“Syraa” (Telugu/Hindi/Tamil/Kannada) film review

Director Surendar Reddy has given an exciting and energetic twist to Megastar Chiranjeevi’s most ambitious project to date about Pre-Independent India’s forgotten freedom fighter Syraa Narasimha Reddy. With an iconic star cast assembled from Hindi, Tamil, Kannada, Telugu and Bhojpuri film industries, Surendar weaves a inspiring and pacy, sheer pacy narrative in 170 minutes about the times before Sepoy Mutiny or Rani Lakshmi Bhai with some highly convoluted cinematic liberties.  Is it watchable? Absolutely, you will not sit restless even for a minute. Is it convincing? Yes, even if you nod in dissent because the director doesn’t let the action scenes steal the intensity and depth of emotions. Until the interval bang, the film builds steady tempo but after that assumes an unstoppable momentum right to the finish - never letting any scene go waste in highlighting the steadfast patriotism and leadership qualities of Syraa in galvanising other satraps and the masses into revolting against the British. To be fair, the film has always hid the making and the production values in the shooting phase and that makes watching the film an epic cinematic  experience truly worth it. 

Authentically, we may have our doubts about the claim that Syraa single-handedly eliminated 10,000 British soldiers but the bone-chilling sequences of his rise and his bradvado in death deserve to be well-told and captured with all the paraphernalia that a Tollywood film can afford. From that standpoint, #Syraa is another Pyrrhic victory for how good an action film about a lesser-known freedom fighter can be without the fuss about a Mangal Pandey or a Manikarnika or the distractions of “Thugs of Hindoostan”. #Syraa is a winner in all departments and deserves to be more widely watched for the crafts in display. Ratnavelu’s cinematography, Julius Packam’s background score and Amit Trivedi’s high-pitch compositions all stand out in enhancing the dramatic appeal of the script.  There are quite a few spectacular moments which elevate the wow factor of the film. What deserves mention is that, Chiranjeevi and Ramcharan gave such free hand to director Surendar Reddy in extracting an intense portrayal of a warlord who tames the British in his own crude ways before more follow. Having two fair damsels like Tamannaah and Nayanataara, nothing stops Chiranjeevi from serenading them in dream sequences with silly steps but no, he didn’t and that raised the dignity and stature of the megastar in submitting himself to the script in his 151st film. Entries by special stars Amitabh Bachchan, Sudeep, Vijay Sethupathy, Jagapathi Babu, keep the excitement alive and the variety high, their exits equally dramatic and make you thirst for more. For a change, Tamannaah outshines Nayanataara. - a rarity considering the experience of the latter and the girlish tendencies of the former. Chiranjeevi delivers yet another mature and convincing performance as Syraa N Reddy, his dialogues are few, his emoting with eyes powerful and his stunts well-worth it. For someone who was obsessed with telling the tale of Syraa, he deserves credit but for whom the Telugu would have lost another opportunity to hear about another freedom fighter who never entered folklore. Some of the dialogues by Sai Madhav embellished by Parachuri brothers were epic but some more mention about the contemporaries and about the economic hardships of the Telugu would have added insights. Surprisingly, production values of the film stand out without much fuss -  a rare feat considering Surendar Reddy has never before directed a historical or a mythological. The film’s only shortfall is the degree of skulduggery and atavistic violence which perhaps is justified given the time of the protagonist. As the titles roll on, we noticed only one glaring omission of the long list of freedom fighters who took the mantle on after the first war of independence - Veer Savarkar. How did they miss him? On the whole, a well-made film and watchable once. Watch it for the screen presence of Megastar and many other megastars who set the screen on fire with great performances. Even if you like nothing about the star cast, the story itself will draw you in from the first frame. Vouch for it.

