"Yevadu" (Telugu) Film Review

RamCharan strikes back. And he strikes gold with a sure-shot winner in "Yevadu" - a high octane commercial potboiler from Dil Raju. "Yevadu" has been the most-postponed film in recent times and with the release syncronising wih Sankranti today - his film might fare better with the festive audience longing for family drama and simple entertaining fare. Is the film different? Not different from the commercial fare - same old stunts and bone-smashing violence, item girls and cussed duets with cute girls. Infact, the film is longer too with 166 minutes of typical masala fare with a surfeit of villains  - Saikumar, Kota Srinivasa Rao, etc. Then what makes this watchable. Its the plot with a unique cinematic twist that comes in the first half hour and then again at interval block. I do not want to spoil the fun for your viewing experience by telling you the story. But suffice it that, Ramcharan takes off after half hour with a trail of sequences left by the other cameo star Allu Arjun in combating regular villains until a routine revenge drama takes over. 

Director Vamshi Paidipally weaves a simple story with a Shakespearan twist which gives an excitement in watching. Intermixed with loads of comedy from Brahmanandam on lines you have seen him before, the film takes off with good narration, characterisation and screenplay leaving the hero without any romance in the first half. Infact, much of the romance is on the side of villains with a new girl before Shruti Hasan takes over in second half. It is quite a typical commercial fare but novelty in treatment makes it eminently watchable. I believe the storyline with a twist is invested into by Vakkalanka Vamshi (the effervescent ETV newsreader of an era) and director Vamshi. Music by DSP has been the most hummable in this season and atleast two songs are chart-busters already. BGM score amplifies the emotions and the peformances well. 

Allu Arjun and Kajol Agarwal create a looming presence for themselves by selecting a role that gives them their own space in a film dominated by Ramcharan and Shruti Hasan. Dialogues are quite classy even if they occasionally hark back to vainglorious family fame. It is the violence that makes you squirm which doesn't usually have Dil Raju's sanction as he prefers everything toned down to family melodrama. First half is better than the second half because of tighter grip on narration and screenplay. Since everything adds up to the climax in the second half, director had brought in lot of elements and formula points for Ramcharan fans post-interval. That gives you some predictable and boring moments. If Tollywood continues to make films in this format, it may not get us anywhere in creative highs, but it will continue to ring in cash registers. Ramcharan improves his poker face and looks tidier and portly. He dances well and sustains himself in both the flashback and the first half. He doesn't grade his storylines well enough to select different films and infact uses regressive methods to taste success at Box Office like use of excess violence,  old comedy fare, over-mention of family tree and dynasty, and tried emotions. This time, the elements of family drama, revenge, emotions of mother-son sentiment and power-packed action with a unique twist could ensure a sustained run at the box office for "Yevadu". It should be the first hit of 2014 and could wipe out the deficit of the ten-odd films released so far. My rating for the film for its surprise thrill and watchability despite cliches is 3.25/5

"The Wolf of Wall Street" (English)

Martin Scorcese has been making films since 1964 and is regarded as a Hollywood legend who makes hard-hitting films with lot of visual effects and verbiage. He forged bonds of creative trust with actors like Robert de Neiro and now Leonardo DiCaprio. "The Wolf of Wall Street" is Martin's latest film with Dicaprio starring the latter as Jordan Belfort, the broker who made a killing in penny stocks and created a business empire that lured hundreds of aspirants from all walks of life - bakers, mechanics and retirees. Martin Scorcese's last film "Hugo" carried his stamp but the present film based on the same book written by Belfort is a throwback to the anarchist days of the 80s where the market cap to GDP ratio was below 1 and Reagan's years made it a national rage to own common stocks and brokers were divinely bestowed with tips.

Martin shows the Wall Street culture that is still the meanest in the world - with characters who sizzle in sex, lies, drugs and greed. Here is Belford who is indoctrinated into a dizzy culture of dope and sex while ripping off clients on over-churned stock portfolios. Belford tastes blood early and becomes the pet broker in his office. He figures out a new way to put hands in the wallets of customers: recommend penny stocks which are not traded regularly on the bourses which pays 50 per cent commissions - something similar to our trading in illiquid physical shares or micro cap stocks in low-trading category. Belfort fires up the opportunity and creates his own firm in due course which attract hordes of brokers in Wall Street firms. But Belford understands the selling cycle from telecalling to pitch to close. That makes him take on folks from unconventional backgrounds and mould them to deliver, this includes guys like Jonah Hill who crack the code of fast-pitching and over-trading in dud stocks.

