"Lincoln" Film Review (English)

"Lincoln" is a moving film about one of the noblest American Presidents in history. Its a film strictly based on the life of Abraham Lincoln but director Steven Spielberg has based it on a riveting book called "The Team of Rivals" which talks about those crucial second-term Presidency years of Lincoln where he had to garner the support of 22-odd Senators to get the crucial "Bill of Emancipation" passed in the Congress. The entire film focuses on this play where the Republicans egged on by President Lincoln use all the tricks of trade to persuade, incentivise, mollycoddle and even coerce some of the rival Senators to accede to the Bill which seeks to abolish slavery.



Daniel Day-Lewis has played the title role of Lincoln remarkably well. He looks the part exceptionally good - his gait, unique beard, unkempt hair, nonchalant looks, brooding shoulders, unsmiling yet sincere facial expressions and disarmingly slow but assertive Chicago accent (which today's President cheaply imitates). Spielberg has got limited screenplay opportunities to telescope the many-faceted personality of Lincoln, so he uses few frames to highlight them and these are inter-mixed with the story from the book above. And so you see some brief but poignant picture frames of Lincoln as a good husband (with a wife who "drove" him till the end), Lincoln as a born-story-teller (he never tries to win an argument with logic; he brings a story with an embedded message that does the trick), Lincoln welcomed his son's distractions at office and doted on them, Lincoln felt for the poor, kept his promises and never lost an opportunity to bring humor. Spielberg shows all these glimpses within the tight script of the story - and those images haunt you even if you haven't read a word about this man. Music by John Williams is apt and under-stated. Steven Spielberg's films have become so inseparable from John Williams' music that you see the duo's output as one unit. Credit must go to John Williams - after Walt Disney, he has got the maximum Oscar nominations - 46 times! (Disney got 52).



The greatness of Spielberg continues in the way the film starts off with Lincoln in the silhouette facing the troops in a Civil War station and the way it finishes with news of his assassination. No flashbacks, no room for over-dramatisation, no bawdy display of Americana just a mesmerising straight narrative with an elegant under-statedness. Starcast has some American greats as rival senators who stood out on screen. Set Design and Costume Design must deserve an award; re-creating a period setting like that before motors and moving images came is tough. What made such a fine film which got 12 Oscar nominations fare poorly at the BO is understandable. It got timed with the US elections, and then there was a more imaginative "Vampire Hunter" movie on Abe which got the wind out of Spielberg's film. A few more shots of the gory Civil War and a few more popular anecodotes about Lincoln might have made the film more dramatic to watch. But Spielberg being Spielberg, he wouldn't compromise on his adherence to an authentic story within a taut script. Hurrah! Anil Ambani's company is the co-producer of this proud film. It deserves 4.5 out of 5 and should be a universal audience film.

"Kadali" Telugu / "Kadal" Tamil film review

“Kadali” (Telugu) or “Kadal” (Tamil) has been touted as a comeback vehicle for Mani Ratnam and a launch-pad for star-children Gautam Karthik and Thulasi Nair. It may turn out better for the newcomers but Mani Ratnam has given a disappointing film. “Kadali” means “ocean” and for the first time after “Sakhi” and movies like “Mouna Ragam” and “Gitanjali”, he has gone back to love story which got him maximum adulation. However, Mani Ratnam’s film leaves a lot to be desired because of gaps in characterization, screenplay, pace and overall lack in entertainment values.



The story is set in a fishing hamlet where the villagers care a damn about Church and God. When Aravind Swamy (Sam Fernando) sets foot in the village church as a Father, it is in shambles and un-serviceable. He slowly builds trust and respect for himself, God and folks taking their religion seriously. He shows restraint, patience, understanding and enormous love for all those who confess to him and Church. He starts doting on Thomas (Gautham Karthik) whose mother dies and father abandons him. Thomas grows up as an energetic fisherman and becomes a son to Father Sam. Enter Beatrice, a Nurse-in-the-making on the other shore who bumps into Thomas and instantly connect with each other. Meanwhile, Burgsman (played by Action King Arjun) re-enters the village as a warlord who is a terror in the village, he extorts, terrorizes, smuggles and kills people for a living. His first entry alongwith Aravind Swamy at the film’s outset dazzles; the scene carries the seeds of conflict between the two more like a battle between Evil and Good, Satan and God. The entire movie then is a double-pack sandwich: the rift between Aravind Swamy and Arjun who both influence Thomas into toeing their respective briefings on one side and the love story between Beatrice and Thomas on the other. Had Mani concentrated on the love story only or the conflict between the Good and the Evil, it could have got better. Instead of giving a simple story, Mani Ratnam complicates the plot and hasn’t really delivered on all fronts.


