Two Great Films, One Simple Message

Dasavatharam and Vaaranam Ayiram, two of the biggest films of 2008 were the toast of the Vijay awards, an award function that is being designed, promoted and conducted like an Oscar of Tamil films. Kamal Hassan bagged every important acting award, understandably considering that he donned almost every possible character that is seen in the film. And other technical awards went to Vaaranam Ayiram, the film that was made by the director for his own personal consumption, which means not meant for general public but decided nevertheless to release it, considering the fact that he could make some money on the bargain.

Such scathing remarks on the two films require explanation: Especially when entire Tamil Nadu seems to have gone berserk over them.



First Vaaranam Ayiram: A few questions: What is the relevance of the title with respect to the story? The mother character’s recital of the Andal’s verse in the end remains a mere tokenism and even evoked an unintended laughter. Next: What is the profession of the father, the pivotal character around whom the story is supposed to revolve (but actually revolves around the son)? Why was he struggling to pay for his son’s education? What was his contribution to his son emotionally, intellectually, or even financially? What is the relevance of the lengthy rescue operation in the 'climax' with respect to the story? How does the lengthy detailing of the son’s second romance establish his affection towards his father? There are more questions but it is too tiring to list them out. Tiring for both the writer as well as the reader. If you want a good film about fatherhood, try Thavamai Thavamirundu.



One phrase used by the review in The Outlook magazine sums up Dasavatharam: ‘Prosthetic Torture.’ If anything additional is needed another review by this blogger should help. If neither does, try watching the DVD next time with a condition that you will not fast forward any part!

That these two films received such rave reviews from the media as well as industry is a matter of wondrous speculation. On second thoughts, it’s not because, rooted in sycophancy, the industry is long learned to worship false gods. It’s not just with the industry but a cultural phenomenon because as a society, we graze around superficially and hence lack credible knowledge. We worship Karunanidhi as the Tamil icon when not many critically know the depth of his Tamil knowledge. If you're curious, it's actually very poor.

Besides, there’s a general lack of self-esteem that prevents people from criticising established icons. For instance, what is your achievement in life that you set out to criticise Dasavatharam? This means that unless you act in hundred films, direct a few, and win some awards, you are not eligible to launch scathing attack on something which you believe genuinely inferior.

That reviewing is an independent activity removed of any past achievements of an artist has to be understood. That reviewing is neither an obsequious ode nor a supercilous criticism has to be established. That reviewing is not ‘Hollywood is the best and Indian films are the worst’ attitude should be conveyed through a genuine approach. Finally, reviewing is nothing but the honest record of an audience’s movie watching experience, of an audience who knows a thing or two about movies, of an audience who has grown sick of online reviews.

Hence this blog.