Contagion Review  |

Sun, 11 Sep 2011 Rating:  'Contagion' - a spine-chilling real tale  - Abhi Disaster movies, where humanity faces an unassailable enemy in the form of a meteor, floods, virus, aliens etc. are aplenty. It would hence take a genius to make another and yet make it feel fresh enough for it to be enjoyable and terrifying. Steven Soderbergh, with "Contagion", is that master. Its genius lies in its matter-of-fact approach without literally making a statement on anything, either humanity or the possible theories behind an epidemic as also in not using melodrama to raise empathy. In the world of twists and counters twists, the film treads a near straight line, yet manages to give one the shivers. After a trip to Hongkong, Beth (Paltrow) falls sick and dies in a few days. Even before her husband can come to believe it, their son dies similarly. Before researchers identify the virus, hundreds of people all over the world begin to die. As the global health bodies jostle to figure what's happening, an epidemic breaks out that threatens to destroy the political, social and economic structure of the world as mobs run riot and anarchy rules. How humanity survives it, forms the later part of the film. "Contagion" is the story of one virus's journey through humans, its exponential multiplication and final elimination. Unlike many other virus disaster films like "28 Days Later" or "I Am Legend", it is not a horror film. Yet, it is much more terrifying for this one seems chillingly possible, as severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), bird flu and others have proven. And it doesn't take a meteor like in the underrated masterpiece "Deep Impact" or "Armageddon"; not even aliens like in "Independence Day"; nor even global warming as in "2012" to threaten human life and bring the world to its knees. It takes one small, invisible virus. "Contagion" is a spine-chilling tale because it literally and very simplistically shows how a conveniently connected world could actually become a problem in such a case. And how the well oiled governmental machinery globally could collapse under such an onslaught. If one were to look at parallels or metaphors, they are aplenty. Consider for example, the financial contagion of 2008-09. The virus of greed, which first showed symptoms in America, nearly took down the world, till two years later, the same time it takes to control the virus in the film, it was controlled and the world limped back to normalcy. Face it, we live in a world where there may be physical borders but which is so well connected that viruses - be that on bodies or computers or financial systems - can spread rapidly through the world and systematically destroy everything. Thus, without attempting to make a statement, "Contagion" decimates the stupid notions of nationality and borders and paints the world as one extended body, where problems in one part, even one human in this case, can affect and destroy the world as we know it. And it is to the credit of a dream, ensemble star cast who not only do bit parts in a film they believed in, but also give their best. One can only hope, pray, wish that the scary possibility of such a story stays confined within cinema halls and that we actually never see it.

Johnny English Reborn Review  |

Advertisement

Rating:  'Johnny English Reborn' is a reboot indeed  - abhi For every good, there's bad. For every suavity, there's the uncouth. And for every swashbuckling James Bond, you have a nutty Johnny English. So, if the Bond franchise can reboot, why not Johnny English? So what if the franchise, prior to this, was only one film old? After a rather embarrassing episode, suspended MI-7 spy Johnny English (Rowan Atkinson) has been hiding in Tibet. However, information about an attempt on the Chinese Premier's life and no clues about its origin, forces the MI-7 to trace this unconventional spy and bring him back to Her Majesty's service. But, he is so bogged down by his colossal past failure, the question arises whether he can bring himself together to do the impossible in the present. Rowan Atkinson reprises the role he first essayed in the 2003 film Johnny English. And he reboots it as well; making this one a much subtler, refined and quirkier version of the first. Like the first film, this one has many moments, but unlike the first, this one does hold itself together till the end. There are some really funny moments. The one where English is chasing down a parkour exponent who's leaping through barriers and jumping over buildings while English uses his 'wisdom' to outsmart him, is especially funny. So is the one where he flies a chopper like he is driving a car and another one where he is being chased down by agents in fast car, while he's riding a wheel chair. As with most films or series that Atkinson has acted in, the story is like a vessel to comfortably set him up to play his childlike gags. Though cliched as it is, since we all have seen Atkinson deliver the goods in the past, this vessel does hold his gags comfortably together without being cheesy or too unbelievable. Yet, there's definitely a lack of originality in the film. Most of the gags are quite familiar and though Atkinson tries to instill a different sense of timing, he does not really get it right enough for the film to go beyond its own limitations. Despite the film never really taking off, it's good to watch some good old, trustworthy gags giving you company. Hope Atkinson does more of Johnny English. After all James Bond does need equal and opposite competition.