The problem is also not a plot that smacks of Christian traditions. One can argue that from the first frame till the end, Mani Ratnam showcases the Christian traditions of Church and religion in full glory with a built-in bias. I have no problem with that because he wanted to make a film on aspects of Christianity where followers are torn between temptations of Christ vs. temptations of Satan the evil. But at several time in the film, the angles of cinematographer Rajiv Menon and the director’s eye point towards an explicit portrayal of a religion and its traditions rather than moving the story forward. He should have taken care to make a plot where atleast some characters have names from other religions. There is a scene in which the heroine steps into a boat driven by the hero and alongwith her ten girls step inside. All the ten girls’ names belong to a religion. I don’t understand what made Mani Ratnam give such a blatant treatment. I trust him to do an honest job as a director and not be influenced by anybody for extraneous considerations towards promoting a particular sect or religion so obviously. I have nothing against that too as a bit later in the film, I found it intriguing to learn about the traditions of baptizing, confessions, seminars etc. and also realized that most films are actually made for the majority with names like Rajesh and Gopi and Gita and Anjali so I could empathise with how others feel when there’s no inclusive approach to giving a universal evocative appeal. But as a honest critic, I felt this and thought it must be highlighted as many others may not even comment on such issues. In the 80s, Bapu made a film like “Rajadhi Raju” which shows a conflict between Satan and God more explicitly and all characters are biblical names. Bapu garu were quite honest in admitting the film is financed by Christian producers and the names and characterizations were all representative of a creed. Over 150 minutes of slow-paced screenplay and a half-baked story later, I felt a bit cheated by the dishonest approach in over-highlighting a particular religion. No offence meant here, please don’t get me wrong. In the 80s, “Seethakoka Chilaka” also portrayed an intense love story in the backdrop of a Church father but never made it look like a religious movie either. Here, Mani Ratnam portrays a parable in modern format and doesn’t give any hint of it in promotions so I failed to understand his compulsions.



As for the story, Arjun steals the show every time he appears on screen. He provides the lightest and most entertaining moments in the film with his versatile acting. Aravind Swamy also does his part with great conviction and honesty. Newcomers hold lot of promise together especially Gautam Karthik. Gautam is handsome like his father Karthik and has the right personality to make it big in films. Thulasi looks more elderly than her sister Karthika on screen but has the looks to make some impact in Kollywood. AR Rahman’s sound track and music give a good lift to the many moods of the film. Out of the two duets, Mani Ratnam uses one song “Gunjukunna” as a background song while showing dialogues between the young couple and the other song “pacchani thota” which is superbly shot is shot on the other side of the Indian Ocean in Mauritius, not on the side where all the story action is happening. That looked out of place but the song is a visual treat and compliments ARR’s music well. Rajeev Menon’s cinematography is breath-taking and elevates the feel of the film and its music to oceanic levels. I hope someone covers the craft of a cinematographer of his caliber one day to tell us how he gets into the mind of the director so well in giving the unseen eye such riveting attention of various visuals. Editor A.Sreekar Prasad is one of the few technicians who alongwith AR Rahman gets Mani’s recurring patronage for the last several films. But I wonder if that’s working now for him. Sreekar who is known to be now part of story discussions and film shooting sequences should detach himself from the director if the final output has to get better and watchable; this is not worth 150 minutes of footage and many scenes and even characters could have conveniently got left out. Dialogues are sharp but quite serious.