#Rating 3.75/5

#Syraa #SyraaNarasimhaReddy #MegastarChiranjeevi #AmitabhBachchan #VijaySethupathy #Sudeep #JagapathiBabu #SurendarReddy #AmitTrivedi #Tamannah #Nayanataara #JuliusPackam #Tollywood #Bollywood #FreedomFighters

“Pink” (Hindi) Film Review

We should have got the hint when Shoojit Sircar took  backseat and produced  “Pink” directed by Aniruddha Roy Chowdhary. Sircar took more time to add labels which helped the film reach more audiences – he roped in half a dozen new names and made PVR Pictures, the largest Multiplex partner, and ensured the trailer released well before the festival season as early as in July. The film delivers making the wait worth it. "Pink" is the most important film of our times – and makes a statement on everything that comes within its sweep and  audacity. The title “Pink” is a euphemism for the color usually associated with feminity and all the vulnerabilities and stigmas affecting it; it’s a color for all the stereotypes that girls grow up with as if they have to stay with that for life. Then the narrative of 126 minutes which builds a simple story of three girls getting traumatized by four Delhi boys – which stays faithful to the episode that triggered it all – then expands the unintended consequences with all the legal permutations and finally, unleashes a feisty screenplay that keeps you engaged throughout. The interval, the pre-climax and the climax  complete the emotions that surcharge this legal thriller.  “Pink” gives out consistent and loud messages to the patriarchical Indian society to re-examine the paradigms through which the law and the law-makers (mostly men) relate to and affect women.

What makes the film different from the recent legal-content films like “Talwar” is the laser-sharp focus of the director on shepherding the main story. Since the story is not in public domain but plausible, the narrative has solid pace and intensity and at many times loaded with panic-attack emotions especially in the first half. Once Amitabh Bachchan enters the fray as a defence lawyer for the three girls Tapsee Pannu, Kirti Kulhari and Andrea Taring, momentum picks up and the audience is driven to the edge of the seat with courtroom drama bereft of stupid theatrics that we usually see. The only humor in this intense and tense film is experienced  when the defense counsel Deepak Singhal (Amitabh Bachan) is at work. The cross-examination by Bachchan not only wins many hearts but hits at the nub of our banalities – those series of dialogues that he utters as “Safety Rules for girls: Rule no.1, 2,3,4” raise the heckles and mocks at the ways we label women for all the sexual attacks on them. On the other hand, Deepak's adversary on the court, played by Piyush Mishra, personifies what’s wrong with our legal system, in the way cross-examination begins and ends with an axe to grind. Piyush carries his role with a gusto that makes him both repugnant and convincing. Dhritiman Banerjee as the judge is sober and composed showing the eclipsed emotions that a judge is never supposed to show in blink-and-miss moments.  The only gaffe in the courtroom why the portraits of Netaji and Tagore are doing on the walls of a District Court in Delhi. Small obsessions of a crafty Bengali director but forgivable because of a bold story projected with impact.

Tapsee Pannu steals the show with a performance that is both gutsy and pensive. But at times, her role demanded more emoting and she falls flat. After the Telugu film “Sahasam”, this is the role that brings some attention to her. Kirti Kulhari, the other girl is more nuanced. Andrea as the girl from Meghalaya looked apt in her role and reflects the plight of women from Northeast used to the society's insensitivities. Amitabh’s under-stated presence in the first half only to take the center-stage in the second half  with a hurrah performance  is a big plus for the film as word-of-mouth publicity picks up. He has shown a delicate mixture of probity and persuasiveness while single-handedly taking on the case with pure legal acuity. His approach in the build up of opening arguments, investigation and cross-examination give you a sense of intrigue that is missing in most films that ought to reflect current dilemmas through courtroom drama. The closing arguments merely underline the recurrent theme of what it means to be an adult woman and the need for consent. Another highlight of the film is the stark contrast in approaches followed by both the lawyers. Amitabh never cross-examines any of the motley of witnesses presented by the plaintiff, he presents only one witness who surprisingly is ignored for cross-examination by the plaintiff. But the approach to examining the key accused and the victims by both the lawyers is a treat to watch.