The Success trap shows some sick humor with explicit sex scenes, substance abuse and scant regard to the person who pays all of the broker's bills - the poor customer. Belfort breaks up with his wife, seduces another man's wife who attends his lavish party, continues his tireless induction of hundreds of colleagues to plunder stocks, rip off clients, and that is when the chickens come home to roost - when FBI is tipped off in a trading scandal about a stock they made a killing. Belfort becomes a wreck because of this sex-and-drug addiction; he gets into deeper mess of money-laundering, offer of bribe to a FBI officer and stuff like that which pulls him down. Yet, he walks scot-free in the end and becomes a sales trainer.

 That makes "The Wolf of Wall Street" one of Martin's most irresponsible films that neither reflects the changing times nor give a new message to Wall Street admirers: Make merry at work, milk your customers, make love and get high on drugs. It is unlikely that the film despite an awe-inspiring performance by Dicaprio will every be counted as a classic in the elite company of films like "Wall Street", "Wall Street  Returns", "Boiler Room" or "In Pursuit of Happyness'. It is just shown as a law of the jungle without a message of uprighteousness or taking a high moral ground. It shows Martin's lack of familiarity or research on a topic well brought in the book. Martin presented the story but could have given the class of Oliver Stone to deliver a better script with loose ends upended. Regulators in US are no longer pro-cyclical and have moved on - you can't trade without compliance watching you as big brother, you cannot talk about your customer disparagingly because the "Access to Review" rule works against you - if you refer to a customer as an idiot or a dodo in your peer convesations, it can be a recordable fact of evidence used against you. Most of the dialogues are those spoken in the inner recesses of day-traders' minds and contain the word "fuck" too many times in each sentence. The slang is atrocious and contain fond unmentionables. It looks as if Martin wanted the audience to take a call on all those who thrive on the culture of preying on other people's money . Martin also dwelt too much on the same routine of pepping up colleagues to pitch products resulting in a film that close to 3 hours. Had he not chosen the film to the novel, Martin would have scored new highs with an in-your-face  narration on the different dimensions of the brokers and advisors. It does glamorise the profession but leaves wrong messages for everybody who watches the film, strictly for adults. Despite Dicaprio's exuberance and portrayal and Martin's pacy narration, the film will be disowned by the brokers and Wall Street representatives because it is unreal today and the industry shown in the film has changed . Families should avoid it because what is shown is as good as "porn scum", one of the pet expressions used by the hero. 

My rating: 2 out of 5

"1- Nenokkadine" (Telugu) Film Review

Director Sukumar has made some of the most intelligent films in commercial genre  - "Arya", "Arya-2", "Jagadam" and "100% Love". His films usually have an air of native touch with intelligence, wit and comedy that sticks well. Coming from the background of a Mathematics lecturer, there is a lot of sprinkling of concepts of logic, puzzles,algebra and mathematical induction running undercurrent to the main storyline which is usually romantic in most of his films where he tries to weave abstract themes into a cogent story. "1-Nenokkadine" is another film in that genre except that the director forgot to entertain us and also thought Mahesh Babu will not mind doing a role that pigeon-holes him into one of the most boring characters of his career. 

The story appears to be copy-pasted from some foreign film where a boy Gautam (played by Mahesh's real son Gautam) grows up with half-registered memories of his loving parents being killed by three villains on a trip to Goa. The boy grows up to become Mahesh who has an acute "Integration Disorder" which is a simpler term for "Schizophrenia" where Mahesh gets hallucinations about the three villains who killed his parents -  Kelly Dorjee, Pradeep Rawat and Nazar. He books himself solid everytime with the police only to be found out that his acts are unreal or sometimes real. These get him into close contact with a TV journalist played by debutante Kriti Salon. Both of them fall in love and the scene shifts to London where Mahesh unearths more clues about his parents - he eventually finds out the villains and the truth about his parents and why they were killed. Is that all the story? It's a bit more complicated than that as there is an angle of GM foods and seed companies using Hydrogen Cyanide in crops. Then there are three kinds of clues of Rubik's cube, a locker key and a 1992 British coin which finally lets Mahesh go and find out the truth about his parents. 