Mani Ratnam has taken three years to make this film. I wonder whether he has learnt or introspected on his previous works which failed to fire before completing this film. A sabbatical of three years should have done wonders to Mani’s original sense of story-telling but there is still no freshness in his frames. Most directors have, like any human being, three senses – visual sense (Bapu, Shantaram), sound sense (Sreenu Vaitla, K Balachander) and kinesthetic sense (sense of touch and feel – BharatiRaja, Balu Mahendra, Vishwanath, Subhash Ghai). Mani Ratnam falls somewhere between visual sense and kinesthetic sense but over the years since “yuva” and “Guru” and “Raavan”, his directorial prowess hasn’t kept pace with the lagging attention of his audiences who have outgrown the visuals he thinks the world will still love to see while ignoring the crying needs of entertainment, comedy and drama – which make a film click at the box office. In his obsession with crafty technicians and faultless film grammar, Mani Ratnam has developed a huge credibility gap and an execution gap between what’s on his mind and what’s the cinematic output he expects to get received as. Faultlines can also be blamed also for the teams that co-opt for his movies – everybody calls him “Sir” and everybody is overawed by him – there is no critical input coming at the shooting stage. I also have a bone to pick with him in Telugu dubbing, he has shown scant respect for the sensibilities of Telugu audiences over the years – audiences who love his films and his style, audiences who lapped up “Gitanjali” and made it one of his biggest hits, audiences who gave their first positive verdicts on films like “Gharshana” (“Agni Nakshatram”) and “Nayakudu” (“Nayagan”). Mani Ratnam, from what is reported, hasn’t treated Telugu audiences with the same veneer they look upto him with. He shows some town in Tamil Nadu with Tamil name and the dialogue says “its Bheemli”. Look at the lyrics in one song “Gunjukanna”, it is atrociously translated by Vanamali. Roughly translated from Tamil without respecting the beautiful nuances of Telugu language, it says,”Kudiseti gadiyaaram = a clock which rains” or “Palemo perugu laaga indaaka padukunde = milk is sleeping like curd”). What kind of crap is that which even bears the stamp of endorsement from AR Rahman. From the beginning, look at the producers who backed Mani Ratnam’s projects dubbed into Telugu, not one producer has gone back to him after one or two films – CL Narasimha Reddy (“Gitanjali”), MuraliMohan (“Iddaru”), Sunkara Madhu Murali (“Yuva”) and now Gemini Film Circuits. So, you see, he is investing in his catalogue of films but is not getting a consistent producer because of a dwindling reception at the box-office. He only invests in those Telugu dubbed films which he feels will click at the box office. The last time it worked was "Sakhi" and the bad run continues. This is more patience for an audience who adore Mani but he hasn't reciprocated their respect and treats them like a bid market. Mani Ratnam and his craft have been discussed at length by Baradwaj Rangan in his book “Conversations with Mani Ratnam” (a review I will deal with later). But for now, “Kadali” is a disaster and doesn’t deserve a rating better than 2 out of 5.

"Viswaroopam" Telugu/Tamil Movie Review

"Viswaroopam" is truly a treat for fans of Kamal Hassan who admire his versatility and talent. Even though there's no title justification, the film is a stand-out in terms of technical brilliance and production standards that outmatch Asian cinema. To say, it holds a candle to Hollywood will be an outright cliche because Hollywood is always going to be on a different planet - their industry, their stalwarts, their creative flicks and their collaborative genius can never get exceeded in many lifetimes by anyone else outside of Hollywood. But Kamal Hassan wouldn't take that, as would  many other talents in Bollywood and other "Woods" who feel they are a misfit in Indian industry. Eventually, these talents either hit upon one or two films that pushes the door for an Oscar nomination or they end up collecting shingles for a role in "their" films which Americans can't even remember.

Kamal Hasan has gone through this angst many times in his lifetime and one day, we will all get to read about it in his own autobiography. Unlike his contemporaries in South film industry like Chiranjeevi and Rajanikanth, Kamal Hasan never compromised on his beliefs, his standards of acting, his quest for meaningful cinema within the boundaries set by commercial sensibilities. Unlike Rajanikanth and Chiranjeevi and even Amitabh Bacchan, he never got carried away by what the fans expected of him. Each time he acted, right from his toddler days as a child artiste, he kept pushing acting performances towards new highs and never fell to the temptations of stardom. We could have lost him many times in his career as an artiste of repute but Kamal Hassan never succumbed to the trappings of a mass hero which can nip your creativity in the bud. Playing characters, working with the greatest talent harvest in the golden age of Tamil and Telugu film industries, Kamal Hassan was true to his own self - which has earned the respect of every film goer who sees an artiste in him.  He has tried to play a new character and not the same matinee idol role that others were getting drunk on. On top of this acting talent, he can also write screenplays, sing an occasional song, make himself up into a different getup, edit films, pen sharp dialogues and direct movies. That makes him almost a non-pareil in modern times in Indian films a sort of a Raj Kapoor, Guru Dutt or a Shantaram. He is also a maverick in more ways than a Hollywood multi-faceted legend like Sidney Lumet, Clint Eastwood or a recent Ben Affleck - he strongly believes in creating cinema thats different, bold, taboo-free and subtext that sometimes is so strongly segued with his own belief-systems that they lead to the ruckus that's unleashed for "Viswaroopam". Whatever they may say, that Kamal is an atheist, he is anti-brahmin, he is anti-Hindu, he is secular, whatever, "Viswaroopam" is an uncomplicated visual treat which must be watched atleast once. 

