This is a very late review, so I’m sure most of you know what the movie is about and how it reminds you so much of Shankar’s earlier works. And I just read the review of the movie in my paper and kinda… er… disagree!
So I’ll just cut to my take on it. I watched the movie this morning. I’ve updated it cuz a lot of people seem to think that I don’t want people to watch the movie! That’s not quite what I meant. Presenting, my three takes on the film!
Take One (written by Psycho Suderman):
I laughed so much that my tummy still hurts.
Thanks to Vikram’s portrayal of Remo, the cool rampwalk model. The scenes are a howler. Sample this, with a fake wannabe ‘wuz’ accent (‘wuz’ if wikipedia forgot to mention, is colloquial for faggot): “We’re supposed in love right, so let’s go some place and do some Yo-Yo.”
It’s the most entertaining movie you can find in the halls, of course after Chandramukhi. But it doesnt quite entertain the way Shankar would have liked it to. The entertainment more is like: “Look at that… 28 crores through Shankar’s special effects appear so funny… It’s a three hour long joke!”
Take Two (from Pseudo-Cool Suderman):
What’s wrong with Vikram? He had scope for not one but three characters here.
His Ambi turns out to be irritatingly innocent … It’s okie for Ambi to be a conformist, but being a loser crybaby isn’t helping things. The plot just requires him to be a meek, timid guy next door who believes in following the rules. He could be frustrated alright but not irritatingly nagging to extent of making the character totally unrelatable.
Indian, Gentlemen and Muthalvan had strong protagonists. Even at their lowest point, they maintained their dignity. What does Anniyan have? Anniyan has Vikram in and as Chickenshit.
As I was saying, Ambi pisses you of being Mr. Loser Tinyballs, Remo cheeses you off being the wannabe from wuz-bekistan and the lesser the said about the psycho serial-killer Anniyan the better. Anniyan has to be corniest of vigilantes. Actually, Citizen comes a close second. Vikram resorts to gimmicks (his eye-ball movement looks like Pandiyarajan’s thiruttu moozhi) and talks like he just swallowed a toad.
Anniyan has to be his worst performance in recent times, the grunting Pithamagan comes a close second.
Shankar had a great premise in there for a worthy sequel to his ‘Gentleman,’ ‘Indian’ and ‘Mudhalvan’ masala-coated message movies, but he totally fucks it up by letting Vikram get totally indulgent. There was a soul to Ambi’s character, that unfortunately does not come out of Vikram’s over-the-top portrayal. Not all of Anniyan’s killings seem all that justified and him leaving a jumble puzzle for a clue to confuse the police makes you believe Shankar’s attempting a spoof of his own vigilante movies.
If you thought Shankar cannot possibly come up with a screenplay which more implausible than his Boys, you thought wrong. The situations seem so thrust in and forced … like Anniyan’s public appearance in Nehru Indoor Stadium to make the ‘Know-what’s-wrong-with-our-country-speech’… Why didn’t he just courier the tape to a TV channel? Cuz it’s been done before in Indian and Muthalvan!
Characterisation is sacrificed for gimmickry, the soul is given up for style, the logic is given up for convenience, the talented Vikram is given up for Chickenshit!
Shankar’s lost it. Like my friend asked at the end of the movie: “What punishment does the Garudapuranam hold for Shankar?”
Maybe we should tie him up and make him watch Anniyan 28 times! Okay, throw in another 28 screenings of Boys for bonus!
(Kenny, I don’t know you anymore!)
Take Three (written by ThAmbi Sudhish Kamath):
Anniyan has to be seen once, in spite of the annoying performances, ONLY because it tries to say something nice. Something which I really quite appreciate Shankar for. It’s been on my mind ever since I’ve been to Singapore. It’s been in my heart everytime I see yet another motorist jumping the divider, over to the wrong side to beat the traffic jam. It’s been a part of every right-minded Indian’s psyche: “What are WE THE PEOPLE doing, apart from complaining and bitching about the system and the corruption?”
It is a film with its heart in the right place. Just that the face of the film is so unwatchable!
P.S: I thought the art direction was quite cool in the last song ‘Rendakka’… I want an ambassador just like that!!
MADRAS INK. 
Suderman: So, Anniyan leaves a Ambigram after each murder? LOL
A good review…
The story does lack a strong character. I ended up feeling Shankar made this movie in a doped state…his attention to detail is lacking big time in Anniyan, especially the old man accident scene where Vickram’s shirt goes from being spotless to bloddy, to semi spotless to semi bloddy!
