Spoilers ahead…
Text:
When I saw Mahesh Narayanan’s Malik recently, I was left with this question: Given how different the Tamil and Malayalam film industries and audiences are, is it possible to make something like Malik in Tamil?After watching Pa Ranjith’s Sarpatta Parambarai, I have the answer, and it’s a big fat yes. Why this comparison? Because, first, both films are epic in scope and sprawl, yet intimate in terms of emotions. One could almost say that they deal with micro-emotions.
Read the rest of this article at the link below.
Copyright ©2021 Film Companion.
Posted in: Cinema: Tamil, OTT / TV / Online
Baradwaj Rangan 
gnanaozhi
July 22, 2021
Hey BR, fie on you for this tantalising headline and then linking some Telugu movie in the links lol.
Jokes aside though wrong link alert
LikeLike
Jay
July 22, 2021
The link given points to a different page. Can you fix it please? Thanks!
LikeLike
ravenus1
July 22, 2021
The link usually gets updated when BR puts up a transcribed text version of his video review that is already hosted here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
bart
July 22, 2021
Saw your video BR. Loved the movie. I liked quite a few things that you had mentioned. My only quibble is with the lengthiness the screenplay has created. Like you had mentioned there are two fights before the mid-point which has its own dramatizations followed by the second half which feels a bit dragged on. Kalaiyarasan’s role had a well-justified arc I thought. The freshness in mileu, differently-thought training montages, intra-group rivalry, spunk in the women characters, period setup, the performances (supporting characters like Vettai Muthukumar was wow!) made the movie super solid.
The spillover characters who are shown low-end party workers in DMK regime and later in ADMK doing kadaththal, kalla-charayam business are based on some real-life characters I’ve heard of. Though this wasn’t explored and left to imagination, it added a bit of spice and colour. That probably requires its own movie. The inter-mingling of politics and sports and what brought its eventual death (the sport) could be part-2 :). Was surprised to see political flags, colours, symbols, figures used as-it-is without camouflaging. Bravo!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Aman Basha
July 22, 2021
BR must be in a hell of a good mood this week, review Malik, Sarpatta, do a VR interview for the first time.
” mediocre Kabaali and and the slightly better Kaala”
I must say Kaala>>>>Kabali. Post Endhiran, Rajini has been memorable only in Kaala and Petta IMO. One for deconstructing him and the other for restoring him.
LikeLike
Satya
July 22, 2021
I’m just glad the two-film deal is over. Now, Ranjith can go back to being Ranjith, and Rajinikanth (on the evidence of Karthik Subbaraj’s statement that his film with the superstar is an apolitical entertainer) can go back to being Rajinikanth.
That did happen, though not everyone is happy about it. You are a visionary BR! 😉
LikeLiked by 2 people
madhusudhan194
July 22, 2021
“I must say Kaala>>>>Kabali” – I completely agree. Haven’t seen Sarpatta yet. But I Kaala also had a dense screenplay and was full of raw energy. Casting Rajini was a problem because of his image and his statements before the film release backfired against the film. Although his performance was solid.
While watching Vaanam Kottatum, I kept wondering how Sarath Kumar would have been perfect for Kaala. But I guess the film wouldn’t have got the reach that Ranjith was aiming for. Still Kaala was miles ahead of Kabali in terms of writing, craft and the performances. It had a kickass villain too.
But Ranjith definitely needed to break free from Rajini to make better films. I guess it also helped him get a wider audience. I see hindi-speaking audience on twitter raving about Sarpetta. For Ranjith and his powerful voice, it is a big win.
LikeLiked by 2 people
KS
July 23, 2021
The movie felt like a blend of Maan Karate and Madras. That is, Maan Karate without the comedy, but with the usual Pa Ranjith actors and stock characters, and a few token shots of Buddha and Ambedkar and maybe a throwaway reference to beef biriyani. In fact, almost all Pa Ranjith movies feel like a rehash of old movies, but with a couple of frames of Buddha/Ambedkar conspicuously inserted in the background to serve as a drishti bommai to ward off criticism. Its like he can simply remake any of the old classic cliched movies about underdogs, dons, petty rivalry, and all he has to do to be lauded as a path-breaking revolutionary is to make the hero wear a blue shirt. Poor Atlee could really learn from this.
Also, whats with all the DMK and Stalin suck-up? That really stood out in a jarring way.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rambo
July 23, 2021
I enjoyed the movie and it did flow past despite the length. It did flag a bit post the almost fight where they tried to montage the decline, which was less convincing. The real heroes are the set and costume designers for sure – where even the extra’s were suitably hirsute and attired and even little things like the posters were of that era. What i struggled with is judging whether some of the emotional scenes were a bit OTT in terms of acting. Having seen people make a scene in public in chennai – where people are over dramatic – it maybe felt right, but there was a bit of 80s visu movie in some of the scenes. Overall – it was a good movie which used a predictable plotline to show you some great characters and let me relive the lovely backdrop both in time and place. But BR’s praise for it makes it seem like a master piece which it is not.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ragenikanth kannan
July 23, 2021
There is not SP without Kabali & Kaala , After Madras no one was ready to make a movie with Pa Ranjith is was Rajini who gave him BTB movies and made him popular across India and overseas , Yes Kabali was slightly disappointing but Kaala was very well made Movie.
