Spoilers ahead…
Read the full review on Film Companion, here: https://www.filmcompanion.in/game-over-movie-review-the-enjoyable-fabulously-twisty-game-over-starring-taapsee-pannu-is-a-bona-fide-original-baradwaj-rangan/
Oh, a serial-killer movie! That’s what I thought during the vicious opening scenes of Ashwin Saravanan’s fabulously twisty Game Over. The creepy camerawork by A Vasanth sustains this impression, with grainy images and a handheld vibe. Like in Michael Powell’s seminal voyeur-thriller Peeping Tom (released in 1960, which also saw the release of another seminal slasher movie, Psycho), we seem to be witnessing a sicko get off by murdering women and recording their final moments. A television report confirms the presence of a murderer at large. But wait! Serial-killer thrillers are built on fetishes, motives, and a reveal — either early on, or later — about the killer’s identity that makes us piece together a “story”, along with the protagonist. Game Over is not exactly that movie, but then, you could come at this film from several angles.
Here’s another angle. Game Over is a psychodrama about a suicidal video-game designer who’s afraid of the dark: Swapna, played by a gritty Taapsee Pannu (as always, the actress is more impressive at showing strength than vulnerability).
Here’s another angle. Game Over is a movie about a ghost possessing a body in order to extract revenge. (The means through which the “spirit” enters the body is genius, one of the most unique and imaginative plot points I’ve seen.) This angle involves a tattoo artist (Ramya Subramanian), and her place of business does sound like something to do with the afterlife: Immortal Inks.
Continued at the link above.
Copyright ©2019 Film Companion.
Baradwaj Rangan 
Sri Prabhuram
June 13, 2019
Did you watch this in an early screening?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Reuben
June 14, 2019
“A wankfest for cerebral cinephiles”?
That’s another addition to your list of gem of an expression.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Akash Balakrishnan
June 14, 2019
Have to disagree gently yet firmly.
Theory 1 : If it was the ghost story, then it doesn’t make sense that the killer(s) waited until new year to kill swapna. I mean, it is pretty evident that the killers are from/ have their source at immortal inks. The killers had photos of Amudha(#4) and Swapna(#10) which were from immortal inks. It just feels contrived.
Theory 2 : If all of it were real, then how did Swapna get 3 lives ? What explains those two extra tattoos which magically appear and disappear ? Then how does Swapna see Amudha and her mom’s faces in her dream ? What explains the logic of this universe ?
Theory 3 :If this was a controlled and simulated(via VR) therapy(Kinda like shutter island) by her psychiatrist then a) it is a cop-out which is too cheesy, b) there were not even hints to that and c) there are better ways to manipulate a mind rather than giving an inspirational story of a sister and having her fight for her life
Theory 4 : The most likely one. If it all were happening inside her head, then what was the point of opening the movie with Amudha’s death(it doesn’t fit into the narrative pattern) if not as a means of a introducing a red herring/misdirection. This theory explain some loopholes and ditches some. It explains the three lives, inflammation in her wrist, new year’s eve being the fateful night etc. But it doesn’t explain Kalamma(if she was a real person) seeing the killer, Anwar anna’s death etc.
And there are these obvious missteps. it doesn’t take a whole subplot to explain the disappearance of tattoos as losing lives in a game(She is a gamer. She knows), the lack of emotional connect during the thrilling third act(though it was cleverly written), the emptiness at the end when the long thrice teased deus ex machina finally occurs, the number of moments and soaring scores in the first half which stalled the movie after a really good opening, the ultra-sympathetic, sure-shot backstory of Amudha with that soaring score and other stuff. These films bank on thrills and chills not emotional connect. So, it doesn’t make sense to hide a subtext about themes of female empowerment(The main reason for Tapsee’s casting seems like the parallels with Pink. She didn’t convince me as Swapna) and patriarchy(Who asked for this story ? Especially in this form) within a story which thrives on smarts and thrills and not empathy. As for the David lynch connect, I haven’t watched any of his films except Mulholland Dr.(which I am not a fan of). Unlike music or paintings, to which we respond by manipulations, films and storytelling are supposed to make sense as they are about humans and their circumstances. The whole point of the existence of storytelling, right from the start of humanity, has been about educating or warning people about the different perils and circumstances that one person faced. Stories are meant to be interpreted with logic and emotions (Nobody asks how a particular instrument hits a particular note in a music piece or how a stroke can be made in such an aggressive manner in a painting. we just accept them and interpret them by asking why it was done that way). But stories are meant to have logic. Atleast in Mulholland Dr., we had an explanation for that cowboy and other plot holes(The protagonist is fascinated by the cinema world). But here, as Anupama Chopra noted, it is a lot of noise and fury signifying nothing. There a some movies inherently smart(like the ending of Inception or Shutter Island or even the resolution of Super Deluxe which question or bring to consciousness certain mysterious aspect of ourselves through narrative mystery) and then there are some movies which try to be smart just for the sake of being smart and twisty and cerebral. Game Over feels like it was written between the post-production and delay of Iravakaalam and seems like it belongs to the second category.