The songs picturization were a damper…The only relief in the movie was Vivek’s jokes. Otherwise I would have run out of the theater! In comparision Boyz seems better now!
good review. i saw the movie today, and i can agree with your review. i thought the only thing good was sujatha’s dialogues at some places. nice site. will visit often.
Sudhish… Didnt have time to c anniyan…everthyin happenin real fast..as i tol u over fone yday, im leaving 2nite for kottayam, kerala. Wish me luck. Its a 1 yr pg diploma course, so will be back and become the next SK..!!! Srinivas.(PS- I’ve never been outta Chennai and lived…God help me)
Sudish was it that bad??
Appadi podu maamu! Edhu, edhu review…not the one in ‘friday review’! (where the first para was high funda english, and then sad, scribbled-in-the-movie-hall-eng. Why cant you write all of ’em reviews? Actually, Susan’s are also pretty neat…so, between the two of you, couldnt you do ’em all??)
Suds, padam paakavenamgarey? hmmmm…or will morbid curiosity draw me theatre-ward? I wonder…
Shelob.
Completely agree to your review of Vikram’s performance. But u shudda mentioned abt Sabu Cyril’s sets. I think He is GOD FATHER IV. Its outstanding!!!!
well-written though i didn’t quite agree with the completely negative rating. If you r in the mood for yet another review, do read this one.
And since you have lotsa reviews on your site, i’m hoping u do read others’ reviews once in a while too. if yes, please do check out my reviews site when u get a chance…
hei suderman
it is not “just another” anniyan review. it is “the” review for anniyan! movie sucks real time. was surprised to see all the media going gaga over the worthless piece of crap! you should get the review onto hindu!
mark
anti:
Lol! yup, he does!!!
nitin:
thanks!
the lines in the Nehru stadium speech part were really good! Only that his Undertaker costume took away a lot of punch!!
Indian thaatha said that with so much dignity, dressed as a soldier… here he says similar lines looking like Papa Shango-Undertaker!
srinivas:
all the best dude!
and u’ll be fine by urself!
I learnt most when I spent time independently and far away from home!
Im sure u’ll look back at these years fondly!
all the very best and wish that you go more places than SK did! 🙂
vasanthi:
it was that bad… but it was a wee bit good! hope u’ve read the updated review! 🙂
Shelob:
No, no… please watch.
1. Cuz u will laugh ur ass off! it is entertainment!
2. Cuz there is a part of it which makes sense… and which every Indian must watch!
anonymous:
Sabu Cyril’s work in the last song was very very good…but the train (interiors) set was quite poor… it was so squeezed in!!
Balaji:
Nice site!
Pretty decent review but as u can see i dont agree with it entirely either! 🙂
Mark:
ha ha!
My paper has a professional reviewer who specialises in Tamil films. I wont get a chance till she retires! 🙂
sud you have the best review for anniyan. anniyan was a big disappointment for me.
I like movie reviews by Chitra Mahesh. but nowadays i dont see any movie reviews by Chitra Mahesh in Hindu. is she still in hindu
Sudhish, your updated review is even more Kalakkals!..the 3 face analysis is a nice touch 🙂
BTW, can someone tell me where I can get a copy of garudapuranam 2759th edition?(replete with graphic pictorial descriptions 🙂
Hiee! Came here from kiruba’s blog. I am doing my masters in journalism at madras university. LOVE YOUR BLOG SUDHISH! Keep up the good work. your writing has inspired me to start my own blog. take care! please find a way of starting to write full time reviews for the Hindu soon!
hey,
Yea man…this movie is shit! And yea ur right it was so irritating to watch ambi. I guess you shld have known it but this movie is a real real poor adaptation of the book “tell me your dreams”.
Movie is highly dumb man! I read the sify chat transcript of shankar…he said he came to know abt the novel after the film was taken! Wat a piece of junk! I didnt expect this kindaa answer from him! Yea Shankar is out of any more vigilante stuff…and this is clearly shown in anniyan!
tsk tsk, you destroy my dear Vikram’s image of the “acting sooperstar” to shreds! Or is Vikram the next Shivaji?
Btw, me book-tagged you! very curious on what is your food for thought!
nice review… have to just watch the movie now & c it all fall into plce, or out of place. Gr8 blogs. will keep coming bak!
Anniyan was disappointing.