Technically, the film’s cinematography gets the moods aligned with the tone of the narrative – there is no room for any relief in the 126 minutes. BGM score by Shantanu Moitra is the finest we have heard in years. Using a haunting medley of violins, bass and percussions, Shantanu intensifies the first half by building the tempo of the incident and then blending tensions  that leaves you restless all through until the interval. By the, the stage is set for greater expectancy and intrigue towards closure. Shantanu’s strength is in mixing different  instruments with live recording of street sounds. Going by previous OSTs of Shoojit Sircar’s films, enough care is taken by Aniruddha Roy Chowdhury in syncing Moitra’s sounds with the film’s motifs and images. Dialogues are hard-hitting and reflect the usual measured metrics of Sircar’s films. In a film that is near-perfect, the few things which take away the credit are the half-developed characters of Amitabh’s wife, Tapsee’s father, Kirti’s estranged lover and so on – the director lost some opportunities for impact-making statements. The film is going to be talked about for a long time as long as the society shields the culprits and shames the victims in the stigmas and stereotypes it perpetuates. In one of his famous judgements, Justice V.R.Krishna Iyer once remarked: “The life style of the people shapes  the profile of the  law and not vice-versa.” This film drives the point of that more directly with preciseness and seriousness without sensationalising the issues. “Pink” is not to be missed at all, it is watchable but keep the pre-teenagers out of it for the disturbing visuals.

Rating: 4/5

"Piku" (Hindi Film Review)

Rarely comes a movie with a starcast, story and narration that draw you out of your zone of mind chatter and then makes a point or two in 125 minutes flat without any formulaic elements of story-telling or even statutory warnings. "Piku" has raised great expectations when Shoojit Sircar, the director of "Vicky Donor" and "Madras Cafe" cast Amitabh Bachchan, Deepika Padukone and Irrfan Khan in an improbable combination. Surprise, he delivers with style and aesthetics. And engages you till the end with a screenplay that packs a million emotions, it has a storyline that resonates with most people.

Piku is Deepika Padukone who stays with her seventy-year old father Bhaskar Banerjee (Amitabh Bachchan). Piku is single and a key partner in an architecture firm who never takes a break even as she dates many men in the hope of marrying one day. Amitabh is a hypochondriac old man whose sole problem in life is constipation. He also worries about all the parameters that make old men make weekly trips to diagnostic centers - BP, Sugar, blood count and so on. Deepika and Amitabh argue about health issues and about that over-anxiety about   smoothness in bowel movements that eludes Amitabh till the very end. Piku has an obsession over her father's health habits, her father has a neurotic thing or two about his health and constipation. Both get worked up and miss out on the real fun in life - it takes a toll on Piku's work habits. She calls a regular taxi service to ferry her on work trips but almost always drives the car drivers to bump up.. Enter the owner of the fleet of cars - Irrfan. With the main characters built out like this, an idea comes to both father and daughter to head out for a holiday in homeland Kolkata by road. Irrfan is forced to drive the vehicle because none of the drivers turn up.

 For the next 1500 kilometers of road trip, Irrfan becomes a curious bystander to the intriguing fights, ego-trips, patch-ups and face-offs between the three of them.  Irrfan is a stranger to the family yet he becomes an intruder who negotiates emotions and drives home a perspective or two on what is bugging the twosome. At times, Irrfan also throws tantrums or tramples upon the ego of Amitabh or  holds a mirror to Deepika on the way she has been dealing with her father all these years. Most of the times, the exchange of words between Irrfan and Amitabh is fiery but what Amitabh realises is that Irrfan is dry-cleaning his funeral clothes and making him see ways of getting out of a lot of self-created mess -  mostly in the mind. Shoojit Sircar gives us an unhurried and dispassionate overview of the emotions of millions of Indians as we deal with health issues of aging parents and clueless youth who have their head in the sand on matters of balancing affections with personal goals. Will Amitabh solve his health issues thanks to Irrfan? Does Deepika find a man finally? What is Irrfan's role in both of their lives? Is there a twist in climax? (Hint: There is...) "Piku" takes you on an exhilarating ride of emotions and treatment like never seen before. It is difficult to give a three-act structure to a story that moves out of your living room and back but Sircar pulls it off with  memorable story-telling.