As for the connect Mulholland Dr., movies and stories are different from other types of art since the creator’s subjective vision or logic is not the final word on the meaning since it is the logic that stands in the end. If it were all subtext and metaphors and artistry, no one will be debating over Kaatru Veliyidai or Mulholland Dr. or even the meaning of life itself
PS : Forgive the allignement and possible typos. I am lazy to allign such a big written piece and i have a faulty keyboard
LikeLiked by 4 people
Akash Balakrishnan
June 14, 2019
And… the gaming aspect. Unlike movies whose stories and scenes are pre-determed in nature, games are an actively- created world. If the point of the structure was to mimic that of a video game with clues and stuff(the one dimensional-villain, insurmountable odds), then the film could have largely benefited from leaving out the entirety of a the first half which raises the – is this necessary question – and opting to make the whole movie an improv-escape drama(with those surreal touches) and making it more entertaining by leaving out clues within the house(butterfly effect of events that happened on the first try) which would payoff in clever, lip-smacking, innovative ways. And given that the second half was entirely about Swapna’s survival, it wrote itself into end, inevitably building upto a deus ex machina. The jump scare with the head was also not so scary since we knew that she would return in the third and last try. Should have been a lot better.
As for surreal cinema which still make sense, meaningfully and logically, The Shining would be a good example. Those scenes with people on the empty hotel, the atmospherics, all of those still make sense with Kubrick’s personal view(Which differed heavily from what Stephen King intended) that humans are inherently bad and reveal themselves when left in isolation. The hotel itself makes sense as a metaphor even if all those surrealistic touches are not explained within and outside the movie by the maker.
None of these is to say that this is a bad movie. It had good, innovative screenwriting and nice thrills in the second half. But it should have been a lot better instead of going full on video gam-ish structure leaving out the purpose of storytelling itself. But this is not a usual – everyone dies through gruesome violence – story and that is what makes this a pain to watch it in this form
LikeLiked by 1 person
Vignesh
June 14, 2019
Post interval duration is too short. There was no need for the intermission. Without that, the movie could have worked even better IMO.
LikeLike
Varsha
June 15, 2019
Akash: Just sharing my thought here. I did not see the film as genre-hopping. I saw it as a ghost story(your Theory 1, with female empowerment being a subtext). After reading the other theories, this theory also seems to me to be the most likely, what with Swapna’s tattoo paining at constant intervals eventually leading her to know the truth of it, saving her from her attempted suicides(the hanging attempt depicts this clearly, though not much the fall from a building) and bringing her out of her suicidal tendencies(through amudha’s mother) just in time for the killers’ strike, not to mention the three chances to escape and get back at the killers. As for the issue you raised with this theory, serial killers act in weird ways that have no logic for a sane mind to reason. Also, between Amudha and Swapna, they killed other girls and the police was obviously searching for them. So the time line of the killers did not seem so much of a bother for me.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Akash Balakrishnan
June 15, 2019
@Varsha
I didn’t see the film as genre-hopping. The female empowerment theory raises more questions than answers. Don’t u think ? Firstly, if it were an out and out drama about female empowerment and patriarchy, the snippets of girls/women walking in dimly lit subways during the credits make sense. But then, it confuses to all men are pigs stereotype, in hindsight. Also, if the serial killers didn’t need to be the same people. They could be random rapists and stuff. And what’s with giving the killers a personality ?(The unique way of killing, just noises, well planned murders, that menacing gesture before the car is about to blow up etc). Why tease a personality when it all ends with a Deus ex machina ? Its like the night king,TBH.
Also, the main problem I had was not the whole serial killer angle but the form in which these themes are presented. People watch Jaws or horror films for entertainment. The connect with the story in terms of those movies solely rest on what’s gonna happen next that’s gonna give me jolts. There is not a tinge of empathy(atleast in this movie. I didn’t feel any). So, how can people see someone so inhuman(triple lives, against insurmountable odds) as someone they can relate to.
And… If ghosts exist, then I don’t see the point of the ghost playing with time and space through a body whose head has already been removed. And if u take it as visions gifted by the ghost, then why not show that before Eve. I mean, she came to terms with the tattoo once her Amudha’s mon visited her. And if she wanted revenge, why risk this girl’s sanity and mortality ? How does that count as a sister helping another woman ??
Finally, the killers’ timeline makessense since Swapna is their 10th victim. But why did they wait till new year’s eve to kill her when they could have did it the day she visited immortal inks after noticing problems. The source is immortal inks. We can all agree on that. So, why bother to let Ramya’s character bring Amudha’s mom to visit Swapna.