While the story appears ingenuious it is circuitously told without any respect or sensititivity towards an audience who have never been trained to think logically, linearly and sometimes abstractly - all at the same time. Sukumar must have always taken more additional sheets during his examinations, and this film is also unusually long at 169 minutes which collapses so many things in one plot that it reminds you of too many films - "Ek Niranjan" (where the hero hunts for his parents), "A Beautiful Mind" (where the hero is schizophrenic and solves cryptic clues), "Nenu" (where the hero talks to himself as if his wife is around) and "Athidhi" (which was a disaster for Mahesh because he does nothing but brood).  A film like this can be fitted better into a graphic novel or a page-turner instead of allowing itself to run like a multi-grain bread gravy-train which is running on too many engines. It failed to register - there are atleast seven brilliant clues which are too fleeting to notice. (I missed two of them which my wife, a Maths teacher could easily catch). Then a lot of repetitive scenes and surreal stunts take the thunder away; only two  stunts, one  in Goa waters and another in tunnel road where the hero skids off under a car that is skidding off in the opposite direction, stand out. Comedy is nil and the lose lines that Posani Krishna Murali mutters get you no cheers. Mahesh gets louder laughs than others when the joke is on his hallucinations. 

Mahesh looks fab and fitter than before - he seems at ease in dances with a few groovy moves. By baring his torso and his skin below the neck, Mahesh has proved a point or two. His stunts are becoming mediocre and implausible - there is no emotion or build-up of adrenalin. It is just one risky jump after another with the acrobatic guidance of Peter Heins. One of the stunts post-interval look like a repeat of "Dhoom-3". At this stage in his career, Mahesh needn't prove his mettle in mindless stunts but look to enhancing his market-cap by doing entertaining scripts because thats what draws out the best family crowds. In this film, there is not one scene which gives a high to Mahesh in upping the ante in acting, emotions or comedy. By picking a plot which keeps him serious throughout, Mahesh has erred on the same side which took him back with films like "Athidi". Incidentally, "Athidi" was produced by UTV and "1" is produced by Eros International apart from the producers who gave us "Dookudu". 

Kriti Salon as the tall journalist who stalks Mahesh and later becomes his lover is a promising fresh face. She looks ravishing, cute and is able to hold on her own against the persona of Mahesh. Her character is the most clearly etched one in the whole film. Nazar has few good lines and tried to do an image change by playing the main villain. Usually, he plays Mahesh's dad or a relative so playing a villain has pulled down the emotional connect both have had in several films. Music by DSP is great in background score but falls flat in main songs. The song in Goa with Kriti Salon wooing Mahesh and the one that comes immediately after interval are well shot. Dialogues are below-par and contribute their bit in making the audience uneasy. The lack of clarity and consistency in screenplay mar the film throughout. One, the title is not justified. You don't know whether it is about superstardom or aloofness. Two, the director misses out that audiences don't come to watch movies to solve puzzles in Sankranti season. It's harvest time for many not exam time. Three, Sukumar is overawed by Mahesh so much that he is blinded by admiration. In the first half, there is a bike parked by an ATM user flinched by Mahesh  - the number says AP 09 MB 1. Again, he drives another car where the number is AP 09 WZ 1. Why does he have to show stranger cars as no.1 that Mahesh likes to drive? Lastly, a lot of gaps in tight narration make the story-telling hazy and lazy. The gamble taken by Mahesh also is risky because Sukumar has ruined the film with over-worked story, hazy screenplay and scant disregard for entertainment value.  Which makes it one of the forgettable films in Mahesh Babu's career. 

My rating: 2 out of 5.

Uday Kiran - Promise cut Short by Self

I am surprised by Uday Kiran's suicide. All of us get our share of hard knocks in the school called life. Uday Kiran had been at the receiving end of high-handedness of some of the high and mighty of Tollywood. His death has also exposed the core issues of oligopoly dominating Tollywood which are being endlessly speculated upon on Telugu channels. Whether there is truth in that or not, whether or not the guilty will ever get punished or not, the laws of Karma will catch up with everyone one day - you can see the glimpses of such Karmic consequences in the way some of the family members of the "errant" powerful family suffered in their own personal lives too - somebody has married thrice, somebody else has ended a marriage too soon. Peace of mind will never return to them, neither will wages of sin be escaped ever.