What makes the film stand out is not just the brilliance of all the technical masters - in photography and in music by Anupam Roy but in the aspects of direction and narration and finer subtleties and sensibilities of Bengali households. If you have been closer to a Bengali, you will realise the DNA in their social intercourse - everybody loves good food and roots for their culture but they also have intellectual candour and the abrasiveness of behavior towards each other. Daughter corrects the GK of father, sister-in-law gives it back to her sister's husband, a family tenant talks turkey with her avuncular "owner". In such a "Didi-style" war of words, one wonders why Bengalis rarely inter-marry, keep fighting with each other but bond better overall than many other regions. Sircar captures the essence of an ordinary story and constructs a mesmerising mosaic of human emotions - there are dollops of humor that bring the roof down in almost every scene with every character - sometimes insinuative and mostly  explicit about the motions of the human digestion. For this film, Shoojit farts all his way with the ultimate compilation of jokes and trivia about constipation and all that - that  regales us despite being predictable. Messages that come out of the film are purely accidental, not intentional so Sircar ensures the movie is never preachy and boring. That shot of Deepika Padukone playing  Shuttle Badminton is a paisa-vasool scene.

 Performances by all the three stand out - Amitabh, you don't see him, you only see a Bengali babu who is finicky about his health and self-righteous about everything else. This film is the finest for AB in years  - better than  the flippant experiments of recent years - people will enshrine AB for this role forever for he has truly imbibed the core of a Bengali patriarch. Deepika gives an impressive performance that dovetails her hiterto unexplored dimensions of acting into a complex role. Hiding her emotions, guarding her vulnerability, and hardlining a tough father while letting go when needed - whoa, what a role! Irrfan essays another effortless role as an owner who is at more than one receiving end. He has mastered the art of input-output ratio for an actor - just knows what dosage to give for each scene and yet leave the audience gasping for what is not expressed. His school of acting is quite different from the montony of a Naseerudin Shah or an Anupam Kher. It spawned the likes of Nawazuddinn Siddiqi but Irrfan is a malleable actor who stumps you with new tricks each time. A surprise packet has been Moushimi  Chatterjee - so full of energy and live-wire Bengali goodness and outspoken-ness. She makes her entry in both the halves with  good impact. Raghubeer Yadav as the doctor is also good. Musical output by Roy takes the cinematic experience to new highs. Also the role by the cinematographer - he shows great visuals of the Ganges and the multi-faceted personality of Kolkata but you still cannot miss the sponsor names like Amul milk more than once. But how did he shoot those moving pictures of a car in motion? Haven't seen that in many films and considering the lengthy footage of the travel, it looked authentic - the visuals of the roads. 

Sircar's strength seems  to turn an ordinary story into a fireball that keeps snowballing until you get the main points, in crisp format. No pretensions, no flashbacks, no mundane stuff but taut editing. No wonder, he is done with in 125 minutes. If only the jokes were not just about the stools all the time, this could have been a five-star movie but who cares? This is one of the cleanest movies in recent times and deserves a universal view (Can't understand why a U/A rating was given). If you have parents or not, this film is sure to move you. Most watchable and entertaining.

Rating: 4.5/5

#Piku #PikuReview #AmitabhBachchan #DeepikaPadukone #Irrfan #ShoojitSircar #AnupamRoy #MovieReviews #Bollywood #Bengali #MoushimiChatterjee #Sony #RaghhubirYadav

"Shamitabh" (Hindi Movie Review)

The voice that should have become as world-famous much before the man who still casts a spell on billions of fans was once rejected by All India Radio. Yes, we are talking about Amitabh Bachchan’s voice which is the finest amalgam of texture, timber, diction and a baritone that reads the best Hindi dialogues. So what happens when that voice has an ego that eventually engulfs a superstar? Without delving deeper into a storyline that gives away the plot, “Shamitabh” is a 153 minute roller-coaster ride through the emotions that oscillate between ego and ego-massage between two men who are joined at the hip; both of them can’t do without the other and both know this - Dhanush and Amitabh Sinha (Sr.Bachchan). Akshara Hassan is the anchor in the film building bridges between the two who throw tantrums at each other. Great performances by all the three principal stars including debutante Akshara Hassan. Yet director R.Balki, undoubtedly one of Bollywood’s exciting directors, fails to give a clean output that can sustain interest. What went wrong?

