What else, a but a movie.
Or is it Thursday? Well, I am sure it started on a Wednesday.
I don't exactly remember when was the last time I watched a movie all alone, because thats when I watch them thoroughly, savouring every moment and every scene, looking deep, trying to understand the character, significance of a scene, etc.
"Unnaipol Oruvan", is the remake of "A Wednesday", that impact of a movie starring ever affable Naseerudin Shah and "Dr. Jekyl / Mr. Hyde" kinda actor Anupam Kher, you love him or hate him based on the movie you have watched.
What one experiences while watching "A Wednesday", is a sense of awakening. You don't feel energized (a la Jackie Chan movie), but warm, with a sense that even we can be true hero. No, its not in the way, an ordinary man beats twenty baddies with brawn, but the genuine "Common Man", whose brains energized by raw emotions, can outsmart to eradicate evil. Powerhouse performances from the lead players in that movie starting from Shah to Kher including Jimmy Shergill and the character "Jai" (whose real name I don't remember) created that sense.
Why am recollecting "A Wednesday" (A.we) here? Simply because, after watching "Unnaipol Oruvan" (Un.O), I did not get that kind of "sense". This is not to say that "UO", the Tamil remake is bad, or a sweeping conclusion that every remake is bad (well, you can say so, with RGV though, remember 'Aaargh'? pronounced "Auwack"), I found "Baasha" to be a far better movie than "Hum", or "Thillu Mullu" when compared with "Gol Maal". Here, in the case of "A.We", the remake did not feel as good as the original, or even half that good.
Despite Kamal. Despite Mohan Lal. Despite good performances. Despite a better than acceptable adaptation of the theme.
On a stand alone basis, "Un.O" is a good watch, certainly. A movie worth every buck you put on that ticket. It rightly pulls all the strings in your heart, and your brain. The trouble is "A.We" pulled those strings better, and therefore that "sense" lingered harder.
May be I am biased, but my bias is not without a reason, which is what this post is about.
What ails "Un.O" are these -
(a) Kamal Hassan: Don't get me wrong, it is not his acting, but his 'aura'. Great movie, great script, fantastic actor, but not the apt role. As a movie goer, I have come to associate certain degree of intelligence with Kamal, certain amount of "power" from his character. Except of course in out-and-out comedy movies, where he delivers big time with his innocence through eyes and diction.
With Kamal in the lead, you know for sure, he will not do anything wrong (as in anti-social). With Naseeruddin Shah, you can never be sure. Thats because of background as a supporting / character actor. With almost "Zero" movies in which Kamal plays a baddie (except a rare one here or there, where he plays anti-hero), you cannot go wrong with Kamal! Too much of symbolism of the goodness in Kamal or his character or his intention in the movie is also the culprit.
Naseeruddin Shah did not carry any such burden. There is absolutely no aura, that of "Macho" or "Intelligent" or any such image. When he says he is a common man, he means that, and we believe firmly, for it is palatable, for it feels genuinely true. When Kamal says so, it doesn't wash completely.
I believe, with Kamal taking the role of Anupam Kher, and a person such as "Delhi" Ganesh or Manivannan or similar actors in Naseeruddin Shan's role, this movie would have rocked, as good as "A.We"
This is not take away the credit from Mohan Lal, or to diminish Kamal's performance, but to remind the rule of "Horses for Courses". Kamal was bit too intelligent here.
(b) Dialogues: You would laugh or atleast smile, heartily in "A.We", especially in the scene in which "Jai" tells about sharing "love" to a cop, or Jimmy Shergill telling the terrorist "Mujhe galthi karna accha lagtha hai" or when Naseeruddin Shah says "Kya mein pankha beh raha hoon?" or the classic from Anupam Kher "Yeh, baccha kaun hai?"
Their replacement here in the movie sucks big time. Often you need a good person to deliver these dialogues with elan, to carry the spirit with they embody. Kamal's dialogue simply doesn't fit in the scheme of things or nor does it gels with the flow.
"Jai's" rendition communicates his, soft demeanor, but firm approach to work, and Jimmy's tells us of his attitude.
