JAILER (2023)

 

I have not watched a single film directed by Nelson, so I am saved from comparing this to his earlier films. He is making a star-driven flick and when the star is Rajinikanth, it inevitably comes with shitload of expectations. Nelson knows that, and most importantly Rajini knows that too well – almost all the films (bar one) post 90s, he has been making films for those who whistles, dances, and behave like alcohol-less drunks during the screenings.

And then, there are those like me. I was a Kamal Haasan fan growing up, then became a full fledged Sivaji Ganesan fan and that allowed me to appreciate Rajini better, later. Rajini the actor impressed me more than Rajini the superstar, and I had long wanted to see the performer side of him, because, dammit, at one point during the history of his career, he was directly competing with Kamal Haasan in that  department.

But that’s me. This film will satisfy all parties: Fans of Nelson’s previous flicks – which I have not seen, but am able to see the signature on this – will appreciate some aspect; fans of Rajini; and dudes and gals like me. The first half especially was most satisfying for me, as I got to see Rajini back to his roots, a stage artiste turned onscreen performer under the guidance of K. Balachander. It was all there, every moment, every tic, every movement, the facial expression, the body language – lessons of underplaying a part, is all there. The man has not lost it as I had long feared.

Then, the one power he had not used for long time was brought back. There is only one actor in this industry, for me, who could exude that one thing – menace. As a little boy, I recall being terrified of him in this gem of a film called Moondru Mudichu (1976). That scene where, after letting Kamal’s character drown and making no efforts to save his onscreen buddy, Rajini rows the boat and sings a song in a terrifying M.S.V voice, I cried. I hated him. I feared him. I would never be his fan for a long time. He was menacing in Avargal (1976), in Bhairavi (1977) and later in Thappu Thalanggal (1977), a curious look at the life of a henchman. Hell, even for a song in the glorious masterpiece, Mullum Malarum (1978), you know that nobody is gonna mess with him.

That menace is brought back here. It was not even in Baasha (1993), where he was just angry in those supposedly tensed moments. Baasha’s performance pales in comparison to what we get to see here. A full blown rage, at times under control and at times erupting like a sleeping volcano waking up without notice. He still moves like panther, stalking the prey – hordes of henchmen who looked like they have escaped the 12^th century monastery, you’d know if you have seen that underrated murder mystery, The Name Of The Rose (1986)  starring Sean Connery. These guys come from that school of henchmen which is supplying baddies for Tamil films, all looking perfect in unkempt beard, face like first few seconds post-acid attack (damndest thing, because acid plays a part in this movie). The lead bad guy (Vinayakan) was also made up to look like that, and unfortunately he was no match for the star. It’s same old performance that a more capable villain veteran like Sathyaraj would have chewed and spat had he started his career much later. This performance was passable within the context of the film.

Somewhere between the story of a retired jail warden, played by Rajini, living peaceful wife with his wife, and his cop son’s family, the director co-opted the plot of Thanggapathakkam (1974), and those who had seen that classic knows how the film is going to end. It was no spoiler for us fans. Shocking as it was back in 1974, this time it was expected – thus losing the supposed gravitas. There was even a nod to Alex Pandiyan of the Moondru Mugam (1983) fame when we are given a short flashback to 15 years earlier where Rajini was de-aged (not that technique, but good makeup and lighting) looking terrific as the jailer that can make criminals leak in their pants. Both ways.

There’s violence and blood everywhere. But as it still is, in Tamil films, amateurishly splashed all over the place with little regards for physics and goddamned biology. That is why the film is rated something or other for excessive violence, though that is pretty laughable considering what you see is silly, though what was suggested was far more sinister (acid dunk, yippee, pretty sadistic for a hack director).

The pace was uneven… at times, we are not quite sure which part of the revenge plot are we in. There is a scene taken from ye olde James Bond film, Goldfinger (1964), where a whole bunch of folks had to play possum, likewise reactions of the henchmen who were given crash course of watching old Jackie Chan flicks on the exaggerated spasm when getting shot or beaten up with a small fist.

But amateurism is expected. Once overlooking all those, there’s Rajini lording over like Collosus as he crushed his opponents second half onwards. There is supposed cleverness in his vengeance plot (that  Goldfinger schtick) though it felt drawn out, only the relief being the much welcomed cameos by Jackie Shroff, Mohanlal, and some guy to lighten up the proceeding. This is first time Lal-ettan (as the industry calls Mohanlal) appearing with Rajini… and I always felt Lalettan was more of a Rajini-like performer energetically compared to Kamal and Mammooty who works from inside out. Seeing both together brought smile to my mug. 

Then, the plot lifted from Thanggapathakkam rears its ugly head and sort of dumbs down everything that has passed, including needless lives taken out violently earlier that makes Rajini’s character not that smart after all. When it is dealt with, there was none of that “Twinkle twinkle little star” moment, or for those who had not seen the Sivaji film, that deep, heartbreaking remorseful moment. Not sure why Nelson downplayed it. Speaking of which, there were some humour here and there, where I chuckled but I keep hearing that the film had comedy in it. It must have flew by me, I have no idea it existed, and it definitely didn’t come from the comedian-flavour of the season, Yogi Babu who’s about as hilarious as a funeral director.

Speaking of funeral, they dug up another past sell-by-date actress Thamanna to add sizzle that looked bloody out of place amidst two wig wearing characters which look more at home in an old stag shorts. They couldn't stop getting nostalgic with actress who does talking with dubbed voice...some oral fascination there 

Well, I thoroughly enjoyed Rajini in this film, and definitely will go for a second viewing. Otherwise, this is not what I really wanted from Rajini the Actor. This is fan service number with a bit of stretching of talent involved for him. I want more of that. I want the Rajini that could give Kamal a run for his money, let alone the pretenders who are still vying for his crown. That crown stays were it is, just that its power is still not fully utilised yet.