Could it be Ilayaraja’s music? No, the maestro has given three good songs and embellishes the scenes with his own majestic interpretation of how we should read a film. And he has done this for the 1000th time in his career with this film. On the other hand, director messes with the picturisation of songs. The golden rule in South is, you don’t break Ilaiyaraja’s song, you don’t insert dialogues in between Ilaiyaraja song because his music is like a symphony with interludes that ascend and descend seamlessly. If you break his song, the beauty is lost. In almost all the songs, Balki commits this crime which disrupts the sense of sounds we grew up with. Can’t beat it right? Is it PC Sriram, the ace cinematographer who lets it down? Nope, he doesn’t add his interpretations to the camera angles, his work has always been a subset of the director’s eye and this movie is no exception. R.Balki must take it on chin for making a film high on form but low on substance. He gets majestic performance from Amitabh; even Dhanush is spirited and Akshara shows much promise despite unconventional looks but the story-telling sucks. Instead of building layers into the storyline, director resorts to extracting monologous performances from 'Amitabh in the graveyard' or breaks into a song that shows a Western Toilet in flowing glory. (What a criminal waste of "Piddly" song - the best in the album - showing WC in all variants of design!) Or he takes potshots at all that’s wrong in Bollywood - middle-men acting big, producers launching zombies into heroes, NYTs making it out in bed with stars at  night, directors cocooned in their delusions of grandeur and so on. Nothing new.

The fault in our stars…is an undercurrent to the film’s plot as the director gets under the skin of a rags-to-riches Dhanush who becomes a Superstar. Beyond this undercurrent, the film hardly moves and characterisation is lacklustre; Amitabh gets to use his “voice” maximum even when he is off-screen. Dhanush hogs limelight in the first half but only until Amitabh enters. The film has many gaps in narration. Balki takes the flashback route to tell the story of a rags-to-riches superstar but halfway we lose it whether the movie is in present tense or past, although the film moves back and forth. A lot many scenes are repetitive and don’t either move the story or surprise us, which is not the case usually with Balki. He has an Admaker’s eye but in his efforts to balance commercial cinema with artistic license, he forgets to entertain. And leaves more gaps in the narration with a disappointing climax. As it is, the plot is interesting but difficult to fathom how a superstar can grow without a home-grown voice and keep it Bollywood’s best-unknown secret. Leave that, why does he show a superstar with humble beginnings on one side but  uses people on his way to stardom without acknowledging  their contribution - be it Akshara or Amitabh? Why does he carry flings with co-stars when he is in love with Akshara? Why does Amitabh throw tantrums everytime with Dhanush but cooperates with the latter when he is in bed with someone? Why dos Akshara leave her assignment as Assistant Director and go all out to help Dhanush at the outset - is it that easy for an AD to skip work and knock on the doors of the who’s who? In the second half, when Dhanush refuses to work with Amitabh and agrees to make an all-mute film with real star Abhinaya (that girl who acted in SVSC) the director doesn’t appear serious about making a sensitive statement about such actors. More, Dhanush is made to abandon the project itself halfway. A lot many questions unanswered.

