Read the full article on Film Companion, here: https://www.filmcompanion.in/nerkonda-paarvai-starring-ajith-kumar-may-be-the-most-important-movie-of-the-year-pink-baradwaj-rangan/
Kollywood’s ‘Pink’ remake has the potential to change the heroine on screen as well as the hero off it.
On the surface, the trailer of Nerkonda Paarvai, the Pink remake directed by H Vinoth and starring Ajith Kumar, points to yet another movie a big star/hero would make. An early scene sets us up for a “hero introduction” shot. It’s night. The Ajith character is sitting on a park bench, and he’s not facing the camera, which is at a distance. There’s a wind about, blowing up dead leaves, like how we might expect in an action scene. But instead of giving us a series of “teaser shots” like this and slowly revealing Ajith’s face, the next time we see him, he’s facing us, in court, fully lit. He’s looking at Shraddha Srinath and asking: Are you a virgin? He repeats the line in Tamil: Neenga kanni-thanmai oda irukkeengala.
Continued at the link above.
Copyright ©2019 Film Companion.
Baradwaj Rangan 
shaviswa
June 19, 2019
The trailer makes me feel they have masala-fied the story for Ajith fans
I hope I am proven wrong here.
LikeLike
abishekspeare
June 19, 2019
Is anyone else raving about the fact that BR looks SOOO good with his beard (I AM LITERALLY BR-eD)? For the uninitiated,please go visit his insta page. It’s…Wasim Akram-am
LikeLiked by 1 person
e221
June 19, 2019
What Surprising to me is you have mentioned the word director or Vinod names in this long article. You dont think the director did not have any role in this and all credit goes to Ajith himself?
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 19, 2019
He has a fight scene? Really?!
LikeLike
brangan
June 20, 2019
abishekspeare: It’s…Wasim Akram-am
Hehe.
e221: I can only talk about H Vinoth’s contribution after the film, no? With Ajith and Vijay, THEY pick the films. THEY pick the directors. So as of now — i.e. before the film — we can only look at the film from the POV in this piece.
For now, I am just mulling over the potential impact of one of the top stars taking up a non-massy subject like this.
And no, it doesn’t bother me that there is a fight sequence. Maybe they have changed the Amitabh character to someone like Sunny Deol in DAMINI. Who knows? Let’s see the film and THEN judge, no? 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
meera
June 20, 2019
That they decided to make this film in tamil itself is a big deal considering we are still stuck in the kuthu vilaku kudumba ponnu nostalgia…
Ajith is always coasting along the lines of a mass hero… he knows he has the appeal and wants to do something meaningful with it since he can’t pull a kamal range acting… at least choosing a role and a film that shows empowerment is in itself credit worthy.
Actually when I saw PINK I was 100% sure that very mom should take her son to see this movie (Ofcourse at an appropriate age). Men/boys should understand the consequences of their actions even the role of the boy who doesn’t “actually” do anything but is the friend character. He is the most dangerous breed. If you want to teach a boy that biology is not the only man thing about him then PINK is learning material. Ofcourse i would sit and watch this with my daughter … sometimes the right path is the hardest to take but…
LikeLiked by 2 people
pjarugula
June 20, 2019
If you think about the fact that Ajith did Varalaru, it makes him being in the Pink remake now quite ironic. I guess it will be like he is redeeming himself.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Isai
June 20, 2019
I don’t agree with the core premise of this article about Kollywood insisting that ‘heroine should be virgin’. For example, I wouldn’t be surprised if Meera Jasmine/Keerthy Suresh’s characters have had flings before meeting Vishal in Sandakozhi movies. But, we don’t get to know about it because it is irrelevant to the movie’s story. In the same way that we don’t know if the Hero has had flings in the past. Of course, heroes have portrayed the role of womanisers but that would be the core plot of the movie (Theerada Vilayaatu Pillai etc.). The problem is, our mainstream movies are written with a single character’s (Hero’s) POV and other characters SOLELY exist as checkpoints in the travel of the hero. That is why we don’t ever see the Hero’s parents/friends having a life outside the hero. Same is the case with heroines. We are only taking baby steps in proving that heroine based movies also have a good market. Once that is firmly established, we can look forward to seeing such movies done by heroines like Nayanthara. So, until we reach a stage where we regularly get female oriented/led movies, we cannot unbiasedly say that Kollywood forbids free sexuality for its heroines.
A mass hero cannot tell a non-heroine that he liked having sex with her but is not interested in a serious relationship since he doesn’t feel a deep connection with her. So, there is no double standards for the hero/heroine. I don’t understand why a heroine having flings/being in a live-in relationship is portrayed as a sign of women empowerment. I believe that a woman should have complete control over all aspects of her life, including her sexuality. But, I don’t know of any clinical study which shows that having more flings/relationships is good for a person. At least in my personal experience, I feel that each terminated relationship progressively reduces one’s self worth, if only slightly. That is why people want their ex-es to pine for them.
I do realise that such relationships are happening and why a film critic like BR may rue the fact that this is not getting portrayed on our screens. But otherwise, I feel that this projection of flings as a sign of women empowerment is mainly done by average looking men who feel that they would have a much better shot with a hot woman if she can more easily dismiss/forget it later.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rahini David
June 20, 2019
So what is the opinion of the above-average looking men who are reading this thread?
And the average looking men and below-average looking men, while we are at it.
🙂 😛
LikeLiked by 1 person
bart
June 20, 2019
The stars and their galactic shifts with age..
Aside: That opening line left me thinking.. How do you say Virgin in tamil for a man? Even GV Prakash movie’s popular dialogue said, “Virgin pasanga saabam”.. How will it sound if he said, “Kanni pasanga saabam..”. These are sunny days..
LikeLike
Honest Raj
June 20, 2019
Maybe they have changed the Amitabh character to someone like Sunny Deol in DAMINI. Who knows?
I think you’re being spot on! Plus, Boney Kapoor has earlier said that Vidya Balan’s role in the film is more than just a “special appearance”.
But if I were Ajith, I would’ve insisted the makers to remake Neethi Devan Mayakkam. My role, of course, would be nothing beyond “guest starring” as the patriotic military officer (Kamal did the role in the original). As for other prominent characters, I’d have Lakshmy Ramakrishnan play the Sowcar Janaki role and Rangaraj Pandey play Major Sundarrajan’s role.
LikeLike
Srinivas R
June 20, 2019
Hi Isai – The thing is tamil movies have a long history of movies where the woman’s virginity is of prime importance to the plot. Think Dharmatin thalaivan, Aval varuvala, even the genteel Rythm. In all these movies, the heroine is estranged/ suffers the loss of a lover and meets someone later who she falls in love with. The screenplay ensures that the heroine is virgin and the audience is very clear about her virginity. Rahini, a regular commentor on this blog, can give a thesis on this topic (as she has already done a long time back)
This is also broadly reflective of the society of viewing a woman’s virginity as a marker of community honor. The recent crimes in Pollachi went unattended for a long time, simply because girls and families were worried about their “honor” or “purity” more than bringing the culprit to justice. There were some really cheap memes in social media making a comment on the victims. That really is the truth of our society.
