"Pilla Zamindar" is a short and breezy comedy with lively performances by an ensemble of stage artistes who never get their share of limelight in films. Director Ashok and Producer GS Rao have created a fun-filled tale of how a Richie-Rich Naani who takes money for granted gets to earn his spurs and grow as a mature human being who learns that what drives happiness is not money but other things i...n life - love, friendship, self-growth, personal victory and service-mindedness before the world can recognise you. Earlier, he loves things and uses people but towards the end he loves people and uses things - and in this real "graduation" process, the Director has shown enormous talent and command over the script, story-telling and entertainment aspects with oodles of right-balanced emotions. No foreign locations, no exotic sets, no thorough-fare fights that exhaust you. In just 130 minutes, you get a lung-expanding excursion into the village atmosphere and get to see folks who make merry in their rustic walks of life with greater ease than urban folks who smart under the metrosexual madness. Except for a bit of crassiness and maybe one vulgar song, the movie is a victory for what a combination of raw talent, good performances, tight scripting, flair for outstanding humour and spirited execution can achieve. Naani, Rao Ramesh, MS Narayana and the gang who hang out with the hero all deserve applause. There is an unconventional speed and exuberance in the screenplay that gets you hooked even though you know whats coming. Once in a while, we commit a statistical error of watching a good movie wee bit late. Like that, we saw "Ala Modalaindi" and "Golimaar". Its now the turn of "Pilla Zamindar" which is already into 50days run. The experience was thoroughly enjoyable and leaves you light-hearted inspite of the subtle messages beamed out. Saptagiri 70mm where we saw is as robust in viewing experience as a multiplex - and that was just one of the other pleasant surprises - music and photography were equally good. Movie-makers should make this movie a case-study on making low-budget movies that can become paisa-vasools.
December 5, 2011
Niall Ferguson Vs. Pankaj Mishra
I am excerpting a now famously spirited spat between Niall Ferguson and Pankaj Mishra both acclaimed writers in their own right. Pankaj reviewed Niall's book "Civillisations" and thats where the trouble started for Pankaj where Niall was "alleged" to be "racist" in his views of West Vs. East. I couldn't paste the link from LRB site (London Review of Books) without keeping other letters column. So duly acknowledging these two letters - Niall Ferguson's letter and his repartee by Pankaj Mishra - both are captured in this. Source: London Review of Books (lest I be facing a suit next!)
Niall Ferguson's letter to London Review of Books:Watch this man
Pankaj Mishra is now in full and ignominious retreat. As my last letter explained, in his review of my book Civilisation, he made a vile allegation of racism against me (Letters, 17 November). In his response he nowhere denies that this was his allegation; nor does he deny that he intended to make it. He now acknowledges that I am no racist. Any decent person would make an unconditional apology and stop there. But Mishra proves incapable of doing the right thing. His mealy-mouthed acknowledgment is qualified by the offensive suggestion that I lack ‘the steady convictions of racialist ideologues’, to whom his original review so outrageously compared me. Mishra’s slippery spin on his original words is that he meant to accuse me only of a ‘wider pathology’ of ‘bow[ing] down before the conqueror of the moment, to accept the existing trend as irreversible’. Unfortunately for his reputation, this new smear is also demonstrably false.
If Mishra bothered to read my work – or if he were not so intent on misrepresenting it – he would have to concede that since my book Virtual History (1997) I have consistently argued against the notion of irreversible trends in history. He would have to concede that the first article I published on the subject of ‘Chimerica’ (in the Wall Street Journal on 5 February 2007) explicitly concluded with a warning that the Sino-American economic relationship could prove to be a chimera. Far from writing ‘whatever seems resonant and persuasive at any given hour’, I have consistently sought to challenge the conventional wisdom of the moment. The Cash Nexus (2001) – published at a time when most bien pensants were ardent proponents of European monetary union – accurately foretold the current crisis of the euro. My book Colossus (2004) was subtitled ‘The Rise and Fall of the American Empire’ and warned that neoconservative visions of American imperium would likely founder on three deficits, of manpower, finance and public attention. Throughout 2006 and 2007, when others fell victim to irrational exuberance, I repeatedly warned of the dangers of a large financial crisis emanating from the US subprime mortgage market. And, far from hailing ‘the Chinese Century’, I spend pages 319-324 of Civilisation discussing the numerous challenges that China is likely to face in the coming decades. In fact, the phrase ‘Chinese century’ does not appear in my book.
