially the Chaplin Chellappa Character in Punnagai Mannan) Shall Be Barred From This Blog. Sincerely, etc.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
June 21, 2017
” SK and HR are mutually exclusive in each other’s spheres. One cannot by any means do what the other does.” – In essence, I can agree but if I plot what SK can do on a sphere and what HK can do, I am sure the SK sphere would be much bigger. So the actor’s range also matters.
” I believe that Sri is the best in her space and she wouldn’t do badly in shabana’s space.but vice versa is not possible with Shabana” – Depends how you define Shabana’s space as such. Would Sridevi really be ‘not bad’ in Godmother? Have a hard time imagining her fitting into such roles. Naveen’s comparison may have been provocative but in essence I don’t disagree that Sridevi too, like most glamorous heroines, is reluctant to do things that would make her look ugly. And that tends to impose limits on her range. I agree that Shabana would be a misfit in total masala song and dance roles but in this way even B-grade Bollywood heros would be incomparable to actors like Naseeruddin Shah or Om Puri and I don’t agree with that. One has to finally look at the actor’s range also. By the by, it could be argued that the ability to play both vamp and virtuous ‘nari’ had been demonstrated by Mumtaz in the 70s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 21, 2017
Interesting. 🙂 As someone who adores Sri in both her glamorous outings (the good ones, not the Himmatwala, Tohfa embarassments) and as an actress – MANK has it right – she is a performance artist, and in her space, I would definitely put her on par with Shabana. But then, I grew up seeing her in her Malayalam outings, where she was definitely not glamour girl.
In Hindi, the problem is that once you cross a certain age, actresses are forced to look like little girls – the twin braids, the shrill high voices, the giggles, the short frocks, the manic pixie dream girl trope; it happened to Sridevi, Madhuri, Juhi… the gaze is patriarchal, and the industry is, too. (Witness our sanskari Nihalani saying that he cannot certify Lipstick Under My Burkha because ‘ladies do not have such fantasies’. Ugh!)
Unfortunately for Sri, she ruled the roost at a time when there were no good roles for heroines. If she, Madhuri, et al were in the running today, the Deepikas and Priyanka Chopras wouldn’t have a chance. And I say this as someone with a massive girl-crush on Dips. 🙂
In today’s commercial space, I definitely think Alia has the right combination of acting chops and screen presence. It helps that she looks like she’s 12 – they don’t have to try very hard to make her look like a little girl. I definitely like Anushka; as a producer, she’s encouraging different stories, and giving newcomers a platform to tell them.
I am conflicted about Kangana; on the one hand, I do think she’s talented; on the other hand, I think she’s a one note actress who’s playing either bipolar or schizophrenic characters, and she’s predictable.
In the middle space, there’s the brilliant Radhika Apte and Swara Bhaskar; I also liked what I have see of Nimrat Kaur and Kriti Kulhari.
MANK, re: Mohanlal – I don’t know whether he was disinterested in Drishyam, but I have seen him sleepwalk through plenty of movies in the 90s. You could tell the only reason he signed the film was the pay cheque.
Sree Vidya, like Sridevi, was far better utilised in Malayalam, and has a great, great body of work behind her. Her place among the pantheon of great Malayalam actors (and we have plenty of them) is secure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 21, 2017
Here we are talking about actors having bad phases or tarnishing legacy or weighed down by their own body of work but in Holywood, Daniel Day Lewis has “retired” from acting.
LikeLike
Naveen
June 21, 2017
RGV was madly in love with Sri in his formative years in the film industry. i think he did a couple of good ones with Sri in Telugu – kshanam kshanam or govinda govinda ( ir both )?
The upcoming Mom seems to have Sri in a very serious role for the first time. i hope it is a new milestone in her career. she looks too serious in the trailer.
LikeLike
sanjana
June 21, 2017
Sadma was owned by Kamal. Mr.India was owned by Sridevi.
Sridevi is jack of all genres and master of some genres.
Shabana is master of some exclusive genres.
Shabana is classy, while Sridevi is more massy and can be classy if she tries as in EV.
LikeLiked by 1 person
rothrocks
June 21, 2017
I am not familiar with Sridevi’s Malayalam work, so will have to defer to Anu Warrier/MANK there. Based on what I saw in Hindi/Tamil, no, wouldn’t rank her on par with Shabana. At least she got some good films in Tamil; her foray into Hindi coincided with one of its worst periods.