Barbie (2023)

 

Review. (This was a post in my Facebook page, typed direct there rather than posting it here)

For a story based on kids toy, the story for this film is very adult. Alright, before fantasies are launched, let me be clear. Yes, it's about girls' (and some boys, don't be coy here) most popular toy doll .... And it doesn't take a big stretch to know that we continue to play with dolls when we are adults. Well, some of us anyway especially those who collects merchandises ( I had James Bond and Aston Martin scale models not too long ago).

Why adults may like this? That's because the film goes deep, becomes more of a satiric take on existential crisis some of us have or are driven into when the question about mortality and the meaning of life start bugging us (or, are asked by jerks who sell religions). It's that moment in most of our lives when we really question all that's around us and makes us try to get closer to our creator.

That what exactly happens to Barbie here and it's beautifully told by the filmaker and the scriptwriter who understood how to get the story across to kids and adults alike.

I was looking forward to this films simply because of being a Margot Robbie fan. But as much as she was perfectly cast, I was completely drawn into this world despite being colour blind all... And, being a very, very amateur philosophy enthusiast/student, the films take on existentialism, with a bit of theological undercurrent intrigued me. 

I mean, here I was , both drooling and admiring Robbie's performance (there's a slice of her Harley Quinn somewhere, I know) and then immediately taken into the intricate world of mother daughter relationship and thrown headlong emphatically understanding into the pain of growing up as a woman, the expectations in being perfect and I am sure this also makes a perfect film for mother and daughter outing and bonding.

As usual with films that thrive in concepts, the pace sags somewhere in the middle but picks up anyway. I really enjoyed it and it pretty much matched my expectations. A special mention must be made to the production design...it's immaculate recreation of the Barbie's world is a sight to behold, I suspect it will get a nod during the award season next year. 

Now that we have been seeing the friendly rivalry with Christopher Nolan's Oppenheimer, it's intriguing to know that one of Barbie's early designer had also worked with Raytheon, a god-damned defense company (story link in the comment space)...how about that?

#rakeshmovietalk

Oppenheimer (2023)

 

Christopher Nolan makes complex films, with complicated story about conflicted characters. It’s no surprise that he chose to make a film about the Father of Atom Bomb, J. Robert Oppenheimer, controversial figure in history. I wouldn’t say that Nolan is no stranger to controversies, he had mostly been in the safe territory and in fact, have been steadily gaining fans, some fierce defender of his complex, abstract and sometimes confounding works.  Yet, Controversies have already started, especially on whether the character has been lionized, and the use of that verse from Bhagavad Gita.

Yes, that verse: “Now I am become Death, the destroyer of world”.

Offended many Hindus, it did. Well, let me say having brought up in that culture (they call it Sanadhana Dharma, though my birth certificate says I am a Hindu.) I have understood in the early days that Hindus are mostly very “open minded” (yes, the quote marks are very intentional) and have been taking punches, kicks from those belonging other faiths with smile and blood trickling down their lips (like Rajini in Baasha).

But as I grew up older, there’s this whole generation of folks who went on to gleaning and garnering “facts” and pointers from books and other mediums (yes, medium here also refers to some dudes who do a lot of sitting around and spouting philosophies that usually never get challenged by the so-called followers, who would jump to another guru as soon as the offer is a lot more appealing to their self-ish needs).

So, I was surprised that Hindus got their knickers twisted over this. My parents are Hindus, my brothers are Hindus, I know friends who named their pets Hindu names, instead of the usual Johnny or Whiskers and we would least be affected by a filmmaker who made films about a man dressed up as a bat,

I digress. The use of the verse, ticked many off by those whom I believe have digested the Bhagavad Gita in its entirety. I have only read the Tamil version of Mahabaratha, and that moment was probably in Act 4, scene 35.7b, and I missed it. Damn me for being an insufferable fool for having not taken note of that.

But I watch the film as a fan of the medium, for the entertainment value more than the messages, the jibes against non-religion religious folks, and it worked for me. The presentation was immense, the experience derived from it is something that will stay with me a long time.

It is an experience and I watched it in an ordinary theatre, and would be seeing it on IMAX next week, hopefully. It is very talky, yak, yak, yak and Nolan is, I am afraid, not David Mamet or Quentin Tarantino, for that matter, in the dialogue department. It can frustrate you when you can’t penetrate the words exchanged throughout the three hours runtime, and Nolan knows that. This is where the man also remembered the rest of us poor semi-literates.

The music. The background score was there almost all of the time. I have complained about how this device was overused in Tamil films (with exception of those scored by Ilaiyaraja, who knew how to play with silence too). But here, the music helped us to understand the gravity of the situation. I bet Nolan was telling Ludwig Göransson, who also composed Nolan’s Tenet, “Dude, suspense here….more suspense there….intolerable suspense for this scene”. His previous collaborator Hans Zimmer may have been hiding under the bed when Nolan came looking for him for Tenet, if you know what I mean – how much suspense can that poor German born composer take.

Nolan, clearly a contender for best Hitchcock’s “visual participation shtick” heir after de Palma, also got himself a bevy of heavyweight casts and none of them disappoints. Robert Downey Jr finally gets to kick himself out of the comic book world and prove why he had always been in the A-List for a long time (remember Chaplin, yeah, he knows a biopic when he sees one), and Mat Damon gives a welcome presence, as, at least, we get a bit of humour from him.