What redeems the film? For sure, performance by Amitabh Bachchan.  And his witty one-liners. Balki’s brief to Bachchan is to insert theatrical oddities in a commercial cinema with him as the centrepiece. “No Whiskey, very risky”…”Don’t use your little finger  so much or you will change the definition of No.1 in Bollywood”…”My voice is worth more than your weight” are a few of AB’s best one-liners. Dhanush is good in parts but his characterisation is confusing. I wonder what happened to him when he was hearing the script of this film for the first time. It seems he turned down 33 scripts before choosing “Shamitabh”. It is quite a sub-optimal choice for him because despite his antics, he is over-shadowed by Amitabh and doesn’t use his strengths well. After “Raanjhaa”, this doesn’t really cement his entry in Bollywood. Akshara Hassan has the face of her father and the eyes of her mother, she carries her role with maturity and poise but I am afraid she doesn’t have the glamor of her sister. Since this is her first film, I hope she proves her acting talent with more versatile roles. Ilaiyaraja’s music is good only to the extent Balki uses him. In some crucial scenes, unless the director and cinematographer understand the subtle nuances of the scene and present it well, Ilaiyaraja can interpret in his own way and give it a different dimension. That’s what happened in many scenes, where the emotions get jumbled in Ilaiyaraja’s ensemble. Compared to Balki’s previous films like “Cheeni Kum” and “Paa”, the sync between the maestro’s music and the director’s intent is largely amiss. What pulls down the film is lack of entertainment and comedy and the depth that can counter the non-stop rendition of Amitabh Bachchan’s “voice”. One of the best lines Bachchan says goes something like this: “ I don’t want my film to go to Sundance festival, Cannes festival, Venice festival and so on. I want my films to get released for Diwali, Dasera and Christmas festivals and do big business.” Or to that effect. Alas, “Shamitabh” becomes a joke on the same lines - it may go to Sundance and Cannes, hasn’t got released on any festival here and may hardly do big business. Watchable only if you have loads of patience and undiminished love for Amitabh. If you skip it, however, nothing changes.

Rating: 2.75/5

#Shamitabh #AmitabhBachchan #Dhanush #RBalki #ErosFilms #Bollywood #Ilaiyaraja #IlaiyarajaMusic

"Manam" (Telugu) Film Review

"Manam" is a beautiful film -  a flowing tribute to ANR and his lasting legacy. In the works for over two years, the film was making news for many happy reasons until it became clear that this will be ANR's last screen appearance. Directed by Vikram K Kumar ( "Ishq" fame) and produced by Reliance Entertainment, the film has all the elements of a sugar-syrup family comedy with minimum distractions. No villain, no side-tracking comedy and no vulgarity - it has a stamp of class and well-directed sweetness all-round. There are not many families in the Indian film history which had the luxury of appearing on screen in all the 3-G glory. The last time such an act was performed, according to me, was "Kal Aaj Kal" (starring Prithviraj Kapoor, Raj Kapoor and Ranadhir Kapoor). Now, it is the turn of ANR, Nagarjuna and Naga Chaitanya to give us a magical story of improbable origins.

The improbability is the only weakness in the plot - where Nagarjuna is the son of Naga Chaitanya and Samantha and ANR is the son of Nagarjuna and Shriya Saran. How these five people you will not otherwise meet in heaven actually get enmeshed with each other's lives in a cute inter-mixing of two love stories spread over two generations is the bone of the matter. Beyond this, it would be puerile to elaborate the story as it may snatch the thrills of watching a clean film not seen since  the likes of SVSC. The implausibility of the plot is tolerable as today's films have more illogicalities than the subtle cinematic liberty taken by the story-writer of this plot. So the illogicality is passable in the name of delectable entertainment that the film offers.