What is evident from his films, in general,  and this film, in particular,  is that Kamal Hassan likes to give subtle messages of rationality, empowerment of women, a voice of dissent to those who act irrationally and a background to the social winds of change that sometimes miss commentary and observation by one and all. "Viswaroopam" is a good story told with lot of detail and passion  about an Indian RAW officer who infiltrates a "Jihadi" network of terrorists by becoming one of them. He changes his name, religion to be a Kathak dancer flirting with his girl disciples but earning the distrust of his not-so-loyal wife Andrea Jeremiah. Andrea is a nuclear oncologist and lands in a soup when a detective she appointed to spy on her husband's "illicit" liaisions knocks on the door of a terrorist. That terrorist's den belongs to Rahul Bose - a one-time ally of Kamal Hassan in his flashback role as Wasim Kashmiri. Rahul's men hold Kamal and Andrea captive and get ready to break his knees. That's when Kamal sets himself loose and polishes off the villains.  The sequence opens out further to reveal the flashback in terraneous Afghanistan where Rahul Bose and Kamal get together to become brothers-in-arms under the elderly guidance of Nazar (he is always there in Kamal Hassan's films, isn't he?). The flashback is the heart of the film and runs for an elaborate length within the overall running time of 148 minutes.  It is well-researched and well-shot on the magnificent plains of Afghanistan or the parts of Central Asia that protected Osama Bin Laden. This part of the film  - the part of the flashback which shows the sun-drenched tough-living conditions of mountainous regions where the terrorists train to fight for a cause but have their emotions run below the surface - for their loved ones - is shown with fascinating detail.  Under-stated but firm interplay of emotions of joy, friendship, betrayal, love and anger are well-bought out.  Certain scenes may remind you of the basic plot in "Kite Runner" that memorable tale filmed from a best-selling book. There are other scenes which resemble some of Kamal's films like "Dasavataram", "Satyaa" and "Hey Ram" (which he himself directed). 

Screenplay is pacy, and the narrative cascades well with a storyline that is well-written. Characterisation and emotions are the only two aspects which take a back-seat in Kamal's self-directed films. Not all characters get the right attention and except for Kamal, Rahul Bose and his associate, the rest of the characters were a wasted lot. Shekhar Kapur,  Prema Kumar and Nazar could have got meatier roles because they have the screen presence. Kamal's own performance actually gets overshadowed in the film by Rahul Bose who is such a fine actor. At times, Kamal Hassan is unconvincing as a Jihadi terrorist, but Rahul Bose is bang-on whether he stops himself short on doting his son and wife or rabble-rousing his camp followers or slicing his targets. Even his Arabic is flawless and sounds so good to hear. Andrea Jeremiah is cute and so is Prema Kumar but Kamal's fans must be disappointed not to find the customary lip-kiss that has become so commonplace in his films lately. The last time Kamal directed "Hey Ram" he was all over Rani Mukherjee but this time wonder whether it is the the creditors and the censors that made him lose intimacy with two cute debutantes.  Songs never get the extra-padding in his films especially the era after he gave up on Ilaya Raja. In this film, Birju Maharaj composes a lovely number on Kamal as a Kathak dancer set to hummable tune by Shankar Ehsaan Loy. The trio also score a terse yet tense background score that never distracts the audience from expecting surprises. Kamal has once admitted that he killed his own career in the early 2000s by acting in comedy films in which he plays marbles with other also-rans. Then it took many films to get back his mojo even though the golden run has gone. He is not a bankable star at the box office because he doesn't improvise on his charishma, he merely experiments with different characters and nobody really whistles when he appears on the screen, nobody takes ninety seconds to read his name on screen as with other stars with epithets like m-e-g-a-s-t-a-r or s-u-p-e-r-s-t-a-r. Here is a star who gives story the headweight it demands, blends his character like any other character in the film  and uses humor that is most often never dumbed down for the galleries. You will find references to famous literary works like "killjoy" or questions that he wants you to ponder like "Which God of yours?" (a reference to the Hindu Pantheon). Infact, think of the treatment, there is nothing in the film that buys controversy. Its just that the terrorists of a certain network are shown as highly religious in the traditions they follow - thats not objectionable by any stretch of imagination. 

Obviously, violence is quite graphic and brutal as it is depicted to match the explicit nature of what terrorists indoctrinated to achieve their means do. Climax could have been better and the wry humor that Kamal likes could have been spaced evenly throughout the film. Tension grips the film from the outset except for the titles when pigeons - the most peace-loving creatures flutter in their backyard. One noticeable point, I must say is that for the first time, a film doesn't preface with a statutory warning on smoking and drinking. Thats a rarity. Kamal Hassan, the director has aced up Kamal Hassan the actor. Wherever he wants to migrate to and become a citizen of,  Kamal's films are good to watch  - they are different and have a nice mixture of cinema sensibilities that the Indian viewer is seldom exposed to. For all that and for the controversy that it has generated sans the emotional and entertainment connect with the masses, "Viswaroopam" deserves 3.75 out of 5. 