And people saying Ranjith is back is joke, it was never out of form
LikeLike
Sam
July 23, 2021
Kind of off-topic, but did anyone notice similarities in the cinematography (not the techniques, but the actual picture quality) in the latest Amazon releases (Mailk, Sarpatta, Narappa)? Imo these similarities have been making the movies look more like tv shows. Not sure if Prime is regulating the cinematography of their releases or something, though I’m not sure how this would work if the movie was shot before they team opted for a Prime release. Maybe it’s all in my head, hahaha.
LikeLike
brangan
July 23, 2021
The text piece is up.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bala
July 24, 2021
One or two passing references to other movies is fine, here, you seems to have spent nearly 30-40 % of the time in talking about other movies. May be the comparisons, relationship exploration could have been a seperate video. I feel this movie deserved a standalone review of its own.
LikeLike
H. Prasanna
July 24, 2021
“made me fear we were losing a fine filmmaker to his ideology.”
Topic ready for next FC feature with BR and Vishal Menon (Why did you stop with “Pan India status of Prabhas”?). Would like to hear you talk in a safe space about “ideology and filmmakers”.
LikeLike
Rahul
July 24, 2021
Structurally and thematically, I saw this film as a combination of two Rockys , Rocky (till the first fight ) and. then Rocky II , from the end of the first fight till the end. Of course, this film packs a whole lot of other things in.
LikeLike
ravenus1
July 24, 2021
Having seen this, I thought BR enthused a little too much about the few and far between fresh elements, and glossed over the smack-in-your-face cliches and less digestible elements.
Kabilan is prevented by his mum from ever participating in boxing and gets his kicks from watching bouts. But in his first step inside the ring, with no training at all, he knocks out a practiced boxer.
His mum goes justifiably ballistic when she comes to know of his boxing, but she all-too-apparently comes and goes out of the film as per the script’s convenience. Whatever happened to that threat of self-immolation?
The fall of Kaliban was actually quite interesting, but seemed to suffer from being stuffed between two boxing drama installments, and appeared very hurried in the edit.
Rangan abandons Kabilan when he seems out of physical and psychological shape, some MacGuffin fisherman comes in and gets Kabilan in shape and then disappears. Rangan waltzes in at the end to lap up the credit for it.
There were points where the drama was at such a hysterical pitch I just wanted to plug my ears – when Kaliban does his “Woe is me” act ending with his mother saying, “Jaa beta, ab main bolti hu tu boxing kar” reminding me of all those 70’s movies where Nirupa Roy would take back the vow she made her hero son take to avoid fighting.
This could have been a lot better as a mini-series I feel, with more time to nurture the actually fresh elements. This here was an insufferably long cliched movie with a few interesting bits here and there.
Interesting that Prime showed this in 1.85:1, an unusual ratio for what would originally have been designed as a big screen movie.
LikeLiked by 4 people
Rahul
July 26, 2021
ravenus1 , Indeed, this film checks the boxes on many of the cliches , but IMHO it has a fresh approach towards them.
“Kabilan is prevented by his mum from ever participating in boxing and gets his kicks from watching bouts. But in his first step inside the ring, with no training at all, he knocks out a practiced boxer.”
Kabilan is kind of like Eklavya. He watches Rangan from afar and practices in his mind. He is obsessed with boxing as a kid. It may not make sense in real life, but in a film this much of backstory was enough for me.
“Whatever happened to that threat of self-immolation?”
Moms often make such threats.
“Rangan abandons Kabilan when he seems out of physical and psychological shape, some MacGuffin fisherman comes in and gets Kabilan in shape and then disappears. Rangan waltzes in at the end to lap up the credit for it.”
I thought this was interesting for a few reasons. Ironically this episode highlights that the importance of Rangan for Kabilan is not only about boxing, but it is about being an ideal – a friend, philosopher and a guide. Even the other coach could teach him the minutiae of boxing, but only Rangan could make it an existential issue for him, when he cheers him on at the last moment in the fight. The trope is still there, that the boxer needs the coach and wins him back, but it has been reimagined.
“reminding me of all those 70’s movies where Nirupa Roy would take back the vow she made her hero son take to avoid fighting.”
The difference is that usually the hero will stick to the vow , and then when he is getting beat up by the goons, the mother will release him from the vow. Here, Kabilan was in any case practicing boxing, though the feelings of the mother hung heavily on him. The mother also does not change her mind on the spur of the moment, but after realizing the trajectory of Kabilan’s life from when he got into professional boxing and when he drifted away from him. Once again, a more refreshing and thoughtful approach to the trope.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rishikesh
July 26, 2021
@brangan Thoroughly disliked Toofan, eh? I thought you had a special place in your heart for such old-school films. I frankly felt Mehra did his best to make the familiar feel new through the somewhat raw and gritty treatment. Things did fall apart in the last 30 minutes or so, but I felt film was sort of steady until then.
LikeLike
Rahul
July 26, 2021
I could go on and on about how other tropes were subverted. Normally we would expect the first fight to be won by the bad guy by cheating and the second fight to be a redemption for the hero. The first part is true but not quite. Technically the flight ended with Vembuli ending up as undefeated but the cheating is so blatant that it is a moral victory for Kabilan. The second fight is supposed to be a redemption for Vembuli instead of for Kabilan. Though Vembuli did cheat in the first fight , it was shown to be a last resort for him. He still has pride in his skills and wants to beat Kabilan fair and square. These are all plot points that are not formulaic.
I will not be surprised if Vembuli and Kabilan form a mutual admiration club after the second fight and just like Apollo Creed helped Rocky to fight Mr. T, Vembuli and Rose help Kabilan fight another boxer in the sequel.