Crazy, Stupid, Love Review  |

Rating:  'Crazy Stupid Love' - poignant and hilarious  There's good news in the air for cinema fans. The rom-com genre, a strong forte of Hollywood that was sadly dwindling thanks to some totally lacklustre films in the past few years, is back with a bang. The proof is "Crazy, Stupid Love", one of the best romantic comedies of our new millennium, and a laugh riot to boot. Cal's (Steve Carell) world turns upside when his wife for over 25 years Emily (Julianne Moore) reveals that she has slept with a co-worker and wants a divorce. He moves out of his house and frequents a bar where a casanova Jacob (Ryan Gosling), taking pity on his self-pity, teaches him the moves to make women fall for him. To complicate matters are Cal's children, their baby sitter's crush on him and a mad English teacher. It's been some time that a romantic comedy has either been romantic or comic. Many of them are witty or have slap-stick humour. But genuine, situational humour, funny observations about life and relationship and a true squeezing of a story's potential to make you laugh your guts out have been rare. That is the reason that this film shines amidst dull contemporaries. In terms of poignancy, you can call it the "American Beauty" of rom-coms. While "American Beauty" manages to get the satire out of marriage and its fall out, this one gets the humour out of it. And what's more, it's got a totally unexpected twist in the end like a thriller and a scene after that which will totally sweep you off your feet with its humour. The shots are conceptualized beautifully and best of all the directors - Glenn Ficarra and John Requa - know the importance of silences and pauses even in a comedy that usually rely on a lot of dialogues. It ends up being as poignant as it is hilarious and totally natural in its execution. Yet, at the core of it, this one is a film for the family. What it is to fall in love, to stay in it, to fall out of it and to fall back in again. It analyses the concept of love from various viewpoints, that of a young boy in love with a much older girl, a young girl lusting for a man more than double her age, of a long married husband and wife now bored with each other and a lustful smooth-talking man who always has his way with women. It shows how our viewpoint of love is influenced by the loves of those around us. And it is to the credit of a stellar cast that brings the eccentricities and love in their character out front. Steve Carrell and Juliana Moore are at their usual best, while Ryan Rosling will steal many pretty young things' hearts with his antics. Yet, beyond it all, it is the smart screenplay of Dan Fogelman that, despite its flaws, manages to keep you focused on its strengths. This one's bound to go down in history as one of the most original rom-coms of all time. And that is no small achievement.

Abduction Review  |

Publish Post

Rating:  'Abduction': All thrill gets abducted  - abhi There has always been room for a 'Jason Bourne' type spy film revolving around a teenager. This year has so far seen two such attempts. The first, successful attempt was "Hanna" and now comes "Abduction", which sadly fails the litmus test. Nathan (Taylor Lautner) has always felt uneasy with his existence. His suspicion of not living his own life is confirmed when he stumbles upon an image of himself as a young boy on a missing persons site. As he initiates a search for himself, things take a turn for worse as his parents are killed, and he is on the run - both from the CIA and a mysterious Russian operative out to get him. Paired by fate with his girlfriend, he must do everything to survive. At the face of it, it does sound like a decent premise for an action film. And it is. However, what pulls down the movie is extremely cliched screenplay, non-existent acting from its lead and topped up with not-so-explosive action sequences that don't give the audience something to remember after leaving the cinema hall. And the worst problem for the film is Taylor Lautner's stony face. As we saw in the last "Twilight" film, he has worked hard to get a good physique. But one only wishes his acting skills too were as evolved as his muscles. In a film like this that plays on the anguish of the protagonist, acting abilities - no matter how small - do matter! Secondly, there isn't one remotely interesting fight sequence. No cars crash dangerously close to a key character, no bullets fly inches away from the protagonist and neither is he ever in too much danger to scare the viewers. Opportunities for creating tension are missed by sloppy writing and direction. Worse still, Alfred Molina and Susan Sarandon are wasted in the film. There isn't even an original line or a remotely cute gesture from the kids to make audiences swoon at them. And that is sad because John Singleton's last cinematic outing "Four Brothers" had so much more action, emotion, drama and chutzpah that it makes you wonder what has gone wrong with him. It is obvious that the producers wanted to make another teen action franchise, a marriage between Jason Bourne and James Bond with "Twilight" like angst put in for good measure. Sadly, it seems like this film has indeed seen the 'twilight', right at its sunrise.

