Does Kaththi need two Vijays?

While Kaththi it's doing great business at the box office and almost the entire media is unanimously praising it as a week made entertainer, one thing about the movie leaves a lingering doubt in my mind. Why are there two Vijays in the movie. Except for the marquee value of having Vijay playing a double role there really doesn't seem to be a necessity for two characters. Yes, we have to admit that the two characters are completely different from each other and that Kathiresan is able to accomplish what Jeevanandam might never have with his methods. But my question is why did there have to be a Jeevanandam and then bring Kathiresan to pose as Jeevanandam. Would the movie have been any different if there had been only one Vijay, named Kathiresan or Jeevanandam, having the qualities of Kathiresan?

Kaththi is focused on the right lead by Kathiresan to bring justice to the village. The double role card played by Murugadoss doesn't have any  significance in the plot. It does not carry any suspense because it is revealed to its right at the start, it does not serve as a turning point at any portion of the film, nor does it cause any major confusion to the characters in the film itself. The only instance where the double role factor has any impact is in the one scene where the antagonists discover that the person they are dealing with is not Jeevanandam, but someone who has taken his place. But even that moment turns out to be of little consequence in the subsequent events and hence the question to Murugadoss; why did you bring in two Vijays?

We all love to see Vijay on screen, especially when he died something new and different on screen. So natuirally, when we saw that Murugadoss was using him in a double role, we think that there is something special in store. But, what we get is a rather underplayed Vijay who is replace very early in the first half by the normal exuberant and energetic Vijay, who then proceeds to do what Vijay does in most of his films, which is sing, dance, fight and emote like only he can. What makes Kaththi good is the fact that it has a solid screenplay and great social relevance, which takes it a notch above a regular 'Vijay' movie.

. So naturally, when we saw that Murugadoss was using him in a 

The double role, I believe, is an unnecessary burden on the screenplay which helps only to add a prologue and an epilogue to an interesting story. The central plot in itself was good enough to make a good movie without resorting to this redundant gallery show, and yet Murugadoss chose to do so, which is puzzling. The double role in Kaththi somehow reminds me of the double role played by the villain of Ghajini, which was a jarring note in an otherwise fantastic movie. Now, the double role in Kaththi is not nearly as bad, but one only feels that it could have been avoided. Please do not take this comment as one that says that Kaththi is a bad movie. It is an immensely enjoyable entertainer with social relevance. The double role however seems to be an unnecessary appendage. What do you think? Please let me know.

Sex Tape

Sex was never this funny! Lol

It begins with explaining how boring your life can be when you grow up. A couple discovers that marriage and two kids makes ex almost impossible. And before they know it, the hardly remember how good they were at it. How do they spice it up, how do they get it back? They do something crazy to turn on the heat, which in this case happens to be a three hour long sex tape where they pretend to be sex gurus showing each and every position in the ‘book’. But technology has robbed us of so much privacy that even the most intimate of moments cannot be kept private. A few careless hours, and before they know their raunchy porn video is on the ‘cloud’ network. Now, almost everyone who is someone in their lives, which includes their kids and the mailman, is one click away from seeing the wild carnal details that they filmed in such detail. It’s a mad scramble to retrieve their ‘honor’ before it all goes up in ‘porny’ smoke.

‘Sex Tape’ is all about that mad scramble and less about the

actual tape. The trailers made one thing clear; this is a fun/comedy movie, and not a hot sexy one. The film stays true to it. Yes, there are a few moments in the beginning that are inevitable to set up the premise. But never once does the streak of humor go missing, which is the best thing about Sex Tape. It is a tough balancing act by the director handling such a subject to not make it look like a ‘sex’ movie, and at the same time to not turn it into childish run-around movie. The need of the lead pair, at first to reignite their sex life, and then later to destroy the evidence, is well articulated, which is what connects it to the audience.

But, serious stuff aside, the movie is really a lot of fun. Thanks mainly to its lead pair of Jason Segel and Camerone Diaz. They have played the devoted couple who realize that they are ageing but yet want to have a shot at their younger, more romantic days again, with conviction. And, they share a good comic timing, which makes their verbal exchanges really enjoyable. And, the script has written in a couple of tailor-made situations for slapstick humor which thankfully work quite well without stretching out for too long. There is a bit of melodrama towards the end, and a scene in a huge server room, which seems a bit too far fetched. But, we can understand the writer’s lack of options to effectively finish the script on a sweet note. The pre-climatic portions definitely do not live up to the energy and fun of the earlier parts.

