Wednesday, August 24, 2016

“Pete’s Dragon” movie review

Disney’s recent wave of making live action versions of many of its animated classics seems to be working well for them – the brilliant “The Jungle Book” was a highlight of this year. And now they seem to have another success with “Pete’s Dragon” which, though not as dazzling as “The Jungle Book”, hits the right note.

A young Pete is traveling with his parents when they have an accident – his parents die as the vehicle they’re in crashes in the jungle and Pete is protected by a dragon who is hiding there. Six years later, Pete (Oakes Fegley) and the dragon (whom he has named Elliott) are inseparable. When a lumberjack crew start cutting down their forest, Pete befriends Natalie (Oona Laurence), who is the foreman’s daughter; and is taken to the city by a kind ranger Grace (Bryce Dallas Howard). Trouble ensues when Gavin (Karl Urban), a member of the crew, spots Elliott. As Pete connects with the family that has taken him, Gavin and his crew are trying to capture Elliott.

The main positive of Pete’s Dragon is the simplicity of its story telling. At a time when CGI is overused and movies are filled with excessive visuals and action sequences that assault and overload our senses, it’s a refreshing change of pace for a movie to focus on the story and relationships and let the showy CGI take a backseat. The movie is almost serene in its pacing. The relationship between Pete and Elliott, and the subsequent relationships between the human characters, is developed nicely. It also helps that there are some very capable actors who deliver solid, understated performances.
That isn’t to say that the CGI and special effects are unimpressive. The choice to have the dragon more like a puppy than as the vicious looking creatures we have come to expect after being exposed to Smaug and the dragons from “Game of Thrones” is actually a very bold one, and it works well. The action scenes towards the end of the movie are also done well.


The movie touches upon themes like friendship, family, the importance of believing, and even topics like deforestation, animal endangerment and how our prejudices make us do the wrong things. But ultimately, it’s about the warm fuzzy feeling you get when you watch a movie that just makes you smile. The movie may not be for everyone – though the kids will love it, many adults are sure to get impatient watching it. For me though, the movie works. After a long day, this is just the kind of movie to soothe your nerves – and that is a win for me.

Tuesday, August 23, 2016

Why “Kabali” didn’t work for me – A Movie Analysis


Two disclaimers before I begin – one, spoilers ahead. So if you haven’t watched the movie, come back once you do. Two, I am not one of those Rajini haters, who try to poke holes at anything he does. On the contrary, I enjoy his core movies like ‘Padayappa’ and ‘Sivaji the Boss’. That being said, I am not in the league of his super fans who feel everything he touches is sacred. Which probably puts me in a place where I can objectively look at his movies.

I went to watch Kabali on the first day with high expectations – the promos of the movie were fantastic (in fact, the entire marketing campaign was worthy of a Rajini movie), ‘Neruppu da’ was all the rage (still is, actually) and the general vibe was very positive after the past few disappointing outings. And, to put it bluntly, the movie disappointed. It isn’t only that the movie didn’t meet lofty expectations; it was not a good movie. Sure, there are some elements that worked. But on the whole, the movie didn’t.

So let’s do a deep dive. For starters, this movie should prove beyond a shadow of doubt to all the haters that Rajini has still got it. His charisma and screen presence are unparalleled, and the first ten minutes of the movie do a great job in showcasing it. However, after that, the movie steadily goes downhill. The movie tries to juggle multiple plot points –how Kabali must ward off threads from the rival gangs, how the charity set up by his associates helps Tamil youths, and the mystery of who killed his wife. The last plot point felt the weakest, and unfortunately here that the screenplay focuses on the most. Honestly, if the film was made as a murder mystery which our hero was working to solve, it may have turned out ok. But in the lottery of the multiple threads, it looks like the weakest one was picked. Had they focused on the gang war (which was what the trailer seemed to promise) or even on his efforts to rehabilitate the young ‘uns, we could have been looking at a real winner.