LikeLike
brangan
July 26, 2021
Rahul: It’s uncanny how you listed so many of the points I wanted to tell ravenus. I will say more in the AskBR I am doing but I am sure Ranjith’s glorious return to form as a “filmmaker” must have also upped my live for this film.
Unlike many, I think KABALI and KAALA were dips in his career because (a) they looked like they stopped at the screenplay level and many scenes (except a few like the demise of the Dinesh character) were not “staged” with a director’s eye, which Ranjith did SO well in ATTAKATHI and MADRAS.
And (b) the films really struggled between superstar-ism and Ranjith-ism. I really got the feeling (I may be wrong) that somehow his hands were tied. (Compare the riot in KAALA to Anbu’s killing in MADRAS.)
Here, right from the first twenty minutes, I was on a constant filmmaking high. Along with the director’s ideologies, his “filmmaking” was back. And I am sure that added to my assessment.
Rishikesh: Old-school does not automatically mean I like it. What are the new things you are doing to the old template? That is what matters. I was invested only in the Paresh Rawal charcater and I wished the whole film had been about him trying to get a relationship with his granddaughter while hating her father.
LikeLike
Rad
July 26, 2021
Sarpatta Parambarai, Excellent Bugger!! I enjoyed it from start to end. Got hooked within first 10mts and felt this movie is going to be different. To me, I was impressed by how each showdown is staged. First showdown between Rangan and Duraikannu, how the chain of events lead to Kabilan and Raman fight and then to Kabilan and Dancing Rose. How political change impacts the characters. Kabilan’s fall connecting to Baakiyam’s fear. 3 hours just flew by.
@Rahul: Eklavya is a great insight. I didn’t make the connection. Now that you mentioned it, you can extend it further. Rangan doesn’t ask for the thumb!! Classic!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
ravenus1
July 26, 2021
@Rahul: Thanks for your comments. I agree with some of them, this is where I differ:
I did pick up on the Ekalavya element, but it would have been nice to at least show him practising by himself to foreshadow (it’s not like they stint on training sequences in the rest of the film). As is, it looks more like “Of course he beat the crap out of the guy even if he hasn’t the least bit of training, he’s the HERO.” For a film that’s supposed to make you take boxing seriously, it reduces it to the realm of standard movie fisticuffs (given that every bout in the film ends by a knockout, that seems to be the attitude – no one ever wins by points).
I don’t agree with your assessment of the Rangan-Kabilan equation in the second half. As I see it, Rangan abandons him (not in a mean-spirited / selfish way, but he does not fight to keep the hope up in his former star pupil and help him in his redemption). What is then the great spirit in him that Kabilan feels indebted to? It would have been far more emotionally engaging to see Rangan being actively involved in Kabilan’s healing / return to form.
LikeLike
Ravi
July 26, 2021
@ravenus1
“But in his first step inside the ring, with no training at all, he knocks out a practiced boxer”
That question was answered in one of the initial scenes – fleetingly though. When Arya complains to John Vijay about getting stopped at the gate, JV tells him it’s not enough to practice boxing in the bathroom; you need to get up there and fight to get recognized. With that and Arya observing Rangan’s coaching sessions from far, suggest that he was not totally out of it.
LikeLike
Rambo
July 26, 2021
While I don’t fully buy into @ravenus1 thesis, I do think there was a 70s’ 80’s movie sentimentality in the film that jarred a bit with other parts of the film. And that there were some cinematic liberties/flaws in the screenplay. For instance, Rangan sorts out Kabilan’s injured arm in the last fight scene but didn’t do anything in the first fight with a similar incident that was just as crucial for him to win. And bringing in the random fisherman for the Rambo montage did damage the Rangan character’s arc. Would have been better to see Rangan picking up the pieces and making him whole again (say after initially refusing to do so because he isn’t convinced of his redemption). Maybe use the fisherman as a zen master used to sort out his mental state first rather than making him a boxing instructor as well. But these flaws didn’t reduce the entertainment of the overall film. There were similar plot holes or flaws in the 2 earlier K films, but they stood out badly since there wasn’t much else going for those films (more Kabali than Kaala as others have said). Not so much here. I knew it was a predictable storyline and expected the cliches, but enjoyed it for the (very well sketched out) colourful characters and the milieu of 70s chennai.
LikeLike
Satya
July 27, 2021
Unlike many, I think KABALI and KAALA were dips in his career because (a) they looked like they stopped at the screenplay level and many scenes (except a few like the demise of the Dinesh character) were not “staged” with a director’s eye, which Ranjith did SO well in ATTAKATHI and MADRAS.
Kabali… yes, but Kaala wasn’t a complete dud. The intermission sequence was staged beautifully, about how Dharavi comes alive with Kaala at its centre, even when his physical presence is not around. The last song conveys this very well even without the support of the lyrics. I also can’t think of one scene in Ranjith’s works that manages to build characters without much chatter like the way it happens at the police station in this film. I have my reasons for not liking Kaala, but the political subtext and the way it is weaved into the script really works. Removing it can damage the film considerably, so I guess that was a success.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anuja Chandramouli
July 27, 2021
I like sports flicks even if they are not game – changers in that rousing genre. The Longest Yard, Remember the Titans, Rush, Dodgeball, the entire Rocky franchise and Creed are films I have watched more times than I care to remember. Million – Dollar Baby is one of my all-time fave films and it never fails to reduce me to a miserable puddle of tears. In short, I love sports films, unless they are made in India. Here people do weird things like cast Priyanka Chopra as Mary Kom, give Farhan Akhtar a chance to log in a whole lot of gym time to play Milkha Singh unconvincingly or whoever it was he played in Toofan, etc. Even the critically acclaimed Irudhi Suttru was a disappointment because I felt it was about a lot of things but the boxing itself which it was purportedly all about wound up somewhere at the bottom. Which is why Pa. Ranjith’s Sarpatta Parambarai was a refreshing change.