And Cillian Murphy. What a casting coupe, to use the cliché. He has always been around, usually in the second class carriage in the train of Nolan’s casting, and this time he was pushed forward as the leading man. It’s as if, Nolan had been waiting for this film to happen to finally give Murphy that break. And the actor never wasted a single moment. If you have watched the clips of actual Oppenheimer you can tell that, though Murphy does not look like him at all, but he nailed the stoicism with that glazed eyes, staring over the horizon. He’s almost in every scene and he commands attention. I send a message to a friend saying that this is an Oscar bait film, and especially in the acting department. Murphy, RDJ and the (sigh, this is frustrating) completely unidentifiably Gary Oldman as Harry S. Truman. I have said that before, the latter should be banned from any award list…he’s too much for the competitors, leave them alone willya Gary?

The presentation. The one film that came to my mind for comparative purposes, not that it needed that, was Oliver Stone’s Nixon (1995), the biopic of a much maligned historical figure. It is not so much the character but the way the story was told, jumping from flashbacks to flashbacks, use of colour, grainy images that Stone has known for deploying to keep the audiences at the edge of the seat. Here, flashbacks are told in colour and the contemporary setting in colour. This is not exactly path breaking story telling technique, it has been done before, but Nolan was again being kind to us. With the story jumping from past to a nearer past, then back to present, the switch of colour among others really helps to keep us on the page.

The cinematography has always been Nolan’s biggest strength and he doesn’t fail us here. It glides through from one moment to another, to that explosive section two thirds and yet kept us firmly interested as the following proceeding could have bored the heck out of the attention impaired.

This has to be the movie of the year, as I gauged even before the trailer was released. There’s something about the subject and the director’s credential that told me that this is gonna be huge. And it is. It’s gonna garner lots of notice come awards season next year. The whole Barbieheimer “fight” was not for nothing. The heaviness of one complements the simplicity of the other, and the filmmakers of both films were sporting enough to play along with the “competition” and by the look of it, both films are really reaping lotsa moolah it in… and most importantly, bring more and more folks back to the movie theatres.  

no p.A.I.n no g.A.I.n: AI and penmanship: Part 1

Q: Would I be worried about Artificial Intelligence (AI) as a writer?

A: What is the opposite of artificial intelligence? If you say “politicians”, you are wrong because most of what’s floating on consciousness are artificial as well. My answer would be: Human intelligence of course. While artificial limbs and parts make up for none, would artificial intelligence do the same, considering that in hundreds and  thousands years of existence, homo sapiens still rely on some magnificent force in sky to help them pass their exams, and bless their sandwiches.

Do we need AI? And without bothering about the flow, I’m gonna jump to it: what the fudge will AI do to my job as a writer?

Seriously. The notion that AI would (permitted to?) infiltrate and take over many jobs is both a threat and a joke. Threat, as in, you will become redundant and will soon be kowtowing to robot overlords. You will be waste products, mostly used for amusement of the android or slaves doing work like reaching for the coin dropped down between the grilles of a drain cover. 

Joke, as in, who’s gonna curry favour with the boss? (do, what in a more vulgar language involve lifting of the male reproduction organ pair). Actually that’s not funny…. It’s even “threat”ier than the aforementioned doomsday scenario. The sentinel being will replicate, even mutate with the bosses gene and go predator on our collective asses. 

But that’s me, most of my favourite sci-fi flicks are dystopian in nature and has either Sigourney Weaver or Ron Perlman in it – AI is hardly shown with saintly glow. Think of HAL in 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968). AI can take over some functions, but writing is not an assembly line product, and it will never be like how machine took over productions of many manufacturing entities No, I actually welcome it. Here’s why:

I have had my ups and downs as a writer over the years -  yet worrying about competing with other writers, or dealing with  heated rivalries had never been the issues I had to be burdened with. At most, it was the insecurities with my own work. I recall now the time when a sub-editor who works second shift, coming in the next evening with a face that seemed to have joy sucked slowly through a straw overnight, told me to be more careful as my writing were full of mistakes.

Couple of months later he was no longer working there, possibly out looking for joy transfusion.

But that struck me. Hit me hard. It always does. Having had no formal education in English outside of the standard English they teach here in primary and high school, till today I have this insecurity about my grasp of the language. In the final exam in school (SPM), I scored higher in Malay than English. And I never even had a Malay girlfriend in school. The tragedy! Well, almost….

Thankfully, over time (quite a long time, actually) I managed to accept that I can go on writing with all those mistakes because everyone does that. Even most seasoned writers make mistakes, or write terribly. Back then, I have corrected my seniors and handed them the proof-read page and they just went on as if the red-inked scribbles were specks of dust on windshield. As I got older, I have my own writing corrected and I never felt as bad as I used to, but damn it. It sure do hit you a bit, especially when the one that corrected you is a young punk. 

But I realise this, of course. What makes writers unique is the voice. Sure, there are all types of writing, but you can still make your voice come through in the most droll academic pieces no matter how sleep inducing it is. 

Which would be lost as AI takes over the entire writing assignments, no matter if its academic, or industries like media and advertising/public relations. Feed the sonovabitch some stuff and see it vomit out copies, speeches, press releases and worryingly, scripts. Sleep inducing looks more prospective now. 

Collateral 

Which is why the type of writing that are most affected happen to be the ones that doesn’t require that “voice”, Namely, where drones of writer churn out mass manufactured copies, like Buzzfeed, where the headlines itself was meant to keep you staring at it for more than ten second: some of these headlines are longer than excuses heard in bedrooms. I mean, look at an actual sample of a headline:

“Kim Kardashian’s 7-Year-Old Son Saint West Said He Often Tells Her That She’s “Nothing” To Him, And People Have Many Thoughts”

That is, if you are curious about the “thoughts”, you click the bait (yes, that’s what these pieces are known as, clickbaits) and fall into the rabbit hole with ad banners and more link tunnels and secret pop-up doors to sealing a deal with the bankruptcy court, or even better, run afoul with the law.  