It was a fine thriller(in the second half). But post-iraivi(atleast in Tamil cinema) a film which hides all these subtexts under a non-empathic thriller which hunts at female empowerment while nodding to the generic male villain is not new gen storytelling. It’s just smart storytelling which keeps the audience hooked for those 100 minutes. Nothing more than that.
The film largely struggles between the director’s identity as a storyteller(the smarts and twists), the themes and the video game angle. And that’s the reason this film with these themes don’t work in this particular form.
For the entertainment factor and all those stuff, this film is nice(okayish pre interval portions). But if it must be seen for all those subtexts and allegories, then IMO it fails in justifying the material. Had this film been made if Iravakaalam released on time, then I think this film could have been much better.
PS : Not a patriarch. I believe in equal rights and people dealing with their own shit. I just wanted to like this film more. All of these are purely my opinion and it is debatable. But my main point was about the essence of storytelling and structure. Not on these themes.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Akash Balakrishnan
June 15, 2019
Also, Swapna always lived in that house which had only three people including her. They had to wait for Amudha’s mom to go away in order to kill her. Or maybe they waited till Amudha:’s birthday to kill her. But for Swapna, new year didn’t mean anything happy. So, why would they wait till that if accessing her is so simple. Also, if these people are those who thrive on ruining people’s happiness and killing them in really bloody ways, then it doesn’t make sense to make them remain anonymous. Why were there pictures of dimly lit subways in credits(which was on screen after Amudha’s murder) if the killer’s were doing well planned murders on selective women. Why was that scene of Amudha’s mom’s documentary like interview footage from Immortal Inks played instead of it being in normal aspect ratio. If it was a ghost story, then why bother starting it with a serial killer vibe if not for just planned misdirection. Many questions which don’t stick with this theory. Narrative pattern is confusing(not in an impressive way).
LikeLiked by 2 people
Akash Balakrishnan
June 15, 2019
Also, @Varsha
Sorry for comments being all over the place. The more I think about it, the more it confuse me. Just constructive discussion.
Th tattoo thing could be explained as some sort of side effect of that anniversary syndrome. That trauma of her keeps coming back to her after that incident at the coffee shop. Due to hr syndrome, the parts of her brain which stores memories(that trauma) gets triggered and it hurts her wrist since she believes everything bad started to happen after getting that tattoo. It’s bind-body connection(that is not how anatomy works precisely. But I would buy that any day instead of a ghost in her bloodstream saving her from her suicidal tendencies by triggering inflammation). Let us just say her brain triggers memories from getting that tattoo. The timeline isn’t clear so lets just assume she got the tattoo at noon on 31 December and went to the new year party at night when trauma hit her. The inflammation and prickly sensation being a side effect of revisiting those old memories(the prickly sensation from the pricking of tattoo needles. This leaves more plot holes. So what’s with Swapna seeing Amudha and her mom in dream(She saw that at Immortal inks, maybe. Given that both of them were there that day).
If I remember correctly, at that point we don’t know what Swapna’s trauma is. We are left to think that she might be somehow connected to Amudha or her death. Its what people call red herring. First act solely rests on the mystery(to the audience) surrounding Swapna. The point was to let us connect things with her. We get Swapna trying to commit suicide several times without any plot development. Then the subplot about Amudha out of nowhere(A sure shot sympathetic story within the universe of this story). And Swapna gets inspired by her story(?). And just when things are alright with Swapna, another trauma(Amudha’s revenge ? or serial killers’ plan or just plot contrivance ?). And at the end of that, Swapna decides to live ?? How does it explain her getting three lives ?(A cool idea, perhaps). What explains every question and still sound logical ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
doctorhari
June 15, 2019
Spoilers *
I wondered how this movie would have worked if rather than the psycho-killer, the director had gone for obsessed stalkers who are rejected by the girls. (In the case of Taapsee, it could’ve been the guy in the jail who escaped.) Wouldn’t the subtext of patriarchy/misogyny have come out even better?
This was otherwise an absorbing, innovatively conceived, edge-of-seat thriller. There was finesse in the making and in the writing. Only that the triple psycho-killer (really?) and all that, which may have been good ideas for a trashy, B-grade slasher movie, dampened the impact for me making it a see-and-forget thing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Varsha
June 16, 2019
I didn’t imply that you saw it as genre-hopping, if that’s what you mean. Since BR mentioned it in his review, and since you were responding to it theory-wise, I felt it was appropriate to begin my comment with how I saw the film. The way I saw it was mostly as a ghost/supernatural film with female empowerment and video game angles being vague subtexts. I mean, even without those angles, I could make peace with it as just a ghost story like this director’s earlier film Maya. I don’t see it as an out and out female empowerment drama, but I don’t see why it should reduce to an “all men are pigs” stereotype. We hear of violence against women all the time in real life, and this story is a reflection on that. In fact, giving the killers a personality is, in my view, and as BR has stated in his review, does exactly that. It establishes how the killers see women, how they treat them.
