Mozhi - meh!


Download

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Idha vidunga...post your roast on 'Pachaikili mutchucharam'. Unga fav director Gautham film :)

Anonymous said...

Ok..ipo than kaetten, aduku munnadiye 'pachaikili muthucharam' pathi comment post panniten.

but Im waiting for it..evlo late aanalum post pannunga

GasquetFan said...

Suresh, what you can never discount is that these movies may turn out be declared as classics by a future generation. Just like DON was marketed as a classic by a moron called Farhan Akhtar.

I see Pokiri being remade 30 yrs down the line with the then superstar. Mozhi being remade with the then kozhutha pig (I mean jyothika).

Thilak said...

Suresh,

Another fan requesting a roast on PKMC. Mr.Gautam menon deserves one..

BTW Jothika is such a dumb actress. So she fits the bill for the role (mokkai intended). Honestly, why is she hyped this much? Lets face it, Looks are important for Tamil actress. Jothika doesn't look good at all. Why the hell is she still being hyped a lot!

Good comment regarding the stupid posts in forums/communities like 'Jo will be sorely missed', I guess they meant about her size.

When can we see a decent tamil actress? Or did we ever had one?
IMO Sridevi is overhyped. Revathy was pretty okay but she used to force herself into the role rather than fitting into it.

Oh yeah..even the guy in Iqbal. A deaf-and-dumb guy used to work in our village. Infact they breathe through their mouth (snore loud when they sleep) and make all sorts of noises. Superb point!

Few other things I would like to add:

Prithviraj was shown to be a dork who was there to just woo Jothika

None of the characters 'evolved'/'developed' through the movie.

That cliched idea to make Prithviraj 'love/admire' Jothika was pretty naive/retarded.(With bells ringing/lights switching on)

When they drag the movie with Prithviraj's idea to dub Jothika with some imaginary voice and its consequence.

Except for few spontaneous Prakash raj's lines (mokkai included), I found the movie to be 'irritating' on the whole!

Thilak said...

whats the intro music and fusion piece in the ending?

Anonymous said...

good one.

1.what's the site where you watch these theatre prints?
2. last fusion bit - from where?
3. also in future podcasts, if you can give rough idea of budgets & BO, wud be very helpful to me personally.

30 years from now classic-a ? i have serious doubt that movies will survive for another 30 years :) maybe like 1-day match, we'll have 1 hour movie. but this 2.5 hour song-dance extravaganza will definitely be dead in 30 years.

thanks
ip

Suresh said...

@ Anon - I know how much people hate GM, keeping that in mind, I'll try to do see the movie soon ;)

@GF - That was a big travesty man - Don being dubbed as a "classic." It wasn't even a cult movie like Sholay, except for the fact that it was remade in all major languages. But so were several other crappy movies. But really, Billa was a decent 'masala' movie. One of the earliest of its kind.
haha I think implants will be more common in TN in 30 years. So yeah we'll see some real porkies! Talking about implants, have you noticed Ayesha Takia? What's "up" with those puppies?

Thilak - I know man. I mean, I don't know how anyone could like her bloody face, let alone her expressions or acting. I don't care if the women are not beautiful but they insist that she is. The "hero" sings praises about how pretty she is (literally and figuratively). Let her come around like another average woman - but no! She is supposed to be strikingly beautiful. Subjectivity be damned.

I think Sri Priya was a wonderful actress, never really made it big. Be it AvalAppaditan or Vaalve Maayam, she's been exceptionally natural. Suhasini, and Saritha have been really good in a few movies. Shoba - one of the very few naturals Tamil cinema ever had. Too bad she killed herself early in her career. Revathy can be fun at times, but can easily get under your skin with her whiny cries - fit the role of a divorced, insecure woman in Marupadiyum neatly. Gautami can act, but was never really used so well except in 'Ni paaddhi naan paadhi.' The same can be said about Radha and Radhika in 'Sigaram' and 'Keladi Kanmani' respectively.
Nadiya and Amala were the only genuinely "cute" actresses we probably ever had. Amala was so adorable in 'Satya' and 'Karpoora Mullai.' Amala's role in 'Illam needs a special mention too. And Nadiya in 'Poove Poochudava'. These are roles that no contemporary bimbo can do. Asin should apologize to the women for being called cute.
In the 90s, Kushbu did some roles that were ok - like in 'Jaathi Malli.' After the late 90s, I like how Simran cries and how she acts dumb - she can bring out the 'dumb blonde' look in her face quite naturally (Vaali, PKS). These are some of the actresses and movies I can think of right now. I can probably recall a few more.
It would seem that we always had the talent, it was never really used so well. In the same light, I wonder how you hold Kamal in such high regard - he is just like several other actors in the field. He had his movies both ways - extremely contrived acting with hackneyed body language and the good ones. Even within a movie, some scenes would be more 'real' than the rest. I have not seen a movie in which he just there - not trying to pull the attention towards himself. He's too pretentious for that sort of thing. (Anyway, I'll probably do a podcast on him.)