Finally, if there is one thing about the movie that is

consistently good and funny and amusing, it is the dialogues. Most scenes would have fallen flat if it were not for the witty lines. Admitted, it does play on our guilty pleasures, but what else can we expect when a couple is looking for a self- made porn movie. It has been cleverly used to keep a naughty smile and the occasional laugh on your face for almost the entire duration of the movie. Its not the regular Hollywood rom-com that you get dime-a-dozen. Go for Sex Tape to have an amusing couple of hours. Sex was never so funny! Lol.

Mostly witty and funny – not sexy!

2.75/5 

The Tickets of the Week - Choose your movie!

Three releases from Hollywood this week. All have pretty well known stars and so the choice is a bit tough because it surely is not easy catching all three in theaters. So, here is a peek at what is in store.

1. Sex Tape.

Marquee Name: Camerone Diaz.

The ‘Charlie’s Angel’ was last seen in a major release in Bad Teacher. Well, is she a marquee name in India? Not always. But, with a movie named ‘Sex Tape’, the interest is definitely increased. But, this one is more of a comedy/drama, with very little of the ‘title’ element. Expect to have a laugh riot, if the movie delivers what it promises.

2. The Judge

Marquee Name: Robert Downey Jr.

Well, the name Robert Downey Jr. might not bring people into theaters, but if you say the words Iron Man, the barometer jumps a few inches. Robert Downey Jr. is hugely popular as Iron Man/Tony Stark and to a lesser extent as Sherlock Holmes. It would be very interesting to see him on screen after a long time as something that is not Iron Man or Holmes. This is far removed from the action and thrills; The Judge is a family drama, with a bit of courtroom stuff. Interesting premise. And you have Robert Duvall and Billy Bob Thornton for company. Definitely an inviting option.

3. Left Behind

Marquee Name: Nicholas Cage

Cage ceased to be a big draw after Ghost Rider ran out of steam. Now, going by his last few movies, one has to approach a new one with quite a bit of apprehension. The last few years have damaged his legacy a bit and we hope for our sake and Cage’s that this one stems the rot. Looks like a fantasy action flick with a little bit of sci-fi thrown in. We have had quite a few action movies this year, so this one has to be quite good to catch our attention. Besides, there are many action films yet to release this year. So, the idea of waiting for a bigger better option doesn’t seem that bad.

Bottom Line: In spite of big names like Robert Downey Jr. and Nicholas Cage having releases, it is Cameron Diaz’s Sex Tape that has managed to get more shows in Chennai city than the other movies. Is it Diaz, is it the movie’s title, or is it something to do with how the movie performed globally? Friday has the answers.

Dracula Untold: Vampire, war, vengeance

Dracula, the bloodsucking count, has captured moviemaker’s imaginations for decades. He has been told, retold, reinterpreted and reinvented time and time again in different forms. What began as an eerie tale of a count who became undead at night to drink human blood has transformed over the years. Dracula has been painted as a schemer, a womanizer, a merciless killer, even a complete idiot (in a spoof). The name Dracula has moved out of the horror genre and into pure action over the past few years. So, what else is left that is new and that can be tried with Dracula? He is now a savior, a prince who takes up a curse so that he can wield the power that saves his people. Now, that is something new!

The prince was once a ruthless slayer, a warrior who impaled his enemies. But he now wants peace

and no more war. As they say, peace is forged by war, and even though he hates it, war comes to his doorstep because there are other men who covet power above all else. The prince has to defend his people and he knows that the enemy is too big and its will too strong. To conquer the enemy the prince will have to invoke a power that might just take him to the dark side. He makes the choice. Does he cross over to the dark side or does his soul have the strength to use the powers only to defend his people and nothing else?

In many ways, this is not a real Dracula film. The only thing ‘Draculaic’ about it is its name. The premise has parallels with many other warrior movies we have seen over the years. Its about one man’s will to save his fellow men from the wrath of the enemy. The only difference here being that the man chooses to become a terrifying monster to fight his battles. The fun in watching Dracula films is in watching him being the antihero! Here, the protagonist is more righteous than anyone else – hardly the stuff that Draculas are made of. He resists his unquenchable thirst for human blood, he resists attacking his own people even when they try to take his life. Yet, he is Dracula.