What are the highlights of the film? Undoubtedly, the scenes between Nagarjuna and Samantha as some of the best supermom moments get unfolded on screen in a rarely seen combination. Then the scenes between ANR, Naga Chaitanya and Nagarjuna - the drinking scene, even if slightly overdone. Then the delicate scenes between Nagarjuna and Shriya in the rural backdrop where bucholic charms haven't erased the purity of some souls. Finally, the roaring screen chemistry between Naga Chaitanya and Samantha for the nth time which makes the film youthful. Performance-wise, Naga Chaitanya gives the best shot amongst everybody as he shares screen space with Nagarjuna and ANR for the first and last time. This is his film, not really Nagarjuna's or ANR's. Samantha and Shriya get their sunshine moments and naturally have a blast. Nagarjuna looks old but carries himself better than some of the commercial roles we are used to seeing him. He should quickly migrate to being part of more such meaningful cinema such as "Manam". ANR is seen for less than ten minutes but by making a delayed entry minutes before the interval and staying the course right till the end, he gives out a dignified performance before he bowed out. Director Vikram used the limited availability of ANR's footage deftly by spacing him to re-surface again and again until that last shot of his where he smiles and waves you goodbye.

Whichever way you look at, "Manam" is a terrific film to watch that doesn't bore you despite the over-extended goodwill messages and sweetness. Infact, the emotions in the film choke you at times and remind you of the beauty of life and the miracles that pour out of love of all kinds. Vikram Kumar is quite a talent in the way he used a venerable starcast including Brahmanandam and MS Narayana. After a long time you get a feeling of confidence of a director in showcasing his mastery with a clean narration, good performances and messages that won't embarrass you in front of your mom. Except that little cheeky jingle of why we say "ladies first", nothing is offensive in the film. What makes the film different is the treatment of the story playing out between different generations of characters and the quality of output. Music by Anup Rubens, his 25th musical score deserves a high five. All the songs are exceptionally peppy and melodious. By using three different scores for each generation of Akkineni family, Anup Rubens has shown he has a talent for matching  song composition skills with a standout BGM. The director's class also shows in his selection of team in dialogues, cinematography. Vikram Kumar sure has a fresh mind that needs more backers  - how he thinks in telling a good story better is a case study. One example, in the song "Ta...Taaa....Tatta Tattaa...." which has Nagarjuna and Naga Chaitanya shake a leg with the old clippings of ANR song, any other director could have used an item girl to add to the stomping on the floor. But by not going for the predictable, Vikram proves he is different. More power to such directors and cinema. In many ways, Vikram's style of commercial cinema reminds me of the class of Radha Mohan, the Tamil director who made many successful films for Prakash Raj.

You wished the film's length of 163 minutes were cut down but I sense some scenes of ANR were not possible because of his passing out so they had filled in with other stuff. Good to see Amala and Akhil get roped in this family drama for the records. Akhil's entry in the end gives an inkling he will also join the family business soon. No less a person than Amitabh Bachchan did a 45 second cameo as a tribute to ANR. What a way to finish off a glorious career! In as much one feels compel to judge a film, "Manam" has surprisingly few shortcomings - which I have already qualified. You will walk away with many good feelings after watching it.

My rating: 3.5/5.

ANR and the Art of Living

My piece on ANR as an inspiration for healthy living.

http://www.news4andhra.com/details?contentId=1861

"The Great Gatsby" Film Review (English)

Finally, one of America's greatest works of fiction finds an incarnation in the big screen. This is Hollywood's sixth attempt to capture the surrealistic  almost evanscent classic by one of the most conceptual novelists  - Francis Scott Fitzgerald. I must say, it is one of the most beautiful films I have seen in a long time, probably not since "Avatar" and at the end of the 146 minutes of a magical story with a trepid ending and a tragic twist in the tail, I get a feeling that Fitzgerald's efforts have not gone in vain. He was perceived as one of the improbable screenwriters who never quite made it to Hollywood despite gallant attempts to make a film on his novels. While  Fitzgerald's other stories have been made into films  - "The Last Tycoon", "The curious case of Benjamin Button" etc., "The Great Gatsby" made many false starts and failed attempts starring many ruling stars, including Robert Redford who looks like a million-dollar baby even in night dress.