After the promise Ranjith showed with the excellent Madras, he went on to make the awful Kabali and Kaala which prompted me to set the bar really low for Sarpatta Parambarai but the film, while not lacking in the ideology he cares so much about and which yields mixed results cinematically speaking, treats the material with a certain dignity and has such innate respect for the sport of boxing, you can’t help but be charmed.
Sarpatta Parambarai’s oft told tale is of an underdog, Kabilan (Arya), who rises from the dumps only to fall so that he can rise again. None of this is groundbreaking, but Ranjith can be counted upon to freshen this stuff up. It helps that Ranjith always opts to work with a powerhouse cast. Pasupathy, is just pure dynamite! He conveys so much with his eyes and subtle use of body language, that it is impossible to take your eyes off him. The man is a study in understatement! John Vijay is excellent. The supporting cast of boxers – Santhosh Prathap as Raman, John Kokken as Vembuli and Shabeer Kallarakkal as Dancing Rose are so good, they easily eclipse Arya who is in his element in the training montages and inside the ring where he does a decent job of conveying intensity and aggression but in all the other scenes it is obvious that he is the lightweight among an impressive array of heavyweights. He is particularly horrendous in a scene where he has an emotional meltdown and wallows in self-pity. But the good thing about his character is that he is no saint, and despite his sins, you do root for him.
Kabilan’s journey is an impressive one although I found it hard to swallow that a rookie could take out pros in successive rounds with next to no training. Why do we keep showing this in our films? It doesn’t happen that way folks. Excellence in sports takes so much more than talent, aggression or inspiration. Boring things like endless training, hard work and dedication are called for. A couple of training montages before a big match is just not going to cut it. Just once, I would like to see a protagonist who lives, eats, sleeps, breathe his chosen sport allowing for no distractions. I doubt a project like that would be green – lit but I daresay it takes just that kind of maniacal commitment to achieve sporting glory!
Be that as it may, of course we have to talk about the caste as well as class divide that is always present felt in Ranjith’s films. There are characters like Thanigan (Vettai Muthukumar) who would prefer the likes of Kabilan to beg for alms in front of their homes, shovel up cow dung or slave for them but draw the line at him going on to represent and win for their Sarpattai clan. His devilry to stop the progress of Kabilan is reprehensible, unpalatable and in the climatic stretch, somewhat unconvincing. One wishes Ranjith would temper his passionate beliefs with just a touch of balanced perspective because ironically, while he has raised his voice against those who would trod upon the rights of lower caste members and blue – collar workers, he seems to endorse those boxing clans like ‘Sarpatta parambarai’, ‘Idiyappa parambarai’ etc. though it is almost a given that it must be a struggle for aspiring boxers to gain acceptance to these clans with the inordinate pride some of them take in their identity and their reluctance to let outsiders in. Sounds familiar? I have always wondered at the bias displayed by people who raise their voice against bias.
That aside, critics always rave about the ‘powerful’ women characters in Ranjith’s films but I beg to differ. Bakkiyam (Anupama Kumar) as Kabilan’s mum, Mariamma (Dushara Vijayan) his wife and even, Sanchana Natrajan while solid performers are given nothing to do but scream and berate the men in their lives in an endless litany. The interminable shrieking is at the shrillest pitch possible and really grates on the nerves. It is commendable that these women make the men earn their respect, but I would have appreciated them more had they gone about it in a less hysterical manner. And I really wish, that a woman who repeatedly whacks her son with a broomstick isn’t applauded as ‘feisty’. Abuse is abuse whether it is a man or woman meting it out and I wish folks would stop treating it like a perfectly acceptable thing.
However, grouses notwithstanding, Sarpatta Parambarai has some beautiful moments. I loved that Dancing Rose berates his buddy’s less than honourable conduct while later bolstering the same fallen comrade by telling him that there is no shame in a loss if you have fought with honor and given the best you have got. I misted up at that. Incidentally, he is the only character who is a decent sport. Everyone else with their mulish clannishness including the hero would have done better to exalt the sport of boxing more than their petty rivalries.
Another aside worthy of a mention is when coach Rangan returns from jail and has a private moment with his wife, where they exchange a look of heart melting fondness though they are in the middle of a crowd… Ranjith does his best work when he brings out these small, intimate moments that establish the bonds shared by his characters and these triumph over the more epic stretches he stages though they are effective too. Ultimately, Sarpatta Parambarai may not quite deliver a knockout punch but it is definitely a helluva fight!
LikeLike
sachita
July 30, 2021
Anuja:
One of the points Pa. Ranjith repeatedly makes is he wants to capture life in north madras.
” but I would have appreciated them more had they gone about it in a less hysterical manner”
These women are feisty independent and hysterical too. So he probably wanted to capture that too considering the era.
In Madras the women were strong but they represent a different era.
“Abuse is abuse whether it is a man or woman”
i agree with this too but just wanted to poined out above too.
(Personally the broomstick scenes made me push the fast forward option).
LikeLike
brangan
July 31, 2021
sachitta: I don’t think “hysterical women” (or men, for that matter) can be boxed into either an era or a caste/class or a geographical zone. They exist everywhere and across time, and in a screenplay, the point is whether the woman’s “hysteria” is justified — and I think that is done very satisfactorily here.
