Tag: movies

  • Onam, OTT & Culture

    Until recently, I was a fan of Rajinikanth’s screen swag. It wasn’t just the recent releases that dampened my enthusiasm. When Kabali released, I was awed. Not just by the performance, but by what I then thought was statesmanship. That was when a Tamil colleague schooled me on contexts, including politics, that I had no clue about. Since then, though I haven’t stopped watching regional movies, I stop at an ” I liked/didn’t like it”.

    Onam reminded me of this. Or rather, it served as a trigger to write this. It began with the chatter around Malayalam films, thanks to OTT. Movies, I have believed, are a cultural phenomenon. On one hand, when someone who is not a Malayali talks up a movie, I am happy about the “cultural exchange”. When that develops into a misplaced sense of authority and expertise, it becomes irritating. When it goes into the level of actors apologising because idiots don’t get references, it becomes angst. Of course you have never heard of Pattanapravesham! You have to go 32 years back to know the damn context. “Can you please end subtitles?” Nuances, commentary, references are often lost in translation. But that’s a two-way street, and movies are a business. [Aside: This could be the next level of Amazon Prime’s X-Ray feature, or even an Alexa skill]

    Onam itself has been hijacked quite a bit by Insta influenza. In the real world, in non-Corona years, this means you hear “haath se khaana padega?”, if you’re waiting to pick up your sadya in a restaurant. Or, worse case, if you’re waiting for a table, all the best. The photoshoot takes time. But this is a relatively smaller threat. The larger one plays out on Twitter –  the politics of Vaman Jayanthi (h added for spite) vs Mahabali! With Malayalis participating instead of celebrating, with snide comments in Keralese. Ha! And all I want to do is wear my mundu, eat my sadya, drink alcohol, watch a movie and in general, have a nice day. That, I have realised, cannot co-exist with being present on social media on that day.

    Access to culture has become easy. You don’t need to learn Malayalam to watch a movie. You also don’t need a Malayali friend to eat a sadya. Both the language and the friend would have helped set context, and contributed to a deeper understanding. But who cares in the age of superficiality and instant gratification?

    I realise that a lot of this is just angst – at a couple of well kept secrets being commoditised, trivialised, and hijacked beyond redemption. I don’t really like labels, but at what point does this become cultural appropriation? Onam is only a few days. I am more worried about cinema. Because the presence of an observer changes what is created. With expanded audience comes more money. When products, and festivals start catering to new tastes, what becomes of the originals, and the audience they used to cater to?

    For now, vannonam, kandonam, thinnonam, pokkonam. Please.

    P.S. Self analysis: Is this how curmudgeons are born?

  • Awesomeness is homemade

    Three weekends and three Malayalam movies – different genres, different directorial approaches and a largely non-overlapping cast. But all of them underlying that this is indeed becoming a glorious age for Malayalam cinema! New stories, novel thoughts, fresh perspectives – this is a wonderful time to be a viewer. I decided to write this post, because as I’d mentioned earlier while on the subject, movies are a representation of an era, and years later, I’d like to read this and remember what a great time we had!

    On the first weekend, we saw ABCD, (trailer) starring Dulquer Salmaan, who with each outing impresses further, seems destined to be an actor and a star, and might not have to wait for years like his father (Mammootty) to attain either. Our decision to see it in the theatre was also heavily influenced by the presence of Jacob Gregory, whom we were fans of thanks to Akkara Kazchakal. The movie was not meant for intellectual stimulation and delivered its promise of entertainment quite easily. What it also did was look at contemporary issues in a non-preachy way. Despite a few niggles – the editing could have been better, Gregory’s accent could’ve been worked on and he could have been better utilised in the first half – Martin Prakkat has ensured that his success continues after his debut film Best Actor. Extra points for not trying to force fit a love story that could have spoiled the superb essaying of a script-backed character by Aparna Gopinath, the very anti-thesis of a traditional Malayalam movie heroine.

