Showing posts with label Priyamani. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Priyamani. Show all posts

Monday, January 29, 2024

REVIEW 793: NERU

Release date:

December 21, 2023

Director:

Jeethu Joseph 

Cast:

Mohanlal, Anaswara Rajan, Priyamani, Siddique, Santhi Maya Devi, K.B. Ganesh Kumar, Sreedhanya, Jagadish, Aditi Ravi, Nandhu

Language:

Malayalam with English 

 


Sara Mohammed (Anaswara Rajan) is an artist who is blind. When Sara is home alone one day, she is raped by a stranger. She gathers her wits about her during the assault, and much to the surprise of the police, is later able to identify the attacker despite her inability to see. 

 

It is an intriguing concept, and with Jeethu Joseph directing Mohanlal in the role of Sara’s lawyer Vijayamohan, it is hard not to have sky-high expectations after their team-ups for Drishyam 1&2

  

Neru (Truth) is not in the league of the Drishyams – its writing is not as refined. It also does not match up to the naturalistic genius or finely tuned politics of that other fantastic recent Malayalam legal saga, Ratheesh Balakrishnan Poduval’s Nna, Thaan Case Kodu (2022). And its courtroom drama dips into several tropes of the genre – a down-and-out lawyer re-donning his robes for what seems like a lost cause, a bumbling lawyer (Nandhu) whose clumsiness serves to underline the leading man’s skills, and so on. Still, the question of whether Vijayamohan will ultimately trump his insecurities and triumph over his rivals, the pleasure of seeing Mohanlal in a part shorn of macho posturing, Sara’s resilience, her parents’ supportive attitude and Anaswara’s measured performance make this a special film in its own right. 

 

Mohanlal’s filmography has for decades been dominated by hyper-masculinity and omnipotent heroes. So when he chooses to play a man who wears his vulnerability on his sleeve, the character’s significance extends beyond the boundaries of this storyline. 

 

Neru is about a system teetering on the precipice of letting a woman down, a system redeemed by a few good souls. Vijayamohan had withdrawn from practising law after a setback years back. He remains a respected legal expert. The rapist, Michael Joseph, is the son of a Mumbai-based industrialist. Realising that the public prosecutor is messing up the case and that the accused’s wealth can buy almost anyone, the senior policeman Paul Varghese (K.B. Ganeshkumar) goes out of his way to help Sara. Paul and a zealous young advocate, Ahaana (Santhi Maya Devi), persuade Vijayamohan to don his robes again, thus setting up a confrontation between him and the reputed, unethical defence lawyers Rajashekhar (Siddique) and his daughter Poornima (Priyamani).

 

Written by Santhi Mayadevi and Jeethu, Neru benefits from the duo’s background. Santhi is a lawyer in addition to being an actor-writer, Jeethu has a knack of getting the best out of one of Malayalam cinema’s biggest ever stars. Their joint effort results in a film that remains engaging till the end even though the culprit is revealed at the start. The suspense in the script lies elsewhere. 

 

Neru is a showcase primarily for Mohanlal, as such films tend to be, but the writers have had the good sense not to entirely neglect the other actors and characters. Though Sara is not developed as fully as Vijayamohan, she is for a change conceived as a regular person, not a helpless simpering woman nor a warrior queen avenging her rape in the way women survivors do in fantastical worlds routinely created by men writers. She is tough even if hurting, spirited even if traumatised. She is also an illuminating example of a survivor who is doubted because she kept her cool, although if she had not she would undoubtedly have been asked, “Well, where’s the proof?”

 

It is a relief to see Mohanlal in a part that allows him to focus on his craft instead of a swagger. He gives a moving rendition of a lawyer who acknowledges his courtroom phobia and ultimately comes into his own. When Vijayamohan says, “I lost that touch. I am not confident anymore,” the actor ensures that the pain in his character’s voice is under-played yet palpable. Mohanlal makes Vijayamohan’s transformation almost indiscernible in the way only he can when at his best. 

 

Priyamani’s character is just outlined, but her striking personality leaves a mark on Neru. It is nice to see her given visibility in this narrative, but she deserves a better-written role. 

 

Surrounded by accomplished and charismatic veterans, the seven-year-old-in-films Anaswara not only holds her own but lends tremendous maturity to Sara. 

