Between Reviews: Flipping the audience the bird
FLIPPING THE AUDIENCE THE BIRD
MAY 18, 2008 - WATCHING THE NEW VIJAY RELEASE, KURUVI, I got the disconcerting feeling that the screenwriter had accosted me in a dark alley, pumped my veins full of Sodium Pentothal, interrogated me on the things about Tamil cinema I loathe the most, and based this entire film on his assiduously taken notes. There is not one scene here that did not make me shake my head and pray to the cinema gods that, please, let this be the last time I’m subjected to this particular cliché. Or that one. Or the one earlier. (Needless to say, the cinema gods never, ever listen to me. Otherwise, there’d never have been a Kuruvi in the first place.)
Take, for instance, the cliché about a father swearing that his son will, one day, avenge the wrongs done unto him – a plot point that comes to fruition here when said son bashes in the villain’s skull with the very piece of rock that was once hurled at his father, still congealed with the father’s blood. There are two ways to handle this sort of thing – though, when it comes to Tamil cinema, there, really, is only one way (the alternative being to write this development as a Main Hoon Na-style spoof, which we don’t do here), and that way is to treat the film in all seriousness.
For, on the face of it, Kuruvi is based on a serious story, with our hero being a near-mythical saviour of slaves in a quarry – one of whom poses to him a question that needs no answering: “Engala kaapaatha vandha saami nee dhaane?” (Aren’t you the deity that’s come to rescue us?) – in the manner that another near-mythical masala-movie hero, one named Indiana Jones, freed the slaves shackled to a Temple of Doom. Now, the latter film had its share of hijinks and pratfalls and romantic dalliances too, but when push came to shove, when the formidable Dr. Jones reached his destination, we willingly suspended our disbelief because of a number of reasons.
Because it was thrilling. Because there was danger. Because the action sequences left your heart in your mouth. Because there was a villain who looked capable of inflicting serious harm on the good guys. And because the hero himself seemed to believe that this was one adventure he may not make it out of (even if we, the audiences, knew better). But in Kuruvi, Vijay is so cocky, so self-possessed, so much the Tamil Film Hero, that when he’s lined up for identification before the villain – he’s on camera; the villain is watching the lineup on his computer monitor – the scene is treated like a bit of slapstick. There’s even a nya-na-na-na routine that Vijay does, diffusing every element of tension. And if he doesn’t take this villain seriously, why should we?
So you have to wonder if this is what the masala movie has come to: 100% protagonist, 0% antagonist. We don’t have a problem with the hero being Superman-like, able to leap over tall buildings in a single bound. That sort of thing comes with the territory. And we’re not going to question his ability to dispatch into oblivion any number of henchmen, all of whom possess biceps at least twice as large as the hero’s. That’s a given, too, in these films. But why not involve us with the narrative, the way this very director, Dharani, did with this very hero in his earlier Ghilli? Why not thrill us, exhilarate us, confound us and dazzle us to the extent that raising such questions becomes an impossibility – at least while watching the movie?
Kuruvi does none of this, and so we’re free to linger on the other clichés – because you’ve got to find some way of amusing yourself if the movie doesn’t do the job for you, right? So let’s move on to how heroines are treated in these films. To label the character played by Trisha a bimbo would be to give sufficient cause for the bimbos of the world to unite in a class-action suit – but, again, that’s par for the course. No one would accuse Kate Capshaw either – she accompanied Indiana Jones on his adventure, and functioned as both comic sidekick and romantic foil – of possessing an iota of brain matter.
But the cliché that gets to me is that the heroine has to be shown her rightful place in the male universe. She’s seated on the flight that’s to take her to Chennai – in search of the hero, whom she does not even recognise, but then we’ve established that considered thought processes are beyond her ken – when Vijay, who’s trying to get to the seat next to hers, stamps her feet. She howls in pain, but instead of apologising or extending his sympathies, our hero merely remarks that she had it coming because her legs were splayed wide. (A true woman, apparently, sits with her feet demurely tucked under her chair.)
And instead of retaliating, this girl – born and brought up in Malaysia (which is all East, but for the purposes of this film, an embodiment of the exotic, decadent West) – opts to stay silent. But it must be said that my picking up cudgels on her behalf is a purely academic exercise. While watching the film, I doubt I’d have cared even if she, instead of the villain, had wound up at the receiving end of that blood-congealed rock. Whether upon being forced to marry some gangster she does not care about, or on receiving news that Vijay has been killed, she reacts the same way: with a glazed indifference that suggests she’d rather be out shopping for shoes. Then again, maybe that’s what you do when you’re stuck in a movie like this.
Copyright ©2008 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
And if he doesn’t take this villain seriously, why should we?…eggjactly !!!
I thot you would make a reference to the scene just before the interval.the scene where our kuruvi looks up at a parunthu and take a long jump(approx. half a km) almost reaching a train. But I am glad that there wasnt any plane or jet on air at that time..imagine !!!
