Goa - Review

I am a fan of Venkat Prabhu from the very first film he made. (I have even managed to catch his acting debut earlier...). Saroja was a good follow up and I couldn't wait to see to Goa right on the first day. Infact I imagined, he took much longer with this one than his other movies. Goa went sold out on the day of release thanks to all the promos and hype and I ended up watching Tamil Padam instead. Reviews pronounced it an average movie and I almost fell for it. Caught it a good 2 weeks after the release and here I am, my faith in Venkat completely restored.

Goa is cinema like we have never seen it before. Atleast in Tamil cinema. Here we are stuck with thali sentiments, item numbers and round trolley shots of our heroes and Goa just lets you laugh at it's heroes all the two and a half hours you are with them. The movie is mad, impulsive and hilarious. If you walk into the theatre everytime expecting good cinema with parameters like story, screenplay, dialogues, songs and music, my suggestion would be to avoid Goa. This is definitely not for the high -brow. Instead if you are all game to be entertained with spoofs, jokes - some bad, some good and a good deal of lunacy, go for it. The movie defies any sense of logic and is carried purely by the madeness of the leading trio. And surprise, inspite of an overdose of half clad (actually not even half clad) women prancing around the beach, the director has given his female characters their due.


Jai, Vaibhav and Premgi as Vinayakam, Ramarajan and Samikannu run away from their village to escape their parents. Meeting a friend in Madurai convince them to get married to a white woman to go abroad and make their fortune. And for this, they set out to Goa. Please do not look for any logic beyond this point. Now they are Vinay, Ram and Sam all set to paint the town red. But it is Jack (Akash Arvind) and Danny (Sampath) who get the ball rolling. Never before has tamil cinema even discussed alternate sexuality leave alone present it with such sensitivity. It's flawless acting from Sampath. Considering it is the villians who are stuck with their image the most in the industry it is a casting victory. The character of Roshni (Piya) is again a welcome change to tamil cinema. We actually get to see a heroine who seems real! I tried figuring out what Suhasini (Sneha) was all about, then decided to forget and watch the fun. You'll end up doing this several times during the film.

So, Jai's funny, Vaibhav's cute and Premji is nutty. A breezy romance, pretty women and what else?? Yes, the songs... they are bad. The title track and 'Idhu varai' is hummable. I was too busy laughing to notice the background score. Sorry Yuvan, do something better for your cousins the next time. Not all the jokes are funny. But here's a bunch of guys who will do anything to make you laugh. Why not indulge them a bit?

Ayirathil Oruvan - Review

I had to watch the movie twice before i put down my thoughts on it. Unlike the industry and the media I didn't eagerly wait for this one, and took my own time to catch it when it released. Loved it the first time and even more the second. Keeping the commercial aspect out of it, I really wish the theatres didn't chop the movie down as they pleased. The 2 theatres I went to, had their own versions of the film. I wonder who gets to do that? I would love to have a job that lets me cut and paste movies before a show... :). Should check.

Ayirathil Oruvan does not aspire to be an intelligent film. Entertainment is the primary factor and the efforts are obvious throughout the film. Why I mention it particularly is because I came across people of the opinion that Selva Raghavan was taking himself too seriously. I dread to know what we get, if he does do that and give us the end result to see. Selva has presented a fairly interesting story in a format that's never done in Tamil Cinema. The screenplay, dialogues and the lead cast conribute immensely to the watchability and the fun factor of the film. He then incorporates small doses of personal quirks and fantasies to his frames and situations that he uses to carry the story forward. Now these are not essential for the film but they do contribute to the movie watching exerience (positively and negatively). The blood, violence, the sub cultures and sexuality displayed, I see as a result of this. The gun happy army's treatment of the ethnics (or people dependant on nature) on more than one occassion has to be a reminder of the days we are in. The extent of Selva's vision impress me. Its entertaining and different.


The film traces a group of people out in search of a lost archeologist (Prathap Pothen) researching the remains of the Chola dynasty from 11th century AD. Leading the team is Anita (Reema Sen) accompanied by the daughter of the archeologist Lavanya (Andrea Jeremiah), some private security led by Ravisekharan (Azhagam Perumal)and a bunch of coolies headed by Muthu (Karthi). As Reema takes the story forward, Karthi keeps us in splits and constant wonder at his acting capabilities. Reema in a role of a life time presents a dazzling performance. It made me jump with joy to see a female character in tamil cinema given this importance and have it carried out most successfully by the actor. She is beautiful, brave, brutal, intelligent and mean all at the same time. Where any actor would be insecure to let a woman take the focus, Karthi displays immense talent and prudence in choosing to do the role. He is easily the best part of the film. Andrea is graceful and subtle in her depiction of Lavanya, who is the brain that leads the team. She underplay of the unaffected, independant woman of today adds to the credibility of the character. Partibhan's enacting of the Chola King is moving. Among all the display of majesty and sorrow, his panache for comedy takes him instantly to the hearts of the audience.