A life well-lived?

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 which included her parents who live in the same house, her two kids Beta and Gamma, her ex-husband Foceton, her two younger sisters Ishta and Srishti and her grandmother who is bed-ridden)uploaded 36000 photos and 467 videos on her wall, liked 18,150 pages in her lifetime, wrote 95,000 posts on FB, generated a combo of 875,876 likes and 19,87,245 comments, tweeted 17,500 times which includes 12,345 re-tweets, has a combined network of 8.7 million connections on her Linkedin. At the time of her passing at age 47, she had four Kindles, three IPADs, two IPAD-minis, one netbook, two laptops, one I-MAC, eight sim cards and four mobile phones of various brands."

What's your story like? I hope social media is not defining the boundaries of your life?

"Vetaadu Ventaadu" Telugu movie review/ "Samar" Tamil movie review

"Vetaadu Ventaadu" (Hunt, Chase) in Telugu ("Samar" in Tamil) is quite an unsual movie even though it collapses many genres in one film. It must be Vishal's best film to date even though his character is flaky. Directed by someone called Thiru,  it starts off with a chase sequence and then gives an impression of a usual boy-meets-girl-relationship gone sour kinda story. The girl Sunayanana (a fully wimpish-looking girl who is not fit to play a heroine's sidekick) dates Vishal and then walks out on him. Later, she has a change of heart and sends a note asking Vishal to come and meet her at Bangkok, she even sends him flight ticket. Reluctantly, our six-foot hero Vishal boards the flight to Bangkok and bumps into Trisha who dotes on him to navigate the flight smoothly. Then a half-developed love story with Trisha while Vishal is afoot to trace Sunayana. In this backdrop come some bizarre twists, enter villains JD Chekraverty and Manoj Bajpai. It appears they have played the game with Vishal, setting up the flight tickets, the false hopes of Sunayana coming back into his life and the ignition of romance with ravishing Trisha. Its all set up like a game which the duo villains love to play with characters many more like him.




The story is quite unusual, the treatement quite brilliant though patchy at times. It is quite thrilling at times almost until the cllimax but fizzles out at the end as the plot unravels. Quite a bold and impressive effort by director Thiru to come up with a story like this for South Indian audiences which may not click so well with Telugu audiences who dont soak upto experimental themes and plots lacking in entertainment. The film's strengths are screenplay, music by Yuvan Shankar Raja, cinematography and editing. There are some outstanding stunts with Vishal which are a maverick thing for our kind of cinema - it is neither martial arts nor dishum-dishum stunts, just spontaneous and authentic, I dont think such fights are composed ever in Telugu cinema. Vishal fits well in the role of a lost-lover, gullible onlooker who later beats the villains in their own game. Trisha looks as glamorous as ever and ups the ante in showcasing her liberal dressing thats needed to survive as a Diva, 12 years after she set foot in South film industry. Her body continues to defy age but her face is getting tedious and tired. She doesn't look convincing when romancing male co-stars who are younger than her. But to come this far in an industry which is famous for dumping heroines into the trash cans of history is itself an accomplishment. Atleast one more song feauturing Trisha and Vishal could have established the second romance track in the film - needed to rev up the second half. It was definitely good to see JD and Manoj Bajpai team up together for the first time after "Satya" movie, they have the screen presence and chemistry together and carry off their roles with superb ease, they just needed some more scenes to bring out their dangerous side and devilry better, that could have highlighted the climax towards its logical conclusion. Yuvan Shankar Raja is one of my favorite composers who is a worthy successor to his father's legacy. He has it in him to take on the might of Rahman and Harris Jayaraj, what he should do is to focus on the realistic side of Indian films than the surrealistic part of the film grammar. If he gets back the mojo of films like "7/G Brindavan Colony" or "Aadavariki Maatalaku Ardhaale Verule", he can be the music composer that today's stars will queue up for signing. On the whole, 138 minutes of stylish, unpredictable surprises and rollercoaster ride which may or may not be a commercial success. But who cares, if the film is watchable once and gets a rating of 3 on 5!

"Seethamma Vaakitlo Siri Malle Chettu" Telugu Movie Review

"Seethamma Vaakitlo SiriMalle Chettu" is a clean and supergood U-certificate blockbuster from the house of Dil Raju who made some of the finest DVD value catalog of family films over the last several years. "SVSC" is a culmination of many people who are proven talents in their own areas of work and so many of them have come together to give a great film that will be a sure-fire superhit which the toddlers and the seniors can watch together.

