Why this Hypnotic State, di?

If something or someone does manage to occupy your thoughts, the morning after, then it must have been good. I recently watched a movie called Mayakkam Enna, where the protogonist ( played by Dhanush) is a wildlife photographer, immensely passionate about his work, but is taken for a ride. He loves, he hurts, he regrets, he repents and he is incapable. People cannot understand him and he does not realise that.  His angst, passion and rage at his inability to succeed takes a turn when he falls for his best friends girlfriend. A girl who understands his frustrations and is there for him through thick and thin, until the very end.

 

The movie is highly performance driven, with the protogonists occupying much of screen time and doing justice to every minute of it. Though there are gaping anachronistic holes, I am sure most people would not notice it or at least tuck it under the pillow, while gushing over the performances. I thought the background music and the cinematography were strong supporting pillars for the motion picture.

 

The movie was layered in that  the story was not linear and during the course of the narrative, is peeled to reveal different aspects. For example, the movie starts out as Karthik, the photographer lamenting about his life and the new woman who comes into it, eventually we come to relate to the story from the girls perspective, and then you start understanding Karthik's relationships with his friends and then, towards the end, there is a study of the relationship between the siblings.

On the contrary, the ending was quite abrupt,as  there was a lot invested in studying and analysing Karthik's misery and then suddenly, he is a world famous photographer and all ended well. I thought it sort of made the whole struggle of the protogonist's wife sort of insipid.

 

What I find exciting is the fact that the story is quite true to life. These are some of the people you might meet in daily life. Flawed, emotional, bitter, concerned, opportunistic individuals who could be be crossing your path on a daily basis. This movie unravels like a book and actually makes you relate to the character in every possible way. The hero is the asshole and he does realise it towards the end, but that does not elevate immediately to the “ I think I am a much better man and you have to love me now” status.

 

10

This is all over the internet. If any one is capable of something like this..Its only him.

The much awaited trailer of KamalHaasan's Dasavatharam. I couldnt resist putting this one up. Its only increasing my expectations a gazillion times.

Chak De Script Execution!!

The horrible indulgences contributive to a successful day wasted leave you high and dry. Saturday was spent watching movies, I managed to see Half Nelson, the DVD was lying around for a very long time.
Half Nelson is the story about an idealistic high school teacher in the Bronx, whose unorthodox ways of teaching 8th grade history inspires his students to think outside the box, rather than succumb to the conventional mores. His personal battles with drug addiction, and the subsequent discovery of the issue by a student leads to him striking an unconventional friendship with her. The film explores the relationship between these individuals, one, whose idealism head butts against stark reality, and the other whose circumstances make her choose the easier way out. A very performance driven show, engrossing albeit a little lethargic at times.

Another movie I wanted to watch was Chak De India, due to various reasons. Firstly, it was a sports movie, and we dont make those kind of movies in India. Lagaan was a fine effort, but it was more of using the game to settle personal conflicts, rather than focusing on the game itself. This movie concentrated on women's hockey, had Shahrukh Khan, in one of his unconventional avatars ala Swades and Paheli, and was helmed by a director whose previous work was great cinema. I was skeptical about the commercial viability of the product due to the very reasons mentioned above, but I was pleasantly suprised and wrong.

Beyond good performances, astute direction and skilled editing, the real winner is the execution of the script. The script itself is cliched, with the underdog team rising like the proverbial phoenix from the ashes, ably guided by a mentor who battles his own personal demons. Here we have Kabir Khan, whose failure to net a critical goal in an India- Pakistan final, leads to bribery allegations and accusations of being a traitor. He leaves the game and the world he knows for 7 years only to return to coach the womens national team to win the world championships. What makes his approach different is the fact that he does not do this to reinstate his image or as a personal vendetta. All he does is to emphasize the fact of playing as one team, transcending physical, regional and emotional boundaries, even if it involves a lot of stand-offs, altercations and rebellion. He wins, and in the process reclaims everything that has been taken away from him.

