This blog entry is dedicated to the “gem”-of-a-director, famous for epic remakes and renowned for taking Indian cinema to the World level who has recently come out with another movie which has had the audience dumbstruck again (for different reasons though)
Whilst the director’s movies have acclaimed fame internationally (One of his movies - Nayagan being listed in the TIME Magazine’s 100 Greatest Movies), his critics have this invariable argument against him – Most of his films are remakes of either real life occurrences or the mythological stories! Nevertheless it is difficult to adapt and present the same on the silver screen and the people of India are stupid only when they vote, not when they watch a movie! So, when a movie is a success, it deserved to be (Vijay’s movies are hard core exceptions)
Such is the reputation of the director who decided that it is “Ramayana” which is to get reshaped in his forge this time. Whereas all his previous remakes proved a worthy watch, I’m still wondering whether the director was high on cocaine when he wrote (to be read as re-structured! or may be got inspired from would be soothing) the script for this movie. Lets analyse...
Always on the short cut Rama! Did he really pass police training or got his certificates from those who have been selling duplicates for literally every document on Earth!?
Half exposed Sita! What was she – A cabaret or pole – dancer?
The all hyped, good-to-good, bad-to-bad Ravana - Man this is how every Tamil movie’s hero is portrayed !
Let alone the characters which were blasphemously transformed. The story line suffered a much worse treatment!
Cutting of nose becomes “gang rape”! That too by the police!
Accepting the one who surrenders, and wishes to talk for peace is replaced by killing the same person!
And this hurt a lot! The all mighty Hanuman is a complete “comedy-piece*” who somehow retains the ability from his alter ego, to jump between the trees!
*I insist on the usage of this word over here, although there are proper English words like moron, brainless, kook or whatever!
And finally Sita falls in love with Ravana! Boy O’ Boy… Here the director became a bit too predictable. When everything is being represented as the opposite, its obvious the heroine is going to fall in love with the villain (With the movie titled after the villain, this is pretty much expected – As already stated We are fools only when We vote)
Having gone this far in insulting a great epic, why didn’t you instead push Sita off that cliff in the climax and make Rama and Ravana - gay partners? That would have been an unexpected twist and would have left the audience completely bewildered! And you would have been appreciated for enlightening about Section 377 too. You missed a grand opportunity of entering politics!!
It is when such loathsome representations are being made, am I reminded of movies like ‘The Da Vinci Code’ that received a strong opposition from the Catholic Churches of India (while the ones in the Rest of the World did not protest much – I still wonder what was itching the ones in India) The but-for-Hindus secular Govt. which was already hanging loose on the about-to-be snapped threads did support the groups, failing which they would have lost the opportunity to loot for the years to come, till date! Adding a specific disclaimer did give the admit pass for the movie. Regardless of religion, insulting epics cannot be considered as Freedom of Expression.
Are the Hindus and their mythologies in existence just for making such hideous depictions? Even people who said ‘God ain’t there’ or those who criticized that bindi on a woman’s head looks like blood oozing out, wouldn’t have gone to this extent! Thanks for scaling a surmountable peak!! You have now set new records, which will definitely be overtaken (may be even by you, God knows). You are just Mani. Not Murali, to create unachievable targets!!
May be just one question is left un-asked! Why didn’t the Hindus or the organizations that supposedly represent them didn’t protest against the release of the movie or after the release!? There are two possible answers.
One they are completely bored of fighting. Such acts have been happening from the M F Hussain era. Atleast they could term him a Muslim protagonist and tell that his art work was against the religion. What can they term you? A Hindu traitor?? Their stupid acts are already digging their graves. We do not want you as the icing on that stinking cake!
Second reason! May be they did not watch the movie at all !! Half the India does not
have a 3 square meal. Who would bother about a so-called artistic movie! A 5 song 2 fight masala entertainer cheers that part of India more and makes them feel the money’s worth! Your creative wonders are beyond reach for them.
You may continue giving such remakes for the mouthwatering A Class audience while the country is still in awe with the question – Why do all producers fall in short of budget when it comes to designing a heroine’s dress!
Help these epics live longer (by not doing such profane remakes) !
Long Live the sovereign secular democratic republic !
Ever Loving
Ganesh Ramachandran
The above mentioned 'Indian'
nice da... mani's mellowd down a lot... good one..
ReplyDeleteWell written Ganesh. It is not just about this much. There is more to talk. There are other ways to interpret!
ReplyDeleteDei,Read my post which is basically a response to thuis psot(It was written in haste so dont pay heed to any typos taht might ahve crept in ) : http://srikumarsblog.blogspot.com
ReplyDeleteAlso,read this : http://krishashok.wordpress.com/2008/01/10/ramayanapedia/
:)
okay.. i wanna keep this short... i appreciate ur attempt to popularise ur blog by critisising the ace director... Satirical remakes have always been hits... otherwise Gulliver's travells wudnt have been famous at all...
ReplyDelete1.We all know that Ram did question Sita on her loyalty...this comes embossed on the epic... :)..
2.Raavan is potrayed as a dexter in various fields..
3. cutting of nose will not be receiving... gang rape by police is something we have come across...
