"Star Trek" (2009) - Movie Review

The memories of the Spock’s sharp grips are still there reminding the TV Series we watched in India without a clue of the story. It was about the graphical galaxies and the actions. Yet Captain Kirk played by William Shatner brought the hot seat of being the Captain as something of high on toes and seeing the safe existence of the USS Enterprise (I never remembered the name of the space ship before seeing this film though) cool. J.J. Abrams bottles those tension in the main cockpit of the ship intact along with a rejuvenation of the middle aged actors breathing refreshing youth to it. Result is astonishingly terrific chemistry and fun with a plot disturbing the debatable space-time continuum. This is “Star Trek” and it accomplishes its tasks considerably.

Abrams did something of a similar feat in “Mission Impossible: III”, a franchise declining after John Woo’s second of the franchise force feeding preposterous in sumptuous amounts. That film carried a strange sense of seriousness and paralleling the action part of it with not alone entertainment but with lot of sense and admiring cleverness. “Star Trek” follows that trend with actors believing in their roles as they believed watching the TV series growing up. In this film we see baby James Tiberius Kirk born as his father George Kirk (Chris Hemsworth) a young acting Captain as his predecessor assigned him before entering the suicidal caves of a giant highly technical space ship of one Captain Nero (Eric Bana in an unrecognizable face lift). As the attack is imminent and the auto pilot failing, George destined to die saves 800 lives and manages to do some damage to the gargantuan enemy ship.

Years multiply and as we see young Spock struggling to cope with his half Vulcan half human troubles, James Kirk grows to be stunningly handsome and cheeky spoken Chris Spine. As Kirk gets himself beaten to death in a bar fight with “Star Fleet” grads, the wise aged Captain Pike (Bruce Greenwood) talks some sense into altering his future of prosperous space adventures. Along with Kirk we meet the crew that begins in the earlier phase with physician McCoy (Karl Urban), Uhura (Zoe Saldana), Sulu (John Cho), Pavel Chekov (Anton Yelchin) and later part of the film Scotty (Simon Pegg). What comes to the table of discussion in terms of characters and smart comments is between Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Kirk.

Where there have come a series of monotonous approach of several directors in bringing a block buster is by getting into a predetermined route, Abams lets his execution by balancing the factor of entertainment and the limitations of such in characters with a great skill. While we are constantly amazed by the witty conversations between Kirk, Spock and McCoy, the graphical choreography in giving the outer space experience is clear and comfortably shaky. Thus adding the much needed shudder of being in that situation without much annoyance.

The story also really involves on the capability of the each personnel on the ship. Not merely demonstrating a magical line but delivering those lines with a tone of experience and a hope of genuinely getting an appreciation from the superiors. When the space ships leave from earth to respond for a call from the Vulcan planet and one by one the ships go into light speed, the USS Enterprise stops. Sulu is the new pilot and how wisely and with cracking air of sarcasm does Spock asks whether the Park Brake is still on. It is in these few details we see that the characters have a reason to be who they are with not a script turned expertise in their skills but the dialogues and the actors saying it with a confidence to believe them of those capabilities.

But when the film gets into the future and alternate reality, there are flurries of questions with of course no answers. Leonard Nimoy as the Spock Prime coming from future reprises his TV Series role. And Chris Spine and Zachary Quinto working very well together to amazing surprise of mine. The film always rides on the edge without letting a time to get ourselves warped in the questions. It thus covers up the great blatant holes with considerable ease and also maintaining to admire the characters it creates.

“Star Trek” is no venture into seriously involving in the character study and the grey area of good and bad as the trend of cheesy old flicks and comics take in to screen. It is definitely a film very well aimed at the sector of entertainment than material. But it respects its general audience and adds the element of sense and plausibilities, again not in the physics but in the presentation. It does not bury itself into the grandeur nature of its material and begins to see these firmly placed TV characters into something more jolly real and fun. “Star Trek” is as entertaining it could get and is as mature it can get too.

"Next Day Air" (2009) - Movie Review

In the slim and thin ice of crime comedy is the danger of flipping into a story straightly said with no laughs, not even a smile. That is “Next Day Air”, a film which some how saw the light of being in front of the camera. There is not a character we become a favourite of and there is not a mannerism you just enjoy watching them do again and again. All that exists is a desperate try to achieve those. Result is that the people seem not to be either too stupid to be laughed nor too dangerous and high on the edge to be scared of. It is the blandest comedy one could get and come out with nothing but a near hour and half melting reminder of the time and not the characters.

Welcome to another film still in the shadows of Guy Ritchie’s cult flicks who then again resembled from the works of Quentin Tarantino. Brody (Mike Epps) and Guch (Wood Harris) are the small time crooks locking their miniscule brains in to the microwave of their house to rob a bank. Brody hardly listens to what Guch says which is supposed to be the running gag not in the present but in the flashing past of their series of mishandling they tried out. They get their hands on drugs delivered wrongly by a UPS kind of company Next Day Air. The lazy high employee is Leo (Donald Faison) supposed to be the innocent in this whole mess to be rewarded in the end. See how much of “supposed” I used, which tells the fiasco of this film.

I am having hard time to revisit the movie to fetch some of the glowing bits. The acting blatantly is far from professional. With Donald Faison in a different outfit than his scrubs from TV series, his character is an amped up R-rated Turk. There is a consistent hunt for a punch line in these crooks. Where the characters being the essence of the originality in films like these, the people in this film try to be some one from the film they saw growing up. Thus it is merely a show off and a constant awareness of them being cool, stupidly cool and dangerously stupid. We get a little bit of everything and whole lot of unoriginality as the film wraps up thankfully fast enough for a lagging film.

We all should have seen the three cards having its face down shuffled by the street man to guess the desired card to win the gamble. Films like this work that way of course not the manipulating con effect in real life to be played. But played in the form of entertainment and coming out appreciating the way we were played. The fun of how the man kept shuffling at a speed and ambidexterity to make it worth for seeing him do that. And in “Next Day Air”, the cards simply stays there and we are staring at the man indifferently. In this case director Benny Boom’s eyes on wondering when will he make the move. He looks at us thinking that it is a cool posture he has and we walk away shaking our heads.

If the acting were a terrible display, then the screenplay should have had special botchy colours to impress the studio. Some how Blair Cobbs sold his story and how he did it is the curious question more than the drugs and money which gets handled in the film. The film is not a show of horrible attempts on jokes hitting the walls but the lethargic attitude of not even trying to. There is Mos Def as Eric, the fellow employee of Leo who has no business in the film. He is neither funny nor a catalyst in providing a twist. Then there is a guy sleeping and the third accomplice for Brody and Guch being there as a scare tactic and nothing else. We do not fear that guy rather forget his existence in the film.

The only scary act and a possible development was the drug lord Bodega (Emilio Rivera) and he is busy burning cigars at people’s faces. Writing is a tough process, that is something I could say without an air of attitude. Writing a short story or screenplay has a greatest enemy, that is the authors themselves. I would try to write and read it back to be horribly disappointed at the poor quality of being smart and trying hard. There is a block delete happening without fail after every attempt. To beat the self analytical criticality is half the battle to begin writing. But some times the writing itself is bad that it got to be deleted. Blair Cobbs should have let his self critic take control for “Next Day Air” and start afresh getting up out of the couch and running without rest.

"Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi" (1983) - Movie Review

There is always nicer way to tell the worst of things. “Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi” beats that trend. How can I say this without being harsh? Yeah I can. It sucked big time. The charm of the first Star Wars dissipated in the second and is vanished beyond doubt in this. Nothing happening apart from a cycle of capture, rescue, capture, rescue and fill in dark side and emperor to get a film to be bored. It is a shame that a franchise which had some good direction but hazy execution in second gave in to this sham of giving in to the blockbuster criteria, a very bad one indeed.

Luke (Mark Hamill) and his crew comes to rescue the frozen Han Solo (Harrison Ford) from the society of gooey creatures with Jabba the Hutt as the leader. 3PO, R2-D2, Chewbacca, Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher) captured. Boom, Luke saves. Luke and crew into the shady jungle where the “shield” for the new death star resides. A quick chase with the enemies and Leia captured. Then every one else is captured by a clan of fur ball creatures. Boom. 3PO becomes a god to them and an unnecessary bad joke to make them friends. Why? So that when the troops of the rebel decreases, these beings would do comic stunts (attempt). Luke leaves to confront his dad Vader. Get captured himself. Emperor boils the hate as it is the dark side of the force. Boom. Luke does not give in and dad Vader comes to the “good” side. And we are captured forever into this mess of bad film residing in galaxy so very much among us. This is bad.

Remember I said in the review of Episode V on how the film wisely allowed the character of Yoda to bring that maturity and insight much needed for the film. Well, Yoda dies after the script pours in two words into his mouth before he dies. There is another Skywalker. What is the necessity of that? Definitely not another episode because this is it where the emperor either get killed or turn into good man, which of course is highly unlikely. Not with the given frightening make up. What is the problem with the rebels with emperor? Did he torture the people? Did he raise taxes? Did he went to war with zillions of other planets which Lucas invents as he goes along? They played with the invisible force in the first, I did not mind. In second they used it for some enlightenment for Luke to get some life lessons, felt ok. Now with more dark side and good side, it becomes a prop for picking sides. Intolerable. Damn the Force !

There was an incredible opportunity landed on the laps of these creators to do anything they want and could have made anyways a box office hit. It is not like the Indiana Jones wherein we need a little bit of layered study into the crazy adventurer unless it aids a funny moment on the screen. May be that is what the Lucas and team deduced of the characters out of this film. If that has been the case, why the journey in to zen way strategy in the second? What we see is a spectacle of idiotic plot situations wherein the result was imminent escape. Not even a single bit of interest intrigued me to see what would be the end of any stunt.