Whether the speculation on dominating the Tollywood industry ceases or not, the days of oligopoly may soon be over because history teaches us that everytime a few people gang up together to stifle newcomers or corner the profits in the entire value chain from theatres to distribution to satellite rights, a tipping point like this occurs which will upstage the existing players who are calling the shots. 

In Hollywood, this happened from the times of Goldwyn Mayer till the times of Steven Spielberg. In Bollywood, it hapened with the original trio of RK-Dilip-Dev to Rajesh Khanna to Amitabh Bachan to the three Khans. Amitabh's over-dominance has bled the Bollywood industry with series of mega flops because the industry was revolving around the angry young man's machismo, it made the industry starve for good scripts, look for cheaper alternatives like Mithun Chakraborty and Anil Kapoor and eventually unleashed a new creative revolution that makes Bollywood the most celebrated industry in the world today - churning out regularly Rs.100-200 crore hits. Look at Sandalwood - Karnataka's film industry - which roared under Raj Kumar's mega stardom, driving creative composers, villains, heroines and producers out of Karnataka because they could not survive the big star-centric universe. It took many years of vacuum, government sops and renewed vigor to make people watch Kannada films again. Of course, though the film standards have gone up a few notches, the industry has gone back to more monopolistic days - with Raj Kumar's sons now being at the commanding heights of Sandalwood in distribution, content and production. Tamil Nadu used to be a leaf out of Andhra Pradesh in being oligopolistic but that has changed recently with Madam Jayalalitha seizing control of the trade by breaking up the segments concentrated upon by rivals from DMK family and restoring the order for small films to breathe free. 

Tollywood has always been peculiarly haunted by somewhat singular film fraternity right from the days of Akkineni Vara Lakshmi Prasad (Late LV Prasad) who ventured into films from agricultural surpluses and built the modern Telugu film industry as we know today. That has led to more and more industrialists with agricultural background turning to film-production and direction - most of the themes till today therefore, resonate with feudalistic fervor. Over the years, the domination attained unassailability with the Kammas entering the fray and building stardom upon stardom. At the height of his glory in 1980s, after his coronation as Chief Minister of Andhra Pradesh, late NT Rama Rao took a decision that at that time was taken with a regressive intent: kill any competition that can allow the next Superstar to rise up again. NTR took a measure to introduce the slab system of charging entertainment taxes on the basis of assumed occupancy rates - that effectively sealed the fate of small films and low budget films. ANR, Krishna, Shoban Babu and Krishnam Raju were just dividing their stardom and Chiranjeevi was yet to see the megastardom. He wanted to see a bright future for his son Balakrishna and ensure the oligarchy continues. It led to wipe out of many small films because the halls refused to screen films which did not guarantee a minimum attendance. It also led to more and more such theatre-owners get into the clutches of producers who made big banner films and ensured minimum eye-balls for their family heroes. It led to more consolidation at the top end forcing more and more small producers capitulate. It led to concentration of stardom but distribution and production returning to the likes of the few that rule the industry. Major distributors like Lakshmi Films got annihilated. Producers who made high-quality family fare like Navata Krishnam Raju and K Murari withdrew from film-making. Creativity has hit new nadirs although the market cap has expanded - that has widened the gap between the mighty and the meek. Yes, you are still making more films but fewer hit films. 

Last year, according to one producer, there were 13 small-budget films which became superhits  whereas only 9 big-budget films became hits. That means, despite the channels of exhibition and distribution being at the mercy of a few, audiences are clamoring for new content. Eventually, the audiences will move on from one megastar to another but the appetite for imaginative and innovative content will grow with maturing of audiences across the ages. Only then, when all-round talent is harvesting a bounty will the industry expand. Bollywood is in that sweet spot today - with atleast three heroines and a dozen heroes commanding a gross of Rs.100 crores. Tollywood in its 82 years is making hopelessly 200 films plus but only now has crossed Rs.100 crores. A Rajini and a Kamal have routinely crossed Rs.150 crores in recent times, from a neighbouring Kollywood, which is reinventing itself to expand markets yet cut its teeth into new and expanding cakes overseas. Zombie films will atrophy and take down the majority of the makers who continue to swear by them. New Order will emerge from those few who are not being wholeheartedly backed today. Film Industry after Film Industry has escaped this fall however big. Look at the biggest studio in South India- Ramoji Film City. It's valuation is up because of TV serials and tourism activity, not because of film shoots planned there. A few years back, one of Hyderabad's biggest Star Producer studios came up for outright sale - this is the studio that made some golden hits for ANR and NTR and made over 100 films in all Indian languages and created a Guinness Record. According to reports, the valuation came to around Rs.700 crores and that hasn't come from film negatives but from the land parcels embedded within the studio limits. Doesn't it tell you that if you continue making stupid masala films, it doesn't get  you anywhere?  Or, just because you are Mahesh Babu or Pawan Kalyan doesn't augur well for all the producers in Tollywood? My point in this excursion is to give a consumer's analysis of where the industry is going and whether that direction is desired by one and all. Thats a limited point to the main discussion. 

