"Drusyam" is an ambitious remake of the original Malayalam film by the same title - which hit national headlines with simultaneous bidding by leading film industries to reckon with - Bollywood, Tollywood, Sandalwood and Kollywood. With Ravi Chandran playing the role of Mohanlal in Kannada, Kamal Hasan in Tamil and Venkatesh in Telugu, expectations soared before the release. As usual, Telugu producers rushed to the fence in releasing the film. D.Suresh Babu backed Sripriya to direct the remake originally made by Jitu Joseph. Sripriya is that sizzling actress who starred in some unforgettable films of the 70s and 80s - "Anthuleni Katha" and "Vayasu Pilichindi".
The starcast is impressive - Venkatesh, Meena, Saptagiri, Kruttika, Ravi Kale, Nadiya and Naresh - and all of them have given great performances except Nadiya and Kruttika who were inconsistent in their performances and sometimes unconvincing. The story has been sensational and revolves around a six-sigma event - a highly improbable event in the way the ending goes. According to what I read, the story is an autobiographical adaptation by the original director Jitu Josph; it happened to him and his family and hence he approached a producer. After shooting for the first thirty minutes, the producer threw in the towel and in stepped Superstar Mohanlal who backed it to the hilt. "Drusyam" in Malayalam collected over Rs.50 crores and became the first film to cross that kind of a milestone reserved for big-brother film industries of erstwhile AP and Tamil Nadu. The original film runs for two hours and forty five minutes with minimum props and gripping intensity. The current remake runs for almost two hours and fifty minutes. The original film shows Mohanlal in a status of humble economic conditions. The remake shows Venky as a serial entrepreneur and reasonably affluent farmer-entrepreneur.
To tell the story will be to give away the plot. And to analyse the treatment and faultlines in the story will also unveil the storyline. But we have to make a beginning somewhere and talk turkey. So the story begins with Venkatesh and Meena and their two lovely daughters, one a teenager Kruttika and the other a pre-teenager. Venkatesh runs a cable TV business which goes well into the graveyard shift. His world at work revolves around movies - and he watches them every waking minute at work which starts around noon and stretches till the morning dawn. His assistant Saptagiri helps him out at work and they take the calls from customers at whim. At home, Meena is the boss and runs the household with the daughters and her indulgences in shopping. Its a happy world for Venkatesh and family even if they quibble and crib about the world until one fine day an intruder disrupts the peace. The intruder who takes lewd video of the teenaged daughter gets tackled in the most appropriate manner when he comes to Venky's home and makes fresh advances against Kruttika.
The crux of the film revolves around how Venky rallies behind his family. What really happened to the boy? Is he dead? Missing? Killed? Action speeds up with the boy's parents, Nadiya and Naresh stepping in. Nadiya is IGP and uses her full force to investigate the matter. Naresh is a doubting Thomas who always feared his wayward son was spoilt and had to end in a mess like this. The biggest support for Nadiya comes from a vengeaful constable of the local police station - Ravi Kale who was rubbed on the wrong side by Venky. The film goes in a different direction of suspicion, witness-examination and probe into the antecedents of the boy's travel to the village. This part, the cross-examination part and the preparation by Venky in psychologically steeling his family's nerves is the most exciting part of the film. The treatment is more nuanced and works on aspects seldom highlighted in films about the elements of criminality - mind-body coordination, body-language, evidence and its destruction and reconstruction, the art of dodging cross-examination, and the psychology of a crime-implicated person. The ending of the film takes one or two extra turns before it leaves you with lots of food for thought - on how the justice system works in India and what happens when someone were to subvert it.
Surely, the second half throws in a basketful of surprises but the first half lags because the director takes a lazy approach to establishing the characters and their idiosyncracies. Despite a valiant attempt to remake the film, the film's original script seems to have some flaws which can't be overlooked. But if you see the film in its flow, these faults may not be relevant because the treatment of the story takes a different direction but still they are plausible. For instance, on one hand, Venky works in the night shift as a cable TV owner but there is no reason to stay out of home when the whole world is sleeping when you have an Assistant and customer calls are few. If Venky really loves his family so much, as they show later in the film, why does a father of two girls and a loving wife spend his nights out watching silly movies? Not once do they show either Venky or Saptagiri, his assistant taking customer care calls seriously. Secondly, in Malayalam film, Mohanlal has a pitiable economic background but here, Venky has a five-acre plot with a lovely pathway and an opulent house but still cribs when his wife shops or demands an extra ice cream? Third, the police who beckon his family for interrogation do not check out his vast plotted house even once with sniffer dogs to find out if something's fishy. Fourth, almost every other character in the film uses a mobile phone including the delinquent boy but Venky doesn't use - which world is the director thinking of? If it is cable TV business, why do they show Venky all the time watching latest movies with channel logos shown once or twice? Does it mean that the customers also spend the night out watching the films all night? And not once do we see Venky using a remote while his assistant is shown photoshopping lovely females. Fifthly, the clues and alibis used by Venky during the interrogation - they don't really add up on closer watch - which is what Nadiya alleges. (For example, no bus ticket is issued without a date printed). Sixth, the interrogations done in a guest house are unlawful - they even interrogate a child and manhandle the womenfolk. And not once does a lawyer show up anytime during the in-camera interrogations. If watching films like "Ankuram" gives one knowledge about such subtle legal aspects as "habeus corpus", pray, why such a slip up? Seventh, in the Malayalam film, even the cable films watched by Mohanlal are intelligently assembled to stay relevant to the basic plot of the film. But here, they show films for populism - a Pawan Kalyan film here, a Mahesh Babu or a Sobhan Babu film there. But the beauty is why, the hero doesn't know that a naked SIM Card is less dangerous than a SIM inserted into a carbonn mobile phone. Lastly, since the film's perspectives are entirely shown from Venky's angle, enough care hasn't been taken in the characterisation of Nadiya - the mother in her dominates the policewoman in her way beyond the endurance levels of the audience. Which is why, she misuses the system of interrogation blatantly until she pays a price with her post. The ending is quick and brilliant as you leave the hall with a mixed feeling - Can everything be manipulated in the name of love and selfishness?
Performances-wise, Venky and Ravi Kale stand out with contrasting beauty. Venky is shown glamorously even if it is a dull character. The last several films of Venky have been forgettable flops and everytime he experimented in the last decade - "Nagavalli" or "Eenaadu" the audience rejected him. Despite the flaws, this is his best comeback film. It is not perfect film but it is watchable and draws you in despite inconsistencies. There are not many films that Tollywood can boast of in this genre. I didn't get goosebumps watching this film. But I didn't feel bored either. Music by Sharath is good in atleast the two songs. Cinematography by S.Gopal Reddy looks good. Comedy by Saptagiri alone is good the rest do not just fire up. Yes, visuals can be deceiving but to take a tongue-in-cheek approach to the film's title, it should not have been named "Drusyam". "Adrusyam" is better!
My Rating: 3/5.
