By Vishnu Mahesh Sharma @ vishnumaheshsharma@gmail.com
We have seen so many films where the hero meets the heroine when the heroine is accomplishing an act of theft. Case in point Amar Akbar Anthony, Parvarish and Thupparivaalan. In these kind of films, this portion, apart from giving the heroine melodramatic reasons/motives for theft, doubles up as love at first sight for the hero. However, other than this nothing particular comes out of the sequence. The scene remains one of the masala tropes using which a bit comedy, a bit romance, a bit melodrama and a love song (in some cases)can be placed in the screenplay.
While watching Virupaksha, I felt the same about the hero-meets-heroine scene. Here also, the hero sets his eyes on the heroine while she is stealing a rooster. Their eyes meet and he instantly falls for her. However,by the time the film reached its concluding portions, I realized that even after being so similar to a conventional meet-cute scene, how different (read creepy) the scene actually was.
Note: The rest of the write up contains major spoilers. So if you have not watched the film, I would suggest you not to read further and come back to it once you have watched the movie.
In the mid portions of the film, we get to know that anyone- who witnesses the death (dead body) the first-gets possessed by a spirit. The spirit leaves the dead body and enters into the witness’ body through his/her eyes. Now here, we scratch the surface and get a devious layer. Because, when our hero looks, the very first time, at the heroine, the only facial features those are visible to the hero are her eyes for rest of her face is covered with a scarf. Scratch the surface one more time. And what is the color of the scarf!- It is RED!!!.
Thus after scratching the surface twice, we understand that the scene serves as a foreshadow that these very eyes would cause bloodshed in the village. The genius of writing is the scene is not content with this symbolism and foreshadowing. It goes a step further. Which means there is more to scratch and more subtext to discover.
So, what is that the girl stealing? No money, No bread, No double roti, No jewelry. She is stealing- a rooster. Moreover, if we hear the noises from the background, we get to know that the thief has been stealing roosters for a while. The question arises, why would a daughter of the village lord indulge herself in such a petty act? This we get to know in the concluding portions of the film. We observe that sacrificing a rooster (cutting its neck by one’s own teeth) is an integral part of an occult (black magic or Sidhdhi). When the hero meets the girls, by this time, she is still trying to expert the occult. She is still experimenting with the practice to master it. That is why she needed all those roosters every now and then till the time she perfected the occult.
Time to scratch the surface one final time and think about it in hindsight after watching the film. The seemingly romantic scene is, now, no more the same, instead, we see that it is filled with tinges of scare and spookiness.And, It is commendable that in a movie (which on its surface a super natural thriller) a plain and done to death scene is so very rich with color symbolism, foreshadowing and metaphor. It, in its body, follows every formulaic trope to the hilt. Nevertheless, in its spirit, it is so very different from those routine scenes by working not only at macro level, as a meet-cute scene, but also at micro level, as a red herring and intentional loose end (to be tightened in the climactic portions). One of the best examples of accommodating a necessary masala devil (read succubus) in the screenplay by giving it a purpose and a soul.
SorenKierky
May 31, 2023
Sukumar is perhaps the best amost Telugu writers when it comes to world-building. Stripped down, Rangasthalam is nothing exceptional, but the characters/atmosphere/moments are woven in well enough, he spends enough time for that. Here, it’s a bit more fast paced, but it’s subversive enough and the attention to detail is good enough for it to work well.
Except for the fag end of the climax (which was weak and generic, but still nothing terrible enough to ruin it for you), the movie’s horrors come from the atmosphere and detailing of the characters/milieu, which is the biggest success. Nothing could take away from that, not even the expressionless lead.
@BR, surprised to see you skipped this on. It’s on Netflix, defo worth watching IMO.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Vishnu
June 1, 2023
@SorenKierky : Apart from atmosphere, the generics of mainstream templates are used for specific reasons. Case in point deafness of the hero in Rangasthalam. His deafness doesn’t give him an opportunity to do something extraordinary for his hearing capability. Compare that with blindness of the hero in Kaabil. There the lead extracts revenge through means which would be outright impossible even for a man with all senses intact. But in Rangasthalam, the lack of hearing sense remains the hero’s vulnerability only. He ca read lips and denies to put on hearing aid but after the tragedy he regrets it and would make out the actual culprit only after putting hearing aid. So the strength lies in his resolve and not in the weakness of his senses. Thus even after following the template of a-man-with-disability-taking-revenge, the film carves it’s own formula within the conventional formula.
Same goes with Virupaksha as well. A spirit is out to take revenge of wrongdoing by people against it. But this spirit also, like in any other horror film, possesses body but at the same time, it is provided with a body as well. The heroine knowingly and voluntarily invites the spirit and becomes a medium to extract revenge. So, we can say, again by deviating slightly from the template, the film invents it’s own formula within a formula. The film experiments within the contour of routine horror film pattern. And I think that is why even an emotionless lead could not spoil the mood for the reliance was more on these slight deviations than the routine tropes.
LikeLike
brangan
June 4, 2023
SorenKierky: I liked the film more as an idea. Had I read Sukumar’s screenplay and imagined it, I would thought this would make a great movie. (The scene Vishnu talks about, for instance — it’s genius!) But the very generic direction killed the film for me. Thrillers and horror films — more than any other genre — rely on mood and atmosphere, and here, that was missing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jeeva Pitchaimani
June 4, 2023
Rangan, need a help.
The writing was not generic in my opinion. It was about a particular village, their customs and people. How do u characterise direction as ‘generic’? In my opinion it is difficult to separate both writing and direction rite especially in a film like this? Can you please explain ?
LikeLike
kaizokukeshav
June 5, 2023
Virupaksha was an oddity in itself. It had some great dark suspense moments and weird reveals at the same time. One sentence that kept ringing is, ‘I never watched a movie like this that mixed horror and logic’.
Black-magic movies are difficult to convince. But the concept of creating ‘network-effect’ and using it as revenge plot line was a wow moment. The climax looked like a retcon than a meaningful addition and should have been totally avoided. Also the darkness was too intense for general audience.
With the inexperience and budgeting issues, the director gets the benefit of doubt. He should be given a chance for another shot at bigger uncomplicated movies and less-darker themes. B Ajneesh Loknath was outstanding in this movie. He has a great future.
LikeLiked by 1 person
brangan
June 5, 2023
Jeeva: The writing was not generic, as I said. As for direction, see this lighter scene from SEVEN:
It does not stand out — staging wise, lighting-wise, colour-wise, even mood-wise. It is one of a piece with the rest of the film. With VIRUPAKSHA, however, you get everything so brightly lit up like a serial — everyone dressed so perfectly. The scene where Samyuktha is guarding over the two lovers in the cottage should have been so much more moody. It now feels like a generic scene. The only scene that worked for me (directorially) is when the guy is run over and the girl doesn’t cry out or anything. She is just dazed and she returns. But after that, the beehive scene is again so impersonally staged.
A lot of directors today (and perhaps rightly so) don’t want much ‘stay’ – and they ask the editor for quicker cuts. See NEELAVELICHAM to see what a good director can do with eerie material (though that film has narrative issues).
Then again, VIRUPAKSHA is a huge hit and NEELAVELICHAM bombed — so go figure 🙂
LikeLike