Luke is more conflicted than Vader. Vader has pretty much accepted his master the emperor man and does his deeds faithfully. He is even ready to get his son straight to the master and get names. Luke is stirred rightly by the emperor of the hate but what brings him back to the ground of the deception planned on him? A simple Yoda speech does not suffice this greatest resistance to pass on blind rage. And what does emperor do all day? Foreseeing stuffs and then leaving the destiny take its path does not seem to be tough. He builds death star and destroy every living thing in this galaxy and rule who? When there is no one to control, what is the fun in that.

If these are the wrong questions to be asked for Star Wars, then the film gave me ample time to ask these which tells a lot. Generally films which go through the sequels and prequels get the time many films do not have the luxury of. They can make amends of the flaws in a character. Bring in the element of human imbalance and the way to solve it by their personality and situations. Star Wars definitely is not a dumb portrayal of cheesy stunts. It had something more than graphics in the Episode V which did not heighten to the skies but this film is tragic and very sad to witness such a failure done with laziness and compromises.

"Dreamer" (2005) - Movie Review

“Dreamer” which began as a complete hopeless debacle picks up out of nowhere and never stops running. It is a formula film of course with a horse destined to win with zillion odds against it. In fact I postponed watching the film because I have been little bit fed up on the string of motivational cheesy line up of movies in the past few days. Hence when there is a dad Pop Crane (Kriss Kristofferson) who swears not to come for a race and a script made villain Palmer (David Morse) along with a cute little girl (Dakota Fanning) trying to as usual act as adult shouldering with her dad Ben Crane (Kurt Russell), there is no way in the invisible hell this is going to be a better film. Well, I guessed wrong.

When the poor little farm girl gazes at the stable which is empty, there is father Ben gearing up in an early morning towards the race ground. He works for Palmer when we meet him with his working men Manny (Freddy Rodriguez) and Balon (Luis Guzmán). The stubborn cute girl Cale convinces her dad to ride along to the grounds and instantly falls in love with a horse, Sonya. Against the advice of Ben, Palmer puts Sonya through the race with a suspicious leg for a known drown in the sand. The Sheikh arrived from Dubai is not happy and hence with an altercation Ben leaves with the horse and his men.

I was beating myself for watching this at that point of time. With the orchestration spoon feeding the emotions, the film was slipping and slipping by a lot. With the cherubic beauty we see Cale feeding Sonya with popsicles in her healing process. They have hopes of breeding it and then make money out of it which of course is not going to work out because we know she has to race. With being hit again and again, Ben loses it and blames Cale for this misfortune to his wife which the girl overhears. Being the kid she is, she decides to run along with her horse and the horse runs, runs hard. Thus this paves some hope for the family of putting this horse in a race.

What is beautiful about the film is the actors and the way they work the dialogue to their favour. Young Dakota Fanning who has been the child actor portraying most of the time as this cold distant kid emanating far too maturity for that age gets that part used well and good. Hence when the naivety of an offspring is beckoned by the story she is right off with the smile. The thing which works on the side of the film is when Cale confronts her dad to not treat her as kid. With Ben we realize she is not a kid at all, at least when it comes to horses and Sonya. Kurt Russell has been absent from the screen for a while and it is unfortunate because the scene when he says his awareness of Cale feeding Sonya the popsicle is a seasoned actor walking it with flair of his own. Casual as it seems, that is the point of elevation for an otherwise formula film. It soars high and high after that.

So the horse wins as expected and every body is happy. But it is done with heart and actors side stepping for Fanning and Russell. Elisabeth Shue as Mrs. Crane, Kriss Kristofferson along with Rodriguez and Guzmán give the subtle supporting roles. Generally an unsatisfying film leaves me with an unfulfilled day. I hate to have a day like that. “Dreamer” made it a good if not a great day. It is convincing these characters and writer/director John Gatins works within the motivational churn routine to give a winner.

This film basically placed back the possibility of a story with an underdog a chance to be worked out well if the actors and script were right. We are into a point wherein the predictability has been accepted and moved on. But here when the horse gallops towards the victory, the director does not try anything fancy. We see the run in may be few angles with the slow motion very expected and required. The beauty of that gallop is like a metal music played with mellow transformation and we are sold.

Recently I was talking with a colleague on how I gauge films. And I am quite sure I have written about it in some review or other. Anyways, I explained that a film has a total control over its audience. It can be the cheesiest film ever and still get away with it. It can be a portrayal of the most moving story on paper and still lose its audience in presenting it. The art of the film is to evade the pit falls with cleverness or emotion or however manner they could to woo the viewers into liking the film and finish it with a good feeling of watching a better or best film. “Dreamer” in its controlled cheesiness and forgiving predictability sculpts the rest with originality and uniqueness to make it a better film than most out there.

"Nothing But the Truth" (2008) - Movie Review

There is a test of time to the particles we adhere in conducting our lives. We change as it is a process and the capability we have developed as humans in the shaping our minds. The understanding of the perception, the experiences in the days we lead and the remiss we commit and the value we nurture becomes one’s personality. That personality might have been residing within ourselves right from the child hood. Butchered, moulded, reshaped, rediscovered, we as a person evolve and hold close those principles as we are put through the machine of time. Rachel Armstrong (Kate Beckinsale) does the time literally in guarding her source for a story she wrote which slapped and slammed the President of the United States for wrongly invading Venezuela in the accusation over his assassination attempt. This fictional story though takes some real life events is made own into a great film by Writer/Director Rod Lurie.

A film being for its greatness depends on a team work. A team work beginning in letters on a paper to the visuals and performance in supporting casts of all forms. A screenplay will take its focus on its primary character to endure that person’s pain, happiness, pleasure, arrogance and principle as prominent in writing meaty part thus giving the actor a wide chance to establish those emotions to the audience. But in the first major part of the film wherein we see the people around this issue, is a packed up unexaggerated power house performance from every single cast. Angela Basett as Rachel’s editor holds close her reporter detailing down this enormous story and the newspaper’s attorney Avril played with a ruggedness and a man of high temper by Noah Wyle. Those two whirl this tension around the already nervous Rachel on the consequences of this story. When the hell breaks loose, as Rachel we have no clue what is coming on in is a big ferocious truck ransacking her life upside down, jamming to the wall, disintegrating her into pieces and landing flat on the floor still breathing to go through it all over again.

Rachel reveals the identity of CIA operative Erica Van Doren (Vera Farmiga) in this story and the government forces to scare and bring Rachel’s source out citing the danger of national security. National Security takes precedence over anything and everything in the belief system of ardent officials. They see the righteousness in their action towards the great glory of being fanatically patriotic. Unquestionable in taking their orders as they see the pleasure in being so, they bully the civilians who have lived their life calm and serene with no threat not alone to their family but to their values they treasure. That scarcity or even the impossibility of being challenged by circumstances automatically make these so-called patriotic people wearing the flag as their skin towards a elevated stature of citing the right and wrong. One such is the FBI special prosecutor Patton Dubois (Matt Dillon), a man chiseled and proud so subtle in his passion for the job and the country he serves. He has no mercy and his care for getting the primary source of Rachel puts her directly into the scrutiny of dealing with his zeal.

In a speedy hearing where the law works a little slow, Rachel is put to jail even after a terrific support and appeal by the big gun the paper assigns for their client. He is Alan Burnside (Alan Alda), a passionate enthusiast of the apparels he wears and suggesting like-ably obtrusively to the people he meets. He respects the stand taken by Rachel in this battle. Thus begins the waiting game for the government in cracking Rachel in jail. She withstands without a blink but asked to stare at the life they are dismantling. Her husband Ray’s (David Schwimmer) patience begins to fade along with their son Tim (Preston Bailey) beginning to care less and less about the description he vividly says to her mom before she was taken away.

Vera Farmiga as the uncovered CIA operative is lethal in her portrayal. She from the uncovering carries the posture of a tough cookie. She throws away the spears of her mind on the people judging her. Here are two women being the victim of their passion. Farmiga’s character especially knows the consequences and faces it without any fear. She is broken down though and that sight brings us to our knees for this ordeal to end. And the agonizing part is we know how to end and when we see the final sequence, we who have began to respect Rachel, now completely understand her.

What Rod Lurie does is the endurance riding on us. He does not wiggle time on the minutiae of the day Rachel goes through in her doing the time. He displays the days at regular intervals and we are dismayed at those times on this woman’s persistence. Yes, when I said she goes through the test of time literally, she does it. Like the flags which loses the unfurled wagging on its mast as the wind recede, the traces of Rachel’s story and the actual cause of those dies away. We as her husband begin to see her as this obstinate and inconsiderate mother. In fact her attorney annoyed by it tells that he represents her and not her principle. Strangely at that instance we begin to get closer to Rachel than in the whole film.

This is a mighty overlooked film of 2008 which never got the light of the release. Now it is on DVD and I beg of every one to watch it over because it deserves the attention. The time wherein press are becoming these hungry monsters for bad news, this tells that there are people who fight for the cause with uncompromising attitude. After the film we beckon ourselves on the willingness to go through what Rachel does and we are scared. We are scared of that closed walls when freedom takes a walk, scared of the turmoil we would go through inside as Rachel does, scared of losing the loved ones begin to wipe away their affection, scared of the guilt of being selfish for guarding personal principles but most importantly is that we are scared to death that we would give in and make a deal with our ugly inside to be haunted forever. “Nothing But the Truth” is one of the best films of 2008.