Hope Shankar stops this mindless masala-movies !
“Boys was worse”
Suderman, I’d agree that Boys was “cheap” as a movie. But would you agree that Boys was at least realistic?
IMHO, Boys is the most realistic of Shankar’s efforts so far! I’d wager to change my name to something else if someone (boy or gal) in their 20s, can from the bottom of the heart swear that they havent seen even one incident in the movie in their past!
Vikram in most places is irritating, especially the eye thing.
There is no logic behind killing the guy who stops on the road and then goes off. why anniyan kills only him. He should have noted all the registration numbers of the vehichles and go and kill every one of them.
Inventory is over with sankar.
Good Review.
saravanan:
chitra mahesh was a freelancer…now she writes for deccan chronicle! yes, i liked some of her reviews.. she was cool!
vijay:
lol!
no doubt shankar is creative! he’s quite talented too… just that he’s losing his touch… he needs to brush up his screenwriting skills… he’s always been a good screenwriter…till boys happened. Muthalvan was his best effort, Indian and Gentleman were pretty good too!
mrinalini:
i do full time reviews for my paper.. but only for Hindi and English films!
the current reviewer for tamil films has been doing it for years… so they want the specialist to do the job!
and mrinalini…
thanks a ton! 🙂
prasanna:
well, he’s (like always) had the best of technicians and money with him… all he needed was a tight script which he didnt have this time…
i dont think much of shankar as a director, i always thot he was a decent screenwriter… ive watched him shoot…
he wud make his cinematographer (one of the best technicians) K V Anand give him all possible options for every shot he takes…
And then he sits with the best editor to choose the best option…
Duh… thats wat a director is supposed to decide BEFORE he goes to shoot!
so going by this, any of us can make a movie if given a good script, lot of money and the best technicians!
Divya:
Vikram has great potential… I thot he was fabulous in Sethu, Dil, Dhool and Saamy…
Pithamagan is a role anyone cud ve done…
having been on stage myself, i think the easiest roles are the ones where you need to play abnormal… for the Pithamagan role, he had the rite kind of clothes, make-up and lighting…that did half his job of acting, he didnt even have lines… he just had to look retarded and behave like an animal… which i cud ve related if he was playing Mowgli and if he was raised in the jungle by animals…
but here he’s just been in a graveyard… he does see people every single day… he is not mentally ill either… the character and his mannerisms were not justified!
Here in Anniyan, his Ambi is a stereotype… whats worse, its a crybaby!! and i dont wanna see a crybaby hero!
and hey divya…
im a bad person to book tag…
i dont read at all!
not even newspapers…
not even my own stories half the time!
and im not proud of it but i simply cant get myself to sit in one place with a book… im too restless…
I managed to read The Godfather and I read The Spirit of Lagaan, from cover to cover at one go! that was unputdownable! truly inspiring account of what made lagaan!
I dont read much, just the comics I read as a kid, some enid blyton, nancy drew, hardy boys, a few sidney sheldon… a whole lot of abridged versions of shakespeare, jules verne, hg wells…
I dont own too many books!
sanchapanzo:
i agree…
but i hope shankar comes back with something refreshing! he’s the only one producers seem to trust with big monies! so i hope he makes use of that responsibility and comes up with something revolutionary next time!
anti:
Boys was realistic in its first half… but the screenplay didnt really flow smooth… there were too many sub plots thrust in… the POTO act when they are arrested for abetting terrorists and stuff… the final climax lacked soul… u had to feel bad for the loss and feel good for the glory…there was so much potential there… all lost cuz of that music video presentation for Secret of Success!
without getting into the morality of the film, I just think Boys was a bad movie…
7 G rainbow colony was a good movie but it was a wrong film, especially cuz it was soooo real! read my review of that and that wudve applied to boys too if only Shankar had managed to make it a good movie!
vj:
I hope he has not run out of stock… im still grateful to shankar for giving us Gentleman, Indian and Muthalvan!
even what he tries to say in Anniyan is commendable… if only he had cut down on style and gimmickry, it might ve at least been watchable!
hey suderman,
am not saying shankar is a great director but hez a decent director! Anniyan he screwed up like shit and denigrated himself! In films like mudhalvan, gentleman and indian et al..u have grass itching scenes mate! Like when arjun comes out of his house bruised and battered punches the air acknowledging tht he is joining politics! that had goosebumps all over me man! That aspect is totally missing and the movie also seems highly illogical!