Sooner or later, the discerning ones are going to boycott all forms of clickbaiting. In fact, when it comes to all things online, look at the websites. The whole damned thing is dying – simply because the contents sucked platypus ass. The ones that are strong and surviving, are e-commerce platforms and ones that actually got bigger are the media sites, where I am sure, AI cannot get hold of in its entirety thanks to….writers.

Creative how?

So, would AI make writers redundant? Some, yes. Copywriting will go the way of the dodos for lesser products and services – they can all be dealt with by even Chatgpts. Creative writing would still be handled by the hands that can. There’s a reason why only Arthur can wield the Excalibur. And authors, their creative calibre. See, I can make it rhyme, try and beat me, AI. 

AI can be the maids, slaves, if I may, to do the cleaning up bit, touching up a grammar there, removing the misspelled trashes, and replacing with fresh fragrant ones. They will be the R2D2s and C3PO combined, intelligent but are subject to our whip lashing. They would still be tools. Maids. But not the type Schwarzenegger sleep with.. 

We use them to be precise about our “voice” in the writings. With dead writing, no matter how creative it can program itself into being,  I am sure many would clamour to hear those human ”voices” in writing, as inn performances based on those brilliantly written scripts that has its own unique colour. Especially scripts, in fact. No AI can do the verbal machine-gunning that David Mamet is known for, nor could create genuine hilarity ala Mel Brooks, which stemmed from his own unique worldview and upbringing.

Features with interviews, unless written in Q&A format, can never have the flair that a writer who throws her character in the mix when fleshing out the page detailing the encounters to the readers, who will see the colour and taste the flavour the author had intended in the piece.

This is where, In fact, I welcome AI. It is gonna separate the real writers from hacks. It will filter the gold nuggets from the muds and sand. The pretenders and the hoaxers will be weeded out. The shells once occupied by hacks will be filled by the AI bots. The ones with real panache, the ones that grind away at night, spurred by increasingly loud growling deadline – they stay!

It all goes back during the moment when automating and mechanisation was taking over the lives at the beginning of last century. A perfect example of that paranoia would be Charles Chaplin’s 1936 masterpiece film, Modern Times. A strong satire on technology taking over our life, and aims at the heart of it all – capitalism too, can be cruel, cold and as inhuman as socialism/communism is seen from the other side of the fence. The heart is missing. We always want that. Digital is cold, analogue is warm – just ask sound engineers.   

Like all tools, AI is starting out young, earnest, innocent. But age corrupts, vile corrupts absolutely. It was a writer who warned about artificial intelligence, if one were to recall 2001: Space Odyssey by Arthur C. Clarke, filmed and released in 1968 by director Stanley Kubrick, in which the central villain was a sentient AI, named HAL. A bloody red light, that’s it.

Now, how will impact journalism. Well, I am confused with my own argument now. I shall tackle this another day. Or get the ChatGPT to write part two, I’m just too lazy. 

2nd part here.

The Flash (2023)

 Two scenes that got me emotional. One, when Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne does the eye scan and walks into his room of batsuits. Two, the climactic multidimensional, multiverse showcase of the DC superheroes and the various incarnations. There was Christopher Reeve and that got me into tears. Yes, it's an emotional manipulation on the filmakers' part milking nostalgic reactions from the audience...but it was well placed within that multiverse nonsense (acceptable nonsense because it's from god-damned comic book, not pages of Tolstoy).

There's only one draw for me to eagerly wait for this flick - Keaton. Other Batmen came and gone, but for three decades like a fanatic loyalists, I stood by Keaton, proclaiming that he's the best. So what if he's not comic book accurate (oh yeah, try the various other earlier incarnations on pages you get even ones sillier than the intentional campy live TV version). 

Keaton didn't have a trilogy. He sort of moved on when his earlier frequent collaborator Tim Burton decides not to do the third. This, for me, is that third Keaton Batman. To watch from that perspective, despite his lesser screentime, makes the entire film a fantastic experience.

This, to me, is the best DC flick since the earlier Keaton Bats film (I don't dig Christian Bale's grim take, sorry Nolan fan boys), and certainly the best comic book film since the first Iron Man (2008).

The multiverse concept doesn't bug my semiliterate brain, it works because, hey, we watched and understood Back To The Future (referred to heavily here - great plot device to enlighten the audience - albeit the Eric Stoltz version.... movie nuts would know about that casting trivia). It's quite easy to follow but can be messy when we are thrown in it, then again it doesn't ruin the flow.

The simple message of not changing the past and accepting "fate" and that "fate" can never be altered is hammered down enough to make the early devotional Tamil film fans proud. I hate that message and that is my only complaint. Fate, like the concept of "creation" is all encompassing easy answer to unanswerable questions relating to selfish desires and disappointments. To throw that chip into a comic book film feels like ho-hum, almost lazy, to me.

But it is interestingly probed here. The question as to whether you really get to meet, interact and touch the physical you of the past is firmly put aside without getting science in the way. Hey, it's a comic book movie, they have done worst shit on the page panels.

The film was already notorious for casting Ezra Miller.... he's got massive legal baggages to deal with that made him an instant fan repellent in these days and ages of knee jerk, politically correct, woke moral posturing. We are still struggling with the concept of parking legally, making us swell moral judges, don't we? But I digress.