As Mishra – and the LRB’s editor – must have appreciated, the allegation of racism in Mishra’s review was ostensibly buttressed by repeated accusations of omission of important issues and evidence. In my last letter I took five of these supposed omissions and showed they are in fact in the book under review, in black and white – and in the index. Had Mishra read the book so casually that he missed all five? Or was he wilfully and maliciously misrepresenting it?
Exposed, Mishra now retreats into quibbling about my tone. For example, my reference to Kenneth Pomeranz’s work is said to be ‘uncouth’. Really? Here is what I wrote:
For a century after 1520, the Chinese national savings rate was negative. There was no capital accumulation in late Ming China; rather the opposite. The story of what Kenneth Pomeranz has called ‘the Great Divergence’ between East and West therefore began much earlier than Pomeranz asserted.
I leave readers to make up their own minds about whether or not this is uncouth. (By the standards of serious economic historiography it is actually pretty polite.)
Mishra’s disingenuous approach is exemplified by his treatment of Chinese economic history at the start of the modern era, a central topic of Civilisation. Mishra’s original review said I gave no evidence for my position. Now that he stands corrected, Mishra responds that ‘[Ferguson] now unearths a footnote’ citing ‘two obscure Chinese scholars’. I find this extraordinary in two respects. First, the reference needed no ‘unearthing’. It was there, in the source notes and bibliography, for him and other readers to see. Second, David Daokui Li is hardly an ‘obscure scholar’. He is one of China’s leading economists. Not only is he the director of the Centre for China in the World Economy at Tsinghua University, he is also a member of the People’s Bank of China’s Monetary Policy Committee. He is, moreover, a former fellow of Stanford’s Hoover Institution and a former editor of the Journal of Comparative Economics. To say that Professor Li’s curriculum vitae is more impressive than Pankaj Mishra’s would be an understatement. A simple Google search, had Mishra bothered to do one before he wrote his rejoinder, would have spared his blushes. Your readers can now draw their own conclusions about the quality of the work you allow into your publication.
My book is not a ‘paean to the superiority of Western civilisation’, as Mishra describes it in a last pathetic salvo. I explicitly disavow triumphalism in the introduction. Rather it is a dispassionate examination of why the West came to dominate the Rest economically, geopolitically and even culturally between the 1500s and the 1970s. Besides the familiar, ugly methods of expropriation and enslavement – employed by Western and non-Western empires through the ages – there were novelties, not all of them pernicious. One of these was the scientific method, whereby claims are not advanced that patently conflict with empirical evidence. Another was the rule of law, under which, among other things, the freedom of the press does not extend to serious defamation, at best reckless, at worst deliberate and malicious. It is deplorable that the London Review of Books gives space to a man who seemingly cares about neither of these things.
I am still waiting for an apology, from both Pankaj Mishra and the editor who published his defamatory article.
Niall Ferguson
Harvard University
Pankaj Mishra writes: Niall Ferguson does not, alas, satisfactorily embody the ‘novelties’ – ‘scientific method’ and ‘rule of law’ – that he insists were the West’s gifts to the ‘Rest’. He seeks to mitigate the crimes of his beloved Western empires – what he calls ‘ugly methods of expropriation and enslavement’ – by also implicating ‘non-Western’ empires in them. He persists with questions that I have already answered in our previous exchange. Asked for proof of the ‘recent research’ that has ‘demolished’ Kenneth Pomeranz’s The Great Divergence, he comes up with the curriculum vitae of a Chinese academic nearly as well connected as he is. However, some readers of Civilisation may still want to see the actual paper that apparently singlehandedly discredits a major work of scholarship.
It is hard, even with Google, to keep up with Ferguson’s many claims and counter-claims. But his announcements of the dawning of the ‘Chinese Century’ and his more recent revised prophecy that India will outpace China, can be found as quickly as the boisterous heralding of the American imperium that he now disavows. As for his views on the innate superiority, indeed indispensability, of Western civilisation, these can be easily ascertained from his published writings and statements. Here is an extract from an interview early this year in the Guardian justifying the conquest of Native Americans:
The Apache and the Navajo had all sorts of admirable traits. In the absence of literacy we don’t know what they were because they didn’t write them down. We do know they killed a hell of a lot of bison. But had they been left to their own devices, I don’t think we’d have anything remotely resembling the civilisation we’ve had in North America.