Warner Brothers has left nothing to chance this time around - the sixth time around. They roped in a starcast of the decade - Leonardo Dicaprio as Jay"Great" Gatsby, Toby Maguire as Nick Carraway, Carey Mulligan as Daisy Buchannan,  Joel Edgerton as Daisy's husband and our own Amitabh Bachchan as the jewish businessman in a cameo that marks the Superstar's official entry into Hollywood. Who can direct such a starcast and take the magical, make-believe, hard-to-project vigorous words of Fitzgerald? Baz Luhrrmann  - who has a mind of his own and a unique gift of collapsing song, ballads and drama into celluloid opus. His earlier films - "Moulin Rage", "Australia", "Romeo and Juliet" have marked him out for the potential in TGG in 3-D. Luhrrmann creates an extravagant biopic that sizzles and rarely fizzles out. 

Nick Carraway (Toby Maguire) as in the book is the main narrator of the film who observes that his great fortune in life was in meeting the "great" Gatsby. He is a struggling writer who lives next door to the regal mansion of Jay Gatsby, a self-made, self-obsessed billionaire who throws the biggest and the loudest parties - inviting anybody who cares for drowning in food and wine and dance on the house - more inclusive than our own IPL post-match parties. Nobody knows what he does, how he earned such obscene wealth and what his background is. One day, he gets a hand-written invite from Gatsby to attend one of his parties and Nick is thrilled and paints the whole party that he is the only "chosen" one. Indeed he is for reasons learnt later; Nick's cousin Daisy Buchannan lives on the other side of West Egg, across a Bay married to her husband, her many-affaired husband. Gatsby and Daisy have been in love since he was 17 but filmy fate gave Daisy away in arranged marriage to  Buchannans. Nick soon finds that his new friend Gatsby wants him to re-arrange love with his old flame. Sparks fly, naturally, when Daisy makes it to the party but her husband, like all husbands gets wind of the secret liaisions of his wife. Many wranglings later, there is a twist in the tail as Buchannan speeds away in a fit of rage in the sporty car of Gatsby only to dash into one of Buchannan's lady-loves and kills her. But the husband, a gasoline-filler, is fed with the notion that it is Gatsby who drove his car that killed his wife and not the real paramour. Daisy is indifferent to Gatsby because she is confused between the moral limits of marriage and the catnip pull of Gatsby. But Gatsby remains composed and intriguing till the end, Nick playing the last man standing for him, even at the funeral which is the most poignant shot in the film - none who made it to his lavish parties except Nick turn up at the grave. That's the long story that cannot be made shorter but what makes the film a visual feast is the images, the songs, the contextual and the subtext messages coming through the times and the characters set in 1920s - when American stock markets were at life-time highs, economy was over the hill and society was both loud, hedonistic and vainglorious. 

What endears the film is its many messages because Fitzgerald's novel is itself so timeless because of its metaphors and its malleability to interpretations. The West Egg can be today's Bay Area, the new-age Silicon Valley, the East Egg can be the old money, and the characters can all be so spine-chillingly true - a  billionaire who refuses to give up the ghosts of the past, his friend who refuses to talk turkey for fears of antagonising both the parties, a woman who cannot reign in her wayward husband and cannot hide her feelings and vacillates till the end, an old-world husband who goes after Munnis and Sheelas but doesn't want to dock his wife and what more, expect loyalty. It is these images that make the story burnt into relevance forever ninety years after Fitzgerald wrote in 1925. Baz Luhhrmann makes a winner with minimal distractions of 3-D technology and memorable motifs of Fitzgerald's prose. Leonardo Dicaprio stands out with a quirkacious range of expressions, he gets the best introduction and also makes the exit in a watery grave in the end - exactly like in "Titanic". Can't believe his looks kill even today since his debut in 1997. Toby Maguire has a veneer and a role that will get him many new fans than just kissing boring girl-friend and climbing walls as Spiderman. Joel Edgerton as Daisy's husband has the best presence after the two. Music and SFX also stand out - heard that most of the SFX are created in the Reliance studios of Hyderabad and Mumbai. Its a great flick and must watch for a great synthesis of an American legend of literature with an Australian legend in directing. 4.5 out of 5.