“Krishnam Vande Jagadguru” is quite a resonant title taken
from a Sanskrit Sloka in Bhagavatam. It has Rana Daggubati who hasn’t yet tasted Box Office
success and casts Nayanatara in her first glam role after “Srirama Rajyam”.
Director Radhakrishna Jagarlamudi is known for themes which are seldom dwelled
upon on celluloid. In “Gamyam” he talks about being a humanist instead of a
hedonist and enjoying the journey more than the destination in life. In “Vedam”
he talks about the essence of right living and right thinking taking stories of
five different people and blending them in the climax to drum up the broad message of Vedas. It broke new
ground in presentation and clearly remains a unique film of sorts - in genre, theme and vivacity. “KVJ” his
current, therefore, built a crescendo of expectations - it has the implicit backing of the king of
script-judgements D Suresh Babu, and all the paternal support that comes with
such backing – theatres, distribution, the works. It is touted to be the real
launch film of Rana. Does it deliver? Maybe, but it’s a mixed bag, according to
me.
The story is quite explosive. Loosely borrowed from the
famous “Surabhi” Nageswar Rao character. The patriarch of Surabhi theatre (Kota Srinivasa Rao) runs the troupe with new
generation of artists who show mixed commitment to the craft. One of them is
BTech Babu (Rana) who is the “manasa putra” of Kota Srinivasa Rao, he is 6’3”tall,
handsome, built like a planet and pulls off any role from the mythologies from
Abhimanyu and Ghatotkachha to Narasimha and Krishna Avatars. He is the only
hope for Kota to enact his magnum opus “Krishnam Vande Jagadguru” in Bellary
Mines but BTech Babu has plans to study in US. Crest-fallen, Kota dies. Shaken by Kota’s death and his past, BTech
Babu re-dedicates himself and unites the troupe to carry on the tradition. This takes him to
Bellary where he falls in love with Nayanatara (an investigative documentary
film-maker on mining scam). He also meets with the real baddies of Bellary –
Murali Sharma and Milan Gunajee and finds more economic and social arson leading
to imbalances in the surroundings of Bellary. Then the climax in a filmy way
where Btech Babu pounces on the real villain who disturbed his ecosystem: While
playing Narasimha Avatar, he pounces upon the villain (find out yourself) and
eventually lets the displaced villagers give a fire exit to the villain.
Director Krish had picked an explosive theme of Mining loot
and its effect on the underbellies affected by it. He blends it half-heartedly
with the declining patronage for theatre arts with the influx of media and
economic boom leading to evolving forms of crisp entertainment. He lacks the
control and finesse to blend both. In 136 minutes, he shows half-hearted will
to grapple with the issues of the movie. Unlike Bengali and Marathi theatre,
why did Telugu theatre vanish after centuries of fantastic run? There must be
reasons beyond the evident – could it be mass urbanization or media invasion?
Could better improvisation of language (simplification, actually) helped? Could
they have picked up shorter and more vibrant and relevant themes? Any craft
dies not because of falling patronage but only because of lack of marketing
initiatives and perceived value – those aspects were not properly investigated.
If Annamacharya had sung several thousand keerthanas, how come only few are
sung with telling noticeability by even the unitiated? Some soul-searching
needs to be done by Telugu theatre why such a decline befell it - those who don’t adapt to the changing times
in technology, presentation, content, theme or relevance, they are bound to
perish. Krish disappointingly, has done no justice to the relevance of this
debate. Instead, he sprinkles a few powerful dialogues that art is that which
wakes you up from dreams, not the dream itself. Point taken, but how does the
art become sustainable, remunerative and fulfilling? Krish doesn’t answer: If you use
language that’s not crisp or clear to the current generation, the
theatre has no hope in hell. But if you make it entertaining and improvise, it
can survive the odds as in cities like Pune, Mumbai, Kolkata etc. For every “Surabhi”
example, we need to see why some others have succeeded like “Prithvi” or “Qadar
Ali Baig theatre” or some noted English theatres. Everybody loves a good play
and stage performance and I can vouch that given good presentation and content,
people will go to any lengths to watch theatre, there’s no dearth of audience
here.
Krish also under-utilises his own strengths in documenting social
problems well in his assessment of the mining mafia. Even though so much has
happened in Bellary, and Goa mining scams, some justice is happening in terms
of export bans, invoking of the RTI, land acquisition laws, etc. I don’t want to delve deep into this
issue as there are other larger points of debate which can be tackled
separately. Showing how mining barons terrorise the villagers is just
old-school villainy. When you have the main villain as “Reddappa”, there is so
much scope for bringing real-life characterization and depth to sophisticated
villainy. Krish fails to deliver here as well as in the characterization of
most roles in the film. Nayanatara is a documentary film-maker on the mining
scams. We don’t think she is either intelligent nor capable of the task at hand
in the way she is characterized; she is mostly seducing Rana, dancing with him
or running with her camera in Ambassador car. And what is the connection
between a CBI officer and a documentary film-maker? Do they authorize film-makers
to shoot documentaries and give leads? Murali Sharma is a talented villain who
continues to be short-changed in Telugu films, he had scope to give a fiery
performance but is again given short-shrift. The three best characters in the
film are L.B.Sriram as the safekeeper of sand, Brahmanandam as “Rampam” and
Posani Krishna Murali as “Tipu Sultan” car driver. Infact, the lightest moments
in the film are when Brahmanandam takes a dig at stage artists and when Posani
Krishna Murali sizzles on screen with his antics. Their screen presence electrifies for the
moments they appear.
Rana Daggubati
definitely has a diction that is top of the tree and credit must be given for
his awesome dialogue-delivery of tough Telugu. He looks very impressive in the
roles of mythological characters especially as Abhimanyu and Narasimha but he
needs to improve his looks and work on what is the best facial hairdo for a
person of his hulk and height. He looked better in “Dum Maro Dum” and previous
movies in terms of looks than in this movie. He probably looks better with a
stubble or a beard and a moustache like Victory Venkatesh (btw, Venkatesh has a guest appearance with Sameera Reddy in a song). But he delivers a
heartful performance that may make him win more hearts. Had Krish concentrated
on every scene one at a time, the intensity of Rana would have come alive
because he has streaks of fiery acting like Venky. Krish has treaks of my uncle
Bapu – he doesn’t allow a scene to fully develop to its potential (like they
say in Telugu, “scene panda ledu”). Music by Mani Sharma sounds unlike him and lacks the class and
masterly touch of his earlier films. I get a sense that Krish imposes his own
restrictions on the music output expected for BGM and songs except in “Vedam”. The
background song with SPB at about half-dozen moments of the film brings out the
pathos well. There are songs which abruptly break into the flow of the scenes - like the circus song. What mars the film also is
the degree of violence – it has some scenes that you will cringe to watch like
tongue-slaying and hot-water throat bath etc. Why do they show such scenes? Why
compound cruelty with clarity? I understand the censors have ordered for 36
seconds of brutal violence to be cut but only 12 seconds are cut in some
theatres and the rest are showing off.
On the whole, a movie with mixed-bag results and could have
been better handled by Krish because he had a great opportunity. I hope he
becomes deft enough to be equal to the themes he selects henceforth. I will
give this movie 2.5 out of 5 as I was disappointed a bit. It is watchable more
in the first half than the second.