The camera (Ramji) is beautiful and haunting.. While some animation errors were obvious, it did not really affect my experience of the film. There is no escaping violence, it is in your face and bloody. The frames are dark and strong almost throughout. The music is hardly what one would expect from a 22 year old. GV Prakash bowls you over with the background score. While 'Un mele asathan' is raunchy and delirious, 'Malai Neram' by Andrea is pleasant and soothing. Its a pity that the latter was not included in the movie. 'The King arrives'- a crazy heavy metal piece is another of my favourite.

If some long drawn scenes like those at the 'killer' amphitheatre and the battles were crisply edited, the more interesting parts of the movie dying at the hands of the theatres could' ve been avoided. Some parts of the movie continue to be ambiguous, even after watching it twice..For eg: what really happened to the psychic/ priest? How did he comeback from the dead? We could've done with some lighter moments in the second half. Some key characters just fade to into oblivion by the end of the movie. And Selva better give us a sequel to justify all that; or I have a lot more questions for him.

My Name is Khan

I didn't plan to watch this movie in the theatre. Was hoping to get a DVD as soon as they released it. Shahrukh in the trailer annoyed me. I thought the Asperger syndrome will give him more reasons to over act. Now, I have been through the Shahrukh phase in my life, saw DDLJ about 10 times (and still love it...), Dil to pagal hai 3or 4 times and Kuch kuch hota hai another couple of times and cried hopelessly watching all the three. But lets face it... Aamir is cooler now!! But finally thanks to a good friend, I find myself at a matinee show right on the first day.


Ok, in one word the movie is alright. Better than what I thought it could be. There are no song and dance routines or multi coloured layers of chiffons and silk one would expect from a Karan Johar movie. I guess he just wants us to know he's matured and can make movies on international crisis... ok Karan, we believe you. In fact that seems to be the point of the whole movie. But catch a bollywood da puttar turning out a realistic, gritty post 9/11 story. Its just not in his blood. (or in Johar's case, it's something else in his blood...). A story about a small family that could've been heart warming comes in the form for of an exaggerated drama with an illness, 9/11, a cyclone and the US Presidents thrown in. Any warmth created by the performances fades away in the enormous spectacle created behind.


Shahrukh underplays the illness and is actally likeable as Rizwan Khan who is affected by Asperger Syndrome. Kajol looking her best in a while, though a bit too chirpy at the begining is convincing in the second half. The audience travel with Rizwan Khan who is on his way to meet the president of Unites States to tell him, 'My name is Khan and I am not a terrorist'. The movie makes a sufficient case for the audience to empathise with the victims of muslim alienation post 9/11. But as we begin to cheer for the brave and loveable Khan, he is suddenly transformed into a saviour of the masses kind of role that instantly remind us that we are seeing nothing close to reality. Mama jane and her son, Funny hair Joel did add an interesting element. But Khan bringing help to the cyclone hit area was stretching it a bit.

In all its fairness, the movie is different, both for Shahrukh and Johar. It all depends on your tolerance for Bollywood exaggeration. To me, it was a story of an ordinary man lost in the synthetics of the drama and spectacle in the background. The film does have it's moments though; the scene at the mosque and Khan's relationship with his son does strike a chord.

Tamizh Padam - Review

I walked in to the theatre with my fingers crossed. The movie fan in me fell for the hilarious trailers and got me to venture out on the first day. Now I hoped, it was worth the back ache from the front row seat (all that I could manage considering my pathetic clout with the Chennai theatres) and the 120 bucks I spent on the tickets. I have this experience with most over-publicised comedies... The best jokes were all in the trailor. I hoped it was not the case with this one.



Ten minutes into the film and all my doubts were laid to rest. A baby who narrowly escapes male-infanticide at a remote village of Cinema patti is taken to Chennai by his Paatti. The young boy grows up to be the saviour of the masses and we are ready for a hero introduction song. The film further proceeds through all those familiar twists and turns we are so familiar with in a hero's life. Encountering the villains, the heroines, her dad, his fortune and of course his long lost family. It is here that CS Amudhan the director displays his vision. It is no mean feat to repeat a story that's been said a hundred times. Nor is it easy to get away with poking fun at our demi-god heros. He manages to give us a hilarious movie by keeping off individuals and playing up the innumerable cliches that has over the years become part of Tamil cinema. He refrains from mimicing an actor' s mannerisms / style and concentrates on the characters the 've played. A very wise strategy I must say. He uses the various situations over used by Tamil movie directors to get the laughs and communicate the sattire. Actor Shiva, who plays the hero Shiva never mimics an actor, he simple goes through the situations our favourite stars have already visited.