There is a general rule about ghosts in most ghost stories which, I think we have come to accept, given the fact that most of us don’t have real-life ghost experiences as a benchmark. Ghosts, though supernatural, are not full-fledged super personalities. Their powers are limited in most cases to a particular environment alone. Also, they have desperate and specific needs which, combined with their limitation, leads to a high disregard for living people’s sufferings. For instance, Yaavarum nalam had the ghosts confined to the flat, especially the TV in the flat, since they had an attachment to it in life. Eeram had a watery environment, and Maya had the mayavanam forest and the film taken in the forest as the environment. In yaavarum nalam, the intention of the ghosts was, by the self-confession of one of them in the climax, to bring the doctor to the house where they died, and to kill him there. If the environment limitation is disregarded then one could envision the killing in quicker ways than what is shown in the film. But the ghosts had to wait 30 years to have their revenge. Also, Manohar(Madhavan) suffers a lot in the process, yet he empathises with the ghosts and saves their only living relative from the asylum.
I saw Game Over as a ghost story in this manner. Here the environment is the tattoo on Swapna’s wrist and through it, a limited control over her body and mind. Here, unlike in the films I have cited above, the environment is so small that the powers of the ghost are also highly limited. The tattoo paining and the visions of Amudha and her mom are the only signals the ghostly tattoo can give Swapna to prompt her to know more about Amudha. The ghost’s primary motive, as always, is revenge, so there is indeed a disregard for Swapna’s suffering. In fact, Amudha’s mom helps Swapna more than the ghost ever does. Maybe the ghost expected the meeting to happen and maybe even triggered it through the mom’s memorial tattoo, but even then, it’s mostly for selfish interests. The visions at the climax during New Year’s eve also are triggered through the tattoos(three of them appearing on her hand, instead of one). The timing of those visions had to coincide with the killers’ actual arrival because, psychologically, the visions prepare Swapna for the real danger which is imminent. If there is a long time gap between the visions and the killers’ arrival, the psychological element will not be so strong. Also, remember, the motive of the ghost is revenge on the killers. If the visions came much earlier, what if Swapna decides to avoid the killers totally by moving away from that house sooner? The ghost has to pit Swapna against the killers, and at the same time, give her an edge over them so as to ensure that she kills them and not the other way round. From Swapna’s point of view, while her first trauma defeated her completely(even though the perpetrator was behind bars), she manages to overcome her second trauma by herself with some help from the ghost. That should have given her the confidence to face life anew, I guess.
I think your reading of the tattoo thing as a side effect of the anniversary syndrome has one tiny problem. Initially, Swapna finds the tattoo pain only puzzling. She believes everything bad started to happen after getting that tattoo only after learning that it’s an unintentional memorial tattoo. So, I don’t know if it can be called a side effect of the anniversary syndrome.
As for the killers’ actions, as I have said before, all I can think of is that, since serial killers have no logic, a storyteller can take liberty in setting up their actions as he/she sees fit. Some of the other questions you have raised, like why start the story with a serial killer vibe, though interesting, delve into the director’s psyche, so I don’t know how suitable it would be for anyone other than him to answer. All I can say is I could make peace with it. Of course, that does not mean you should too! To each their own, I guess, would be an appropriate conclusion.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Akash Balakrishnan
June 16, 2019
I get ur angle completely. But when u start a movie which opens with a shilling yet un-sympathetic violence against a women, our minds naturally tend to register that as more to come. We build subconscious tolerances knowing that this story is about killings. It applies for any kind of victim. Once u open a film that way, the only way u can movie forward is to go behind the killers(investigation or slow revelation of events through that anniversary response etc). That’s my main problem with the movie. If it were an out an out ghost story, I didn’t feel a tinge of sympathy for Amudha(the subplot with all those sad music which was way out of the main story made me roll my eyes) and that’s the reason it doesn’t work. Also, if the ghost was confined to her body, how does it acknowledge Anwar’s death, the possibility of the killers arriving that exact day etc(so that’s an all knowing ghost ?). If so, then why not reveal all the killers in the first vision/try ? I mean, there is a better chance for revenge and Swapna’s survival. Isn’t so ?? Coz the director wanted a thriller drama there.