LikeLike
MANK
June 21, 2017
Aditya, since it’s Day Lewis, I wouldn’t take it seriously. This must be his ‘method’ of preparing for a role where he plays an actor who’s about to retire 😋
LikeLiked by 2 people
MANK
June 21, 2017
Anu, I think Kangana is the best actress of this generation and someone who has the potential to be the true successor to Sridevi and Madhuri, who combines both star mystique and acting chops . unfortunately, she is a complete mess as a person. due to a series of bad industry experiences ,complicated love life, and substance abuse, she seems to have hit rock bottom both as a star and actress. As you see her in last couple of films, she is becoming alarmingly repetitive and a self parody. to top that she has feuded with almost everyone in the industry and there is hardly an actor or filmmaker who would work with her anymore
Anushka and Parineeti are very gifted performers , but they really don’t posses a star aura. more like girls next door.
Alia is terrific , but as you said just comes across as a school girl and the kind of roles she can be cast are very limited
Deepika is the least talented of the group, but the most gorgeous which explains her stardom. she has the movie star quality and she is improving as a performer as evidenced in tamasha.
If she, Madhuri, et al were in the running today, the Deepikas and Priyanka Chopras wouldn’t have a chance.
completely agreed about that point. both Sridevi and Madhuri were unlucky to have been active in a period when it was a bad time to be a mainstream film heroine. it is a testament of their abundant talent that they still made their mark
LikeLiked by 1 person
Honest Raj (formerly 'V'enkatesh)
June 21, 2017
MANK: Take the songs out of the film, it’s no lesser than a Ray/Benegal/Adoor film. 🙂
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 21, 2017
Congrats MANK. You are the 10485th person to make that joke 😀
For my money, mainstream or art or any of those useless qualifiers, Radhika Apte and Parvathy are the best actresses of this generation. Both can do the whole gamut, can dial up or dial down effectively and can give you the feeling that they belong, in almost any kind of film.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 22, 2017
Madan, re: Kangana, I agree completely. My problem with Kangana is also the complete and continuous state of victimhood. She doesn’t just have a chip on her shoulder; she has a whole blasted forest. While I do think that an aggressively self-promoting, nakedly ambitious, totally focused male actor would not be as pilloried as the equivalent female actor, I do think that Kangana brings a lot of her troubles upon herself.
I forgot to add Vidya Balan as an actress of substance. Alia is growing by leaps and bounds, actually. I liked her turn in Udta Punjab; I wouldn’t have thought a thoroughly urban girl like Alia could have pulled off that act. It was not just costume and makeupl it was her body language. I have hopes that she will continue to make unusual choices; she’s only 24, she has time on her side.
Deepika is less talented than this lot, sure, but she’s also learning her craft, and I find her much more interesting now than I did before. (Take it for what it’s worth – as I said, I have a huge woman-crush on her. 🙂 ) I’m glad you mentioned Tamasha – I was one of the minority who liked that film.
LikeLike
brangan
June 22, 2017
Gradwolf: “useless qualifiers”? Surely you see that “mainstream” and “art” are two entirely different ways, appraoches, sensibilities. I find it ridiculous when people say things like “there is no mainstream or art cinema, there is only good and bad cinema.” That’s like saying “there is no hotel food and dhaba food, there is only good and bad food.”
An actor who is able to pitch a mainstream performance need not be comfortable in an art film. I don’t see why this is so useless a distinction.
I love Parvathi and Radhika Apte, but would they be able to pull of Mr. India? Do they have those “broad” instincts? I am not so sure.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Naveen
June 22, 2017
Parvathi suprises me with her every movie or interview. being in a regional industry is the only reason she is not known outside. you do not see the actor in her movies, only the characters. she is mohanlal that way.
Anu, i liked Tamasha too. Deepika was very very good.
ultimately a film is a director’s baby. how much hard work the director puts in will affect all other departments
LikeLike
sanjana
June 22, 2017
Mass acceptance matters. Hindi Medium trended so well, but can Irrfan Khan get an opening in 30 crore range? Bigger cinema needs big stars and we need an occasional bigger cinema. Of course Baahubali franchise is an exception but even there, the film was mounted on a very big canvas to appeal to the widest possible audience.