First, lets look at the creative team that came together for this film. Mani Sharma scores Background score, he has embellished the exceptionally melodious music given by Mickey J Meyer whose last best score was for "Kotha Bangaru Lokam" and perhaps "Happy Days". There are about seven songs and all of them have lyrics and sonorous music - which means Mickey J Meyer has taken the right feedback from those who apprehended his abilities. Mani Sharma and DSP are the best in Re-recording after AR Rahman and Ilayaraja, and in this film Mani proves that he is a pro in setting the right moods throughout a family film with emotional roller-coaster rides. Next comes K S Guhan whose name sounds straight out of a triumvirate list of AVM producers but he is not, he is the cinematographer of repute and one of his best works came in "Athadu" movie. He has made everybody in the film including an irritating character played by Ravibabu come alive and look good. Then, its time to salute an original legend in dialogues who was gainfully employed by K Balachander for innumerable films with telling effect - Ganesh Patro. He has taken the noblest intentions of Srikanth Addala, the director (of whom we will talk more later) in giving us heart-tugging dialogues, dialogues that come straight from the heart, real and yet credible, touching and sometimes tears-triggering. He has also created within the ambit of a wonderful screenplay and straight narration of a simple family story a memorable line for each character in the film which defines and extends their screen presence. For example, Prakash Raj has a line that defines his personality in the film. Rao Ramesh, the only equivalent of a villain if you can call in the film, has a few lines of "Plan, Scheme and Vision" that defines his world and his character in the film. Venkatesh and Mahesh, Jayasudha and Rohini Hattangadi, Anjali and Murali Mohan all have their lines in the film which create an endearing interplay thanks to the words of the director and the dialogues of Ganesh Patro. Can other legends who are past their prime plan in similar ways plan to stage a comeback, I ask as a film-lover?



The story is not outlandish or complicated, infact it is the simplest storyline for a family drama seen in years. Prakash Raj and Jayasudha live in a village with their grownup sons Venkatesh and Mahesh, their only daughter and their niece Anjali and mother Rohini Hattangadi. Prakash Raj is a Good Samaritan who helps anybody who bumps into him because he feels "we shall not pass this way again". Jayasudha and her mother-in-law Rohini Hattangadi's only worry how the sons settle and when they get married. Venkatesh, the eldest son is a straight faced angry "young" man, he is undiplomatic and doesn't mince words and faces struggles at work with his adamance. Mahesh, on the contrary, is street-smart, sweet-talker who flirts with anybody and is acutely conscious of his handsome looks and has lots of fun at others' cost but tries to bind the family together with his diplomacy skills. Their family is connected to another family in Vijayawada comprising of Rao Ramesh, his wife and two daughters Samantha and another girl. Rao Ramesh has absolute disdain for Prakash Raj's family because he measures his world by materialism and success - and feels the latter's family is a bunch of under-achievers and goal-less people who are just eking out their living by killing time. Samantha falls in love with Mahesh and Anjali, the girl who grows up in Prakash Raj's family is paired with Venkatesh from the beginning and she is the daughter of Rao Ramesh's sister who is no more. The climax of the film shows Rao Ramesh get a comeuppance from Prakash Raj's family in a bizarre episode at Bhadrachalam and he changes his mind to give both his "daughters" to the family almost like in "Hum Aapke Hai Kaun". That is a story which seems quite unimpressive but the way in which Srikanth Addala meshed the storyline with narration, built layers of characterisation of each character with utter honesty and rustic charm, is a visual treat -a celluloid extravaganza, ably supported by roaring performances by everybody with a few exceptions.