Also, she doubts the tattoo of being a bad omen just after knowing it’s origins. But, even before that, the seed is planted in her mind when her mom says it is all coz of that tattoo. She is in a state of dilemma after her trauma. She doesn’t know what she did right or wrong and what led upto the events of that night. So, naturally there is a chance for her mind to acknowledge the tattoo as one of the reasons for her trauma(the article in internet reads rape fantasy of a tattooed girl). The biggest problem with Tapsee’s performance, as BR noted, was that she doesn’t display the vulnerability of a person suffering from PTSD. Maybe language problems. Why was the plot point if anniversary syndrome introduced only if power cuts are gonna scare her ? I didn’t see any effect on her syndrome in her struggle for survival. The all men are pigs stereotype is not something u get while u watch the film. But when u come home and read the subtext of female empowerment (which was intended. Those credits sequence etc) then the idea of masking a male killer without revealing any motivations kinda adheres to that though not in a largely politically incorrect way. But subconsciously.
If the killers were going after tattooed women(moral policing ?), why show some random places suitable for crime, in the credits ? Why didn’t they kill Swapna earlier ? Just because it is a ghost film, doesn’t mean that the killer’s can come and go whenever they want. The angle between Kalamma and Swapna was written well with a few good touches but not performed well, IMO. A person suffering from rejection and trauma clinges on the only source of love they get. For Swapna, it is Kalamma. Now that’s a really good material for a story about female empowerment. Isn’t it ?
LikeLike
Varsha
June 16, 2019
I can very well understand your problem with the narrative style of this movie. It’s a fact that this movie does suffer from narrative issues. All I am saying is, how much it affects a person’s viewership depends on that person alone and it varies from one to another. It is very much subjective.
Regarding the ghost in the tattoo, yes, as a general rule, ghosts are all-knowing, at least pertaining to the places and people they haunt. In Yaavarum Nalam, for instance, the TV serial shows things happening in Manohar’s family well before they happen. Here, too, when we talk about visions, it is not something of the ghost’s own creation. What it is showing Swapna is not simply two visions in the general sense of the term, but two possible futures. The first vision is how things would turn out if Swapna were to face the killers for the first time. The second vision is what Swapna, with the memory of the first future, would do. How many killers get revealed to Swapna, revealing the killers’ identity, Anwar’s death or even whether Swapna will be successful in the third and last real life attempt are not under the ghost’s control. Swapna herself and the killers too play a part in how these things turn out. The director, of course, uses these to set up a thriller, as any storyteller would do.
Like you, I too didn’t feel much empathy, though, as you say, and as BR has mentioned in his review, the Swapna-Kalamma portions are well done and were touching. I agree with you on Tapsee’s performance and the anniversary syndrome(like the serial killer vibe at the start). If Swapna acknowledged the tattoo as one of the reasons for her trauma before knowing it’s true nature, it doesn’t get depicted very clearly. She vehemently blames the tattoo only after the fact.
I may sound like a broken record here, but I have to reiterate that serial killers are like that. That is their definition. They don’t have logical motives like moral policing. For them it could be just something like “Tattooed girls turn us on”! That is why serial killers are hard to catch even in real life. The lack of any reasonable motive is the key. And it’s not just because it’s a ghost film. It is because it is a film involving serial killers. Thinking back, maybe that is why I personally didn’t feel the serial killer vibe at the start and then the change of tone to be so much at odds. There is not much to investigate about serial killers in the format of a whodunnit, except their identity, which is irrelevant to this story, which is about Swapna.
LikeLiked by 4 people
The16thShard
June 17, 2019
This is how I would explain the extra tattoos (lives) that magically appear and disappear?
The movie’s final arc is similar to movies such as Edge of Tomorrow and Source Code, with Swapna being granted three lives just like Pac-Man. Till this point in the movie’s final arc, the supernatural element is only hinted at by Ramya’s foreboding explanation of ‘memorial tattoos’ and the prickling of Swapna’s tattoo (a heart encircling a joystick) whenever she is in one of her more suicidal moods. It suddenly takes a more central role on that fateful night when the mysterious serial killer(s) come to murder Swapna. In a seemingly inexplicable turn of events, her tattoos multiply into three, implying the three lives/hearts she has remaining. It was when I was trying to puzzle this out that I realized the connection between Swapna and Amudha runs more than bone-deep.
If you remember, Amudha also has three tattoos (hearts). She is a cancer survivor who managed to beat the disease three times, and it was after each of these instances that she paid a visit to the tattoo center (rather chilling called Immortal Inks) to get a new tattoo done, representing a new life earned. Now when Amudha’s ashes are inadvertently transferred to Swapna, it was not just her fighting spirit and other qualities hinted by her mother that got infused into Swapna, but also the three lives she had earned. These are specific details to simply brush away as coincidences. You could argue as to why it didn’t take effect earlier (i.e. the tattoos didn’t multiply), but my hunch is that it may have been dormant so long and was triggered only after the visit from Amudha’s mother. When you connect the concept of the three lives gifted by Amudhu to Swapna to battle her demons, with an earlier scene when a stricken Swapna bemoans her inability to change her past since she has only one chance, it’s almost poetic.
Full Post:
LikeLike
Akash Balakrishnan
June 17, 2019
Have to disagree on the point about serial killers and also about those three version of the future being acceptable as cinematic/storytelling liberty. But as u said, SUBJECTIVITY.
