movie reviews ... and more
Raavan - Preview
Raavan
NOT A REVIEW - Just refraining my excitement lest…
***
Hope never dies. Since January 2010 - week after week, we have waited for the "most" awaited film of the year so far. Friday after Friday we have been more or less taken aback by how things went wrong with an otherwise sure winner. And yet, this third week of June 2010 too, we wait with bated breath and the enjoy the excitement it brings along.
This once, we can claim, we are fully justified. Mani Ratnam - most of us will claim, he hasn't gone wrong too often. And the look and feel of the film as seen in the promos, don't do anything to keep high expectations at bay.
What with Abhishek Bachchan playing the anti-hero with a turmeric face-pack on.
What with Aishwarya Rai playing her "
She is the one who's pushed, pulled, tied, thrown and put through all such trying situations. And I had to do that. The number of takes & different magnifications, the director would like to shoot in, and that too in both versions (Hindi & Tamil) made the whole procedure very taxing physically.
What with Govinda playing the Hanuman equivalent only his character understands both sides of this battle. Understands that they both are fighting against the same enemy only from opposing sides.
What with the new-age Ram (Vikram) has an ego that makes him ignore the "wrong" means he uses to achieve the right ends.
But then, there is doubt too. While the official site makes enough room for positive anticipation -
The battle between good and evil, between Dev and Beera, between Ram and Raavan. But when the lines dividing good and evil are blurring fast whose side will you take. When hate turns to love and the good starts looking evil, which side will you battle for?
Putting me in a dilemma always works for the film. But, what's scary is what the lady has to say -
She actually discovers an insight into his persona, the truth behind why he has committed this so-called crime
Is this then the regular misunderstood Mr. Crusoe being understood by the lady who has been wronged? And her understanding of the situation actually makes her fall in love with him? *shudder*
But there is still hope. It could be done in a way that makes it a riveting story, a spectacle. Despite more shudders while you look at the filmi-giri in the promotional trailers. It might just be restricted to the promos, you convince yourself.
Note, like other recent releases, the visuals are more-or-less guaranteed to work. Take a look at the 'ambience' section of the official site
Also, I haven't heard the soundtrack, but looks like it's being absolutely loved by one and all - one, and, all.
Will Vikram be able to do justice to Ram in Hindi while he's playing the title role in Tamil? Is it finally Abhishek's turn for a hit? Is it finally our turn to see a good film? June18th is when we'll know!
Till then -
This article was first published at meetu's Times of India Blog
Raavan - Movie Details
- Official Sites: Website
- Banner: Madras Talkies, Reliance Big Entertainment Ltd
- Producer: Mani Ratnam, Sharada Trilok
- Director: Mani Ratnam
- Lead Cast: Abhishek Bachchan
![[Has twitter account]](/site_media/images/icons/twitter_small.png)
, Aishwarya Rai, Govinda, Vikram - Supporting Cast: Tejaswini Kolhapure, Ravi Kishan, Nikhil Dwivedi, Priyamani
- Screenplay: Mani Ratnam
- Dialogues: Vijay Krishna Acharya
- Cinematography: Santosh Sivan, V Manikandan
- Editor: Sreekar Prasad
- Action Choreography: Sham Kaushal, Peter Hein
- Choreography: Ganesh Acharya, Brinda, Shobana, Astad Deboo
- Music Director: A R Rahman
- Lyrics: Gulzar
- Running time: 140 minutes
- Reviewer: meetu
- Categories: Hindi Movies
- Genres: Musical, Romance, Tragedy
Raavan - Trailer
Raavan - All reviews summary
External Reviews
61 reviewers have given Raavan an average rating of 1.7/5.0. 16 yays, 36 nays, 9 so-so. See all external reviews »
Comments (34)
Despite being at home, this is one movie I don't think I will be watching at the cinemas. There is something special about Abhishek, something so special that I can not stand the sight of him for 10 mins, let alone 2 hours or whatever the run time of this movie is.
My prejudices aside, the reviews so far have been utterly disappointing.
Well i was really upbeat about Ravana,but your review really dimmed my spirits.....Music by A.R Rahman is always fantastic..