Which ought to be really, why Uday Kiran had to give up so soon on his life. When you give up on your life, you are giving up on what can work from you from the next moment you stay alive. Acting is not the sole objective of life, if you are an actor. There are many actors who came to terms with what's not happening in their lives and then took charge of some things that made it happen in different ways:

Actor Tarun still acts in youthful roles,  runs a restaurant and retains his zest for life.

Actor Raja is waiting for the perfect small-budget film and converted to Christianity. He finds more solace in his new religion.

Actor Rajendra Prasad has matured into mellowed roles and winning accolades with his versatility. 

Actor Naresh has been experimenting with character roles and playing key roles in relation to the ruling heroes and heroines of Tollywood.

Actor Navdeep has not given up on himself and has played noticeable roles against superstars and also starring in small budget films.

Actor Pradeep, yesteryears hero in Jandhyala films, has reinvented himself as a top executive in an IT company.

Last heard, Uday Kiran has actually got a chance to hear four new stories from casting agencies I know of. Instead of listening to the new stories, he kept repeating his sob story, it seems. If only he has listened to new ideas and realised that life is not all about just acting...If only he realised that being alive offered infinite possibilities to his potential outside even films - as a restaurateur, TV serials, second heroes, character artist, sports coach, life coach...anything. Uday Kiran, R.I.P. You had so much potential but you limited life with your limitations, my friend. If only...

Happy New Year!

Keep kicking a ball

Even if against a wall

There's no knowing what may occur.

despite a feeling of problems recur.

The entire world knows

we hit highs, we hit lows;

sometimes wrong, sometimes right -

This not only applies

when a bad ruler denies,

When a nation could fight

a dynasty's divine right. 

Change is in the air,

not just the  calendar.

A whole frustrating year just went by

but 2014 might be worth a try -

Success is not guaranteed -

but who knows the beauties to  unfold.

If this writing is dense,

don't get tense.

Get close to your ones near and dear

Wish you a happy New Year!

Morgan Stanley's loss is HDFC's gain - An analysis of the MF deal

Morgan Stanley AMC's takeover by HDFC AMC reminds me of the famous quote by T.Rowe Price: "Change is the investor's only certainty." Here's a fund house which came to India way back in 1994 which collected for their maiden NFO (it was sold as an IPO) Morgan Stanley Growth Fund more money in that year than what Sri Lankan Government budget counted. Of course, it took several years of bad decision-making, lazy fund management and investor apathy before Morgan Stanley resurrected it's dented image in Mutual Funds by re-launching several new schemes and new fund management that's almost the talk of the town in atleast fixed-income investing. In all these years since 1994, Morgan Stanley's assets have touched a little short of Rs.3300 crores which includes it's legacy fund - the infamous Morgan Stanley Growth Fund which has a size of Rs.1300 crores apprx. Just when the fortunes of the fund house are about to look up, HDFC AMC has picked it up for a whopping Rs.170 crores almost paying half of whatever PAT it earned this year about Rs.328 crore - which is the highest in the industry. The nearest competitor to HDFC - Reliance AMC is sitting on a profit of around Rs.194 crores. Considering that, one wonders why HDFC bid in a hurry to stay at the top of the race. It could have easily pulled in some of the star fund managers like Ritesh Jain to garner a handsome lead in debt assets. 