Serial killers are hard to find since they are not related to the victim in any personal way. It s hard to shortlist suspects without confirming personal motives. But the killing style confirms overall motives.
Regarding that three tattoos thing, it is explicitly shown in the movie. So it is not something that registers in hindsight. For that to work,at least for me, it must be Amudha’s story or Swapna’s story completely. But, no. In a story devoid of sympathy and empathy, those poetic touches(New year’s eve, Amudha’s help) all seem like plot contrivances rather than being organic to the story. Also, as far as I understand filmmaking, the first scene/shot of a movie is supposed to set the mood of that film. So, not sure how that doesn’t count. That’s the reason a film like D-16 works heavily in spite of the narrative pattern/contrivance(the first scene is something completely unrelated to the real crime. It is not told from anyone’s flawed perspective. Just to give a completely different picture so that we don’t identify the real killer). And in a story which works basically on the amount of thrills it gives, it is hard to give an F about internal changes. Especially one which is not plotted with great detail. The structure, as I noted earlier, is an issue. It is there to serve the director’s interests/strengths and to keep us guessing and entertained. And in doing so, it collapses/confuses the material underneath it. have been waiting for Iravakaalam right from the release of that teaser/trailer. Guess that will be a satisfying movie
LikeLike
Varsha
June 17, 2019
Akash:Yes, true. That serial killers are not related to the victim falls under the broad category of lack of logical motives. You can be unrelated to the victim, yet still have a sane motive. But they do have a modus operandi, which is what this film also shows, both at the beginning and end. About the other points, well, you have stated your views, and I have, mine. We can agree to disagree, I suppose? 🙂Interesting discussion, though. Hope the feeling is mutual.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Akash Balakrishnan
June 17, 2019
The feeling is mutual, of course 🙂
LikeLike
Sutheesh Kumar
June 18, 2019
Really liked Game Over, didn’t mind the genre shifts as it was done seamlessly. What surprised me was the gore, those gruesome scenes were well executed and aesthetically done. The third act was quite a ripper.
LikeLiked by 2 people
naveendreamer
June 18, 2019
Hi BR,
Can you please tell me as to who decides the genre of the film when they list the movies on websites like bookmyshow?Is it the filmmaker or the website (bookmyshow)?
The genre for ‘Game Over’ is published as Drama and Thriller on bookmyshow.
I watched the movie and felt cheated. It is definitely not a thriller.I would slot it as a Horror or Fantasy and had I known this before, I wouldn’t have cared to watch this as those genres are not my thing.
LikeLike
Paras
June 18, 2019
Watched Game Over few days back and honestly I am little confused 🙂 Not the storyline but the theme/purpose of the movie. Agree much with Akash. The movie doesn’t stay true to the purported intentions i.e this is simply genre hopping to make it seem a clever movie. As asked by naveendreamer above, who decides which genre a movie falls? Again, it is not that some websites like BMS, Imdb etc. should be right always about slotting the movies into the right genre, but the Director of the movie must stay true to his art form. When BR stated in review that we can look at this movie from various ‘angles’ I thought he meant it from story angle and not the genre angle altogether. Super Deluxe also did this sudden genre change in the last 15 minutes but then we were being fed subtly about the alien aspects at regular intervals and that was the TK’s masterstroke.
Apart from genre hopping, second aspect which did not work for ME was the fact that the Director has treated the ‘indian emotions’ in the movie in a very non-indian way and that kind of feels jarring and leads to a so-called emotional disconnect. For example, why would an Indian girl, even after getting raped and who is still undergoing PTSD, choose to consciously live alone without her parents and that too in a 3 storeyed individual bungalow, without room-mates but only a domestic help? Ok..so we may say Tapsee is a modern girl with no such inhibitions and bindaas attitude. Then why did she just run away from the fast food restaurant and not confront where 2 guys were making a pass at her and also discussing her rape video so blatantly. Again..How come she is ok to have Kalamma, a domestic help, with her all the time but doesn’t want her parents, atleast her mom if at all, to stay with her?
Again..I am not stereotyping here..all I am saying is I felt Tapsee’s character arc is not defined clearly. There are more such instances which did not work for ME due to character and genre inconsistencies, but stating them all here would make this already lengthy post..boring 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Vikram
June 18, 2019
It’s an engaging film no doubt, but the ‘original’ tag is a bit unseemly. You should check out the 2017 American film Happy Death Day. The repeating events, the masked killer and even the car blast scene are direct influences.