    The second weekend saw us in PVR for 5 Sundarikal – an anthology with stories of 5 different women in various life stages. 5 directors, with one of them making a debut. My favourite was Aashiq Abu’s Gowri, (despite not being a fan of Kavya Madhavan) thanks to the really sensitive story of a couple whose life goes through a drastic change after a seemingly casual remark by a visiting friend. Kullante Bharya was an equally strong contender, and quite unchacteristic of Amal Neerad, I might add. I place it second only because the story is an adaptation. Dulquer takes on the narrator role with ease and does a splendid job of making sure the nuances are caught just right. Shyju Khalid’s Sethulakshmi, based on a story by M Mukundan, is poignant and very disturbing! Fantastic treatment of the story in terms of catching expressions, and portraying scenarios. Anwar Rasheed’s Aami does not fail only because of the superb portrayal of the protagonist by Fahadh Fasil, who captures the flitting gray shade nuances of his character with ease, and the riddle based flow of the story. Sameer Thahir’s Eesha, starring Isha Sharvani and Nivin Pauly reminded me of a short story (not sure if it’s Archer) and was probably the only one which only worked marginally for me. But in all, it was an excellent compilation.

    The best was saved for the last – Murali Gopy teaming up with Arun Kumar Aravind after Ee Adutha Kaalathu – Left Right Left. The title of this post is inspired by its tagline – revolution is homemade. Fantastic casting, with Hareesh Peradi, (what was he doing in Red Chillies?!)  Murali Gopy and Indrajith making each character easily believable. So strong is the script that you feel the angst and pain that each of them have within – and that even goes for the ruthless character played by Hareesh Peradi. The political overtones are more than obvious, but yet manage not to take over the film. There is an immense amount of realism in the movie, and that is not because one could easily associate it with real life personalities, but because even the secondary characters have a clear DNA – why they are the way they are, what drives them, what is their rationale for doing the things they do. It is really difficult to choose between the three protagonists and that’s because of the strong script as well as the brilliant portrayals. Like I mentioned in a tweet, it was awesome to see the sons of gifted actors – Murali Gopi, Indrajith Sukumaran, Sudhir Karamana, and Vijayaraghavan in a single movie! If that isn’t new generation Malayalam movies, what is? 🙂 A powerful, hard hitting movie, and kudos to the director for delivering the script just right! For now, watch the back story of the characters in the movie’s potent anthem

    until next time, malayalam cinema #ftw

  • Rise!

    It is difficult to make the last part of a trilogy when the first two have set sky-high expectations and one managed to create a larger than life character that would probably have to be one of the best in films, ever, if not THE best. But it had to me made, and 99% would like it. And there would be a 1% hating it – either because they hate crowds, or because their stance would stand out amidst the idol worship. This also includes the .01% for whom this film – objectively and for genuine reasons known to them – didn’t work. I haven’t seen any reviews in this category yet.

    So this is just a thank you note to Nolan and his team, for scripting a trilogy that took Batman out of the “Holy atomic pile, Batman!” and the more recent caricature versions to a status deserving of years of comics. For making an intelligent movie with neat hat tips to earlier villains. For wonderful visuals that let me ignore the small doses of incredulousness in the plot. For providing an awesome closure even while throwing a line of hope.

    But most importantly, for putting together a perspective on morality and the idea of justice, pursuing these themes consistently across the three movies, using characters with different worldviews, backgrounds and thinking as well as modern issues such as economic crisis and terrorism to add layers to it – the affluent Wayne/Batman can afford a moral compass and changes his path from revenge to justice, Selena/Catwoman doesn’t have that luxury but also seeks a more just balance, Bane is radical and seeks an entire wipe out, the Joker was unpredictable with seemingly no plans except chaos and showing the moral decline of society – even the white knight Harvey Dent, Ra’s-Al-Ghul abhors any sort of weakness in the delivery of justice. All have their own notions of justice, fairness and the institutions of society, institutions we have chosen but whose tools have been subverted, whose rules we try to live by have slowly become unfair and shackles those who desire justice. And thus, for the idea of the Batman as a symbol for those good people who restore our faith in humanity with their actions – “Anyone can be a hero. Even a man who put a coat around a young boy’s shoulders to let him know the world hadn’t ended”, and as an ideal.

    until next time, thus spake a fanboy 🙂

    Bonus read: Nolan’s goodbye letter to Batman

  • Collective bargain

    “The way they speak about dinosaurs now, a few years later, that’s how they will talk about the mill workers”, says a character in City of Gold, a Hindi film by Mahesh Manjrekar, adapted from a play by Jayant Pawar. Its based on the Great Bombay Textile Strike. A decent movie, with some great performances and with its share of stark realty, though parts of the second half had a Bollywood melodrama hangover. I guess the response at the multiplexes (many of which are ironically what the mills gave way to) wasn’t really great either. But it was a story that had to be told.