Anuja: On your point about abuse, THIS particular woman in THIS particular piece of fiction felt that THIS particular behaviour of THIS particular son warranted THIS particular punishment.
And yes, I laud this characterisation. Not because this makes the mother “feisty” but because I see a woman at her wit’s end, constantly facing the same behaviour from her son.
If you want to take this piece of fiction into the real world and frame it as “abuse”, then I would say the son is as guilty of “emotional abuse”, by constantly (and even as a grown-up), repeating “trigger-inducing behavioural patterns”.
We cannot fully “enter” any fictional world if we constantly keep thinking “what if this happened in the real world”. And this “entering” is key to getting involved (and losing onesself) within a movie and its characters.
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
July 31, 2021
Sachitha: “These women are feisty independent and hysterical too. So he probably wanted to capture that too considering the era.
In Madras the women were strong but they represent a different era.”
Like BR pointed out, you will find women like that in all eras across all walks of life. But while I admit Ranjith probably had his heart in the right place, my issue was that all three female characters had to use those melodramatic gambits and shrill voices to drive home their admittedly sensible points. Ranjith’s depiction of the men was far more balanced with even characters like Vembuli, Dancing Rose sketched out in a nuanced manner. There are so many shades for the male characters whereas with these women, they were pretty unidimensional even if Ranjith is far more sympathetic in his treatment of these ladies.
It is an issue I have with most of these promising directors. They veer between portraying women as candidates for sainthood or as shrews (even if they are made to be flagbearers of feminism to establish woke credentials). It is too simplistic and makes one wonder if these guys have meaningful relationships with any of the women in their lives. There is absolutely no attempt to understand and depict the complexity of the feminine psyche… That is such a pity!
BR: “THIS particular woman in THIS particular piece of fiction felt that THIS particular behaviour of THIS particular son warranted THIS particular punishment.
And yes, I laud this characterisation. Not becuase this makes the mother “feisty” because I see a woman at her wit’s end, constantly facing the same behaviour from her son.”
Fair enough. But it bothered me that she was whacking him even as a child and showering him with abuse when his behaviour wasn’t actually problematic since he was chasing his dream. Sure, she is battling her own demons from the past, but that still doesn’t justify her harshness to the son, especially since she makes it a point to do it in front of everyone. I firmly believe that abuse breeds abuse so she is definitely to blame at least partly for Kabilan’s abusive behaviour as a traumatized adult. That woman’s character made me really really uncomfortable. Just pointed it out. And it was also bugging that the director was asking us to sympathize and understand when she is hitting this fella so hard with a broomstick! Exact same problem with Alia’s character in Gully Boy when she broke a bottle over a rival’s head and it was supposed to be a cutesy thing to do!
‘If you want to take this piece of fiction into the real world and frame it as “abuse”, ‘
In my head, the fictional world is every bit as real as the real world. As Dumbledore told HP, just because something happens in your head it doesn’t mean it isn’t real. Which is probably why I have always felt the same principles hold true in both worlds. As in, if something is problematic in La La land, but doesn’t spill over into the real world, it doesn’t mean it ceases to be problematic right?
LikeLike
Madan
July 31, 2021
“As Dumbledore told HP, just because something happens in your head it doesn’t mean it isn’t real. ” – IMO this example itself shows why expecting the fictional world to conform 100% to the real one is unsustainable. Because HP itself is totally made up in every degree and unabashedly so. As with anything else in the genres of fantasy or comic superhero. Yes, people identified with JK and were disillusioned when she turned out to be a transphobe and likewise MAGA-verse identifies with some comic superheros. But that’s their problem, not that of the creators of art in either case.
LikeLike
JPhil
July 31, 2021
I sat down to see this with my teen son and he predicted every twist in this movie before it was announced by an ( admittedly ) unobtrusive soundtrack .
When the director sat down to capture the story of boxing clubs in an era in Madras on a backdrop of political turmoil , this is the best story he could come up with ? Underdog boxer wins fight which is metaphor for life etc . ? I found it difficult to engage with a very predictable format .What was missing was a loyal friend who dies bleeding in his arms !
.Like ‘Malik’ , found that the filmmaking was top notch but the actual story told too pat .
And my dear genius BR , I saw some recent chatter on the RDB review and was reminded of those reviews of yours. With every respect please resurrect those . This transcribed video stuff is not you !
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
July 31, 2021
Madan: “IMO this example itself shows why expecting the fictional world to conform 100% to the real one is unsustainable.”
Dude, whoever said anything about the fictional world having to conform 100% to the real world? Of course that would be unsustainable. IMO, the boundaries between the two are constantly blurring and what applies in the real world applies in fantasy land and vice versa.
“Yes, people identified with JK and were disillusioned when she turned out to be a transphobe”
Are you kidding me with that? JK is a transphobe because she said the term ‘women’ ought to be used as opposed to ‘people who menstruate’? I’ll just go ahead and say it. This sort of PC BS makes me mad as heck! In a country where female infanticide is such a bloody norm and where it takes so much for a woman or a girl child to hold her head up high and be proud of herself, this sort of nonsense is the last thing we need. Why on earth, should we negate the identity of women/girls and say ‘people who menstruate’ or ‘people who have their periods’? What about little girls who haven’t started menstruating or older women who have hit menopause? Shall we pretend that they do not exist in the interest of establishing our wokeness?
And may I ask why we are not asked to say ‘people who stand up and pee’ instead of men/boys? Also if ranting about this makes me a TERF (Trans Exclusionary Radical Feminist) where is the equivalent term for men who couldn’t care less for according equal rights to women let alone trans – women?
