Revisiting some biographical movies

Biographical films are quite rare in Tamil. However in the last 10 years or so, we have been fortunate to get three such excellent movies. Although none of them were commercial successes, they are certainly worth watching. I’ll briefly review all the three movies, from the most realistic to the most stylistic. Also added on late as a fourth movie is a classic biographical movie.

Iruvar (The Duo):

This movie is based on the life of the real-life duo of M.Karunanidhi and M.G.Ramachandran (MGR). It shows the ascent of DMK, MK capturing power, the split in the friendship of MK and MGR, MGR forming ADMK and capturing power and finally MGR’s death. This is directed by Mani Ratnam and I believe this is one of his best movies. First, it takes a lot of guts to take a movie like this, when the protagonist’s legacy is still richly alive (and in MK’s case he is still in active politics). Though he has cleverly renamed all the characters, it is very clear as to whose life story is being depicted.

Though I was aware of the general events in these two people’s lives, this movie presented so many other details and as I confirmed with my parents most of these details were true. Most of these were kind of open secrets that everybody in my previous generation would know (for instance like how MGR marries Janaki). However some of the other sequences seem to either more closely kept secrets or just imagination – like how MGR’s first wife and Jayalalitha appear alike in the movie (are both played by Aishwarya Rai). But, at least in one case the director has clearly changed the real sequence in the movie (Anna never becomes CM in the movie). This is such a large gap that I consider this only to be a conscious attempt to disclaim this story as a true story. Also conspicuous is that he leaves the story of Jayalalitha totally hanging in the movie – this again might have been due to practical compulsions. Also the director has shown MGR’s reason for the split with MK as ambivalent.

This movie has an excellent cast – Prakashraj as MK, Mohanlal as MGR and Aishwarya Rai as Jayalalitha (her first movie!). Revathi, Tabu and Gowthami are the other female leads and everyone seems to have done their job very well. Stylistically this movie is top class. As it deals with the story of a scriptwriter and actor capturing power, it is filled with poetry and rhetorical flourishes – probably one of the reason why the film flopped in the box-office – which give a special feel to the movie. Though the poetry did seem to go overboard sometime, I did enjoy it mostly, like for instance in a romantic scene between MK and his second wife (played by Tabu).Among other things, the movie does an excellent job in showing how MGR influenced the public through his film songs and in fact two songs are created in the same style! “Kannai katti kollathe” is especially note worthy as it feels like just seeing a typical MGR song!

One thing which can be considered a flaw is that the movie romanticizes the life-story of these two people too much and in the process almost hides their mistakes. There was one scene in the movie, where MGR is questioned by his minister that he like MK is also not controlling corruption and MGR giving a weak reply to it, but this is only one scene which can easily be missed. Also there were too many songs featuring Aishwarya Rai and at least one of them was just an insertion in lieu of an item number. In essence Mani Ratnam might have just taken too many artistic liberties, but still this movie does record the story of two interesting individuals whose lives intersect at crucial points and with it what is till now the most important part of modern Tamil Nadu’s political history.

Bharathi:

This is based on life story of Subramanya Bharathi, who is considered to be the greatest modern Tamil poet, despite having died at a young age of 39. Bharathi was a revolutionary in certain ways and he radically opposed many practices prevalent then (early 20^th century) like caste discrimination, discrimination against women. As a result he was considered an unfit in his own traditional Brahmin community. Also he supported the freedom movement and his songs were instrumental in spreading the freedom movement in Tamil Nadu. Because of this, he had to spend a long time in exile in French governed Pondicherry. Despite all this what really distinguishes Bharathi’s poetry is that they have this spark of courage or even seething anger, in whatever he writes. Due to his genius and anger against society Bharathi was always an interesting personality and this is very well captured by the movie, giving it a very stylistic feel. The character of Bharathi is excellently played by Shayaji Shinde and Devayani plays his wife in a wonderfully underplayed role. All the songs (composed by Illayaraja) are good and very apt to the situations.

The movie starts with the child hood of Bharathi and how he was recognized very early. In this part the sequence leading to the “mayil pole” is very intriguing and I doubt whether it really happened in Bharathi’s life. The movie shows Bharathi in all his moods, as a revolutionary when he performs thread ceremony and puja for Dalit children, as a man nearly mad with ideas when he commands the Nawab to come and meet him and provide money for publishing his collected works, as a dejected father when he is intimated of his daughter’s marriage only on that day and a dejected man when he discovers that after all these years of reforming society he hasn’t been able to reform his own wife. In fact it also hints at widely believed notion that Bharathi consumed ganja for sometime. Especially impressive was the scene where Bharathi goes to meet Gandhi – he barges in when there is some discussion going on and requests Gandhi to head a meeting where he would sing his poetry. When Gandhi refuses due to lack of time and asks him to shift the meeting, he plainly refuses and leaves after saying that he is pleased with this meeting and that he blesses Gandhi’s freedom movement. This really summarizes Bharathi as he was, as a true unconquered and unhindered genius.

All the songs, many of them written by Bharathi himself are very good (music composed by Ilayaraja) and suit the movie. The movie ends with the funeral of Bharathi, which shows the lack of recognition for this poet, as it is attended by only seven people. Bharathi’s own song, “Nallathor veenai seithey” beautifully rendered in the background is most apt –

“Nallathor veenai seithey athai nalam keda puzhuthiyil erivathundo

Solladi Sivasakthi ennai chuddar migum arivudan padaithuvitai…”

“Do you make a good Veena and throw it in the dust,

Tell me Sivasakthi, you have created me with a sparkling intellect…”

(See here for the full translation, also other poems translated in the same site)

Kamraj:

As the name suggests, this is a biographical film on Kamaraj, who was a popular CM in Tamilnadu and considered to be the ‘kingmaker’ nationally. One thing we can notice in the movie is that it is almost documentary style. While this does make us believe that all the incidents shown are true (which I think most of them are), it also becomes a little boring. Nevertheless, it does a good job in showing the principled life of Kamraj and how he virtually shames the current politicians (or perhaps all the politicians who came after him). In fact the dialogues in many places seem to be chosen for this effect as they virtually lash out at the various ills like corruption which plague today’s politicians. The scenes which showed how Kamraj got the idea for the now widely popular mid-day meal scheme for school children and then implemented it were particularly good. In fact this scheme started in Tamil Nadu and was so successful that it has been extended to most other states in India.