Zookeeper Review  |

Rating:  'Zookeeper' disappointing, go to the zoo instead  - abhi There's something particularly charming about literally hearing animals talk to humans, a sub-genre pioneered by Hollywood. To thus see such a film fare so badly with its cliche, is indeed a real treat. Griffin (Kevin James), a zookeeper, is great with his animals but miserable with girls. The animals, concerned about the love life of their beloved keeper, conspire amidst themselves to get him hooked. However, when their plan fails, they break the only code they have in the animal world: to never speak like humans with humans even though they can very well do so. There's not original bone in the body of our "Zookeeper". And that is a shame considering that despite many such films previously, there was scope to be original, at least with the story. Instead the story spirals down the roller coaster at breakneck speed with a predictable plot, sub-plot, situations, humour and everything else that comes in between. What comes out in the end hence, is a story that is too immature for adults, and with its crude jokes, unpalatable for young audiences. The film thus lands smack in no man's land. Yet, for those who like and love animals, it has its funny though forgettable moments - funny because animals syncing their lips to human dialogues is interesting to watch; forgettable because the lines and jokes that the five writers choose to put in their mouths is bad, crude and hackneyed from top to bottom. What's worse is that even the physical antics of the humans and animals aren't funny or goofball enough to raise even a chuckle. Instead all it raises is a been-there-done-that feeling. Why? Because you have indeed been there and done that in countless other films, much better than our poor and dull zookeeper starring in a poor and dull film. Much of the problem of the film is in the second half. Though cliched, the first half is bearable but it is the rush of the second that does the film in. "Dr. Dolittle" wasn't great, but it was good. Don't expect this film to even do little to humour you. Yet if you love a giraffe screaming "Mayday, mayday" or a gorilla go on a city outing and fooling humans including a hot chick into dancing with him, or love to hear some star voice-over cameos (Sylvester Stallone, Cher, Adam Sandler and Jon Favreau among others), this is a film for you. If not, you'd be better off with a trip to the zoo.

