Friday, June 18, 2010

Reading Reviews

of Raavan(an) seems like a tiresome experience. Every reviewer puts amazing mokkai by repeatedly using the same cliches. It is hard to find a review that does not say the following (a) Movie is based on Ramayana (b) who is rama, seetha, raavana in this movie (c) history of manirathnam's movies (d) reference to Roja, bombay, dilse, yuva, guru

I haven't seen the movie yet, but it is staggering to know that every reviewer assumes the average reader has no clue about who manirathnam is or what the movie based on.

13 comments:

Tyler Durden said...

That's interesting. I had the same thought when you mentioned "Guna" and "Stockholm Syndrome" in your earlier post instead of Almodovar's "tie me up, tie me down". The syndrome itself was a few decades old by then, but "tmu,tmd" was just an year old and more of a direct inspiration for Guna. IIRC, it did make some rounds in film festivals that year and got some coverage in english/thamizh magazines even before Guna came out. I am sure there a lot of people who think referring to "tmu,tmd" is so passe and tiresome :-).

Perhaps the feeling of "reviewer assumes average viewer has no clue" comes down to (a) what the reviewer is familiar with and (b) the increased number of reviewers these days :-).

Anonymous said...

One more observation.
Everybody seems to say the storyline is bad but the cinematography is very good. I think this will be like Iruvar or Kannathil Muthamital. Not a big commercial hit but a really good movie.

Praveen said...

Read this

Sowmya said...

mani rathnam movies are passe illayo.

Hawkeye said...

tyler,

in that post i predicted that SS will become a cliche everybody refers to in raavanan reviews. but seems like nobody is mentioning it. i have no problem with many reviewers..just that there is no personal touch to reviews. it all seems like they are writing for a boring newspaper.

anon,

lets see. i dont think he can ever beat 'iruvar' though.

praveen,

his review doesnt look unbiased. who is he?

sowmya,

with passing years i have come to enjoy criticing people i used to worship in college. sachin, mani, arr etc. but still i am unable to ignore them.

if you are not tuned into the reviews you maybe lucky - if you read them you'd agree that saying 'mani is passe' is becoming passe

Sreekrishnan said...

they all fall into 2 categories. 1. who wants to make sure they write good about it whatever they feel because they dont want to go down as someone who wrote bad about a Maniratnam movie
2. who write bad because they think they have seen better movies and that writing it negatively is "cool"

and every one writes a story in the review instead of an analysis.

very few people write based on what the movie intends to do vs what they Like. Like and dislike is different, but does the movie justify its story and stay within boundaries to build the drama .. no one says that !

etho innum 7 hrs to go for Raavanan !

Hawkeye said...

sree,

exactly. writing the story in a review is like the most boring thing ever. edho kadan ezhave'nu ezhuthara maathiri irukkum.

9:45 raavanan for me and sometime tomorrow is raavan

blackaccord said...

a typical online review goes like this..
1) a synopsis of the movie a.k.a namning the big guns involved..
2)story of the movie and try to think they are smart by not letting out the suspense/climax..
3) grade the actors, meesic, cinematography, screenplay, direction..
4) final conclusion...

Reviewers from rediff, sify etc have this standard formula and don't shy away from it.. As SK pointed out, they want to play it safe...In the end, the Box office results are going to tell the story about the commercial success of the movie.. Awards and critical acclaim (over a period of time) are going to speak about the quality of the movie...

Tyler Durden said...

Shyamalan (yes [i]that[/i] Shyamalan) did a nice impression on film critics in Lady In The Water with Bob Balaban which more or less sums up the relevance of "professional" critics for me. When you can actually pay your way to get a positive review (or worse, the TV channel produced the movie themselves), credibility takes a dive.

Bloggers are another matter entirely. I read a blog where someone was pissed that Mani had a disclaimer on "All incidents being fictitious" when he had clearly "stolen" from the Ramayanam. The name of the movie is "Raavanan" for crying out loud. "Written by Kambar, Valmiki & Mani" apdi-nna credits poda mudiyum?

ps: Did you write a blog on Balaban or Gosford Park or both some(long)time back??

Sreekrishnan said...

Blackaccord/Hawkeye: http://movies.rediff.com/report/2010/jun/18/south-tamil-movie-review-raavanan.htm

Comedy !

Anonymous said...

every review I have read has also mentioned Robin Hood.

SathyaRam said...

I have not seen the movie yet. But the reviews seems biased either way always......

I do not know whether Iruvar can ever be surpassed but if this movie is 50% as good as Iruvar then it is worth the money....

Last I also feel this is a movie where Mani does not have Sujatha and the impact may be felt

blackaccord said...

Seriosuly... can suhasini stay out of mani's movies? We really miss you Sujatha (as sathya had pointed out)..
I didnt sleep during the movie but had to sit thru' comments from the back like 'sura was better' etc..
Spare a thought for Vikram who has delivered his best...