I am awed by the meticulous details you cared to spare . I am thankful that you are took the pains to be point some nice things about the film too . I am impressed on this review . And thanks again for making me want to see the film and giving me a certain warning too . you are a good (great ) writer
Good point about the Surpanaka thing. Didnt want to write it in my review because it will definitely become a cause celebre once the movie becomes a dud and they want something to work on. :)
Hi Meetu,
i watched the movie and i do agree with you to a certain extent. But dont you think that for the mind blowing action and cinematography the movie should be watched in the theatre? Also, what did you think of Vikram?? just curious :-)
Divya
I enjoy the notepad section of your review. Please add it too
There is nothing to admire about this film except its music. Abhishek lagta hai ab Maniratnam aur Aish ka bhi naam dubane mein lage hain. Even after so much buzz created for this film, Abhishek is unbearable. Fruits of sweet tree are not always sweet.
movie sucks.. saw the telugu version..
expected something much better from mani ratnam..
better to go back and enjoy his earlier movies.. :)
I agree with Seema. We want the notepad thing back. Its fun..
I agree with all the points that you have written against the movie. I disagree with all the points that you have written in its favour, sorry.
Cinematography does NOT mean picturesque locations! I expected something better from Santosh Sivan. We tried to overcome disappointment by joking that the cameraman must have been shivering in the rain, that's why it was moving so much.
Music was distracting, too much, too often, and too loud. This is the first Rehman movie where not a single number has stays with you.
Maniratnam was always known for accuracy of locations and continuity aspects. Remember Roja. The South Indian village looked like it WAS a South Indian village. Himalay was actually Himalay. Here it goes all over the place. WHERE is the story taking place? The locals have names like Jamuniya and Mahua. I could identify most locations in the Western Ghats. OK, one can always argue that its a story, but at least be consistent in telling it. In between all the lush greenery of W Ghats, the marriage suddenly takes place in what appears to be 100% Madhya Pradesh.
If you have to use CG for special effects, please use them intelligently. You can't show a person falling hundreds of feet into a gorge, (mind you, the camera is NOT zooming down with the victim) and yet the body keeps looking the SAME SIZE!!!
Some silly things could have been avoided. In Ash's dance class at home, there are so many children with their arms spread out, that if they actually start dancing, they would end up slapping each other. In a supposedly pristine setting of what appears to be a jetty-like structure going into the lake, why is there a harmonium on one the walls? OK, she is a dancer, fine. Behind there on the wall, there is a mysterious plastic box which is completely out of place. I suppose the make-up artist forgot his kit there.
Ash gets off a train in lush green mountains, (of course she is not carrying a purse, but none of the Bollywood heroines do, so that's ok.) Then there is a shot of a state transport bus (Maharashtra ST bus, obviously) travelling through a landscape of bone-dry parched mountains, and suddenly, voila! She is walking in lush greenery again!?
Ash falls hundreds of feet over a cliff onto a tree and doesn't break a single bone....Ash is hanging over a wall and pulls herself up with one hand, and NOT A SINGLE MUSCLE of her arm is taut. What did they use as a dummy - Madame Tussaud's wax replica?
I can go on and on, but have to stop here. Maniratnam, Rehman and Santosh have disappointed totally. I never expected anything from the actors anyway.
I have never bothered to see any of Mani Ratnam's "Bollywood" films. For me it is very simple, any filmmaker of artist comes from a particular sociocultural background and acquires that sort of artistic sensibility. For me Mani Ratnam is a Tamil film maker, and his films represent that sensibility. For me his best two films are Nayakan and Iruvar, both firmly rooted in Tamil culture and context.
And so I went to watch Ravanan. Vikram is a fine actor and he does credit to his role, his eyes showing his passionate, confused, kind and heroic nature. Mrs Bacchan cannot act and that is reinforced throughout this film. When you have fine actors like Karthik, Prithviraj, Prabhu, and Vikram in the frame there is no hassle, but when you have Mrs Bacchan, well, then you really look around to see whether you can spot something else that is interesting.
The first half of the film is a bit long and overdone, and the second half comes together too quickly, but the overall production values, acting, locations and most importantly the messages make it worthwhile. Some of the scenes are outstanding, one, where Dev burns holes in the photo and the other of the boat crash and abduction. The sequence where Veera awakens to the charms of Ragini and vice versa in a "silent" sequence is also fabulous. The tempered sexuality between the two, and the awareness of it, is beautifully expressed through Vikram's body.
Rehman's music is standard, though Vairamuthu's lyrics are fabulous, he has managed the rustic earthy feel and sounds infinitely better than the Hindi versions. That could also be because Tamil is a far more nuanced languaged and lends itself to beautiful rhymes and alliterations.