It is bad enough that being a proud feminist (or is that Peoplewhomenstruateist?) makes you an object of scorn and ridicule with too many using the term as an insult now we have to deal with this mammoth pile of crap! Enough is enough!
First it was “people who menstruate”. Now it is “birthing people”. Suddenly using “Women” is no longer acceptable. Apparently, it is a “non – inclusive” term that can no longer be used. Talk off political correctness gone completely off the rails! Milli Hill was cancelled, trolled and viciously abused because she dared to suggest that “women” be used alongside terms like “birthing people” especially when the topic on hand is pregnancy, menstruation, obstetric violence and anything at all related to the female anatomy. She talks about it at length here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0431a0e6-e890-11eb-baaa-861dba20d87a?shareToken=3338ab7196e096a126cb1616ae320b14
It is pathetic that JK, Hill and others were forced to endure this level of hatred by the same folks who believe themselves to be on the right side of history, urge everyone to join the “be kind” brigade and be inclusive. How you can preach inclusiveness while trying to exclude progressive women who have actively advocated liberal causes for not agreeing with your terminology and exercising their right to question it is beyond me! Irony just died in a convulsive fit, kicking and screaming!!
But I am glad feminists (and no, that is not the same as TERF) are pushing back!
P.S: This rant does not mean I am against trans rights. I support the LGBTQIA community and I apologise if this came across as anti trans rights. To clarify, I am merely anti bullshit. Thanks for understanding.
LikeLike
Jallikattu lover
July 31, 2021
What’s with the MGR omission man? The guy brought freakin’ Muhammad Ali to Chennai in the same period!!
If you are making a film about Boxing, and naming parties and historical events, why would you choose to omit this? If I ever to interview Ranjith, I would definitely bring this up.
LikeLike
Madan
July 31, 2021
“IMO, the boundaries between the two are constantly blurring and what applies in the real world applies in fantasy land and vice versa.” – No, what happens in fantasy land does not apply in the real world because by definition, it cannot. It does not matter if somebody was ‘inspired’ by fantasy land. They have to still act on it to do something in the real world. So…to use the most absurd example to make my point, the kids trying to imitate Shaktimaan got badly injured because you cannot defy gravity in real life. The same principle applies in HP too except that the fetishization of it was enabled a long time ago for reasons that have been unclear to me.
But the larger point is, a fantasy world is necessarily one that originates in the writer’s imagination and hence why we have to always grant the leeway that something happening in a work of fiction may not conform to what we expect would unfold in a comparable real life situation (and here when I say fantasy I mean fiction in general other than fiction that claims to be based on real life events). Said another way, I hate deux es machinas but I am not going to say they shouldn’t be there.
As for JK, she said or did a LOT of other stuff apart from people who menstruate. Not going to go there because if you’re so deeply convinced she’s not transphobic, there’s nothing I can say to you that would change your mind. I am not going to call you a TERF or anything for that because I don’t believe in guilt by association. But that again is also the reason I find calls for responsibility in art troublesome. I make exceptions for things like glorifying stalkers for obvious reasons, but I would not like to hold every film situation to a microscopic gaze to examine whether it meets the reality test. That imo defeats the point of fiction. I have complained at times about not being able to buy into something shown in a film but that’s down to the writing and not about whether it looked real life enough. Dharavi never looked the way it does in Nayakan, so neat and well organized. So? Does that make it a problematic film?
LikeLike
sachita
July 31, 2021
Anuja: I see your point. In Madras, Ranjith managed to portray Rithvika’s(Kalaiarasan’s wife) character and Catherine’s character (karthi’s girlfriend) differently. Here that isnt the case.
BR/Anuja:
It is still abuse even if she has her reasons. She does it repeatedly here and he is bound by the fact that she is his mother and a single mother at that.
Culturally, this resorting to violence at personal level wasn’t considered wrong for a long time in our society ( a lot of other countries too). In this era,I do think people now realize it is wrong.
i am sure some people still dont think twice before switching from verbal disagreement to physical abuse within the family.
It does happen in life and dont see any issue in Ranjith portraying it.
LikeLike
sai16vicky
August 1, 2021
But we are humans first and art appreciators second right? If “I am” watching a movie about a pedophile, “I am” most certainly going to conjure up fears of what kind of damage he/she might end up causing to “my” near-and-dear if they happened to live in “my” surroundings. It’s that instinctive; it really is.
Not doing this obvious thing and deciding to “lose” oneself in the movie, feels like treating art as an addiction. (No offense intended to anyone here.) It doesn’t seem all that different from say immersing oneself into drugs/alcohol.
LikeLike
Madan
August 1, 2021
“But we are humans first and art appreciators second right? If “I am” watching a movie about a pedophile, “I am” most certainly going to conjure up fears of what kind of damage he/she might end up causing to “my” near-and-dear if they happened to live in “my” surroundings. ” – OK, so when you watched Silence of the Lambs, did you really apprehend Buffalo Bill visiting your locality one day? Did you think Alex from Clockwork Orange would one day come by your neighbourhood looking for his fix of the ‘old ultraviolence’? Let me stretch it further. Did you think Damien the Satanic one from The Omen would demonize your home?
I think half the problem here is our films are so soft, so timid when it really comes down to it. So they don’t push the audience far enough, to the point where the audience would finally have to accept suspension of disbelief is the only option. Albeit I find this line of argument disingenuous in the Indian context anyway because we KNOW Rajnikanth can’t REALLY pull off the fight scenes he shows in the films. Why is it different when the character is evil? The audience cannot have a dichotomy in their head where they allow heroes to get away with rewriting the laws of physics while they want negative characters to be more life-like.