Tamil cinema has also had a lot of movies about bigamy, but the man is never portrayed as having committed a crime ( except marupadiyum). Or take Vaali as an example, a man lusting after his brother’s wife was a successful movie, with a role reversal in Uyir, the movie ouraged the moral police of the society.
Having a fling, multiple relationships etc. is a personal issue and it affects everyone in different ways. The point that Pink tried to make and hopefully the tamil version makes successfully, is that even if a woman has had a history of relationships, even if she is not a virgin, her consent is necessary. A crime against her cannot be justified on the basis of her virginity.
Tamil movies and tamil society in general doesn’t believe that. If a woman falls victim to a sexual crime, her past relationships will be dug to find an excuse to blame her. Even after the horrible murder of Swati in a railway station, the good people of tamilnadu and it’s media were portraying it or imagining it as a case of jilted love.
Live-in relationships, flings may not be a sign of progress, empowerment etc. but they are not a crime that should make everyone raise their arms in outrage. They should not be used as a stick to beat someone when things go wrong in their life. That’s what happens in tamil movies and tamil society as well. What makes it worse is that it’s one sided, as you said, a hero can be seen as a womaniser and he will be excused for his sins. It is not even conceivable to portray a promiscuous women positively in tamil cinema.
BR, i think film makers are right to be sceptical about depiction of strong women in tamil cinema. Tamil society is deeply patriarchal and won’t take very kindly to woman character with a mind of her own. Jyothika is starring in a series of movies that is tamil society approved brand of feminism. Kudumba Kuthuvilaku + moral science lessons + public service advisory. That is the maximum that tamil cinema can aspire for.
LikeLiked by 7 people
rsylviana
June 20, 2019
I don’t agree with the core premise of this article about Kollywood insisting that ‘heroine should be virgin’
@Isai – Erm, you’re joking right? Wasn’t the central plot of “Trisha illana Nayantara” about the hero’s epic journey to find a virgin girl for him? Also the reason why many 80’s movies had the heroine’s first husband dying before the first night was to establish the fact that the hero aint gonna fall for some random run-of-the-mill non-virgin girl but to the still-virgin heroine yall! Director Vasanth (of Rhythm movie) even mentioned that the audience were not mature enough to accept the hero getting together with a non-virgin girl that Ramesh Arvind had to suffer the same fate well before his character got physical with Meena’s character.
Some films tend to judge a woman for having a past even if the film has established that her relationship hadn’t been consummated. Take Raja Rani for instance – when Santhanam is about to tell Nayantara about Arya’s first love he actually asks her “how can you get angry on your husband who decided to marry you even after knowing that you had a previous relationship?”.Forget the fact that this would be incorrect even after disregarding the progressiveness of the statement since Arya was still not over Nazriya when he agreed to get married and so he wouldn’t have bothered to get all the details of his fiance before his vows, but if Arya is such a righteous man for agreeing to marry Nayantara after Jai , hasn’t Nayantara proved her righteousness by agreeing to get married to Arya after Nazriya? Where is her freaking medal of honour ?
I don’t understand why a heroine having flings/being in a live-in relationship is portrayed as a sign of women empowerment
Precisely for the fact that our movies and society continue to judge a woman for having had sex and a female still going ahead with it means that she doesn’t give a damn about other’s judgement? It means that SHE gets to decide what to do with herself and not others? Make no mistake , the people making a hue and cry about a woman’s sex drive are not doing it because they are concerned for her self-esteem or of her chances of contracting an STD but they do so because it flies in the face of how they believe a woman should live her life.
Very few of our mainstream films are okay with the heroine(or any female for that matter) being sexually active. Others either make a joke/sermon out of it or just go out of their way to prove that she is still a virgin.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Isai
June 20, 2019
Hi Srini,
I saw Pink in 2016 and still remember the dialogue ‘No means NO’. I hope they convey this accurately in this movie as well.
I broadly agree with your comments about the patriarchy in Tamil society. Where I beg to differ is that at least for the past 20 years, Tamil Cinema has alienated its heroines from the society. They are usually Non-tamil and their dressing and behavior is not seen as reflective of the Tamil society. Instead, they were portrayed in the way that was most receptive to the new target audience (15-25 yrs old Male)”. That is why the seductive dance, which was once reserved for the vamp, got ‘mainstreamed’ and the heroines became ‘loosufied’. When the heroines can dress up in bikinis, drink & party and dance seductively on screen (even though a majority of Tamil society won’t like its women doing this in real life), you can’t blame the non-portrayal of losing one’s cherry alone on the conservativeness of the society. That is why my point about the emergence of market for female led movies, still seems to make more sense to me.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 20, 2019
BR, point taken. I just wish that they didn’t make the film more of a ‘male saviour’ than Pink did. But yes, the fact that such a film is getting made in Tamil is important.
I don’t think a woman having flings or a live-in relationship is female empowerment. However, I do think that the world judges women more than a man for even having a past relationship. Whether a man or woman has relationships prior a socially-approved marriage is a choice. And the right to make that choice is definitely empowerment.
As rsylvania points out, the outrage against a woman having sex is not about concern for her self-worth. It’s about a woman’s ‘purity’. And no, each terminated relationship doesn’t destroy anyone’s self-worth. Not unless they were in an abusive (emotional or physical) relationship. Otherwise, it’s just a journey that makes you who you are today.
@Srinivas, I totally agree with your larger point, but there’s a problem with a man who has multiple partners being a womaniser, but a woman with multiple partners being labelled promiscuous, no? Promiscuity should be gender neutral, shouldn’t it?
LikeLiked by 1 person
shemz
June 20, 2019
The problem our movies had was not just with the non-virgin heroines, but with the woman’s right to choose as well. Even if there was a heroine, who has had multiple boyfriends before she met our hero, even if she had not been physical with any of them before, would not sit well with our audience or our story tellers (mostly). Or, in some cases, like that Dhanush movie, where the heroine is in a relationship, Dhanush is the one persuading and chasing her and not her who is leaving the other guy because she is unhappy or whatever!
The problem was not that the woman had sex, but that she had the audacity to move on when she felt things were not right/ harmful/ toxic. If the woman had the right or the guts to move on, you cannot make a story of her falling for the good-for-nothing hero and sticking with him, so the logical (?!?!) thing to do is to shame those who break it off.
I don’t know if anyone is saying that flings or multiple relationships equal empowerment, but not being judged for choosing to walk out of a relationship is definitely empowerment. It is precisely the fear of being shamed that keeps many (women and men alike) in not just unhappy relationships but in toxic and harmful ones as well.
P.S. I kept thinking how 96 would have played out if Trisha had not been forced into marriage by her father. What if she found a nice guy in college, found things in common with him and they fell in love and married? Most importantly, what would Ram have done, when he saw her happily in love with another guy, since he almost followed all her moves until her marriage? I guess that story won’t sit well with the audience either!