He did a good job, playing dual role of the same character from different age group convincingly. Hopefully the audience can put the actor's personal issue aside, let the real world deal with it, and enjoy the film for what it is. Damn, poor DC could use some hits and try to be at least neck to neck with the smug MCU. DC could really kick off a good new phase with this film. Hey, I even liked Sasha Calle's Supergirl. 

Ponniyin Selvan 2 @ PS2

(Spoiler alert: Not sure what I am giving away, but there may be some stuff you better off not knowing now, but if you are familiar with the story the books are based on, perhaps it’s fine)

The highly anticipated second part to last year’s Ponniyin Selvan has hit the theatres and for the poor industry that had been enduring pretty dull outings of lately finally got something that would jerk the shoulder of audiences who have been sleepwalking into theatres. The film lives up to it’s promise and premise – unless you are a huge fan of the original books. Any fans of books will have, one way or another, gripes about film versions. I am a fan of Ian Fleming’s books, I am as jaded as Luke Skywalker in the recent Star War instillments when it comes to the adaptations.

This is not a sequel perse, but continuation as the film was intentionally broke into two parts, having had majority of the scenes shot at one go. Kinda what they did with the Lord of The Rings flicks. So, to compare with the first would be unfair, depending on who’s reviewing.

But I tell you this, its’s a lot more intriguing and exciting this time around, thanks to the narration’s focus on the dramatic character clashes and political skirmishes. Here, the lead characters are fleshed out even further and given lots of emotional dimensions – scopes that unfortunately some performers are out of depth with.

Speaking of which, I had my issues with Aishwarya Rai and Trisha, with their frozen demeanour that I spoke about in the review of the first film. I still have issues with the two overstaying actresses, but having had already anticipated that, it didn’t interfere with my viewing pleasure this time around. It probably added to the joy of other scenes, having these two piss poor performances out of the way.

This time, the narration is briskly paced, scenes are given good beating like in an interrogation room – truth comes out in most of them. In fact, I was even enthralled by a romantic scene involving Karthi’s Vandhiyadevan and Trisha, involving a sword. It was titillating, frankly even exuded with sublime eroticism and Karthi nailed his confusion amidst convulsion of pain, and compulsion of still needing to wisecrack within his predicaments. More on him later.

As mentioned the story moves, moves and moves. It never lets up, with exception of the encounter between Vikram’s and Aishwarya Rai’s Nandhini, a very well written sequence with an important end. The climactic battle sequence is a lot more better shot and edited, and we have an idea of who’s frickin’ fighting whom, an issue I often have with even many well-made Hollywood flicks, where we sort of get lost amidst heavy cutting, and multiple angles and varying distances that they keep alternating, giving us a goddamned headache.

Vikram gets to do more heavylifting this time around, and he did it gloriously. It's satisfying that he was picked for this role, a lion with thorn in the paw, and he roared his way through with lots of hurt, continuing where he left off. His ending was apt. It may have been anticipated, by those who knows the story, it still feels shocking.

Mani have tough time juggling many important characters, as he did in the first film. But he sort of nailed it down to what matters to the central strain of the story, and limited the focus to the main characters. Others make appearances too, like ones played by Prabhu Ganesan, his son, Vikram Prabhu and Parthiban, the latter who had bigger part in the first one. But its thoroughly satisfying, nevertheless.

If only the lead character was played by a far more powerful actress, this film would be up there with the Veerapandiya Kattabomman or Karnan -  too bad. It could be wrong casting decision, but then, it could be that the industry, the last thirty years, at least, had been bereft of truly mesmerising, strong female performers. Definitely by choice, thanks to the male dominated industry.

Mani has delivered and thank god it was him. Both MGR and Kamal Haasan wanted to adapt the books, but I get a feeling that if at all they were made, the films would cater to the fans of the stars, not the books, more. There are rumblings about caste already in the first film, and it is very notably present in this film as well. But guess what? Mani didn’t give a ****. He just went on with it, and so be it. For a quiet, soft spoken, almost effete director, he is one stubborn goat and that is why this film managed to get made in the first place. Despite my own personal disdain for some of the stuff he did onscreen in the past, I salute him. Good job.

Additional Note: Karthi continues with his fantastic performances as Vandhiyadevan and I think his character would be great in a spin-off. Just him, perhaps his girl pal, the fabulous boat gal played by Aishwarya Lakshmi and his best frenemy played by Jayaram off onto another bunch of adventures. On the other hand…they might totally ruin it. Oh, I shut up.

Millennials and Generationism

 [I wrote this last year April… heaven knows why I never posted this. Perhaps I had diarrhea that day. But here it is… have I changed my mind…? Hell no.)

*-*

“Stupidity is a lack of intelligence. Ignorance is the decision to ignore certain facts and realities. (James Mulholland from his article on racism)”

 

Generationism: “…belief that a specific generation has inherent traits that make it inferior or superior to another generation. The term is usually applied to claims of superiority in the expressed values, valuations, lifestyles and general beliefs of one generation compared to those of another, where objectively verifiable criteria substantiating the claim of superiority in themselves are lacking.

 -+-+-+

I have been seeing many posts, especially in the Facebook lately, a trend somewhat, by some folks who hangs on to old traditions and ancient practices the way vultures circle rotting corpses. 

Look, I am an old guy, and come September this year I'd be stepping into my fifth decade, and I was whining about “kids nowadays” since I was in my twenties. I had always been an old fart. Even my beloved aunty Saro who is several decades older than me, calls me, not old fashioned guy, but “old era guy” (pazhaya kalattu manushan).

