Tag: Movie review

The Running Man

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.out.com/

Rating: 3 stars out of 5
Starring: Glen Powell, Josh Brolin, Colman Domingo, Lee Pace, Michael Cera
Where to watch: Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: Even though it is a much anticipated movie by the most creative director of last decade, this movie fails to do justice to it’s subject matter

This movie is set in a dystopian world where the country is almost ruled by a broadcasting network (creatively) called the Network in the parallel with the government. Most of the population lived below poverty line, in squalor and money and power resides with a select few, as is with any authoritarian/totalitarian regime. Network has a reality show called The Running Man where a contestant fights to survive for 30 days in exchange for $1 billion. In this world, there resides our hero Ben Williams (Glen Powell) who is not able to afford flu medicine for his 2 year old kid. He then decides to play for The Running Man, if it meant saving his daughter and giving a better life to his family. He is joined by 2 other contestants, who are a little more naive/optimistic than him. As the “game” progresses, we learn how rigged it is, with well-equipped hunters doing everything to ensure the contestants do not win. The game is hosted by Bobby T (Colman Domingo) who is removed from the plight of the people and is only a show piece. The real muscle behind the Network is Dan Killian (Josh Brolin) who is the scary kind of evil – calm and too self-assured. The contestants don’t have any chance of bettering the game or the Network as all the stakes are against them. But our hero Ben fights against all the odds, or at least tries to.

A few years ago, there was a movie called Jackpot starring Awkwafina and John Cena which was on the similar lines, without a dystopian world and all powerful Network, but hilarious nonetheless. It is not meant to be taken seriously and the makers are self-aware. This is exactly the problem with Edgar Wright’s movie – it doesn’t know what it wants to be. It is equal parts Scott Pilgrim and a socialist’s manifesto. The cinematography of the movie by Chung Chung-hoon is on point and does elicit an emotional response from the viewer. The 80s aesthetic with the sci-fi future is shown on point. But that’s where the movie’s promise ends. The world setting of the movie in act 1 is very quick and effective, leaving a huge margin to develop the story and characters, but that is sacrificed for style, which leaves the viewers quite apathetic towards the characters. It also fails to prove a point or even instill hope in the viewer as most of the people in the movie are portrayed to be too desperate to be good, too selfish to be considerate, which does not land the point home of hope, and hope is a good thing. Maybe the best of things.

Edgar Wright is one director who is not pinned down by genres – be it horror movies like Hot Fuzz and Last Night in Soho, or action-packed Scott Pilgrim, etc, and that too with a blend of genres. Even in movies where he was associated tangentially, his signature style of quick zooms and pans were visible and made for great storytelling. But here where the story was already in place by the great Stephen King, the execution is bland. One would be hard-pressed to determine if the movie was an Edgar Wright work. But that is ok, he has proven himself more times that he hasn’t so there is no cause for worry, he will be back soon and better for it (“calm down heart. all is not lost”). In other news, has anyone else noticed how Josh Brolin is in everything these days? Anyway, give The Running Man a miss, and if you are looking for fun escapism, opt for Jackpot.

Caught Stealing

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.newyorker.com/

Rating: 3.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Austin Butler, Regina King, Zoë Kravitz,  Matt Smith, Liev Schreiber, Vincent D’Onofrio, Bad Bunny
Where to watch: Netflix
To watch or not to watch: It is a fun ride, delivers what it promises, which is a non-exceptional chase thriller in New York, filled with quirky eccentric characters

Hank (Austin Butler) is a sweet, borderline alcoholic bartender, who is more than an average ball player and one of the biggest fans of Giants. One night, after closing up the bar, he returns home with his non-committed long term girlfriend Yvonne (Zoë Kravitz), only to find that his neighbour Russ (Matt Smith) is leaving for the airport to take care of his sick dad and has given the responsibility of his bad tempered cat Bud to Hank. Little does Hank know that Russ is running away from Russian mobsters who are out for Russ’ blood. They mistake Hank for Russ, and beat to a pulp so much so that he needs to be admitted to the hospital to remove his ruptured kidney. From there, he is contacted by narcotics detective Elise Roman (Regina King), who tells him that the ring of drugs run deeper than Russians. There is the Puerto Rican Colorado (Bad Bunny) who works with the Russians, who in turn owe Hasidic Drucker brothers (Liev Schreiber, Vincent D’Onofrio), basically making a drug dealer’s Ponzi scheme. Fascinating.