LikeLike
sherevelations
June 19, 2019
akash: i was reading through the thread and I have a theory
The ghost was helping swapna overcome her fears by instigating a dream that might help her. So she instigates a dream that is familiar to her, which is being killed by the killers. Thus they might have showed how the ghost was killed in the beginning. So the ghost instigates what is familiar to her, the incident of her death.We also know that swapna is afraid of dark. For her last life, we see swapna not turning on her lights, even though she was very scared. This act of not turning on the lights,helped her to kill the killers. We know in the first half about anniversary effect and we know that, with closer to date, a person will react unconsciously. Maybe swapna was already unconsciously afraid since we see the fireworks coming on the final life(showing that it is new year where her traumatic experience took place), and the ghost took her fears and converted it to her killers. If you noticed each of the lives lost, the adversity increases, maybe also prompting that new year is getting closer(from what we know of anniversary reaction). So when when she kills all the killers, we see the fireworks coming so we know that swapna managed to live and even overcome her fear through the new year. Another interesting detail is the name of the main character. Swapna means dream. and like someone mentioned, the 3 lives is similar to how the ghost fought all 3 times. Like i said earlier, a ghost can only instigate a dream that it is familiar with, so 3 tattoos can be similar to the ghost’s 3 tattoos symbolising her fight against cancer, the killers are what the ghost remembers about her death. Using the past as a tool, the ghost weeves a dream for swapna’s already frightened mind, to make her get through the new year getting rid of her accumulating fear.
LikeLike
sherevelations
June 19, 2019
Paras: 1) swapna decides to live without her parents because she was being victim blamed. There was a scene where you hear the conversation with the parents, in which they suggest the uneventful incident happened only because swapna decided to go for a party. This stung like a bee even for me as a viewer. Any girl would want to run away from a toxic environment where the parents are not helpful but just making it worse for you.
2) Tapsee might have a bindaas attitude but swapna clearly doesnt. We see swapna wearing full sleeved clothes and being afraid of the dark so intensely. We see the same swapna wearing sleevless in her flashback. This suggest swapna is too afraid to even think about her past. Why would a girl, so ridden with fear want to confront 2 men who is making fun about her rape.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Paras
June 19, 2019
sherevelations :
1) If I remember it correctly, it was her father who indulged in victim blaming. And not her mother. Assuming it was her mother too, still weighing the pros and cons would not it be better for Taapsee to stay with her mother who, by virtue of being a mother, can help her to overcome PTSD sooner. If not parents then why not close friends or as a last resort why not stay with 1-2 other roommates. This would have been nitpicking otherwise but the fact that she’s staying only with a housemaid, and NOT with a group of people, and also in such a big 3 storeyed bungalow with invisible neighbors, is so critical to the entire story.
My bad…when I mentioned Taapsee I didn’t mean as real Taapsee but only Swapna. I reconciled that Swapna is currently a person who has bindaas and progressive attitude because even after the trauma she has chosen not to get overly dependent on her parents or friends and staying in outskirts in a huge bungalow with only a housemaid, and also the fact that she would rather depend only on a psychiatrist’s help and not her close friends or relatives to overcome PTSD and few more instances. But when the Coffee shop incidence happens she meekly leaves the place. So, all I am saying here is that her character traits are inconsistent and because the genre of the movie also is confusing…all this has left me slightly disappointed.
LikeLike
Akash Balakrishnan
June 19, 2019
@sherevelation
Coming back to this thread right after Ask BR(Didn’t watch it fully). Guess u might get answers there
LikeLike
sherevelations
June 19, 2019
@paras
her mother did indulge in victim blaming. It takes time for people to forgive. At that situation no one weighs pros and cons. I mean anyone rather be alone than with parents who remind them constantly about the past. The mother even wanted to speak to swapna only about rape fantasy porn that was circulating. Maybe swapna just need to be alone to process what’s going on and not have people constantly reminding her of her trauma or parents who are constantly worried to let swapna live her life. Maybe since she is a game developer she probably already bought the house long before the incident, since you earn quite alot from game developing. And I don’t think having many people in the house is a critical part of the story but the director does try to give us something to hold on since the house has a camera to view who is coming towards the door, a security guard, and a helper. And you cannot categorize people as uni dimensional. You can be independent and scared at the same time. Maybe swapna is an independent person, maybe swapna reacts to her closed ones in anger but that doesn’t mean swapna has to be strong everytime. I think by showing her as independent yet afraid to confront the two men, she has more layers to her character rather than being uni dimensional, which sadly many movies portray their protagonists as. Humans have their strengths and weaknesses.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Paras
June 20, 2019
I guess there is a thin line between making a character multi dimensional and making a character believable/relate-able. It’s like saying a person has fear and immense phobia of heights but also loves and does a lot of bungee jumping. In such cases, connecting with the character becomes difficult. I don’t know but somehow in quite a few scenes, I found Swapna inconsistent and probably so Iwasn’t able to sympathise with her in her agony or celebrate her eventual victory.