And shankar shld have said i did story adaptation…nothing wrong in that! But he turned out to be a jerk!
Yes. Gentleman was a great movie. Though its like Robin Hood, the message that Shakar was conveying was great and new to Tamil cinema. The first half of Mudhalvan was awesome. He missed the kick off, in the second half.
Still, he is an awesome commercial director. He is a specialist in taking the songs.
But the songs in Anniyan are not that much good. The Heroine selection is awful. I dont know why he has chosen sadha.
May be the trend has changed now. We have seen a lot of these superhero movies starting from, Gentleman, Indian, Mudhalvan, Citizen, Samurai, Ramana etc.. etc..
Neway Hats off to shankar. Atleast he is trying to tell something useful to society and people through his movies. hmmm.
Suderman – you are one biased journalist ! I agree that Remo’s part was overdone and did appear phony. But trust me, I have seen Ambi like characters in real life – Over-sensitive, naive, and earthy. There is nothing unnatural about Ambi’s characterisation or Vikram’s performance in that role. In fact, I thought he was exceptional as a “pazham”. You say, “Being a loser crybaby isn’t helping it”. Yeah, right ! If you were like Ambi, you’ll stand up to those thugs and more ! And about Anniyan’s eye-rolling, where the hell did u see Pandiarajan in that muzhi ? Now, Suderman, just try eye-rolling like that. You should be a good actor to be a good director right? Just try it. I bet you’ll faint within seconds. Now I wonder what punishment do you deserve as per Garudapuranam, for writing such a biased review, ignoring a genuinely exceptional performance. How about Andakoobam for starters ?
And continuing from my previous anonymous post — I just found that you boast of Multiple Personality Disorder (MPD) too. (By the way, it’s no longer called MPD. It’s now Dissociative Personality Disorder). Think about this Suderman – If Ambi were your normal “Rajni” style macho hero (that you want every one of your hero to be like), would there be any need for Anniyan or Remo to emerge ? So, Ambi had to be a cry-baby. Ambi had to be over-sensitive. My suggestion, Hang in your boots as a movie reviewer, and go visit those car shows. You do a much better job posing for photos !
dear anonymous,
i see u can relate to ambi having similar traits as him! 🙂
so seem to be so meek here that u dont even wanna put ur name… so i buy ur point!
and for ur suggestion of hanging in my boots, moron… i dont need my boots to write a review… bad phase to use… cuz i need these boots only to kick silly anonymous asses out of my blogs!
but i wont do u any harm cuz u r like ambi… u have nice intentions and no malice and u’re just chicken! 🙂 u gave me ur opinion… next time try saying it politely and maybe ill treat u with a lil more respect, wuz-ball!
Okay, in reply to the points you raised:
Arjun in Gentleman and Kamal in Indian too were affected and victimised but they carried it off with dignity… I have no problems with Ambi being been meek and timid but he surely cud ve had been portrayed with a little dignity… protagonists who feel as strongly as him sit and cry, they DO feel bad and helpless LIKE Arjun or Kamal did in the earlier vigilante movies…
That is why they were relatable, Ambi isnt… at least not for me! Vikram did the soft roles for 18 years before Sethu… they did not work… not cuz they dont suit his persona but cuz people dont like to see him that way… all his successes have to do with machismo and dignity…
Dil, Dhool, Saamy, Pithamagan even… look at the movies that have failed even after he became a superstar… King and Kathal Sadugudu… these movies showed him doing soft crybaby roles… High time u stopped believing that all people who sob on screen are good actors… Vikram is a very talented actor when he’s subtle… not when he tries to be Sivaji. Sivaji worked in an era when the sensibilities of the audience had to do with theatre and drama… the settings of the cinema then were soaked in that sensibility that such histrionics did not seem out of place! the sensibilities today are very different… machismo sells… Secondly, the protagonist needs to maintain some dignity even at his lowest for me to respect him… or for me to relate to him…
which is was my point in the review! next time, leave ur name cuz u have nothing to fear when you criticise me on the basis of arguments… i have a problem only with people who dont give me good enuff arguments and resort to name calling!
Cheers! 🙂
Good stuff Sudhish. When a creator becomes obsessed with himself (and his limited bag of ideas) over a period of time, the audience loses interest. Maybe the director in question should make movies less frequently to give the audience time to forget his previous work. Maybe it will help him get out of the ‘formula zone’ he’s in. This might also give him more time to try and add some element of originality to his stale crop of repetitive storylines.