The film moves at a fairly leisurely pace with no major spikes throughout its duration. It is a pretty

linear and simply narrated action set piece, where one battle follows another at regular intervals. The action blocks themselves are pretty enjoyable though we have seen many like this, and quite a few that are better than this. The only times when we really sit up during the fist 75 minutes or so is during the prince’s encounter with a demon inside a deep dark cave during his quest for unlimited power. But the film really does surprise you with the way it ends. From the moment he becomes the monster you see the prince fighting the evil within him, unleashing it only during the battles. You can see him trying to remain human even as the dark threatens to engulf him. And then, the end is something that most of us would not predict. Thos final 15 minutes or so make Dracula Untold worth a watch.

Finally, with a character as popular and mythical as Dracula, the dialogues ought to have been far far more fun and memorable. The only thing one can remember is ‘Let the games begin’!

Verdict: ‘Undraculaic’ Action flick with an unpredictable end

2.5/5

Annabelle: Scare me once before the end..please!

‘Before The Conjuring, there was Annabelle’, said the teasers that told us that this movie was coming. It was indeed a smart move to remind the audiences of The Conjuring, which was very well received in Indian cities. But, what the makers may have overlooked is that with the mention of The Conjuring, there would also be expectations; to be spooked, chilled and thrilled in the same way, or maybe in even better ways. Annabelle was the opening note of The Conjuring, and also made a significant impact in one of the story’s turning points, and so it is indeed exciting that an entire movie is focused on the demented doll and its doings in this world. Question is, does it make for a good horror movie?

Let’s get one thing clear, Annabelle is made in much the same way as The Conjuring. Many horror

film buffs had felt that The Conjuring was a bit too underplayed, with too few spooks and chills than normal. They said, it was not exciting enough. But, those who prefer more substance than shrieks and screams had found it very interesting. Annabelle tries to take us down that path. The makers have banked on a solid screenplay built around a good story. There is very little in terms of intentional scary stuff, be it graphic visual representations or curdling sounds. The director does not try to put scary things in your face and make you jump out of your seats or shriek in horror. Yes, there are moments when things come out from behind doors, there are dark corners, flickering lights, rain beating down on the window panes, creaking chairs, a big church with a weird looking statue; all these tell tale signs that something supernatural, or extranatural is lurking about. But, sitting through the 100 minutes of the movie, I never once felt my heart beating faster than it normally would, nor did I gasp. Yes, I did empathise with the young woman and her baby for being caught up in a warp of inhuman presence, but I never felt afraid, which is where perhaps Annabelle fails as a horror flick.

I have a theory about horror flicks. When we go to watch a horror film, we know what we are getting into; so there is no question of being surprised when a ghost appears on screen. The success of a horror film lies in planting the seed of eerie expectations in our mind about what is going to happen. It is about giving us clues about which corner or which door might reveal the supernatural. It is about getting us all wound up and then surprising us just a second before or a second later than we expect. It is that moment of uncertainty in which the horror film comes alive. Annabelle hardly ever comes to life like The Conjuring did. The moments like ‘hide and clap’ and the ‘hanging corpse’ that caught us unawares in The Conjuring are hard to find in Annabelle. I don’t know, maybe we have become familiar with the director’s style as a result of which he is not able to stay a step ahead of us. At least, that is how most of the audience reacted! There wasn’t any nervous shifting, no uneasy screams or an eerie silence in the movie hall, a sign that a horror flick hasn’t caught the audience by the scruff of their neck.We also miss the methodical approach, of exorcism or incantations that we have enjoyed in other horror flicks.

Some might call comparisons with The Conjuring as unfair, but the makers invited it by almost

branding Annabelle as a prequel. Make no mistake, this movie does a good job of narrating the story of the Annabelle doll, has well defined characters and portrays the mental disintegration of the protagonist in a very believable manner. Thanks to these two movies, even the most rational of minds now clearly knows the differences between ghosts and demonic spirits. But all that doesn’t add up into a good horror flick. It fails in its primary objective- which is to scare! Annabelle finally ends up diluting the aura of fear that was built around the Annabelle doll by the cameo in The Conjuring.