 

Obviously it is essential to ask why Indian cinema routinely gives centrality to Vijayamohans and not Saras, to men who are allies of women rather than to women survivors themselves. Usually, male leads in these films become saviours and the films themselves are guilty of a condescending gaze on the woman. The reason why Neru escapes that label is that it views Sara through a lens of empathy and solidarity, not pity, and gives space to her story and her strength – even if not primacy. The film also gives her greater interiority than most such films do and does not patronise her.

 


Neru
 trips up on the latter front towards the end though, when Sara stands before Vijayamohan with hands folded and head bowed, and the camera zeroes in on this exchange. 

 

Symbolism is crucial to cinema. In Indian culture, a NamaskaramNamasteNamaskarNamaskara is a traditional greeting, but the physical gesture with palms meeting has various meanings here and elsewhere – humility, resignation, supplication, worship or gratitude. In a cinematic universe replete with male saviours, in an industry that routinely marginalises women in stories and discards women actors while creating circumstances conducive to megastardom and longevity for men like Mohanlal, Sara pressing her palms together and lowering her head is more than a thank you.

 

To avoid even a hint of a saviour vibe it was vital for Vijayamohan and Sara to be shown as equals, and for Mohanlal-Anaswara to stand shoulder to shoulder at all times. In that moment, they do not. 

 

The bow in Neru harks back to a Dalit folding her hands before a Brahmin ally, a policeman, in Article 15 (Hindi, 2019) or another Dalit folding her hands before an upper-caste ally, a lawyer, in Jai Bhim (Tamil, 2021). Both were empathetic films. In each case, the gesture – a fleeting one – was made by a member of a subjugated group, aimed at a member of a dominant group played by the marquee name in the cast, and when juxtaposed against the larger socio-political context in which these films were made, subtracted, even if marginally, from their anti-dominance messaging.

 

Just like the passing mention of a past relationship between Vijayamohan and Poornima. Their link is superfluous to Neru’s plot, and is yet another example of a standard practice among male stars in India who seek to prove their eternal magnetism by ensuring that a woman partner is featured in every story to be played by an actor vastly younger than they are rather than a woman of their own generation. In this case, Priyamani is almost a quarter century younger than Mohanlal. 

 

These asides are completely unnecessary in an otherwise entertaining, sensible film. 

 

Neru approaches the theme of rape largely with understanding, although it could have done without the heightened maudlin music and repeated – albeit brief and not titillating – flashbacks to the assault on Sara. One scene sticks out like a sore thumb: the one in which Vijayamohan greenlights an idea that allows the unscrupulous Rajashekhar to be alone in a room with Sara, thus leaving him free to taunt and re-traumatise her. This decision is inconsistent with Vijayamohan’s sensitivity towards his client in the rest of Neru and his progressively improving presence of mind up to that point. The episode is obviously written for theatric effect, and is thoughtless considering that real-life activist lawyers lay considerable emphasis on prioritising a survivor’s mental well-being over all else whereas Vijayamohan’s move is viewed with an uncritical eye by the script. The scene took me back to an even worse one in Pink (Hindi, 2016) in which Amitabh Bachchan’s character badgers his own client, a sexual assault survivor, in the witness stand to make a point in court. 

 

Malayalam cinema tends to do language mixes well, epitomised by last year’s Thankam and Ariyippu in 2022. Neru is not brilliant like them, its dialogues in the courtroom are sometimes stilted, but the Malayalam-English blend at least fits the setting, characters and actors perfectly, barring the English lines written for Rajashekhar that don’t sit well at all with Siddique. 

 

Legal wranglings, extra-legal machinations and the surprises thrown up by Vijayamohan’s probe sustain interest in Nerueven with its flaws. This film is not Jeethu’s best, but may turn out to be his most important if it heralds a new phase in Mohanlal’s career. Neru is hopefully an indicator that after cringe-worthy outings arguably epitomised by Monster (2022) and Alone (2023) the actor has finally sensed the winds of change blowing through Malayalam cinema, as the other Big M did some years back. If my reading of his participation in this film is accurate, then it’s a turning point not just for his career but for his industry too, more so because Neru follows close on the heels of the excellent Kaathal in which Mammootty played a gay man in a heterosexual marriage. 

 

The two M’s are as mainstream as mainstream can be. It’s a joy to see them join hands with filmmakers who are resisting the wave of male fury currently sweeping across commercial Indian cinema of most languages. Neru belongs on the list of Malayalam films defying the national trend. 