Yet as I aged ungracefully (hair loss, alcoholism, liking some contemporary actresses and swearing allegiance to cats) I am beginning to realise the follies of the way of my thinking...

I mean, look, every other goddamned generation is always sneering at the next generation, saying that they got it easy. "Kids these days," some geezer would say, "I used to walk 20 kilometer to school". Exaggeration is the side effects of aging and memory loss. Hell,  some of these "honest" men are leading corporations and running the government

Being unenforced ritualistic endeavours, generationism oftentimes rears its snapping turtle head in many other departments.

Let’s take the fashion, for example, especially men. The now septuagenarian former wearers of baggy pants hated bell bottoms when the later, err, swept across the nations. Just about the time they caught up with the flaring trousers (with flaring nostrils of hesitance) with progression of time, these new embracers of bell bottoms rang their bells (re: Anita Ward) angrily when the goddamned straight cut that they left behind hastily to peruse the disco floor burner….wait for it… made a comeback in 80s. Arrrr! They cried like peg legged pirates waving their unsheathed swords towards the youths wearing the very goddamned baggies they had long re-stitched into sailing masts. 

Aside: The slim cut of late sixties early 70s is back now, sigh. If women’s fashion is like football, men’s fashion is table tennis. End of aside 

Now, let’s look at pop culture...that’s even harder hitting, I tell ya. When Chuck Berry and gang burst open the door to unleash the foot tapping, hip swaying rock n roll into the scene, the previous title holders, the Jazz aficionados (or hepcats, whatever they mean)....raised hell. Yet, when rock n roll went psychedelic, insolent Elvis fans refused shaved their respective pair of sideburns. 

Soon enough, disco ruled the stage (or dancefloor), the rockers cringed and went full tight leotards, torn jeans hairblown hair, and makeup that made women err… blush?. Though I am not a fan of hip hop/rap… but I thank them to putting some of these glam Rock sonsofbitches back to the sidewalk. That genre hasn’t recovered if one were to judge by the number of “best of” or “greatest hits” compilations they churn up more than the number of actual albums they did.

But I digress.

In the social media, often, I saw the resurgence of “traditional is the best” schtick where, especially the Indians, have traditional cure for every goddamned thing including riots at movie theatres screening Tamil films.

When Poet Laureate Kannadhasan wrote munnorgal moodargal alla (the ancients are not dumbasses)… he didn’t say that they were genius and did shit and stuff and were ahead of us. If so, they would have cured dumbassery among the community long time ago. What he meant was, the folks of that sub-continent survived during their era of extreme difficulties with very little man-made resources with acquired wisdom amassed over time. They were survivors, not whiners that happened to be the very generations now looking back and selling blended leaves to cure piles.

Anyway, my grouse is how this mentality is affecting the way they/we are looking at the younger generations, specifically the millennials. Millennials are lazy, the older generations complain. Millennials got everything handed out to them, and they are needy...it seems.

Well, f*** off, geezers. Let’s look at these facts. Yeah, facts. If you can call old decrepit piece of dung products and practices as facts and sell them on radio stations, I don’t mind calling the following facts myself.

Top Ten Old is gold, but not all that glitters are gold facts .

1.      Mobile phone is bad? Mobile phone reunited many lost family members, friends, acquaintances.  If it’s splitting the family members at the dinner table, regulate the usage – have better attitude.  Stop whining about it.

2.       The better transportation system made world smaller, it also able to make the Meeks murderers on road - most of whom are not millennials. Let’s not forget the traffic offences and inconveniences. Check out the driver’s gray hair.

3.       Most technology we have now comes from the innovation in the defense industry started by older farts. That industry is behind the death of millions if you didn’t know.

4.       Stop bugging the younger generation for their cluelessness or for not being as smart as your generation.  We were pulling spider legs that age, remember?

5.       Who invented wrestling, where skimpily dressed sweaty men do extremely physical things to each other? Millennials?

6.       Don’t sneer at the millennials for not keeping a tab on what’s happening around the world.  The ones who do are running the country or, have been voting in all the wrong goddamned geezers in the first place.

7.       Old farts are the worst offenders in the social media ,  sharing unverified b.s., malicious panic creating rumours,  thrusting their favourite football team onto unsuspecting open beaks of the young'uns,  ditto political parties,  favourite old fart actors (and Thalaivars), and worse  personal faiths. 

Aside: Which means kids will never buy that James Cagney is the patron saint of awesomeness, so shut up Rakesh. End of aside.

8.       All the great traditions, cultures, faiths, ideologies,  from past have either evolved or failed! Values? Yeah, sure. There are still theft, corruption, rape, abuse of the underage and animals, murder on every goddamned civilisation at any given time.  Let the kids now change all that – help them, don’t discourage them if they are sincere, not just merely being woke.

9.       Current movies sucks, music went down to drain? Well boo-effing-hoo, the executives greenlighting them are… you guessed it – old farts.

10.     And when you corporate knuckleheads look at coming up with products and services to please consumers and make shitload of money…which age group do you often target?     - RKP,  25/04/22

Varisu (2023)

This is sort of the kinda flick Karthik (Muthuraman's son, not Siva Kumar's) used to flourish in back during the hey days of the 90s, where film qualities were fresh from the day before's wet market, with radio friendly songs by the likes of Deva or Sirpy, or in case of skint treasure chest, S.A.Rajkumar, who unleashed melodies after melodies that chase after their own respective tails (an honorable trade now expertly weaved by Harris Jeyaraj). 

It's nice to hear the background score (or as the Indian film experts call beegeeyem") because the loudness kept me awake, most grateful.

It's nice to see Ganesh Venkataraman. I had hope for this dude once, in fact, I even had a dude crush on him. He has yet to prove himself. Bugger need a career counselor.