Annabelle – Good story, fails to thrill!

1.75/5.

What I felt after watching Geethanjali!

There are hundreds of reviews about the movie, so no point giving another review. But, here is what and how I felt straight after the movie.

The suspense!

Really, I cannot comment on that because I had read some reviews and comments before watching the movie. All the reviews and comments had revealed the suspense element in the plot. So, knowing the secret from the start, I never felt engaged by the suspense. One request to all reviewers and commenters – please don’t reveal the key plot element of a movie, especially if it is a suspense thriller. It takes away the entire fun of watching the movie. If you feel that you must reveal the entire story, then please have spoiler alerts in your comments and reviews.

The thrills:

Well, Priyadarshan has tried something entirely new to him. Yes, he did direct the Hindi remake of Manichithrathazhu, but all those who have seen the original know that he did not even come close to matching it. Here, he tries to go into the horror track, trying to give us scary moments. One must say that the graphics and visual effects in each of these scenes is top class, at least by Malayalam cinema standards. Horror has never been shown so effectively visualized in Malayalam. But, the look and feel of the horror scenes seems to have been borrowed from many films. Some shots looked like they had been inspired from The Conjuring, and other shots reminded me of various other movies. The lack of originality was a big problem. Also, one could anticipate each ‘thrill’ at least 5 seconds before it happened, and so none of it really scared anyone in the theater. That is a major failure for an experienced director like Priyadarshan. Not a single thrill worked the way it had to. So, Geethanjali failed as a thriller.

Performances:

In a script that lacks conviction, there is nothing much actors can do. Here, only three characters have

any sort of strength in them. Two are Geetha and Anjali. One of those characters is dead when the film begins. The third is their mother, who is in a paralysed state for most of the movie. That leaves only the Geetha/Anjali as the strong character in the movie. She has done quite well. This is a complex character for a debutante and she has proved that she can perform. The others are merely pawns. Innocent tries to evoke a few laughs, but situations are far too weak. His face looks wrinkled, he looks a bit slower after his recovery from cancer, but his signature dialogue delivery is still intact. He can make us laugh again if he gets the right scripts. Nishan has nothing much to do. He gets only one scene where he can prove his worth and the young man has fluffed the chance big time. Mohanlal is completely wasted. He is just an onlooker in most scenes. I wonder whether this is the same Priyadarshan who gave us some of the finest Mohanlal performances. There is just one scene where he gets to take centerstage and he has shown his class there, because he makes a lengthy and boring narration actually look interesting. Siddique has an interesting role which he carries off with responsibility.

Music and BGM

Don’t waste time discussing that, nothing worth talking.

Technical aspects:

Every technical aspect is among the best that Malayalam cinema has seen. Camerawork, lighting patterns, set design, colour patterns, locations and all that are simply top class. If only they had been backed up with a solid script and deft direction; one can only wish.

Overall:

A film that can work only at a visually pleasing level. Priyadarshan needs to understand the grammar of making a good thriller, it’s a completely different style of film making than the one he is used to. But, he must be applauded for raising the bar of visual perfection in Malayalam cinema. If I had not known the suspense element before entering the theater, I might have enjoyed this more. I guess, uninformed viewers might like this a bit more than the others. So, for all reviewers and commenters, you might not like the movie, you might have seen Charulatha, you might have seen many other movies, but please don’t reveal the suspense twist and spoil the fun for people who are watching it for the first time. Let people see that twist for themselves. Restrict your comments to the overall quality of the movie, please!

Geethanjali – classy visuals, but hollow movie!

All in All Azhaguraja

All in All Azhaguraja – A 1000 wala where only 500 make a bang!

We know Rajesh’s brand of film making! Nothing is serious, you know that a laugh or gag is just round the corner and you know that it’s going to be a happy ending. It is that expectation that draws us to theaters for All in All Azhaguraja. Rajesh seems to alternate between settings for his films. His first and third were set in Chennai while his second and fourth are based in southern states, far away from the bustling city. While the first and third were all about a guy going after a girl and the subsequent happenings, the second and fourth deal with young men who are yet to find any kind of a steady profession, try to become businessmen and also fall in love. The similarities between Azhaguraja and Boss Engira Baskaran are not too difficult to notice from the outset, but Rajesh does enough to keep us from reminiscing about any of his previous hits while we are in theaters for Azhaguraja.