"X-Men Origins: Wolverine" (2009) - Movie Review

I would gladly say that I had an entertaining time watching “X-Men Origins: Wolverine”. I would also say that as this fictitious indestructible comically named metal “adamantium” , it adamantly resists to develop the character of James Logan a.k.a Wolverine (Hugh Jackman). The “X-men” series are unadulterated fun and it quite carried its aura of being a little over above the regular mindless block buster consistently. When the promos for this film began to hit the screens, I had a good feeling that there will be a pragmatic presentation into this wild character of mutant over the staple action scenes. It rarely does so.

Before the civil war comes two brothers James Logan and the outlandishly negative elder brother Victor Creed (Liev Schreiber). They become immortal fighters for the American army going through the wars and the mark of the “hollywood” evil war, the Vietnam War. There is always a fanatic military officer hunting around looking for people. Generally officers like Stryker (Danny Huston) have a ready tool set in their coat with syringes for extracting blood samples from these special people and a written script of lines to persuade mindless ruffian heroes and mutants in this case to work for the government and say “country needs you” or “I can help you get the revenge”. There are actors type casted and when it happens to lead actors, their careers perish. When it happens to actors like Danny Huston, they crop as different forms of same sleazy double crossing middle villains as Stryker. There are no possibilities for him being anything other than that and he now can become a brand ambassador for those roles. I hope he pulls something else apart from that.

Wolverine has a selective conscience. He tilts his mind for murders when escaping out of a situation killing soldiers who were merely ordered. Then he spits easy speeches like “they were decent people” later to another mutant. But Hugh Jackman does this angry man with a passion. He now has the capability to behave with his broad shoulders and disappear in that role. As he leads this “peaceful” life which means live with an outstandingly hot girl friend (Lynn Collins) working either as a teacher or work in day care or as nurse or anything which has kids and care rhyming merrily with each other. He works hard as a lumber jack but owns this great secluded property in the middle of nowhere. He loves his girl and the girl has a legendary story as answer for her questions which no one would give a damn like “Why moon is alone?” Thus we learn his name origin of Wolverine. They are happy and knows the past of our man waking up from nightmares. That means it will crumble as expected.

When we meet Wolverine his knuckles extends elongated bone structures not metal knives. It is that obsessive experiment Stryker wants which as said is the painful procedure ever and his body endures it to become the walking chopping machine. When Stryker puts together the team and when they enter a guarded diamond kingdom in Nigeria, there were characters coming out along with fast actions. Ryan Reynolds as Wade Wilson was very effective and I am annoyed that this capable actor is not getting more chances than he really should. And even if he does, they come as amputated assortments.

For everything the film markets, it delivers. But I do not see any kind of difference from the other X-Men films. Actually the other franchise had some actual issues of dealing with mutants and some mutants wanting to get rid of their powers. This compulsion of military conducting experiments gets to my nerve. The plot as it claims tells that Stryker does nothing but emotional drama with a blood. And why does Victor wants to be this animal and also get his brother along for the ride? He is a plot victim moved upon as the wishes of director Gavin Hood and becomes friend/enemy/brother/warmonger/sociopath and every other thing. In the end the bond between the brothers which in reality has been for more than hundred years sounds ridiculous.

Too many characters begging to be friends of Wolverine and wants to be BFF within limited amount of time. Taylor Kitsch as Gambit is some one with that yearning. He attacks Wolverine initially and suddenly he is risking his life for him. The only plausible exploration into the balance of judgment in determining his way of life was the titular character and he is busy checking the sharpness of his weapons. For the good times the film provides, you do not need a new film for it rather rent the other films of the franchise which does the same and does it cheap.

"Earth" (Documentary) (2007) - Movie Review

A few months back I saw a film called “Baraka”. Only visuals speaking and dictating the terms in the movement of the film, it goes through the nature’s and the urbanized town setting a vibration throughout the film, though failed to appeal and follow through till the end for me. Despite that, it is a film of uncompromising audacity and brilliance. “Earth” is a cushioned and comforted version of it, with the narration of James Earl Jones (Patrick Stewart in US version) guiding the journey of the three main characters. Polar bear, Elephant and humpback whale.

There is though a multitude of difference between “Baraka” and “Earth”. The former is not alone a look on the humungous chain of nature but also the impact of modern trends and the civilization waking up into odd places of beauty and architecture. This film is a meditation in the life very closely resembling the turmoil of humans. It goes through a year into the lives of these three animals surviving into the harshness of the forces of nature and the predators.

A polar bear family has taken their parental responsibilities. Father cruising with the full battery charge to set up a base for hunting season while mother back in the hole coming out to train the two cubs. Father is depending on the ice to stay on so that the journey into it is worthwhile for the yearly starvation he is going to make. In the vast white lands of the Arctic, the stillness of the environment is invigorating and threatening. It is a world inside our world separated in air, water and land degrading slowly even for the current residence which are diminishing.

While the nature’s beauty is more than enough to provide the nutrients for the photography, it is the angle and the peculiar shots the team of Alastair Fothergill and Mark Linkfield captures. A top angle floating through in the speed expanding to show the enormity of the planet and the animals it allows to navigate. A flock of birds migrate and they can cover a huge city flying in unison. A highly fast camera grasping the tiny shreds of body hair when a cheetah runs to slaying down Thomson’s gazelle. Then there is a scare to turn into comic moments when the mandarin ducklings jump from the nest in their attempt for their first flight. There is a wide focus shorts from the top showing the countless herds of caribou migrating towards the search of water.

In these animals is the quest for one thing, which is to survive at any cost. The parental instinct shocks us. The emotion of these looked down beings brings questions on this whole existence as an accident. Is it a chemical reaction, these protective feelings towards their offspring? Is that reaction a string of comfortable accidents to aid the pursuit of this living? It is not a film about the concept of existentialism but the similarity in the lives of the fellow beings. Humans have developed the capability of creating more hurdles than necessary already posed by the land we stand. Here there are predators closing the circle of the ecosystem. They look villainous and hunt without mercy on the offsprings as they are the easy targets. Strangely while the chemical aid of the parental instincts help in love and care, that does not come forth with other animals. Survival of the fittest as they say is undeniably true when seeing this picture.

There is another brilliant braveness when a flock of cranes carry their mission to jump the great Himalayas to settle for a tropical survivable climate in India. The winds change as they wish and at an altitude which is impossible to imagine, they do the unthinkable and succeed with literal flying colours. It is a magnificent moment in the triumph of determination and skill.

Enjoying “Earth”, I wish there was version specifically made for adults. As Disney produces and is aimed to invite kids and parents, this takes a much softer look on the brutality of our planet. When I say about a need for a mature version, I say about the look on the down and up in a more sequenced and cascaded views of the life against nature. In this they do show the lions, cheetah and wolves getting their blood but that is their survival. The look on that wherein they are not shadowed by a villainous perspective would have been a much more interesting and effective film. Apart from that “Earth” is a thoroughly inviting film. It has a perfect narration not cheesy and not cold with a need to hear basis orchestration by George Fenton and Berliner Philharmonoker. Watch “Earth”.

(Remember to sit through the credits to get a peek on how they got those aerial and tough shots of the animals up close and real)

"Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back" (1980) - Movie Review

Supposed to be the best of the Star Wars, “Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back” is a hesitant approach towards dealing the concept of right and wrong. This entitlement of “Force” being the synonym of the God power is used as the tool to invite the young hero kid Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill) into the claws of Darth Vader (David Prowse). In between that stands the Yoda (voice of Frank Oz) giving some of the best sequences in this otherwise scared film in taking a fierce step in the drama of galactic existence.

There is a good judgment call by George Lucas in sketching the story which is to understand the characters than the mere dependency on the uber-hi-tech visuals. When the spectacular photography skis us into the cold planet of Hoth, Luke is sprouting out into the realms of manhood. He has taken responsibility of being the leading soldier in the rebel group and in one of his regular patrol to monitor the surroundings, he is wounded and captured by bear like animal. Seeing the death on the jaws of this beast, Luke witnesses Ben Kenobi (Alec Guinness) in spirit advising him to reach out for Yoda to become the Jedi Knight. Being Jedi Knight is being ridiculously powerful without using it. That is the nature of Zen. Maintaining that control over the limitless power is the art of a wise master. It is a formula but has ample opportunity to enforce the maturity of the film. Thus they do it through Yoda with Luke. Those scenes work and see the direction the film wants us to take through. The rest though is nothing new from the first part except with some more outstanding graphic work.

In this part we see 3PO clearly addressing Han (Harrison Ford) and Luke as human beings. What that explains is uncertain. There is a tension which is projected as a clinical approach between Han and Leia (Carrie Fisher). Han maintains his charm for arrogance and love for smart lines in this with Ford doing his sleep walk over the role. I was informed that this is where we learn about the dark side of Darth Vader. Other than choking remotely, in person and through mind of his Admirals and Captains, there is nothing in depth of Vader to be attracted to the dark side of the force. He is desperate to get Luke alive. He wants him on his side as he knows the capability of the kid. That hunt is what the film is all about. The players in bait and rescue and again bait are Han, Leia, 3PO (Anthony Daniels) and R2-D2. Another addition to the list of betrayals and friendship is Lando (Billy Dee Williams).

Luke the charismatic kid follows Ben’s spirit like a puppy dog. He takes his course towards an unknown planet to hunt for Yoda. Yoda a small suspecting looking creature begins to nag Luke and then reveals the true self once Luke has ridiculed enough. Begins the lesson of control and “free your mind” style advices for Luke to get seasoned with the force. Yoda looks like the inspiration for Morpheus in “The Matrix”. Yoda also commands the respect being a puppet over the screen effortlessly. We do not see much of him though. Seems like getting trained as Jedi Knight is a one week crash course which our friend Luke cuts short to rescue his friends. Ben and Yoda literally begs Luke which is of no use. Yoda and Ben both capable of seeing the future do not see this because they could have saved lot of energy. But wait Luke also by that time gets a glimpse of selective future. May be that is the reason he was being that stubborn kid and wastes their time. Anyways, when the power goes to peek in the eventuality, it gets confusing and unnecessary.