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 22, 2017
Rangan: The problem (and the useless part) is because we are not comparing such films, with their own distinctions and place etc. Not saying these distinctions are not necessary or that they do not make sense. We are comparing performers with a lot of “would they”, “could they” and in that regard, we are only second guessing and building theories. Very few like Kamal or Amitabh and those with humongous body of work, have I think cut across and we can talk about them with some certainty. And not to mention, at least in Hindi cinema, there was a clear distinction between mainstream and parallel cinema, with even the performers more or less divided sharply between the two, only with some exceptions.
LikeLike
Aditya (Gradwolf)
June 22, 2017
And about mainstream space and Apte, one must check out All in All Azhagu Raja (as daunting as it sounds and is) to just see how she can ace an absolutely nothing of a role in a nothing of a film. I’d bet that she can pull off a Mr. India.
LikeLike
Vishnu
June 23, 2017
@Kid, that comment on Mohanlal should be one of the most beautiful comments ever to have written on an actor. Awesome stuff!
Also the comment comparing Amitabh to Dilip Kumar was also a treat. 🙂
As folklore has it, Mohanlal who started as a villian in films slowly graduating to side roles in his formative years, was the only Malayalam actor in those era (including end 70s-80s beginning) who in his initial years never got booed upon by audience (as booing actors, be it hero or villain or side role, during their initial days when they tend to give bit amateur performances, was a common practice in Kerala then, and it is said invariably almost every actor who began in those era had to face it except Mohanlal) which is a symbol of his talent and his future rise.
I would wholeheartedly agree with Kid, that his is the most purest form of acting. Take any Mohanlal movie between 1986-95 when Lal was at the peak of his game. There may perhaps be well over 150 films in that period but one would never (or let it be “almost never” just for a bit of humbleness 😀 ) be able to find even a single false note anywhere in his performance whatever be the film. And he had that rare capacity among actors in the world, to single-handedly raise a film several notches from being somewhat mediocre to something excellent, atleast during his prime years. That’s his magic.
From playing a tribal pappad-maker in the crafty ‘Paadamudra’ to the political-goon turned political-leader in the phenomenal masterpiece ‘Adwaitham’, his acting was like listening to an unforgettable soulful music, the flow unbelievable.
Just watch this simple scene from this superbly hilarious movie Akkare akkare akkare (from the famous Dasan & Vijayan CID combo). I think this one scene (or the video available is rather a slightly extended sequence) may be enough to show any student of cinema, how an actor can combine brilliance of acting with a certain charm & star-ry appeal. And also to complement Lal in this scene we have got a brilliantly comic Srinivasan. (And since most of the dialogues in this below scene are in English, I guess everyone can well understand it).
LikeLike
sanjana
June 23, 2017
I could not watch any Parvati film so far and it is my loss. Why is she shunning bollywood or is it other way round?
Mainstream heroines used to be highly annoying with some exceptions. Smita Patil, Shabana Azmi, Deepti Naval came as something different. It was good that they could not dance like Madhuri or Sridevi. Or looked as glamorous. Otherwise we would have lost their performances.
LikeLike
Vidhya M
June 23, 2017
For actresses, knowing the language (leave alone dubbing for themselves) helps to set their performances at the right pitch. Sridevi got it right in 16 vayathiniley, Meendum Kokila, Gayathri etc, as she knew Tamil. In Hindi, her articulation became high-pitched as if in a frenzy to complete the alien sounding lines. (Maybe she learnt the language later!)
Talking of Parvathy, I saw an interview of hers in Malayalam – thanks to a link posted in one of the comment threads in this blog. I know just a wee little Malayalam, but her comfort level in conversing in the language came across to even a non-Malayalam speaking viewer. Contrast that to say, a Trisha or Samantha who know Tamil, but struggle to keep a conversation going in the language. This discomfort probably manifests in their acting too.
Kamal stands out in that aspect – his usage of some phrases, words, slang harks back to those days, when even at home we would use such lovely pazhamozhigal and amusing words (eg Padagaamani for a troublemaker), in unadulterated Tamizh. There’s a running joke on how Kamal’s posts in Tamizh need to be translated into Tamil – however, for us who grew up in the 80s, his words sound familiar from our day-to-day parlance mostly.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Naveen
June 23, 2017
Anu, Sanjana any list of competent Indian lead female actors cannot miss Shobana. she could be Smita patil and Shabana azmi put together. she could not have been Sridevi though.
i have accidentally seen so many of Shobana’s malayalm movies on TV and have found them so good. unable to recall names. some of her movies with mohanlal and Mamooty are a delight to watch as the lead pair is supremely sooo good.She has been very good in comedy, social drama, masala etc. Manichitrathazhu will stand tall and above the crowd forever across all industries within India. she became Ganga and Nagavalli.