LikeLiked by 3 people
Eswar
June 21, 2019
@isai: I don’t understand why a heroine having flings/being in a live-in relationship is portrayed as a sign of women empowerment.
It’s a sign of empowerment, because, being able to choose one’s relationship i.e whom to relate with, when to relate and how to relate is a sign of independence. This is irrespective of whether this independence affects a person positively or negatively. A related example is consuming alcohol. Alcohol is injurious. But individuals should be able to decide whether they want to drink or not. So when a woman is shown drinking in a movie we can’t dismiss it saying alcohol is harmful and so it is not empowering woman. It’s the underlying principle – that one is able to choose and decide their actions makes it empowering. If a married woman is able to decide that she doesn’t want to work, then, it is as empowering as a woman who decides to work after her marriage. But if the decisions are made for her by her husband, in-laws and others, then the mere act of going to work doesn’t make a woman empowered.
LikeLiked by 8 people
Isai
June 21, 2019
Srini,
Let’s take the movies that you quoted:
I don’t think Vaali and Uyir are equal comparisons. Vaali is a case of identical twins, which is quite uncommon and hence the villain character is easily alienated from the society. Whereas, in Uyir, Sangeetha portrays a normal Anni who is lustful, which considering the usual joint family setup of Tamil society, is far more problematic. Also, in Vaali, the victim Simran shoots the lustful Ajith whereas in Uyir, Sangeetha’s innocent husband commits suicide.
In Dharmathin Thalaivan, the point is Suhasini chooses to dress and behave like a widow, even though she was not even married to Rajini, thus indicating her deep love for him. Now, convincing THAT women to (re?)marry is a big obstacle for Prabhu’s character. I see such obstacles as part of a good screenplay.
In Aval Varuvala, Karan comes back to haunt Simran’s life by now demanding to pop her cherry, thus giving tension to both her and the audience. This scene also later helps in establishing that the hero is broadminded enough to not care about the public exposure of his girlfriend’s past. If I remember correctly, there is a semi-nude scene of Simran being harassed by Karan and his friends. Showing this woman as the heroine IMO is even better than showing that Simran has had sex with her husband.
In Rhythm, both the pairs get a song each and there are no sex scenes. There are clear reasons why both Jyothika and Ramesh Aravind were traveling alone in the train (despite being married). In fact, Ramesh Aravind is wearing a white shirt while speaking to his mother immediately after marriage, whereas in the next scene, he is shown as wearing a T shirt while traveling in the train, thus NOT establishing that the marriage was NOT consummated.
In all these 3 movies, there are clear screenplay reasons for why the events happened in that way. More than that, I feel, in hero-heroine romances, the first meeting, proposal, acceptance/rejection, parents reaction, marriage, consummation, childbirth are like Railway junctions for the screenplay. You can easily change the direction of the script at such junctions and also keep the audience guessing on whether the train will reach the next logical junction. So, these junctions won’t be crossed just like that. Take the movies Ghajini and Thaandavam. In both these movies, the heroines die before consummation. Despite the presence of another attractive heroine, the heroes seem intent on spending their remaining life in grief and remembrance (unlike the heroines of the above 3 movies). Now, are we going to say that matriarchy is only pressurising Kollywood to have such scenes?
Also, I don’t remember any MOVIE where a live-in relationship was used as a stick to beat someone when something goes wrong in their life. Please quote.
I wonder if we are projecting our feelings about Tamil society on to Tamil Cinema.
LikeLike
Ravi K
June 21, 2019
This insistence on non-promiscuity also plagued “Aruvi.” The film concocted some ridiculous way for her to contract HIV so as not to have her contract it through consensual sex.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isai
June 21, 2019
Rsylvania,
You are correlating Tamil society with Tamil Cinema whereas my comment pertains only to Tamil Cinema. Again, I am not talking about 80’s cinema. My point pertains to what has happened in Kollywood in the last 25 years.
Re:Trisha Illana Nayanthara, I had disagreed with BR who seemed to suggest that Kollywood powerholders are preventing the portrayal of Non-virginity by a heroine-grade actor in big-name hero films. TIN is a small budget movie about an eccentric teenage virgin hero. Even in this movie, the heroine Anandhi’s non virginity is explicitly mentioned. And once our eccentric hero decides to dump her, she is shown as getting back with the handsome hunk Arya. In what way is this a condemnation?
You seem to have misunderstood the dialogue spoken by Santhanam in Raja Rani. Please watch the scene again. In the previous scene, Arya was very affectionate towards his ‘distant’ wife Nayanthara right after she told him about her past. Yet, she rebuffs him (bill payment scene). A drunken Santhanam says that ‘You seem to respect the promiscuous apartment secretary but you rebuffed and insulted your husband who had approached you affectionately even immediately after knowing about your past’. He further says that ‘Avan malli poovum Alvavum vaangitu unna paaka varanum’ which clearly shows that he didn’t look down on her for her past. And Santhanam wouldn’t have known that her relationship was not consummated.
LikeLike
brangan
June 21, 2019
KADHAL is another film that comes to mind, though the implications there (from the POV of the girl’s dominant caste family) are twofold: (1) Keeping the girl a virgin (2) Not allowing their family to be “sullied” by an oppressed caste boy.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kay
June 21, 2019
Make no mistake , the people making a hue and cry about a woman’s sex drive are not doing it because they are concerned for her self-esteem or of her chances of contracting an STD but they do so because it flies in the face of how they believe a woman should live her life.
Excellently written.
LikeLike
Rahini David
June 21, 2019
Isai, I am a bit unclear about a few points you are making here. Are you saying that movies like Rhythm, Aval Varuvala and Dharmathin Thalaivan etc were made in different times and that recent movies have surely changed their attitude about these tropes or do you actually buy the theory that these movie makers did not give too hoots about virginity tropes and that some of us are seeing something that isn’t there at all? Are you actually saying Aval Varuvala made perfect sense to you?
What is your take on Kaadhal? Was that “she had periods” scene inserted to placate the casteist section of the audience (that their caste girl wasn’t shown to have gone the whole way) or was that scene meant only to show how difficult life can be for an eloping couple until they get a place to stay.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isai
June 21, 2019
Anu, I thought you had magnanimously accepted my request for mutual non-interference in each other’s comments. But I guess, your proclivity to misunderstand my comments, FUME and respond with indignation, got the better of you.
I had spoken about depiction of HEROINE (not even another female character) having flings ON-SCREEN. Which, I think is much different from women having flings in real life. I had said that “each terminated relationship progressively REDUCES one’s self worth, IF ONLY SLIGHTLY” which is not the same as a terminated relationship DESTROYING anyone’s self-worth.
Now, if only you reply bombastically, pretending that you were not responding to my comments, your arc would be complete.