There will be nail biting flight scenes and one or two clever choreography in slaying down giant Imperial Walkers. And along with it you would know which fighter pilot would get hit when he gets more than one line of dialogue. If some one is going to play the card of “for those times”, please save it for something really classic. Movies like “Serpico” or “Three Days of Condor” of “those times” did not take that excuse. Nor did the old and gold sci fi “The Day the Earth Stood Still”.

Anyways, directed by Irvin Kershner, this Star Wars sure takes a bold step in to seeing these characters. They understand the bar they set in the previous film and the need for thick personalities. Yoda is the trump card but they do not utilize him to the fullest extent. Instead we are thrown in to the cockpit of Falcon every other minute and wondering when will it really get fixed for taking off to its super high speed. And oh, 3PO and R2-D2 still have a very good chemistry as they had in the “A New Hope”. Han and Leia too develop a good rapport and makes believe of their love when Han enters as Darth Vader’s test subject for Carbon freezing. While there is no wonder it is thoroughly a cult status in following up a B movie entertainment of the first, it could have been a far better film and more importantly the mature film it attempts to be if the creators would have boldly handled it with iron fist..

"Chop Shop" (2007) - Movie Review

Ale (Alejandro Polanco) in “Chop Shop” reminded of the small kids working in an old torn up automobile shop back in my native. They all had an universal trait of wittiness, shrewd and would sell you the crappiest product as the best in no time. They work hard and some how learn the attitude to cherish and enjoy to find the solace in the little money they get. Some become so loyal to their master that they soon take over the shop or may be move out to open their own and compete better. The strangest though is that “Chop Shop” happens in the near by neighbourhood of New York. If they have not showed the high buildings in the initial scenes and roaring “Mets” cheer from Shea Stadium hiding this place, it could have been mistaken for another country with people speaking accented English.

Ramin Bahrani the director of this film takes through the life of this young boy growing up as his surrounding demands to. He works his way out and finds a job as the errand boy in an automobile shop. Low labour and a night guard to live there puts him out there. He sneaks in like million times to get his things done. He jumps in to the office of his boss for making calls for locating his sister (Isamar Gonzales). He steals tire plates from the stadiums, sells pirated DVDs, markets as the kid trying to go school and ride on the wave of sympathy in subways and almost does everything possible to get the bits and pieces of dollars. He has been saving up for quite a while now and hopes to get a van with his sister to open up a fast food shop of their own.

He is industrious and Bahrani builds up a different sense of appeal in this tough life. As Ale we are elated on the day he goes through. Running around and understanding the possibilities and environment he has been put in, he rises up for the challenge. In such an young age he is pushed to accept the reality of what he is in and begins to swim in it as fast and as effective he possibly could. In that his only closeness in fun and love is his sister who in her teens has been hanging out with friends Ale does not like. He ridicules her friend’s aspiration of going to Florida and have a better life. He knows he can keep his sister at her happiest and make a living together. In between them is his buddy Carlos (Carlos Zapata) whose Uncle owns the torn up fast food van. That is his destiny.

We see the place of another world lying by the sides of riches and luxurious. It is the world hardly any one is aware of. It is the market to get the fixes done reasonably cheap but also need to street talk to get that part of “reasonable”. Ale has the job of convincing the passing cars to lure them into the shop he is working. He competes with adults who he steps in front to say that this car is his business. I could not stop wondering how familiar Ale is for me. In the native where these shops are covered with asbestos to increase the scorching heat to another level are kids like Ale. If there are two kids working in some cases, one definitely will be the calmest and obedient than the other. The other though would be equally astute but mouths off. Both helps in this business because work is everything. They are destined to be the next in line automobile shop owners.

There are no plots other than the quest for this van. From the looks of it, no one needs to inform us of the tragedy it heads to but not the usual. Because Bahrani does not put up sadness like films which haunts in the destitute generally fails to. While Ale is some one knowing the street smart skills, he still gets his hands burnt. After all he is still a kid. He is angry and disappointed with his sister when he finds out her reason for late night stay but does not know how to talk to her about it. Or may be he does not want her to stop as the money is good. He is conflicted and look at me how I evaluate him as an adult.

“Chop Shop” is a unperturbed view of this kid’s life no one knows near the most liveliest city. It focuses how different a few miles away to deviate from a social atmosphere sparsely aware of. In that place we find the breathing busy bee Ale and how he is building the life around it without spending time on the unfairness he has been put in. But again he is a kid learning and seeing around to accept the way of existence. He practices it to stay in the game. He grows up fast to talk eye to eye with a seasoned work fellow. Bahrani while informs us of this unknown universe does not exploit it for melodrama or sympathy. He simply takes those characters and makes us like them, care them and brings a calm smile when they put the darkness behind to proceed towards the dawn of another day.

"Dasvidaniya" (Language - Hindi) (2008) - Movie Review

The garish assortment of the current Bollywood films have numbed any movie goer to be uncontrollably happy for a calm film. Even if the calmness actually becomes a movie with bland characters never reaching its peak though showing hopes of it. And when the slowness has woken up, it begins hurrying to wrap up before it reaches a resolve. “Dasvidaniya” is a one man with “The Bucket List” which is again a sappy tutorial with no fun. There are patches of originality with wide gaps of nothing but inability to embrace the graveness of the death with a smile, not laughingly but with full of heart.

A text book definition simpleton Amar Kaul (Vinay Pathak) lives in the middle class caricature flats in the busy Mumbai. He is the silent destroyer of himself. His boss (Saurab Shukla) is always in the look out for another couple of hands to grow up so that he can plunge into his food is an epitome of the dreaded bosses and uses Amar as his work horse. With a mother (Sarita Joshi) buried in TV serials, this 37 year old lonely man has nothing but boredom in his life. Adding to this comes the film’s pet disease while reality’s worst of worst, Stomach Cancer. If anything needs to be said very concretely about in a Bollywood film then it is the relentless effort to establish a point by known facts, well Bollywood facts. If a character must and should die without any visible ailment, it has to be cancer. It is the single most forgivable fault any director can get by in the history of cinema.

Anyways, our man drenched in sorrow and pity deflowers his alcohol chastity to invoke his dual personality. He comes and kicks the lethargy in moving the ending life of Amar. Hence he formulates wishes as he goes by to fulfill before his time says enough of him. Vinay Pathak is perfect for this dull and slow moving Amar. His innocence which would win him sweet guy title with girls would only go till that. Amar’s crushes and loves end before it starts and begins as soon as it ends with the next woman coming right across him. His mundane chores of writing “Things to do” every morning has driven him to madness of being stuck in a day. In fact his cancer is the most lively thing ever happened to him. He gets a reason for being unreasonable. He leaves his job (gloriously embarrassing his boss), buys a new car, takes an abroad trip, visits friends and tries to reunite with his distant brother (Gaurav Gera).

Who is Amar? As I defined a simpleton right? Well that can be numerous billions of Amar’s in different forms in countless cultures with same routines of days. Yet there is an individuality in their similarity. Our Amar never gets out of his comfort zone even in his jump start to break his string of file filled work. A person like this gets to slice the shell of shyness and go out to enjoy his life. He does so and in an unexpected surprise from his friend Rajiv’s (Rajat Kapoor) wife (Suchitra Pillai) suspects his sudden arrival as a free help for his cancer treatment as they are both doctors. Hurt and let down, he gets out in an unknown land and develops a three day relationship with a sex worker (Manoyla Svitlana). What happens between them is a script scribbled unexplained band-aid. It is utterly unconvincing and a blatant laziness in not taking an effort to properly tell a story of this given up man in finding a love (and getting laid).

I might crib about the simplicity being the grandeur in the current Bollywood industry but the film actually rides on the laid back wave to sooth the story without stress most of the times. While that indeed helps, it becomes a loose cannon in getting complacent. “Dasvadinaya” not only suffers that but takes a good solid lunch and relaxes when there is so much demanded from it.

Director Shashant Shah takes the cue card proposal to his friend’s new wife from “Love Actually” into dumb charades in drenching rain to his child hood sweet heart (Neha Dhupia). Then he even uses the yellow paper from “The Bucket List” with a proper “Things to do” title at the top. In these unneeded plagiarism without which the film could have survived comfortably never summates to its emotions. Its central character has hard time becoming this individual for whom we begin to care not because of his illness rather for his character. In the very end of the film it comes a close touch to it. He sits on the balcony and tells his brother the reason for buying this particular property. He explains the hours he spent and the small details he got out of it which has completed his life. Unfortunately it seems too late for Amar and for us towards the film.

"The Soloist" (2009) - Movie Review

What is the relationship of being a friend? The knowing of another person apart from the loved one is important. In schools and colleges, it happens to belong somewhere. It scatters when the roads takes different exits. Many depart and dissolve in the newly found things, grow apart and basically become different person. But sometimes it exists and travels beyond those territories where both the person growing differently acknowledge that and nourish their friendship in the process. Few thus become very best friends not on the ranking system but on the level of being unbelievably comfort in saying the worst of worst and best of best with the equal stature of gravity. But there are friendships which becomes beyond an expectation from each other. Not the basic communication and hanging out but a disappointment in their friend’s life decisions. It is about believing the rightness in stretching from help to demand in their friend’s life style. When there is something clearly wrong with our buddies and we try to do everything possibly we could and they disappoint us, we depart and distant. “The Soloist” tells a story of such nature, often clueless but few times getting right precisely.

