Ponmagal Vandhal could prove to be a watershed moment for Tamil Cinema. Widely spoken about ahead of it's release for being the first big name mainstream Tamil movie to release directly on OTT, a lot is riding on this movie but only time will tell how the tide will flow on this.
Made with an ensemble cast, including the screenplay specialists trio of Bhagyaraj, Parthiban and Pandiyarajan, brilliant character artists like Thiyagarajan and Subbu Panchu (special mention for his voice, so evocative. Anyone who has watched Sivaji will know how powerful Subbu Panchu's voice is), the movie gets off to an interesting start. It is 2004, Ooty. A sensational double murder, followed by public outcry, swift police action and arrest, ending with an encounter of the criminal on the grounds of self defence wraps the opening act. Cut to 2020, and a PIL petition populist (Bhagyaraj) and his daughter (Jyothika) successfully appeal to Madras High Court for a retrial of this case. Is Bhagyaraj seeking cheap publicity, or will new truths emerge from this retrial forms the rest of the movie.
Armed with this interesting storyline, a brilliant cast and a powerful medium (courtroom dramas are among the best mediums to convey a creator's vision), the movie is well placed to deliver a strong 2nd and 3rd act. But that is where things start to unravel.
First, one of the golden rules of film making is to Show, Not Tell. Cinema is primarily a visual medium. Unfortunately, most of the courtroom scenes here are characters literally saying what the Director wants to convey, without any connect with the audience. Second, there are attempts to force-feed certain emotions that are plain shoddy. Poorest examples of this occurs twice, once during the interval block and once at the end. On both occasions, Jyothika proclaims major revelations about the case, facts so gut wrenching that they would bring tears to your eyes. Left alone, this scene may have worked. Instead the Director pans to various sections of the audience sitting in the courtroom (who are ostensibly proxy for the audience watching the movie) and shows them crying. How much more lame can one get in trying to convey a feeling? To do this once is bad enough, but to do it twice in the same movie is in rather poor taste.
Next, using multiple narrative techniques to convey a story is welcome, so long as this approach helps keep the audience engaged, holds off the big reveal for the optimum moment, and fits with the flow of the movie. Here, the director has tried something novel but failed. The most important events of the fateful night/day in 2004 are told in Flashback (fair play) with the added twist of non-linear narration (taking it too far). This attempt distracts the viewer from focusing on whats happening and also makes the flashbacks' pacing feel like a contradiction from the comfortable rhythm of the rest of the movie. To add to this, there is too much voice over when the flashback events are narrated, and it starts to grate.
Lastly, the climatic court sequence hinges on a complex plot device that is generally difficult to pull off convincingly. In all my experience of watching movies, I can recall only two movies ever doing this well. A Few Good Men, and Shaurya which was based off A Few Good Men. Here, this set piece falls flat and does not provide the much needed flourish to close the case. Yet again, the focus seems to be on theatrics and melodrama, rather than subtlety and poignant reflection...
On the whole, while the cause is noble, and this is undoubtedly a much needed movie to bring more focus on a major social issue, as a Cinema, it is more of a Female Samuthrakani Paadam, rather than an entertaining Padam.
Comments
Post a Comment