Param anna.. being a comedian also a tough job to do.. :-)
Printable View
Param anna.. being a comedian also a tough job to do.. :-)
Oh Obama is going to put me on ignore list and I am losing my sleep over it. Toughen up kids.
Easily the biggest reception to any tamil movie teaser :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahen
Vikram, what an actor! Shankar has provided him an amazing platform and the actor in Vikram has relished it completely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdfG...ure=youtu.be&a
So the beast is just for a song.. :)
Kandasamy, Anniyan ellaam vittutinga. Remo was anything but romantic.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
He was good in Sethu. Saamy was only Vikram-pissible performance. Liked his Gemini performance too but all of that could be done by others and they don't prove anything.
Raavan and Pithamagan ellaam terribad. Even the characters were terrible so there is only so much he can do but in Raavan, he pulled the character down with his non existent acting.
According to the making of video that Mahen posted, that weight loss seems to be for a character and not for a song sequence.Quote:
Originally Posted by mexicomeat
Arumai arumai :banghead: .Ungalayellam konjam nadinga boss show ku anupuna therium :sigh2:Quote:
Originally Posted by paranitharan
விடுங்க விடுங்க.. இங்கே அவர் சொல்வதுமட்டுமே ரொம்பவும் சீரியஸாக எடுத்துக் கொள்ளணுமாம். மற்றவர்கள் ஏதாவது எழுதினால் "ஆர் யூ சீரியஸ்?" என ட்ரோல் செய்வாராம்.Quote:
Originally Posted by Deepak7
any one can tel their views...athukaga unnala nadika mudiyuma nu kekarthu doesn't sounds good....example oru hotel Ku poram dish nalla illanu solrom athuku owner mudinja nee poi cook pannu appathan unaku theriyum nu sonna nallava irukumQuote:
Originally Posted by Deepak7
I take back what I said about the I songs earlier. I am actually enjoying most of the songs. :oops: Still can't stand Mersalayitten only because of the heavy use of auto-tune. Aila Aila and Ennodu Nee Irundhal are so repetitive though. It is getting kind of boring when I listen to it more than once.
kamall-lukku piragu antha idam vikramukkuthan..no doubt-ttu!ai movie release-sukku piragu athu meendum nilai niruthum..
If you do that in hotel say saravana bhavan, A2B(ennaku therinja good hotels), then the problem is with? SimpleQuote:
Originally Posted by praboo
+1. Adhe Adhe!Quote:
Originally Posted by Deepak7
Songs are good and hype is great but still doubtful how they are going to recover the supposedly massive investment.
Doubt that he can approach Kamal. Vikram is a good actor and a good fit for Shankar who relies heavily on make-up, special effects and needs a commitment of 2 to 3 years. I hope and wish "I" does well so it clears the way for VR-2.Quote:
Originally Posted by A.ANAND
+1Quote:
Originally Posted by kumarsr
exactly my sentiment. He is best suited for the gimmick roles that need dedication rather than acting.
Request : Is it possible to get the high resolution (original without watermark) of this poster, please :
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BxvlkJACQAESTbk.jpg:large
Off Topic :
Chithan
Chithan is a very peculiar character, atleast never seen before by me. We have only seen physical or mental disorders enacted by several artists throughout the globe, but never a character like Chithan.
Chithan is a normal human being, meaning, he does not suffer any physical disorder, but still he is abnormal that he cannot even walk straight. Chithan is a metally stable guy, who knows hunger and pain, but still he is unstable, as he does not feed like a normal person or react normaly to physical pain. Chithan is not a muet, but still he does not speak or is it that he is hesitant to deliver in a understandable human language ? Maybe Chithan will pass an IQ test with ease, but still he cannot express himself. Chithan has feelings, but cannot translate it for the soceity. For him love is universal, just as death, he loves a man, yes, another man. This affection he gets is only similar to the love of a domestic animal with its master; [other notions excluded]. He does not hide his love, but does not convey it in a manner others could understand. Mourning is his breakfast, but mourning for his love is never in his menu. Chithan is not confused, but still he cannot focus. He hears voices from the sky, but is deaf to others call. He is emotionally attached, but quite detached in expressing them. He is neither secure nor feels insecure. He is afraid but never nervous. When he is excited he just stares. And when he is angry or in joy, he shows his teeth, where his eyes take care of the relay.