Too much of English, with an western pronounciation, makes things even worse. The assuredness with which computer hacker handles himself in "A.We" was way too superior (character chosen was better in Tamil, with the wittiest dialogue in the entire movie reserved for him "Idhellan enga Thattha Kollu Thattha madhiri. Abhivadhyai sollindu arambikiraen")
With not much of life in the dialogues, I guess, half the battle was lost vis a viz the original. The entire cop team and Anupam Kher's interaction with them, including his interaction with the Chief Minister was hair raising and truly fantastic. Here it was good, very good, but certainly not as good as in the Neeraj Pandey original.
Some of them are typical "Kamal" dialogues (or is it 'Crazy' Mohan?) with word plays, using a particular word as part of a larger word / phrase, or using some current political scenario as a background for a few of them.
(Funny though, even after more than a year after watching "A.We" just once, I am able to remember more dialogues in that movie than the one I watched two hours back. I think this summarizes the quality of dialogues)
(c) Characterisation: The characterisation of Ganesh ("Arif") and Mr.X ("Jai") pales in comparison with the that of Jimmy Shergill and the real "Jai" (I remember it to be a muslim name). Ganesh should remember that merely chewing gum and having a heavyset frame alone will not make you tough, but it is in the eyes, in the attitude.
Yuckiest one was the TV Reporter. I honestly found the role to be going a bit overboard, what with her interaction with the Commissioner of Police on smoking etc. She looked more like an arrogant prick than anything else. In "A.We" the character was kind of dudish (as in "Dud" and "Dude"), but carried a lot of poise and sensibilities. Here it was sorely missing.
Where "Un.O" scores over the original is in editing and in building up the momentum. What with alternating between one scene and another, adds up to suspense and also drama. It builds up the momentum. Some of the needless yet over-hyped momentum in "A.We" (that of partial images of Naseeruddin Shan interacting with the terrorists), were thankfully avoided. Having a "Jeep" instead of a "table" in the middle of nowhere was also commendable. (I loved that jeep. My heart broke when the jeep exploded :()
Overall, atleast in this case, "A.We" was truly 'awe'some, Unnaipol Oruvan was, you know, was good, but when compared to its potential, it grossly underperformed.
PS:
1. I watched "A Wednesday" also all alone, therefore, even that movie was subject to similar nitpicking(!) as above.
2. I have watched many remakes many times over, including their original. I have watched the same movie twice or thrice, sometimes, within a span of one week, but still found them to be very very impressive ("Vettaiyadu Velayadu", "Nadodigal", "Dark Knight", "Cindrella Man", "Swades" etc.) so on. Therefore, the argument that "I had a template to compare for this movie, but not for that movie" does not sell here.
3. Would I recommend "Un.O" to anyone? Certainly, yes. Especially considering the fact that this might be the last good movie this year, with somebody eagerly waiting to "Hunt" you! (After which RGV ki Aag will look like a classic!)
Comments
Most of them who have watched '(A. We)' told me that Naseerudhin Shah was much more acceptable than Kamal as a 'common man'.You also seem to be of the opinion that 'Kamal' carries an aura that the audience are required to dump before watching the movie.
May be true , but to be honest ,I have never felt like that.
But I felt this film demands heroism.Heroism of the 'common man'.. That's what MGR , Rajini were doing. The rickshawallas and autowallah's they potrayed are all the 'common man'..
But people never questioned the identity of such a common man then...? They never questioned why such a common man turned super man then?.. If its kamal .. Why such a question ?
Funny.. MGR was a rickshawallah but was wearing a foreign watch.! People never questioned that..
Simple..
1)If Delhi Ganesh or Manivannan were the hero, it would have affected the 'business' of the film?
2)Bombay already had the anger..
People just had to come to watch the movie.. In chennai, people dont have the anger.. hence the starpower is required to attract the audience.
May be Kamal Hassan has fallen prey to the fear of 'non collection' at box office if he had cast Delhi Ganesh instead of him in this film.
