The most interesting aspect of the narrative, however, is the way it holds back information in favour of later-on revelations that reshape our earlier experience. When we first see Beera, he has a plaster on his throat, but only later do we realise that this wound is a marker of how recent a tragedy was, a fact never spelled out in words. When a gold watch is given to someone, or when his hand is subsequently chopped off, or when a policeman is tonsured and tortured, we are outraged on their behalf, until later events inform us that they may well have deserved their fates. With commercial cinema, the expected style of narration is to establish a tragedy first, get the audience to empathise, and then punish the wrongdoers so that we can rejoice in their being brought to well-deserved justice. But here, our emotions are constantly confounded. Heroes turn villains at the bat of an eyelid, while villains display stoic reserves of heroism.
Raavan is really comedy film, untentionally. Why lie detector test for Sita? Technology has advanced so much. He would have asked for narcoanalysis test and brain mapping because that is more accurate. Aish provided a good catching practice for Abhishek, falling down from trees and other things every 10 minutes. Anyway, there is no use in dissecting this crap of a film because he will go on to make another boring film and casts a start (of course from Bachan family) to get all the hype.
I had thought that Mani Ratnam delivered a dud after reading one negative review after another. Now I must see this. But I will probably catch the Tamil version as it is supposed to be far better than the Hindi one, mostly due to Vikram
BR: What an outstanding review, I think you have outdone yourself. I hated the film, and your review has made me rethink about the entire experience. Fantastic..Now caqn we expect a BR for the Tamil version, which is definitely superior?
A much more thoughtful review than the rest. Putting your review together with the positives in this review( -reloaded/ ) my belief in the fact that Mani has made an admirable film (not a masterpiece as one might have anticipated) is strengthened. It is depressing to read reviews where so called critics seem trigger happy to criticize the movie.
Agreed that the movie has its flaws (forced analogies,cardboard characterization of Dev to a certain level for instance) but then the movie definitely has its moments which I personally think far outshines the negatives.
With regards the statue in the wilderness, I am surprised you have mentioned it in the off-hand manner that you have, considering that unlike Kannathil Muthamital where it served more as a stunning visual (maybe also as a reminder of the peace that Buddha preached) here it plays a kind of central role in the scene, given that it is the statue of Vishnu. The dialogue between Beera and Raagini in this backdrop is to me one of the highlights of the movie.
I think many are going overboard with criticism of the leads here. If the movie fails on any level it is not due to them but the director. I quite liked Aishwarya Rai here and Abhishek made quite an impression on me in the end.
Hmmm, after all the pressure everyone put on you, the Raavan review is here finally. Maybe its just me, or are there a couple of paras missing ? There are some reviews or between reviews (happy?) that you write with all your soul. I felt that way about your VTV or Aayirathil Oruvan ones, when you just plain salute the film, wholly. Great analysis here but this movie dint quite elicit THAT kind of response, I guess.
sir your tske on vikram is important for us to understand the interpretation of characters and my sincere opinion is that mani sir has never had a hold on the hindi medium as much as much and brilliant in tamil.One scene that comes to my mind is in Ayutha ezhuthu between Suriya and Bharathiraja in college.please tell us about raavanan
In Raavan, it is back to broad strokes. There is no attempt at establishing the terrain or the characters. The character of Veera is written in such a juvenile manner. There is no detailing of any kind. too much rain and mist and too little human emotion. The writers should have worked on little moments between Veera and Raagini in her days of captivity, which would have given Raagini an opportunity to compare Veera with Dev. The character of Givinda, or Ravi Kishen are all cardboard. all atht effort on that fight on the bridge..what for? If yiu want to show off spectacular cation, make an Indiana Jones and prove yourself. why this fakery?
Though I am the biggest admirer of rahman on the planet, I am getting tired of his Arabic and African chants in the background score, pointlessly used. Give me Ilayarajas haunting violin strains from Paa any day. Of course the songs are exquisite. The scenes that go with Behne do and Khili re are the only enjoyable moments in the film for me. but what was that Thok De Gilli doing juat after interval, when the much more meaningful and relevant Kataa Katta was coming up in a few minutes. elementary punctuation marks, Mani saar!