Despite being in a documentary style, the movie doesn’t aim to avoid all controversies. Towards the end, it clearly shows that Kamraj is highly disappointed with Indira Gandhi. In fact before going to sleep for the last time, he hears the news that she has imposed emergency and is furious at this and regrets that he had made a wrong decision by selecting her as PM. Also Kamraj is shown strongly criticizing the DMK, for populist policies like rice at Rs.2/Kg. (or some such related thing) and also gaining sympathy on an unrelated injury to MGR during film shooting.

Some of the incidents shown which seemed very relevant to the current political scenario are –

• After Kamraj becomes CM, his house in his hometown immediately gets water connection. When Kamraj sees on going home, he immediately orders the removal of the water connection as he has not paid for it and as CM he should be a model for not abusing power.
• A couple of cars and a police jeep escort Kamraj on a tour outside. He asks as to what all this is for and after being told that it is for security, he asks – “When I am in my country, among my own people why do I need any security?”
• Kamraj usually helps some poor people who come to his residence for help, with his own money. However, when the wife of a person arrested for selling illicit liquor comes, he blankly refuses saying that her husband had done a serious anti-social act.

I felt many other dialogues were aimed directly against current political ills, but I don’t remember many of them now. In fact, if our current politicians were made to watch this, they would feel remorse for at least some time. Dissapointingly, whereas the above two films were at least well received by critics, this didn't seem gather much attention among critics or people - probably because it was quite a low budget venture?

One main thing the movie missed was to show how exactly Kamraj-led Congress lost to DMK in 1967 elections. It did offer some reasons like the populist policies of DMK, but I think the main reason is that Kamraj did not strategically tackle the anti-Hindi (or rather anti Hindi imposition) protests at that time. The movie doesn’t even make any mention of anti-Hindi protests (at least I don’t remember it), so in a way it seems to be blind to Kamraj’s flaws. Nevertheless, an excellent watch which shows how politicians ought to function.

Veerapandiya Kattabomman:

Now, these is a late addition as I was planning to review only the above 3 movies. However, I recently watched this movie as part of the Raj TV’s series of movies called “Tamil Cinema 75”^* – to celebrate 75 years of Tamil cinema. This too is a biographical movie, so decided to include this here.

This movie is one of the classics in Tamil cinema and in particular one of Sivaji’s dialogues is so well quoted that every person who has lived in Tamil Nadu would know that, if not the movie. This shows the life of Veerapandiya Kattabomman who ruled the areas around Panchalankurichi (in south TN). He was one of the earliest people^** who resisted British rule bravely and gave up his life fighting for it. I have not been able to see how much of the movie’s story is real because, when I searched Wikipedia I found two articles, this and this, while the first one gave only very basic info about Kattabomman, the other gave very detailed info but it was exactly the same as that in the movie!

The movie is a long one running for more than 3 hrs and as I saw it on TV, it prolonged to nearly 4 hrs! I had missed the early portions of the movie, but true to its classic status it managed to keep me interested for the rest of the time. The movie proceeds at a leisurely pace, but is never boring. It has a lot of songs, but again they were also not boring since many songs helped in the narration itself. Even at the worst, I didn’t feel that any song was ‘inserted’ as I feel in watching many masala movies now. And surprisingly, except in portions towards the climax, the movie was never really melodramatic and didn’t involve too many verbose dialogues either. Of course I listened to the dialogue where Kattabomman refuses to pay taxes to the British officer for the umpteenth time, and yes the verbosity does seem justified!

Sivaji Ganesan, needless to say, gives a great performance as he brings forth the good heartedness and patriotic fervor of the character. The other lead actors like Gemini Ganesan, Padmini have also done well. In short, this justifies itself as a classic for a good patriotic theme and a good, if not great execution of it.

* - I have a big grouse against this effort by Raj TV. Though good intentioned, it doesn’t seem to be executed well. After some good movie in the start, it seems to be airing some very ordinary movies and suddenly some day we again see a good movie playing. Worse, they don’t advertise the movies even one week in advance and their website doesn’t even have info on what movie is playing today!

** - Though Sepoy mutiny of 1857 is popularly considered to be the first revolt against British, it is not. There were revolts by some chieftains in Tamil Nadu like Puli Thevar and Kattabomman, followed by a much a bigger revolt called the Polygar war.

A clarion call!

Thavamai Thavamirundhu - Review
I watched “Thavamai Thavamirundhu” quite some time back and wanted to write a review ever since. Finally got the time and inclination now. Coming from Cheran, after his critically acclaimed and commercially successful “Autograph” this film carried huge expectations and I should say it has satisfied them. After a couple of disappointing movie outings, this one was a really refreshing one to watch.

Cheran takes a similar milieu to his “Autograph”, but the treatment here is so refreshingly different that it makes me think that for such directors there would be no dearth of stories. The movie’s main theme is the travails a father undergoes to bring up his sons and how he is or ought to be treated in his old age. Rajkiran (as Muthiah) and Saranya (as Sarada) are the parents and they toil hard to bring up their sons. The elder son Senthil (as Ramanathan) changes after his marriage and doesn’t treat his parents well, though the younger son Cheran (as Ramalingam) learns just in time. The message here is much stronger than in “Autograph”. Yet Cheran manages not to become didactic and make the message seem very reasonable – quite an achievement by itself (this reminds me of “Vedham Pudhidhu”, of why a strong message need not be didactic). More on this later - the movie is also very good in other techniques, which I would try to list down,

Realism: The movie is always so realistic which makes this message even more believable. In fact, I should say that this movie has taken realism in Tamil movies (at least in mainstream ones) to a new level. (Though I am not giving a plot summary (one can be found here), there a few SPOILERS ahead. Of course this movie is hardly a suspense thriller, so this may not matter much!). As a striking example of the realism, I would like to point out one particular scene – when Ramalingam leaves the house to elope with his lover (on another pretext). In the scene, his mother is woken up by his father to wish him farewell and her voice started off by being really sleepy and feeble – in fact it was just audible! The cinematography is also excellent as it dwells on the various shades of grey in indoors.

Narration style: Cheran follows the same style as in “Autograph”, which is to go back to flash backs repeatedly from the present. Also, in the end he continues with the present for sometime, to result in a rather strong climax. Of course as would be well known by now, he has shot the flashback in color and present in black & white (as in “Hey Ram”). But what was much more interesting for me was the extent to which he focuses on various incidents. Incidents which conventional films would focus on like a normal marriage (of that of Ramanathan) are never shown and we are told of it only in later scenes (in interesting ways). This style allows Cheran to focus on the remaining scenes, allowing them to progress slowly to have the intended effect. Many complain that the film is over 3 hrs long, but I think the length is justified as it allows us to appreciate the feelings and settings. Of course, some scenes are very touching and I nearly cried in a couple of them!