“Not doing this obvious thing and deciding to “lose” oneself in the movie, feels like treating art as an addiction.” – And I duly submit that it is much less dangerous to be addicted to art than to alcohol or drugs or any number of other addictions that can kill. Why should we seek to police art when alcohol is freely sold in most states in India to earn precious revenue for our fiscally profligate govts? Heck, why do we not police religious addiction which in my view is the second most dangerous addiction of all (with the most dangerous being the addiction to wealth and resource, the root of most wars fought in the history of human civilization)? It’s not like society isn’t monumentally f-ed up in myriad ways that ‘fixing’ art has to be the priority. We have this impulse to do so again and again because art is a soft target. It is easy to stop a person from saying something we don’t want to hear, much harder to control their actions.
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
August 1, 2021
“No, what happens in fantasy land does not apply in the real world because by definition, it cannot. It does not matter if somebody was ‘inspired’ by fantasy land. They have to still act on it to do something in the real world. So…to use the most absurd example to make my point, the kids trying to imitate Shaktimaan got badly injured because you cannot defy gravity in real life. The same principle applies in HP too”
Madan, to use the same eg. The kids watched Shaktimaan on TV in real life. Fantasized about doing what he does and the fantasy spilled over into real life resulting in injury. This is what I said about blurred boundaries. The fantasy gave the push and confidence to do something that defies rationale so it’s role cannot be discounted as immaterial. The two lands are therefore not as separate as you want them to be. And it doesn’t always lead to accidents either. Professional athletes like Novak, Kohli, visualise their goals over and over again in their heads and make it happen, transcending ordinary physical abilities to make the extraordinary possible.
“But the larger point is, a fantasy world is necessarily one that originates in the writer’s imagination and hence why we have to always grant the leeway that something happening in a work of fiction may not conform to what we expect would unfold in a comparable real life situation (and here when I say fantasy I mean fiction in general other than fiction that claims to be based on real life events).”
If you want to look at it that way, reality is also stranger than fiction etc. but my larger point is also the same as yours that anything goes in fiction and I am not really a stickler for conformity to real world scenarios etc. but this character’s arc was problematic for me personally. And no, I didn’t feel like I was yanked out from the narrative because I was conflating it with real life issues. Even in a fictional milieu it bothered me because for me personally there is this constant blurring of boundaries between both worlds and it doesn’t matter to me if I am in one or the other.
“But that again is also the reason I find calls for responsibility in art troublesome.”
I actually feel the same way despite everything I said that sounded otherwise. When something bothers me , I wish the maker had been more sensitive but at the same time I acknowledge that it is the creator’s call when it comes to his work of art and he is entitled to do whatever he sees fit. Was just discussing my personal response to it. That’s all.
As for JK, all I can say is that while I am all for gender expression, it still doesn’t make sense to pretend that biological sex does not exist because believe me it does. Pointing that out doesn’t make one a trans phobe. And neither does insisting that trans – inclusion not compromise women’s rights.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
August 1, 2021
“The kids watched Shaktimaan on TV in real life. Fantasized about doing what he does and the fantasy spilled over into real life resulting in injury. This is what I said about blurred boundaries. The fantasy gave the push and confidence to do something that defies rationale so it’s role cannot be discounted as immaterial. ” – What I am trying to say is the responsibility when people confuse fantasy and reality lies with the audience and not the creator. I don’t think you disagree on that anyway so we’re good.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
August 2, 2021
Anuja, not jumping into the larger discussion, but did want to address this point: Exact same problem with Alia’s character in Gully Boy when she broke a bottle over a rival’s head and it was supposed to be a cutesy thing to do!
But it wasn’t supposed to be cutesy at all. The audience were not supposed to sympathise with her. The film certainly didn’t – Kalki files a police report; her parents are called to the police station; Ranveer’s character breaks up with her. In fact, he makes it very clear that he thinks she’s psychotic. That Kalki later withdraws the case is a different point altogether – she’s leaving the country.
As the audience, I certainly didn’t feel any sympathy for her, nor did I think her cute. I remember the shock I felt when I saw that scene. You realise how troubled a person she actually is – and her background makes you realise why she is the way she is. But it never glorifies that behaviour – the film punishes her for it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
sai16vicky
August 3, 2021
@Madan: Any movie (or any piece of work for that matter) that I have seen so far (at least an adult), I have always had my human instincts kicking and alive. This includes ‘Talk to Her’, ‘Last Tango in Paris’, ‘Lolita’, ‘Origin of the world’ and the list goes on.
Well, for starters, alcohols and cigarettes come with a sign saying ‘They are injurious to health’. What do movies come with? For example, ‘Pokiri’ that a ‘Mambazhamaam’ song, which would redefine crassness in every sense, came with a ‘U/A’ Certification that allowed kids to watch it (with parental guidance).
So that gets a pass because it’s ‘art’? Do you really think it’s a soft target in this case? Art forms that are commercialized must be scrutinized as much as any commercial product. Now, one may doubt these scrutinizing standards but at the very least, they must exist.
LikeLike
Madan
August 3, 2021
“Any movie (or any piece of work for that matter) that I have seen so far (at least an adult), I have always had my human instincts kicking and alive. ” – Then I would say that in itself is problematic as it would make any movie with a reasonable amount of violence very difficult to watch. I am curious here. How would you transpose this attitude to say watching Formula 1? How would it be possible to watch it without screaming whenever two drivers make the slightest contact at some ridiculous speed we lesser mortals can never drive at? Like when Alonso and Hamilton touched wheels last Sunday and nothing happened. You know that they know what they’re doing, right? You know you’re not supposed to dive from 30 feet high into a pool attempting somersaults in the air just because Olympic athletes can. Why does not that apply in art? We know it comes with a don’t try it at home sticker.