This is definitely not a "Realistic" film, I have no quibbles. But the strong sub texts of the Upper caste state vs the lower caste "dark and animal like" forest dwellers, and also the nature of upper caste contempt of anything that is not "fair skinned", as also the assumption of upper caste superiority is very obvious. How palatable that would be to a Bollywood audience is debatable. But these are themes that are likely to reasonate with the tamil audience.
Overall the film is definitely above average, but it does not reach the mark set by Nayakan and or Iruvar, not to mention Mouna Raagam.
@cinefreak - If directors are bound by regional boundaries, then we shouldn't be having a term called "world cinema". For example, Satyajit Ray made ONLY Bengali movies (except Shatranj Ke Khiladi), and he succeeded to woo the world audience.
To quote him -
"I never imagined that any of my films, especially Pather Panchali, would be seen throughout this country or in other countries. The fact that they have is an indication that, if you're able to portray universal feelings, universal relations, emotions, and characters, you can cross certain barriers and reach out to others, even non-Bengalis."
Even when we see a French film based on a French subject, no matter how relevant/irrelevant it is to Indian context, it should be entertaining and appealing. For the matter of fact, I have seen several good Tamil movies (and movies in other languages, too), but, region or language never seemed to mar my experience at all.
I am afraid if Mr. Mani Ratnam thinks the same way you do... :)
At the end of the day, its either good cinema OR bad cinema.
@moviebhakt - that is precisely my point. It is when one makes a film which is one from own's lived sensibility ( am not using the word "region"), that it is possible to transcend a specific cultural context and appeal to so called "universal" notions of what it means to be human. The term "world cinema" is a misnomer and a marketing tool. If you survey the good directors, their films are totally rooted in their sensibilities. You cannot make a film which caters to a "universal" audience, that is the legacy of Hollywood, which Bollywood is desperate to imitate, and such a film first and foremost becomes a "marketable product" or in Marxian terms a "Commodity" which is rootless.
Yes, to understand any cinema one has to be a "cultural insider" and that is as much true of say the allusions in any Godard or Kurosawa film. We might relate to some aspects of it, even enjoy it, laugh at the jokes etc. but since it is tied to a particular milieu and sensibility, we still do not really understand it, though we can marvel at it.
Hollywood tried very clearly to create a product, through a "Star" system which seeks to assume a homogenous audience, created through media. Bollywood tries the same. Look at any of the directors of Hindi films, Prakash Jha, Govind Nihalani, Benegal, etc and most of their "good" films are firmly rooted. They are definitely not Bollywood. Look at Fellini's "La Dolce Vita" or "8 and a half", or any other world cinema classic that you would care to name, it holds true for all of them.
For a Bengali to watch Ray's films, is a completely different experience, as compared to a non Bengalli, I do not doubt that for a second. Yes, that they appeal to others is also beyond doubt, but that is not because they are designed to cater to a "universal" audience, but instead are very firmly rooted in a particular cultural ethos.
To be frank,this movie clearly lacks in screen play. The songs are good to hear,but lack choreography. The stunts are non logic and unbearable.It is clearly evident that Aishwaria can't act ;)The movie is just another over hyped Bollywood flop buster.
@cinefreak - I really do not understand the problem in Mani Ratnam making Hindi movies. Guru worked wonderfully. He had a good story to tell and he told it beautifully. For that matter, Satyajit Ray made a wonderful "Bollywood" film (since Hindi relates to Bollywood) as well. Therefore, I think its time for you to let go your prejudice and give Guru a shot (since you haven't seen it yet).
As far as Raavan is concerned, I have not seen it. But, most of my Tamil friends(they saw Raavanan) and Hindi speaking friends did not like it because of the same reasons (weak plot and screenplay). I do not think that the movie's plot had anything to do with Tamil culture and context (lets not forget, Ramayana is the backdrop). First and foremost, you need to have a strong story and a crisp screenplay to support it. And that's exactly where Raavan/Raavanan lacks. If that had been good, I don't seen any reason why both the versions won't be liked.
Let me reiterate a bit differently this time - At the end of the day, its either good cinema or NOT SO good cinema :)
On another note, I do not think I should be dragging Ray into all this...
@roy sorry, didn't get what you are saying. Elaborate please.
@Divya see, i can't call a movie good and recommend a theater watch just for its cinematography, when i didn't enjoy the overall product. It's for the reader to decide whether he wants to go for that, after reading what i liked and what i didn't.
Re: Vikram - I have no clue what's the hype about. He was pretty stiff and looked awkward to me.
@Seema @Mayur sorry for the laziness. Will start publishing that again.