Keep writing.
G Krish
Suderman – Your reply to my anonymous post is clearly missing the point. You are equating the characters of Arjun and Indian thatha to Ambi, which I feel is incorrect. The reason is, Ambi’s character is “incapable” of being the protagonist. He wants to, desperately – but he is incompetent, meek, shy – whatever you wish to call it. Because of this, Ambi can never carry himself with dignity – and remember, Anniyan “emerges” because of this incompetence and lack of dignity. The protagonist is Anniyan (hence the title) and NOT Ambi.
1) You bring in references from Vikram’s older movies and how he was good in this and that. Dude – when you are evaluating a performance, all you have to see is, if the actor stuck to his character and emoted and behaved the way he is supposed to – and how good was he in that role. That’s it. None of the past performances or future performances matter. I am not sure how else you could emote for a character (Ambi) that is over-sensitive and yet at the same time doesn’t have the energy to carry it through…. So, I am not sure where your problem is: Is the characterization of Ambi itself unrelatable – or is it vikram’s acting that makes it unrelatable? I don’t think there was anything wrong with either.
2) You say ” you don’t have to cry anymore on screen .. blah blah like Sivaji etc..” If the character would cry in that situation, he has to. That’s all. To what range you’d go depends on the actor. Sivaji probably did what was best for his time – overacting according to today’s standards – but stuck true to the characters nevertheless. When somebody says Karnan – the first thing that comes to mind is Sivaji. Thiruvilaiyadal – Sivaji, Kattabomman – Sivaji .. Lots of people have played Sivan including Sambar – but it’s Sivaji that stands out. And so continuing on the crying part, there is nothing like you CAN’T cry anymore or you CAN cry on screen. If the scene and situation and the character’s intent demands he cry – he cries. It’s like the producers saying .. “we must have a kuthu song, 5 other songs and 6 fights in a movie”. Didn’t Rajni just prove that as absurd. Where do all these biases and blind beliefs spring from?
3) Hang in your boots is just a phrase – like for example “Kundakka Mandakka”. You should take it as an analogy, my friend. Not literally. Watching too many S.Ve.Sekar dramas?
4) Also, for the record, my name is Kurian Mathew. Born and brought up in Madras. Settled in US. Had (and still have) a number of Brahmin friends – reason enough for my appreciation of Ambi’s characterization and Vikram’s performance in that role. And hey, I am least like Ambi – neither meek, nor over-sensitive.
5) You had said, “next time try saying it politely …” – Ha ! That, from a movie reviewer who bashes everybody left, right, and center; uses foul-language whenever and wherever possible; and commits the gravest of all journalistic sins – writes a biased review.
You know what your problem is: You mistake freedom of expression to be freedom for trashing anyone. Critiques are important, no doubt. I have enjoyed your reviews on some other movies – but on this one – nah, you are way off, except about Remo and the graphix scenes. You expect politeness from me? – Try being graceful and unbiased for a change.
Cheers,
Kurian
Kurian,
Im glad I was able to at least convert one ASAF into a legitimate netizen… if u had done this before, it wud ve saved u and me a little time and effort! 🙂
I COULD say u r biased cuz u like Vikram. And hence u wud even appreciate the smell of his fart!
But I understand taste and opinions differ from person to person, so I will not counter that point!
Anyways, w.r.t ur numbered points…
1. I have a problem primarily with his portrayal. I think he over did the loser bit! And thats my take on it… My point is he need not be a loser to feel frustrated, meek and submissive… He cud still do the same with helplessness yet with dignity… Anniyan was born out of his inability to do something within the framework of law… not cuz he’s a loser… not cuz he’s a crybaby… Remo was born cuz of his inability to be cool and contemporary … not cuz he is supposed to lack dignity… hence first by characterisation and worse by portrayal, Ambi to me is absolutely unrelatable.. But like i said in my review… there is a soul to the character of ambi which does not come out cuz of Vikram’s portrayal… his crybaby thing put me and a lot of others off!! Ambi, my friend, is the guy who believes in rules and political correctness… Hence, he’s realistically is the protagonist of the film… Anniyan is just one of the alter egoes of the protagonist… besides Ambi does not make a good title for a man who’s made movies with titles like Gentleman, indian, kadhalan, mudhalvan… In this case, its that gimmickry of Anniyan which robs the film of its class!