It says something about the political culture of our age that Ferguson has got away with this disgraced worldview for as long as he has. Certainly, it now needs to be scrutinised in places other than the letters page of the LRB.
Niall Ferguson's letter to London Review of Books:Watch this man
Pankaj Mishra is now in full and ignominious retreat. As my last letter explained, in his review of my book Civilisation, he made a vile allegation of racism against me (Letters, 17 November). In his response he nowhere denies that this was his allegation; nor does he deny that he intended to make it. He now acknowledges that I am no racist. Any decent person would make an unconditional apology and stop there. But Mishra proves incapable of doing the right thing. His mealy-mouthed acknowledgment is qualified by the offensive suggestion that I lack ‘the steady convictions of racialist ideologues’, to whom his original review so outrageously compared me. Mishra’s slippery spin on his original words is that he meant to accuse me only of a ‘wider pathology’ of ‘bow[ing] down before the conqueror of the moment, to accept the existing trend as irreversible’. Unfortunately for his reputation, this new smear is also demonstrably false.
If Mishra bothered to read my work – or if he were not so intent on misrepresenting it – he would have to concede that since my book Virtual History (1997) I have consistently argued against the notion of irreversible trends in history. He would have to concede that the first article I published on the subject of ‘Chimerica’ (in the Wall Street Journal on 5 February 2007) explicitly concluded with a warning that the Sino-American economic relationship could prove to be a chimera. Far from writing ‘whatever seems resonant and persuasive at any given hour’, I have consistently sought to challenge the conventional wisdom of the moment. The Cash Nexus (2001) – published at a time when most bien pensants were ardent proponents of European monetary union – accurately foretold the current crisis of the euro. My book Colossus (2004) was subtitled ‘The Rise and Fall of the American Empire’ and warned that neoconservative visions of American imperium would likely founder on three deficits, of manpower, finance and public attention. Throughout 2006 and 2007, when others fell victim to irrational exuberance, I repeatedly warned of the dangers of a large financial crisis emanating from the US subprime mortgage market. And, far from hailing ‘the Chinese Century’, I spend pages 319-324 of Civilisation discussing the numerous challenges that China is likely to face in the coming decades. In fact, the phrase ‘Chinese century’ does not appear in my book.
As Mishra – and the LRB’s editor – must have appreciated, the allegation of racism in Mishra’s review was ostensibly buttressed by repeated accusations of omission of important issues and evidence. In my last letter I took five of these supposed omissions and showed they are in fact in the book under review, in black and white – and in the index. Had Mishra read the book so casually that he missed all five? Or was he wilfully and maliciously misrepresenting it?
Exposed, Mishra now retreats into quibbling about my tone. For example, my reference to Kenneth Pomeranz’s work is said to be ‘uncouth’. Really? Here is what I wrote:
For a century after 1520, the Chinese national savings rate was negative. There was no capital accumulation in late Ming China; rather the opposite. The story of what Kenneth Pomeranz has called ‘the Great Divergence’ between East and West therefore began much earlier than Pomeranz asserted.
I leave readers to make up their own minds about whether or not this is uncouth. (By the standards of serious economic historiography it is actually pretty polite.)
Mishra’s disingenuous approach is exemplified by his treatment of Chinese economic history at the start of the modern era, a central topic of Civilisation. Mishra’s original review said I gave no evidence for my position. Now that he stands corrected, Mishra responds that ‘[Ferguson] now unearths a footnote’ citing ‘two obscure Chinese scholars’. I find this extraordinary in two respects. First, the reference needed no ‘unearthing’. It was there, in the source notes and bibliography, for him and other readers to see. Second, David Daokui Li is hardly an ‘obscure scholar’. He is one of China’s leading economists. Not only is he the director of the Centre for China in the World Economy at Tsinghua University, he is also a member of the People’s Bank of China’s Monetary Policy Committee. He is, moreover, a former fellow of Stanford’s Hoover Institution and a former editor of the Journal of Comparative Economics. To say that Professor Li’s curriculum vitae is more impressive than Pankaj Mishra’s would be an understatement. A simple Google search, had Mishra bothered to do one before he wrote his rejoinder, would have spared his blushes. Your readers can now draw their own conclusions about the quality of the work you allow into your publication.
