Subscribe to RSSReview : Raavan. With a small rejoinder on Raavanan
Raavan
Director : Mani Ratnam
Writing Credits : Hindi – Mani Ratnam, Vijay Krishna Acharya (Dialogues); Tamil – Mani Ratnam, Suhasini Maniratnam
Cast : Hindi – Abhishek Bachchan, Vikram, Aishwarya Rai, Ravi Kishen, Govinda; Tamil – Vikram, Prithviraj, Aishwarya Rai, Prabhu, Karthik
What goes for the film : Mesmerising cinematography, lovely song picturisation, beautiful extended climax
What goes against the audience : Bad characterisation, bad marketing and an extremely boring first two-thirds
Cinemaa Opinion : Full empathy for those who didn’t & won’t like it. Scroll down for a detailed review.
30 minutes – Too little, too late
The technicalities are in place just as can be expected in a Mani Ratnam film. Santosh Sivan delivers another bravura performance behind the camera, with most of the film fit to compete in the highest echelons of wildlife photography had it been a piece of non-fiction. Gulzar’s songs and Rahman’s music are lucky to be subjected to one of the best musical treatments in recent Bollywood history. Indeed, Mani Ratnam remains the master of contemporary song picturisation, as is amply proved by the lusty force of Behne De & the militant tempo of Thok ke Gilli.
These aspects though, have more or less become a constant with Mani Ratnam’s films. And even though Raavan scores extremely high on these fronts, its pitfalls match up with its highs blow for blow. The final product is something that is highly flawed but packs in quite a few punches that justify the name helming it. Sadly, the meatier of these punches from an overall cinematic appeal standpoint, are too little and too late by the time they come in.
To begin with the flaws, the film wasn’t marketed quite right. In a classic example of a disturbing trend, where the promotion of a film is planned, designed and executed by people far removed from the film’s creative team; Raavan was pitched as a fresh take on the good v/s evil theme. Fresh it wasn’t as there have been quite a few attempts in a similar vein in the past. V.Shantaram’s Do Aankhen Baarah Haath; Raj Kapoor’s Awaara, Yash Chopra’s Deewar & even Mani Ratnam’s own Roja have preceded Raavan at what it does from that standpoint and have even bettered it by miles.
Raavan tries to recalibrate good and evil but unfortunately ends up strengthening the very definitions of good and evil it seeks to refute. For instead of greying the lines between black and white, it merely transposes the characters and their perception vis-à-vis contemporary social mores. Beera (Abhishek Bachchan), the titular Raavan, is introduced as a Robin-hood, a do-gooder for the deprived tribals, whose only fault is that his thoughts, ideology and action is in contravention of the law. And while the film keeps stressing on this facet of his personality through dialogue, it never takes the pains to establish it through something more concrete. On the other hand, it overemphasises the dark side of SP Dev Pratap (Vikram), Beera’s counterpoint. This propensity of the film to stretch the dark within the legal and the white within the illegal coupled with the bad characterisation makes the good v/s evil premise fall flat.
And then there’s this curious trend of referencing mythological epics in contemporary backgrounds. First, it was Raajneeti claiming to be a derivation of the Mahabharat, when in fact, each Mahabharat reference in the film was force-fitted. Now, its Raavan that puts the Ramayan cart before the horse. For starters, Sanjeevani Kumar (Govinda) was a character that wasn’t required in the first place. He existed just to fulfil the Hanuman analogy. And he (the character) ends up taking a lot away from the film while not adding anything at all. Further examples are unnecessary allusions to the Shoorpanakha and Agni-Pariksha episodes. Ridding the film of this referential baggage could have provided the much needed focus towards the central theme as well as allowed for more time on stronger character arcs.
I can’t resist likening Raavan to a football game between two middle rung teams, a tedious midfield battle, mediocre at best. And just when the more patient of viewers reach out for the remote to change the channel, there comes a long burst of inspired moves from both sides that leaves the bored & brave viewers breathless. Raavan meanders pointlessly for more than an hour and a half, so much so that it was no surprise to see the almost full house trickle down to less than 50% by the interval and most of the others cursing the boredom. But in a strange twist of fate, the brave ones who stayed back were rewarded with arguably the most brilliant 30 minutes of cinema from Bollywood this year.
The 30 minutes begin with an incident that shows Dev Pratap at his devious worst in the film, luring out an opponent with false niceties and then shooting him in cold blood (the subtlest and best done Ramayan reference, though still unwarranted). They end with one side in the good v/s evil battle emerging victorious over the other. In between they contain two brilliantly shot action sequences (an attack on the police camp by Beera’s gang and a solo hand to hand combat between Dev & Beera on a suspended bridge) and a couple of lovely twists in the tale (another epic fail of a Ramayan reference is attempted through one). But the best part of these 30 minutes is the intricately woven web of relationships and emotions. A tale of motivations, actions, love and lost innocence. All through simple, straight storytelling.