It's nice to see Jayasudha, who's definitely in for the paycheck. She didn't age much, looks great and I do hope she stick around longer - there are so few actresses from K. Balachander fraternity around. The industry could use you brilliant, talented gals, suck some of the blood cells or something.

It's nice to see Prabhu Ganesan, who's definitely in for the paycheck.

And lunch. Sigh.

It's nice to see SJ Surya's guest performance (not cameo, because he gets his own flashback privileges), though he seemed to have misplaced his eccentricities.

It's nice to see Sarath Kumar taking over from fellow elder Nattamai, Vijaya Kumar, playing the long suffering patriarch of a wealth endowed family, albeit with better stock of organic hair.

Hari O Sambo 😑

Thunivu (2023)

If I were asked to choose between Ajith and Vijay at gun point, I’d not hesitate to choose Ajith. One, he’s one of those limited actors who can work well within the confines of his capacity. He sucks when he attempts to push himself. But within his comfortable zone he can weave magic and be very entertaining.

And that what kept me in the movie theater till the end, in this, otherwise a wannabe, bank heist thriller.

Joining the excitement of seeing gravity defying, physics spitting films doing well of late, even getting recognition at prestigious award shows, Thunivu is very generous in incredulous, verifiably silly action sequences. Some fans would laud this, but in the absence of circus tents around the world which has long since stopped enticing to watch bearded lady and Dick Grayson’s parents fall to their respective “origin story” deaths, movies have been delighting these passive adrenaline junkies. Tom Cruise’s career depends on it. Thunivu thrives on it.

Then the Tamil movies obsession with flashback sequences. This Tamil Movie flashbackitis strikes after intermission. To and fro, we get expositional orgies of plot “correcting” information, coincidences, and convenient backstories. It’s relentless, and completely unengaging. If the film just stayed at the bank and allowed the character interaction to reveal fragments of those backstories through dialogues and actions, it would have been a smarter tale despite the amateur pyrotechnics and terrible supporting casts and worst extras.

Like Rajini, Ajith these days merely sells his image. Nothing wrong with that. His character here fills like a continuation of one he played in Mangatha, a film that I really enjoyed, especially his performance.

Ajith still excels in wearing negative shades to his character’s personality. He carries that attitude and that is why I hung on to him, instead of walking out when the relentless flashback attack began. His insanity kept the film together, strangely. 

The heist story and the marionette act with bigger powers that be planning a headline making tragedy is not new. Ask Michael Mann who has been perfecting the sub-genre since the 1981 film he directed James Caan in, Thief. After years of history of Tamil film attacking politics and politicians (and the industry players joining them anyway), this film goes after the finance sector and the behind the scenes players. Some viewers not too savvy with the sector’s working might be lost as to how account holders are being robbed, but we get the picture. It’s not too different than swindling politicians. Voters and consumers are like addicts and alcoholics, lessons are often learned too late. So, don’t sneer at us ex Rehab inhabitants.

Anyway taking Ajith out the film would make this flick as interesting as half boiled egg white  The plot tries to be clever, but could have been clearer. The action scenes tries to be clever, but could have been clearer. The other characters tries to be clever, but almost all, especially the cops come off as uniformly uninformed uniformed dumbasses. Clarity won’t cut it. #rakeshmovietalk

2022: The Year of Diarrhea

 

This is my long awaited sequel to the 2009 and 2008 review I wrote back then. Compared to last two years, those two years were like time spent at a monastery.

In all fairness, getting by 2021 and hopping into 2022 was not exactly like from pot into the fire… no. It was like missing the flame, but getting right down to the coal, getting raked left right till you are not even edible to a T-Rex.

Despite the fact that T-Rex will resist you as pièce de résistance, for having a more refined taste, ...but then, even the great Extinct One would be glad that it didn’t stick around for the stinkaroo that was 2022. Seriously, it was a shitty year in which the only momentary reprieve was when Will Smith smacked Chris Rock and was talked about in the media in the same manner as they would when Hitler invaded Poland.

Speaking of which, right in the beginning of the year, Russia invaded Ukraine. It was not an incursion, or a mild mosquito-esque bite on some small village. It was a goddamned invasion. And the world sat and posted stuff about it, about the human rights, about how unfair life is on Ukraine and how Putin is a shitbag. More than 50 million Ukrainian civilians were killed… but don’t forget to wear a mask.

Because Covid didn’t end in 2021. Nosireebob. The year ended, but Covid signed an extension contract with the devil (played by John Malkovich) and continued to party all year around. This writer got infected briefly. The experience, shall I say, was confusing. I was expecting an ‘Excorcist Linda Blair’ like reaction, but all I got was mild fever, a bit of body ache and some shits. What a bummer.

Yet, 2022 had its own roller coaster ride and calm boat ride. This year, finally Anwar Ibrahim realized his and his followers’ dream of finally become the prime minister of the country – after a rather relaxed voting process. The amount of yelling, cursing and Facebook banning would make you think that Malaysian voters are rabid political beasts who would bite live electric wire to prove a point. Come the actual time to go out there and doin’ dat thang, they were all just regular blokes and gals. Some even said good morning.

The win by Pakatan Harapan made “I told you so” as the most used expression in the country, and everyone was excited including Barisan Nasional who, for years hating DAP decided to join force because… no, not because they want to share power. Of course, not. They want to help us, the people. Yeah. Does that sound convincing? How if I tell you that fish can ride a bicycle? Yeah, that’s more convincing.