Intro: The Corrs - No Good For Me
End: Fatboy Slim - Song For Shelter

Ip,
Thanks.
1. Tamilgrounds.com or mohankumars.com (or in torrents from majaa.net)
2. Fatboy Slim - Song For Shelter
3. Sure. I think this movie would have costed within 2-3 crores (now that's the new 'low budget' range). But I'm not sure, just guessing from the sets, outdoor shots, actors and all that. BO - I think it's doing reasonably well. I didn't bomb like his previous movie 'Poi' (that KB directed).

I really hope that this song dance 'masala' nonsense dies out except in a few movies here and there (heck, even Hollywood has its musicals once in a while).

Thilak said...

A big confession: Amala is the actress I used to sight-adichify in my younger days..

great choices there..As I said, those actress lacked to be consistent. Well I hate corny terms like 'male-oriented industry'. I find it repulsive but Isn't it obvious!

"In the same light, I wonder how you hold Kamal in such high regard - he is just like several other actors in the field. He had his movies both ways - extremely contrived acting with hackneyed body language and the good ones. Even within a movie, some scenes would be more 'real' than the rest. I have not seen a movie in which he just there - not trying to pull the attention towards himself. He's too pretentious for that sort of thing. (Anyway, I'll probably do a podcast on him.)"

ippidi yellam kaekka koodadu, LOL. But will give my reason. You decide how appropriate or pointless it is. Although the man is called pretentious, contrived and found to be extremely enforced at times, seeking importance to himself as claimed by many. Why I disagree there! The First reason has to be: Right from my childhood days, I have felt for his characters.

while I hate Revathy because I couldn't stand her whining and all those stereotyped roles where she gives those rhyming pada-pada epilogues at stretch. Thanga moodiyadu! I think it's that phase when you're a young kid..you find these kinda woman-oriented roles (Where she might have done her best), irritating. Nice to see you agreeing there! she could very well pull out such roles! But being a misogynist phase in that part of the age, I hated those movies. (another confession) Well not anymore, but I used to hate those roles.

Coming back to KH, I was extremely moved by KH in my childhood days(and even now) that I often find his characters closer to my heart. Only in recent roles, I find the 'repetition' or 'pretentiousness'. But I could still feel the emotion of the characters that he plays. I started watching Tamil movies in my school days when we had our treasured VHS player and used to borrow VHS tapes from a nearby lending shop. I guess its from Moondram pirai. I think It's the first movie that made me gut-wrenched and dumb-struck. It made me cry. I couldn't sleep that day. After that, I used to fight with my mom to borrow KH movies. (She never liked him and she cites his marital status as reason, I mean wtf!)

For example, in the movies you already mentioned Valvey Maayam, Raja paarvai, Unaal mudiyum thambi, Varumayin neerum sivappu - I was moved by those roles. The youth roles fits KH well. Especially VM's Kamal would have played the role perfectly. The subdued -slowly dying guy would have made your heart go out for him. The classic song in the end just testifies his brilliance. While the unemployed guy in VNS is probably one of his top 5 roles easily. Generally KB's characters could be really hard to take. This is one of the exceptions. In Rajaa Paarvai, he would have underplayed without rocking our cradle. He would have pulled the blind guy's role with ease and realism. He didn't use the Kaasi-Vikram technique (damn!). That body language was never to be seen in any of his later movies.

16 vayadhinile - In a role, where you just have to walk like a cripple and have the village gimp makeup, making him look bad but still when BR zooms into his face, he didn't just say his lines sleepwalking. He would have spoken it with that innocence! Tell me, didn't you see 'Chappani' before 'kamal'. We had that feel throughout the movie. You could only see the retard and understand his helplessness. When Rajini calls him and mocks him, you can only sympathize or sometimes laugh at it.