It is formed upon the true story of Los Angeles Times newspaper Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.) discovering the homeless Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx), a gifted musician. He becomes his column and then the help extends. Lopez does what he could and is awed by the homeless people scenario and wants this lost musician to find a better life. The problem is Ayers chose this life style. Because his mind was losing its way and he did not want to bother his sister Jennifer (Lisa Gay Hamilton). He has lines repeating and memorizing his new found friend, Steve Lopez in those.

Lopez is played by Robert Downey Jr. with the hurried mannerism for a journalist. He fits himself nice and easy with simple T-shirts and a flowery shirts to be in his elements. Comfort and cool, he writes the encounters of his day to day life close with the city and the political system based on it. That is how he finds Ayers playing a violin with two strings. Ayers mentions his drop out from Julliard school and with a few calls, Lopez writes his column. After that his relationship with the troubled Ayers vacillates with the partial role of journalism and a provider. This oscillation forms his problem in placing this man in his life.

Having a responsibility of taking care of some one is not easy. Your conscience wants to but letting the other disturb the balance of the every day activity surmounts a troubling dilemma. Thus it would become this half baked attempt. Many of us suffer through that tenure of disturbed guilt. This guilt erases itself as the avoidance of seeing that person. But in the case of Lopez, it is a deal of Ayers providing material for his job and hence this responsibility becomes something he takes when he wants to. This screws up the expectation of what Ayers want and vice versa.

Bringing out this is where “The Soloist” suffers. It explores into this dreary and despair of the homeless existence. That exploration while has the sadness and shocking image of that livelihood needs a more explicit approach. The rawness of that place carries a painted portrayal in the film. The objective of making it edible for the regular movie goers betrays the reality. Similarly there is no hold on this attempt of Lopez to do the good will with expectation. He constantly wants to help with a reward in the end and that does not come through. This is the grasp of the situation but the film is far from it. It slips away every time it has the control.

But there are some beautiful scenes of music and images interlacing the screen mesmerizing us into the same trance Ayers resides. Especially when he is taken by Lopez to a rehearsal Orchestra. The screen turns into this kaleidoscope of levitated state in the viewers. The music jumps the image and to be fair while we have seen these kind of dancing patterns of pictures, lighting and fountains, this is the closest you can draw on someone’s elated mind on hearing those notes of purity. In that Joe Wright finds those because the music is captivating and it is no surprise that inspired him to put that out there.

“The Soloist” has good actors playing their calibre and being that person. The chemistry in between Downey Jr. and Foxx flames here and there with the major absence of it in the rest of the film. Catherine Keener as Lopez’s ex-wife would have needed more than couple of drunken accusation and mild smiles to support the personal crisis he goes through. This is a film needing alterations. The agony of Lopez to not clearly reach out Ayers as the way he supposed to is what we feel about “The Soloist”.

"Fighting" (2009) - Movie Review

“Fighting” is another form of “Redbelt” a focus on the art of fighting only though it is not about discipline in this film. It takes the deception and the simplicity of that David Mamet film along with the twists towards a character driven fight film. The movie works for various reasons, one being how Terrence Howard as the hustler and then the agent Harvey with Channing Tatum’s Shawn McArthur. That connection between them which grows upon the film makes it a believable film. And the kinetics in the four major fights are intense but not “Fight Club” bloody, unexpected and forceful but not a glorification. It does not argue or take stands of this underground fighting, rather uses it as the plot device and works on its characters with utter ease. Dito Montiel who did a strange balanced feel in his debut feature “A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints” has a mature eye.

The back ground of this young and tough fighter Shawn is a slow process of discovery and that is used not as the trigger for the plot but an aid in to see a purpose for his existence and doing what he does. He is hustled by Harvey on the streets and shows his fist capabilities which in escaping the con catches Harvey’s attention. In the busy corner of the New York City, it seems to be unlikely for these two meet again but they do. Harvey knows he is cornered, hands over his money and proposes to get him into the high class fights to get paid hefty by punching people to pulp. Money is large and fast which lures the man and thus the ladder up procedure to that final fight where the characters have more stake than ever happens to end the film. If it appears cheesy it is not and if you think things have been figured out, you have not. And if you think it is going to be big time suspense, twists and turns, it is not. It in its pastoral presentation of the high lighted New York City lines up its story out the platform neatly and nonchalantly.

Harvey is the know all person. The connective submissive with petty games personality amongst the big gamers in the big money arena. He came up to the city with high hopes along with his buddies Martinez (Luis Guzmán) and Jack (Roger Guenveur Smith) but he has been stopped long road away by them. When Harvey sees Shawn, there is a potential he sees but still not the one he gets. In the first fight he gets, Harvey does not have much hope for his boy and he does not do good either. What he does is that he can take punches and stand up tall. He gets the chance proper and strike that opportunity solid to knock down his opponents. Montiel is careful in what he is showing in the fights. They rip off each other with bare knuckles and it is not a pretty sight. But the choreography and camera placement is such that the brutality gets muddled in the shaky camera and resurfaces for a clear view of an effective but much less blood. Hence it is as real as the actual fight with the sword sharpness in pulling in the audience of its unpredictability.

What is the driving factor for Shawn is unclear. True that his history has some revelations for his likings in fighting but money feeding his need seems to be sufficient enough for this film though. Fighting as a sport is a tricky nature which I have always had tough time to comprehend. Boxing, Karate or other arts of fighting for a winner wonders whether emotions are hidden once the punches have vanished among the blood and sweat. But the enmity in any sports is given and this is an open invitation for a brawl to vent out. The rules though are present if not followed. It at least is enforced by a referee. Here though there is none. The only presence is the group of people cheering for their man. Which makes them scarier than the fighters because to realize such ardent drool for violence is hiding among them is unsettling. But the spectators in this films are the big players for the big money. Generally films about fighting have an obligation of the decision to enter the ring. Boxing does not need to as it is the most closely watched and conducted sport, yet the current trend of street fight and high bets with us following the lead man demands moral clearance especially when reality is stressed. And it is surprising that “Fighting” never has one and we the audience have no problematic feelings about it. May be it is because they make their case of such fighting very early an acceptance as that of boxing. It worked.

Terrence Howard and Channing Tatum are very effective in this. Howard being that low key who has strings to pull by leaking into the gaps of persistence, acquaintance and annoyance make us root for his behaviour. Tatum is casual and carries a transparency into his character of being truthful and expecting that sort from others. He is struggling in the streets to make a living and Howard accommodating is nicely shot. When Howard’s Harvey asks something more from Tatum’s Shawn of throwing a match, there is a subtle drop from Shawn to jump agents and at that time Harvey explodes with a slow escalation of anger. Those few of the scenes make “Fighting” one of the films with a very carefree, easy on its plot and characters with an effective story telling.

"Glory Road" (2006) - Movie Review

Are we all getting tired of underdogs succeeding in the films? That is the question I asked myself while watching “Glory Road” which is another journey into the life of one Coach Don Haskins (Josh Lucas) recruiting black players during the times when racial emotions were on the high and open. So they crawl through their differences, fights, racism, personal emotions and everything a sports underdog success story films consider of. It has come in shapes, forms, curls, twists with the core of the film, inspiration as the running mantra for the film. Sure it is a feel good film with evening to pass in the couch munching snacks. No, I am not going to give it up so easily on it because it had characters which in a very developed fashion could have been a great film. It is a run of the mill film with lot to crave for.

When a team event like basket ball is the focus of a story, we need to know the players and no time for their relationships and side runners. But what I have the greatest concern is that not knowing their oppositions. Generally they turn out to be the perfect jerks because you got to root for the team in pursuit. Hence in the limited time, we are asked to dislike the other team, especially a coach reigned as the champion. His team has worked, struggled and matured as much as Haskins’ team Texas Western Miners. The sorry coach in this film would be Adolph Rupp (Jon Voight). When Haskin, the nice guy introduces himself, Rupp has that look of disdain but still the controlled courteous to leave a bitter feeling with Don. Yet in the minutes of his team getting hit hard by the underdogs, we learn a little bit about Rupp through the performance of Voight. He is human too and not some caricature for the film’s convenience.

Well I am getting way ahead of myself. Rupp’s team are the tough champs Miners face on in the final match. Before that is the recruitment process where of course being crippled of the luxuries and consideration, Haskin goes on to convince and get black players in to his team. They are Bobby Joe Hill (Derek Luke), Harry Flournoy (Mehcad Brooks), Willie Worsley (Sam Jones III), Nevil Shed (Al Shearer), Willie Cager (Damaine Radcliff) and David Lattin (Schin A.S Kerr). Along plays the typical Missouri farm kid Jerry Armstrong (Austin Nichols) who is the only real other player we get to know. Of course the film is about the men making it out there against the odds fighting hate in and out to get cheered and groomed by the man, their coach.

Don was a high school girls basket ball coach before he gets hired on by Texas Western College for which he gets a tiny bit of scoff from Bobby Joe to get the entire team a run till their last water molecule out of their body gets out. The pedigree are fed as a cruise control and you do not know how did you get here. You have trees on the road which seem to repeat itself as its twin siblings till the destination you reach. You hardly notice the thing you pass by you never cared for in the route to the place you have been thousand times. Such becomes the middle part of the film.

“Glory Road” has those silver stroke times. The times when a particular character says something with the scene and situation together providing a sudden wave of unsatisfied agony that how the director, in this case James Gartner could have done better having the ability to produce that scene. One such comes some where in the middle of the film when the team vacates a particular motel after they get racial epithets slain inside their rooms. The assistant coach Ross Moore by Red West comforts Coach Haskins on how he needs to be happy to bring in these kids into the team and then tells a line “Shame on us” which beckons more of him in the film and also the director to replicate true moments like this.