Mankatha Review  |

Advertisement

Rating:  Mankatha doesn't stand on independent merit. It rests on the fanboy's identity crisis.  - Abhi I sat agaze at that golden symbol with "Thala fifty" imprinted on it. Not because it was mesmerizing but because it wasn't an opening credit, it was part of the film, right after Ajith beats up a bunch of guys. Could you be any more self absorbed? While that thought deeply disturbed me, the remaining members of the audience were cheering and wagging their tails, surrendering themselves to the actor instead of the experience. Every single thing Ajith said about himself be it "Thala" or that he turned forty this May or taking a crack at his heroic status, these retarded fan boys felt obliged to respond, which they did by clapping, screaming, laughing and "Aiyyo". The effect they have is similar to that of canned laughter in sitcoms where you're prone to succumb to the virtual peer pressure. Here it isn't virtual, it is all around you. To me, it was watching a deleted scene from the rise of the planet of the apes. The above series of events repeated once Arjun made his entry akin to that of a WWE superstar. He's addressed by the nickname "Action King", a title coined by the actor's fans. Then enters Vaibhav wanting to marry Anjali which shortly transports them to an exotic beach with music in the background. Arjun does the same with Andrea giving way to a dance act by Ajith and Trisha. It is a heist film; do we really need to see what romantic little lads they can be? Mankatha was marketed as an action-thriller that revolves around IPL bookies and gambling. It doesn't. IPL and gambling are only mentioned. But more than a heist film, it is celluloid homage to Ajith. If you're one of his followers and looking for a place of worship, you're welcome to be a part of it and enjoy the sense of belongingness. Yet, it is interesting that Mankatha releases not long after the forty year old actor dissolved his fan club. Stepping into an Antihero for a change isn't much of an experiment when the character's greed is glorified and his nihilistic morals celebrated by the star vehicle. And each time he mimics the Marlboro man, drinks unto memory loss, cheats his accomplices or sleeps with a total stranger he seems to reassure his boys in the crowd that they are on the right path. Mankatha doesn't stand on independent merit; it rests on the fanboy's identity crisis- something that their thala has been treating by staying active in the film business. Venkat Prabhu, who made his mark with the honest, good-hearted entertainer, Chennai600028 has just lapsed into the commercial format. How ironic that it should have the tagline 'Strictly No Rules'. Just before the long awaited intermission, Ajith is explaining his master plan. It is so uninteresting and inappropriate, it feels like reading the character's secret but uneventful diary. The plot is of little importance to Venkat Prabhu. He knows that the audience will swallow anything he gives. Fake suicides, death reports, revivals, twists and coincidences- he shoves them all down your throat. As a viewer, the fabricated plot insulted my intelligence and undermined my exposure to cinema. Mankatha has a few moments but as a film it fails. Ajith's lover in the film is strictly against his smoking and drinking habits but the fact that he's a corrupt policeman accepting bribes from her father is perfectly fine. The few character attributes chipped into each character don't add up to a meaningful whole. Ajith has given the film his all and his presence on screen is arresting, even with all the phony antics. Arjun plays second fiddle and does his job well. Anjali is asked to do nothing but stand beside Vaibhav for which she's rewarded with the opportunity to cry on screen, thus making her feel utilized. Premji Amaren does here what he's been doing since his debut. And so does everyone else. The comedy is powered by repetition and pop-culture references that are brought up, not as a tribute, but to reminisce with the audience. The music videos are eyelid batting (except for 'Vilayadu Mankatha') with 'Balle Lakka' taking the cake. It pops up at a time when the film is nearing its end and pierces through your eardrums. Even the sounds of the gun shots were more pleasant. It is indeed a Venkat Prabhu game. He knew that the fans were blinded enough by idolism to not enjoy such a terrible song. Game over. If you've not seen the film, I'd suggest you watch the promising trailer and derive your own story from it. That'll be more fun.

Kasethan Kadavulada Review  |

Sat, 10 Sep 2011 Rating:  Kasedhan Kadavulada is merely a passing phase in Kollywood. It has come. And it will go without leaving its mark.  -Abhi Not long after the release of the attempted heist film Mankatha, we have a comic caper triggered by an ensemble cast of comedians - Karunas, Sathyan, Pandiarajan, Manobala, lollu sabha jeeva, singamuthu and Mayilsaamy. At a script level, Kasedhan Kadavulada had potential. The eagerness with which the film has been made is apparent. It isn't an ardent desire; but an impatient longing. Director Thirumalai couldn't wait to see his film on screen which is why the execution is dull and straightforward. I don't remember the camera ever being moved except during the song-dance sequences nor do I think there were any retakes done. The lead characters of the film are a gang of youths (three boys and a girl) that cons the rich and lets the poor reap the benefits of it. We're introduced to them by the first con act, where they pull a gag on a sex starved married man. The four of them don the roles of prostitute, her husband, her pimp and an honest policeman. The cop raids the house and finds the two of them supposedly fighting over something. In his hour of need, she plays the wife and leaves for her mother's house along with 'her' jewelry and clothes. This is what these people do for a living. Their real test comes when a landlord walks in giving the inhabitants of a slum, a three month notice to evacuate the neighborhood. Being the heroes that they believe they are, they bring it upon themselves to pay him a sum of four crores. This is where it begins and this is where it is likely to end. How it happens, you'll have to see for yourselves. What you can expect though is a huge bounty changing hands repeatedly. Of course, it's entirely circumstantial but it does have substantial logic. The comedians don't embody the characters; it is the characters that embody the comedians. There is not the slightest evidence of characterization. Every member of the cast is put in a 'funny' situation and asked to be funny. The script is a mixture of new and borrowed ideas. Had there been more focus on telling the story instead of showcasing the comedians' comic ability, it would've.... no, could've worked. Right now, it is merely a passing phase in Kollywood. It has come. And it will go without leaving its mark.