Michael madana kamarajan, Apoorva sagordagal - I could believe the characters. They are entertainment oriented films but actually he would have acted in different characters with focus on the 'output' to be evoked in the audience. Like the iyengar in MMKR is probably a typical palakad cook (people like Vikram should study that role before acting in roles like 'Ambi' in Anniyan). Or lets take Appu role. Forget the pain he took to do it, what you see on screen is the dwarf midget. Take those scenes where he goes to witness the marriage (misinterpreting that he was the one to marry her), the way SSR freezes his reaction when his ring is removed and he goes on to sign in the register. It's a long shot, he would have displayed that change of emotion. The other role of madras-basha speaking mechanic (With those Crazymohan lines) would have shown us a totally contrasting character. The police Kamal would show his anger with his fierce look. Isn't that look stamped over our memory! (okay let me also pay credit to that haunting score by IR) Isn't that what the character supposed to evoke? The way he is killed makes the revenge, even more profound.

Pesum padam, Nayagan, punnagai mannan, etc - I feel none of these films had him do the same kind of role. He had different body language in every movie. Where do we see him stagnate and mess up a role! Maybe armchair critics find otherwise.

Kuruthipunal, Satya - Two roles where people complain of his histrionics while his fans love those movies. In both the movies, where he plays a cop as well as

I recently saw Salangai oli, is there any other actor skillful enough to do that role! Leave the dancing skill..Even though SPB's voice was a distraction when I watched it (yeah in telugu), I could make out what he was saying from his face reactions. Like the scene where Ananda babu/jayaprada plead with him..but he refuses to oblige..I don't know whether you enjoyed it. But I was amazed by his acting. Even in Sippikkul Muthu, I couldn't digest people finding Tom hanks amazing in forrest gump and finding fault here..whats wrong with Kamal in this movie? It's one of the best among the not-so-smart characters one in celluloid (I put him on par with the best characters from 'One flew over the cuckoo's nest')

Mahanadhi - again its not an underplayed role. It's played to the character. Infact, throughout the movie you can see his transformation. IMO, its his best role to date. The pain and grief of that character, Krishna is 'sensed'. Thats what great actors do. Isn't that what he does?

Sivappu rojakkal - another movie where you hate his character and in some cases, bringing out the fear. Credit should go to BR too..But still Kamal's reclused body language and behavior is noteworthy. That's one of the better silent killer performances from our country.

If I had to be honest, its true that we could see him enforcing himself into some roles, but there aren't that any actors who is free from that. From brando to mifune, all great actors have done versatile roles, at times hackneyed (another word into my poor vocabulary) but most of the time, the characters evoke the proper reaction. As you said even in those movies, some scenes would be more 'real' than the rest. KH is no different. But just like them, KH has also evoked different emotions (be it comedian, serial killer, dancer) from different characters. Honestly, In a land where mediocrity is celebrated, the man is nothing short of a genius.

Never cared to be politically correct but I hope you don't find it pointless. It might have lacked a nuanced perspective. You know there is a rant like, 'A fan-boy's rant is farce' (I use this statement a lot) something along that lines. Hopefully it doesn't apply here.

Anonymous said...

On a tangent, was just reading about you & thilak trashing me on orkut :))
"scathing comments"...Dei, naan avalavu think panradhe kidayadu. Feel free to trash everyone/everything. That is your style and it works out very well, especially in your podcasts. What works, works. I think both of you seemed to have missed my actual point & were going on & on about logical cherrypicking & subjectivity.

Ippo, inda "intellectual honesty" business is fine for you and me. We get it. We are meta-analyzers. We analyze those who analyze, and we analyze that analysis too...meta-meta levellukku poyachchu. Avalavu vetti :) But junta has umpteen concerns. Cinema is just one of their pasttimes. Adu kooda illena they will really kill themselves with the utter boredom & banality of routine day to day life, atleast in TN. Adunala, some compassion is in order.

Ippo, think pannu - why does every Tamil movie have to be earnest ? Why ? There are no exceptions. Maybe 1 in a millon, like Aval Appadi Thaan, or Sivappu Rojakal, or Thappu Thalangal. But other than those few, every tamil movie is earnest. Its always pleading to the characters & by extension, to the empathizing audience - to do the right thing. And the really horrible thing is - these movies are popular. You never have a popular tamil film where the protagonist kills for the heck of it, and has fun with violence, and doesn't get killed in the end. Villians don't rule, they have to get a raw deal. What's with that ?