btw, the fact that Sri is being compared in the list with Kangana, Deepika, Alia shows that she has already become a time tranceding machine. this was the girl/lady who acted with Sivaji, NTR, ANR one time and still being a point of reference and talk. ideally she should be compared with thelikes of Jayasudha, Jayaprada, Sripriya who have all long settled down. Sri can still be the USP of a film.
and when it comes to dance ( of the filmi kind ), everybody else pales before. suprising that Sri never did a proper classical dance role. maybe Saroj Khan and Puliyur Saroja prevented that or she did not prefer, given she was not classically trained from you age ( compared to shobana, revathi, hema malini et al who were calssical dancers before becoming actors )
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
June 23, 2017
Sanjana, it isn’t necessary that an actress has to be deglam for her performance to come through . if the character lends itself to glamor organically, it is never a problem. Rekha is the ultimate glam goddess in both Umrao Jaan and Utsav, both of which i think are her best . Ditto Meryl Streep in The french Lieutenant’s women and Devil wears Prada. And i find Shabana the most beautiful and sexy in Arth, which is one of her top 3 greatest performances
Regarding sridevi’s dialogue delivery skills,Rekha used to dub for her in her early days in hindi cinema . she picked up the language gradually.she has a weak voice that lend itself easily to comedy but not to high drama. so she is working from a place of weakness to begin with. and has always struggled with her dialogue delivery .it gets amplified when one is working in an alien tongue. her hindi accent was always problematic.People were willing to ignore it up to a point because her screen presence was simply hypnotic. I agree that she was one of the best screen dancer ever. Madhuri, Vyjayanthimala, Padmini etc where far more well trained and technically accomplished dancers than her. but she knew how to dance for the camera and many a times dance in character. the coordination between facial expressions and body movements were simply amazing
LikeLike
MANK
June 23, 2017
as a viewer ,its hard to decide where to focus on , her expressions or her movements. i am sure her directors also had the same problem.
God, here she is a rockstaar
LikeLike
MANK
June 23, 2017
Actually there is a major issue of dubbing with actresses like shobhana ,geetha ,.. in malayalam. Dubbing artist bhagyalakshmi was the voice of almost all malayali heroines in 90’s . in manichithrathazhu, 2 dubbing artists dubbed for shobhana, one for ganga and one for nagavalli. so i don’t know how much of the credit should go to the actresses . Urvashi used to to dub herself , but not consistently. there is the bizarre instance in Kilukkam, where Revathi dubbed for herself in the first half of the film and Bhagyalakshmi dubbed for her in the second half
But these days all heroines are dubbing for themselves, which is a good development. An actor’s performance is incomplete if he\she is not dubbing in their own voice
LikeLike
Anisha
June 23, 2017
@MANK There are a lot of heroines who have their performances dubbed by other people, like Savitha and Deepa Venkat. Top heroines included.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 24, 2017
Sri may not have been classically trained, but god, can she dance!
I like Shobhana, but no, I certainly wouldn’t put her in the top rung of actresses and definitely not as a combination of Smita and Shabana. That’s just so over the top! She’s competent,no doubt, but her greatest performance was inManichitrathazhu and that, as MANK pointed out, was dubbed by two different dubbing artistes.
I remember Mammootty once asking why even heroines who speak the language don’t dub for themselves. (Shobhana doesn’t speak Malayalam at all.) Contrast that with Sree Vidya, who not being a native Malayali, still spoke the language beautifully and dubbed for herself. There was a time when you recognised an actress by her voice; then, in between, all the actresses sounded the same. Now, once again, it is nice to hear Manju’s voice which is different from Navyas, which is different from Bhavana’s.
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
June 24, 2017
Anisha, yes I know. Dubbing is very prevalent in South Indian languages, otherwise how could tamannas,Hansikas and Kaajals would have a career
Anu, yes shobhana’s Malayalam is terrible.its shocking really. She’s a native Malayali,she has been the most prolific actress for more than twenty years, must have done close to hundred films and she never tried to be proficient in the language. That’s when we have actresses like – as you mentioned- srividya,Sheela, jayabharathi who weren’t natives, but became so proficient in the language that they always dubbed for themselves.
one need to blame the directors also here who discourages rather than encourages actresses to dub for themselves even if they know the language. Many of them are too lazy to sit with the actresses on dubbing sessions. Revathy has recounted how she bad to literally beg priyan to dub for kilukkam, still he didn’t let her dub the whole film, even in the case of manju varrier, someone else dubbed for her in first couple of movies. It’s only after she started dubbing herself that she reached her full potential as a performer
LikeLike
Jose
November 6, 2017
@Ramchander
The intention was not to rhyme. At times, my fondness in referring him as Kamalji while talking somehow crept into writing, I think.