I want to look a little closely at each of the plot points. Let’s start with the most important one – the one with Kabali’s wife. There have been many movies which have taken this same premise and done amazing things with it (it isn’t fair to bring it up, but remember ‘Memento’?). So what goes wrong here? Well, for one, it doesn’t do anything new with this idea. Kabali meets a gangster, who after some “convincing”, points him to another gangster. The other guy points to a third guy. And so on and so forth. There is no real value add in these scenes, and it really doesn’t advance the plot. Once he meets the guy who reveals the key twist, and Kabali’s daughter is introduced, they could have dropped this one. But no. Post interval, the daughter reveals that Kabali’s wife is alive – and this sequence again has an information grapevine that runs through four or five people (which again is completely unnecessary). So do we get our family reunion in the next scene or two, giving sufficient time for the other plot threads to pick up? Of course not. In what seems to be done purely for product placement reasons, we have a wild goose chase that takes us to Chennai (we only get to see the inside of Le Meridien Hotel and some old guy’s mansion) and then Pondicherry where again after some ten minutes of screentime being wasted, we get to see the reunion between Kabali and his wife. This scene is specifically done to show the acting chops of Radhika Apte and Rajini – and it succeeds. But if this had been done without the whole in-between stuff of getting from Malaysia to Pondicherry, wouldn’t it have had the same impact? If the film makers felt that this would build up some emotional gravitas or suspense or whatever, it didn’t. It felt like a Super Mario video game where at each level some you get the irritating message “The princess is in another castle” – without any of the exhilaration when you eventually succeed. Even the action scene at Auroville after all this feels forced – much like the handshake between Kabali’s daughter and the helpful sidey character. I mean seriously, who shakes hands in the middle of an escape from a gun battle??

There are some positives here too. I felt the scenes where he remembers his wife were done very cleverly (she remains young while he is old), which is promising as it feels indicative of a transition phase for Rajini – the director boldly avoids a duet or a dance number with the heroine, which keeps the maturity of our hero’s character intact. Even the flashback scenes are handled well, and the interactions between hero and heroine are minimal and dignified – which actually adds more to the chemistry. But, even though I’m a fan of Radhika Apte, in all honesty, wouldn’t it have just been better to have her die and give Rajini an emotional scene mourning his wife’s death? And for Radhika Apte, give a few powerful flashback scenes and a good death scene? Or atleast get to the point sooner? It’s not like she’s even present for most of the time. At the end of it all, did this even serve a purpose?

Now let’s look at Kabali’s foundation for endangered youth. Of course, as with every other Rajini movie, Kabali is a do-gooder and contributes to society. His foundation is meant to protect Tamil youth from the ills of drug addiction and gang violence. The drug addict girl is just used to force the point of the impact of drugs, but I found it too much with the hammy acting and the very excessive effort to tug at the viewers’ heartstrings. The main reasons for having this charity were to show his heart of gold, to give a circumstance to narrate the flashback and to get the bad guys to trash the place to instigate him. And the use of the guy who plays with his cap to add a ‘cliffhanger’ ending is so weak and rushed, it’s laughable. And of course, this entire thread is not really justified by the screenplay.

The gang war thread had the most promise; and some real talented actors as well. Winston Chao is charismatic and is really a worthy antagonist. There are also good performances from Kishore and John Vijay. I was kinda put off by Dinesh’s performance – I think they tried to add a humour element which didn’t really work. Neither was I impressed by Kalaiyarasan, who has a meaty role. But the problems don’t end there. For one thing, there’s way too less time spent on this sub-plot – so none of the characters are developed. It’s a crime that Winston Chao gets so less screen time. Moving on, the plot seems a bit Godfather-esque. Kabali doesn’t want drugs sold and other immoral activities done, and this causes other gangs to fight back as it is eating into their revenues. Not to mention they sent Kabali to prison and killed his wife. The gang war thread hurriedly picks up post the family reunion to form the climax where Kabali eliminates all his enemies.