Between Venkatesh and Mahesh, I honestly liked the performance of Venkatesh for the variety and shades portrayed; first it is weak and then slowly grows in the end. Mahesh's character is good in parts and he shows the youthful fervour and intensity thats earmarked in the story. As a younger brother, Mahesh strikes an amazing chemistry with Venkatesh, the elder brother; he steals the thunder from Venkatesh in some of the scenes because of the way the story moves in the direction of educating Venkatesh for better. There are about six scenes between Venkatesh and Mahesh, mostly at wall corners and terraces - they are the best moments of the film and stir you with what goes on between two brothers when egos are involved and affection takes a backseat. It is captured in the most honest and thrilling fashion and might be one of the best draws in the film. Within the first few moments of their appearance on screen as brothers, you forget that they are superstars and get engrossed in the characterisation. Mahesh, being the younger brother, speaks more in the film, is shown as more ebullient and racy whereas Venkatesh being the eldest brother, shows many nuances of acting with his subtle variations in silence and few lines of eloquence. Prakash Raj's characterisation is not that great in the film compared to the previous films of Dil Raju but his presence lends dignity to the role. Rao Ramesh, who also lends his voice to the statutory cigarette warnings at the outset, has got a role thats consistent and worthy of his potential but towards climax, he could have got more lines as to how he realised his follies; director allows a song to tell it all. Jayasudha has got a meatier role and carries her role with consummate ease. The surprise package in the film is the character of 'Sita" played brilliantly by Anjali (The Tamil girl in "Journey"). If the voice dubbed is her own, then Anjali is the actress to watch out for almost like Soundarya in yesteryears. She is the soul of the film and binds so many characters together and moves the story forward at several moments of the film. She is beautiful, has the looks, got an arresting screen-presence and looks commandingly paired with Venkatesh; pity that this pair got one song whereas Mahesh and Samantha got two songs. Samantha has got three songs in the film including a solo; obviously everybody believes she is the lucky mascot for Tollywood these days. For now, we will hope her luck will favor this time also and she will one day outgrow her cute looks and wimpish girly giggles, she should reach out to the casting directors of Hollywood and get roles like "SnowWhite", "Cindrella", and "Barbie the beauty"!



The running time is 159 minutes. Srikanth Addala who has made "Kotha Bangaru Lokam" is clearly the silent craftsman who has given his best shot after KBL with this film. He has shown that given the backing of a good producer who dirties his hands and gets down to the brasstacks of film-making in tow with the technical team, any director who is earnest, feels sincerely about a message of family values that should reach out to the widest audience in this nuclear-family and fast-paced world, one can indeed make a blockbuster movie. Luckily, for both the makers Srikanth and Dil Raju, the stars are aligned literally for a thorough entertaining film thats given a clean chit at the Censor Board, moves you and touches your soul many a time with lots of clarity. If there are any blemishes in the film, they get over-shadowed by the momentum of the story-telling, music, performances and traipsing speed of the characterisation in giving a warm hug to the audience who come with mixed expectaitons. Ravi Babu's characterisation as a villian, Tanikella Bharani's character as a modern-day Sage Narada who carries tales, and some of the scenes of extreme eve-teasing Mahesh Babu at public places are the only ones I remember, in bad taste. Mahesh definitely looks younger and stylish; his dressing sense looks vastly improved. Venkatesh has got mono shades and could have improvised his dressing patterns. Can the movie be shorter? I always feel so, including this movie review. Is the movie entertaining? Yes and No. Yes, if you expect to be surcharged with emotions and get engrossed with the story and not get bored at all. No, if you expect fireworks from an ensemble of extraneous characters who charge Rs.2 lacs per day and consume Biryani for their entire family. No mainstream comedians in this film except Venu Madhav as a Census Officer. One neat cameo in the film by Producer-Actor Murali Mohan is to be noted - he comes at two crucial junctures and both times he elevates the character of Prakash Raj.



Srikanth Addala is an IIM graduate who has been working for nine years in Dil Raju factory. He has offered a different treatment to how a blockbuster should be and has shown rare sensitivity and dexterity to blend two superstars with different images into one unit of brothers, plain-clothed characters. If this is a trend that becomes more defined and prevalent in days to come, then Tollywood can scale greater heights because this is the industry that remains second to none in terms of entertainment, comedy, scale and technical values. Imagine the power of superstars like Pawan Kalyan, Nagarjuna, NTR, Prabhas, Allu Arjun, Ramcharan, Balakrishna, Ravi Teja and these two to come together for a good story and just be characters instead of being ego-sized cutout characters. Sky's the limit. "SVSC" is an effort that's a dream come true from the beginning for those who believe in the power of cinema to thrill them to bits. For all those who are on this side of entertainment, the side that doesn't take sides of Heroes and only believe in good story-telling, SVSC is a visual treat. I stick to my guns and give it 4.5 on 5. Cheers! Happy Sankranti!

"Naayak" Telugu Movie Review

“Nayak” starring RamCharan is a sensational winner and a film worthy of duel under the “Sun”kranti. Sankranti is the grand-mother of Tollywood movies and is not for the faint-hearted. Even the best of stars don’t take a shy at the stumps for Sankranti because of the weight of expectations and the stakes riding on the season. It is the equivalent of Diwali for Kollywood and Bollywood, but unlike Bollywood, Tollywood Sankranti separates men from the boys because there will be a clash of atleast two, if not three or four star-studded films. This little intro is for setting the tone for the year and “Nayak” proves to be an auspicious start for Tollywood. It has all the elements of entertainment – a rising star of a Megastar, romance, drama sans melodrama, villainy that justifies heroism, twists in the interval that shakes you up and comedy that is of an unprecedented scale, plenty of action and glamor of two cute heroines – Kajol and Amala Paul. Well-directed by veteran VV Vinayak.