 

Rating (out of 5 stars): 2.75   

 

Running time:

152 minutes 

 

Poster courtesy: IMDB 

Still of Anaswara courtesy: Neru’s trailer 

Friday, August 9, 2013

REVIEW 215: CHENNAI EXPRESS


Release date:
August 9, 2013
Director:
Rohit Shetty
Cast:



Language:

Deepika Padukone, Shah Rukh Khan, Sathyaraj,  Nikitin Dheer, Kamini Kaushal, Lekh Tandon, Manorama, Priyamani
Hindi and Tamil

WARNING: LONG REVIEW AHEAD!


The first half hour of Chennai Express is rollicking good fun: the lines are quick-witted, Shah Rukh Khan’s comic timing is a revelation (didn’t know he had it in him! he should do more comedies!), Deepika Padukone’s thick Tamilian accent is hilarious (if only we can relax and not get our knickers in a twist about it) plus we get a neat little parody of the climactic scene in Dilwale Dulhania Le Jayenge that deserves, in fact, to be mocked. After that though, it’s a series of troughs and crests and crests and troughs – in fact, too many troughs – culminating in an overly long finale fight and the inexplicable Lungi Dance. Overall assessment though: if you’re in a mood for some determinedly nonsensical entertainment that’s not entirely as over-the-top as we’re used to seeing from director Rohit Shetty, this one’s it.

SRK takes on his favourite screen name once again in Chennai Express in which he plays the 40-year-old grandson of an over-protective North Indian halwai (Lekh Tandon) in Mumbai. When the old man passes away, Rahul heads off to Goa for a holiday but is diverted to Tamil Nadu’s Komban village when he gets unwittingly embroiled in the business of Meenamma (Deepika), the beautiful daughter of a Tamilian don (Sathyaraj). The question many have been asking since the film’s first trailer was released is this: is Chennai Express a return to the irritating old Bollywood stereotype of the oily-haired aiyyaiyyo south Indian epitomised by Mehmood in Padosan and repeated ad nauseam in Hindi films till the end of the 1980s? The answer, with a few caveats, is a surprising no. Yes, there’s a pointed contrast made between the skin colour of the film’s southern Indian lead players and their emphatically black-skinned flunkeys, but to be fair, Bollywood’s portrayal of north Indians is not very different, with a lighter skin usually conveying a higher status. It’s noteworthy though that Chennai Express sends out a gentle message to north Indians who by and large consider it every Indian’s duty to speak Hindi while making no effort themselves to learn other Indian languages. It does so by doggedly not subtitling its lengthy Tamil dialogues, choosing instead to get translations from Meenamma or a Tamil-speaking Sikh policeman played sweetly by Mukesh Tiwari, and on other occasions leaving the audience to guess what’s probably being said.
  
Most interestingly, SRK spends much of the film in a self-deprecating mood, being the anti-thesis of the Hindi film hero, openly showing his fear of the bad guys, with the camerawork intentionally stressing his smallness in comparison with the towering presence of the villain Thangabali played by Nikitin Dheer. He gets a drubbing from Thangabali at one point. Elsewhere, he seeks Meenamma’s protection though of course he won’t admit it. And in one scene, the lady even gets to kick him real hard for reasons we won’t reveal. How often does a Hindi film hero do this? Kudos then to Shah Rukh for risking it, especially considering the prevailing on-screen invincibility of his arch rival Salman Khan who remains capable of taking on crowds, trains and trams with his bare fists. Rahul even – hold your breath! – announces his age as 40 in the very first line he utters in the film, and Meenamma tells him he looks 50-plus. Considering that at 47-going-on-48 SRK played a 25-year-old boy in the first half of last year’s Jab Tak Hai Jaan, this comes as a relief. Gentlemen of Bollywood, when you star in a film with a heroine half your age, kindly admit that it’s an older-man-younger-woman romance.
 
The other significant point is Chennai Express’ take on DDLJ, the film that catapulted SRK from stardom to stratospheric megastardom. DDLJ romanticised its regressive message about the unquestionable will of the family patriarch and a woman’s lack of say in personal matters. Twenty years later, SRK returns as another Rahul, this time not to succumb but to question a father for being despotic with his daughter. The men are still the ones doing the talking, but the nature of the conversation has changed, and that’s a small milestone to celebrate.