One of the major problems was the lack of character development. A really good death scene felt wasted on Dinesh’s character, because there was no sense of dread that a major character who the audience feels for is in mortal danger and is about to die a gruesome death. Even Tony Lee and Veera, who are the primary antagonists, are hardly fleshed out. It’s more the talent of the actors that gives us compelling villains. I’m not even going near the plot holes because that’s expected (but seriously, even a local nightclub restricts entry better than their gangster convention/birthday celebration).

Another thing I have to mention is the whole punch dialogue about Kabali fighting Tony Lee to show that Tamilians are also equal or even superior to anyone, though amazing and cheer inducing, feels like an after-thought and doesn’t ring true. Probably because Tony Lee’s actions don’t justify this criticism. He has a Tamilian as his right-hand man and confidante, he killed Nassar’s character purely for business reasons; he even pays his respects to his dead Tamil henchman by gracefully merging both Tamil traditions and his own showing his respect for both cultures (how many mob bosses pay their respects to a two bit henchman, really??). One may argue that he destroys Tamil youth by selling them drugs, but I don’t think he makes a conscious business decision to sell drugs only to Tamil youth – everyone is affected. He just makes a small mention in a dialogue – that’s it. We all talk all kinds of shit in a tense situation.

But jokes aside, the entire climax seems to come in a hurry and didn’t make audiences feel invested. I think many people were just asking to get on with it and finish already. What should have been the crux of the movie seems like it was just tacked on as an accessory.

It would be remiss of me not to mention some of the things that impressed me about the movie. Like many Rajinikanth movies, Kabali has strong female characters. Dhansika’s character would have traditionally been a man’s, but it’s a great sign that a female actress is given an action heavy role. Kabali’s wife is also shown as a strong woman who gives sound advice and makes him the man he is. A lot of the supporting cast shines – of course it’s hard to give a lot of screen time to others in a Rajini movie. Most importantly, I think this could be a turning point for Rajini where roles will be tailor made to suit an ageing look and showcase acting chops, something like what happened with Amitabh Bachchan. This movie proves he can pull it off, and is in fact even better this way.


At the end of the day, Rajini managed to pull the movie like only he can. But Kabali was a let-down. You know it’s a problem when the whistles and shouts during a Rajini movie die down ten minutes in. And it’s bad for any movie when people start shuffling impatiently and looking at their watches when the end is some time away. Like the movie’s poster, it felt like Rajini was being dragged down by the snail-paced screenplay and lazy script. Which is a shame, as this was a product full of potential. But eventually, the movie was not worthy of the actor. 

Wednesday, August 17, 2016

"Jason Bourne" movie review

The feeling that stuck with me throughout “Jason Bourne” was one of déjà vu. Sure, the film has the return of Paul Greengrass and Matt Damon to the series, after the disappointing run of “The Bourne Legacy”. And that’s great. But it all seems too familiar and formulaic, and that removes all the tension in what should have been a tense spy thriller.

All the usual tropes are there –a reluctant Jason Bourne, who is living in hiding trying to lead something of a regular life, is pulled into the world of espionage. So now Bourne has to follow clues and go around the world trying to fill in the blanks. A sincere CIA operative is leading the operation to capture Bourne, while her superior, who has some shady background stuff going on, is trying to get rid of him. The superior has his own ‘asset’ whom he is using to get rid of Bourne, who uses every dirty trick in the book to get him. Throw in a lot of chases and a mind blowing car chase for the climax which ends up devastating the traffic scene. And of course, Bourne exposes the CIA honcho and his operation. Sound familiar? Yep, any other Bourne movie (maybe not the first one).

Taken on its own, the movie isn’t all bad. Matt Damon reprises the role that he can probably play in his sleep now, and does a great job. The shaky cam is back, which may not be good news for everyone. The movie continues in the tradition of great action, though I think “The Bourne Ultimatum” was where the franchise hit its high. The final car chase in Las Vegas deserves a special mention – they definitely raised the stakes on this one.