I would like to know the University of Kentucky team. What did they think of these players who clearly travelled the rough roads than them but still it is a game worked hard from both sides? The rage to win and plant their stand in ego would have been insurmountable, more in the case of the Miners to prove the point. What was running through Adolph Rupp and even if he really thought that his opposition had no chance, how did he come to accept the challenge he faced in the court apart from throwing hands in the air and saying “There is it” more than few times? The real events are undeniably to feel a bit happy of the achievements and growing up the people did in a totally unfavourable environment but why cannot we learn something about the long time winners being thrown hard down the floor startled, upset but possibly learning the greatest things of humility, respect and reality.

"Katrathu Tamizh" (Language - Tamizh) (2007) - Movie Review (in Tamizh and English)

(Review in English at the end of Tamizh Review)

"கற்றது தமிழ்" படத்தின் விமர்சனத்தை தமிழில் எழுதவதே தகும் என்று தோன்றியது. ஒன்பதாம் மற்றும் பத்தாம் வகுப்பில் ஏதோ ஒரு ஈடுபாட்டில் தமிழ் எனது முதன் முழியாக எடுத்த ஞாபகம் வந்தது. பிறகு பதினொன்றும் வகுப்பில் உருப்படியான +2 மதிப்பெண் வேண்டுமென்றால் எளிதான (இங்கு இதற்க்கு அர்த்தம் எளிதாக மனப்பாடம் செய்து சில்லறை பரிட்சியயை ஏமாற்றுவது) ஸமிஸ்க்ரிதம் எடுப்பதே நன்று என்று எல்லாரையும் போல் நானும் மாறினேன். தமிழ் படித்த பொழுது ஈடுபாட்டோடு இருந்தேன் என்று சொன்னால் அது பொய்யாகும். ஏன் என்றால் படிப்பின் மீதே எனக்கு ஈடுபாட்டு இருந்தது கிடையாது, இதில் தமிழ் வேறு அல்ல. இது எனது முதல் தமிழ் ப்ரியர்த்தனம் என்பதால் சில குறைகள் இருக்கும் என்பதை இப்போதொழுதே சொல்லி விடுகிறேன். பிறகு நமது படத்தின் கதாநாயகன் போல் "மானமுள்ள" தமிழ் மாணாக்கள் என்னை சின்ன பின்னமாக சிதைக்க போகிறார்கள்.

இந்த படம் மிகவும் முக்கியாமான மற்றும் பிரதானமான வடுவை சுட்டிக்காட்டிகரது. இன்று உள்ள நிலைமையில் தமிழில் உயர் படிப்பு என்பது சமூகத்தின் கூத்து அறையில் தரை சீட்டிக்கு டிக்கெட் வாங்குவது போல். நேராக வருங்கால முன்னேற்றத்துக்கு உயில் எழுதி விட்டு உறங்கிவிடலாம், தவிப்போடும் கொந்தளிப்போடும். அப்படி பட்ட ஒரு நிலைமையில் தான் பிரபாகர் (ஜீவா) ஆக படுகிறார். இயக்குனர் ராம் முதல் காட்சியில் தனது பார்வயளார்கள் குழம்பி மற்றும் வியப்பில் இருக்க வேண்டும் என்ற ஒரே காரணுத்துக்காக, பிரபாகர் தற்கொலைக்கு முயற்சிக்கும் தருணத்தை காண்பிக்கிறார். மிகவும் தவறான செயல், பிரபாகர் மற்றும் ராம், இருவருக்கும். இந்த தருவாயில் இவருது கடந்த வாழ்க்கையை சிறு வயதில் இருந்தே ஆரம்பித்து இருந்தால், மிகவும் சிறப்பாக அமைந்திருக்கும். அதற்க்கு பதிலாக, இன்னொரு தினசரி நடப்பான காவல் துறையின் அராஜகத்துக்கு பலியாகும் வாலிபராக காட்டியது எதிர்பார்ப்பை குறைத்தது. பின் பிரபா இந்த மான பங்கத்தின் கதறல் தாங்காமல் தற்கொலையின் கதவை தட்டி மீண்டும் தவறான தருவாயை தேர்ந்து எடுத்து தோல்வி அடைகிறார். இதெல்லாம் பிறகு தன்னுடைய கொலை பயணத்தை தொடரும் தருவாயில், இது ஒரு கடினமான மற்றும் தேவையற்ற தொடக்கம் என்று நொந்து போனேன். ஒரு படத்தின் மீட்டல் மற்றும் அதற்கேற்ற பதத்தை ராம் தர முயல்கிறார் என்பது புரிந்தது. ஆனால் அதற்க்கு ஏன் இப்படி ஒரு இருட்டின் பகிரங்க வெளிச்சம்? அதுவும் இந்த கதாபாத்திரத்தின் முக்கியத்துவம் தெரியாமல்?

இதேயல்லாம் பொறுத்து கொண்டு இருந்த போதிலும் கதிரின் ஒளிப்பதிவு தனியாக தெரிந்தது. இந்த தருவாயில் இசை பற்றி கூறி விடுகிறேன். பின்னர் மறக்க வாய்ப்பு உண்டு. யுவன் ஷங்கர் ராஜாவின் பாடல்கள் இதற்க்கு மேல் ஒரு படத்திற்கு அமைப்பாக மாறாது. பின்னணி இசையிலும் மிகவும் கூர்ந்து பட்டும் படாமலும் தனது ஆற்றலை தெளிவாக செய்து இருக்கிறார். பின் கருணாஸ் தனது கேமரா முன் பயந்து கொண்டு இருக்கும் பொழுதுதான் படம் தனது நிலை கண்டுகொள்கிறது. பிரபாவின் சிறு வயது காதல், இறப்பை தனது நண்பனாக தூக்கிக்கொண்டு போவது மற்றும் சகித கடினங்கள் ஒரு மனிதனுக்கு நடப்பவை ஓய்ந்து போன கதை என்றாலும், இங்கு ஒரு வித நேர்த்தி இருக்கிறது. குறிப்பாக தனது தந்தையின் நண்பராக வரும் தமிழய்யா (அழகம் பெருமாள்) இயக்குனரின் தெளிவான புரிதல் மற்றும் அழகம் பெருமாளின் சாதரான நடிப்பும் இறப்பாக அமைகிறது. இந்த சிறு இடைவெளியில் ஒரு வித வெளிச்சத்தை காட்டிகிறார்கள். பின் மறுபடி நம் கைய்யை பிடித்து பிரபாவின் தோல்விகளின் ஊர்வலத்தை மாறி மாறி வருகிறோம். தமிழ் படிக்கறேன் என்று சொன்னாலே மிகவும் கேவலாமாக பார்க்கும் சூழ்நிலை அவரை வாடிகிறது. இதனால் வரும் தாழ்வு மனப்பான்மை அவரை ஒரு தனி மனிதனாக மாற்றுகிறது. கல்லூரி வளாகத்தில் தனது அறையில் வரும் இன்னொரு மாணவன் வளர்ந்து வந்து படத்தின் பின் பகுதியில் பிரபாவின் பொருமல் மற்றும் கோபத்திற்கு பெட்ரோலாக ஆகின்றான்.

இதில் எல்லாற்றையும் தாண்டி பிரபா ஒரு தமிழ் வாத்தியாராக பனி புரிகிறான். ஆனால் சென்னை மேன்சனில் சக உறுப்பினர்கள் மேலும் அவனது தனிமை மற்றும் அவனது இன்னல்களை ஏற்றி விடுகின்றன. இந்த உலகத்தின் இப்படி ஒரு வர்க்கம் ஏன் இவ்வளவு செழிப்பாக வாழுகிறது என்று கேள்வி கேட்டு பதிலில் எறிகிறான். இந்த தாங்க முடிய வழியில் தன்னையே இழக்கிறான். இது மெதுவாக அவனை வேறு ஒரு இடத்திற்கு கொண்டு செல்கின்றது. அது அடுத்தவர்களின் உணர்ச்சிக்கு மதிப்பி இல்லாத இடம். தனது சீற்றத்தின் தாகம் அடைக்கும் இரத்த ஆறே அந்த இடம். அந்த பழக்கத்திற்கு அடிமை ஆகிறான். இது கேட்க மிகவும் ஆழமான மற்றும் பார்வையாளர்களை பாதிக்கும் படமாக தோன்றும். ஆம் மற்றும் இல்லை என்பதே எனது பதில்.

ஆம் - ஏன் என்றால் படத்தில் வரும் இந்த மேலோங்கிய கருத்து உண்மையே. கணிப்பொறியின் ராஜாங்கம் இந்திய வாழ்கையை ஒரேயடியாக மாற்றி விட்டது. அதிலும் தமிழ்நாட்டில் வேறு திசையில் செலுத்தி கொண்டு இருக்கிறது. இதில் பிற படிப்புகள் நசிங்கி சாகின்றன என்பது ஒப்புக்குள்ள வேண்டிய உண்மை. வரலாறு, பூகோனம், பொருளாதாரம் போன்றவை இன்று உள்ள IT யின் செம்மையான வாழ்க்கைக்கு ஈடு கொடுக்க முடியாது. இதனால் அந்த படிப்பிற்கு மதிப்பு இருப்பது இல்லை மற்றும் அந்த படிப்பு படிப்பவர்களை பிரதானமாக படிக்க தெரியாது தற்குளிகள் என்று பேர் சூட்டப்படிகிறது. இது இப்படத்தின் மூலம் வெளியே வந்தது நன்மையே. ஆனால் இதோட ஒரு மிகவும் கொடூரமான இன்னொரு சிந்தனையும் புகுதப்படிகறது. நன்றாக ஆடை அணிவது மற்றும் பெண்கள் தங்கள் விருப்பத்திற்கேற்ற உடைகள் அணிவது ஏதோ கலாச்சாரத்தின் கற்பழிப்பு என்று சொல்வது எல்லாம் மிகவும் கொச்சைத்தனம். அதிலும் அதை ஒரு சாக்காக எடுத்துக்கொண்டு பிரபா கூறுவது மிகவும் கேவலம். இதற்க்கு எல்லாம் பிறகு "I am not justifying" என்று சொல்வது படத்தின் நேர்தியயை சந்தேகப்பட சொல்கின்றது. இந்த தருவாயில் நம் பிரபாவிடமிருந்து விலகி செல்கிறோம்.