Cast & Acting: There can be no two opinions in this. Almost everyone, especially the four main characters of the film have given a very good performance. Rajkiran as the father is the ‘hero’ of the movie and he blends into the movie so much that I couldn’t say he was acting! Especially his voice was so suitable (tender and caring during many scenes), that it alone was sufficient to convey all the emotions! Almost the same for the mother role played by Saranya. Cheran and Padmapriya could’ve given better performance, but it doesn’t seem to be lacking in any particular way. As much as I would have scoffed at this idea before seeing the movie, Rajkiran would definitely be in the running for the National award for the best actor.

Songs: Songs are exactly the way I like them to be in a movie – they blend with the movie and sometimes move the story ahead. “Ore Oru oorukulle” was a good song to picturise an excursion. “Oru muraithaan” was a touching song and I guess the song was split into portions with scenes in between them (something which I first observed in “Autograph”). The theme music which shows the parents having a good time at their son’s house is very apt for it and it was then I noticed that it had a very euphoric tone. Some segments like this and “Oru Muraithaan” song were like pure poetry on screen. That some little known composers like Sabesh-Murali can give such a fare reminds me the importance of context for songs.

The theme and its stress: Cheran uses the often used technique of using a counter example (Ramanathan) and example (Ramalingam) to convey his message of how parents should be treated in their sunset years. The technique is very effective, since Cheran doesn’t specially villainize Ramanathan’s and his wife’s characters. Their motives are shown to be quite natural, but misguided ones and he also shows their effects. For instance, he shows how Ramanathan’s wife is almost jealous at seeing the care given by Muthaiah & Sarada to Ramalingam’s children and in effect shows the futility and difficulty of trying to live in a nuclear family. The one flaw in characterization may be that the father – Muthaiah is shown to be a perfect person. But I guess the theme wants to stress that even such people are not automatically treated well by their children. Also, all of Muthaiah’s decisions are quite liberal (logical) and balanced and may be this also indicates to the parents that they should change with the world.

However I was having a feeling that Cheran was stressing more than love for parents in this movie and it was confirmed in the final scene when Ramalingam agrees to give the house to his brother, because, he was “his best relation”. Cheran in effect stresses on the importance of relations and the joy got from them, in this fast changing world where nuclear, single child families are the order of the day. In this world, when the necessity of relations and the importance given to it in our culture are being questioned, he shows how important they are – for instance to provide support during distress (like when Ramalingam has his first child). In effect it is a clarion call to restore the faith in our culture.

That such a strong and relevant message can be given convincingly and engrossingly within the mainstream cinema format is a big achievement. That’s why even when I see that all reviews are praising the movie, I feel the movie deserves this and even more!

King Kong - Why this?

So I am back after a long break. Without going into any silly excuses, the break has been bigger than what I intended it to be. Though not many people seem to be missing my blog, I certainly missed my blog.

I saw King Kong recently and now have the urge to review it. Not because it was very good, but because my opinion seems to be so much different from the opinions I find elsewhere. I was quite easily getting bored in what is billed as a top commercial film for 2005. Actually I don’t expect much logic from a commercial (‘masala’) film. I only expect it to proceed in such a way (for example, move at a fast pace) so that we don’t notice the logical flaws, at least till the end of the movie. In my recent viewings, movies like Anniyan and Gilli fitted this quite well.

But King Kong was neither an absorbing masala movie, neither did it have an interesting story line. Of course, one thing I have to clarify is that I was never able to accept a gorilla expressing so much affection for a human (in such a short time) and even worse, the human reciprocating it! May if some one is able to accept it the movie would be more viewable. Nevertheless, I don’t find any excuse for showing a whole zoo of crazy creatures in the forest scenes in Skull island. Just because you have the power of computer graphics doesn’t mean that you have to overuse it like this! As every possible creature which fitted the imagination of the director comes on screen, we (myself and my friends) were laughing out at the action sequences, for otherwise we would have been nauseated by those animals.

I have jotted down some amusing and illogical things I found in the movie. Usually I don’t do this for a commercial movie, but in this I was able to find so many flaws even while watching the movie, that I thought I should put them down.

• Most of the characters in the movie (including King Kong) seem to be mad – they do extremely risky things, bordering on illogical. I can excuse the movie producer’s madness in going to a remote island as ambitiousness, but I find no excuse as to why the crew of the ship went into an unknown forest for just rescuing a girl, how he accepted to encounter a mighty gorilla with only Chloroform and some ropes and finally how the girl thinks that climbing to the top of Empire state building can save the gorilla.


• Every animal in the Skull island seems to be all set to fight until death! From my limited exposure to Discovery channel, my knowledge is that animals don’t hunt unless they are hungry and though they fight with each other over for instance a female, they rarely ever fight till death. But here we see two dinosaurs fighting to death with the King Kong over such a small prey like Ann. Of course the other thing I remembered when I saw the King Kong facing three dinosaurs was how it was exactly analogous to Rajinikanth (or any other mass hero) finishing of ten villains ;-)


• Back in New York the movie’s human hero (forgot his name!) directs King Kong to Ann in the very next scene after wondering why she is not present in the auditorium.

Apart from the above, I did find numerous logical flaws later. Of course the main flaw was that the movie was too lengthy. It could have easily been trimmed of by 30 minutes, mainly in scenes in the forest and also in scenes on the ship. One thing I liked about the movie was the way it started and showed the New York of depression era. The relation between King Kong and Ann though unbelievable was shown quite subtly and some sequences like the skating scene were quite good.

In summary, this is quite a mediocre movie with an unbelievable storyline, entertaining only if you are ready to tolerate a zoo of weird animals and be able to appreciate an extra-human (!) relationship. I really don’t understand why it is getting such good reviews – perhaps a majority of people fit the above description!

Personally, my last two movie outings have been a disaster despite having selected the movies. The last movie was Ghajini. Except for cute romance between Surya and Asin there was really nothing else in the movie. And just like how I feel King Kong misused and overused some good computer graphics, I felt Ghajini had misused and disused an excellent movie concept like Short term memory loss.

This was a post written in some urgency, but I have two posts pending for a long time, which I am putting down just so that I don’t forget to write them.