(but why Delhi Ganesh all of a sudden?.. Nasser would be a better choice)
Kamal knows the mistakes in his film much more than all of us. Do you seriously think he does not know 'Horses for Courses'?( Who else but Kamal would have given Nasser that role in Magalir mattum)..
BUT .. I cannot imagine any one else except kamal for that role.
Any other person speaking such witty dialogues would have sucked big time and would have been non acceptable...
And you have disappointed me by saying the dialogues were bad...
I actually thought the dialogues were awesome , the humour in them amazing , the irony and sarcasm in them great.. I don't know how much of it is in the original..
May be I am biased towards Kamal.. I think.. This is the best way this film can be done in Tamil.
Did I forget while writing this post that I may have to contend with a Kamal Fan Boy (or Devotee as you would like it!)? Sure, I did!
Lets just not compare an actor (Kamal) whose job is to act with stars whose job is to, well, occupy the screen in the most fashionable way possible, without a bit of emotion. What Rajini or MGR or Vijay did is of no consequence. As to why people (blind ones, who are fascinated by gimmicks) didn't question them, again is of no consequence. For you are not part of that people, neither am I (most of the time atleast!).
My post was not about Kamal, but the movie. As to whether Kamal does not realize the "H for C" rule, all I can say is, here he did not.
Dialogues were, I maintain, not befitting the movie. Its high on intelligence, sarcasm - but didn't completely serve the intended purpose. Presence of Kamal gave away the entire script. As if that was not enough, symbolic gestures in the form inscriptions in the bags. Then comes the dialogues, which, in and out, either speaks about what Kamal (and not the character) is or what he thinks of the world /politicians. These things, in total, takes away the much needed element of suspense.
Even in the original, you have sarcasm, humour, but that was in a different league altogether. When Shah interacts with Kher, he does with utter coldness. A kind of detached way of saying. Kamal does with some kind of authority, as in being somebody superior.
What a movie of this type does or should do is, create an impact at heart. Like the way Evano Oruvan or Anbe Sivam or Thavamai Thavamirundhu did. Impact! Drive home the point, do it effectively. "Karuvatha" scene which is supposed to move people, simply failed to do so. There was lot of emotions in the Original, which was not completely there in the remake. This lack of emotions, especially in dialogues, made me write this post. Simply because this movie simply failed to touch me.
Delhi Ganesh was only an example. I could only think of those two guys that time. I admit, we (as in the General Public) would have been reluctant to go watch a movie in which he was a hero, affecting the business. Even three visits by Kutty (or is it more) will not save the movie.
Anyway, to each, his own.
Cheers
PS: People in Chennai do not have any anger. Are you sure? Just of think of yourself! :)
i prefer kamal in anbe sivam or unal mudiyum thambi kind of role..
i am suprised u liked vetaiyadu vilayadu..
i think both thillu mullu and golmaal were equally good..
PS : yet to watch wednesday..
Thanks for your comments though. Thought provoking is just an incidental result, and never an intention. I just try to post whatever runs in my mind (the monkey mind:).
Comment can be altered / deleted all by yourself, in your log on. I don't delete any comment on blog post, even if they are extremely critical.
Cheers
The movie was very good. My views are in comparison with A Wednesday. Anbe Sivam, to me, is certainly the best of Kamal. Unnal Mudiym Thambi I had watched long back, and I don't exactly remember what the movie is about. Your using it along with Anbe Sivam, makes a compulsion on me to view that soon.
Some how, Gol Maal did make me smile as much as Thillu Mullu, partly due to Hindi speaking ability. As you pointed out, it must be extremely funny, else, we would not have had Thillu Mullu.
Anything wrong with Vettaiyadu Vilaiyadu? I believe, it was one of the better Kamal Haasan characters.
Cheers
(1) First - The movie was no nonsense right from the first frame till the very end.
(2) What was shown in the movie was a true appraisal of the current state of security in our country. Both of those who cause the damage and that of the working of the investigators.
(3) A true appraisal of public sentiment. A true potrayal of public emotions and feeling of insecurity.
(4) It shows Tangible areas for improvement - which is most important. We are doomed to live in a society, we might as well put up a good fight for social security..