“Well, for starters, alcohols and cigarettes come with a sign saying ‘They are injurious to health’. ” – Not alcohol, just cigarettes. And please do educate me as to the manner in which movies can literally kill you in the way too much cigarettes or alcohol can. Prove to me that watching movies is as likely to kill you as smoking or drinking. And forget killing yourself, you may kill others if under excessive influence of drinking. Are you going to drive your car into somebody else just because you watched three back to back shows at the movies? Really? Thank you for making my point for me that movies are a soft target as you do not even acknowledge the difference in proportionality in possible harm done as between cigarettes/alcohol v/s movies. But it’s not just proportionality but a matter of agency which I will address below:
“Art forms that are commercialized must be scrutinized as much as any commercial product.” – But are any and all commercial products really scrutinized in the way art is? Do we ban the sale of expensive cars that can accelerate to a very high speed or do we insist that only drivers with a special licence can drive them? No, we don’t. And these high flying BMWs and Porsches do kill. Somebody is put in jail but the life lost is never coming back. But has anybody even suggested that the sale of such cars should be regulated? No. We accept that the responsibility lies with a bad driver. So how is it any different when it comes to art? I am sorry but I really do not accept the implicit argument that the audience is somehow devoid of agency when it comes to art. If you are unable to separate fact from fiction, you should not watch, as simple as that. The responsibility to manage your reaction to art lies with you, not with the creator. If we did not accept this implicit premise, the entirety of a capitalist arrangement of society would collapse.
LikeLike
Anuja Chandramouli
August 3, 2021
“But it wasn’t supposed to be cutesy at all. The audience were not supposed to sympathise with her. The film certainly didn’t – Kalki files a police report; her parents are called to the police station; Ranveer’s character breaks up with her. In fact, he makes it very clear that he thinks she’s psychotic. That Kalki later withdraws the case is a different point altogether – she’s leaving the country.”
Anu Warrior: But that is just a slap on the wrist given the gravity of her actions! And since there is no case filed she gets away scot – free. Plus, was there any doubt that Ranveer and Alia would reconcile? The film asks you to root for this pair! It was just played to up the emotional stakes for Murad.
Earlier in the film, she savagely assaults another rival at that person’s place of work. When she is pulled up for her behaviour, she very cutely convinces everyone including the Vic’s parents that she is not to blame and tells them to check her rival’s phone where V day msgs to Murad are found and she is shamed for it. In that scene, you were definitely supposed to cheer for Alia and her ‘cleverness’. I felt the scenes with Kalki were merely an extension of the same… Even Ranveer gets mad this time around only because Kalki is a benefactor and has been crucial to kickstarting his career. So the film suggests that he is self – serving and has chosen his career and a white chick over his sweet gf and you are supposed to applaud when they get back together.
Anyway, it doesn’t matter. As I said, it is a bit of a personal reaction and a trigger when certain forms of abuse are portrayed on screen. I adore Tarantino and horror movies and barely flinch at the blood and gore on display but there are other times, when I am haunted by relatively milder stuff for whatever reason and vent about it here with varying degrees of outrage. Go figure!!
LikeLike
Anu Warrier
August 3, 2021
@Anuja, fair enough. The thing is, I didn’t find her cute in either of those scenes. I discovered she was not ‘heroine material’. What I took away from those scenes is how possessive she is and how manipulative she could be.
But you’re right about personal reactions. Sometimes there’s no ‘logical’ reason why you feel that way. Your logic seems perfectly, well, logical to you. (At least, that’s what I tell myself! 🙂 )
LikeLike
Ramit
August 4, 2021
In the bottle smashing scene, we were meant to sympathize with Alia. At least we were meant to not villainise her. There was an elaborate setup for that scene. We were shown how she had been lied to. How she had been cheated. We were meant to share her anger. The bottle smashing scene was further meant to establish her bold/passionate character. When Kalki withdraws the FIR, we don’t oppose. We don’t desperately want her to press the charges. If instead, there was another character whose ‘love’ or ‘soft’ arc had not been established earlier then we might have been livid if FIR against him/her for a violent act was withdrawn. But this is what good movies do. They can make us feel different from our normal behavior.
For example, one emotional scene with Sulekha Sikri in Badhai Ho, and we forget how she had been torturing Neena Gupta. Without that scene, we won’t have been this much in awe of Sulekha Sikri’s character.
I can understand how an alert and aware viewer like Anu can differentiate the good and the bad in a scene but it’s not the case for all viewers. For example, the friend I saw the movie Pink with said he initially thought Amitabh Bachchan’s character was stupid for not offering any counter arguments early in the case. I was shocked to hear this. For me, it was so obvious that the movie was deliberately painting him clueless so as to make a rousing scene for him to impress the audience with later. My friend’s reaction in a way justifies the filmmaker’s choice for predictable trope.There are actually viewers who thought Amitabh was indeed clueless.
In summary, I think Gully Boy did normalize (unwittingly though) the toxic behavior of Alia’s character. (there was hooting at the bottle smashing scene in the threatre where I saw the movie).
LikeLike
Sri Prabhuram
March 6, 2023
Very curious to see where Ranjith goes with this sequel.
LikeLike