The script is tight and clear, two of the most important and underrated things a script should be. It is fun to watch, doesn’t take itself too seriously (unlike Aronofsky’s Black Swan, The Whale, basically his entire filmography) and thus delivers what it promises, which is also not commonly seen these days. Another winning point in the movie’s favour is the character of Hank, who is unlike the macho, testosterone-filled action movie stars we see in these movies (cue: Jason Statham). Is he an alcoholic? Yes. Is he commitment-phobic? Also yes. But he calls his mother daily, is loyal and faithful to his non-girlfriend, takes care of a foul cat. And that’s adorable, and you don’t want the goons to be after someone so adorable. You are rooting for the guy. Even the bad guys aren’t totally bad; they are in a business and are only working to solve for the stolen merchandise. Some of them will observe the traditions set by their grandmothers and follow the rules of their religion (which added a little sumnin’-sumnin’, NGL). The real bad guys are the real surprise. This is a big shift from the regular grim Aronofsky flick, and it is a pleasant surprise that he is willing to experiment (and he goes with the body anti-dismorphia with Austin Butler).

Having said so many good things about the movie, there are some things which the movie fails to deliver. The individual gangsters are mostly cliched, the chase sequences predictable, the romantic storyline adding nothing much to the whole, etc. Basically, the parts that make it a whole, while flowing into each other seamlessly, are nonetheless not surprising. There are some unbelievable points like Hank being able to run right after getting his kidney removed, being a cliched hero with a traumatic past, a die-hard sports fan making him a stereotypical American, kinda make it a bit boring too. But here’s the thing, these parts also fit together, so you need to take the good with the bad, because altogether it is quite pleasant. Will highly recommend for a Friday night chill movie session. Austin Butler has great things ahead of him for sure.

Heretic

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
A worthy attempt to subvert a genre, but loses its way halfway through
https://www.latimes.com/

Rating: 3.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Hugh Grant, Sophie Thatcher, Chloe East
To watch or not to watch: It is a decent first watch, and has a lot of shock value, but take that away, and you have any generic thriller

2 LDS missionaries are trying to spread the word of their lord and saviour from home to home, come over to an isolated house near the end of a road. The house is occupied a Mr. Reed (Hugh Grant) who had previously shown interest in learning about the LDS church. Since Mormon women can’t enter a house without a female present, the sisters Barnes and Paxton (Sophie Thatcher and Chloe East) check with Mr. Reed if he has a girl roommate. It starts raining heavily and after Mr. Reed’s confirmation that his wife, his soulmate is inside, the sisters enter Mr. Reed’s home, away from the torrential rain and a promise of pie. They discuss how religion is not the centre of culture anymore (which we witness in the initial few minutes where some young adults harass the two sisters). The three talk about how important it is to believe in a doctrine and find out through testing what one true religion is. And that is the whole premise of the devilry of Mr. Reed.

This is a clever movie, no denying that. In the typical horror movies we have seen, religion has been used as a weapon to ward off evil, be it The Exorcist, or the more recent Conjuring universe. This movie flips the trope on a tangent and raises the question – which is the correct, true, highest, purest religion? And theoretically, the road to the answer is paved with evil deeds by Mr. Reed (clever, right? *eyebrows wiggling*). And this is also the point where the movie loses its spiel. It begins as a debate on the truth taught by religion, which mostly asserts that that religion is the first religion, the one and the only. But what is first – The Landlord’s Game or Monopoly, Radiohead’s Creep or The Air That I Breathe by The Hollies or Get Free by Lana Del Ray. That is the debate, which gets lost in the rest of the movie. Or if it is present then it is only in words, not in action. Which kinda makes the whole premise lose steam.