1. A review (or should I say an overview) of Tamil television serials.


2. A review of three excellent biographical Tamil movies Bharathi, Kamaraj, Iruvar.

A perfect movie?

A couple weeks earlier got a chance to watch Kudaikkul Mazhai, again. Surprisingly it was telecast in Sun TV (I have a big rant against Sun TV, but that would be later). Don’t know whether they wanted to have at least one recent good movie in their collection or bought it by plain mistake! Having started this topic, here is one complaint against Tamil channels – Why do all of them take a good three years or more after the release, to telecast Tamil movies? Especially, when Hindi channels seem to be airing the movies barely one year after the release date. Is it because of some archaic agreement by the movie makers or all the channels plain stupid?

Already I have digressed quite a bit. Returning to the movie in question, I had already reviewed it here. But just wanted to add some deserving praise for it. Because even the second time I saw it I couldn’t find any flaw in it. This is the most perfect (or the perfect?) movie I have seen (of course “Hey Ram” is still my favorite movie). Though perfection may appear to be an elusive goal, it is feasible if the task is very well defined. Which is what this film does – it takes a theme of how fragile a person’s psyche may be and how it should not be offended for fun – and portrays it to near perfection. The movie would appear weird in a first viewing, but the climax justifies the weirdness. In a second viewing, we can see that everything in the movie moves towards the climax.

Just like how a complex but beautiful mathematical proof proceeds by pulling along disparate elements with it to lead to a beautiful result which wouldn’t be possible without any of the constituent elements. Even if the proof is difficult to understand and result doesn’t seem important enough to warrant the hard work, the proof should nevertheless be appreciated for the beautiful way in which it evolves. There lies, in summary, my appreciation for the movie.

Appreciating "Hey Ram"

For quite some time now, “Hey Ram” has been my all-time favorite film. Of course, as I have not got the chance to watch (despite trying earnestly) many of the Tamil classics, this would mean that this is my favorite film from the 90s. However many seem very surprised when I say this. I know few people who like “Hey Ram”, but for most the film means either a confusing and intimidating film or a steamy film with intimate scenes between the lead actors or both. I guess the film is fairly well known (though may not be popular) in Tamil nadu (or should I say Chennai?), as interaction with my peers from there has revealed. However, surprisingly it seems to be little known to people outside Tamil nadu and I got only vague responses like “I guess the film is known for the smooches between Kamal and Rani”, when I tried to ask some people about it. For all I know, it may well have these, but that is not the point of the movie. It pains me when such a good (or great?) film is so unappreciated. Hence this attempt to take stock of what film tries to say, weigh it with all the criticism I know of and compare it with a well known and much more popular series of films – Mani Ratnam’s “Terrorism Trilogy”.

Review of the movie
A summary of the movie can be found in many places in the web, like here. I would tell whatever is necessary for this review. In short the film tells how a well educated, forward minded person becomes a terrorist and almost assassinates Gandhi before realizing the reality. There have been other films on terrorism and religious fundamentalism, but what I like in this movie is that it almost goes inside the psyche of a terrorist and examines why he becomes one, apart from showing how he realizes the truth.

Saket Ram (Kamal Hassan) is an archeologist working in Indus valley sites with his friends Amjad Khan (Shah Rukh Khan) and Lalwani (Saurabh Shukla), when Hindu – Muslim riots break out (during the time of partition). He returns immediately to Calcutta to join his wife Aparna (Rani Mukherji) and spends some happy time with her. However as riots break out in Calcutta, they are attacked by a Muslim mob and while he is tied into inaction, his wife is raped and killed. The intimate scenes between Kamal and Rani and the brutal rape scene are often criticized, but I feel both are important to show how much Saket is affected by this incident. In his fury Saket takes up arms and attacks and kills some Muslims until he regains his self. Later he comes into contact with a Hindu extremist – Sriram Abhyankar (Atul Kulkarni), a Tanjavur Marat. Totally broken he comes back to his home town (Sri Valli Puttur?) in Tamil nadu. Hardly before he returns to normality he is compelled into a second marriage with Maithili (Vasundhra Das), a typical Tamil Brahmin girl. This part of the film shows how he still suffers from the trauma of the events in Calcutta. Unable to forget the events he makes an emotional trip to Calcutta. Here he meets the Abhyankar again, who fuels his hatred towards Muslims and says that the root cause for this (Muslims enjoying privileges) is M.K.Gandhi.

Later he returns to his hometown and stays for sometime there. Now feeling quite stifled by his traditional family and needing a change he goes to Maharashtra(?) with his new wife. There he attends a party given by the Maharajah, who acts as the organizer for Hindu extremist activity. There, brainwashed and under the influence of alcohol he swears on his mission to kill Gandhi as he happens to be one of the two chosen persons to do this. The imagery in this part is a very beautiful one. It shows how confused he is under the influence of drugs. A drunk Saket rushes to have sex with his wife, just when seeing a sexy dance performance. Later he is shown to visualize her like the gun he just picked up before the Maharajah. This hints at how sex and violence are often outlets of suppressed emotions triggered by an event. Some symbolic scenes earlier in the party also show his guilt of having orphaned a young blind Muslim girl (by killing her father in Calcutta riots). The imagery later where he braves a strong wind when aiming with his gun seems to show the struggle between conscience and instinct of revenge. Immediately afterwards, the other chosen person to kill Gandhi – Abhyankar - is critically wounded in a Polo match and he extracts a promise from Saket that he would do the mission whenever told so.

Saket now returns to his hometown, but remains a disturbed man since he knows that he may have to complete his mission at any time. After some time, he receives a telegram, which says him to deal with Gandhi when he stays in Delhi. Saket leaves home without informing anyone and after renouncing worldly ties in Benares comes to Delhi to plot the assassination. It is here that an interesting diversion comes in. Saket goes to a Muslim dominated locality in Delhi to retrieve his gun, which he has misplaced. There he meets his old friend Amjad. After going to the soda factory to retrieve his gun, he confides to his friend of his mission. In the soda factory, because of his gun the Muslims there (who are also armed) consider him as their enemy. After a small fight he escapes from there. However, due to circumstances this leads to a Hindu – Muslim riot in that place. It is interesting to see that first Saket argues with Amjad against Muslims, but later in soda factory he begins to defend Muslims when he sees that it is the Hindus who keep fighting even after a peace offer was made. This event I think shows that there is no one side which is correct in religious riots and they arise because even small things (like Saket taking a gun there) can trigger a riot in a tense situation. The most touching scene of the film was when the police asks Amjad in his death bed to identify the man with the gun (who was Saket himself) who started all this and Amjad replies, holding Saket’s hand – “I only know Ram, my dear brother Ram” – meaning he still sees the real human behind Saket. Amjad dies because of the injuries in the fighting and this causes further guilt to Saket.