Is a "Its ok to be evil, gangsters are people too" mentality like Sin City or Pulp Fiction ever going to be part of TN films or folklore ? Even in say Thappu Thalangal, when Rajni is happily chopping people left & right & Saritha is fucking everybody including Kamal, with no care for morality/ethics, suddenly they have to decide to be good, do good, get married etc. - only to pay the price when the cops catch up with them. Why this need for payback ? Why does the eldest daughter in Arangetram who is sleeping around so her Iyer family can send Kamal to medical school get rejected by same family ? She can say fuck you to the whole lot, but no, she has to plead on her knees to accept her back.

Sivappu Rojakal - Kamal has fun fucking every dame he meets & burying her & planting roses, but then familygirl Sridevi must worship Bhadrakali & get him killed by crucifix in graveyard. Why ? Why can't he fuck Sridevi & bury her too & get on with his life ?

Finally, your Aval Appadi Thaan - why does Srividya get such a raw deal ? She could has slept with both Rajni her boss & Kamal her heartthrob & dumped them both & married some hotshot industrialist. But no, she has to be left by the wayside.

Excessive emphasis on doing the right thing & being the good boy is what is keeping idiots like Cheran alive. Illena where is the conflict in Thavamai Thavamirundu, or Autograph, for that matter ? Imagine if Autograph was a French movie. This is what would happen - Cheran will go meet Lathika, find out that her husband is dead, they will both fuck, & then he'll head back To Chennai, he'll sleep with Divya as well, and finally get married to somebody else altogether. Ofcourse at the marriage he'll invite everybody & there will be some grand orgy. That is what any male would want to do. But no, we are from TN - so Cheran must feel sad & angry because Lathika's husband is dead, & then feel sad that Divya is going to be in blind school & Kamala is stuck in village & on & on...yedukku ? Why this much sorrow ? Cheran can easily ask his dad in Thavamai Thamamirundu to fuck off & get a better job instead of being a printer all his life, and go to Chennai & sleep with that engg college chick & ditch her & get on with his life...but again, what sort of example would that send to all the goody goody TN boys & girls ?!

So, that's the real problem - TN audience & by extension TN itself, is so immature & goodygoody they cannot accept any badboy image at all. Everybody has to be good & do good. If person is bad there will be hefty payback in the end.

In this sort of hopeless scenario, you ae insisting on things like intellectual honesty. Do you see how foolish that is ? Whether you have Mahanadhi or Pokkiri or the dozens of films thilak has mentioned...all variations of the same earnestness, the samer good over evil theme, the same goodboy wins badboy dies shit...just difference in execution & plot points. Then why bother ranking & rating them ?

The day we have an openly evil film in TN, where the protagonist doesn't give a fuck, & kills all & sundry & screws around & gets the last laugh - and audience ends up making that film into a huge BO hit - then we can honestly talk about intellectual honesty. Until then, all such talk is like saying Hustler is more honest than Penthouse because they don't airbrush the vagina. Who cares, they're both dealing with the same organ, whether you airbrush or photoshop, it will look more or less the same :)

ip

GasquetFan said...

Thilak,

You obviously admire kamal too much, but why you are trying to give an objective spin to your taste?

To me Kamal is as contrived, as irritating, as pretentious as any other actor I have seen. He is good in roles that suit his personality like any good actor is. What I particularly dislike about him is that he popularized this concept of actors taking on different roles to satisfy their 'creative urge'. I find that laughable. It's like a theoretical physicist claiming that he can teach chemistry, biotechnology, economics and any subject to ninth graders.
Every one of us have their own theories of greatness, and often adjust parameters to fit in people we love. Like Suresh does with Federer, like I do with Gasquet. Ofcourse I stretch it a little too far.

Suresh said...

Thilak,

Seriously man. You have to get out of the "I've loved him since I was a child" mode. Try to distance yourself from the person and just see what he becomes in those movies. Most of what you've quoted as his best are some of the best examples for his pretentious acting. Kamal has given some really good products, but you can easily count them.

Sometimes even corny expressions appeals to you - when Shivaji goes "ammama thambi endru nambi" in Rajapart Rangadurai - my mom weeps till her saree edge can't soak in more tears. You can think about several scenes of his and scores of people who have been "moved" by that kind of acting. But it's theatrical - it's theme driven emotion. The kind of acting you would watch in Opera (and cry too). But you put that in a movie supposedly about real life, there's a clear disconnect. But I wonder how many would want to see that disconnect. Just like "good movies", "good acting" is even more problematic to assess. But I think you're almost close to my mother when you cry for some of the scenes you've mentioned.
You didn't have to list a whole bunch of movies to give your standpoint - I've seen those movies. I know what he has done. I won't be able to see what you see unless I fell in love with him, really. But I'll try to address the general Kamal fan in a podcast may be. And yeah, I agree with GF's comments too.