The real pull of the movie is seeing Hugh Grant, the rom-com heartthrob who could star opposite Julia Roberts and make people wonder who is prettier of the two, as an old, wrinkled, charming man, with the signature Grant smile and the disarming look of dismay, as a conniving, heartless, sadistic misanthrope. Since this movie is essentially a three-hander chamber piece, it would have been a total dud if it wasn’t for Thatcher and East. They both have given themselves to their characters from beginning to end, and also developing themselves along the way. East being born into the church, but still curious about the world outside it and Thatcher being a convert and dedicating herself to it totally, completely. So strong is her conviction that she has converted 8-9 people through proselytising! It is interesting to see the two young women tackle their belief against a formidable opponent. But it doesn’t mean the story is strong, infallible or that its flaws can be written off as foibles. A worthy attempt in the age old genre, but needs improvement. Watch it with popcorn, but prepare to be disappointed.

Infernal Affairs

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment

Yes, it is as good as you have heard

https://www.netflix.com/

Rating: 5 stars out of 5
Starring: Andy Lau Tak-wah, Tony Leung Chiu-wai, Anthony Wong Chau-sang, Eric Tsang Chi-wai
Where to watch: Netflix
To watch or not to watch: There are only a very small group of people who probably might not like this movie. Probably

Hong Kong has recently been taken over by the Chinese government after the British handed over the territory, and the police have been very strict about illegal activities. A don by the name of Sam (Eric Tsang Chi-wai) has lost a few men to the police raids. He has a clever plan to foil the police though – to place young kids with no criminal record in the police academy so he gets an inside man. The police has a similar plan – they place a smart young cadet right out of the academy in the criminal underworld (well, they make a whole show of throwing that man out of the academy so there is no suspicion. Just semantics). Now the young man is a long-term undercover policeman Chen Wing-yan (Tony Leung Chiu-wai) and the inside man of Sam is Inspector Lau Kin-ming (Andy Lau Tak-wah). Both the opposite parties know there is a rat in their midst, which they are unable to find out, until they do (if you have seen The Departed, you know how this goes). There is a lot collateral damage along the way, which depicts the Chinese influence on Hong Kong very clearly. It is a true delight (Edmund could have chosen this movie instead of those stupid turkish delights. Just saying).

When a movie is this good, it is this exact goodness which makes it difficult to write/review/critique it, because the reaction to it is plain gushing. There are multiple layers to this movie, from the characters to the situation and the story in general. We have Yan, the undercover cop who is tired of this life and is longing to have a normal life on his morals. He is not the top honcho in the criminal group and is struggling morally, very strong in convictions, but living in sub-optimal conditions, only able to sleep on his therapist’s couch. In parallel and in contrast, there is Inspector Lau, who is sure about who he is, what he needs to do to get what he wants, comfortable in the life he is leading and has recently moved into a swanky apartment with a girlfriend (who is writing a novel about a man with multiple personalities. Cheeky, that). All this is super easy to see and conclude and is a prime example of show-don’t-tell policy. Even the casting of the movie is on point. The viewer cannot help but sympathise with Yan who elicits a “poor guy” response at every point, and Lau with the chiselled cheekbones depicts a smooth operator policeman, rising through the ranks, getting what he wants before he even asks for it. And of course, Superintendent Wong is an intelligent, worldly man who is a formidable opponent. All of the players are all about business and there is little to no drama about it.

Drama is what differentiates the American version of this movie from this one, and the potential reason why Infernal Affairs might be rated higher than The Departed. The conversation between Yan and Wong on getting out of the undercover business drips with the desperation of a lonely, conflicted man vs the similar conversation in The Departed, which is more dramatised and had a high-horse moral tone to it. Infernal Affairs doesn’t need to explain the right and wrong of the situation, since that is largely stitched into our society’s DNA. It cuts through all that, gets straight to the story, and even eliminates any action. It is pure intrigue. And for these reasons, Infernal Affairs is a must-watch!