Later Saket’s in-law’s find him at Gandhi’s place and assuming he has come to serve Gandhi, introduce him to Gandhi. Further he becomes very familiar with Gandhi as he is hailed as a savior of Muslim community in the recent riots in Delhi. These scenes which show Gandhi are very interesting scenes in the movie. Kamal doesn’t take the easy way out by showing him as a holy person beyond question. In fact in one scene, Gandhi himself is shown to say that he is not a Mahatma. Later in another, he says he is helpless against these Hindu – Muslim riots and only thing he can do is to fast. This is more or less my stand on Gandhi – that he might have done normal mistakes of a human and it is wrong to glorify him as a perfect Mahatma or disparage him as a Hindu-hater or a cunning politician. As Kamal (or is it somebody else?) told in an interview “The greatness of Gandhi lies in the fact that, even if you remove all the halo and popular image from him and dissect him (his actions) to the core, he still comes out a better person than what we would have thought”.

Already disturbed by the riots he started in Delhi and after seeing that Gandhi did not deliberately try to harm anyone, Saket goes to confess to Gandhi – but its too late as Nathuram Godse has just killed Gandhi. Nasserudin Shah in his limited role gives an excellent performance as Gandhi. Shah Rukh does his cameo role quite well. The two heroines have little screen presence, but perform well.

Hence, the movie is a brave attempt which almost succeeds in dissecting the psyche of a terrorist and hence the heart of a terrorist movement. Even good, educated people become terrorists due to certain triggers in a volatile political situation. Hence to prevent terrorism (and religious fundamentalism) would be to maintain a stable and just political situation, with respect for other religions/groups. We should always try to address real inequalities in the society, since when there are not redressed they lead to terrorism. Also people should be made more aware of divisive forces which encourage terrorism. It also tells not to target the family/community of a terrorist – since he becomes one due to circumstances and may not have anything to do with his community.

Also there is one more layer to the movie, in that all this is shown in flashback as old Saket is being taken to the hospital but is stopped on the way because of riots in the anniversary of Babri masjid demolitions (Dec. 6th). As we relate with the story it is clear that we have not learnt from our mistakes - that religious fundamentalism and terrorism are self-defeating and endless exercises in terror. If we want to more interpretation we would always find more layers in this movie – like why the title is “Hey Ram” when Gandhi is not shown to be saying this during his death – whether it is directed towards the two ‘Ram’s in the movie and the real life Ram all of whom plotted to kill Gandhi; the naming of the Saket’s second wife as Mythili (other name for Sita) and quite few other things, but of course we never know whether the director intended this or not.

There are many other subtle things which reveal the meticulousness with which the movie was taken. Like the photo of Hitler in the Maharaja’s palace which shows the Nazi tilt of the then Hindu fundamentalists, postman hesitating to give the telegram directly to Kamal due to untouchability at that time in Tamilnadu, showing the then Maharaja’s hobbies like hunting and Polo etc. The same meticulousness also seems to present in the period sets. The background score by Illayaraja suits the mood of the movie. There are few full-fledged songs, but those that are present justify their presence and are quite good. Nee partha… song is a haunting one.

Criticisms:
I would try to analyze the most common criticisms of the movie that I am aware of.

• Kamal seems to be obsessed of himself and almost every scene has him. He hogs the screen presence.

I regard this to be the most stupid of all criticisms. It is the story of a man who becomes a terrorist – it is told in a biographical way. In fact I don’t remember a scene in which Kamal was not present – because it is the story as experienced by him. I was really surprised when I learn that a supposedly leading critic has dubbed the film as narcissistic – how can he have the same scale for all styles of film making?

• Too much of violence and sex.

I can’t really comment on this as I have seen the film only in television (a good 4-5 times, thanks to Sun TV). But even if it has these, it does seem to be justified for the theme. For me, anything in the film is OK as long as it gels with the story.

• Not easily understandable. Too many English & Hindi dialogs and sound quality is not too good.

I would agree to some extent with this. Though English and Hindi dialogs are required to keep things realistic, Kamal could’ve at least provided sub-titles. I really don’t get why he didn’t do so. Also the sound recording was done as live (on the shooting spot) recording – I don’t see the advantage with this and dialogs are less clear sometimes.

• Kamal has wasted good actors like Girish Karnad, Hema malini with small roles

I don’t get the point of this. Casting is director’s prerogative and as long as they act well we shouldn’t complain.

• Quite complex, symbolic and often multi-layered.

I would agree with this. In fact when I saw it first I understood only half of what I do now and I thought Saket was indeed going to kill Gandhi! It may not be the same for others, but for me it gives joy in understanding and putting together the pieces in such a work – as long as it is honest to itself. Also it quite questionable whether a movie with such a deep message can be made any simpler. If making it simple reduces the depth then it would become like many other mediocre movies.

• It is anti-Hindu/ anti-Muslim/ anit-Congress/ anti-RSS

The very fact is considered to be against so many interests should show that it doesn’t really support any of them. Of course parts of the movie are anti-Muslim or anti-Hindu but we shouldn’t judge a movie without watching it till the end. And of course the end justifies and imparts a strong message.

• Kamal doesn’t act well and appears stony faced thoughout.

I really can’t comment on this, as I think evaluation of acting is a very subjective thing. Yes he does remain quite stone faced – but anybody who is undergoing a serious struggle with his conscience may remain so (of course, some may not remain so and may show all the confusion or clarity in their face).

Comparison with Mani Ratnam’s “Terrorism Trilogy”

None of the films in the trilogy (Roja, Bombay and Uyire (Dil se)) really stand up to “Hey Ram” in the depth of the message or the way it is told. Only Roja comes closest though it is still very far away. Here are individual comments,

• Roja – This movie is quite good through out and in the end it gives the message of how even a terrorist can be reformed and made to see the truth. Of course this only shows the human side of a terrorist (something which “Hey Ram” also does) and this is hardly the method to solve it. Offers some insights into Kashmir Terrorism, but none very deep.