My book is not a ‘paean to the superiority of Western civilisation’, as Mishra describes it in a last pathetic salvo. I explicitly disavow triumphalism in the introduction. Rather it is a dispassionate examination of why the West came to dominate the Rest economically, geopolitically and even culturally between the 1500s and the 1970s. Besides the familiar, ugly methods of expropriation and enslavement – employed by Western and non-Western empires through the ages – there were novelties, not all of them pernicious. One of these was the scientific method, whereby claims are not advanced that patently conflict with empirical evidence. Another was the rule of law, under which, among other things, the freedom of the press does not extend to serious defamation, at best reckless, at worst deliberate and malicious. It is deplorable that the London Review of Books gives space to a man who seemingly cares about neither of these things.
I am still waiting for an apology, from both Pankaj Mishra and the editor who published his defamatory article.
Niall Ferguson
Harvard University
Pankaj Mishra writes: Niall Ferguson does not, alas, satisfactorily embody the ‘novelties’ – ‘scientific method’ and ‘rule of law’ – that he insists were the West’s gifts to the ‘Rest’. He seeks to mitigate the crimes of his beloved Western empires – what he calls ‘ugly methods of expropriation and enslavement’ – by also implicating ‘non-Western’ empires in them. He persists with questions that I have already answered in our previous exchange. Asked for proof of the ‘recent research’ that has ‘demolished’ Kenneth Pomeranz’s The Great Divergence, he comes up with the curriculum vitae of a Chinese academic nearly as well connected as he is. However, some readers of Civilisation may still want to see the actual paper that apparently singlehandedly discredits a major work of scholarship.
It is hard, even with Google, to keep up with Ferguson’s many claims and counter-claims. But his announcements of the dawning of the ‘Chinese Century’ and his more recent revised prophecy that India will outpace China, can be found as quickly as the boisterous heralding of the American imperium that he now disavows. As for his views on the innate superiority, indeed indispensability, of Western civilisation, these can be easily ascertained from his published writings and statements. Here is an extract from an interview early this year in the Guardian justifying the conquest of Native Americans:
The Apache and the Navajo had all sorts of admirable traits. In the absence of literacy we don’t know what they were because they didn’t write them down. We do know they killed a hell of a lot of bison. But had they been left to their own devices, I don’t think we’d have anything remotely resembling the civilisation we’ve had in North America.
It says something about the political culture of our age that Ferguson has got away with this disgraced worldview for as long as he has. Certainly, it now needs to be scrutinised in places other than the letters page of the LRB.
Let the Parliament function
Even though I am a die-hard bull about the economy and stockmarket, I am worried about the way the Parliamentarians in India are acting out of their wits. If they don't allow the ongoing Winter Session to function properly, and deliberate and discuss the passage of crucial bills - you can rest assured that not only FII outflows will increase or additional FDI get stalled, it will do more harm than... good to Brand India in the near-and-long-term. I am scared that if this session doesn't function its chartered course, Rupee can touch 56-58 to a dollar and markets can slip to 12k also - aggravating a fragile balance in macroeconomic headwinds. Opposition in India have opportunities galore already, they should just rein in their destructive emotions to act responsibly - else, they will be perceived as enemies bigger than some neighbouring countries. Dear opposition, choose your batttles well, you are on the verge of winning a war, why fritter away a chance to show some statesmanship?