    The subject has interested me earlier too. To be precise, in 2005, my last official trip to Mumbai. The office was at Peninsula Center, and when I looked out through the windows, I could see a few chimneys. I wondered enough to come back and read up a bit. I was curious because amidst the RGV underworld flicks and the contemporary images I had of Mumbai, this seemed to be a part of history that had never figured in conversations. A legacy that seemed to be buried in the collective consciousness.

    A single movie might not really be enough to cover the individual lives that were affected, though it does try to portray a microcosm. But as the line in Frost/Nixon goes “You know the first and greatest sin of the deception of television is that it simplifies; it diminishes great, complex ideas, stretches of time; whole careers become reduced to a single snapshot.”

    Though it is said in a different setting, and context, the connect I sensed was legacy. How a person is perceived by a later generation. Artists have their paintings, actors/directors/crew have their movies, politicians, sportsmen/women have their auto/biography/memoirs, authors have their books, musicians have their music, they have a better chance at being remembered by a larger number of people, long after they’re gone, a better chance than us, the commons. A  collective’s legacy would be the place and time they lived in  – the larger picture, their collective actions, the people who became popular, the events that shaped the future. What happens if a collective chooses not to remember, or chooses to remember only parts? Who does it matter to then?

    until next time, decadent chronicles

  • Moult

    Two new malayalam movies watched in a fortnight. Nothing special in that, you’d think. What does make it special is that they brought back characters from the past.

    “2 Harihar Nagar”, the official sequel to a movie, after 19 years, has four characters who’d set a benchmark in comedy at that time. [Priyadarshan, as he regularly does with decent Malayalam movies, screwed it up in Hindi as Dhol]  Handled by a capable director and an extremely good screenplay, these guys managed to pick up right where they left off. They had us in splits this time too, and add to that, sprinkles of nostalgia and some good suspense, this movie was a treat. It was amazing to watch their chemistry, intact, or perhaps rekindled, after so many years, more so, because their ‘image’ has changed quite some in the years that have passed. A couple of them play character and villain roles now, and popular ones at that; one had some time in the limelight, even being anointed the “common man’s hero”, before making an idiot of himself in inconsequential roles and TV shows, and the last flirts with the screen once in a while. But what we saw in the movie was a transformation, and a pleasant surprise.

    “Sagar alias Jackie”, the director claims, is not a sequel to any film, but merely  uses the hero (and one more character) of an earlier one. On hindsight, that makes a damn good disclaimer. The original movie ‘Irupatham noottandu’, made in 1987, starring Mohanlal as an enigmatic ‘smuggler with a conscience’ , was one that in no small way contributed to his rising stature in the industry. Over the years he has proved his acting skills time and again, until recently. These days he is more of star, and scripts pander to this. He is easily the best actor I’ve seen, and though I used to be a fan of the superhuman avatar in the initial days, when it used to be backed by excellent screenplays, these days his roles are quite indistinguishable from each other. More stylised, this one proved to be the same fare, unfortunately.

    Both scripts used the equity of iconic characters. While one set of actors broke their current moulds, and recaptured the feel of their original characters, another actor was caught in a mould and couldn’t come close to the original character. One could argue that the scripts made the difference, but maybe the difference was in acting, and one set proved better because they stayed true to character, and the portrayal automatically fell into place?

    It made me think whether this also applies to us too. Over a period of time, do some of us get cast in a ‘have to be’ mould, arising from others’ and self expectations, or a ‘want to be’ mould because of our own aspirations? Do these moulds take us away from what we originally are, is there an original mould, and would reclaiming it and living with it give us the joy we seek? The choice is an intriguing one.

    until next time, casting lots with the self