Monday, June 20, 2005

Anniyan and Shankar's other super-hero movies

Steering clear of euphemisms with a nonchalant ease, characteristic of me, when it comes to Shankar, I would like to shout that Anniyan is plain bad. More so because, nobody else seem to be doing it. Not that I had expected anything out of Anniyan. But, Shankar sure seems to have lost his touch at the B.O. and might never repeat the success of his previous movies.
Making use of a big cliche found largely in movie reviews (that so-and-so movie had everything GOING for it) in an opposite context, Anniyan had nothing going for it except for Vikram and loads of money to be spent. A beaten-to-death case of multiple personality (if this was a spoiler for anyone of you, kindly forgive yours truly and write so to me and I will remove it), an escapist plot (now, I am talking only within Shankar's context), a screenplay characteristic of under-development of each character like in those movies made by S. A. Chandrashekhar and likes.
Shankar had mentioned in his recent interview with Hindu on "how he brings realism in his own way within the commercial format" and I was nodding with acknowledgement. Yes. Though all his movies have esssentially been fantasy movies making ways for all possible commercial outlets, he always adds realism and colloquy which not many can match or even sense. Real characters (the ones with smaller screen presence too) and some hard-hitting intelligent dialogues (I will attribute that to Shankar as much as his writers). So in his issue-based commercial potboilers, Shankar had always been a quite good one and more importantly a very sensible one. Leave aside his "light" movies (Kaadhalan, Jeans; Boys being both here and there, but very very bad nevertheless), which were always unworthy though sometimes having that Shankar-kinda-realism in them.
The way Anniyan begins with the Ambi character, for the conformist he is, realising the faulty way in which the society works and his resultant frustration being protrayed in an amateurish way, one begins to wonder if Shankar has lost the touch. In these scenes, we can see how the character of Ambi is used more for the flat humour (which just doesn't work, btw). Ambi receives a spam letter which talks about how one Mr. Anniyan is gonna slay sinners. And thus we are introduced to Anniyan, the second Vikram. As "Anniyan" bashes a bunch of hooligans (Vikram doing a "Dhill" here just didn't work; was it Vikram who was indulging?) kills the sinners using creative methods (a la Se7en) based on a sadistic Sanskrit literature. We get to see a serious-looking Prakash Raj on the trail of Anniyan along with a glib-tongued Vivek. Add to this Ambi's outrageous efforts to win Sada's heart (which makes Siddharth's bear-all-clothes method pale in comparison on degree of plausibility for winning a girl's heart). And bang, we get the other Vikram as Remo and Vikram with his antics manages to be an effective parody of what he intends to be.
You have to see the movie to know how bad Vikram has performed. Add Prakash Raj, Nedumudi Venu, Nasser etc. to the big list of actors with no impact whatsoever. Sada needs no mention unless if you had ever wondered how her navel looked like (which I found was just like anybody else's :p).
Harris Jeyaraj's soundtrack score is so-so (mind you, not the BGM score). At least, had the Keerthanai been played, as it was on the audio release, it would have been nice. But, it seems Shankar wanted to capture the Thiruvaiyaaru scene as it actually happens.
The sole saviour, of course, is Vivek who with his very scarcely scattered one-liners (Kamal aficionados alert: 2 take-offs on him!), had me in splits for some moments.

11 comments:

  1. Hi,

    Hey, you wrote everything about the movie but you didn't mention whether the movie is entertaining or not? "Everything is bad except vivek's comedy" that is really a very strange comment on the movie. Anyway will watch it soon and let you know my opinion.

    Smile
    Suresh

    ReplyDelete
  2. I know its trite to say this. But, I seriously (really) don't go by 2 different ways to gauge a movie - entertaining and serious.
    Agreed there are movies that have a light effect on you (I mean those that don't hold you for the whole day) and is still likeable (to various degrees).
    If that is what you call entertaining, Anniyan wasn't, IMHO.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yes... there are only 2 kinds of movies.. the good movies and the bad movies... ANNIYAN is a prime example of the second.

    Just wondering if there would be a punishment in hell for making the same movie thrice... with just different actors.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Atlast i saw the movie. I almost agree with you, the movie is nethier bad nor good. But i liked Vikram's performance and it is the real saviour of the movie along with Vivek's wit as you said. The songs and the stunts sequences are boring to watch. The movie had really a thought provoking message but Shankar messed it up all by adding unnecesaary elements to commercialise it and the "Remo" character is a reall irritant.

    Smile
    Suresh

    ReplyDelete
  5. im yet to see this movie, i'm not expecting too much, but just wanna see his screenplay and the 40 odd cameras that was used to make up some scenes... and also not to forget the rocks that has some paintings which costed him lot of $$$

    ReplyDelete
  6. i think u didnt get the point that shankar was trying to make in this movie...

    This message cannot be delivered in a non commercial way and still expected to reach the audience.

    the movie is classic package for entertainment as well as drive home the message.

    sometimes we take pleasure in criticising big directors. that gives us some vicarious pleasure that we are somewhat better?

    Constructive criticism is good, but plainly stating things like 'movie is crap except for vivek', 'boys is very very bad' etc are amateurish!
    Point out how the screenplay is faulty, or uninteresting, what did and did not appeal to you, etc.
    Read reviews from movies.yahoo.com to understand what this process is all about!

    ReplyDelete
  7. anonymous,
    I thought I had explained why I didn't like the movie quite clearly, even if it had been in a concise manner. Just that u seem to have read those lines, where I passed my judgement on the movie in one line or so, directly.
    I too dislike when people hated the movies I liked. It happens.
    And if you pass on the link for that complete-analysis-of-screen-writing-and-how-shankar's-anniyan-is-an-epitome-of-it-review on movies.yahoo.com, I would be grateful to you forever [I tried finding it and was unsuccessful].

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think you're right on track and not many people are willing to admit that they share your views. jorge garcia is an AWESOME place to discuss LOST.

    ReplyDelete
  9. MOVIES,HBO and SHOW TIME: Hey Guys, I found a cool site that Saves me a bunch on Premium Movie Channels. Beats My Cable Hands Down, and it's ALL DIGITAL. Check this site out .**Movies**

    ReplyDelete
  10. Shankar has lost his touch. He can now only make grand settings. I dont think he can make any more tamil movies. Better for him to switch to the Telugu industry.

    Yeah, I just completed watching Sivaji in Bangalore PVR. Man, the movie sucks. Comedy is the only saviour of the movie.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The interview was very good, he touches some interesting and good topics.

    ReplyDelete