These 30 minutes are also where the 3 lead actors get a full blown opportunity at displaying their histrionic abilities. And surprisingly, though on a personal note, it’s Abhishek Bachchan who walks away with the honours. His scary faces, loud antics and pitch-perfect playing to the galleries of the first 90 minutes apart, he steals the show in this extended climax with a nuanced exhibition of different emotions. Vikram is equally competent, though he also gets the least opportunity due to a unidirectional character. The weak link though is Aishwarya Rai, who falls flat at the acting stakes when she could have taken these 30 minutes to a different level altogether.
I would beg to differ with a friend, who responded to my quick sms take on the film by saying that the last 30 minutes could have been a 10 minute short film. Maybe they could have, maybe they could’ve even been better put across through a poem or a painting, hence it’s the very premise of the comparison that I disagree with…not so much the contention itself. In my opinion, these 30 minutes actually end up doing a lot. They are a redemption of sorts for the film, though as mentioned previously, too little and too late. They are also a redemption of sorts for Mani Ratnam, proving that he still has it in him, all he needs to do is focus a little more the next time around. And they are a redemption of sorts for my hope in Bollywood, unlike some other friends who would like to have a defeatist view of it.
Given a choice though, I would prefer spending the same time on something like Subhash Ghai’s Khalnayak, which, despite being heavily formulaic, was also highly entertaining through most of its runtime. One more film that deserved a mention in the third paragraph of this review.
Raavanan Rejoinder : I watched Raavanan later in the day, expecting a slightly different and braver treatment. Much to my disappointment, Raavanan was the same film in a different language with different actors. Though its impact was marginally better. And all credit for the improvement to this marvellous actor called Vikram whom I first saw in Pithamagan a couple of years ago but really discovered in Raavanan. I had found Abhishek’s performance as Beera to be good. But Vikram’s Veera was subliminal, a wonderful example of how one need not be loud to be intense. Understated menace, anger, lust, love…perfection in each emotion. Vikram raises the bar so high that I can’t think of calling Abhishek anymore than above average in Raavan.
P.S. : Some of the readers may find the “30 minutes” of this review a deviation from the earlier “45 minutes” they got on SMS. That was an honest error that I rectified when I watched Raavanan.
Follow Us
11 Comments
So, I download a pirated version and watch those '30' mins…..or may be someone will be kind enuff to upload those 30 mins on utube…
I cannot imagine Maniratnam doing the 'agni pariksha' angle…..pits….If i remember the rumors correctly as per the original script of Khalnayak, Madhuri was supposed to fall in love with Sanjay Dutt but it got changed because of off screen issues between the couple….even Ghai did not think of polygraph test….
So I watched 'Raavan' yesterday. I still can't believe I saw a Mani Rathnam movie. I am not a Mani Rathnam fan per se, but there have been moments that I have been able to take away from each of his movies that I have seen. And 'Raavan' doesn't have ANY such moments.
Everybody was hamming! – except maybe Ravi Kissen. There was no consistency in the language being spoken by the 'tribals'. Aishwarya was screaming and screeching throughout the movie.
In Mani Rathnam's movies, interpersonal relationships have always been something you can't complain about even though you might not agree with the agenda that he's trying to push through his films. In Raavan, I didn't feel any bond between the husband and wife – and it was supposed to be a 'love' marriage. Nor did I see feel any bond between Beera and Ragini. That magic between Abhishek and Aishwarya in Guru, was completely missing.
And the movie defied logic – Why did Aishwarya have her super-long hair open half the time, in all that water and mud? Why did Vikram have to kill Ajay Gehi's character? These are just some of the basic questions…
What I found most disgusting was – Mani Rathnam's treatment of Ramayan. The story had immense scope. The characters in the epic are not flawless and every character has black, white and grey shades. In 'Raavan' – there wasn't anything like that. Beera was 'good' no matter what he did. And Dev was 'bad'. And it makes me wonder – if Mani Rathnam has been influenced by the 'Rationalist' nonsense that is fed to people in Tamil Nadu that tells them that all Brahmins (Was it mere coincidence that Vikram's character was Dev Pratap 'Sharma'?) are Aryans and are to be hated and lower strata are Dravidians – the true indigenous people who are being subjugated by the Brahmins. This is the general theme of several Tamil movies – but to see Mani Rathnam put it in such a biased and blatant manner, is disturbing. Is this what our cinema has come to? Seriously, I'd rather watch the in-your-face National Integration kind of movies, than this hateful crap. (Manoj Kumar, where are you?) And even if that is what Mr.Rathnam believes in – I believe there was a better way to do it. Our 'artists' purportedly speak for the tribals and then they don't even show any of their rich culture and art, they don't use their language or their music (again, why did Rehman need to use 'African' sounding music in Raavan when we have great tribal music in India?)! It all seems so fake!
Mani Rathnam took a perfectly good story, with a lot of potential and turned it into a personal revenge drama – and a bad one at that!