• Bombay – Certainly the worst of the trilogy. When somebody remarks to me that this is a good film on terrorism, I get irritated to no end. The film it self doesn’t offer any new insights into the Bombay riots, except that two rival religious leaders were fuelling it, which is quite well known. At least Mani Ratnam could’ve avoided the preachy climax – where Hindu and Muslim children join hands, just after a riot. How realistic is this? Anyway, what is the point – how is this going to solve terrorism? Endings like these encourage the thought that religious harmony will magically develop.


• Uyire (Dil Se) – A confusing movie in some ways and ‘poetic’ in some ways. At least Mani Ratnam doesn’t turn preachy here. It can be taken to show the ever present struggle between love (of all kinds) and terror and how sometimes even love can’t stop a terrorist. Quite a good one for this theme.

(If some of my readers are aware of really good contemporary films on such topics, do tell me.)

Hence my point that despite better in many ways then some of the most popular films in terrorism, this movie is sadly very un-appreciated and under rated.

Anniyan - a bit of everything!

Anniyan had all the usual flaws that I would find in a Shankar’s movie. Song sequences which have almost no connection with the story and use unnecessarily expensive gimmicks, noticeable lapses in logic and unnecessary drumming in of the message by what is usually a public appearance by the hero. Despite all this I should say I liked the movie as a whole.

Though this movie is thematically quite similar to his earlier vigilante movies (Gentleman, Mudhalvan and Indian) there is difference in the message he wants to convey. Instead of blaming it all on corruption and politicians, Shankar urges us to look at ourselves to see whether we are all law abiding citizens who do our work well. It is this message which is quite close to my heart. I have myself seen quite silly and irritating acts by people like spitting on the streets and always wondered why they do such avoidable acts. Shankar’s point that only such small individual mistakes lead to a huge mistake is one worthy of note. I guess there are very few movies which have tackled this kind of subject – “Unnal mudiyum thambi” is one I remember right away, though it tackled it in a completely different way. Vikram as “rules” Ramanujam seems to overplay a bit, but the rest of the movie is also based on this characterization.

Second thing I like in the movie is Vikram’s performance. He has got his best chance after Pithamagan and used it almost very well. (SPOILER WARNING – for the rest of the paragraph). Playing three totally different characters is always a challenge. He excels in this, especially in the two scenes where he continuously changes between the three characters. Many people (atleast in blogs) seemed to dislike Remo, but I think he was quite romantic – in fact I haven’t seen Vikram in such a totally romantic role. Another frequent complaint is that all these three characters are overplayed. I think the characterization is by itself in that way. Only because Ramanujam is such a rigid, un-emotive and physically timid person, there exists a real case for Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD). Another thing I like in the movie is the innovative way in which Shankar has used Garuda Purana mythology. Our directors need to involve more of our mythology or folklore while making thrillers, instead of just relying on overplayed sound effects (perhaps effect of seeing Kaal!). Of course Shankar seems to have used MPD to push in what would be otherwise unbelievable fight scenes. But still they, especially the one in the martial arts school, are quite amusing. And there are other lapses of logic like Anniyan who is a virtual personality arriving at a scheduled time to address people. But the pace of the movie is good enough that most won’t notice these.

The songs proved to be the biggest letdown of all. Of course I had heard that Harris Jayaraj’s music for this was no where as good as earlier Shankar movies (which were all done by AR. Rahman). Shankar has spoiled it more by not connecting the songs to the story. Suffice it to say that a fairly serious story with a message has all the five songs as romantic songs (except may be Kaadhal Yanai). Some songs had good music (like Kaadhal Yanai) and some had good (or amusing) picturization, but mostly they didn’t gel with each other or with the story. Also the heroine Sada doesn’t appear good in such exotic locales - she looks better in a simple dress. It is always irritating to see a director like Shankar not relying strong enough on his story and resorting to silly gimmicks in songs in the name of technological advancements. A frequent excuse is that movies (at least nowadays) should have some explicit commercial element, but I guess this has long been disproved with the success of directors like Selvaraghavan and Bala, where songs are blended with the movie (and I am only considering directors who have been consistently successful in box-office).

The climax was quite stylish, but at least I was expecting it. However it doesn’t gel very well with the main psychiatric concept behind the movie. There seems to be quite extreme opinions in the media and blogs about the movie, with some hailing it as great advance in Tamil movies and others saying that its nothing more than a recycling of Shankar’s earlier movies. I think it’s neither of them. On the whole, this is a very entertaining movie with a sugarcoated, but relevant message (though I believe that sugarcoating a message also reduces its effectiveness).

Comparing two pairs of movies

While idly looking through my blog I discovered that my last 6 posts were all book reviews or about books. Suddenly I realized that my blog was becoming too bookish for even myself and hence this post on few movies. I have seen quite few good old Tamil movies of late and wanted to comment on them, but that would be on a different post. Since I like comparing, I would comment on two pairs of films – similar in their themes, but starkly different in the way they were produced, one of them is ‘big’ and the other is ‘small’.

To keep the discussion as global as possible I would start with a recent Hindi movie – “Kaal”. Boasting some leading actors, good locations and a ‘different’ script this was, I guess, released with quite a lot of hype. But through out the movie I could only pity the technicians who had worked for the good locations, different camera angles and background score (which though too loud, would have been good if used properly) on essentially trying to prop up a weak story and screenplay. In fact, I feel that if all these technical elements were under played or at least limitedly used the movie would have been more tolerable. There was absolutely no scene in the movie which was truly terrifying and there was not even much thrill. Of course I didn’t know who the murderer was, but I didn’t care! And the ending was as insipid as it could be - a murder mystery conveniently blaming a ghost!

The sharp turning camera angles, the unnecessarily loud background score and the skimpily clad ladies (why do you wear such a dress in a forest - to get more mosquito bites?) were all constant irritations. It was the Hindi movie I was seeing after quite some time and I thoroughly regretted the choice. More irritating was that it was being hyped as a new generation Hindi movie! (I had felt the same about “Bhoot” though to a much lesser extent). The movie seems to have deservedly flopped in box office, proving that people can’t be cheated too much by glitz and glamour (of course they can be cheated to some extent, which is proved by the success of “big budget” masala movies).