Missed to see your comment earlier…
LikeLike
Rashmi
January 6, 2018
So happy to read this…What a fine actor Nagesh was…! loved the way he portrayed the loving brother in Major Chamdrakanth.. and who cam forget the irreplaceable and outstanding Karumi?
LikeLike
ThouShaltNot
January 6, 2018
They don’t make ’em like that anymore. “…vekkapadu, thalaiya kuni, katta verala paaru, kalyaana vishayam, summaa nikkaraiyae, nagaththa keeru, mundhaanaiya summaa udaadha, thirugu.ThiruguThiruguThirugu…” 🙂
LikeLike
An Jo
April 15, 2018
Apropos Kid’s comment:
Madan:
“He needs space to really explode, preferably a long monologue or two”.
With all due respect, this is quite frankly a remarkably reductive assessment of Bachchan’s work and one which is completely off-base. Bachchan, in his greatest works, always implodes and rarely explodes……
Kid:
Your comment, has to be the most PRECISE, SHARP, and in my limited life and imagination — order be damned — comment, that has captured the essence of Amitabh’s acting prowess so succinctly yet so expansively. Beautiful: Extremely beautiful. Hats off to you for using brevity in ‘expounding’ Amitabh’s greatness as an actor’s Haley’s comet. Thank you for this.
HRISHIKESH MUKHERJEE is on record saying in the now extinct ILLUSTRATED WEEKLY OF INDIA that he’s the ONLY complete actor– [ yes, I know I am in the island of Kamal Haasan when it comes to BR Saab’s blog; but one’s got to say what one’s got to say]–that the Hindi film Industry has EVER seen, much to the chagrin of his friend Raj Kapoor and even the likes of DILIP KUMAR. There are anecdotes on how he used to work an 8 hour shift with Hrishida and then hop-on to Man Desai’s mad-cap sets/films: All it needed for Amitabh was just a shout from Man: ” Abe oye, you are on my sets now, not Hrishikesh’s. Get your act ‘apart!’. Within a matter of minutes, Amitabh was surfing on the tides of Man Desai! And then, again, the next shift with Basu Chatterjee or Hrishida or Shakti Samanta or Yash! All that we as audiences could do was only marvel at the brilliance and shifting of the ‘mind-scape’ of an actor first and the character later from directors as 90-degreed as Hrishikesh and Manmohan.
BEMISAL, of course, happens to be one of my favorite Hrishda’s outings for Bachchan. He was simply brilliant in the film: And that song KISI BAAT PAR MEIN
has so much of in-built philosophy ‘internalized’ by Bachchan that it boggles my mind to-date as to how Amitabh could convey the internal ‘churning’ of emotions with HARDLY any external accoutrements that the physical body could lend itself to. To me, his GREATEST during that period are his performances in TRISHUL and DON: Two diametrically opposite performances in perpendicular genres from the same actor. Amitabh ‘exploded’ in DON in a joyous mode, and imploded brilliantly in TRISHUL. [Look at the irony; Bachchan’s introduction scene in TRISHUL is the one where he non-chalantly walks across a land-scape to be leveled by a dynamite that he lights with his cigarette; but all his emotions are internal and intrinsic, until he throws the property papers on Sanjeev Kumar’s face!]
Also, thanks for mentioning MILI. That bloody shot of his
with a half-glass of whiskey staring into nothingness standing on the balcony or sitting on a chair is a master-class in itself: He didn’t need to ‘act’, he just would have stood still and it would have done the job.
I can go on and on, but it’s better to stop.
But before I leave, as BR Saab pointed out, and that’s KUDOS to his assessment, that inspite of being a fan-boy/man of Kamal Hassan, he STILL finds it a tad difficult to imagine how anyone, let alone HASSAN, could not how, if not necessarily better, provide an ‘alternative’ to Bachchan’s act of Vijay in Deewar. [ And you KID, have nailed it to the ‘T’ when you say that it is not Amitabh performing in front of a statue but actually ‘talking’ to God..]
LikeLike