PULIVAAL

PULI VAAL – A ‘Tale-less’ Paper Tiger

Direction- G.Marimuthu, Producers- Radhika Sarathkumar & Listin Stephen, Story- Sameer Thahir

Cast- Prasanna-Karthik, Vimal-Kasi, Ananya-Selvi, Iniya-Pavithra, Oviya-Monica, Soori-Chokku, Thambi Ramiah- Valliappan, Swarnamalya-Bindhu, Premkumar-Gowtham

Music-N.R.Raghunatahan, D.O.P-Dinesh ,Edit-Kishore Te

Track list

1."Neelangarayil"- Lyrics – Vairamuthu, Sung By-Karthik, Saindhavi,2."Kichu Kichu"-Sung By-Haricharan, Anitha,3."Naadu Naadu"- Sung By- Madhu Balakrishnan,4."Netrum Party"- Sung By- Tippu, Ranina Reddy,5. “Vaazhkai Unnai”- Sung By- Hariharasudhan

The story, backdrop and setting (Screen play), the 1^st half- remake of Malayalam Film, Chaappa Kurishu.

Premise- The film opens interestingly with contrasting shots of Prasanna an affluent businessman and Vimal a salesman - both getting ready to start their day! And that is where the director starts the laborious and dreary first half by highlighting the activities of 1) Prasanna (Karthik) a flirtatious playboy having a gala of time with his secretary (Monika) in spite of being engaged to get married to Iniya (Pavithra) 2) Vimal (Kasi) a departmental store salesman is in love with Ananaya (Selvi) a collegue. Prasanna loses his cell phone (iphone) which has a dirty video in it which if (supposedly) falls in the wrong hand(s) will spell disaster to all concerned (Prasanna & Monika in particular). Vimal accidentally comes in possession of this ‘deadly device’ the iphone. Initially, he is portrayed as being a dumb witted ‘Samathu’ boy who decides to return the phone to its original owner but suddenly and miraculously (for no tangible or credible reason) decides to use the Iphone and its owner (Prasanna) to get back on all and sundry who he feels have insulted his pride and ego owing to his lowly existence as a salesman. How the plan back fires owing to the phone falling into the wrong hand once again by chance and the content goes viral forms the rest of the story.

Acting:- Prasanna as Karthik, looks more like an (off ramp) model trying very hard to pose like a successful high flying businessman and playboy rolled into one. This actor tries too hard to perform and in the end over reaches himself. He should try to play the role within his limitations. (Example) For the love of me why does he walk so fast whenever he is tense or angry? Will someone please explain to him that he can convey the required emotions quite well even by looking calm, collected and composed. His voice modulation is also something he should work on. He has certain repetitive hand positions which he should correct. He is such a pleasant looking guy and he should maintain this demeanor while performing. He also tries to imitate dance movements and facial contortions of other popular ‘masala’ actors which he should avoid. It is rather sad that this actor has somehow failed to peak to his true potential.

Vimal, as Kasi appears to have developed rigid and stereo typed acting prowess. This actor time and again continues to baffle me with the same lazy looking laid back performances along with his monotonous vocal drawls. He is the man who can put a howling baby to sleep by singing a lullaby. Half the time he appears to be a dull fixture around the super market. In almost every film I have heard him repeatedly utter an expression of acknowledgment which sounds something like ‘OON, OON’! His dancing potential needs very little mention. His romantic interludes with Ananaya are crass and crude to say the least. He deceives you by looking like a boy born and brought up in a city till he starts delivering his first line.

Ananya, as selvi is the director’s first dilemma, after watching this film will wonder what exactly her role is! For the love of ‘Brando’ (god of Hollywood cinema) I couldn’t figure it out. Even a shopping basket would have been more useful and would have added some colour! The director has simply forgotten her existence other than make her stand around, trying to look coy, lovey dovey  and at times useful.

Iniya as Pavithra is the second of the director’s dilemmas as far as the female leads are concerned. She need not have acted in this film at all instead the director could have taken some stock shots of say Trisha or for that matter Deepika Padukone and dubbed all the required dialogues!

Oviya as Monica is the final hurdle the director found very difficult to handle! She is caught between three acts 1) To play the character of a professional secretary 2) Flirt with her boss without having an affair and 3) To get seduced by appearing to fall in love with her boss but finally she ends up getting cast in a ‘blue’ film and ends out totally confused and suicidal wreck!

The Rest – Thambi Ramaiah, this is a case of a crown (national award) which has become too heavy on the head it adorns. This actor whether with a wig, toupee, beard, moustache or bald is so stereotyped, loud and garish that makes one wonder about his great performance in ‘Myna’. Was it a flash in the pan?

Soori, is a cross between the ‘preachy’ Vivek and the ‘Vikada Kavi’ Santhanam. His delivery of dialogues and body language will never ever change for the better or the worse. It will continue to bring the occasional twitter and laugh among the humor loving viewers especially in a dry and listless film as this one.

Swarnamalya, Is this actor so desperate to get back to acting that she agrees to act in a trivial and ridiculous scene of getting herself fully doused in cow dung!

Prem should get back to doing TV serials instead of performing in bit roles which fails to do justice to his true actual potential.

Director:- D.O.P:- Music: - N.R.Raghunanadan. Edit: - Kishore Te are the mainstays of this Malayalam remake, if not for their herculean and face saving efforts this film would be a complete and total disaster.

The one’s I found wanting 1) Portrayal of the transgender (Laksmi Narayanan) with caste undertones. I wonder if the censor board members endorse this particular fetish of most directors. If so I wonder why? 2) The everlasting charge in the Iphone (hitherto undiscovered by Apple). 3) Total waste of the three female leads 4) Vimal’s friend gets to know about the upload of the video. 5) Contrived chase by running all over Chennai serving very little or no purpose other than adding an action scene to an otherwise insipid and bland story line. 6) Most of the tracks were fillers and the backdrops were totally irrelevant to the content. (Especially usage of painted pots and card board cutouts). 7) Using old songs to highlight the visuals. (Archaic)

Finally to conclude This time around this ‘feature’ film has a subject which can only be used to shoot a ‘short’ film. I really wonder what the Malayalam viewers really saw in the original film that was interesting or even remotely entertaining!

Left right & Centre: -  

The man to my left (Businessman): - ‘ Ok sir! Subject? No! No subject! But the jokes are Ok!

The man on my right (a prospective short film maker and his female friend):-’ Idu enna padam sir! Very slow, bad screen play, lot of holes! I saw the trailer which was decent but the film….. Bad!

My friend the drama artistes: -  Half way through I thought I heard him snoring and tapped him, “No! No! Don’t worry I am not sleeping! I will tell you later, I mean about the film.” I never heard from him later!

Bottom Line: - Half a quote, “This movie is simply financial leakage, a squandering of resources equivalent to polluting a river or plowing under a rain forest. I’m serious. We’re desperate for things to think about in this society, and these guys contribute to the situation by providing us with 137 minutes of zip.”

Until next time,    

Director Haricharan

Chennai

8/2/2014