If the preceding paragraph suggests in any way that Meenamma is a pushover or Deepika’s role is subordinate to Shah Rukh’s in this film, you’ve read that wrong. Meenamma is a woman who strains at her chains every step of the way. And Deepika sustains her comic timing from start to finish in Chennai Express even when SRK’s Rahul gets repetitive in the second half. After the emotional roller-coaster she pulled off in Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani, here’s another thumbs up for Ms Padukone, this time in a vastly different role. SRK lives up to his promise – made in a beverage ad – that from this film forward his heroine’s name would appear before his in the credits, which as we all know is a break from MCP Bollywood’s norm. Now that’s a condescending piece of tosh if your heroine is playing fifth fiddle to you as is the case with most Hindi films (and certainly Rohit Shetty’s own last two, Bol Bachchan and Singham), but in Chennai Express Deepika is an equal partner to her hero, as she has been in most of her films so far. Hopefully a day is not far when a leading lady does not have to depend on a leading man’s largesse to have her name placed in the credits where it should rightfully be. Until then, here’s another small milestone to celebrate.

It’s because of how Chennai Express chooses to portray south Indians and its heroine until that point that the Lungi Dance in the end is so jarring. First, it relegates Deepika completely to the position of junior partner when it starts off with the announcement, “This is the tribute to Thalaivar from King Khan…” Second, the so-called “tribute” to Rajinikanth continues to reduce this Tamil film icon to mere exotica, which is how North India has deigned to recognise him ever since the North India-centric, supposedly “national” media accidentally woke up to his legend status with the release of Sivaji. As a comical song-and-dance somewhere in the middle of this film, Lungi Dance might have been enjoyable. Placed at the end with the credits, with absolutely no connection to anything that’s gone before, and positioned as a bow to Rajini, it’s reductive and makes absolutely no sense. Though some people north of the Vindhyas may find this hard to believe, there’s ACTUALLY more to Rajinikanth than his sunglass-flipping and other stunts.


Clearly then, Chennai Express is not an entirely smooth ride. Never mind the ideological analysis… Purely from an entertainment point of view, the film slows down too much in the second half. Some things remain consistent though: DoP Dudley does a good job of capturing the film’s uniformly picturesque locations; production designer Narendra Rahurikar creates prettiness without colour coordinating wall paint with the clothes worn by people standing against those walls as we’ve seen in too many films of the past decade; and the costume design team clothes Deepika in the loveliest southern Indian saris and half-saris while dressing the rest of the cast impeccably too, sans the loudness we’ve come to associate with Rohit Shetty’s films. The music, on the other hand, is mostly lousy – except for the extremely catchy Chennaiaiaiaiai Chennai Express theme and the reasonably melodic Titli, This comes as a huge disappointment considering Vishal-Shekhar’s amazing track record. National Award-winning Tamil and Malayalam actress Priyamani looks lovely in her item song appearance but must bear the brunt of the tunelessness of the number to which she is dancing. South India knows her well; Bollywood saw the impact she makes even in a supporting role when she played Abhishek Bachchan’s sister in Raavan… for god’s sake, she deserves better than this.

When you weigh out the film’s assets and liabilities though, there’s more to like than not. Too many Bollywood comedies in recent years have come laden with “jokes” about rape, faeces and farts, urine and sundry body fluids. Chennai Express steers clear of crudeness except for a couple of un-funny comments about izzat lootna, one tacky wisecrack about “chhakkaas” and a few-seconds-long distasteful reference to Shah Rukh’s most sensitive film so far (“My name is Rahul and I’m not a terrorist,” says the hero here, rolling his eyes as if autism is amusing). Chennai Express is partly designed as a bow to SRK (I lost count of the number of times in the film he stretches out his arms in that trademark gesture) but in a fashion that’s less in-your-face than the grating Salman-worship we’ve lately been seeing in the other Khan’s films.

One thing’s for sure: this film is not as mindless as it would like us to think it is. Anyway, kee farak painda? For as Meenamma might say in that infectious accent of hers, “Main ab review khatam karti, tum review padhti, phir tum film dekhti aur khud decide karti ki tum film like karti ya hate karti.Chennai Express is not unrelentingly laugh-worthy, but it’s still good enough for a relaxed, pleasant evening. Happy Eid, folks!

Rating (out of five): **3/4

CBFC Rating (India):
U/A
Running time:
2 hours 23 minutes