LikeLike
hari
June 21, 2019
Isai “I wonder if we are projecting our feelings about Tamil society on to Tamil Cinema.” this point of yours is very important. We all should think about whether we are actually doing it subconsciously or not.
LikeLike
vinjk
June 21, 2019
“Because change is most meaningful when it comes from the top.”
Really? Let the people at the bottom change their mindset…then change will be better and more lasting.
LikeLike
Isai
June 21, 2019
Eswar, my POV is that when a heroine who is shown drinking on screen, is stopped by the hero, if she continues to drink and asks him on why it is okay for HIM to drink and not for HER, that’s a call for equality and a sign of empowerment. But, if she starts to drink to fit in with her college friends, it is not. Similarly, if a Santhosh Subramaniam like character tells his father that even if drinking is a mistake, he wants to make his own mistakes without constant supervision of his father, it is a sign of empowerment. But, the usual TASMAC song is not. That is why I don’t see a mere depiction of drinking/having flings (without context) as youth/women empowerment. I see it as only seeking revalidation of one’s life choices on-screen.
For ex, If I was a non-vegetarian who later choose to become a vegetarian (and vice versa), I would be happy to see a hero portraying this on screen. But, I don’t think it can be called empowerment.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Rahini David
June 21, 2019
shemz: I kept thinking how 96 would have played out if Trisha had not been forced into marriage by her father. What if she found a nice guy in college, found things in common with him and they fell in love and married?
96’s Trisha character made zero sense to me. She walks in as cool as a cucumber and wants to meet all her classmates. She must have been in the same WhatsApp group as VS. She does not even know that VS was unmarried much less that he was still pining. At that point she is someone who knows that she is special to VS and for her part only enjoyed being liked.
As the night progresses come in absurdist nonsense that she was desperate that this reticent young man will become a brave knight and whisk her away from the altar.
And no, they will not show a single photograph of a happy Trisha next to her husband. He has to remain a traditional gold pendant on her bosom. Because, you know, an actual man will spoil the “effect” of that absurdist “romance”. Let him remain a non-person. That will make this a love-story of a sweet boy and a sweet girl.
Forget the “what if Trisha eventually found real love in college” angle. What if Trisha actually found the arranged marriage to her taste? What if he was a Mouna-Raagam Mohan? What if he genuinely cared about having a good personal relationship with his lawfully wedded wife?
What a load of bullshit that movie was.
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 21, 2019
@Rahini
We can ask lot of what-ifs about any story. In this story (96), Trisha’s character was unhappy. Why is this difficult to accept?
LikeLike
Rahini David
June 21, 2019
vinjk: Trisha not being unhappy is not what I am not able to accept. Yes, people can be vaguely unhappy with their martial life and vaguely satisfied with life in general. Happens.
But the Trisha who walks in the school get-together area and the Trisha we see later don’t seem to be the same person with the same personality at all. The one who asks “Hey! you are unmarried? why?” and the one who later says “how badly I was pining for you at the altar” aren’t the same coherent person in my opinion.
The 10th standard Trisha and Adult Trisha can be different. People change. But that Trisha who walks into that get-together was not in the “OMG OMG I am going to see my dear dear VS again. How I love love love him.” mood at all. She was more in the “hmm get-together, eh? Ok let me see who all turned up” mood.
Anyway “What-if” is what we are playing here. What if Meena were a young mother, Simran was a Sexually abused non-virgin, Suhasini were really a Real Widow etc. What if they changed Amitabh character to someone like Sunny Deol in DAMINI.
Well. I absolutely hated that movie 96 and will continue to hate it. I am ok with others liking a movie I dislike. Happens all the time, really. 🙂
LikeLiked by 3 people
Honest Raj
June 21, 2019
In Aval Varuvala, Karan comes back to haunt Simran’s life by now demanding to pop her cherry, thus giving tension to both her and the audience.
Karan anna shroovs for bringing up his name in connection to a film which he was never a part of. 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
vinjk
June 21, 2019
Life goes on and many times we forget what we miss the most. We may not be able to articulate or feel it even as times goes by. My feeling was Trisha’s character was in this zone. Only when she met and started talking to Vijay S’s character did she remember what she had pined for and realise that she still longs for him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
rsylviana
June 21, 2019
@Isai – I didn’t watch TIN and so you need to tell me how the movie ends. Is GVP, the chief of ‘virgin pasanga’, still a-okay with ending up with a non-virgin girl? Because TIN maybe a small budget movie but it was a hit one at that. It also kind of set the scene for the numerous sex-comedies that Tamil cinema witnessed after that. The clips from the movie still do the rounds in social media when Tamil guys feel disgusted with a non-virgin girl / if a girl has been in a relationship, so I feel it kind of reflects our society a bit too.
About Raja Rani ,Santhanam didn’t have to bring Nayantara’s past into that scene and really not in that tone did he? If all he wanted to do was to help Arya with his marriage then he could have just said “Listen, I know you both didn’t want to get married to each other and might have behaved badly during the early days but why do you want to keep doing it even after he has shown some inclination to work it out with you? Because its not just you who has come out of a relationship but him too and so you both could just be a bit understanding towards each other”. Instead we just get the hero’s friend blaming the heroine for what the hero is equally responsible for. Also the manner in which Mr.Santhanam says the whole dialogue about her past is in such a way that it plays to the gallery. I didn’t watch the movie in theatres but I’m willing to bet good money that the dialogue must have elicited wolf-whistles from the ‘virigin pasanga’ in the audience.
And Santhanam wouldn’t have known that her relationship was not consummated.
I don’t think it would have mattered to him. Just the fact that she was in a previous relationship seems to have made her as some kind of ‘impure one’ in Santhanam’s eyes.
Regarding Rhythm, you are arguing after the director himself has accepted about the reason behind the timing of Ramesh Arvind’s death 🙂
P.S – The chilling cherry on top of the Pollachi horror is that the women from the city are finding it difficult to get grooms after the crimes were made public it seems. So much for the celestial Tamil culture I suppose.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj
June 21, 2019
@BR: Thanks for bringing up Kaadhal. I wanted to point this out in the “Readers Write In” thread (by Eswar on caste in Tamil Cinema). Not long ago, a politician, who’s hailed as the “father of social justice” in TN, praised Prabhu Solomon for highlighting the importance of “marrying with in the same social class”.