There are a few flaws here. The plot is quite thin and seems overly simplistic at times. The inclusion of Tommy Lee Jones and Alicia Vikander doesn’t add to the movie – they are stuck with roles which seem to be a rehash of earlier characters. The biggest problem though is that the movie doesn’t have anything new to offer. It seems to be faithfully replicating what has been a successful recipe and hence doesn’t deliver any thrills or twists, which is a problem since that is exactly what the movie needs.

Don’t fix something that isn’t broken seems to be the mantra that they have followed on this movie. And though that may work in some cases, that isn’t the case here. Despite quite a few positives, the predictability is enough to make this a slog. It felt like a scene by scene recreation of any of its predecessors, and doesn’t add anything to the franchise. And that’s a shame.

Sunday, August 14, 2016

"Suicide Squad" movie review

Expectations are funny in how they change our perception of something. If I had gone for Suicide Squad without any idea of the drubbing it has got from critics (and many fans), I probably would have not enjoyed the movie at all. But, when I saw the movie yesterday with the lowest of expectations, I’ve gotta say – I kinda enjoyed it. Sure, there are many flaws in the movie some of which we will go into in a minute (mild spoilers ahead), but at the end of the day, the movie did entertain me.

The plot is threadbare, to put it generously. In order to combat the threat metahumans like Superman could potentially pose to the world if they turn evil, intelligence agent Amanda Waller (Viola Davis) forms a taskforce of villains who can be used to fight them. Things quickly go south when the metahuman in the proposed task force turns rogue and forms an honestly unclear plan of either world domination or world destruction (I never really got that part). So it’s up to the remaining assortment of bad guys in to fight the menace.

So let’s start with what doesn’t work. For starters, the plot (rather the lack of it) is the biggest let-down. There are many plot holes, convenient scenarios and no real sense of danger for the protagonists. This is further accentuated by the fact that their major challenges are literally a faceless horde of zombie like creatures who die pretty easily. The whole movie has a sense of a video game being played in super-easy mode. Not to mention that the grand plan of Enchantress (Cara Delevingne) is not explained at all. The character itself is laughable and the final act is cringe-worthy for the most part. Like with many other comic book movies, it’s the main villain that turns out the weakest link here. Which is a shame, since DC has some amazing villains. Jared Leto’s Joker creates an impression with limited screen time, but despite being very edgy and intimidating, the character doesn’t really rise above being a mob boss. Hopefully in the coming movies – fingers crossed. Another thing that irritated me was that the squad members are portrayed as misunderstood softies with hearts of gold, which honestly just throws away the potential the movie had in being more edgy and giving us real nasty bad guys for us to root for (something Breaking Bad did so amazingly).

But despite all this, the movie definitely achieves one thing – it entertains. Peppered with the right amount of humour and enough character development to keep you invested, the film is definitely more fun than Batman v Superman. Unlike BvS, which was overly muddled and complicated with a cop-out ending, David Ayer sticks to the (extremely limited) plot and does not try to add too much complication (it still has a cop-out ending though). And there are enough threads to link the movie to the DC extended universe (the mid-credits scene doesn’t add much, but is aimed to do just that). But the biggest plus here may be the performances of the leads. Will Smith plays Deadshot perfectly, and his charm goes a long way in making the character. Special mention to Jai Courtney who makes an impression as Captain Boomerang. Viola Davis does well, though her character could have been written to be more intimidating. Perhaps the one most under the scanner, Jared Leto does well to do his own take of the iconic Joker – he does step up to fill some iconic shoes. It’ll be interesting to see how this character will be handled in the upcoming movies. The scene stealer here is Margot Robbie though, who plays Harley Quinn as crazy and eccentric without making the character a caricature.


All said and done, despite its numerous flaws, Suicide Squad wasn’t all bad. I think that most people have reached saturation point with regular by-the-numbers superhero movies which don’t add too much by way of new stuff (which is probably also why X’-Men: Apocalypse’, another movie I didn’t mind too much, was panned by the critics). All I know is, for the most part, I had a good time at the movie. And that’ll do for me.