What is curious is why Morgan Stanley exited the business after getting just 5 per cent for its equity assets. This year, Morgan Stanley is the second MNC after Fidelity to exit the fund management business and it could once again point to the disruptions in the business models thrown up by regulatory winds of change. The Indian Mutual Fund industry despite having a total fund base of  Rs.8.9 trillion or more (that's about Rs.9 lakh crores or roughly 9 per cent of India's GDP) is becoming a joke of sorts with no sense of direction. Of the 44 AMCs, less than 17 are making profits and most of them are to the tune of  Rs.50 crores or less and if you count the profit of all the AMCs this year including the likes of HDFC, Reliance, UTI and so on, it roughly comes to a total profit of Rs.750 crores. That is 0.08 per cent of the total AUM - no wonder, the industry is sinking despite projecting a brave face. Scratch the surface of the AUM and you will find most of the funds are in fixed-income or mostly liquid and ultra-short-term. If you start counting the treasury surpluses of the top corporations in Mumbai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Delhi and Chennai, you can comfortably knock off almost 35 per cent of the total AUM - which may have already moved under the direct code - the new manna from heaven that SEBI has offered investors without realising how under-penetrated the MF industry is despite the industry struggling to re-invent itself well with the advent of new technologies and platforms. The MF Industry is offering the best of choices to the investors to minimise costs but struggling to attract the right kind of investors to meet the long-term financial planning goals. 

Look at Templeton Bluechip Fund which completed 20 years early this month. Since its inception in 1994, the fund has given a return of 53 times on its original investment but there are only 9000 folios which are staying invested since the fund was launched - of which more than 50 per cent are supposed to be inactive! Take HDFC Children's Gift Fund - it returned over 22 per cent compounded return since inception and could have been the perfect vehicle for planning for kid's education, it's corpus is still at Rs.320 crores. Take another plan aimed at Pension  - Templeton India Pension Builder Plan. Even though it returned a handsome 18 per cent plus return, not many investors nor advisors even know it exists in the fact sheet. On the contrary, hefty commissions and mighty incentives offered on Insurance Plans have made Unit-linked Insurance Plans much more lucrative to sell than the plans as mentioned above - despite having significantly lower expense ratios. More people are still sold insurance products but few come forward to buy mutual funds despite a stark need for sound investing in a country which boasts of 22 per cent plus savings rates. 

While the regulator has been blamed enough for the ills of the industry, one cannot blame them forever if the industry is not self-introspecting. I still fail to understand why the Industry's apex body is a self-regulator where a group of biggies decide what the rest of the industry should follow. I still do not understand whether there is uniformity in the alignment  of interests - of the twin goals of growth and profitability of the AUMs across the board. I still do not understand whether the mandatory spending requirement of minimum percentage on Investor Education is going towards the intended purpose. I still do not know whether funds are investing in talent in research, sales and product innovation in the requisite manner. I do not know whether the ecosystem of advisor-distributor-manufacturer is developing harmoniously and whether there's something amiss there. I do not know whether new entrants to MF Industry feel welcomed or threatened by the oligopolistic nature. I do not know whether Morgan Stanley will be the last to exit the MF Industry in India - at a time when other key markets like China and Brazil are seeing expansion in MF activity. 

As far as HDFC is concerned, it's a revival of the "Economic Moat" concept as it rakes in the Morgan Stanley assets to increase it's monopoly on the leading market share. It always had sticky asset managers on the equity front even if they are perennially optimistic about the market irrespective of the cycle performance. Now this will add to its dominant position by being able to hike its investment in technology (hiking its custody fees), reward its long-standing managers with higher carry (they will now get another scheme which will carry assets upwards of Rs.1000 crores) and increase its economies of scale in debt funds. Being an unequal merger (HDFC paid less to Morgan Stanley than what L&T Finance paid Fidelity on a comparable metric of % on equity assets), the benefits are more for HDFC than MS. And that's how realising early in Asset Management helps that some assets are more unequal than others. As for Morgan Stanley, and the guys like Fidelity, exit could have been less painful at a different time. Which again proves a costly rule in Private Equity - it is easier to sell a business than run it. 

Views are personal.

"Uyyaala Jampaala" Movie Review (Telugu)

Over 70 per cent of our population lives in rural India. In AP, we are more agrarian than many states. Proof:  take the massive human migration that happens around Sankranti season in AP: the cities look more deserted and the villages  mill with millions of city-dwellers binging on village talk, cock fights and family get-to-gethers. Isn't it ironical that Tollywood makes less than 10 per cent or even 5 per cent of the films based on village themes? For many years now, Telugu films are getting made only for the multiplexes. Last year, we made 256 films -  58 more films than in 2011 (and  35 films more than Hindi film industry) and yet  fewer than 13 films based on rural India. This year, SVSC came in Sankranti and then there was a vacuum until one or two small films came and went, hardly noticed. Until now, when "Uyyaala Jampaala" came. 