Naseeruddin Shah is arguably the best actor out of India. NS doesn't know how to be pretentious. Try watching alongside Kamal. Anger to outrage, compare his expressions with Kamal's.

Ip,

We were not "trashing" you but your style of argument. And as if to testify it you've showed it again in this comment.

You create an impression as if I don't agree with any of what you say, then counter it yourself as an inarguable conclusion. Really, what does any what you say about "how Tamil movies are" has to do with our exchange earlier or the scraps in Orkut or the thread here. I have myself said in my podcast about AA that it's sad that Tamil movies almost always follow the same old 'negative action - redemption' or vice versa kind of push-pull flow. I had also accused Mani Ratnam for not having the guts to do it in any of his "politically charged" movies - be it Bombay or Roja. Given that I've mentioned this stance of mine clearly in a few podcasts and in this blog as well, I don't know why you had to situate your view in detail while it had nothing to do with anything we had talked about earlier.

This statement epitomizes criticisms before -
"The day we have an openly evil film in TN, where the protagonist doesn't give a fuck, & kills all & sundry & screws around & gets the last laugh - and audience ends up making that film into a huge BO hit - then we can honestly talk about intellectual honesty"
This sort of non-sequitur argumentation is what I "trashed" and still do.

It doesn't matter why they make these movies - it doesn't matter why these people like these movies. If you don't think there is anything objective about critiquing and everything is 'situated,' or simply put biased, then don't worry about those critiques. Why try to critique that critique as if your critique stems from an "objective" stand point?

PS. I apologize if I misrepresented what you were trying to say in the Orkut scraps - it wasn't intended.

GF,
{{It's like a theoretical physicist claiming that he can teach chemistry, biotechnology, economics and any subject to ninth graders.}} - hahaha, amen to that.

GasquetFan said...

Suresh,

Pankaj kapoor comes into the very good actors list of mine along with Naseeruddin shah. Do you like Pankaj Kapoor?

His son Shahid Kapoor is a disgusting mimick of Shahrukh. He should have gassed his son out when he was eight. And whatever I have seen of Mohanlal, I would include him too. There are others too, but I don't remember now.

sk said...

hey GF,
i jus dont get one thing.
{{It's like a theoretical physicist claiming that he can teach chemistry, biotechnology, economics and any subject to ninth graders.}}
despite the apparent infallibility of this argument, there is a big hole. first, acting like a scientist/crook/cop is not as different as teaching che/biotech/eco.

i know both u & suresh love to hate pop figures and flaunt ur hate. acting is make believe. how you go about making ppl believe depends on the skills of th actor to observe, choose, reflect and create his own output. and to a large extent, the target audience too. and we have taken hollywood kind of "underplaying" as the God-sent standard. so, an actor doesnt need to satisfy the aesthetic senses of ppl on the fringes who observe probably more than the actor himself.

u might ask. why then call him a great actor? why not, when Al Pacino (i m a grt fan of Al) is called one,when the actors in Majidi Majidi's films are more natural?

Suresh said...

GF,

Yeah Pankaj Kapoor is alright. But never really thought of him as great actor. I loved him in that DD Metro comedy series in which he teaches Hindi to people from various states. Forgot the name. Oh Shahid is such a candy boy - well, he dances, looks good works for certain genres I suppose.

SK,

I never said Kamal is bad or that I hated him. He is a little over-rated as an actor, in my opinion. What's up with the grouchy comment anyway?
I can't talk for GF, but I think we all hate a lot of people. But there's no point in "flaunting" how much you hated your fat classmate or your pesky neighbour. Ok, actually some people do blog about pages about it.
Anyway, there's nothing to flaunt - you hate something/someone, you say why you do. You construct a environment that is representative and reflective of what you think and in turn make it a reference point for larger generalizability. Just like survey data. Just so that readers know how many bloggers rate Kamal as 'the best' and as 'good, but not great.'

I don't think GF's metaphor was meant to be taken the way you have. I think he meant that Kamal shines above all in a few characters (theoretical physicist), but he chooses a wide range of 'average characters' (9th grade subjects) that don't require too much versatility just to show he can be - "versatile."