ஒரு சிலர் இந்த படம் தமிழ் சினிமாவின் முக்கியமான படம் என்று சொல்லும் பொழுது, 1980 இல் வந்த "வறுமையின் நிறம் சிகப்பு" ஞாபகம் வருகிறது. அதில் வரும் கதாநாயகனும் தமிழ் படித்து விட்டு டெல்லியில் அல்லோல படுகிறான். அதில் அவன் படும் இன்னல்கள் அவனுடைய மனதின் நேர்மையையை சோதிக்கின்றது. அவனும் பாரதியின் வெறியன், ஆனால் அவனோட வழிகள் நமக்கு தெரிகின்றது. அவன் சமுதாயத்தை வெறுக்கிறான், ஆனால் அதற்காக தன்னுடைய வழியயை தன்னால் முடிந்த வரை நேர்த்தியாக செய்கிறான். இறுதியில் அவனோட மனதோடு ஒரு ஒப்பந்தம் போடுகின்றான். நிம்மதியாக வாழுகிறான். "கற்றது தமிழ்" முதலில் தன்னை நேராக பார்க்க பயப்படுகின்றது. அது தனது குறைகளை அடுத்தவர்கள் மீது எளிதாக போடுகின்றது. பின் அதற்க்கு இறக்கம் காற்ற கேட்கின்றது. பிரபாவை போல் மக்கள் இருக்கிறார்கள். வாழ்கை போரை கடினமாக நடத்துகிறார்கள். அவர்களும் கோபத்தோடு இருக்கிறார்கள். அதற்காக நவீன அங்கி அணிந்திருக்கும் மக்களை பார்த்து பொறாமை படுவதில் கொந்தளிப்பே மிஞ்சும்.

தனி மனிதன் தனது தனிமையில் வாடி தன்னையே இழப்பது புதிதல்ல. "Taxi Driver" யில் Travis Bickle இதே போன்ற உணர்ச்சியயை தாண்டி தத்தளிக்கறான். இங்கு தமிழ் என்றால் அங்கு சமுதாயத்தின் சாக்கடை தெருக்கள். மக்கள் சக மக்களை சதை பிண்டகலாகவும், செல்வத்தின் அடிமைகளாகவும் இருப்பதை கண்டு கொந்தளிக்கறான். அவன் மனதில் உள்ள வேதனை சமுதாயத்தால்தான், ஆனால் அதற்கும் மேல் அவனே அதற்க்கு காரணம். பிற மக்களிடம் தன் மன நிலையை பேச மறுக்கின்றான். தனக்கு என்று ஒரு கொள்கை மற்றும் நெறியை நோக்கி நடக்கின்றான். Scorsese அதை ஒரு சோகம் மற்றும் பயம் தரக்கூடிய சிற்பமாக வடிவமைக்கிறார். இங்கு பிரபாவை ஒரு சில நேரம் புரிய நேர்ந்தாலும் (முக்கியாமாக தெருவில் ஒரு ஐந்து நிமிடம் நண்பனுக்கு தேடி செல்லும் நேரம் மிகவும் சிறந்தது), அவர் ஒரு masochist ஆகத்தான் இறுதயில் காண நேருகிறது. இயக்குனர் ராம் இன்று உள்ள "கலாசார" பாதிப்பை அம்பலமாக ஆக்கி விட்டார் என்று நினைத்தால், அது முற்றிலும் தவறு. தமிழ் மாணாக்களை இது வரை தாழ்மையாக பார்த்த மக்களை பயப்பட செய்து இருக்கிறார். ஒழுங்காய் படிக்காதவர்கள் என்று தவறாக கூற படும் தமிழ் பட்டதாரிகளுக்கு இன்னொரு தவறான அபிப்ரயாம் வர செய்து இருக்கிறார். இங்கு நல்ல கதை இருக்கிறது, ஆனால் தவறான எண்ணங்கள் மற்றும் சோகத்தை ஒரு குறிக்கோளாக எடுத்து கொண்டு படமாக்கபட்டத்தின்் நிலைமை "கற்றது தமிழ்".

Review in English

I wrote a tamizh review for “Katrathu Tamizh” both as a symbol of the film’s content and also as another way to present my reviews. Of course my friend Mathi was the one who strongly recommended to write tamizh reviews and he is the patient guy who has been laboriously reading all of the postings out here. And following it up with criticisms and lauds (if there were any). I am digressing. Well, this is not a one on one translation of the tamizh review. It of course resonates the points I mentioned but due to have written more in this language, I would be more specific and might add some more things.

The tale of a lonely man comes in “Katrathu Tamizh”. Lonely man angry at the society for putting his life in the dark paths due to the studies he did. That would be the language of tamizh my native and the protagonist Prabhakar (Jeeva) does find a job of being the tamizh tutor in a school. That does not translate into a great luxurious life of TGIF parties and the irresponsibility of cherishing the financial strength at the ripe age. He suffers and suffers hard. His teaching profession earns just enough to accommodate a one room mansion and work with the simplicities of tea, cigarette and little bit of relaxing sits in a busy congested and corrupt Chennai streets. What does he do apart from teaching and developing a slow wrath towards his surrounding is unclear. He has that child hood love Aanandhi (Anjali). And for a tamil film which has passed through these phases of over written routine, this one appears fresh and mainly with a soul than a piece of melodrama. But after that it is a ritual and exhibition of Prabha’s disappointments and his failure with the society to embrace his stature of losing mind and sporadic schizophrenic.

Director Raam starts the film with the protagonist standing on the edge of his life to commit suicide which of course ends in an unsuccessful note. He wants to question this personality standing and wants us to be curious why he is there. And we learn in a short flash back of his run up of the police brutality in action followed by the burial of his self esteem. Then that further erases his recognition of his little existence getting dismantled seems to push him to the extreme of breaking free of the illness. Illness of the world wherein he is that person with the knowledge of the great language, tamizh. But that does not create any empathy for him rather confusion and wonderment since we do not really know him at that point. Once the character of Karunas as the anchor man running the camera puts the perspective, the story begins. We see how Prabha navigated his child hood with death as a companion and also as a recognition of who he is. The way he is treated in college and rest of his life as this tamizh guy being judged as this not too bright and illiterate attitude is an existing issue. What is even more bothering is that the plain straight forward shot of informing the reality of the career not being an option at all for the students in sociology, psychology, history, economics and the arts group seen as this “beggars with no choice” was strong and needed to be told.

At this moment I have to mention the beauty of Kathir’s camera work and Yuvan Shankar Raja’s music as the passion they have for this film. The director of course has the same passion but with a very misguided view. Suddenly a film which was full of this character becomes into this desperate cry for pushing depression for the heck of it. It turns into this chaotic presentation where the story takes a route unlike to the tamil cinema but very much into the other world cinema. It falls into the cliches of depression and tries really hard to extend the envelope of the extremities one has to suffer. What it really tries to do is the loneliness of a man denying or becoming to subconsciously like his suffering state. And he begins to blame the society’s partiality which has denied his financial status which indeed is true but what happens is that he loses his mind into sociopathic behaviour. A character of such darkness and dangerous capability is not something I am against. In fact you need much more emphasis to understand them and may be apply some of those in our near and dear to assist them in getting that phase of their system. What is cruelly wrong in this film of this character is that he provides an audience justifying his action. Karunas as this anchor man who starts as a fearing common person seem to be fine with the killings Prabha has done and how cheap it is to attribute the people he killed as “bad”. He becomes to have his personal justice who himself had involved in so many acts inhumanity.

I can understand why he is so vexed seeing his college room mate earning more than his capability. I can also understand his terrible frustration of attractive women floating around the Call center with their independence of wearing bold slogans. What I cannot understand is that the director taking a stand saying that these are all wrong and deserves such a treatment. So he seem to basically stamp that any one jealous of others and takes an association to the culture they like needs punishment. And the tamizh students and various other career less groups of people have the right to offend the rest of the people. While the character of Jeeva does say that “I am not justifying anything”, the film takes that position. It becomes crooked in its approach and a film which might have been at its height of integrity disintegrates rather cheaply.

Seeing “Katrathu Tamizh” obviously brought the memories of seeing K. Balachander’s “Varumayin Niram Sigappu” which is a clearer and solid film of an ambitious young man suffering from the flaws of the society’s terms. There he is bothered by the wrongness of the externality towards his righteous path. He begins to learn about his academic degree that it is far away from the realities of survival. In the end he makes a pact with himself and begins to live in his terms of happiness. It does not mean that I liked that film because it ends in happiness but mainly due to the belief in the character. Here Prabha never attains a prosperous nature even in his darkness. I did love his desperate attempt to find a five minutes friend which is more of an harassment and ragging of an innocent by passer.

The pain what Prabhakar goes through is remotely a representation of Travis Bickle in “Taxi Driver” encounters with himself. The similarities while widely different in back ground has the concept of solitude and the rejection of extending a hand for help outside. Bickle is a walking time bomb and so is Prabha even more dangerous. But I can see where Bickle is coming from and his anger but with Prabha it sticks with the screen morphed into a rage of the creator rather than a character. Director Raam adds another misconception to the tamizh graduates, serial killers. There is a great story here but not the one we see over the screen.