The story is about Azhaguraja, a guy who owns a local channel which is admittedly good for nothing

and makes no money for two of its employees who also happen to be the business partners who own the channel. Rajesh’s outstanding ability to showcase utter failures in a funny manner comes too the fore here again. He is helped in a huge way by his Man Friday and casting constant Santhanam (who is by the way greeted with the loudest cheers in the auditorium). The initial exchanges are mildly funny and then arrives the first major gag – Kareena Chopra. Now, whether you enjoy this kind of comedy or not is a pretty personal choice. There might be people who ‘rofl’ at this, and there are people who scoff in disgust; as it is said at many occasions in the movie ‘the choice is your’s’. But, Santhanam has carried this off pretty well, with a drooling slobbering Kota Sreenivasa Rao for company. Then comes the next gag, in the form of Chitra Devipriya (Kajal Aggarwal). The first meeting between Karthi and Kajal Aggarwal breaks many stereotypes in the way it eventually pans out, but you might be able to predict the turn of events simply because you are used to Rajesh’s style of narration. The entire first half goes along with one funny situation following the other, most of them involving Karthi and Kajal, with Santhanam adding the spice. Not every situation evokes laugh, but you are amused in most parts.

It is the second half that the hiccups start coming, though you can sense that it is going to happen late in the first half. Minutes into the second half, the movies goes back into the 80s for a lengthy flashback. That is when you understand why Prabhu was cast in a role that seemed to have nothing of substance in the first half. The flashback has Karthi playing the young Prabhu, with Santhanam playing his character’s father. Though amusing at first, the flashback soon becomes a drag. Karthi tries to imitate Prabhu’s baritone voice without looking artificial, but it starts to get jarring after a while. Santhanam overdoes a certain quirk and there is a song inserted in the middle of all this. Only at the end does the sequence gain some relevance, but you have been a bit bored by then. A bit of trimming in this part could have done a world of good. The post-flashback portions too seem to be a bit of a drag until the entry of MS Bhaskar aka Thillana Divyanathan. The below 10-minute portion that he is given livens up things again. He and Kajal provide a good 2 minutes of slapstick fun. Again, it’s your choice whether you like this brand of comedy. Then it is a straight line to the climax, which is none too special, saving the scene between Karthi and Kajal’s father (who has done a great job with what he has been given). There is small twist and revelation in the finale, but if you are used to Rajesh’s films, you can see it coming a mile away. You might still smile through that sequence though. And finally, the film ends on a ‘Chee’ note. Now, whether that was necessary is again entirely a personal opinion. On a positive note, Rajesh has cut down on the number of ‘alcohol’ scenes that are a signature of his movies.

The cast has held the movie together quite well. Karthi is quite adequate with his signature dialogu

e delivery, but does get a bit loud at times. Santhanam has done what is expected, but is a good distance away from his best. Surprisingly, Kajal Aggarwal shows us that she is game for some comedy. Playing a completely gullible, overambitious girl, she takes her role with both hands and lives it. It’s fun to watch her ‘sing’ and ‘dance’. However, it is the guys with the small roles who have really made Azhaguraja stand steady. Kota Sreenivasa Rao, Kajal’s dad and M S Bhaskar for instance. Prabhu and Saranya are there just for their presence. Saranya in particular is almost wasted and stereotyped, a role that is a mirror image of the one in OKOK.

Technically, there is nothing special. Songs, a couple of which seem unwarranted, do not leave any impression whatsoever and the BGM does get harsh on the ears at times. Dialogues too do not reach the standards of hilarity set by Rajesh’s previous films, but there are few occasions where you will enjoy the wit.

Azhaguraja does have a steady story. But, the script is not able to maintain a consistent rhythm and prevent boredom from setting in. However, Rajesh has put in enough small characters, like Dillana Divyanathan and Biriyani Kadher Bhai, to make sure that stretches of boredom do not extend for too long. It is not a complete laugh riot, but the buoyant mood of the festival and the generally favorable season for comedy might make Azhaguraja quite an enjoyable experience, if you are willing to accept all forms of comedy. Its fun with its share of pitfalls. There is only one regret. Now, an entire young generation will associate the name Azhaguraja with an above average comedy movie rather than that timeless character played by Goundamani. That name ought to have been copyrighted!