Let me make it simple: the guy whose life the movie about is the protagonist! also, the guy who gets the girl is the protagonist. so having observed Tamil films intensely for a decade and having followed vikram’s roles closely, I can say that being a crybaby has never won him audience appreciation. However, loud exaggerated acting has! Anniyan works cuz of the latter, not cuz of the crybaby protagonist who was unrelatable.
2. judging an actor is purely subject to ur sensibility. my sensibility prefers the subtleties of Superstar to the loudness of Vikram!
3. Oh, its a phrase is it? Thank u English teacher… I dont have to watch S.Ve Sekar comedies when I have enuff clowns posting here! 😉
4. Nice to meet you Kurien… 🙂 And I have brahmin friends too who dont confirm to stereotypical film versions! I understand the idea for him to retain the kudumi was probably to say that Ambi is an anachronism today… but I do believe his portrayal is stale, stereotypical and whats worse for me, he’s annoyingly loserly… and please, whats this obsession of keeping Brahmin characters as self-righteous clean and harmless stereotypes??
5. Thambi Kurien: I say what I want cuz I have the balls to put my name below it! Not like a few people here. And Im glad u found ur balls too and killed the Anniyan in u! 🙂
Suderman brotheru:
Well – Yes. I do like Vikram. I also like Rajni, Kamal and Surya among others .. (Ajit, Vijay, Simbu and cohorts, nah – not yet). That’s beside the point, because I take movies on a case-by-case basis. Objectivity. Examples: According to me, vikram was good in Saami, he wasn’t even watchabe in one of those village roles with devayani – forgot the name. Baba – bad. Padayappa – cool. Virumandi – ok. Indian – cool.
Was vikram loud in anniyan – yeah, mabe. But why do you want your hero characters to be not loud, macho, with dignity ? Isn’t that stereotyping ? Isn’t that being biased ? That aside, my point is – if the characterization itself is poor, then it’s the director’s fault, not the actor’s. i.e Blame Shankar – not vikram.
I guess Shankars’s idea was to bring forth dramatic differences. So, while Ambi is clean, harmless – Anniyan is ruthless, and Remo is Romeo. Did Shankar succeed fully – no, only partially – because Remo isn’t well done, and acording to you, Ambi too. But, did vikram succeed as Ambi, Anniyan. I would say yes – coz the body language, behavior, mannerisms including voice were different (Scene with Prakashraj).
I treat Ambi and Anniyan as two different characters. That’s what an alter ego is. The characters may or may not know each other. In anniyan, they do. (Now you’d say Thank you, Psychologist:-)). The actual definition of a protagonist is whoever carries/executes the message of the movie i.e. Anniyan in this case. I am not sure what the tamil movie world’s view is. But from what you are saying – seems like it’s all wrong.
Cheers,
Kurian
p.s: Wanted to comment on the fart thingie – well nah, don’t want to stoop down to that level 🙂
dude u rock the movie was totally hopeless.saw it and never laughed so much after sathi leelavathi.
v can start a new discussion abt what was most funny abt the movie.
for me it wuz when ambi asks for help and no one comes his way.even “AUTO”men,how they dont come forward still surprises me.
Kurian:
Not that i dont like vikram, just that i dont like him in Anniyan. Objective, as u wud call it, is just a matter of sensibility and perception.
the fact that most people did not like the film and found it repetitive is indicative of how biased our reviews are becoming..
given 28 crores, anyone can make a decent film… you can hire the best technicians, best scriptwriters, best actors… and if anniyan is all u can do, i DO have a strong problem!
ur reading of protagonist too… im afraid is subjective.. the story is about a man called ambi who stands for a set of values…he’s a conformist frustrated with the system and his other personalities take over to execute his inner most desires! so there, mr.psychologist! 🙂
there is also a difference between what is quintessential and what are secondary traits for characterisation…
Tamil cinema is star centric. Image of a star plays a great role in the success of films here. The script must necessarily suit star image, else people here do seem to have a problem. This has been demonstrated by them rejecting Vikram everytime he plays a soft character… right from meera to anniyan! they have applauded him everytime he’s displayed machismo… right from sethu (first half) to anniyan (pyscho character)… not that it is my opinion that he can only perform macho roles, it is my analysis that tells me that people dont seem to like him playing soft!
and hence my point… that dignity is quintessential… most indians have huge egos, so they want their heroes to have that trait… some self respect… some digity..
brahminical portrayal is the secondary trait… he need not have been brahmin necessarily, he cud have been any pious lawyer and created the same effect… he did not need an Undertaker costume that makes a caricature of a vigilante… he did not need to be doing the Yo Yo to be modern and cool… that is my problem… gimmickry… style and gimmickry have taken away the soul from anniyan, stereotyping has taken the freshness away from ambi…
if this does not clear our doubts, nothing else can.