About the “heroine should be a virgin” thing, I think it’s more to do with the audience rather than the filmmakers. The ending of Idhaya Vasal is a classic example.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Honest Raj
June 21, 2019
About Aruvi, one of the many good things about the film is that how it tried to empathise with the marginalised. That despite no fault of theirs, how they’re treated in the society. In the case of HIV patients, irrespective of how they contract the disease, they will always be looked down upon by the society. Perhaps, we should draw some parallel between the Aruvi and Emily characters. In the latter’s case, being a transgender was not her choice but to live as one is definitely a curse in the society.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Priya Arun
June 21, 2019
Something I always hoped/dreamed for Rajinikanth…makes me happy to think that Ajith might be considering doing it – picking up meaningful character roles. I felt very happy to see Ajith in the Tamil remake of English-Vinglish. I really wish his ‘fans’ would understand this and just let him be.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Sanjay Menon A R
June 21, 2019
BR sir what’s your opinion about gender politics in movies.Now that FC critics are widely criticizing kabir singh.I have also read critique pieces that criticized gender politics in Iraivi also.Same with the recent Malayalam movie Ishq.You have given a thumb’s up for these movies.So just want to know your thoughts about this if you have time
LikeLike
Eswar
June 21, 2019
@Isai. If I understood your POV correctly, something is empowering only when it is shown as being challenged. Even from this view, the scenes we are discussing, implicitly challenge both the characters in the movie and the movie watching audience. These characters and the audience belong to a certain society. Societies have acceptable behaviours and behaviours that are considered taboo. So when a socially taboo scene is portrayed within this society then even in the absence of explicit dialogues, the challenge is implied. Your example about switching from non-veg to veg is not empowering because eating vegetarian is not a social taboo in our society. You are just exercising a choice that you are allowed to exercise. That is why a beef eating scene is empowering because it is non-conforming.
The explicit challenging scenes that you are referring is obviously empowering, but as you mentioned in your first comment, movies can’t show the entire character growth unless it is a targeted movie like Samuthrakani’s Ponnu. In all other cases the challenge is implied.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Srinivas R
June 21, 2019
Isai – Pardon my memory of Rhythm movie. I remember it as Arjun and Jyothika having a married life before her death , whereas Ramesh Arvind dies soon after the wedding with Meena. I could be wrong.
About Dhramathin Thalaivan – ideally Suhasini and Rajini would have been a married couple ( and consummated their marriage). They live in the same house for crying out loud. There is a vague, waiting for brother to complete education excuse. But the real reason is to keep the woman “pure” when the reincarnated hero turns up.
In Aval varuvala, Simran’s first husband is such a psycho that he will torture her and even offer her to his friends, but hey, he will let her remain a virgin.This sort of force fitting the heroine’s virginity is definitely from the fear that if hero marries a non-virgin, audience may not like it.
I agree with you when you say we sometimes project our expectations on the tamil society and what we see in global movie and sitcoms may not be a reality in TN. The flip side to that is, I really hope and expect that no society places such a high premium on a woman’s “purity”. It is a definite cause for women being restricted and shackled.
Anu – I didn’t use promiscuous in a derogatory sense, though after you pointed out, I realise i could have worded it better.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Ramit
June 21, 2019
“She does not even know that VS was unmarried much less that he was still pining.”
That’s a very feasible scenario. She was mostly cut off from her classmates. They were meeting after 10 years. It’s natural to assume that others would have got married as well.
“she was desperate that this reticent young man will become a brave knight and whisk her away from the altar.”
She was desperate at her wedding day that her bf would come and take her away. Again, it’s a very feasible scenario. In fact, if she hadn’t though anything like this, that would have been abnormal. But now, she had found her peace. Not for a moment did she consider resuming her life with Ram.
“Because, you know, an actual man will spoil the “effect” of that absurdist “romance”.”
I don’t buy this. I don’t think a pic would have made any difference. In my opinion, a mere mention of a husband is enough. Also, maybe there are financial implications to this. That is, if you are using someone’s pic, that person becomes a part of the movie. So, that person also might need to be paid. I don’t know.
“What if Trisha actually found the arranged marriage to her taste?”
She already did. She was pretty content with her life.
“In this story (96), Trisha’s character was unhappy.”
Strange. I didn’t see her as unhappy. I thought she was pretty content and at peace with her life.
“The one who asks “Hey! you are unmarried? why?” and the one who later says “how badly I was pining for you at the altar” aren’t the same ”
She was narrating her feelings of her wedding day! She no longer had those emotions.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
June 21, 2019
@Srinivas – I didn’t think you meant it pejoratively. I was merely pointing out the double standards in the use of words to describe men and women.
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
June 21, 2019
@Isai – a) I didn’t address you. I riffed on your comment on BR’sarticle to address the larger forum which is discussing BR’s article – that discussion happens to include your comment.
Let me repeat that – I did not address you; I’m not asking to have a discussion with you on your comment. I merely expressed an opinion based on what I read, not just your comment but the article and others’ comments as well. You do not have to respond to my comment all if you chose not to.
But you cannot take part in a discussion in a public space and ask that particular people ignore what you choose to say. Well, technically, you can ask, as I can that you not make personal attacks against me, but neither of us is going to get what we ask for.
LikeLiked by 1 person
shemz
June 21, 2019
@Rahini “Forget the “what if Trisha eventually found real love in college” angle. What if Trisha actually found the arranged marriage to her taste? What if he was a Mouna-Raagam Mohan? What if he genuinely cared about having a good personal relationship with his lawfully wedded wife?”
That is a juicy premise too. But the reason I mentioned college romance was because Ram was still following her at that point. So how would he have reacted if he saw her choosing another man?
If she had found love after marriage, he may/may not have guessed it. But if he saw her actually falling for a man, would that have helped him move on? Or would that have angered him? He did beat up that guy who was following her.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Odiyan Hater
June 21, 2019
Either the pr team of the movie’s gonna thank BR for the free publicity or else they gonna be pissed that they have to work extra hard to ensure that google searches of the movie’s title take people to pages that they have already carefully curated/crafted to their liking…
LikeLike
shemz
June 21, 2019
@rahini – “As the night progresses come in absurdist nonsense that she was desperate that this reticent young man will become a brave knight and whisk her away from the altar.“
Yes.. I could not buy this as well, he hardly spoke to her in school!
I wanted to like this film, I am a fan of VJS and I kinda sorta like Trisha too. Visually and musically pleasing film. But it was upsetting in so many scenes. He follows her for about 5 years without her knowledge and yet she seems to be happy/ flattered when told about this !!
LikeLike
96
June 21, 2019
Trisha loves both VJS and her husband (in no particular order or priority or intensity). So Everytime the husband grumbles about her food, she probably relives her fantasy where Ram shows up to stop her wedding with the grouch 😉
See, for some of us romantics who got married the traditional way, our teen years are always rose-tinted when we look back, say in our late 30s 40s. The crush turns into a pining lover, the occasional flirting shows up as absolute romance – all inside our head. So maybe Janu had Ram as her romantic crutch (in her mind) during the wobbly times of her marriage. The fact that VJS still had feelings for her, probably emboldened her to flirt a little more with him. Maybe if she had resided in Chennai, she would have been a little careful with her words and actions? Or if VJS had been more aggressive, would she have shown him her hubby’s photo (the one where she is hugging him?). The film is just an episode from their life – it doesn’t show us whether Jaanu was really distraught during her wedding or if Ram would continue to be a bachelor after knowing that Jaanu is happily married! On that particular day, they relive their teenage when they were soul-mates presumably!