Novocaine

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.cinemablend.com/

Rating: 3 stars out of 5
Starring:  Jack Quaid, Amber Midthunder, Ray Nicholson, Jacob Batalon
Where to watch: Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: It has only one joke, but it plays it well!!! A high dose of entertainment for all action movie lovers

Nathan Caine (Jack Quaid) works as an Assistant Manager at a local bank, leads a simple, quiet life, has an unassuming personality, and has a crush on the teller by the name of Sherry (Amber Midthunder) who has the opposite personality of Nathan, being extroverted, a spitfire and full of spark. One day, some lowlives decide to rob the bank, and kidnap Sherry. Nathan being a one-woman-man, has ro rescue his woman from the thugs, even though they are not a real couple. But unbeknownst to people at large, Nathan has a superpower – he doesn’t feel pain. At all. Not even the bladder sensation to pee, or biting tongue while chewing, for example, which means that he has led most of his life sheltered and limited. Now with the love of his life (even if it was only one date) being kidnapped, the curse he has led most of his life threatening his very existence becomes his power where he can fight the bad guys without restraint (luckily he has some good fighting skills without ever learning them). So, that’s what happens – Nathan Caine, aka Novocaine to his bullies, becomes the knight in a bloody body armour to rescue his princess.

It is a good movie, it is fun, it doesn’t take itself seriously, and neither should you. It is a typical light-hearted movie where the trope is the underdog becoming a hero. That’s it. That’s the review.
Well, the last part can be explained a bit more. There are multiple moments where the plot is only a hole, where the cringe is high and gore is more. But then again, it did not promise to be a high intensity thriller with morals and takeaways. It is a plain and simple action comedy, which is hastily thrown together to make it a quasi-cohesive movie which delivers on entertainment. There is much to be said about self-awareness in the movie making world and it is almost always a positive character trait.

It is fun to see Quaid in a The Boys+Punisher mash-up of a role. He is good at it, and after The Boys, it is easier to see him in movies where things blow up and there is blood and gore. Maybe we are seeing him too much in this genre? He is a decent actor by all accounts, his role in The boys is nothing to sneeze at, and maybe because of the success of the series, he is not getting any other scripts? This is of course, only conjecture, unless Jack Quaid himself comments on the website (wishful thinking). This is only to say that he has potential to be more than one role, one character typecast into this. It will be fun for us, but maybe not so fulfilling for an actor of his calibre. Watch Novocaine on a movie night with a bunch of friends and have fun!

Oddity

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://talesfromthepaulside.com/

Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Starring:  Gwilym Lee, Carolyn Bracken, Tadhg Murphy, Caroline Menton
Where to watch: Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: Absolute must watch for lovers of supernatural horror movies. A simple movie with limited spread of the story which keeps the viewer bound

Dani (Carolyn Bracken) is married to psychiatrist Ted (Gwilym Lee) and they have recently moved to the countryside where she is renovating their home. Ted runs the local mental asylum and works at night. While Dani is alone at home, a patient of Dr Ted comes to warn her of a man who is trying to hurt her. Not entirely disbelieving the clearly disturbed man (with a glass eye) she goes inside and locks the door. Cut to a year later, Dani was brutally murdered that night, Ted has moved on and is now in a new relationship with Yana (Caroline Menton), Ted visits Dani’s blind identical twin sister Darcy in her antique store, to (not) invite her to his house (same as the one he bought with Dani) on the anniversary of his wife’s death. Darcy believes there to be more to the murder of her sister than the police have concluded and goes over to Ted’s house to stay for the night to find out more. To help her with this, she has also brought a wooden gollum, which was passed onto her by her mother.

This movie is goodddd… There are a many things which work in its favour and a few which don’t.
This movie excels in the feels, the creeps, the chills. The gollum placed at the head of the dining table, overlooking the entire living room, is one of those side eye pieces, which let us know there is something weird at all times. There are also some jump scares, which can be termed a cheap ploy, but somehow they work in this movie. There is an expectation of something about to happen, but when that thing happens, it is worth the slow build. And this movie is a slow build overall. There are some long scenes filled with conversations and timed pauses, and they slowly build the premise brick by brick. There are also some conversations which give clues to the whole story, thus conversations become vital.
At the same time, there are some plot holes, which are very small, but they are there. The whole movie is engrossing and a person probably will not notice the holes during the runtime, but they might nag later, after mulling over the movie. Thus this movie is a very good first watch, and delivers on expectations from a horror movie, but might not be worth a second watch.