And then, can someone explain to me why Govinda was jumping around like he was in 'The Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon'? Just to prove to us that he was playing Hanuman? Well, we got the point even without the jumps! We didn't need the character Hemant to pull Beera's sister by the nose, I think we understood way before that scene, that she was Soorpanakha and he was Lakshman.
I know, this comment of mine isn't completely coherent, but these are just some thoughts I had… and wanted to put them on board to see if the rest of you saw what I saw, and agree or disagree with me…
Oh, now I am curious to watch 'Raavan'. I wasn't earlier. But there are SO many disparate readings into the film, its intriguing, Will watch and comment.
This is one of the weakest film, Mani ever made after thiruda thiruda.I was wondering why two years was wasted, but then i guess Mani was waiting for rains for every scene, no doubt the first half in jungles of Kerala and Karnataka have captured beautifully by Santosh Sivan and Manikandan, but i feel Mani does not now need to prove his techincal skills, in early 90,s it was Mani strong Point, but now techincally most of films are anyway very sound.
Abhi and Ash hams away to glory through out the film.The only reason i guess Vikram said yes to this role was because of Mani, for the first half he just ran in jungle with Guns and Dogs.Govinda dissappears from the screen in mid way like arya babbar did in Guru.Tejaswini kolhapure for whole 5 seconds, why did Mani had to cast her such nano second role.
I do not what was so special about last 30 minutes, in other wise dull movie, the action sequence in bridge was good, but not great.
This one is disappointment from word go, had great hope on this one considering what Mani did to Mahabaharat with Dalpati.
Ashwin : The last 30 minutes were special for me due to the way Mani worked out the emotional interplay between the 3 characters. The action sequence was an added bonus. Though its perfectly understandable if it didn't work similarly for you. The initial mishmash could have gotten a bit too overpowering, dulling one's involvement in the film. I, as a reviewer, had to stay involved whether I liked it or not.
@Bollyfan,
i still feel that Vikram's Character was not developed, the only character which had scope was Abhi's rest all i felt were cardboard characters.
Ashwin : Mani's stress here was more on the aesthetics…than on the content, I guess.
Btw…did you see the tamil version? Vikram owned it.
Raavan is a movie to be seen only for nuances… and a directors adaptation of Ramayan… just that the question is WHY??? Why should someone take their time money and enthu out to watch a director do what he feels like with a story … and that is the question for a lot of such movies…there has to be a defintive difference drawn .. instead of promoting like an out an out commercial cinema and keeping the same yardstick for success is foolishness… for a root canal, every doctor more or less have the same procedure… and so we trust them and we go … but if a doctor says root canal, and plays around with my mouth to show some new procedure he's got, ll be cheated, no matter how great his experiment was…. had he let me know he is going to try something new then I'd probably go with that mind set and make sure I am all safe before I take the chance …. I have the same thought about No Smoking… asa director you have something to offer, then you must make sure that the audience knows what to expect and position it accordingly, and not get the audience in and leave them clueless…. if you are doing that, then do it subtly, but not an abstract piece of cinema… this way you get panned on day 1, and the probably viewers are also left thinking about the movie… just keep the line straight….
That apart there is something about the bachchans that RGV and Mani both seem to be get lost into …. what they see in them is something that I still have not been able to find… agreed yuva and sarkaar had AB jr doing smthing… Guru and Naach, saw them acting their characters out than just have an idea and follow it to hilt…. but then they completely lose the movie paying tributes to the actors…. whats up with them???
All in All I saw raavan twice… one as any other audience who watches the movies due to promos and kinds… extremely disappointed.. and once after reading a few reviews to get the nuances but overall it remains a disappointing movie but a great case study!
[...] I’ll illustrate with an example. Never was this question echoing louder than in the case of Raavan. The initial reviews for the film had been scathing. And then, the pro-Raavan lobby took the battle [...]
Pras : Right said about the misleading promos. Have been feeling the same with most of the films coming out of Bollywood in recent years. The promos promise you one thing and the film turns out to be completely different. That root canal analogy was brilliant.
Before Raavan released, my biggest worry was that the Bachchan clan will spell the doom for Mani too after they did the same for RGV. Those fears were more or less justified. And its rather sad to see two of the country's top auteurs grovel like this in front of a family that reeks of self-importance, nepotism and an unbelievable level of arrogance. The way Bachchan Sr. dissed Raavan after the critics had finished with it was abominal. Didn't he realise all those things when he saw previews of the film? I'm sure Mani must've arranged for a special screening for the family.
@ bollyfan, I am not sure about the bachchan family's influence … i just think film makers suddenly start behaving like they found a pot of gold and get lost… the same case with Aziz Mirza after SRK became a huge star, same case with subhash ghai with a Star Hrithik, and then a Star Salman. Or for that matter anybody with Hrithik … I just think these film makers start chilling their heels when they have a Star with them … quite honestly, despite all the greatness, Dil Se had similar issues… and there are so many other such movies, where movie makers lose a track once they believe they have a star…