Coming to this movie’s counterpart it is a relatively little known Tamil movie called “Whistle”. I saw this in television recently. I think it was released very normally and succeeded to some extent. Now I don’t claim this as a classic thriller movie. But it was thrilling and thrilling till the end. And it didn’t have to resort to stupid techniques like a ghost being a murderer (in fact this is ridiculed in the movie). Surprisingly, for all those who regard genre movies very highly, this wasn’t a pure thriller – but had a college group and romance as a background. I can’t comment much on the romance part since I missed something like first 30 minutes of the movie and anyway most of the characters were dead in the end! But it didn’t obstruct the thrill at all. The songs did spoil the thrill somewhat and at least two could have been cut down (there are also some nice and popular songs in the movie). But the last half an hour or so was totally focused and thrilling.

What I expect in a thriller movie is that the identity of the killer (or any aggressor) should be a surprise not easily guessable but still should be logically justifiable (match with all the clues in the movie). This was quite well done here, since any one person being killer would be too difficult here, two people are shown as killers. And their motive is justified by a rather chilling flashback, which also justifies the title and which reminds me of “Kudaikkul Mazhai”, but that is a digression. In “Kaal” this has no meaning since the aggressor is a ghost who can do anything! Sound effects are very well used in the movie, with something happening in silence producing the most shock. All the actors were new, but did seem to perform their roles well. The director(s) are JD-Jerry, faintly familiar, but I don’t recall how. In short, another “small” movie which wins hands down over a “big” movie.

My next comparison would be much more critical and may not be liked by many Shankar fans. It is between his movie, the over-hyped “Boys” (which did very average in the box office) and “Thullavatho Ilamai” (title is hard to translate literally, but one try is Springing youth), which was a relatively unknown film when released, but became a huge hit. Both are concerned about pangs of growing up, difficulties a set of youth face and the how they finally overcome all this. Both were accused as being almost soft porn movies. But there ends the similarity. Now I would like to exclude one factor from this comparison – sex in both these movies. Personally I believe that, sex is shown in a much more subtle and mature way in “Thullavatho Ilamai” than “Boys”, but this may be wrong since I saw the latter in theatre and the former in television.

“Boys” shows the travails faced by the youngsters when they run away from home, but finally they are heroes and hence triumph in a short time after facing all the hurdles. The love story here is quite silly, being based on such silly scenes like hero running naked in Anna salai for proving his love and earthquake helping the lovers to unite! But still they are the hero and heroine and must unite and live happily in the end. In short I feel it romanticizes infatuation as love and chance success as success gained by hard work. How many singers have come up so quickly in life and how many of us have such special talents like singing? Basing such things to show that a group of runaway teenagers are successful only shows the eagerness of the director to have a happy ending, even if it is unrealistic. I dislike Shankar’s movies mainly for these – in fact I would say “Indian” was the only good movie he has done. “Mudhalvan” and “Gentleman” are movies with a good theme but messed up throughout and in climax, respectively. The other three including “Boys” don’t even warrant a mention, as they have nothing more than an average movie.

In contrast “Thullavatho Ilamai” is starkly realistic. Here also youngsters run away from home and get to discover themselves and the world. But both these experiences are not pleasant, so they return back to their homes – and the movie effectively ends there. This also has lead pair who are initially friends, but due to their parents’ suspicion and due to their close stay when running away, have sex. But the movie clearly shows that this is the result of their momentary lust and hence they live as before when they return home. In fact to add emphasis it is shown that the boy, not wanting to face her, left the school and hasn’t met her since. And the rest of the youngsters stay in their homes and come up in life the hard way. In fact the climax of hero and heroine not meeting ever after surprised me, as I thought the climax of a commercially successful Tamil movie can’t be so realistic. On the down side, the movie happens to be a bit didactic with some messages for both parents and children (not that Boys didn’t have this). The movie blames the parents for most of the faults, but that is justifiable for the parents shown. Though it doesn’t have the glitz of “Boys”, it has a very good musical score by Yuvan Shankar Raja and of course direction and screenplay are most impressive of all. Kasturiraja is the director, though it is said that his son, Selvaraghavan, now a popular director played more than a helping hand in this. The lead pair was unknown then, but now Danush is a leading hero.

One reason for matured handling here could be that these youngsters are school final year students and are hence younger than even those shown in “Boys”. But even this can’t justify the totally unrealistic manner in which script is handled in “Boys”. As an aside, I finally confirmed that the beautiful song “Theenda Theenda” was in fact during love making of the lead pair. It was of course cut off in television, but I got the initial music in the scene. Without doubt, it is the most decent, subtle and pleasant song I have heard for a love making scene. No wonder that when I am asked as to what is wrong in showing sex and glamour in movies, my only refrain is to show them only when important to the story and in an enjoyable and not repelling manner.

There are some more movies on which I want to comment and I would list them down so that at least I can remember them – K.B’s “Arangettram” – though I didn’t see this fully, it was already bold enough to shake me, “Pagalil Oru Iravu” - a good climax, K.B’s “Sindhu Bairavi” – a good but controversial movie, Bharathiraja’s “Padhinaaru Vaidhinile” - a good movie worth its reputation as a classic. I am trying desperately to watch classics like “Nizhalgal”, “Oru Nadigai Nadagam Parkiraal”(An actress sees a play - what a title! It's self-referential!) and all Jayakanthan story movies, “Mogamul”, but I am not able to rent or even buy these VCDs or DVDs in Bangalore (or are they available in Chennai?). Can somebody help me please!!

On Kudaikkul Mazhai and other movies

I had seen quite a few movies a recently and I thought I can comment on a few. One that I was most impressed by was “Kudaikkul Mazhai”(Rain within Umbrella), scripted, directed, produced and performed by Parthipan. I was expecting something different from this film, but nothing prepared me for what I saw. Given that most of the film took place in an old bungalow, I thought it would be similar to either “Kadhal Kondean” or “Julie Ganapathy”. But I couldn’t be more wrong. The story shows how a sensitive man is very much disturbed when a girl pretends to love him for a candid camera show. It then shows how he is afflicted with schizophrenic delusion and from then on proceeds to the rest of the story. I wouldn’t like to spoil the suspense by revealing anything, but there is a sudden twist at the end, which puts the entire story at a different perspective. But there are numerous clues for this throughout the film, for instance, that the rest of the film has a surreal feel and also that heroine seems to behave in a way that is strangely ideal, as the hero would like her to. Well I guess I have already revealed quite a bit! The twist is some ways similar to one in “The sixth sense” though the story has nothing to do with it. The dealing of illusions is in some vague way similar to “A beautiful mind”, though when comparing with that, this story ends where that really begins. Though I am comparing with other films for their style, the content and presentation is startlingly fresh and I have certainly not seen this in any other film before. Parthipan builds the film with various strange incidents which finally get justified only by the climax. There are numerous symbolic incidents too, a few of which went over my head! But what astounded me was, the professionalism displayed in the film. There is not a single incident, a single scene which is wasted and inserted for commercial sake. Many describe the brother character of hero as unnecessary but on retrospect (again after the climax) it is very much necessary, though those dialogues could have been cut down. Parthipan has not compromised anything for commercial sake, and if the film is intellectually challenging he lets it to be so. With only two main characters the performances are important and both, especially Parthipan have done very well. In all it’s a refreshingly different, moderately entertaining film, even if it strains on your brain. I guess the film hasn’t done well commercially which is not very surprising, though I hope Parthipan continues to take such films!