I never mentioned Hollywood or any western actor to compare Kamal (not tat anything is wrong with that). I don't want to get into another "how do you judge if someone's a good actor" kind of exchange. We had a similar one about movies and it was tiring enough.
I'll have my opinion and say it out loud, if people respect that it becomes flaunting, if they don't, just whining.

Just for the record: Kamal is a good actor. He has done some really good acting and just as many, if not more, not so good acting. But as a passionate movie maker, I respect him and consider him above everyone else in Tamil cinema. He strives to give better products (his miserable failures regardless).

GasquetFan said...

sk,

That's exactly my point mate. A theoretical physicist can definitely teach biotechnology, economics, chemistry or any other subject to a ninth grader. That doesn't make him a great scientist or thinker in his field of research.

If you like Al Pacino, then good for you. But I don't like him. I think he has the God Father hangover in all his later movies. 'Dog Day Afternoon' may be an exception where I liked him. And he doesn't 'underplay' in that role.

{acting is make believe. how you go about making ppl believe depends on the skills of th actor to observe, choose, reflect and create his own output. and to a large extent, the target audience too.}
I agree with that. And I can only say that KH has not done all the above better than Pankaj kapoor. It may be because KH has a stronger personality and it impedes him from playing different characters successfully. I am not really sure. Since I am not in the target audience of Kamal Hassan or Vijay or Ajith or Vikram, I can't objectively explain why kamal hassan is a bad actor or a good actor without being biased or comparing him unfavourably with Naseeruddin shah or Pankaj kapoor. Because I like them both.

A great popular actor is someone who follows stereotypes, sucks up to the target audience tastes, whether it is underplaying or going over the top. Just like any law in Physics that encompasses all given approximations in nature to suit the physicist's point of view. The GOD is in the detailing, in the engineering.

I can't call him great, not because Majidi (who's that?) films are more natural. But only since I am not affected by his performances. Honestly, if KH was a great actor he wouldn't have become popular. It's like Heisenberg's uncertainty principle. You either become popular or become great. Not both. And lets not have the crap about tamil audience being magnanimous about accepting the best. Kamal Hassan just represents the mediocrity of tamil movies. thats all.

sk said...

GF

i dont get ur analogy of heisenberg principle, which is essentially u cant precisely measure the momentum AND the position of a particle in the quantum world. if it was to impress, sorry u failed miserably. arent u makin "non sequitur" conclusions whn u draw a parallel between an actor and a physicist? as far as ur argument tht one can either be popular or great, but not both, is a lot confusing.

an actor is great if he makes more ppl believe. and more the roles he can take up and make ppl believe all tht, the better actor he is. n consequentially, more popular. here, i like to draw th diff between style and make believe.

{{A great popular actor is someone who follows stereotypes, sucks up to the target audience tastes, whether it is underplaying or going over the top.}} So is an actor great in ur view if he sucks up to the audience on th fringes like you n not th "mediocre" masses? or one who tries to be weirdly diff just to be nt stereotyped? and again mediocrity is not a constant, it depends on th context. Sivaji was a great actor, but u wud his acting histrionic.

n reg ur love for Pankaj Kapoor, who in your words has a strong personality n cant do different roles. so he does wht he does "best". but "best" as defined by whom? to me, greatness is practicality/effectiveness. wht works well is great.

GasquetFan said...

First, I was refering to KH (not Pankaj Kapoor) having a strong personality and hence not being able to do different roles successfully (according to me).

And regarding the audience 'on the fringe', why do you think I was referring to the pseudo intellectuals (critics). For a film like Baasha, an autokaaran is the guy on the fringe. But can an autokaaran say that Rajni was crappy in Baasha? He may, but most probably won't. That's him accepting popular opinion. That is being mediocre. Similarly, I said the KH is the product of mediocrity of tamil films. Like AB is the product of mediocrity of Hindi films and same to Tom Hanks or any other popular actor you can think of. So everyone in the audience is in the fringe in some way or the other, but most of them succumb to popular opinion.

Hence my concept of greatness can also be derived from the same analogy. Any actor who is more bothered about the applauds he receives than the character he plays cannot be great. Actually, KH can be called a clever actor than a great one. Then we tend to think of somebody like Satyajit Ray as being great. I can't say. I haven't seen any of his movies.

Although I seem to theorize crap about greatness, I don't believe anyone can be as great as Gasquet simply because he thrills me with some of his tennis shots. Suresh thinks I am in delusion about Gasquet and that he sucks. And I am fine with it. There is simply no rational way that I can explain Suresh about the beauty of tennis when Gasquet plays. Mixing tennis and movies may seem stupid, but to me they are just forms of entertainment and I don't see why sometime down the line one of them may replace the other without much of a rational thought, but only through random choice.