Engeyum Eppodhum Review  |

Advertisement

Rating:  Engeyum Eppodhum reminds us of the fragility of our own lives. It is one of the year's best.  - ABHI In Engeyum Eppodhum, all three stages of filmmaking are given equal importance- Pre-production, filming and Post-production. That is a deviation from Kollywood's way of doing things and in this case, the deviation is a healthy one. Finally we have a film that is hinged on, not on the star or the distributor marketing it, but the screenplay- one that crisscrosses through two equally interesting strands of stories. It is structured so that you are left with no choice but to keep your eyes affixed and dog the footsteps of the story. Those of you who have seen the trailer will know that the story ends in a fiasco. Engeyum Eppodhum doesn't try to hold more ideas than it can and its reach exceeds its grasp. The characters are well-rounded and their remarkable chemistry isn't one you instantly detect, but one that you see blossoming. The world outside of the four main characters isn't a foreign one. It is enriched with supporting characters that are seasoned with a range of personalities. Revealing the characters' personalities would only debase the subjectivity administered by the implicit yet distinct characterization. You are at liberty to see and perceive them through your own eyes. The film also boasts a quartet of invisible performances. You don't see any of them doing any 'acting'. At a time when using makeup artists to showcase the actor's versatility is in vogue, here we have Ananya, Jai, Anjali and Shrawanand inhabiting real souls. Cinematography is essentially methodical- to back the film's content, not set itself apart as an individual entity. Sathya's music numbers gel well with the film. The film is hard hitting not just because you empathize with its characters but because the fears induced in the onlookers of the aforementioned fiasco, reflect your own. Just like the characters have arcs in the film, so do we in our lives. We don't know how that arc is going to progress but it might just turn out disastrous. Our lives are suspended by a thin thread and we've been hanging from it long enough to forget that it is in fact, thin. Engeyum Eppodhum reminds us of the fragility of our own lives. It is one of the year's best.