I also saw “Nandha” directed by Bala, for the second time. This film, which remade Surya as an actor, is quite somber, mostly about relationship between son and mother and ends with mother poisoning her son and killing him and herself. Most films would be clarified on seeing them for a second time, but in this I only got more confused. It is always quite difficult get any intended message out of Bala’s movies and so just as I considered “Sethu” to be only a new kind of love tragedy, I was considering this film as an emotional tragedy. But I did notice something else in this viewing. It seems to show the conflict between violence and non-violence. Rajkiran, who professes violence to right any wrongs and that we are our own god is at one extreme. The other protagonist is, strangely, silent but much more effective. Surya’s mother is appalled at the effect of his violence, like her husband getting killed or about the plight of Rajkiran’s daughter (at the end of the film). Surya is torn between the two, and chooses the path of violence initially though in the end he willingly and knowingly submits to his mother poisoning him. This makes me wonder whether Bala resolves the conflict towards non-violence, though this is too vague an indicator. What impressed me most was that many important twists in the movie are explained by only one dialogue or none at all– just the barely sufficient, no over emphasis or theatrics. For instance, in the climax, the fact that Surya willingly takes the poison gives a new interpretation for the film. But this is shown without even a single dialogue. Surya takes in the food, after tasting it and finding it to be poisoned looks confused one moment, then he looks at his mother with a bitter look which slowly translates to a knowing glance and he finally takes up the rest of the food. This turned out to be the most poetical scene in the film. This is what I consider to be the hallmark of any Bala film. The most important scene which justifies the whole film is dealt with only subtle emotions and no dialogues and no theatrics. Whether it is Vikram in “Sethu” who silently disregards his relatives and goes back to the asylum, not necessarily because he is mentally retarded but because he wants seclusion, or Vikram in “Pithamagan” who disregards his lover and hence the entire society in a single gesture and walks back, or Surya in this movie, Bala confidently rests his entire film on a few powerful gestures, instead of wasting time on lengthy dialogues and theatrics, something which even famed directors like Mani Ratnam don’t do consistently, as was demonstrated in his latest film “Aayitha Ezhthu”. My AE and Pithamagan reviews can be found here and here.

Though this post is already too long, I have to comment about a few more films. Both had revenge as the theme and hence I shouldn’t have liked them. But they gave quite convincing reasons and the presentation was also good and so I should accept that, regardless of the message, they were an entertaining watch. One was “Varnajalam” (Play of colours). This is a fairly recent film and Srikanth had done a grey character very well. This is a story of a personal revenge which is executed coldly and clinically. The story is told quite well, though it appeared a bit confusing to me, probably since I wasn’t watching the film attentively. What impressed me was that there were no insertions to the climax like a new love relation for the hero – it just ended with him taking revenge. However the film sagged in the middle and comedy track by Karunas was a damp squib. The second was “Sabash”, with Parthipan as the hero. I actually started watching this after sometime from the start, but it was quite interesting. This shows how, a husband avenges a person indirectly responsible for her wife’s death by framing him in the same case. There was a constant suspense as to whether Parthipan’s methods would be exposed and how he deals with various challenges. All the actors had performed well. This was also quite professional with no unnecessary stuff. I think these two films were not noticed much, though I don’t know the reason. They were focused on their theme and were quite entertaining, and frankly I don’t expect anything more from a film.

Quite a contrast from the films I have described above was “Minnale”, which was also remade/dubbed in Hindi as something whose acronym is RTDM. This is directed by Gautam who later directed “Kaaka Kaaka” and frankly I couldn’t believe that it was the same person who directed both. I have always believed that a director stamps his identity on all his films, but here I am wrong. Virtually everything that is good in KK is messed up here. One instance is the picturization of the songs. Nice music by Harris Jayaraj and good lyrics has been messed up in the film. Of course the script is itself quite weak and the climax was the expected one. The film also has numerous logical flaws, but I won’t waste time & space by discussing that. Either Gautam must have learned a lot in the time in between the two films or he must be quite inconsistent in the application of his skills and I hope it is the former .

On some Vikatan books and director Bala

An interesting and absorbing series has just come to an end in the Tamil weekly Ananta Vikatan. Authored by writer S.Ramakrishnan and titled ‘ThunaiEzhuthu’ (Supporting Letter), the series was one of the best ones I had read in magazines. It is a series of essays focusing on various topics sometimes quite abstract. The author usually starts of with a personal incident, but soon goes to a deeper and somewhat philosophical interpretation of the topic that is usually quite touching and also thought provoking. Hopefully, Vikatan should be publishing this as a book as they do for most of their series articles. Then it would be a must buy for me.

Meanwhile, one of the books already published by Vikatan which would be good buy is Evan thaan Bala (He is Bala), a semi-auto biographical account by director Bala. It recently came as a series in the same magazine and I read most of the parts. Atleast according to me, it is a very frank account of his life by Bala. To those who are not aware of Bala, he is currently one of top directors of Tamil cinema. Many adore his direction style and some others, I guess, hate it. The reason may be that all his 3 films so far have been quite disturbing and end in tragedy. Still his first film (Sethu remade in Hindi as Tere Naam) was a blockbuster and others were also hits. Though regarded by many to be on the same league as Mani Ratnam, his direction style is quite different. For one, he shuns any form of glamour, which may be results in an added emphasis on violence in most of his films. Interestingly, I have observed that many die hard fans of Mani detest Bala. Frankly, I like both their films though they are very different. I was intrigued by the weirdness of Bala’s films and started reading this series to know more about this. This book could be quite inspirational to many, as Bala describes his transformation from reckless, uncared for and rowdy youth to one of the top directors in Tamil cinema. Both the books are published by Vikatan Publications.