Last but miles far from least, he is human, but still he behaves like an animal. Basically, Chithan is all that isn't.
This characterisation is certainly anything else, but terrible. The variation of Chithan from being normal to abnormal is potrayed all long the film where normal characters do normal things, but Chithan alone does what one does not expect him to do. The story is basically how this character, a stray, gets domesticated but turns to be the fittest, not for survival but, as a fittest man in love. Beauty is the romance part in the whole film where, when you eliminate the lady artists, its exactly a love between 2 men. The con part is when you jot the story : Hero arrives to a village - heroine sympathises with the hero - they get along well - Villain Kills Heroine - Hero takes revenge.
The problem arises when you look at a piece of work of such a calibre with just jargons of Film Making leading to making sweeping statements.
There are several levels of acting technics, 2 major being : exaggeration and being natural. Without giving you the names of any artists : Exaggeration is the most prominently used technic. The natural talent of replicating oneself to the character and its manerism is something adorable to see when performed by certain artists. But they do go overboard. Being natural is quite difficult too, as you are not the same as the character but the demand is to be. Its like asking you to scold at yourself before the mirror. Its also a Natural Talent, where few artists without any effort convince you that they are what they are playing.
Now comes the interesting part - Being the character. It needs an immense talent, both as natural and as an extended gift, to gauge the character and reciprocate it. It cannot be just coined as a dedication, then any artist with a passion should do that. The depth - how far you can reach your leg in the dark pit without falling down ? - where you have to go and search this unknown person (character) inside you. Bringing him out is altogether a different story. A small deviation can cause an immense impact over the reading. Controlling and giving it in the same meter from start to end is something unimaginable. If its just one scene or two, it can be adjusted but all the closeups at regualr intervals, which stays on you for a while, is not an easy task. What increases the challenge are the 3 basic nature of the character Chithan - Stray, domestic & monster. These 3 nature takes its sweet time to be exposed, meaning, the artist should stay in a particular state for a long while, and then give a glimpse of change so that the audience can translate it. Over doing it (exaggeration) will end up disastrous and underplaying it will cut the impact.
Vikram is Chithan. Watch Pithamagan (again), and any one aspect illustrated above strikes you while watching Chithan, then Vikram is the winner.
Vikram IMHO is the kind of an actor whose acting skills are better handled by someone like the late Balu Mahendra, or, pehaps in some future film, by Kamal !
Vikram gives what the director wants - I find his performances in Shankar's films over-the-top - not that he cannot do understated roles, but its just that directors like Bala and Shankar demand and cater to his over-the-top performances.
someone here said 'maybe Kamal might have done what Vikram did' - nalla joke - the kind of roles Vikram has done, Kamal can do in between yawns !
no comparison at all - nadigar thilagam and Kamal are in leagues of their own.
Feel Vikram hasnt been challenged enough by roles where the character grows during the film or is multilayered.
The one character that comes to mind in that regard is Samurai, although a commercial movie , had some scope in that regard.
But his performance didnt really standout there.
The truly great ones give the feeling they are going through stuff internally much more than what meets the audience's eyes in the physical acting.
He is capable of a being subtler though, he has done a few malayalam movies where he hasnt been so loud. So he can be subtle and loud.
He is great at working with certain material,a wonderful showman. He is inspirational in the way he devotes himself to his craft.
But an acting masterclass is more than just effort .
.