Then, there’s the case involving our former prime minister Najib Tun Razak. Those who despised him were happy with the sentencing handed out. But then, there are those who thinks something is not right. There’s something rotten in the state of KL. There is no point going deep into it, as everyone should enjoy the honeymoon phase with their favourite idol as the prime minister. The shit is only halfway to the fan.

Speaking of “interesting” leadership, Twitter agreed to sell itself to Elon Musk. Seriously, that’s what most of the medias say. I am not saying that Twitter has since become like a gigolo or something. But there is certainly some element of someone wanting to use something for their own perverted pleasure thing going on there.             

In May, the United States of America made the news when their president said something stupid. Oh, who am I kidding. That happens all the time. No, the news is tragic…that is when 19 children and two teachers were killed when an 18 years old opened fire in a classroom at an….

….elementary school. I know we were all shocked by it, then we moved on like deciding what’s for lunch. But let that sink again. Also, dig this: US has had at least 604 mass shootings so far in 2022 and this news came out in November. That is bigger number than their 116 Olympic medals won last year.

And we continue to take the sons of bitches from that country seriously. That’s a child murdering nation, with presidents who immediately assume the role of homicidal maniacs killing people inside and mostly, outside of the country. And there are Malaysians who are just too eager to carry the goddamned Eagle nation’s balls, and with the members of the new government - now that all of the main knuckleheads have joined forces – are now going to be ready to offer their organic boot cleaning services for a fistful of dollars. We’re gonna get sprayed with pure American holy pee soon.

There are plenty of losses this year. Among the celebrities listed here by a UK media Olivia Newton-John Robbie Coltrane, Olivia Newton-John, Taylor Hawkins, Dame Deborah James, Dame Angela Lansbury, Vivienne Westwood, and Queen Elizabeth II. Yes, the latter is listed as a celebrity.

Now, the Brits have a king after more than seven goddamned decades. We have King Charles over there, and, queen Camille. But history will mostly remember them for the tampon thing.

We also had World Cup. For the first time since 1982, I never watched a single game. Speaking of the game, we lost Pele – the greatest ever footballer, who sprinkled so much magic to the game that I dare say that in developing world, he was bigger than whoever or whatever's being worship.

2022 has now come to an end. The Covid cases has gone down – but let’s face it, it was devastating. This is what I got off the net:

Malaysia cases

Updated 30 Dec, 2022

Confirmed cases: 5,025,581

Deaths:  36,851

Global cases

Confirmed cases: 658,820,443

Deaths: 6,684,285

The entire year was ruled by a tiny virus, not a new king or prime minister. A tiny goddamned virus. We can only hope that the next year would be better as we do every year. 

Since the last several years had been progressively worst, I am reminded of an old Tamil movie comedy. This dude played by Nagesh tells another dude, Neelu, about the visit to an astrologer.

Nagesh: The astrologer said, only until I am fifty would I go through difficulties, suffer like a dog

Nilu: After 50?

Nagesh: I will get used to it.

Happy New Year everyone…. Keep the mask on. The…other mask, I mean.

Naai Sekhar (2022)

Note: Expectedly dull and dumb, but worth for Anandharaj’s hillarious turn as frustrated baddy. Also, the end song, an apt rap by Vadivelu himself, with dance choreographed by Prabhu Deva.

The film begins by thanking meme creators. There’s a necessity for that. Vadivelu has been making comebacks like burnout rock stars surviving on nostalgia and “Best Of” collection sales.

Vadivelu is now on second lease (pun…see movie titles) of his career comeback. The first time after he ran out of favour with cinema audience, the repeated showcasing of his earlier comedy scenes found new batch of audience and he made a film being the lead.

Then, it’s the memes…if you have social media friends who do watch Tamil films, you can’t run away from those memes with Vadivelu in it.

Be as it may, Vadivelu needs good writers. After his split from his writing partner Singgamuthu, his art (whatever it is) suffered so much so that  he couldn’t even compete with the lesser comics now filling his market stall.

The industry that’s prone to self congratulations at the drop of a hat, with almost a century of experience behind it is bereft of good scriptwriters, let alone ones who could deal with comedy. The last time there was a good full length comedy feature was 23am Pulikesi which benefited from a very good original source (cartoon strip in magazine). 

It has not been so since in few Vadivelu starrers.

With a limited comic talent Vadivelu relied heavily on slapsticks and self deprecation for laughs, while occasionally dishing out able dramatic performances. But his bag of trick is limited, and a comics expiry date on big screen is just as limited.

Here's another opportunity to make use of Vadivelu by the filmmakers and Vadivelu himself to tap on the fans still remembering him through the incessant (often unfunny) memes.

But the film is only slightly funnier than the crass soapwater shit being passed off as comedy on TV and social media. It didn’t even push Vadivelu into a newer direction which 24am Pulikesi did.

Those still nostalgic about the “great era” would sit through this out of respect and in hope that there’ll be some sort of redemption somewhere. Otherwise the film is a sketch piece but stretched a bit too far.

Also you know shit is not working when you hafta insert that Goundamani/Senthil Karagattakaran theme. In a Vadivelu flick. There’s hardly an originally hilarious moment, just recaps, recalls from his earlier flicks.

Still, the solace comes in form of the flick’s baddy Anandharaj. His desperation, frustrations especially with his inept henchmen who later has to adjust to them who has to do regular jobs to support themselves. That by itself would have been a wonderful subject to explore with Anandharaj himself as big time gangster dealing with labour issues, and latter's health after his bits get shot. He’s the funniest here.

But they’ll stretch that thin too. Sad that Vadivelu’s comeback pitch keeps fizzling out. Time for him to take a bow or continue with character roles. He’s better as a second lead at least.

#rakeshmovietalk