I thought Gilli itself, as a masala film, was mediocre at best, with Vijay’s pathetic attempts at comedy falling flat and the narrative being anything but fresh(not because it was a remake but because there were other successful films earlier which had been there and done that) and the climax fight was a joke. Dhool’s climax was probably more rousing.
I bet these are the days when you sometimes wonder you are in the wrong profession, having to not only watch but also write about Kuruvi
The funny thing is I keep reading about red-carpet premieres these days for every junk movie that gets released, obviously copied from the West.
To arrive dressed up well, walk on the red carpet and than watch….THIS?
vimal: But I did make a reference to that scene. “We don’t have a problem with the hero being Superman-like, able to leap over tall buildings in a single bound”
Vijay: I had fun with Ghilli (as they spelt it). And no — no second thoughts about career, man. Let’s see. Three hours of bad-film watching plus a few hours of writing about it VERSUS going to an office every day and having to put up with chit-chat from vague colleagues and having to sit through (shudder) PowerPoint presentations… There’s no contest, really
In my enthusiasm to get caught up with the latest, I too saw that gem Kuruvi. Please don’t even compare this to Gilli or Billi. I did not mind that compared to this crap. I could go on and on as to how much I enjoyed the superman stunt or the one where he comes out of the manhole or the one where he generates enough momentum inside a sunken lift to actually kick himself out or how Trisha and He completely take over someone else wedding with their singing and dancing. Of course I have not mentioned the webcam which seems to be present every where or how he throws Suman on to a train (Suman deserved it and probably a whole lot of people). But, what is the use of us people wailing. All people associated with this movie would be laughing their way to the bank. And the scriptwriter will get one more single sheet of paper to pen down the next full story including all the dialogue! And we will gather to moan…once more!!
@Dharu–”the scriptwriter will get one more single sheet of paper to pen down the next full story including all the dialogue”–ya,a page which has the heading ‘in not more than 200 words’..
and in kuruvi, the entire bag chasing scene was copy pasted from The French Kiss(which was pasted long ago in Pyar to hona hi tha and later on in Priyadarshans Vettom). so what exactly did the scriptwriters do???
the only relieving part in the movie for me was Saranyas performance..
Dharu: “But, what is the use of us people wailing…” Only the aadhangam-n-tiya?
Apparently, the people behind the film are *not* walking all the way to the bank. “Oothikichu” is one of the kinder words I’ve heard from some film folks. Of course, there’s no way to really verify how true this is…
You wrote what I thought
Tight script, why? Cause, they have stretched the band of reality (even that of movies) so much that it is taut to breaking point.
why do they bother making such movies?
mumimma: Quite an elastic metaphor, that
And why do they bother making these movies? Because the big stars don’t really experiment very much, that’s why. I think the Kollywood term for this is “feeding the market.”
Re: “But why not involve us with the narrative, the way this very director, Dharani, did with this very hero in his earlier Ghilli?”
Why? Perhaps because Ghilli was scene-by-scene remake of Mahesh Babu’s Okkadu, and maybe this film is, um, original?
If this is “feeding the market” someone get Morgan Spurlock on the line and commission a documentary quickly!
Q: But the guy’s earlier films did work - at least on the big screen.
Deepauk M: Oh the idea of Spurlock rampaging through Kollywood
HaHa! Good one Mr.B, it’s rare to read your take on a Tamil Movie,especially another Vijay Assembly Line fodder for the C and D class cinemas. How this Charisma-Free Rajini wannabe with a perennially sourpuss expression boasts the second largest Fan Club in Tamilnadu (apparently) after the Superstar will forever remain one of life’s eternal mysteries.
“But the cliché that gets to me is that the heroine has to be shown her rightful place in the male universe” -Spot On! Chalk this attitude, alongside pairing up Geriatrics with girls fresh off their teens, as key factors keeping Tamil Movies warmly coccooned in the Dark Ages.
About 15 or 16 years years ago, one of Rajini’s biggest hits,Mannan, started with an (anti) heroine who’s the CEO of India’s Number One Corporation and ended with her relinquishing this role to play the devoted housewife who packs lunch for her husband as he goes off to work while commenting on his sexual prowess the previous night.
Nice to know some things haven’t changed:-)
feeding the market - I guess the one where Vijay has to appear and show his prowess in being his MCP’est! Antha chase to train thaan padathoda high(?)light
original :-))))))
“..the screenwriter had accosted me in a dark alley, pumped my veins full of Sodium Pentothal…” Isn’t this enough proof of our screenwriter’s originality? Just about anyone else who masquerades as Kollywood screenwriter would have known that the easiest route to getting the truth out of brangan is to, uh, ask. (Maybe buy him a beer and get a rose-tinted-glass version, but to get the unadulterated version, why waste precious doses of truth serum?) But our intrepid screenwriter here seems intent upon choosing the road not taken. More power to him! And it’s certainly commendable, his “you fueled my creative fire now here’s a title that’s sure to fuel yours” nod to true writerly kinship. (I mean, what are the odds of another rank-bad movie with a bird brain, er, name releasing in the near future and lending itself oh-so-nicely to brangan’s titling festish? “Parunthu,” “Vaaththu,” “Mayil,” “Puraa,” “Kozhi,” “Kazhugu”…Ok, my Tamil-bird-nomenclature hourglass is running out but the last I heard, Kollywood has moved on to animal names - Singam, anyone?).