Anyway, why the emphasis on greatness? Why should we like only great people? I like Maniratnam very much with the full knowledge that he is the glowing example of mediocrity in tamil films. How can I estimate greatness when I know nothing of cinema. I can only identify with the roles that actors play. I have no knowledge of techniques used in cinema and hence I assume that what I appreciate and like must have been dumbed down for me. It's another thing that I don't even like or appreciate what KH does in his movies.

When I say that KH is not a great actor, what I am essentially doing is questioning the rationale behind your claim that he is. If that is your subjective opinion that is fine. But having an objective spin on it needs knowledge of the subject you are talking about. I have never said Pankaj is a great actor or Naseer is. I don't even use that with physicists (forgive me thats my profession).

And the analogy with Heisenberg's principle is a little naive, I agree. What I wanted to say is that when you strive for popularity, you lose greatness. Who decides greatness, you ask. Whether Kamal Hassan is great or not, only he can tell. Everybody else is just shooting from their lips. If he believes the crap that doing more roles and impressing more people will make him great (I have read him say exactly that) then so be it. I just don't think he was being honest when he said that.

Thilak said...

@GF,

I have seen Roja, Maqbool and I liked PK's performance in both the films. And don't tell me, he does it 'differently'. The Don in Maqbool had the same stare, look and in both the roles, he doesn't talk much and whenever he does, he was very much similar to the terrorist(tamil speakin). When I watched it, I thought it had the same shades of 'Roja-thatha'. But I am not stupid enough to call it, 'pretentious' or 'seeking attention'. Almost every actor have their own presence. It's no different for KH, PK or Nshah.

Same way, Al's role in Scarface needn't be subdued. I don't expect a wuss there, I want it to be intense and powerful. I liked it that way.

"Honestly, if KH was a great actor he wouldn't have become popular."

Don't tell me Nshah or PK (or Om puri) isn't popular. Almost every northie friend (who call themselves anti-Karan johar film-critics), they rate them high!

Mohan lal(and Tom hanks) rocks my cradle to sleep while Maijidi's or Kiarostami's characters don't! Why is that? In name of being 'natural' or 'underplay' or 'less-contrivance', some people Sleepwalk through the role! Why is it that some hail these people and those who bring out the emotion, 'overacting'?

Gasquet is a mediocre player and anyone with least bit semblance of following tennis, should be knowing that. But why are you his fan? Please switch on to Roger Federer.

Just to show how non sequitur statement like that can be used to support a lame claim!

@Suresh,

waiting for the podcast. but actually my point was, it worked for me. If I find SG's histrionics overdone but like KH's and infact believe his characters. Like in few of those scenes, for example moondram pirai climax. It could have been more 'subtle' with a different climax. But it's climax makes it great and I could connect to it! Again I am neglecting the fact that you found it 'fabricated', to evoke the reaction.

Nshah is a very good actor and I have always liked him. But I haven't gone to the level of comparing the expressions. Maybe I should.

I never denied being a Kamal fan. But I became a fan from his work. Unless I like their works, I wouldn't be a fan. Be it Kamal movies, IR's songs, Arsenal's football or Suresh's blog/podcasts. I don't buy their ideas/product unless I could connect to it.

If people find Federer great. I don't have to be his fan. I love the serve-and-volley game. I would anyday watch Henman play than the kids now. I have always been Rafter's fan than Agassi when they used to play. Or from the old-archive matches telecasted in ESPNSTAR, I find Edberg's or McEnroe's game more appealing than Borg's. I find serve and volleying more talented/exciting than a base-liner. It might be non-sequitur to draw parallels here. But these are products to be consumed. It's a different skill. Same way, I find KH's histrionics better than N'shah's. Some people agree and some don't. Should I care about them? No! Whatever I adore, its my 'taste' built on my own theory (like GF said). I might have been ignorant or unintelligent sometimes, but as time grows on you. You get exposed to more stuff, the opinions change. Somehow it hasn't changed on KH and IR, over the years.

GasquetFan said...

thilak,

When did I even say PK is an extremely versatile actor who does his roles 'differently'. I just said that he does things that I like, that I can understand and appreciate, that doesn't irritate me. I can't say the same about KH. I already said that the admiration of PK is something I won't be able to explain. It's just a preference. Based on the sorroundings I grew up in, based on the kind of books I read, based on the kind of films I watch.