LikeLike
Paras
June 20, 2019
Watched the AskBR video and one of questions was similar to what I had raised. It was about why would a PTSD victim choose to stay all alone in a big 3 storeyed bungalow all alone. Director simply said it was due to logistical reasons from the perspective of shooting the movie with a large crew and lighting issues.
That’s exactly where I am slightly grumpy…logistical issues (related to camera,crew,lighting, etc. ) can be the basis of the a story which relies so heavily on the location of the character.
Then just think of the pains that Christopher Nolan and his DOP have taken to mount mighty IMAX cameras onto boats, fighter planes, etc. in Dunkirk.
LikeLike
Paras
June 20, 2019
EDIT: Logistical issues (related to movie shooting location) can’t be the very basis of a story which relies so heavily on the location of the character.
LikeLike
englishsfs
June 25, 2019
Similar to Happy Death Day.
LikeLiked by 1 person
crustacean
July 7, 2019
There is this banana loop kick in football…
Where the ball kind of swerves into the net at the last minute, inducing a certain kind of awe.
Slickly executed, Game Over induces precisely that kind of awe.
In any case this game has raised the bar for Tamil Cinema.
The story line does smell kind of inspired, and the making only confirms that stance.
But what a making it is….
Hardly any wasted movement, the camera moves only when motivated, and when it does it is nothing short of glorious. The dialogue too, just enough to fill in some gaps, and even there terse, and to the point.
Having not encountered Vinodhini for some time, one tends to applaud, she walks a fine line, at times finer than the one under her care. Tapsee garners our attention, but not our sympathy, but then that seems by design. So do the others who pop in at regular intervals, this is a movie made not with the heart but with the mind.
And yet that tale of the cancer girl does move you, in precisely that moment when you least expect to be moved. Overall the movie feels like one of those exquisitely engineered Japanese equipment, one that you love to have and handle, but hardly miss once it is gone.
What really happened?
In her mind, and in reality?
There are pointers and they point in more directions than a weather vane has, one needs to watch it again, and closely.
First is the one that meets you after half time, which says Game Begins…
Another is that the maximum score never changes, makes you wonder if the game was played only once…once the first visit was done.
Another pointer is the nature of the assailants, they are regular manga material.
If this happened in Chennai, then my name is Obama.
Then that eerie sounding swing, with people or without, it swings the same.
The VR psychiatry part, one that can be relived easily
Finally there is the message, the turning point of the movie…
She is looking for clues to her ailment, and immortal just gets there, by association.
So does the mother who drifts into view, while she is having her tattoo.
It all points to one thing, it all happened in her mind.
But then did it?
Given that the movie asks for a repeat viewing, would you watch it again?
The answer is no, this is not a movie that moves you.
It is in that sense that the game is over, once the movie is over.
LikeLike
Devarsi Ghosh
September 16, 2019
I wonder how this film was constructed. On the face of it, like Saravanan’s first film Maya, Game Over feels like a combination of two stories: 1. One wronged woman’s supernatural connection to another wronged woman and 2. The house invasion film. The first story gets its well-rounded resolution at the interval point itself, so whatever happens after that is a second story.
So as Saravanan did with Maya (combining the Nayanthara’s struggling actress portion with the horror movie portion), he probably punched two stories here. But there’s another way to approach the story, which is what I think happened. In his interview to me, he said the initial idea was to make a home invasion thriller. (https://scroll.in/reel/923641/taapsee-pannu-film-game-over-is-more-than-a-typical-home-invasion-thriller)
So imagining this is how the story was written: What if a woman is caught in a house with a killer inside? But what if the woman is bound in a wheelchair? So she will be easily killed, but what if she had three lives? Three lives –, so what if this was a dream, and what if the woman is a video game designer which ties in to this theme? But why do we care for this character? What if we compound the problem: make her scared of the dark? But why? Okay, let’s add a backstory. She was molested in the dark, plus if she was photographed at the same time, that explains why she is confined to the house and is afraid to be recognised publicly. But putting her in a wheelchair from the start can appear gimmicky. There should be a plausible reason for her to become handicapped. So we build the character up for the film’s first half. But where are the killers coming from? They needed to be grounded in reality too, and cannot be just part of the woman’s dream. So let’s give them a pre-opening credit backstory. They kill a woman and have a modus operandi. Now what if our protagonist not only has to avenge herself but also avenge this first dead woman? Now in Maya, Saravanan connected two stories via a biological connection shared between protagonist and the spirit haunting. Ditto happens in Game Over, via tattoos. So end result: Protagonist has to battle her demons while avenging one of her fallen sisters, so as to avoid the latter’s fate.
Was the film satisfactory? No. It would have been had the second half not been a dream; if the protagonist actually battled the killers, it would have more dramatic weight. But nonetheless, a superb entry in the Indian horror/thriller genre which is anyway very slim quality-wise. Looking forward to more of Saravanan.
LikeLike