Congress-I and Customer Service
The concept of customer service (moments of truth) has never existed for Congress-I and its lieutenants. Look at the way they are treating their biggest bastion in South - AP and India's second Presidential Capital Hyderabad. Even with 40 plus MPs - we have no minister of reckoning who will award projects here or retain investments. Investments are flowing out of the city, commercial space i...s g...oing abegging, some 30,000 units are threatening closure, companies like ICICI Bank and Infosys have reduced their footprint here to other places (which was not the original plan) like Pune, Landmark Bookshop closed its Warehouse in Hyderabad, many prominent groups have shifted out of Hyderabad, students are not coming to study in Hyd anymore especially Inter/Degree/PG level students which is the backbone of student population, MICE events have taken the severest knock last few years, IT Parks are shifting their R&D to other centres in India and abroad. Congress-I never treated the Hyd city or the state of AP with the respect and support - issues pile up and burial is the solution. This is nothing but a heist comparable in scale to what the British plundered in pre-independence era. The state is ignored in getting Railways footprint, projects, industrial corridors, everything and they manage to keepo the state folks perenially in illiteracy and disempowerment with doles for the poor. Today, the poor of AP are going out of the state for work; a few years back states like Bihar saw outlflow of people because of de-growth in Bihar - now Bihari workers in AP are moving back to Bihar because there are better prospects there. Does that mean we are becoming worse than Bihar?In the triangular contest happening between TDP, Jagan and Telangana demands - the Cong-I has precipitated CBI enquiries which are going nowhere but threatening to cast a shadow on every businessman in the city. I just hope that the next election will teach a lesson on customer service to Congress-I by decimating their base built on crooked plans, divisive politics and devious policies based on faultlines developed by them alone. Who will cry for you, Andhra Pradesh?
Being Cycil
"Blood is thicker than water". You can say now that Cycil Mistry is chosen to succeed Ratan Tata. The oldest group didnt want any outsider to lead them like say Infosys. Thats justifiable and understandable given its range of businesses.
Quotes on Stockmarkets
Some quotes on the stock market that are never out of sync.
"Know that for every Seller in the market, there is also a buyer" - Anon.
"Only liars manage to always be OUT during bad times and IN during good times in stock market."- Bernard Baruch.
"The investor's chief problem - and even his worst enemy - is likely to be himself." - Benjamin Graham.
"Investors shouldn't delude themselves about b...eating the market. They're just not going to do it. It's just not going to happen." - Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize Winner in Economics.
"Your ultimate success of failure will depend on your ability to ignore the worries of the world long enough to allow your investments to succeed. It isn't the head, but the stomach that determines your fate." - Peter Lynch.
"There are well-dressed foolish ideas just as there are well-dressed fools." - Nicholas Chamfort.
"The greatest advantage from gambling comes from not playing at all." - Girolamo Cardano, 16th Century physician, mathematician.
"If you want to see the greatest threat to your financial future, go home and take a look in the mirror." - Jonathan Clements.
just made a killing in the stock market -- I shot my broker". Henny Youngman
"The time of maximum pessimism is the best time to buy and the time of maximum optimism is the best time to sell".John Templeton
"If you have trouble imagining a 20% loss in the stock market, you shouldn't be in stocks".John (Jack) Bogle
"The key to making money in stocks is not to get scared out of them".
Peter Lynch
"The stock market is filled with individuals who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing".Philip Fisher.
"Know that for every Seller in the market, there is also a buyer" - Anon.
"Only liars manage to always be OUT during bad times and IN during good times in stock market."- Bernard Baruch.
"The investor's chief problem - and even his worst enemy - is likely to be himself." - Benjamin Graham.
"Investors shouldn't delude themselves about b...eating the market. They're just not going to do it. It's just not going to happen." - Daniel Kahneman, Nobel Prize Winner in Economics.
"Your ultimate success of failure will depend on your ability to ignore the worries of the world long enough to allow your investments to succeed. It isn't the head, but the stomach that determines your fate." - Peter Lynch.
"There are well-dressed foolish ideas just as there are well-dressed fools." - Nicholas Chamfort.
"The greatest advantage from gambling comes from not playing at all." - Girolamo Cardano, 16th Century physician, mathematician.
"If you want to see the greatest threat to your financial future, go home and take a look in the mirror." - Jonathan Clements.
just made a killing in the stock market -- I shot my broker". Henny Youngman
"The time of maximum pessimism is the best time to buy and the time of maximum optimism is the best time to sell".John Templeton
"If you have trouble imagining a 20% loss in the stock market, you shouldn't be in stocks".John (Jack) Bogle
"The key to making money in stocks is not to get scared out of them".
Peter Lynch
"The stock market is filled with individuals who know the price of everything, but the value of nothing".Philip Fisher.