@Pushkaraj I thought the wet, breezy, rugged atmosphered was captured pretty well. The other nitty-gritty you mentioned are proof that the narrative was not engaging. If it were, these things might have bothered you less. There was a list of such things for Guru too, but I didn't mind them, because I was interested in what's happening next.
@cinefreak the "burning holes in the photo"
scene was a bit overdone for me. too much drama.
nevertheless, it is very likely that the film didn't click with me because it was made with Tamil in mind but wanted to cater to a larger audience.
@moviebhakt i don't think @cinefreak's original point was "films foreign to us, don't work for us". I understood the point he made as "Storytellers should stick to the environment they come from"
Of course, I don't agree with that. There is some value in studying other environments and trying to capture it for an audience. You might fail at it, but doesn't mean one shouldn't try.
Well... see... now the movie isnt working and they have already began the controversies like 'sad' editing and stuff. Who knows when they will realise they have a cracker of a controversy about Ram being a gray character and Laxman being.. well.. Laxman.
I really wanted to see this movie, but looking at reviews posted by others and rating on mirchiplex, I don't think I am ever going to see this movie.
@Seema @Mayur there you go, notepad published here
@roy aah that way.
@moviebhakt, well you have made my point again!! At the last known count, there are close to 500 versions of the Ramayan extant, and Kamban wrote his Tamil version in the 8 century!! Tulsidas's Ramcharitmanas is pretty late, it is 16 century. So there is nothing like the original Ramayan anyways, each culture / social group have interpreted or rather Re presented the story in their own understanding of the world. There is no universal Ramayan, there are versions, where Sita is portrayed as Ram's sister, in the Kamban Ramayan for eg Sita openly accuses Lakshman of lusting after her( if I remember correctly. That brings me back to my point that film makers like all story tellers are telling a story, and the story makes sense and becomes alive, when it is intimately related to the idiom and culture that the story teller comes from, he or she has to rely on the understandings, tropes, and symbols that are prevalent in his or her cultural milieu.
And Bollywood, is definitely not Hindi, ha, ha I do not think that anyone in Bollywood speaks Hindi!! In fact the Bombay film industry always relied on Hindustani, never Hindi, otherwise it was Urdu!!
@meetu - "nevertheless, it is very likely that the film didn't click with me because it was made with Tamil in mind but wanted to cater to a larger audience."
Even if a film is made with a particular audience/culture/sensibility in mind, even then it can be liked by a larger audience, provided it is portrayed in the right manner. And this is precisely what the earlier comments of Ray, that I posted, emphasizes upon.
@cinefreak - Any plans on giving Guru a try?? ;)
I am gonna watch this movie
My cousin really liked it
Lol
@moviebhakt, no plans of watching Guru at all. The story bores me, and have no interest in the machinations of a so called business tycoon!! I can watch Nayakan again, and Iruvar too, bring them on anytime. What I would not do to watch Mounaragam on screen, never seen it on the big screen.
Sorry Meetu...but my take was more in the so-so range rather than thumbs down. :)
Vikram's acting was good. He has brought out the complexity of the ravanan character well. Veera's character kinda resembles realtime veerapan. Worth watching the Tamil version.
@Bollyfan i'll take your word for it. corrected :D
ash was great, abhi was great, vikram was great, govinda was great, the music was superb (we bought the soundtrack)what is wrong with you people? we are non-hindustani's who are familiar with the ramayana and LOVE bollywood movies, this was amazing.
you are reacting like it was Kites or anything salman makes. long live raavan!
Btw, SHAHRUHK KHAN RULES! :DD
@lalli i'm glad you enjoyed the film. For me, it was just about the same.
until now i have found all the reviews pretty good here....and after reading this review i was a bit skeptical about watching it in theatre....but, as it was a mani ratnam movie i had to watch it...and i really loved it..
i can say that it is one of the most awesome movies that i've watched in theatre.
as you said, I could really feel the cool breeze and dew and fog around me.
it was like a futuristic movie for me...where you can feel the environmeent portrayed in the movie for a truly amazing experience.
i would say, watch this movie just for the cinematography and background music...mindblowing !!
and i think salman is way better than SRK....atleast he has some class of his own. :D
@Kapil I'm glad you watched and enjoyed the film. It was a mind-blowing experience for the senses but not for the brain and that's where the cookie crumbles.
kapil--last time i checked, srk hasn't killed any people drunk driving or slaughtered any endangered animals, and let's not get into the whole ash thing.. just sayin.... :)
The movie is a real flop for me...Although they tried to depict the Ramayan in their movie but somehow they missed it somewhere.
Leave a new comment