We’ve seen such duality with heroes – Rajni loved Ambika and Radha, in Engeyo Ketta Kural, Kamal – adhey Ambika Radha in Kaadhal Parisu, Sivakumar – Suhasini, Sulakshana in Sindhu Bairavi, Rajni – Roja Meena in Veera, Rajni – Vijayshanti & Khushbu in Mannan. We don’t ask how Rajni could sing Adikkudhu Kuliru when he shared such a warm relationship with Khushbu just a few scenes earlier.
I like the fact Trish had started off with Lesa Lesa, which too had a similar story, where she couldn’t get over Maddy & yet had feelings for Shaam. And then went on to do VTV & now 96. (Can count Adavari Mataluke Arthale Verule too I guess) Cool!
LikeLiked by 4 people
shaviswa
June 21, 2019
In Rhythm, the adopted son of Meena could very well have been her son with Ramesh Arvind. But to make her into a virgin widow it was deliberately twisted to be Ramesh’s wish to adopt, his philanthropy was to bring that angle in. The story would not have suffered in any way had that boy been her son.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Isai
June 21, 2019
@Srini: Maybe you are right about those 3 movies. But it could also be that you are appraising these movies with a confirmation bias.
1. How soon are you talking about? It is not that Ramesh Aravind left Meena in the Mandapam itself.
2. In Aval Varuvala, if you are willing to buy that he is sadistic enough to “share” her with his friends, I don’t think it is difficult to believe him when he says that he wanted to keep her “fresh” for the share. Later, Simran is stopped by Sujatha from revealing her marriage to Ajith by saying that it was not even consummated. This helps in narrative tension and extends the duration of the movie by 10-15 minutes. Even after overhearing about her marriage, Ajith neither knows nor is curious about her virginity. Instead he says that earlier he was happy, but now he is proud to marry her.
3. Suhasini is Rajini’s first cousin and her father is the sole living elder in Rajini’s family. Besides, most movies don’t start with the hero and heroine being married, because as I said, at that point you want the audience to be guessing on whether their relationship is going to get to the next logical ‘junction’ (marriage). Take Adisaya Piravi, another Rajini movie where he dies right before marriage. Now, do you think that he was killed before marriage because the audience would want that heroine to be “pure” when this killed Rajini’s soul comes back in another Rajini’s body? Or does the logic of the heroine’s father bumping him off before marriage and the screenplay technique of keeping the audience guessing till the last minute on which heroine would Rajini finally marry, convince you?
I think one can suspect but can’t definitelt attribute motives without SUFFICIENT evidence. In these cases, I don’t think it is sufficient.
LikeLike
Isai
June 21, 2019
@Eswar: If you believe that portrayal of Non confirming, socially taboo scenes is empowerment, please tell me whether you see any/all of these as empowerment: Eating the meat of a dead rat/dog/horse/snake/cockroach, using drugs like ganja, coke, lsd etc., having an open marriage, bigamy, polygamy, polyandry, menage a trois, swinging, threesome, orgy. I believe you will be drawing the line of acceptability/empowerment somewhere in between. Now, the problem is, your definition of empowerment seems restricted to what YOU think is OK, but what many in the society don’t. This would become subjective and I don’t think this can be called as empowerment.
I believe empowerment is the demonstration of control over one’s life and claim over one’s rights. It is independent of one’s gender, society and its taboos. Challenge is used just like a narrative device to depict this on-screen.
In today’s world of political correctness, when a man asks a woman to not break the queue and to come in a single line; I see that as empowerment.
I would still see it as empowerment if a woman asks this to a man. But, I fear that quite a few readers of this blog wouldn’t have reacted similarly to both of my above statements.
LikeLike
Isai
June 21, 2019
Honest Raj: My sincere apologies to Karan Anna’s fans.
It was Babloo. Thanks for pointing it out.
My bad.
But please don’t shroov me 😢😢.
LikeLike
Isai
June 22, 2019
Rahini: I just speed watched Aval Varuvala. It disgusted me many times and Babloo’s character and acting was quite exasperating. I don’t know what exactly you meant when you were asking about it making perfect sense. It is rather difficult to make much sense of a psycho movie.
I don’t think Marriage or consummation is treated casually in Tamil Cinema (pls refer earlier comment about screenplay junctions) These directors have consciously portrayed the events surrounding the virginity, in the way they did. Now, if all these directors had originally intended to keep the heroine as a non-virgin and later had to change her as a virgin since NO powerholder was willing to make this movie happen with the portrayal of a non-virgin heroine, then that can be seen as ‘Kollywood insisting on the virginity of its heroines’. But, I don’t think that was the situation there.
Now, let us take Kaadhal. The dominant caste narrative of such love stories is that dalits wear jeans & sunglasses, keep pursuing ‘our’ girls and somehow make her fall in love and then use that to swindle money. But, this movie consciously avoids this narrative totally:
It is Sandhya who pursues Bharath, who initially seems to dislike her; she keeps creating reasons for seeing him, constantly fantasises about him, proposes to him, asks him for a kiss, asks him to elope and offers to bring money and jewellery. It would have been prudent for him to agree, considering her accustomed lifestyle and the fact that only she needs to elope immediately. But, he refuses. He is also usually seen in the dirty mechanic’s uniform (she calls him alukka), thus negating the jeans & sunglass stereotype. And he is the one who is ever seen as giving gifts/money while he even refuses to take money for repairing her bike. When they come to Chennai, before the occurrence of her period in the evening, they spend time alone in Stephen’s room where they are shown to be intimate; they have a ‘hot’ song and after that she is shown as being quite comfortable with his touching her body. Even earlier in Madurai, they are shown to spend large amounts of time alone in the outskirts. So, this is not a love of only stolen glances. Now, if you say that the dominant caste folks are completely fine with all of the above and it is only a bloodstained bedsheet that would have enraged them, well I find that hard to believe. Also, consider that she was most likely to be below 18 years, ie below the legal age of consent. So, depicting penetrative sex is far more problematic. Nagraj Manjule depicted that in Sairat but there the leads are college students and the story ends with them being murdered years later, after having a child. Now, Kaadhal is based on true events, so we don’t know to what extent the director reproduced the real events and what he chose to modify. I don’t think Patils are any less dominant than Thevars, so considering that Sairat is a much bigger blockbuster than Kaadhal, I don’t buy this argument about the director retaining her virginity due to the dominant caste. If that caste is so particular about virginity (both real life, onscreen), then once when the leads are brought back to the farm, they would have been shown as first enquiring on whether the girl is still a virgin and then deciding on whether to kill her or to just annul her marriage.
On one hand the privileged class is being made more aware and conscious of its privilege and thus feel more guilty/ashamed, while on the other hand, the less privileged are finding a louder voice to air their grievances. The problem is, in such a scenario, any claim by a less privileged person about perceived misbehavior/unfair treatment by a more privileged person is expected to be immediately accepted as a gospel truth. An unbiased examination of the facts in such cases, is considered unwarranted and a person doing that is villainised.