Vanthaan Ventraan Review  |

Rating:  Vendhaan Vendran is a totally disposable piece of work.  - Abhi Boxer Arjun (Jeeva) is on his way to a national tournament. He crosses paths with Architect Anjana (Taapsee Pannu), also heading for the test of her life, and knocks her miniature house down. She breaks down (a moment that seizes the pinnacle of the actress' unrefined acting skills) saying that her life is ruined. Arjun assembles it wrongly putting the parking space and kitchen on the first floor, deciding to escort her to the exhibition. Choosing a stranger over his career shows the character's utter disregard for himself. When Anjana comes to find out about the boxer's heroic act, it pricks her conscience. She atones by falling at the boxing judge's feet. The camera zooms into Jeeva's spellbound face, standing behind a glass door. Time for music number "Anjanaa Anjanaa". Terrible. Just terrible. This is when I think that maybe they should've just ripped off a Hollywood movie. There's an overdose of parallel storytelling here and you ultimately find out that half of it was a figment of the character's imagination. Not because there's something wrong with him but because he loves his long lost brother. What absolute trash! The already bumpy narrative slumps into a pit when Arjun's recountal of life events to the villain is interrupted by gun shots from a rival gang. The villain and his gang get out, take care of the situation and kill a man from the enemy territory. When they're back, the absconded Arjun is summoned to finish his love story. Rofl. You then realize that Arjun is telling him all of this with the hope that he'd surrender to the cops- Arjun's way of serenading Anjana. When the cops begin to close in on the villain, he arranges to meet a cop friend on a cruise at the middle of the sea (the location to emphasize on his ambushed state). But once that session is over, he's on his way to crush the police inspector with his truck, on land. Either Kannan is a half-wit or thinks that the targeted audience is. Attempting to bend your mind by adding a twist at the end doesn't just take you for a ride; it drags your expectations down with it. It isn't a surprise, a trick or anything you give a damn' about. It is plain deception to camouflage a myriad of gaping fissures. The oratorical skills of the actors are tested by giving the characters long, complex (yet frivolous) speeches to recite to one another. The transition between them is discerned by the recipient saying 'oru nimsham', just when the orator is about to leave, and beginning with his/her own twaddle. And among all of this is director Kannan, standing behind the camera with a satisfied grin, certain that our level of astonishment is escalating every minute. Vandhaan Vendraan also suffers from polarized characterization. The characters are given the roles of nellavan or kettavan and their minds are as indecisive as the director whose vacillating stand with the characters springs to the surface, every now and then. Why would an actor like Jeeva who has proved his mettle with Ram, Kattradhu Thamizh and Rowthiram choose a role so far inside his comfort zone? Queuing up so many projects a year makes me question his respect for his own talent. His co-star Taapsee Pannu is already a contender for the worst actress award of the year. Vendhaan Vendran is a totally disposable piece of work.

Aayiram Vilakku Review  |

Other Critic Reviews Please do not step on this insignificant little turd. Even before you realize, you're going to be waist deep in it. By Rohit Ramachandran

Rating:  Aayiram Vilakku is awful.  - ABHI Every city in Tamil Nadu has a special reason to be proud of and so is Madurai, which over the years has portrayed itself as an epicenter of violence. The city has glorified violence through sickles, bullfights and what not. Violence in these cities is seen as an equivalent to bravery. Aayiram Vilakku is yet another attempt to retell the story of gang rivalry in some remote part of Madurai. The story revolves around two gang leaders, Lingam and Rathinam, who've been rivaling each other since the day they've known each other. As time passes by, Lingam calls it quits and decides to live a peaceful, reformed life. Gopal, a poor boy in his village works diligently in the mill in an effort to make both ends meet. Impressed by his honesty, Lingam plans to adopt him but in order to keep his original identity intact; he gets acquainted with him as a lone old man. What happens between Lingam and Gopal? Does Rathinam intervene in Lingam's new chosen life or not forms the rest of the story? The story is archaic and we have seen it a million times. Uninspiring script and bland acting hampers everything that this film proudly boasted off initially. Shantanoo can never be considered an actor; for the silliness and slackness he brings to screen, I don't know should I laugh or cry in despair. Sathyaraj, alongside Shantanoo brings to screen something that is worth looking at. Also, for a change it was entertaining to see him perform a matured role instead of some cheap comical role. Sana Khan adds glamour to the film, shows off some skin and meager acting skills. The attempt to couple emotion and action seemed to have completely gone haywire. The film should either have been a full length action film or an out-and-out emotional film that should've ideally moved the audience. None of this was never to be seen on screen instead it was just another film about a common man, torn apart by gang wars. Technically, Aayiram Vilakku falls short of average. Direction was aimless, as though the director had no clue about what he was doing. Had only the director put in little more effort, AV would've at least sparred us this torture. Music by Srikanth Deva is appalling, not even one song was even close enough worth listening to. Kannan as cameraman succeeds in capturing Madurai through some of scintillating frames. While, editing by Sasikumar falls way short of brilliance.