விக்ரம் போன்ற நடிகர்களை சரியாக பயன்படுத்த தெரியாமல் தவிக்கும் தமிழ்த் திரையுலகம்! குறைந்த காலத்தில் படத்தை முடிக்காமல் ராவணன், ஐ இரண்டு படங்களுக்குமே நேரவிரயத்தில் மாட்டிக் கொள்கிறார். வயதும் ஆகிக் கொண்டெ போகிறது. சேது என்ற நிலையை அடைவதற்கு முன் விக்ரம் செல்லாத எல்லைகள் கிடையாது. காதலன், மின்சாரக் கனவில் பிரபுதேவாவுக்கு குரல் கொடுத்திருப்பார். அப்பப்பா!
:thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by OnMyWay
Vikram is great actor, who can mold to what ever character the director prefer, he got great ability to observe things..Also Sharkar is.
If i am correct Shankar and Vikram are virgo, both make a great pair. Wish vikram a great success, all for this true dedication.
caught up with HULK climax in TV, think I climax would be something similar to it. sure Shankar will have his own creativity. Wish to see him directing a hollywood movie. when his close buddy ARR can, sure Shankar can make his step towards hollywood.
Omitting "multilayered", as I am scared of this word/term, most of characters Vikram played do grow all along the film giving a multi flavoured experience for the audience. The problem of this discussion that we are heading nowhere, is basically because the people occupying the least share in the pie chart are coming out with multiple exemples and resuming an entire carrier in just under 250 characters. We have to pinpoint one at a time and go on to feed the argument rather than including a bunch of movies disliked in the same line.Quote:
Originally Posted by OnMyWay
Anyway, lets take the under rated movie Bheema, Bheema alone it is.
Bheema is a free lance rowdy geting his inspiration from a classic goon since childhood. The character elevates with happiness when he gets acquainted with the goon (apply Maslow's hierarchy of needs, if necessary). It gets deeper when he becomes the only savior of his (god) father, until he is exposed to another parallely existing form, the necessity. Here the rugged character shows signs of clamness and a visionless Bhemma starts creating his future when the ultimate misunderstanding hits him hard. One side he is losing his dream fort, other side he is losing his castle which sheltered him. Caught inbetween are the numerous decision that he has to make where time is calcualted only in seconds. There is a dialogue in the film describing Bheema - "Possuku-nu Yosikira narathula Sutitu poite irrupna" - Even this dialogue evolues, giving it altother a different meaning towards the end, where Bheema gets trapped inside his own Best Quality which effects not only Bheema but his God Father too. Then the police encounter should speak for itself the state Bheema is in.
So you see the character does grow all the while in the film, and Vikram suits up with the right design for each changeover.
Now we can take anyother movie of your choice. But please don't bring in Maaja or Rajapattai or Kandasamy just for the sake of it. Its not that there isn't anyting to talk about them, but I consider these films don't merit a discussion, atleast I am not giving my time.
Again people telling ai releasing for deepavali....ithanala kaththiku yenna loss iruka pogathu ..producer sollitar intha padam
Budget yen kathu nondra kuchuku samam nu....vijay and arm inneram salary vangi invest pannitrupanga....venumna collection divide aagi matra nadigar rasigargaluku sandai poda vasathiya irukalam ...kandipa vijay fans kaththi ya than 2 or 3 times parpanga...it impacts ai collection for sure...since its a huge budget and producer in some sort of financial trouble ai Ku than intha clash bathagama irukum nu nenaikiran
Quote:
Originally Posted by mappi
Thanks for the response.
Well from whatever little I know , modern acting pretty much has two parts to it.
Getting all the external mannerisms of a character right; getting into inner psyche of the character and being it on screen.
Vikram gets 1 right , he takes the effort to do it. I just do not feel he does part two well enough . Its no shame though.
There was an interview where Al Pacino says he only sometimes gets into that space.
When people do get both right ,acting becomes a bit magical, where even fully knowing what the character to be ,one would still surprised what the actor does with it.
Without it it becomes a thorough,professional performance , but it just doesnt standout so much.
I am not arguing Vikram didnt do his homework and gets the characters mannerisms or emotions .