LikeLike
Balu R
June 22, 2019
Ajith acting in a character role is probably a bigger deal than the whole virgin thing. After all hasn’t Ajith has already acted in Yennai Arindhal where he is in love with a non-virgin? In this movie, even though Shraddha is the main heroine, she isn’t Ajith’s jodi – so, why would even his most conservative fans care? I don’t somehow see this as a big step forward in mass movies even in comparison to YA.
LikeLike
Eswar
June 22, 2019
@Isai. Empowerment is contextual and varies depending on the society. The example you gave about a woman asking a man to not break the queue is empowering only in a society where women is not allowed to speak out. In a western background this is not an empowerment. Rosa Parks action is empowering only in the context of that time. Without that context Rosa Parks not relinquishing her seat has no significance.
LikeLiked by 5 people
Isai
June 22, 2019
Eswar: “Empowerment is contextual and varies depending on the society.” I don’t think it is. At least not from the standard definition of empowerment. If you have any article negating this view, please do share.
I think if I am unfairly pressurised to vacate my seat (say by a cop or even by a young healthy girl) and if I refuse to do so, it is still empowerment. Though it may not become famous or significant like the Rosa Parks incident.
LikeLike
Isai
June 22, 2019
Rsylvania:
“Is GVP, the chief of ‘virgin pasanga’, still a-okay with ending up with a non-virgin girl? ”
He is not okay. And why does that bother anyone? I don’t see any hypocrisy or double standards here. All of us have or used to have our own filters on what kind of person we want to end up with. We do/did consider any or all of looks, income, intelligence, education, values, personality, wealth, family background, integrity, past experiences etc. when looking for a partner. You are going to perceive a person who was born and brought up in a remote village in Arunachal Pradesh much differently from one from New York. Why should one’s past sexual experiences alone be ignored?
If some virgin pasanga/ponnunga don’t want a non-virgin, so what? There are plenty more fish in the sea. Those who matter, shouldn’t mind and those who mind, shouldn’t matter.
When they started looking for an alliance for a girl in my family, she said that ‘her guy’ should be at least 5.8″ and earn atleast 1.5X more than her. She is 5.1″ and earns INR 75K/M. Nobody batted an eyelid. But, if a guy wants ‘his girl’ to be equally (un)experienced, it is denounced as a crime. You can’t expect EVERY guy to go “Wow, she must have really honed her craft”.
As far as Santhanam’s dialogues are concerned, you can rewrite most of his dialogues to sound less offensive/more diplomatic. But we were discussing about women empowerment. Based on your comments, you do seem too bothered about the opinions of ‘virgin pasanga’, despite your claims otherwise. I think that’s unnecessary.
“I don’t think it would have mattered to him. Just the fact that she was in a previous relationship seems to have made her as some kind of ‘impure one’ in Santhanam’s eyes.”
If it had made her impure in his eyes, he would have tried to convince Arya to leave her and move on. But instead, he tries to convince her to unite (in his own offensive manner). I call this “Patricunation” – A firm, unquestioned belief in the omnipresence of patriarchy, even in situations without proof or with an equally valid alternate explanation.
Regarding Rhythm, please share the link about Vasanth’s comments. I have some differing views on Shaviswa’s comments and will reply to you both after speed watching that movie.
LikeLike
Eswar
June 22, 2019
@Isai. What you call something as unfair needs to be defined by someone or something. This something is the society. Societies define fairness and unfairness, acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. If someone has lived only in an island without ever lived in a society, then that person knows no fairness, unfairness, right or wrong.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isai
June 22, 2019
Anu, let me again assume that the fault was in my end. You sound as if you didn’t respond to only my comments and you and I just happened to have different views on BR’s article or another person’s comments. If so, please explain the following:
I had raised a question about the premise of this article on whether ‘Portrayal of flings by heroine on screen contributes to women empowerment”.. You had replied about women having flings in REAL LIFE leading to female empowerment. I suspect this is a rejection of my views using a FALSE EQUIVALENCE. I mean, what the heck is FEMALE empowerment?? Do you mean that all offspring bearing species will get inspired by seeing women having flings?
I don’t think you have EVER openly admitted that you were wrong to ANYONE on this blog. (At least not since the time I have been commenting on this blog). And no, these are not personal attacks. I am just stating facts about your comments in this blog. If these are untrue, you can easily disprove them. If not, I request you to kindly introspect. Goodbye.
LikeLike
Madan
June 22, 2019
“I don’t understand why a heroine having flings/being in a live-in relationship is portrayed as a sign of women empowerment. I believe that a woman should have complete control over all aspects of her life, including her sexuality.” – Well, you have answered your question right there. That is all is meant by woman empowerment. You are reading into the word empowerment meanings it does not have in this context. Empowerment here does not mean making women stronger or better. It simply means shutting men out of a woman’s decision making. There is nothing inherently progressive about having a live in relationship. What is progressive, however, is not judging the parties to the live in relationship and likewise what is regressive is to particularly hold the woman responsible for such relationships and socially blacklist her while letting the man get away easy. I bring gender into this only because historically, societies have tended to take a male centric view on this. Like making abortions difficult to obtain but not holding a man responsible for the child he had an equal role in birthing. This is just an example and it is less relevant in India where abortion is not a political issue at least.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Isai
June 22, 2019
“It simply means shutting men out of a woman’s decision making. There is nothing inherently progressive about having a live in relationship.”
Madan, my question is limited only to Tamil Cinema, as my later comments clarified. Most of our movies show the heroine falling in love (as opposed to an arranged marriage where the decision is usually dominated by her male relatives). So that shutting out of men was already there. If a woman tells off her nosy neighbour for commenting/criticising about her live-in relationship or the courtroom scene in Pink; now these are examples of empowerment. But, a mere depiction of them having a live-in relationship in a far away Mumbai with a goody-good landlord (like OKK) is no sign of empowerment IMO. As you said, there is nothing inherently progressive about having a live in relationship. It is just another life choice.
LikeLike
Madan
June 22, 2019
“But, a mere depiction of them having a live-in relationship in a far away Mumbai with a goody-good landlord (like OKK) is no sign of empowerment IMO.” – It is if the extant mainstream norm IS to show them always as getting married off to the lover. I partly agree with you in that showing them having a live in in Mumbai doesn’t go far enough. Mani should be bold enough to depict it in Chennai itself but he probably chose to steer clear of controversy. He has kinda always wanted to have the cake and eat it too, so to speak.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isai
June 22, 2019
Eswar: “Societies define fairness and unfairness, acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.”
Societies do define acceptable and unacceptable behaviors. But, you can’t let them define fairness. Ex: Criticism of God may be acceptable in India and not in Pakistan. But, it can’t be fair in India and unfair in Pakistan.
The unfairness I was referring to is like I was once asked to vacate a bus seat because I had sat there without knowing that it allows online reservation. In this case, I didn’t have an actual right to that seat, even though I had thought I did.