Sri Rama Rajyam Movie Review
“Srirama Rajyam” is worth the wait and worth watching all 150 minutes. Honestly, I was not bored even once despite that there were no fights, no item songs, no comedy tracks, no belly-dancing or bottom-pinching movements. On the contrary, Balakrishna who usually mouths blood-wrenching dialogues and Nayanatara who wears sleeveless sarees gave one of the best performances of their lives – Balayya with his “Avatar” Vishnu-blue colour body and impeccable makeup and costumes that are reminiscent of NTR and Nayanatara with her Satwic portrayal of Sita in elegant skin-protecting dresses is surprising.
The script - originally purportedly written by Sage Valmiki – based on the original “Luva Kusha” was well-fleshed out, articulated and embellished by Late Mullapudi Venkataramana garu. You see him in every line that every character speaks in the film directed superbly by Bapu garu. It is incredible that after so many decades after “Seeta Kalyanam”, Bapu and Ramana retained their affection for Ramayana so well as to carve out a mini-epic that will resonate splendidly with today’s audiences. In interpreting Ramayana in the light of today’s changing themes of polygamy, disharmony and dysfunctional childhoods, live-in marriages and celebratory divorces, children and parents who live on different planets, et al – Mullapudi Ramana gives his subtle take on many aspects for those who listen to the under-currents behind the voices coming from the characters.
The original “Luva Kusha” despite its celestial songs and immortal characterization came in techno color and all of 22 reels with higher Telugu proficiency. This one is 16 reels and full of crisp characterization and wonderful visuals and some ten minutes of outstanding graphics toward the climax. Not just Balakrishna and Nayanatara - almost everybody gets to shine once or often most notably ANR (who played a majestic role as Sage Valmiki), Srikanth (as Lakhsmana), KR Vijaya (as Kausalya) and Roja (as Sita’s mother Bhoodevi). The three kids playing Hanuman, Luv and Kush give us a full feel of what blithe spirits are – they are just adorable. At eighty, when most folks wheel away in their chair or eke their twilight years like a vegetable, Bapu garu has worked so damn hard on a subject that’s dear to him and his dear friend Mullapudi Ramana who passed away before the film got completed. Of course, it requires a gutsy producer like Y Saibaba to collaborate so well in bringing such an ambitious enterprise to bear fruit – and he is the silent hero who has to be appreciated. One movie like this will get generations back to its roots – and Bapu has taken great care in giving a top-quality visual which is crisp, neat, measured not once appearing either regressive in message or vulgar at all (like some of the other directors who attempt mythologicals get tempted for). Music by Maestro Ilayaraja is already a hit but in the movie he used it with calibrated orchestration as BGM that will stand out.
There are minor blemishes in the movie but hardly noticeable in the flow and very few cinematic liberties taken by Bapu and Ramana – but they don’t impoverish our worldview, they enrich the movie. Also, given the thin layer of the original Uttara Ramayana, I expected to see Bapu-Ramana team to delve more into the nuances of Rama Rajyam which people like Mahatma Gandhi and others talked about – give us a broader sweep of how a society used to live under Rama Rajya – rather than concentrating on the melancholy and twist of fate separating Rama and Sita yet again. That would have set “Srirama Rajyam” further apart from “Luva Kusha” as the final epic instead of mostly showing a brooding Rama. Sita’s character always shows greater resilience and courage than Rama – and that comes through ably through Nayantara.
Ramayana as a theme always finds takers for its undercurrents of love, family values and devotion. I am always intrigued that right from Valmiki to Kamba to writers like RK Narayan, C Rajagopalachari, Ashok Banker – success always crowns those who stick to the basic knitting. If you stray from the plot like Mani Ratnam or take liberties under the veil of artistic freedom, you will get dumped not for irrelevance but for irreverence. Recently, Delhi University has scrapped AK Ramanujam’s essay on 300 versions of Ramayana because the epic is burned so deeply inside our national consciousness that reading the original version gives more benefits than when it is not endured. To that extent, “SriRama Rajyam” is recommended highly. We are taking out our 83 year old grandmother as well as kids who see Telugu DVDs with English subtitles. And let me say this unabashadely, nobody makes Ramayana epics better than Bapu-Ramana or for that matter Telugu folks.