You are free to call it a classic. That’s your opinion.
I however think it is a criminal waste of money! Read other comments, that might give you an insight into the minds of movie-watchers!
And if you read the last bit of my review, you ll also see that Ive said that people shd watch the movie ONLY cuz it tries to say something nice.
a reviewer is not just someone who tells you to watch or not. he’s someone who also tells u whats good abt the movie (and why is it good) and whats bad (and why is it bad), so that you can make up your mind for urself, and ends with recommendations or warnings. For Anniyan, I’ve warned everyone of what to expect and also told them whats good! Now, its upto each reader to decide if he wants to watch the movie!
Cheers! 🙂
dear anon:
thanks but maybe u should leave your name next time. it aint gonna hurt, right? 🙂
Suderman:
I understand your view point. Yup – objectivity is still subject to perceptions and sensibilities. But atleast you can forget the past performances and movies (the “halo-effect”) and give the actor and the director a fair chance each time.
Anyway, I have two questions –
1) Since you aspire to be a film director, what would you have done differently if you were given 28 crores and the basic anniyan plot ? How will your screenplay be different ?
2) Does Hindu have a problem if you trash a movie in your blog esp. the “what the fuck was I thinking” pic. In US, you could get kicked out.
Cheers,
Kurian
Kurian:
there are plenty of ways to make anniyan… but if i had 28 crores and if i had to make a vigilante movie with the same plot… I wud use a different genre… comicbook fantasy… or even sci-fi…
and made Anniyan unabashedly a superhero like Batman or Spiderman or Superman… maybe they killd him and he was ressurected like Robocop… or i wud plainly use the Batman logic… frustrated with system, he leads a doubel life..
i wudve given him a proper cape and had him be bruce wayne and batman… but consciously… not split personality..
I wont use the Remo character at all!! the heroine could simply fall in love with the superhero Anniyan…
On the other hand, even if i had to use the MPD and use the realistic drama genre, i wudve just given the characters a little dignity. ambi wudnt be a crybaby, he wud be a meek, formal, conformist but he wont go crying all around town… the characters wud have cut down on gimmickry and stereotypes… i wud use gimmicks if im doing the comic book superhero genre… not the realistic genre.
And no, what i say in my blog is my opinion… and even in the US, that holds good… j-bloggers use very similar language too unless there’s a written contract that forbids them from! 🙂
nice review man. and loved your papa shango comment on vikram. u rock!
one thing – this vigilante genre in shankar’s format, the only format indian cinema has exposed, has been squeezed too much. for me, batman begins THE vigilante movie.
thx for arguing against that anon who tried to project ambi(or is it, **mbi) as a common species. no way!
Ur review mirrored my thoughts. Esp about Ambi. There may be many plot holes big enough to swallow dinosaurs but the biggest blunder was Ambi. I was very disappointed with Vikram’s portrayal of this character. And it did cross my mind that Anniyan is akin to an indian superman except that Shankar chose to go the MPD route.
Ambi with all his high thoughts and actions(i have travelled by bus in Madras many times and most look the other way when someone is in trouble) has been portrayed as a total loser. I cannot think of anyone like him i have come across. It was artificial and over-the-top. The blame lies equally on vikram and shanker.
But i do differ with ur take on Remo. I found Remo’s accent and actions endearing.
Sujatha’s dialogue is a big plus.
If you close ur mind to all the gaping holes and issues the movie is still very entertaining.
sudhish,
ur perspective on the movie was …well…different & interesting. personally, i enjoyed the film & really liked vikram’s potrayal of all 3 characters. i definitely liked it much better than Indian, where the unrealistic makeup & kamal’s (over)acting were too unpalatable !!
u ppl suck… wtf, don think u ppl saw the movie. u ppl shud have done the roles of ambi and remo. u bastards, how dare u ppl give such negative comments. thevidiya pasangala…
Anniyan has proved shankar has no more to say through his movies except the same old corruption shit… He is just changing the profession of his characters… i have a quiz here.. guess the next character( may be a bus conductor or some engineer ) any guesses… I think money spent on crap like these can be spent usefully on other movies…