Ulakam Chuttum Vaaliban Review  |

Rating:  UCV is the kind of film that Jayaram was seen in for a few years prior to 'Veruthe Oru Bharya' - films that used to come and leave without a whimper that had made his star status hit a rock bottom. Not a good sign, this!  - Abhi Perhaps it isn't much asking for at least a couple of harmless laughs or a bit of a satisfying drama from a film as Ulakam Chuttum Valiban. Imagine your disappointment then, when you realize that it's a film that hasn't got a joke that's worth laughing over or an event that's worth a mention or a memory. Jayaram plays Jayashankar in the film, who seeks training under Chenkeeri Sethu (Suraj Venjarammoodu) to become a skilled robber, the reason being that he has some real big debts to pay off, and that he has a sister (Mithra Kurien) all ready to get married. In no time does Jayashankar turn out to be a new age urban thief, but has the shock of his life, when he gets appointed as a Sub Inspector of Police. The story of Ulakam Chuttum Valiban reminds you of any number of films that you had seen in the nineties, where the protagonist under dire economic constraints has no other choice but to turn real bad. And some characters in UCV makes you wonder if you haven't seen some one similar recently. The policeman that Biju Menon plays in the film, for instance, has a son who is not yet sure as to what a terrific guy his dad is. Its only when his dad bashes up a few goons real bad, that sonny agrees that his dad is awesome. Sounds like a Daddy Cool, huh? We wouldn't really expect Ulakam Chuttum Valiban to have a tale that's realistic to the core, but a minimum amount of believability could perhaps make a huge difference. Sadly, that is lacking in the film, and in no time does a man switch from being a robber into a cop, with his personality remaining constant. Jayaram has nothing much to do in the title role, and even his facial expressions are those that we have seen in innumerable films of his before. Vandana is the leading lady in action, and she does look charming. I couldn't find the name of the child actor who plays Biju Menon's son in the film, and yet I should mention that he was a delight to watch. The only reason why this film merits a two star rating is on account of Biju Menon, who seems to be getting better with each film. It's an awesome performance again from Biju this time around, and as the narcissistic cop, he scores big time. His comic timing is perfect, and the dialogue deliverance right on spot, which makes Biju Menon the real star of Ulakam Chuttum Valiban. UCV is the kind of film that Jayaram was seen in for a few years prior to 'Veruthe Oru Bharya' - films that used to come and leave without a whimper that had made his star status hit a rock bottom. Not a good sign, this!

Pranayam Review  |

\

Rating:  Pranayam does strain hard to achieve the nuances of an enchantingly sublime love, but ends up being a literal minded love tale, with one among the three lovers oddly left out.  - ABHI The thin line that draws the three main protagonists in Pranayam together stretches over a time span of more than forty years. Achutha Menon (Anupam Kher) comes across his first love Grace (Jayaprada) in an elevator, forty years after they had separated. Grace has been married to Mathews (Mohanlal) for long. Much water has flowed away and many autumns have shed their leaves. And yet, when chance throws the three of them together again, fresh sprouts of memories of a withered love spring up again. As much as it sounds romantic, the superficiality that pervades the entire film cannot be ignored in a hurry. For one, Blessy is never able to strike up a solid link between the past and the present, and though much time is spent on falling in love in the seventies, there is not much in it that suggests of an ever lasting romance. Getting wet in the rain, and singing songs on the train is almost as far as he gets. Contrastingly, Mathews and the relationship that he shares with Grace has all the warmth of a romance that has mellowed over time. It still shows signs of blooms that are just around the corner, and time has obviously had a say on the constancy that they have arrived at. The writing fails Achutha Menon and his love miserably, while its infinitely better when it comes to Grace and Mathews. The dialogues are a huge letdown in Pranayam, and barring a few gems that are mouthed by Mathews, there are very few instances when you listen to a line in it and a gulp escapes your throat. Like the one when Mathews says of doors left ajar, through which love seeps in unnoticed. Unfortunately such instances are few in Paranayam, and very far between. Ironically, Mathews in a scene comments on the certainty of death, and in a compelling counsel suggests that its not a abrupt end, but rather a gradual progression towards an inevitability that lies in wait. And yet, Blessy's obsession with physical loss continues in Pranayam as well, and his story as well as its characters can't help being a part of the climatic breakdown that ensues with the demise of one of the lead characters. The clichés that arrive bundled up as the immediate relatives of the three lead characters, mar the possibilities of the film even further. There is Suresh (Anoop Menon), the proverbial son who has been denied everything on account of a mother who had disappeared during childhood, and his emotional tussle with Grace, draws the focus further away from love, and the pangs of it. The trio of actors who make this film worth a watch, is also the best thing about it. There are any number of occasions when the story and the situations threaten to bog them down, and they never for a moment let that happen. My favorite from among the three, would definitely have to be Mohanlal, who is remarkably brilliant as Mathews. Almost everything about his act - be it the impeccable body language or the flawless dubbing - is praiseworthy, and yet it remains one of the actor's most subdued and restrained performances ever. Jayaprada is equally convincing as the woman caught in a quandary at a late phase in her life, and all the struggles that she goes through are evident, and the frustrations right in place. Anupam Kher, with the lengthiest of the three roles, perhaps makes a slightly less of an impression, chiefly on account of a voice that doesn't often gel with the character that he plays. Pranayam does strain hard to achieve the nuances of an enchantingly sublime love, but ends up being a literal minded love tale, with one among the three lovers oddly left out. The chief reason you should probably watch it for then, is because it showcases three of the nation's best actors who are in supreme form.