"4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days" (2007) - Movie Review

There are certain conflicts which will be the only clearest thing in it, that there will be conflict forever. Atheist or Theist, Pro-life or Pro-choice. These are things which will be argued for no resolution when it comes personally. Everything are just statements and some one else’s fodder for words. The ideology as it stands crumbles when the reality comes banging into the door. One such is watching the Romanian film “4 Months 3 Weeks and 2 Days” giving in details you do not want to see of a student Gabita (Laura Vasiliu) going through abortion and her friend Otilia (Anamaria Marinca) helping her undergoing the trauma.

The film is not an advocacy of pro-choice or pro-life. It documents the two days in to these two girls encountering the worst of their emotional melt down and the fear of getting caught in the 1987 Communist Romania. They are room mates in the university and we see the dawn of the decision for Otilia to help Gabita in something. Gabita begins to pack while Otilia goes around getting stuffs like cigarettes, soap etc. for the procedure. Clearly both of them have not realized the gravity of the act they are getting in to which are the early scenes. Otilia visits her boy friend Adi (Alexandru Potocean) and they have a fight about the evening Adi has invited her for. It is his mother’s birthday and thus meeting their parents along side their friends. They make up of course as any couple and the day proceeds with Otilia going about doing the errands in setting up the hotel and meeting the guy (Ion Sapdaru). We do not know what the heck these two are planning till that point.

When the guy who actually is the doctor performing the abortion rattles the absolute horror of the reality Gabita is facing and Otilia in the middle asking the questions are the times the speculations in our mind gets the face. Gabita has lied of so many things that we are surprised by the patience of Otilia to help her further. She has lied to the doctor over the phone that she is two months pregnant instead of four or more, assumed the money as 3000 lia and did not tell any of this to Otilia. She with her naive eyes make the condition even more tenser than it actually is. The doctor played by Ion Sapdaru is the man who puts down any one by pure intimidation. Having done and encountered so many of this, he gives the bitter taste of the things ahead for Gabita. He scares because it is scary and he does it being the snob and having the attitude expected out of him. We think of him as the genuine sensible person and he shocks us in the end.

The cinematography by Oleg Mutu follows the characters around and stops as if they need their privacy from us. In the hotel with the receptionists and managers born to irritate their customer, Otilia’s job reaches its peak when she sits down for dinner with her boy friend’s parents and the bonus of their friends. That continuous shot of the dinner is a statement of the sociological and societal opinions, a traditional generation scoffing and scorning at the easiness the current generation gets through and of all the heart beat of Otilia racing through with this and the worry of her friend lying lonely in the hotel room.

Writer/Director Cristian Mungiu does not use music to elaborate the distress and tension of these two people. They are hit hard by the event that they act with the will and strength they have. Gabita knows it is the problem she created and ruined further but Otilia is thrust into the position of such stature by her friend. The whole ordeal makes her question what happens when she takes the place of Gabita due to circumstances? That brings in the whole personal encounter of the conflicting terms of right and wrong in the world of conscience.

If there are some times to smile, that would only be the smirk we drop when the doctor dictates the terms of the situation. When we are up to do something predictably risky and nerve wracking, the boldness to gear up takes a while and once made up especially if we are unaware of the reality, the hour following to it is a regularity with a concealed fear. When the objective becomes clear to the audience, one might wonder how casual they were before they arrived to this, but the truth is no one is casual and even if they are openly tense, what is that going to help in this?

“4 Months 3 Weeks and 2 Days” is a stressful film. It takes you through the unsettling feeling throughout the time and we are surprised at certain times of the clinical nature of the characters. We doubt their mercy and emotions. That comes to one’s own personal opinion towards the choices of an individual. Yet pro-life or pro-choice, at the end of the film everybody are in the same state of shock and sympathy.

"Crank: High Voltage" (2009) - Movie Review

I never try to leave a show. I consider it rude for the effort been put on by many of the people. Yet I sometime stop some DVDs, for which I do not write review and politely accept that it is not my cup of tea. Some films offend me but even in that I can see their boldness and candid idea to put it forward. I came close to walking out of “Crank: High Voltage” which may be the worst film I have ever seen. It is disrespectful to the medium of art and it violates, abuses and giggles while doing it over the faces of the audience. It offended me as a film goer and I have no feeling of any kind for the aspect the directors Mark Nevedine and Brian Taylor (wondering it takes two people to make a crap like this) put forth in a known debacle of a sequel. Let me not talk about their previous venture.

When the trailers for this film came, one wonders how it is possible because at the end of the first film, Chev Chelios (Jason Statham in an unforgivable role again) falls from a helicopter, lands on a car and lay dead on the roads of Los Angeles. And hence when I enter the theatre with the idea of what to expect, I plainly was in the ride for some good brainless entertainment. This film managed to fail beyond the wildest and freakiest imagination for a viewer with such an expectation.

He is scraped off the road and then his body parts are used for some organ trading. Then to keep him alive till they extract the other parts, they put an artificial heart which gets triggered by electrical charges thus the title. You see the brainless entertainment I was talking about. The film is a horrendous celebration of violence, sex and abuse. Supposedly high on gore and curse, it bores you every single moment it gets. It is a grind house film which boasts as something else. It does not have the honesty to even accept that and advertise as surreal portrayal of mindless action.

And the characters if there are one, pops up one by one from no where in a Los Angeles full of bad streets and shooting gangs. This is torture. It is bad, It is gloriously bad. It is not so bad to be good. It is bad. I hated the film. There was not a single frame that I remotely and subconsciously liked. It may be one of the stupidest and ridiculously boring film I have ever seen.

Seeing films like “Crank” getting a funding for sequel makes me cringe on the state of the film industry. The studio are ready to venture on a business basis for something so openly offensive about the work its doing. There are many budding and aspirant film makers who crave for an opportunity. Even if they get and get their films made, their films hit some film festivals and limited release with a week running in a desolated theatre in the cities. And here is “Crank: High Voltage” getting wide release and I am sure would run amok for several weeks. It is a depressing state.

"State of Play" (2009) - Movie Review

A Congressman, a young lady killed, an experienced journalist, a rookie journalist, a commanding editor and a nice typical political king maker. You know what it is, the journalistic political thriller mastered in the “All the President’s Men” is taken as the inspiration for “State of Play” which is again developed from a six hour TV series ran in BBC. There are things which audience know of and expect of and are also ready to make the compromises for. That will be to swallow some spoilers of for the performance and shooting dialogues . Russell Crowe as that been-there-done-that journalist and an old friend of the Congressman (Ben Affleck) in the center of investigation is in his elements. We see him as the lousy junk food chunking pen man driving a car to a crime scene and his dealing with the cops and others. Then as the obvious of the suspenses comes out, it is like a long left chilled beer. We drink with the remembrance of its fresh chillness and the mind kicks us into the reality of its luke warm. And oh. you still drink the beer.

While critics talk about the “All the President’s Men”, there are couple of other successors in that league to provide that experience of journalism with the flair and failure it possesses in its passionate workers. “The Paper” will be the one which strikes me as this zeal it has for the profession and how it portrays it. It is in their nerves to prep some one for stories. Jobs which surface so closely and be a spectator and some time in the part of the system of horrendous crimes, it seasons the mind for that growing satellite for information and wariness. Journalism tops that chart and when there is such a surplus of information going through the congested and cellulose inflicted offices, there will be a day for a definite conflict of interest. Such is one for Cal. Cal shares a painful history with his buddy Congressman and his wife (Robin Wright Penn).

Hence when the rookie journalist blogger Della Frye (Rachel McAdams) comes in for information, he brings ego and care with the corrected precision for being a jerk to her. After that his door is knocked by his buddy for a crashing place as he is in the middle of the chaos of being accused of sex scandal whilst his passion for conducting an investigation in to the “evil” corporation handling the outsourced defense projects to become thick and rich.

So it is a no brainer right? The corporation plotting against this hero figure Congressman but we also know that such an apparent thing means things run deeper than that. This figure of thought does not run for Cal. He gets stuck now and then to expand the creaks of his freedom to his buddy. He in fact puts the whole investigation under the stains of the presence of Affleck’s character who is the subject of their investigation. The strains in their relationship is something which does not get clearly ventured on. The placing of a major cast as Congressman’s wife is another indication that things were happening between these three people of interest. The judgment of Cal in that should be nudged rather there is nothing of an enlightenment in between them. The idea to have those scenes to reflect the state of their mind in their day to day job is good but the execution of it is nothing less than a flat line.

“State of Play” of course is a film which would melt the times of the sitting people with dicy camera shots and close encounters with the chilling killer. It has the sleek and clinical approach towards its story which is of course a character for a conspiracy film. And with Russell Crowe being that seasoned worker who has been muddling the lines of good and evil, you see the good side of the evil. But that becomes a flaw. There are several instances where in the multiple interest of personal gain, media and corporate requirement to conceal and reveal information. The characters has only lines to express their discomfort but when the truth comes out, it rarely occurs for us that Cal would do the right thing. He holds the story but does not have the weight on the shoulders which generally characters like this carry around.

And who made Jason Bateman to take the role of sleazy PR pimp man? When I did not know who he was, his performance as the stoned disoriented but entertaining lawyer in “Smokin’ Aces” was the only saving grace for that horrible flick. He tries to pull something like that out here which is neither entertaining nor a serious twist to the story. He is the key to the puzzle and when it unlocks, the compromise for spoilers have already been used up. “State of Play” would definitely be a watchable film but does not take the heavy responsibility of character reflections in it.