I am no expert on Tamil cinema, but in light of the expectations I’ve come to have about the industry, Raavanan does not disappoint. It has all the characteristics of a Masala film, including every film genre under the sun (romance, drama, action, musical, etc.), song and dance, gorgeous actors, and an allegory of one of India’s most popular epics.
Raavanan is an extremely obvious allegory of the Ramayana, the story known to all Indians as the one whose characters are representative of the ideal dharma of man and woman. Lord Rama represents the ideal husband, brother, and son, and Sita represents the ideal wife, sister, and daughter. The film sticks to the story of the epic like glue, accounting for every character and every plot twist, including the characters of Hanuman and Surpanakha and Rama’s less-than-honorable moment, when he shoots a man in the back.
To the viewer who is familiar with the Ramayana, Raavanan’s plot is agonizingly predictable. Yet the film keeps us engaged with its twist on the villain Ravana. In the film, Ravana is represented by Veera, who becomes surprisingly sympathetic throughout the film—so much so that by the end we find ourselves actually wishing Raagini will stay with him. True to Indian cinematic form, however, the film does not deviate from the plot of the epic: good must triumph over evil. So the movie ends with Dev killing Veera, as we all knew would happen. It’s an altogether predictable ending, but not a satisfying one.
Raagini, who of course represents Sita, has some promising moments of bravery, but in the end she defers to her role as a wife and helpless woman. This is expected and true to the Ramayana, since Sita, as the ideal woman, always defers to the man. Ashwarya Rai does not disappoint as Raagini, assuming we expect her to deliver her now-familiar “bewildered-but-still-beautiful-damsel-in-distress” performance.
Dev, the character who represents Rama, is quite static and unsympathetic, in contrast to the epic hero we know and love. As viewers we find ourselves questioning his motivation and becoming angry with his treatment of Raagini. He triumphs at the end, but at what cost? By this point we have sympathized with Veera, and Dev now looks like the bad guy. Prithviraj, who plays Dev, does an unremarkable job playing an unremarkable character.
The film’s twist on Ravana produces a dynamic character who is nearly mad with grief over his sister’s death and desperate to avenge her. Veera is the star of the story and Vikram does the character justice. He is quite believable as the potentially-crazy, surprisingly-sentimental Veera. We are able to sympathize deeply with the character and find ourselves rooting for him in the end. This is in no small part due to the fine acting of Vikram.
Raavanan is a work of cinematic art. It features an appropriately suspenseful yet somewhat cheesy soundtrack, including several song-and-dance numbers. The musical numbers in Raavanan are easier to sit through than those in some other films, I found, because each scene serves a specific purpose. Whether narrating the unspeakable thoughts of Veera, providing exposition about the lives of Dev, Raagini, Veera, and his sister Vennila, or simply humanizing Veera and his people, the songs don’t feel as though they’re in the film simply for comic relief, as so many cheesy Tamil love songs do.
The film also features beautiful scenery and believable special effects. The effects in the film are well done and not excessively unrealistic, except perhaps Gnaprakasam’s “jumps” that are more like flying (if you don’t yet know he’s Hanuman, it becomes obvious here).
Of course, like any film, Raavanan has its drawbacks. We could live without the gratuitous close-ups of Raagini and Dev (even if we believe that, as representatives of Sita and Rama, they are incarnations of the gods and we can therefore get darsan from them), at least after the first five or so. Also, Raagini is highly sexualized, which gets old pretty quickly because, let’s be real, nobody looks that good after sleeping on the ground for 14 days. On the flipside, you’d think that after performing a dance number in the pouring rain one would not still be covered in mud, but Veera and his gang are perpetually dirty despite the splashing around.
As a cinematic project, Raavanan is an impressive feat. It reads more like a Hollywood film than a Kollywood one, which may be why it appeals to me as a Western viewer. Nevertheless, I enjoyed the film more than any of Mani Ratnam’s other projects. The film definitely represents a step forward for the director, whose other films have been mediocre or so over-the-top as to be bad.
Liz echoed a lot of my thoughts about this film. I appreciated that she drew the story back to Ramayana, a story I am less familiar with than she. Yet in the third paragraph she mentions, “the film does not deviate from the plot of the epic: good must triumph over evil” I disagree, I do not think good triumphed in this story. Later in her review Liz notes the differences between Dev and Rama. I do not think Dev was illustrated as the good guy in this film, and I felt the actors did an excellent job giving the audience a deeper understanding of their characters as the story progressed. In this way, I do not feel it stuck to the story of Ramayana “like glue”.
ReplyDeleteI’m with Liz, the songs were some of the best I’ve seen so far. They blended well with the narrative and had a toe-tapping quality I appreciated as a nice break from the intensity and violence of some of the other scenes.
Indeed, it was a classic masala film that embraced some Hollywood characteristics that catered to my western palate.
I agree with Liz, and Ann's opinions on the film. Like Ann, I was also less familiar with the Ramayana than Liz. Due to my ignorance, I didn't know what to expect and enjoyed the more complex characters, Raagini and Vikram. Especially towards the beginning of the film Raagini was a particularly interesting character. It was frustrating to see the strength in her begin to fade by the movies end. I was rather surprised by the ending. I suspect that the epic ends differently, and I am interested in why the decision was made to change it.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I really enjoyed this film. I found myself entranced by the cinematography and breath taking landscapes. I didn't really care that Raagini looked picture perfect throughout the movie. The movie pulled me in and successfully suspended by disbelief.
One thing I disagree with: that Mani Ratnam's other films have been over the top or bad. In fact, this is my least favorite of Ratnam’s films (that we’ve seen)
ReplyDeleteHowever, I do agree with Liz that Ratnam created the “epic” spectacle from the epic tale. The one thing Liz is missing in her analysis is commenting on how much the scenery contributed to the “epic-ness” of the film. Liz did, however, comment on the jumping scenes that also contribute to the vast scenery shots.
I do wish Liz had commented on the cinematography. The intensity of the film comes from the cinematography. The jumping shots would not have had the same effect had it not have been for the high and low angle shots and the slow motion. One of the most powerful scenes is the opening one, where Raagini looks up at the character on the boat. Just as powerful is the parallel scene in which Dev jumps off of the cliff.
Short essay
ReplyDeleteI chose to interview Nirmala for my first pilot interview because we had briefly discussed the concept of beauty before. I thought that she would be a good candidate because since we had already discussed this topic, she knew what my intentions were and she was already thinking about the subject of hair and its implications. She seemed like she was carrying on a normal conversation, although it might have been strange for her to talk about all of her beauty practices. I conducted the interview inside of her office, which might have put her at ease, or viewed the interview as something she just had to get done. It was not entirely clear to me while or after the interview was conducted. We were the only two present in the room, although her door and windows were open, which might have altered her answers since she knew that other people could possibly walk in on the conversation. I thought that had I not been there, she would have been reading and not thought twice about her hair. I also tried not to voice my opinion, so that she would not say what I wanted to hear, and simply let out her own opinion. I thought the interview went relatively well, I learned a lot about beauty practices which I did not anticipate. She was also very willing to talk openly about what she does and how she does it, so there were never any very awkward pauses. If I were to do the interview over again, I would have asked her the questions phrased in another manner. I realized while I was asking her some of the questions that they were awkwardly phrased, which led to failed attempts of clarification. I am also afraid that while I tried to clarify the questions, that they may have become leading questions accidentally.