Doctor Love Review  |

Rating:  Falling in love is more of a ploy in Dr. Love that has little to do with the forces of nature. You design and scheme with all your might, as if the object of your affection is your gravest enemy on earth.  - Abhi In K.Biju's 'Dr. Love' Kunchacko Boban plays Vinayachandran, a youngster who is busy trying every trick of the trade to make both ends meet. He writes and publishes bland love stories that he sells off for a cheap price at bus stands. One fine day, he meets a PE Professor (Innocent), who mistakes him to be an expert in resolving issues of love. And within no time, Vinayachandran, who follows him to college, get known in the campus as Dr. Love. They say, love stories arrive in all shapes and forms. This is one such love tale that tells the story of a 'romantic consultant', that teems with young actors, and attempts to take a peck at almost everything that it possibly can. It has ample doses of all those things that could perhaps make the new campus generation go ga-ga over it, be it friendship, love or whatever. Dr. Love has a few real promising shots right at the beginning, and you think this is going to be a film that would be unquestionably different. The title cards over, the story starts, and you see that nothing much has changed in the world of love down here. This is a campus like several other ones that we have seen before, where almost everyone - be the students or teachers way past their prime - yearn to fall in love. Any outsider, it should be remembered gets posted in the college canteen, (remember College Kumaran?) and so does Dr. Love. Love, love, Dr. Love... goes the refrain in the background, and those with romantic sickness start pouring in for consultation in no time. Though he starts off waiting at tables. he is soon is promoted to the cashier post, given his peculiar skill to draw in sick love birds into the canteen. And in no time, he becomes a campus hero and starts singing songs as well. So where are those campus crooks, you ask, and along comes Rajith Menon and his team, who admit that love isn't what they are on the look out for. Unfortunately, they don't have much of a say in this film, because its all about the purest form of love - the kind that gently eats into you, and eventually chokes you. Dr. Love, for most of its running time is unrealistic to the core, and even of you keep its central protagonist out of the picture, what remains is not quite workable either - like for instance, the last half an hour of the film, when it turns out to be even more and more impractical. The film does have a charming cast, and all of them have done remarkably well. Kunchacko Boban, Bhavana, Ananya, Bhagath Manuel, Hemanth Menon, Rejith Menon, Manikkuttan and new find Vidya Unni are all good, and tray real hard to keep the spirit up and running. Falling in love is more of a ploy in Dr. Love that has little to do with the forces of nature. You design and scheme with all your might, as if the object of your affection is your gravest enemy on earth. And finally, make her fall prey to your charms. Ugghh.. not my cup of romance, this!