So what will happen now that all this is realised. Most probably nothing.
I am a great fan of Naseeruddin Shah and a not-so-great fan of Kamal though I like him a lot in some movies. Yeah, Anbe Sivam is one of them. It takes a lot of self-assuredness for a hero to appear like THAT in a movie. But I liked him much more in one of his lesser talked about films - Sippikkul Muthu. I loved the scene in Nayakan when his daughter refuses to let him see her child. I thought Kamal was great there.
Nasseruddin Shah - what a performer! As an exasperated man trying to explain to his wife that he has a son through a one-night stand and he wasn't even aware of it (actually you begin to feel sorry for him, notwithstanding his infidelity), as a helpless lawyer in Aakrosh, as a musician in Firaaq ... he was fantastic.
As for the comparison between UPo and AWe, the latter was way ahead because Naseeruddin is a face you can identify with on the street, on the train, in your locality. He is the uncle next door. Kamal is a hero, no matter what he does. He ceased to be a common man after 16 vayadinile. Whether it is Unnal Mudiyum Thambi, UPo, Varumaiyin Niram Sigappu or Vettaiyadu..., it is Kamal who dominates, not the character he represents. To cut the loooong story short, UPo was a kamalhassan movie, AWe was a movie that could have had anyone - you, me, he or she as the central character.
Manivannan, Delhi Ganesh, Nasser. Why isn't anyone thinking of Madhavan? He is the man to watch.
Surely Naseeruddin Shah is an amazing actor. There used to be times when I wondered why people like him, Om Puri, etc didn't opt for main stream movies / commercial movies. Was it a conscious choice, or was it their inability to make it big as a commercially saleable "hero". I have seen a few movies in which Naseeruddin Shah plays a typical "tapori" type of hero character. Either way, it is the movie goer who is benefited. May be, if Kamal did not have commercial success with his "heroic" kind of movies, he too could have turned the man next door, and therefore suitable for UnO. I know I am defending Kamal here, but thats because I greatly admire that man. As good as Naseeruddin Shah or even more.
Even being / acting as a "hero", he has tried various roles / characters. Admittedly, Kamal's crying remains the same all through, but nobody can take away the accolades he deserves for his acting abilities.
Your observation about Varumaiyin Niram Sigappu is true. I felt it was overdone by Kamal. But Vettaiyadu Vilaiyadu somehow felt a Gowtham Menon movie more than a Kamal movie. I definitely rate it far higher than many of his other movies.
Madhavan? I didn't think of him at all. If "Evano Oruvan" is anything to go by, he could have pulled it off in UnO.
Cheers
Naseeruddin Shah? The fact that he is as popular as stars like Kamal and Shahrukh Khan without attaining star value in the commercial sense shows his class as an actor. No dancing, singing, no great looks, no muscles to show a la Salman, no superstar status like Amitabh, no he-man image like Nana Patekar, and yet he holds his own. Not once (correct me if I am wrong) have I seen him overact. It is his ability to underplay anything and everything that makes him what he is. Forget his tapori characters. I wonder if he is serious about them. I was particularly cheesed off when I saw him doing Oye Oye in Tridev - horrible movie.
Kamal gets carried away (remember the sermon in the last scene of Thevar Magan? It spoilt an otherwise fantastic movie) and behaves as if there is no tomorrow - like a student who wants to write everything he knows in the answer paper. It is perhaps the influence of Tamil theatre. Kamal started off as a child artist and the Sivaji-style acting, I am sure, has rubbed off on him.
This may sound funny. I think a person comparable to Naseeruddin in acting is Vadivelu. I am yet to see such a versatile actor in Kollywood.
Why Om Puri and Naseeruddin never made it as mainstream actors? I remember how a woman activist (the NGO types) in a seminar tore the media to pieces for portraying women in a bad light. She blamed the actresses too, saying Manisha Koirala, Malaika Arora, Mallika Sherawat and the like were equally to blame. 'Look at Revathi, Shabana and Jaya Bhaduri ... they were so responsible. They never appeared in such costumes' she said.
Give me a break.