The pure joy of spotting movies and dialogues as the story proceeds is incredible. The rip-offs from Mouna ragam, Thalapathy, Annamalai and Apoorva sahodarargal even manages to bring in a feel-good nostalgic element. Needless to say, one is likely to enjoy the movie better if they have been watching Tamil movies over the last couple of decades. Our tradition of having middle aged comedians passing off as college students /heros friends is taken to another level with the 'Boys' ensemble. Mano Bala, Venniradai Murthy and MS Bhasker play Nakul, Siddharth and Bharath who happen to be juniors of the hero. The villians come in the form of popular villan characters from various movies like Anniyan, Bhaasha, Dhool and a few more.

Shiva looks like he was born to do the role. The actor with his excellent comic timing and underplayed expressions instantly takes the audience with him on the joy ride. With a subject where one can esaily go over board, the restraint he displays is commendable. Paravai Muniyamma as the hero's grand mother is endearing. I wish the casting of the heroine was done better. Someone familiar with Tamil movies could ve done a better job. Disha Pandey was just adequate. The dialogues are smart, but the screen play meanders for a while in between. To have an entire song with gibbersih for lyrics borrowed from previous Tamil hits deserves credit both for the idea and its brilliant execution.

Wonder why the director did not travel too much back in time for his inspiration... Some puns off the films of the 50's, 60's and 70's would've added to the party. Perhaps he's saved them for the next spoof. Can't wait.

Striker - Review

The first thought that struck me as the end credits rolled out after the movie 'Striker' was a sense of being disconnected.. Suddenly disconnected from this place I was begining to know slowly through the audio-visuals on the screen. Also I thought why I didn't feel like there was a begining and an end to a story they wanted me to see. Frankly, I didn't think this was great for the movie.. (in the commercial sense of course...). I didn't want to leave the theatre feeling incomplete. But did that mean I did not enjoy watching it? Absolutely not. I enjoyed the movie - almost frame by frame. I think my major concern then was that it didn't seem like a movie about one single aspect or person. It was about Suryakant, Malwani, the game of carrom, the city of Bombay, its under belly and a few more people. The director very effectively took us through these places, people and their lives. Then, what exactly was I looking for??

It was then it struck me that I was expecting to be told about this person, his story the people he knew, the things he did , the troubles he faced and how he over came it. Now that's pretty easy to understand and what we have been fed through our movies over decades. A unidimensional narrative that eventually leads to us to a conclusion that the director would want us to arrive at, often justifying his protagonist and in a weird way, himself. With some adequate masala thrown in, we enjoy this process of forming opinions with no questions asked.

And that is something Striker doesn't do. It does not hold your finger or throw signals at you during the movie, leading you to a particlular end. The director presents the life of Surayakant, with it's elements. What you think of them is entirely your business. I guaged this within about 10 minutes of walking out of thetheatre . We are so used to a certain pattern in cinema that we have now reached a stage where we have forgotten to experience, think and reflect. And that was the reason for that sense of doubt. And when is life ever about one single aspect? Isn't it always a bit of everything and never complete? Its that bits and peices of Suryakant that Chandan Arora brings to us that makes him seem so real, not a hero, but a person we are meeting.


Siddharth brilliantly portrays Suryakant in all his spirit, sorrows and insecurities to the point of not telling them apart. At the carrom board or at home with Suryakant's family, he looks very much the guy brought up by the tiny gulllies of Bombay. And his boyish face is one of the primary reasons the audience empathises with Suryakant. Perhaps the only effort from the director to lead us towards something. As we see Suryakant grows from a 10year old carrom enthusiast to an ambitious young man and later to a person drawn into the darker world of betting and drugs, we meet the people he meets. They come in form of an impressive supporting cast of Ankur Vikal (childhood friend), Aditya Pancholi (an underworld bully) and Anupam Kher (a cop). Through Anoop Soni, Seema Biswas and Vidya Malwade the audience relates to the Suryakant who is just like any of us with a family that loves him unconditionally.


I am glad Chandan included Suryakant's first love affair contrary to what a lot of people think was not required. When one relates the story of a boy growing up, his first love is so essential. No matter of what consequence it is to his entire life or how long it lasted. To keep the audience aware of that bitterness was essential, I thought. Though the idea of marriage-post-rape disgusts me, it somehow seems like the most natural thing in the movie. I don't know how Chandan does it, but I bought it. I guess the Madhu's (aptly played by Padma priya) interest in Surya depicted earlier in the movie dubiously justifies it.


Camera by PS Vinod is beautiful, never distracts and sets the right moods. The clothes could ve been more convincing. Acid wash jeans and pleated trousers could ve really brought in the 80's feel more effectively. Again, while the art was convincing and underplayed, smaller specific props (like telephones, furniture, curtains etc) would ve taken the audience instantly to the 80's. Songs Cham Cham and Piya Sanvara are exceptional. Expected more from Yuvan in Haq Se.


The effort put in by Chandan Arora as director is evident through out the movie. What deserves appreciation is his conviction to tell us this story of Suryakant on his terms and allow us to keep our own emotions for the guy. The lesser the expectations and pre conceived notions, more you will enjoy it. Striker definitely hits us hard and straight.