Produced by Ram Mohan Paruvu, UJ is refreshing, entertaining and evocative. Ram Mohan is an IIM grad and a sensible producer who is building a catalogue of memorable films irrespective of when they are released, even if in between star releases. "Ashta Chamma" and "Golconda    High School" were two of his acclaimed films which proved  families will flock if you offer a message with  a youthful flavor. "Uyyaala Jampaala", his latest breaks the mould and it is not a novel story. It has a classic three-act story of a boy and a girl born into relation, grow up fighting each other and eventually unite in happy ending after late realisation and triggers from a forced arranged marriage. What can possibly be ingenuine in this plot? The treatment, the straight narration with a momentary flashback, a mint-fresh starcast thats neither theatrical nor super-articulate giving them an unmatched natural advantage, motifs from rural backdrop that underpin the roots of our culture - simple friendships, grand-parent wisdom, village naivette, unalloyed emotions, sylvan scenery and bucholic charms. In less than two hours (I couldn't believe this included the interval), director Virinchi Varma takes us through a roller-coaster of emotions of what we go through on a daily basis with far greater impact than what some of the surreal madcap movies we see  with akimbo dances and adipose dialogues that only create noise pollution. 

Virinchi has used the dialect  closest to Bhimavaram-Kakinada belt in most of the characters including the hero who is at stellar ease with the slant. Avika Gour is the heroine who is well known to audiences as the cute girl in "Baalika Vadhu" dubbed in Telugu as "Chinnari Pelli Kooturu". She  is sharp and bright in the film even if she lacks the glamor rampant in commercial films. Raj Tarun is the hero who looks an underdog but walks away with most of the honours despite having an unusual and almost unremarkable personality. Its a credit to the director that if you infuse the right characterisation with the right lines, it doesn't require brute stardom to burn the screen with memories, you can create a stir with basic sensibilities and sincere emoting. Thats exactly what Raj Tarun achieved in UJ. Among others who created impact were Anita Choudhary and Ravi Varma, both playing powerful characters on opposite sides. They show that talent in serials is in huge supply that is untapped. Music by Sunny is impressive. Last heard in "Swaami Ra Ra", Sunny scored some soulful melodies with distinct instrumentation and vocal rhythms. Again hard to believe that a movie this short has just four songs. Virinchi uses the classic director's lag - the first song always starts late and the last song always finishes early - that's the only way to avoid the audiences getting restive. Seeing the film in good old Shanti theatre, I noticed that neither the smokers nor the leakers left their seats during even one song. The title song transports us to a magical world of romantic dreams minus the dirty drills and the foreign frills that today's movies mandate.

Cinematography by Vishwa has its highs and  lows - it captures the essence of village life, at times, it dullens the frames. Still, it delivers. Dialogues are apt and raise many laughs. After a long time, entertainment and comedy is enmeshed with the storyline - most of the funny one-liners come from the hero and his gang. There is subtle and refined humor lurking at every dialogue if you catch the lingo and the local idioms. In a film of this variety where the story draws you intensely with its rustic charm, the only weaknesses are those you didn't notice and they may be impertinent to the overall feel of the film. What is cliched is the use of stereotypes typical of patriarchial society that defines villages - too many symbols of even children playing wife and husband games etc. are bad examples in a society thats outgrowing those qualms. This is in bad taste and must be shunned in films even if it evokes sick laughter. There are also more examples of how the heroine feels disempowered till the end on asserting her love or her independence as a grown-up, such stereotyping does more harm than good to the society because in cinema, the medium is the message and we must be careful in projecting the right messages. It's the same stereotype that Srikant Addala used in SVSC - where a girl grows up in household with the sole objective of marrying the eldest son. Here, Avika is culturally weak and traditional and closer to her regressive picturisation in the mega TV serial that propelled her to stardom. Despite these blemishes, the director and the producer pull off a surprise family-clean entertainer that will rake it in well till the big releases. It may even be a giant-killer if the audiences bless it. It certainly has a repeat viewing quotient because of arresting simplicity despite state-of-the-art references to skype and facebook etc. We need more of such films to resonate with what majority Indians live like. Good returns for co-producers D Suresh and Nagarjuna Akkineni for partaking in the sweat equity of Ram Mohan Paruvu. 

My rating: 4 out of 5 for a clean fare that lingers on with freshness.