Sarcasm aside, I too am seriously bummed this one is such a big dipper (”Oothikichu”) instead of (as I’d foolishly hoped) completing the Big Dipper (my Vijay list: Ghilli, Khushi, Kadhalukku Mariyadhai, Aathi, Pokkiri, ATM). Oh well, will have to stand by for Singam to sizzle (or fizzle) next.
brangan: “…thrill us, exhilarate us, confound us and dazzle us to the extent that raising such questions becomes an impossibility – at least while watching the movie” Yesss! That was Ghilli for me. Vijay had such a quiet yet immensely assured and relentless screen presence in Ghilli that he simply blew everyone out of the water (or so I’d like to think). Agree with Vijay (above) that the climax was a bit of a let down, but I was all too willing to forgive by then.
And “To label the character played by Trisha a bimbo would be to give sufficient cause for the bimbos of the world to unite in a class-action suit.” Hmm. I hope you are fully prepared for the class-action suit coming your way, Sir, from those of us with broken hips as a direct result of reading this line and falling off our chairs (laughing)…
vimal: Thanks! “eggjactly” brought back such fun memories of Salaam Namaste…simply loved Javed Jaffrey’s (ab)original cameo.
Read a recent interview by Director Dharani and his latest product. Apparently this misery was his ode to the bollywood classics of 70s (a la desai, sippy), wow just in amazement on how the quality of classics would cringe to hear and see their inspirations. Also the scene when Vijay jumps like a kuruvi apparently - heights literally !
KayKay: Oh dear. Did you have to remind me of Vijayashanti handing a stainless steel tiffin carrier to Rajini as she smiles shyly and says: Padukkayilum mannan?
Sagarika: “Vijay had such a quiet yet immensely assured and relentless screen presence in Ghilli…” I get the feeling KayKay isn’t going to agree with you on that one
karthik: Yeah, I read that too. That was the piece Sudhish did, right?
brangan: Oh come on. I’m sure KayKay will be more than willing to chalk up my “Vijay had such a quiet yet immensely assured and relentless screen presence in Ghilli…” to “will forever remain one of life’s eternal mysteries”…this being a “flight”-of-fancy week and all.
Well, pretty much, Vijay is following SRK’s formula (most part of his career)…standard story, same appearance in every movie (not even a change in haircut!!), masala ingredients, shallow heroine, comedy oriented hero, standard mannerisms, low risk etc. Until a “Swades” or “Chak De” landed up, I had completely lost hope on SRK.
I have the same problem with Vijay too. If you interspersed quick cut scenes from his last 7-8 movies, it would be hard to identify which one belonged to which.
My greater issue is that both SRK and Vijay have the market standing and clout to try something different yet they don’t. Sure, there is a lot of money riding on them and producers might be risk averse when casting them. But isn’t that true of a Vikram or Kamal as well?
Ultimately it will only help Vijay if he breaks out of this rut and does something about it. Otherwise he will only be a small footnote in Tamil Film History (ala Mike Mohan) despite being a successful star!! I can’t imagine Vijay is in the industry for money alone…wish he started thinking about his legacy too…
Sagarika, no problems on my side. To each his own. After all, I still watch Steven Seagal movies! Try figuring that one out!
KayKay: Skeleton stumbling out of the closet, huh? Nice! Thanks. “Try figuring that one out!” Oh boy, I wish. Some things are best left to folks whose brain cells aren’t sporadically “under siege” - coz that would be one heck of a long thesis.
brangan: Apropos your comment on Trisha, there was this scene right at the end that really caught my attention.
After the slaves have been liberated and Spartacus… no wait, wrong movie. Let me try again.
After the hero has freed his father and the other workers from the quarry, vanquished the assorted baddies and gotten the girl, there is this moment when they all stand in the rain. The father produces an umbrella to cover his son — cue sentimental dialogue — and there’s a slo-mo shot of them walking across a railway line. Vijay looks triumphant, Manivannan looks happy and Trisha looks dazed. Note that the umbrella only covers the hero and occasionally bumps against Trisha’s head, whereupon she pushes it away and keeps walking.
I know she’s a peripheral character in this movie (unlike Gilli, where she was the MacGuffin), but did they really have to rub it in like that?
KayKay>> Steven Seagal? Really?
~r