The atmosphere of the movie is contributed largely by Carolyn Bracken as Darcy. The colourless portrayal of the character is so in contrast to the surrounding that it becomes a subconscious plot point. We know she has a quiet strength, which could have been explored further and could have added to the daunting nature of the supernatural. Gwilym Lee has the same acting skills as the wooden gollum, and the gollum had more screen time than Lee, which is fitting. All in all, a very good watch for all horror movie lovers.

Juror #2

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.primevideo.com/

Rating: 2 stars out of 5
Starring: Nicholas Hoult, Toni Collette, J. K. Simmons, Kiefer Sutherland
Where to watch: Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: This is movie is like a motley teenager who thinks they are the President of the United States. The result is the same. The fact that it is directed by the acclaimed Clint Eastwood can be easily ignored.

In a small town in Georgia USA, a murder trial is going on to determine whether James Michael Sythe, abusive boyfriend of the victim Kendall Cater is the perpetrator or not. On the jury are people from different walks of life, with different life priorities, including Juror #2, Justin Kemp (Nicholas Hoult), whose wife is in a high-risk pregnancy, and he would like nothing better to be excused so he can spend time with her. But as luck would have it, he is a part of the jury nonetheless, and he is a sticky situation, because it turns out he is real perpetrator of the crime, but the police stuck to the theory of the abusive boyfriend being the perp. A fellow juror Harold (JK Simmons) has doubts about the police investigation and he mistakes Justin’s discomfort with the case as doubt into the conviction. The public prosecutor Faith Killebrew (Toni Collette) is standing for elections and is determined to convict Sythe to win the votes basis the fight against domestic violence. The defence attorney Eric Resnick (Chris Messina) is helpless because even though he is convinced of his client’s innocence, there is no way to prove it. It is upto to Justin to sway his fellow jurors away from a guilty verdict all the while walking the tightrope of not implicating himself.

This movie is thankfully not the swan song of the brilliant Clint Eastwood, it would have been a tragedy otherwise. This is a not a good movie. There is no other way to put this.
It might be a spiritual remake of 12 Angry Men, and it does turn into that movie during jury deliberations, it is trying too hard. On the one hand, the importance is on the fact of the situation of Justin Kemp, of course, who could have thought a juror is the very criminal in the case!? Brilliant premise, but somehow the reveal of the fact in the beginning (so early that it is also in the trailors) takes way from the fact. Now Justin is not a slick human like Danny Ocean that he can get away from the scrapes he gets into. He is a recovering alcoholic and a doting husband. And that is another problem – while the fact he is real perp is bang in the beginning, his recovering alcoholism is like a big secret that is hinted at for a long time till it is told (“in case you didn’t get the hints, here is what we were trying to tell you all along”). Weird, confusing, unnecessary and totally unproductive.

A movie with the promises of Eastwood, Collette, Hoult, being disappointing makes one feel hopeless for other releases which are much low on the star power. To be fair, it wasn’t the star power which was a let down, it was the writing. Or rather the confused vision on what the movie wanted to be. Lack of clarity of thought has brought down nations, and this is just a movie. And acting is not a cure, contrary to the movie makers’ belief. They are a tool to bring the vision to life, a face to the written word. There are many instances where a now popular character was earlier planned for a big star, but was given to someone less known and now we cannot imagine that character being played by anyone else. Because actors in a movie can be replaced, thanks to make-up, direction and writing. But there is no cure to bad writing. If anything, a good actor will make bad writing stand out in stark relief.
Not a good movie. Watch 12 Angry Men instead.

