Dr. Vaseegaran (Vasee), played by Rajinkanth was the most compelling and well-played character. Vasee’s slow development from mad scientist to passionate and jealous lover to remorseful humanitarian was revealed to the audience at an appropriate pace. Rajinkanth’s dynamic expressions and body language were entertaining to witness as they changed when interacting with different characters at different times. His character range was showcased between the dynamic personalities of Vasee and static and dramatic expression of Chitti. Rajinkanth’s best scene was saving Sana from her “boyfriend for a day”. Rajinkanth demonstrated love, fear, and a gratifying sense of humor when kicking sand in the face of the drunken perpetrator. This scene also sent a subtle message suggesting that the power of only one man is enough to defend what he cherishes.
Sana, the female lead, was a flat and static character juxtaposed against the animated Dr. Vassegaran. The script gave Aishwarya Rai Bachan very little room to express deeper emotions beyond frustration with her boyfriend and fear of a gang of attackers on the train. Sana was a witness to an incredible development in science and technology, and yet her character remained a mere ornament to the success and celebration of Vasee. In this way, she seemed less human than Chitti the robot. Sana was the only character that didn’t go through some kind of evolution. The villain went from mentor to conspirer. Chitti changed from a servant to an emotional being, yet Sana remained whimsical, romantic and helpless throughout the film. Her lack of character development was disappointing and inconsistent with the rest of the characters presented.
Shankar missed an opportunity to set a precedent for future Indian science fiction film and their presentation of women. Sana used Chitti to pass her examination, while her boyfriend led the nation in science and technology. Sana must work around Vasee’s schedule and receives his attention only when he has nothing else to work on. Vasee outsmarts an army of robots with the destructive power of 100 men while Sana can only offer her lust and sexual appeal to temporarily distract the evil Chitti. Sana cannot help a woman through labor – only Chitti or Vasee managed to save the day. Shankar needs reminding that women can be romanticized, without being stupefied.
The special effects were initially entertaining to watch, but eventually became exhausting. However, the film had its redeeming high-tech moments. The mosquito sequence was the most effective use of graphics. This technology was effective because it took something that was familiar to the common viewer and personified it with visual enhancement. It demonstrated that the special effects grandeur and “mass quantities”, but can be used to take a simple and miniscule element and create aesthetically diverse entertainment. The scene was well timed and allowed the audience to exhale as the plot thickened and was spiced with creative and unexpected dialogue between Chitti and the insects.The “serpent robot army” scene was far too extensive. The length of the scene detracted from the drama artistry of the special effects. As the robot army created each new shape, it was easy for the audiences’ minds to wander from the narrative and begin looking for flaws in the technology – like blurry edges, or a solider without a face. Unlike a musical number or dance break, the violent special effects revealed nothing about the characters and gave did not inspire awe or emotional investment in the plot.
Danny Denzogpa did an excellent job playing the role of Dr. Bohra. Dr. Borha was clearly evil and his jealousy of Dr. Vaseegaran. Yet, this character presented an complicated message about love. Dr. Bohra is wise to not allow Chitti to join the Indian army without embodying feelings, but the combination of love and power result in the ultimate destruction of both Dr. Bohra and Chitti. It was lack of feelings that made Chitti unfit for the army, but feeling fueled his violence. The “take home” message for an uncritical audience in unclear. The audience empathizes with Chitti in the end, and is not meant to reject the affectionate robot – but it is also suggested that love is meant to be sacred to human beings alone. I appreciated this lack of message definition. It fed my western tendencies to search for deeper meaning in symbols and narratives but I do not think it would resonate this way in a typical Indian audience.
Overall, Enthiran offered some complex messages about the relationship between man and technology. However the expensive special effects and exotic music videos were distracting and diminished the films emotional impact.
Posted for Ann
While I strongly agree with your critique that "The emphasis on special effects detracted from potentially meaningful messages and emotions" of the movie I also think that some of the special effects techniques revealed interesting things about the Indian cinema audience. For instance, when Chitti pulls the young woman out of the fire her body is clearly pixilated rather than simply blurred so that the audience is assured they are not seeing the actual naked body of the actress. This shows how taboo the naked female body is to the Indian public which makes her subsequent actions more understandable but no less startlingly. I had a hard time getting past this scene when thinking about the movie. Why, I wondered, is it not okay for a nude body to be shown while a woman being hit by a bus, thrown in the air and then shown laying bloody in the road is acceptable and what does this say about the Indian audience watching it? This scene supports your initial claim. I found complex topics brought up but not addressed which frustrated and, at times, disturbed me.