The script - originally purportedly written by Sage Valmiki – based on the original “Luva Kusha” was well-fleshed out, articulated and embellished by Late Mullapudi Venkataramana garu. You see him in every line that every character speaks in the film directed superbly by Bapu garu. It is incredible that after so many decades after “Seeta Kalyanam”, Bapu and Ramana retained their affection for Ramayana so well as to carve out a mini-epic that will resonate splendidly with today’s audiences. In interpreting Ramayana in the light of today’s changing themes of polygamy, disharmony and dysfunctional childhoods, live-in marriages and celebratory divorces, children and parents who live on different planets, et al – Mullapudi Ramana gives his subtle take on many aspects for those who listen to the under-currents behind the voices coming from the characters.
The original “Luva Kusha” despite its celestial songs and immortal characterization came in techno color and all of 22 reels with higher Telugu proficiency. This one is 16 reels and full of crisp characterization and wonderful visuals and some ten minutes of outstanding graphics toward the climax. Not just Balakrishna and Nayanatara - almost everybody gets to shine once or often most notably ANR (who played a majestic role as Sage Valmiki), Srikanth (as Lakhsmana), KR Vijaya (as Kausalya) and Roja (as Sita’s mother Bhoodevi). The three kids playing Hanuman, Luv and Kush give us a full feel of what blithe spirits are – they are just adorable. At eighty, when most folks wheel away in their chair or eke their twilight years like a vegetable, Bapu garu has worked so damn hard on a subject that’s dear to him and his dear friend Mullapudi Ramana who passed away before the film got completed. Of course, it requires a gutsy producer like Y Saibaba to collaborate so well in bringing such an ambitious enterprise to bear fruit – and he is the silent hero who has to be appreciated. One movie like this will get generations back to its roots – and Bapu has taken great care in giving a top-quality visual which is crisp, neat, measured not once appearing either regressive in message or vulgar at all (like some of the other directors who attempt mythologicals get tempted for). Music by Maestro Ilayaraja is already a hit but in the movie he used it with calibrated orchestration as BGM that will stand out.
There are minor blemishes in the movie but hardly noticeable in the flow and very few cinematic liberties taken by Bapu and Ramana – but they don’t impoverish our worldview, they enrich the movie. Also, given the thin layer of the original Uttara Ramayana, I expected to see Bapu-Ramana team to delve more into the nuances of Rama Rajyam which people like Mahatma Gandhi and others talked about – give us a broader sweep of how a society used to live under Rama Rajya – rather than concentrating on the melancholy and twist of fate separating Rama and Sita yet again. That would have set “Srirama Rajyam” further apart from “Luva Kusha” as the final epic instead of mostly showing a brooding Rama. Sita’s character always shows greater resilience and courage than Rama – and that comes through ably through Nayantara.
Ramayana as a theme always finds takers for its undercurrents of love, family values and devotion. I am always intrigued that right from Valmiki to Kamba to writers like RK Narayan, C Rajagopalachari, Ashok Banker – success always crowns those who stick to the basic knitting. If you stray from the plot like Mani Ratnam or take liberties under the veil of artistic freedom, you will get dumped not for irrelevance but for irreverence. Recently, Delhi University has scrapped AK Ramanujam’s essay on 300 versions of Ramayana because the epic is burned so deeply inside our national consciousness that reading the original version gives more benefits than when it is not endured. To that extent, “SriRama Rajyam” is recommended highly. We are taking out our 83 year old grandmother as well as kids who see Telugu DVDs with English subtitles. And let me say this unabashadely, nobody makes Ramayana epics better than Bapu-Ramana or for that matter Telugu folks.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
"Jailor" (Telugu/Tamil) Movie Review: Electrifying!
"Jailer" is an electrifying entertainer in commercial format by Nelson who always builds a complex web of crime and police...
-
“Midhunam” (Telugu) is a much-awaited film for the art-loving Telugu crowds who love clean, good cinema. “Midhunam” means “couple” in Telug...
-
Will this be one of your friend's obituary? "R.I.P.Lipa Bajaptin. Lipa had had 3179 friends on FB (including 8 family members whic...
-
One of the many, many books written by the legendary Shakuntala Devi. I have a good collection of her books - including those gifted by my ...