LikeLike
Isai
June 23, 2019
“He has kinda always wanted to have the cake and eat it too” – Exactly.
“It is if the extant mainstream norm IS to show them always as getting married off to the lover.” – Ok. What about spouse swapping? It flies in the face of Kollywood norms. Is this empowerment? Many people who rush to label a live-in relationship as a sign of progress, empowerment etc. are not keen on using these labels for spouse swapping. That is why I was telling Eswar that while one can be happy to see portrayal of one’s life choices (those acceptable to us but not to a majority of our society) onscreen, it would be inaccurate to call it as empowerment. I see spouse swapping as women empowerment if it is ideated/initiated by the 2 women but not otherwise.
LikeLike
vijay
June 23, 2019
I don’t think this movie would do shit to change anything. Tamil cinema and industry in general is so regressive that a half-baked film ain’t gonna make a dent
LikeLiked by 1 person
anaon
June 24, 2019
I’m amused by the backlash Kabir Singh is getting. Tamil and Telugu cinema is so steeped in misogyny, Arjun Reddy will seem almost progressive. Hence all the positive reviews. Bollywood moved on from that level of misogyny ages ago, but the South seems determined to bring them down to their level as well. Before anyone wants to jump down my throat about regressiveness in Bollywood, no movie I’ve seen in the last few years (I don’t watch Salman Khan films) glorified stalking as love, had dialogues glorifying masculinity (two staples of Tamil cinema) and generally make films from wider base of formulae. Less regressive / misogynistic = progressive/zero misogyny. Please also note Bollywood made the right noises about me too, pretended to punish those involved. South = zero pretense of even giving a shit. More comments on stages with applause about kuthuvilakus and prostitutes. ugh, just light years behind.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Madan
June 24, 2019
@isai : Exactly as you put it. Only if it is shown as initiated by the wives or at least them being meaningfully involved in the decision.
LikeLike
Isai
June 24, 2019
In Bhuvana Oru Kelvikkuri, released in 1977, the titular heroine Bhuvana has an affair with Sivakumar who leaves her pregnant and marries a rich woman. Rajinikanth marries her, child and at on point, asks her to start her life afresh, with him.
In Dharmadurai, released in 2016, Vijay Sethupathi is in a live in relationship with Tamannah, after she divorces her husband. (I am able to recall some other movies like Ilamai Oonjal aadukirathu, Ponnumani etc.).
Perhaps unlike Tamil society, Kollywood, its heroes and the audience does seem to have accepted non-virgin heroines too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Isai
June 24, 2019
“In Rhythm, the adopted son of Meena could very well have been her son with Ramesh Arvind. But to make her into a virgin widow it was deliberately twisted to be Ramesh’s wish to adopt, his philanthropy was to bring that angle in. The story would not have suffered in any way had that boy been her son.”
If the boy was Ramesh’s son, Lakshmi wouldn’t have wanted to be separated from only her grandson after her only son’s death. If she was staying with Meena, then Meena’s security issues and the boy’s yearning for a family wouldn’t have been so acute. Even in the end, Lakshmi wouldn’t have been a-okay with the boy replacing her son with Arjun (as a father figure). She would rather want the boy to wear a poonool and follow her brahministic lifestyle.
Secondly, there is a smooth flow to the sequence of events (Lakshmi’s opposition, Meena sad about not getting her blessings for their marriage, Ramesh traveling alone to placate Lakshmi) leading to Ramesh’s death (more logical/smoother than even Jyothika’s death). Lakshmi’s guilt about her ill-treatment of Ramesh leading to his death transforms her from a caste conscious snob to a person seeking repentance by inviting Meena to stay at her house. If the boy was to be Ramesh’s son, then you have to show that a single wedding night caused the pregnancy. Otherwise the flow/logic of Lakshmi’s story will get affected.
Finally, Ramesh/Meena’s desire/decision to adopt impresses Meena/Lakshmi a lot. While I do dismiss the former as a cliche, I think Meena’s decision does play a part in making Lakshmi realise that humanity triumphs caste, thus enabling her transformation to a person seeking repentance.
So, a lot of changes need to be made to the screenplay if the boy has to be made Ramesh’s son.
While I am not surprised that someone thought that the virginity issue COULD be the reason for bringing the adoption angle, the conviction with which some people seemed to IMMEDIATELY agree with this reasoning, makes me sad, as it reeks of confirmation bias. As they say, ‘Arandavan kannukku irundadhellam paei’.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Eswar
June 24, 2019
@Isai. Societies do define fairness. Over a period of time, these definitions change. It was fair to discriminate Blacks in a certain era. Someone like David Hume could write I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. Hume might re-think this today, but he may not have when he wrote this. Alan Turing’s prosecution would have been fair for his time but it is not today. The way we treat animals today is okay in many societies. But the future generation might find it disgusting. If we think something is fair (or unfair), it is to do with our exposure, our background. People do not operate in vacuum. Societies play a huge part — not only in one’s upbringing but also in building one’s world view.
Anyway, I have said enough on this topic and I am also worried about abusing this comments space. So I will try not to add more to this discussion.
LikeLike
praneshp
June 24, 2019
@anaon: Ah, the old “I’ll close my eyes, and the problem will vanish” trick.
Nobody forced Bollywood to remake arjun reddy (or singham lol)
LikeLike
Honest Raj
June 26, 2019
@Isai: Bhuvana Oru Kelvikkuri was an exception rather than norm. The “pathbreaking” thing about the film was the casting. Rajini was hardly a star – he was mostly confined to playing villainous roles then. Besides, his role was nothing more than that of a sacrificial lamb.
Also, consider Vaidehi Kaathirunthaal (Revathy doesn’t get remarried though), Chinna Thambi Periya Thambi, Oorkaavalan and Ponnu Veetukkaran. All follow the same template – the female lead becomes a widow on the same day as the wedding (read “before first night”). What do you think were the directors trying to convey by scripting such characters?
If you’re still not convinced about the influence of Tamil society on Tamil cinema in this regard, have a look at this:
https://www.maalaimalar.com/Cinema/CineHistory/2018/03/22231606/1152606/cinima-history-vijayakumar.vpf
LikeLiked by 1 person
Kashmoney
June 27, 2019
What about the movie Sukran? The female lead is sexually assaulted and is later seen having a healthy relationship with her boyfriend turned husband. This movie had Vijay guest star.
LikeLike
Ner Konda Paarvai
June 27, 2019
I want to know the release date. I am a big fan of thala ajith. I want this movie will be successful.
LikeLike
Nerkonda Paarvai
June 30, 2019
Hello Bro,
Thank for your update about another mass hit movie for Thala Ajith. Please update the release date and list of songs in Nerkonda Paarvai.
Thank You.
LikeLike
e221
August 9, 2019
@BR. Now the film is released, whats you assessment about the potential of director H.Vinoth. I believe H.Vinoth will be one of the most promising film maker who might make bigger impact in tamil cinema in coming years. Still, interested to know about you view about the director.
LikeLike