Wicked Little Letters

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.primevideo.com/

Rating: 3.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Jesse Buckley, Olivia Colman, Timothy Spall, Anjana Vasan
Where to watch: Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: It is a funny movie starring some of the best actors telling a story on a deep subject. Why not to watch!

The movie is based in 1920 England, where a lonely, devout spinster Edith Swan (Olivia Colman) lives with her overbearing father and gentle mother, next door to a single, Irish immigrant mother Rose Gooding (Jesse Buckley). Not only is Rose a single mother, but she is also living in sin with her partner Bill, swears like a sailor, and has a jolly good time at the pub with the other patrons, all actions not approved by the tight laced Edith. But Edith has another problem, she has been receiving poison pen letter, filled with profanity, which disturb her parents to no end, that too 19 in total! And not just Edith, the who’s-who of the village have had something vile said about them! The nerve! Who could have done such an evil trick, and who has such a potty-mouth? Why, Rose of course, with her new age ideas and little regard to propriety, she is the right suspect for this deed which has troubled the good Christians no end. Rose is thus arrested and having no money for bail, has to spend time in jail, more now that Edith’s poor mother died of a heart attack upon reading one such letter. There is also Gladys (Anjana Vasan) who is assigned this case, pays little attention to this claiming there is more serious crime to be investigated – and rightly so, she is very good at her job, but her misogynistic boss doesn’t recognise her talent. That is, until she decides to give this quickly spiralling case her full attention.

The premise of the movie is hilarious and the execution even more so. Anything which has either Colman or Buckley is a treat in itself and this one has them both. Add to this mix Vasan (of We Are Ladyparts fame) and you get a cherry on your cake you did not know you needed. This movie has some fantastic dialogue writing and a bit of on-time slapstick comedy which makes it an ideal viewing pleasure. The movie touches on a topic, or rather, a side to human nature we all know and talk about but has never given the center stage or a de-facto position it deserves. And that is the real feat of this movie. Anyone who has ever had someone out to get them should come back to this movie and understand the underlying reason for such malice. It might help to understand the other person and maybe lessen their burdens a bit.
On the other side, the story and performance can only do so much. They are not the salve for the wounds caused by sloppy screenplay. Things suddenly take a turn and it is revealed who has been actually writing the letters, and while it deserves a slow camera pan-up to the face of the criminal, and its own crescendo in the background, it gets none of that, but rather a reveal which is more matter-of-fact. That take away from the almost 50% of the runtime build-up we have been viewing and waiting for. And the climax, while totally funny (ngl) is make out to be this big curtain drawing moment, which we saw coming a mile away.

It is confounding to realise why people can be so bitter about themselves and their lives that they have to take it out on others who have absolute zero contribution in their misery. Their only sin is that they have something the bitter person covets. And don’t all humans covet something they see others enjoying? So when does this scarcity give rise to such acid in their nature? Is there a trigger or is this something that builds up slowly, was always there and was only looking for an opening to rear its ugly head? On the flip side, what is stopping anyone from changing their lives, little bit at a time, because afterall it is the little things that matter, that one can control? Or is the effort in making that change so daunting, so scary, and turning into a harmful part of humanity so easy and satisfying, that it becomes the immediate choice? Is it a choice? Maybe it is. Comment if you have any answers to these questions?
This movie is a light-hearted, but deep movie which comes rarely on the screen, and has all but one pillar working for it. It can be a family movie too, if the family has members above the minimum age of voting, or driving, at the more adult’s discretion. The dialogues and the letters are so ridiculously out-there, they are laugh-out-loud. Jesse Buckley’s character’s free way of life is so inviting, all of us would want to be there with her, but we would need to build our characters strong enough. It is uplifting. Watch it!

Ela Veezha Poonchira

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://www.cinemaexpress.com/

Rating: 4.5 stars out of 5
Starring: Soubin Shahir, Sudhi Koppa, Jude Anthany Joseph
Where to watch: Prime Video
To watch or not to watch: A must watch for your Friday night intense watch! Fresh and brilliant!