I wrote the previous comment with just reading your review. After watching Raavanan now, I totally agree with Naresh, who had commented before me. Were you really happy with the movie, BR ? Is your inner Mani fan smiling?
All Mani needed to do was have intensely scripted close up shots instead of moving the camera all over the place and make ash, abhi and vikram squeak all the time.. there were few moments of awesome chemistry though (more were required!)
Mani Ratnam & the reviewer missed in judging the North Indian emotional attachment with Ram & Sita. Reinterpretation of Ram is a risky matter but to touch Sita is a disaster. In the context of film, two things are important, first this film is about Stockholm Syndrome, second the moment one interprets Ram & Sita he lays bare his lack of understanding of the original story.
Both authorial vision (for the sake of authorial vision) and open text (as Robin Wood says, if every text could be opened, why bother making films?) are deeply flawed techniques adhering to which will only result in compromise and contradictions. We should be able to find a middle ground, IMO.
I think it is high time Mani Ratnam should take a decision, he wants to make powerful feature films or pretty music videos. He should learn from people like Shimit Amin,Dibakar Banerjee, Prakash Jha and Rakeysh Mehra, and see how it is possible to create powerful drama, even poetic drama, without elaborately staged songs,
lekhini,
That was an insightful observation. notice also in both films, when dev shoots the younger brother, the imagery is of tall trees , bringing to mnd the parable of rama shooting an arrow thhrough seven trees to convince sugreeva of his prowess.
Just watched the Tamil version, did not leave any big impact and had the pretty same effect the hindi version had. Vikram has a much better screen presence and does slightly better than Abhishek. Karthik was a let down while Prabhus charecter is well etched and acted out. The biggest let down in the Tamil version was its dialogues. Suhasini makes a mess out of it.
but but.. this narrative style alone isnt enough to justify a Maniratnam movie, isnt it? We have come to expect so much out of it, he hasnt offered any of that for you to cover in your review, isnt that dissapointing?
Did the Raavan(an) marathon this weekend. Saw the tamil version first before AB baby! Must say the Tamil version was much much better, may be because I connect to it more. I thought Vikram (while he shouted hoarse) was a better interpretation of the same part. I felt Prithviraj was better than Vikram. Two very different interpretations of the same role by Prabhu and Ravi Kisen.
vijay: Actually, I do think he directs actors well. An actor, however good, needs someone at the other end of the camera to shape the pitch of the performance. See the difference of Kamal in Nayakan/Moondram Pirai and Kamal in, say, Sathya. The latter is a solid performance too, but the former is at a different level altogether.
Forget for one moment that the film was upending ramayana, and look at pritviraj playing dev. Im not sure i have seen a more certain potrayal of relentless attacking and pure hate ( of raavanan) from a male charecter for some time in tamil films. forall this, rama is not shown as being blindly villainous. he has covetous motivations for which he is willing to destroy everything he doesnt own to get back his own. the moment he hears ragini is kidnapped, in his mind everyone associated are dead. there is no negotiating with him.
BR- You probably know this already -The presence/placement of these links is theme-dependent. Am no wordpress expert but based on these links below it looks like you need to fiddle with the wordpress theme php files.
_and_Previous_Links
-prev-next-post-link-to-wordpress-blog/
The ambiguous and lush (avatarlike) construction of the film lends itself to this interpretation, which is why , in my review, i had compared the film to a ram leela in delhi maidan. the ramayana is merely an excuse for writing in many other stories into the text.
An interesting after-thought : Would Ragini have left Dev after the shoot-out? If she is true to her character, she would have. Sita did, even though the male story-tellers would have us believe that Ram sent her off to the forest.
And is it true that Suhasini writes dialogues or is it just a ploy for showing expenses etc.,? In either case, can we please ask MR not to employ her. If Sujatha is no more, get Balakumaran like Shankar or ask MR to write it himself.
For years now Mani Ratnam has never been able to create a movie in the league of Nayagan, Iruvar, Anjali or Kannathil. With Raavanan (with the *an*), he has created a masterpiece which can stake a claim as one of his best Tamil films ever. Raavan (without the *an*) is good, but unfortunately Abhishek had to be pitted against Vikram and this is a no contest.
b1e95dc632