4. I feel it was directors cut to highlight hanuman's feature
I m on the same side as u wen it comes to liking the film... characterisation and a few more things could have been better potrayed..
and btw wats wrong with remakes???
@girish, manoj: Thank you :)
ReplyDelete@ anniyan: i am pretty sure this one post cannot publicise my blog and will have the least number of comments compared to the other two!So this in no way is an attempt to popularise!! The numbers are corresponding to yours..
1. I never talked abt this point.
2. So what?
3. Lakshmana cut her nose because she tried to misbehave? So if a girl tries to misbehave with you, what will you do in response? RAPE HER?? Gr8!!
4. Hanuman is a mighty man. All powerful. And here, no such feature is indicated other than him jumping between trees which he does to escape from the depicted Rama.. Hanuman's purpose is completely defying..
Yeah There's nothing wrong in remakes. But original stories require an extra effort that make them an inch better!
@srikumar: good response! the director had all the independence to do a remake. his version of mahabharata(thalapathi), although showing the kauravas as good-doers for the ppl around them, gained a lot of appreciation, bcos it was much much more sensible and had a lot of depth, when compared to his version of ramayana.
oh man.... y so much emotions... see i dunno abt politics.. but i understood wat mani tried to say a bit... he tried to show how ramayana would be today...
ReplyDeletetheme of the story is 'the question of right and wrong, good and bad is subjective.' Rama and his crew ruled the kingdom.. politicians and police are rulin today.. so he just showed how the so called gud ppl rule the world today... it is becuz of ppl like dev and others who rape, ppl like ravana (today terrorists) are evolved. Mani just wanted to tell the ppl that dont be an old panjagam.. gud ppl are not gud today and bad ppl need not be bad as well.. he has compared rama and ravana with todays rama and ravana to show how times have changed..
Moreover, we al know that ravan was in love wit sita and the whole kingdom doubted sita.. sita here in the movie is the person who weighs the good and bad of today in the balance.. she feels ravana of today is better then todays rama.. thats wat i think mani tried to tell..
The director has taken the epic has a tool to convey somethin.. I would say its creative. Sita symbolizes all pathnis in the epic.. in that case we should get offended if any movie shows the heroine like that.. Y complain ash dressin alone here.. Do u think if ramayana happens today, wil rama be al tat gud? even sita might not be a pathni today.. we have already lost the value of ramayana.. we have no rights to get offended by the movie. and afteral its a persons view of todays situation depicted in a movie.. we shld see it as a movie..
@arvind: Very true !! May be yours is the perfect interpretation of the movie. But I felt the movie is very abstract that it can be interpreted in any way. Felt it could have been much more clear. And I think you need to re-think abt the point of getting offended by a movie.
ReplyDelete@ganesh: may be da.. but according to me movie is a movie.. it can make u think.. but we should not get offended by anythin.. even the cbfc board should not cut scenes... its like cuttin the maker's creativity... they can just increase the age limit if they feel so..
ReplyDeletehmmm.. getting longer..points were to cast light on the remake issue... u need nt take it all up against .. cool down dude...
ReplyDelete1. its about validity of the story
2. the director sees a hero in raavan and hence potrays him as a hero...
3.this point i m not clear wat u r trying to say..
4. there is not much to give life to hanuman in this muvie... so sidelined...
ok.. this is preferably wat i wud like to put across...
Its easy for directors to relate the characters in an instance to the already existing ones.. may b mani was running out of ideas... thts wen he thinks of a "lift of characters" or infact "a lift of the theme" and puts it on screen...we draw our attention towards him coz its "mani". one of the safe gambles cud be this... mani comes up with muvies which he thinks are burning issues in india... taking into consideration the movie and the locations.. isnt he hinting at the insurgent groups most active in india? this is my take..
God Forbid Arundhati Roy's take too :P..
@ganesh: no offence given or taken...
@arvind: very true. but then the bias b/w Hindus and other religions shud be avoided, which is NOT the case in INDIA. I was trying to highlight the same.
ReplyDelete@anniyan:
1. The validity of the story doesn't stand on just one question!
2. There's nothing wrong in portraying him as a hero. Just an ant-hero story. All is well. I've never written anything against it anywhere.
3. Compare the purpose between Surpanaka's nose being cut and Priyamani being gang raped! Highly irrelevant.
4. Let him be a sidelined character. But may i know why, even in the very few scenes he appears, he is not even close to the Hanuman he can be. Ravana's dexterity is being highlighted. Where did Hanuman's abilities go??
Let it be Mani or any other director attempting it, something wrong is wrong. And If Murali Vijay gets out in crucial situation you wont scold him as much as you would 've scolded Sachin or Dravid, bcos you know seniors are meant to be responsible !! So if its Mani, the stakes are high.
He is definitely hinting at those insurgent groups and at times it was very clearly Veerappan, his name was a definite clue. But it isn;t any consolation.
No offense meant !
Lol... not verappan dude...
ReplyDelete@ ganesh perfect description. when the villan s the hero in director's point of view he should have not portayed the movie as a remake of ramayana. he should have named it as "veeraiya" rather ravan
ReplyDelete