Madhu (Soubin Shahir) is a police constable posted at a hilltop to maintain the lines for wireless signals and keep people away from the area as it is frequently struck by lightning. He is accompanied by another younger constable Sudhi (Sudhi Koppa) who has a rather cavalier attitude to Madhu’s more serious, withdrawn, quiet persona. Madhu cooks chicken curry for Sudhi, cleans up after him, tells him off from watching a couple having a private time among the bushes on the hill, all in all, a fair balance. In the opening scene we learn that there are dismembered body parts found all around the hill, and leads to an investigation that the two constables can follow through the wireless. But along with this, there is a simmering tension under the surface of Madhu’s quiet exterior visible through his furrowed brows, pinched mouth and staring eyes. With that is the mounting tension of the murder investigation, which then reveals itself to be the one missing puzzle piece which makes sense of the seemingly simple narrative.

This movie is largely a two-parter with very few supporting cast members, in fact, it won’t be wrong to say that Soubin Shahir is the Atlas who carries with him the weight of the narration. It is such an easy, simple narration, driven by dialogues, daily life events and, as mentioned before, a simmering tension. People complain about unfaithful wives, upset stomachs, normal police functions, etc. with nothing indicating the weight of the world waiting for the viewers at the end of the movie. But there are breadcrumbs spread all across the movie – from the opening scene, to a seemingly innocuous pregnant woman, a man masturbating, and so on. And when it all comes together, it is such a revelation to see the entire picture come to light. Very satisfactory.

In this era, when everyone blames huge productions like MCU for the high budget and claim the difficulty in products, we have a simple, poignant and deep movie like Ela Veezha Poonchira. The screenplay and cinematography are so tight and well executed, it is a masterclass in filmmaking. It is one of the best directorial debut movies and one of the reasons it feels so authentic is Shahi Kabir, the director, has been a police officer himself. Add to that the acting by Soubin Shahir – man! He conveyed so much by just subtle expressions – expressions of a man trying to hide his emotions in a setting where emotions have little place. This movie is a study in humanity and yes, filmmaking. Film makers, take note. Film viewers, don’t miss this one.

Kishkindha Kaandam

Published on by cinemadilemmaLeave a comment
https://maktoobmedia.com/

Rating: 4 stars out of 5
Starring: Asif Ali, Vijayaraghavan, Aparna Balamurali, Jagadish, Ashokan
Where to watch: JioHotstar
To watch or not to watch: This movie is like an onion – it has layers and will make you cry

Ajayan (Asif Ali) is a forest office who lives close to a reserved forest with this second wife Aparna (Aparna Balamurali) and elderly, retired army officer father Appu Pillai (Vijayaraghavan). Ajayan’s first wife passed away a couple of years back from cancer and his son is missing. Ajayan travels far and wide across the country everytime he gets any news of his missing son. Recently his father, who used to be very alert and sharp, has shown tendencies to forget things, even his licensed revolver has gone missing and there is an investigation underway. Aparna has noticed Appu write things in notebooks and then burn them after a month or so. She discusses this bizarre behaviour with her husband but gets more questions than answers.

It is difficult to describe what happens in this movie, it is all a bit bizarre, until the last act when everything comes together quickly and quietly, like a puzzle piece and it all makes sense in an “Ahhaa” way. The three main characters are believable and understandable – the proud old man unwilling to bend to the effects of old age but unable to stop them, the concerned son with the weight of the world on his shoulders and his new wife who is trying to understand her new environment and adjust to it all like a true superhuman. Along with them are some friends of the family who together fit into the puzzle too.

There is a certain simplicity in good Malayalam cinema which lends a sense of reality to the movies. And this is specially true for Kishkindha Kaandam – the actors depict a very average socio-economic stature and lifestyle. Their characters have friends they have known all their lives and who know them in turn. Despite that there are undercurrents throughout the movie related to the characters differently. Goes to show the wide expanse of human relations and emotions. There are also some deep-rooted moral questions faced by the characters, which they cannot reveal to others because there is humanity, love and sense of protection. As much as the movie is about the thrill, it is more so about the humanity of it all. It will require patience as it is a slow burn, but the understated climax makes up for it.