Nshah and Ompuri may be popular, but I didn't tell that they are great actors. Thats a separate discussion. I just said that I like Nshah and PK because I can relate to what they do. And I think they do it well than others I have seen.

"Mohan lal(and Tom hanks) rocks my cradle to sleep while Maijidi's or Kiarostami's characters don't! Why is that?" Thats a funny thing to say. I don't know who Maijidi or Kiarostami is and I can't say why Mohanlal rocks you to sleep. Thats for you to say. All I can say is that I like Mohanlal, inspite what he makes you feel. I saw only a couple of films of his Iruvar and Company. I liked him in both.

Your earlier response was bordering on fanaticism anyway. Things like the "I recently saw Salangai oli, is there any other actor skillful enough to do that role!" I agree with the dancing part. KH dances gracefully than any other actor I have seen. KVishwanath chose KH to play the role. If he chose someone else for that role, the film could have shaped differently and different set of people would have liked it. I am not sure if there is no one to play that role. There are so many dance masters who are skillful at classical dances who could have done the role.

"Gasquet is a mediocre player" I can live with that statement. Its your opinion. But "anyone with least bit semblance of following tennis should be knowing that" - this wasn't needed at all. I have followed tennis since 1996. I know enough about the game and its past and current players that I don't think somebody needs to tell me who to root for. I can draw several analogies to support my claim that Gasquet is simply the most precocious talent to have hit the tennis circuit after Federer, but its not worth it. I know I like Gasquet not because he is better than others, but because he does something so beautifully that I am amazed every time I watch him play. It's his one handed backhand and I have always had this strange fetish with one handed BH. I liked Kuerten, Federer, Haas, ljubicic and heck even Guadio only because they had solid one handed BHs. Gasquet beats them all by a mile with a BH that is as fluid as a JSBach concerto. When I am done with my work I would fly to Paris just to watch him play at the French Open. Though I bet on tennis games, its only based on a mathematical arbitration that makes sure I never lose any of the bets I make. So I don't really have to back a winning horse just to feel good about myself. Gasquet playing at his best gives me enough thrills to make me watch the replays umpteen times.

"Just to show how non sequitur statement like that can be used to support a lame claim!" I didn't understand the subtlety behind that statement. Can you throw some light?

Thilak said...

@GF

"Gasquet is a mediocre player and anyone with least bit semblance of following tennis, should be knowing that."

It's a lame claim, Gasquet is talented in his own way. Only those who follow tennis like you would know that. You were right when you said, It wasn't needed. Gasquet could be mediocre to many. But you liked him for all the reasons you stated.

"why are you his fan? Please switch on to Roger Federer."

- non sequitur statement

"I don't really have to back a winning horse just to feel good about myself. Gasquet playing at his best gives me enough thrills to make me watch the replays umpteen times."

- just what I wanted to hear. He might have been mediocre to others, but you like him for some reason. Same way, KH might have been mediocre to you, I like him.

Escape.... Great Escape said...

Jyothika screams at the end. Maybe you could put it down to her covering up her defeciency. Self reliant blind people try to hide that they are blind... and likewise Jyothika did not want to exhibit that she cannot form words... so she keeps mum.

I liked it that people are listening to 'open source' music... Vivaldi Beethoven... and the rest, and using it in movies.

I hate jyothika. I am glad to know I am not alone. I vowed I would never watch another of her movies. I wish someone would roll something over her face... pasty complexion, contrived expressions and HAMMING !!!

Anonymous said...

Hey,

I recently saw the DVD version of the movie Pachaikili posted at www.isaitamil.com.

check it out if u havent yet.

-Indu

Suresh said...

Escape - Yeah we have fill ourselves in with an assumption like that (the Jyothika did it deliberately).
Oh no, don't worry, there are lot of people do hate the duck walk sundari.

Indu - Thanks. I got the movie downloaded, I'll watch it sometime this week.

Prasad Venkataramana said...

Suresh,
I recorded my thoughts on this movie and I'm trying to upload the file using podbazaar.com - how do I do that? Do I have to be a paid member (I doesn't state anything like that). Thanks.

Prasad.

Suresh said...

Prasad,

No, it's not paid or anything. Just create an id and mail Sujatha@podbazaar.com asking her to upgrade your account with upload rights. She'll then mail you with all the instructions on creating a program, uplaoding etc. Cheers

Post a Comment

 
©2009 english-tamil