ReplyDeleteI think Ann did an excellent job summing up many of the strengths and weaknesses of Enthrian, notably in the film's depiction of Sana as Vasee's "flat and static" girlfriend. While each of the male characters in the film changed throughout, Sana's character failed to do much more than sing, dance, and stand as a symbol of Chitti's capacity for emotion, specifically romantic love. Throughout Enthrian, Sana's only real power lies in her beauty; as Ann points out, she remains helpless in numerous aspects of the film, such as the scene on the train and the scene with the obnoxious men playing loud music when she and the other students (all women, nonetheless) are attempting to study. In capitalizing on her good looks and sex appeal, however, Sana dominates the screen in all of the musical numbers through sexually-charged dance sequences and countless costume changes from one body-baring outfit to the next. In separating my two critiques (Sana's helplessness vs. her looks as a means of power), I understand their effectiveness in enhancing the film. Instead of balancing Sana's character with intelligence (she used Chitti to pass her test; she foolishly involved herself with the man she called her "boyfriend of the day," etc.), the film reduces her to the cause of conflict between Vasee and Chitti.
ReplyDeleteThis review Enthiran focuses on the overdone scenes and showy special effects. While the film may be overdone and showy to a Western audience, the film was produced for an Indian audience. If we try to look at it from an Indian perspective, the special effects and long musical numbers have different meanings. I agree with Ann on most of her analysis, but at the same time, I can see why the movie producers executed the movie in the way that they did.
ReplyDeleteOne example is the character of Sana. I agree with Ann's thoughts on her character as a static and ornamental. But Sana is not played by any Bollywood actress; she is played by Aishwarya Rai, the most famous Indian actress and arguably the most famous woman in India. Many Indian audiences viewing this movie see Aishwarya Rai, not the character Sana. "Ash" will always be a star, no matter how powerless her character is. She doesn't need to develop like the other characters do, not only because of the expectation that the woman character should be wholesome and home-oriented, but also because Aishwarya Rai's career has already exploded. Ash doesn't need the screen time to develop her character. In addition, how would Sana change? Would she change from her flirty, flaky self into a strong-willed, independent woman? Then she might not marry Vasee, and Chitti would not be attracted to her (hence no plot). Her character must remain static so that the "happy ending" formula of Indian cinema can manifest. I don't mean to suggest that Aishwarya Rai deserves roles as static as Sana, I just feel as if she does not need the role of a a complex character to gain fame.
Another argument Ann points out is the special effects. Yes, they are long and elaborate scenes in which you think the ending is about to happen four or five times. However, this was the most expensive Indian film for a reason. Could it be that the special effects are overdone for the sake of being overdone? This film is conscious about the fact that it is elaborate and unreal. Although I agree with Ann's description of the special effects as "exhausting," the giant-man-snake-robot ending scene was meant to be tiring for the viewer. The audience is meant to be awed and amazed by the special effects, even if they are a little flawed. While this scene may not have added emotion to the plot, it was (as Ann puts it) a show.
Ann’s review of Enthiran does a good job of addressing the weaknesses of the film. Her argument about the showiness of the film is strong, and her criticism of the film's expenses and poor special effects is spot on. Her analysis also of the portrayal of the female character is also relevant and well thought out. I especially like her point, "Shankar missed an opportunity to set a precedent for future Indian science fiction film and their presentation of women." She lists the ways Sana represents a dumb beauty, as many women appear in films. I wish she had suggested some ways in which a woman could be positively portrayed in film.
ReplyDeleteAccording to Ann, the film's only strength lies in the talent of its lead actors. She praises Rajinkanth and Denzogpa's abilities in portraying their characters' complex emotions. Yet she also credits the films' redeeming qualities, its messages about love and the relationship between humans and technology, to the acting prowess of these two men. I wish Ann had spent more time considering the message of the film and the way it was delivered. Perhaps by considering audience reactions to the movie?
I think that Ann's critique of the movie Robot is quite strong in her ideas, but lacks supporting evidence. I especially agree with how the male characters develop complicated characters, whereas the lead actress remains stagnant throughout the entire movie. However, I found the special effects toe be quite complimentary to the entire film. Although they might have been over the top or showy, I do not think that it detracted from the movie. Rather, the special effects were effective in evoking certain emotions from the audience. The mosquito scene, as Ann mentions, was quite brilliant, as it portrayed Chitti in a human-like obsession with his love, Sana. The fire scene and the bus scene immediately following that were both very effective as well, evoking uncertainty, fear, and a shock factor in the audience. Although these scenes may not have been very realistic, they were quite effective in the emotions they evoked, thus capturing the audience in the film. I also thought that the robot army scene at the end was effective in the way in which the audience was to admire Chitt's seemingly undefeatable power. Although it might have been exhaustive for some, I found it to be amusing and began to question whether or not Chitti really could be defeated. Overall, I agree with Ann's analysis of the characters in the movie, but would question the ineffectiveness of the special effects. Although obviously not real in presentation, they evoked emotions from the audience that ultimately added to the experience of the movie Robot.
ReplyDelete