The story is not dramatically different from dual-role stories in which Tollywood has taken a world patent. Set in Kolkata, Cherry is a happy-go lucky software engineer who falls in love  with Kajol. His side-kick is Brahmanandam playing the role of “Jilebi” who bumps into the gang of Rahul Dev and Jayaprakash. In the many romantic twists of the romance between Cherry and Kajol there is another character of Aashish Vidyarthi who is a CBI officer investigating gruesome murders of a goon, a police DIG (think of it!). He thinks it is all the work of Cherry and prepares to nab him next at a pre-announced Kumbh Mela where Pradeep Rawal gets a threat to get killed. At the Kumbh Mela where generally two doubles get lost from each other in olden movies, the bizarre twist that the one who is killing off all the villains is not Cherry, but Naayak, his look-alike. Then a lengthy interval which justifies the violent spree of killing by Naayak of all the guys who wronged him and his brother-in-law’s family. And then the proverbial climax after 160 minutes spaced with six spicy songs, about six to seven slick but needless fights and plenty of comedy from Jayaprakash  Reddy, Posani Krishna Murali, Brahmanandam and MS Narayana.

VV Vinayak is a director who excels in screenplay and story-telling and this is going to be a well-worked out example of his capabilities especially after the debacle of “Badrinath” but what can make his movies a family-draw is an abject reduction of grating violence with sumos, sickles and gunshots. While he has got great narrative grip in giving a story full of twists and flashbacks, he needs to be  a responsible film-maker of family sensitivities and tone down violence. In this film, he inter-mixes a lot of themes from movies like “Tagore”, “Aadi”, “Bunny”(all his films) as well as films like “Sivaji”, “Stalin” and “Businessman”. There are social themes touched upon like child prostitution and child beggary after maiming the children (as shown in “Slumdog Millionaire”). Couple this with violence, and you have a full-blooded “A” certificate. Personally, I feel “A” certificate films mar the fesivity of Sankranti season and should be avoided. But unlike  a movie like “Businessman” released last Sankranti, this film doesn’t have adult-level profanities. What redeems the film from its mediocrities of double-role tamashas seen from the times of “Ramudu-Bheemudu” is the fantastic comedy and entertainment right from the first few minutes. The first fight in a series of never-ending stunts comes only at the fortieth minute so it sets the characters well with the show-stealers being Jayaprakash (this must be his career-best), Posani Krishna Murali (he steals the show in second-half). Brahmanandam, Venu Madhav and MS Narayana have not get the better deal in this film and atleast their characters are not etched out to milk their potential. Ramcharan looks very stylish and “Orange”cool throughout the film and even the mass role of “Naayak” looks classy for him, he probably had the least dialogues in the film as a hero compared to all his previous films. But he proves a point again, that he can dance as well as his dad and his cousin Allu Arjun. All the songs carry  a signature step and a classy twist of a leg. There are so many others dominating in this film that Charan’s space comes only in the songs and fights a few one-liners with  the villains and Kajol. Both Kajol and Amala Paul look passable despite their skimpy clothes and sizzle in the navel. Kajol looks jaded and Amala Paul is guilty of horrible makeup; her lipstick and dressing sense has gone haywire. Aashish Vidyarthi, Kota Srinivasa Rao make their mark in their respective roles. Music by Thaman gives the classy feel to the mass numbers in the album with one song starring item girl Charmmee quite a foot-tapping number. The song remixing “Shubhalekha Raasa” (“Kondaveeti Donga”) is well-shot in Iceland but the song’s interludes are outright copied from the original song by IlayaRaja. I thought the interludes by IlayaRaja have given an iconic status to the song but by copying it fully right through the notes, Thaman  disappointed us. What is the meaning of a remix then?

On the whole, the film is marred  only by excessive violence but carries the day for some extraordinary entertainment and good songs and convincing performances by the entire starcast. Tollywood has patented few themes for eternity and ATM-cash-withdrawal from the box office. Examples, “Yamudu” theme, “Dual Role and sometimes triple role” themes – lost and found kind, “Shakespearan themes” of Taming the shrew/Comedy of errors/King Lear/Macbeth/All’s Well that ends well kind. The dual role concept is given an exhilarating treatment by VV Vinayak who should take a bow with this film. But for the violence in the film which extends the film by atleast 20 minutes, I subtract 0.5 and give the film an above-average 3 out of 5.