The script touches upon sensitive issues without being preachy, and at the same time doesnt trivialize them either. The story did have its own iota of stereotypes like the chauvinistic federation officials, arrogant boyfriends et al but they are just minor aberrations to an otherwise deftly executed script. Also, nobody knew or cared what the protagonist did during his 7 year oblivion nor was there time for unwarranted sidetracks, thereby not straying from the linear path chartered by the script.

I honestly believe that only a good script can salvage pride for a movie, as no amount of quality performance, able direction or star power can make a good movie into something that will stand the test of time. Purists might feel that the whole purpose of entertainment is not justified in the process, and thats where script execution steps in. The whole world loves a story well told!!

of webs and tears..

Spiderman 3 opened last week to mixed reviews. It looks like the critics have unanimously agreed to the fact that this movie is the weakest of the trilogy. The box office speaks otherwise

Now that the mania has eased out a bit, heres my 2 cents. The critical and public response to the third installment has been see-sawing. People either loved it or lumped it. NG lost all respect for the spidey franchaise and I am not sure whether GK slept through the movie or walked out of the theatre.

I have a moderate opinion on the flick. On the minuses, the plot was a bit shallow, the characters underdeveloped and a very disengaging story line. The special effects and the action sequences were obviously spectacular. Harry Osborne had more to do this time and his character was one of the better written parts.

The reason why NS and I felt this movie did not go well with the critics was that there was too much male melodrama involved in it. The main theme of the movie was about forgiveness. All the main characters in the movie, including spiderman have caused grief and hurt to others. The realization hits some of them early and some of them late. Naturally, the tears flow. So we have Spidey, Sandman, Harry Osborne and MJ (thats a no brainer) draining their tear glands in tandem. This was a sore point to a lot of people who might have perceived their superhero to be Leonidas's clone, bellowing his gut out. Unfortunately, Peter Parker just happens to be another kid next door.

More Spidey Trivia...

Tobey Maguire almost missed becoming part of Spiderman 2 when a debilitating injury to his back while filming Sea Biscuit caused him to pull out. Even though Maguire was signed for a 3 film contract at the beginning of spider-man, Sony was forced to reconsider a new lead for spiderman-2. They zeroed down on Jake Gyllenhal for the part and even commenced negotiations with him. However Maguire recovered and was able to shoot for Seabiscuit and then for spider-man 2, as a result of which the shoot was postponed to commence from April 2003 instead of Jan 2003.

Also, Spider-man 2 was initally called The Amazing Spider-man, from the title of the comic the story was based upon.

Spidey Trivia..

Here's some Spidey trivia, Considering I just cant seem to get enough of Peter Parker, his arachnid alter-ego and the world he knows.

The spiderman franchaise is directed by Sam Raimi, whose monumental claim to fame is having directed the cult classics Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2 and Evil Dead 3. Even though Raimi directed some other movies like "for the love of the game", "the quick and the dead" and "the gift", he is still remembered for the horror movie franchaise. Evil Dead brings another name to our minds, the prosthetic chainsaw wielding, saw gun toting protagonist Ash Williams-one of the most celebrated icons of horror movies, played to perfection by B movie cult star Bruce Campbell.

Bruce Campbell and Sam Raimi are childhood friends and go a long way. In fact, Bruce Campbell was one of the executive producers of Evil Dead. In both the spiderman movies, Bruce Campbell has important cameos which help propel the story forward.

In Spiderman, when Peter Parker decides to make use of his newly acquired powers to participate in a wrestling match, he christens himself as the human spider. Bruce Campbell plays the role of the announcer, who calls his name too lame and introduces Peter as the Amazing Spiderman.

In Spiderman 2, Bruce Campbell plays the role of a snooty usher named Dylan Reid who refuses to let Peter to watch Mary Jane's performance and criticizes his appearance, thereby causing a rift in their relationship. Bruce was proud of this role stating that he was the only villain who thwarted spidey and got away with it.

It looks like Bruce Campbell has another important cameo in Spiderman 3, Lets see what he comes up with this time.