Its about the aah moments and how the actor can hold the camera . We should know more about the character when we see the actor plays it.
There is no sense of mystery/magic to what he does.Vikram seems to play it as one might expect it and he does it well.
Great acting is more than "If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...it's a duck,"
Any of his movies including the above mentioned have professional performances. They just dont make the average viewer feel he knew more about the character by watching him act than just by reading a script and interpreting it himself.
It could be a great role that triggers that next step. Maybe if he plays someone like Hannibal Lecter where he is told 'don't move. Scare people by being still.'
Would get him to dig deeper if he has it.
You’re welcome.
So as we see now, the glass is half filled - 'Vikram gets 1 right' - very glad.
I am with you until the part "There is no sense of mystery/magic to what he does", which is supposed to be the empty space in the glass, for the moment.
Lets reverse the psyche part and see :
Assuming Vikram gets that right too, how about looking into the psyche of the audience. Not all characters reach each audience the same way. A grand exemple can be found in this forum itself, where Actor 'A' fans can't even accept the better performence of their rival Actor 'B'. If you come out of this circle, then you see a clear picture of an artist trying to convey something. But still, the people around don't find any similarity in their judgement towards the character that was displayed before them. One finds it extraodinary, the other finds it faulty. So a filmy character, approaches a person how much he welcomes it.
Blaming the Artist alone is not correct is what my point is. Imagine, a guy is busy tweeting while watching the film just to achive his "First on the net" medal by giving regular updates about the film. You should have got an idea how much concentration he has put and what really is running inside him while watching the movie. Then he reviews the movie, calls himself a Critic (actually reviewer are not critics, thats entirely a different subject), and people start to quarrel amoung themselves with the half baked story he publishes, none even take a while to see the real picture. Its going as a chain reaction. He obviously did not cooperate with the artists, where the artist is left at the receiving end, his misplace, which inverts the story altogether.
As you have brought in the right matter, I could see the point you wish to make. A valid one. A performence of an artist could be weighed with certain other aspects too - right from makeup, lighting, costume, attitude of the camera, etc., and most importantly the musical piece that accompanies him. All these combined together acts as a motivation for both the artist and the audience. If any single one is missing, the artist communication gets interrupted and sometimes even misses the whole impact. A small exemple that weighs a lot is : Techinically, when a film maker calls for a close up that dures more than 5 seconds, will distract the audience. 5 seconds could become eternal, its a proven in communications. The eyes have that power which even changes its color according to the signal sent and received. So a film maker can jam this Psyche work practised by the artists. This is where the critics come in and give the deserved ones their respective credits. This breif note is to convey that Vikram alone is not to be blamed.
And also, I accept that not everytime an artist could nail it, they are also humans afterall. Vikram is one amoung the few who minimises the faults and with the cooperation of 'the' audience, excels is rendering what is asked for.
And thanks for sharing the Al Pacino titbit, could I have more information about this interview please, I would like to watch it.
Good oneQuote:
Originally Posted by OnMyWay
Quote:
Originally Posted by mappi
I couldnt find the whole interview online but he speaks about it in many of his interactions.
This particular snippet I could find at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3IGmK9HJ5Q .
If you could, try to see his full episode on 'Inside the actors studio' ,its very good. I think its from 2006 or so.
And I strongly feel the greatest artists work irrespective of applause,the greatest in anything for that matter.
They just love the process of acting,being someone else . Mohanlal, Mamoooty,Hoffman,Anthony Hopkins anyone of their youtube interviews has their views in this regard.
I agree that camera,music,co-actors ,etc add value to a performance.
But sometimes the craft can just stands out and rises above the material,just cant be missed.
If u see some of the audition tapes some performance just stand out for eg.
Its just that I personally feel that extra intelligence ,perceptive ability is lacking in Vikram.
I have heard Vikram stays in character for his roles ,etc. Its mostly his interpretation that lacks.
To quote a counter example, there is is formulaic malayalam movie called RavanaPrabhu starring Mohanlal.
Absolutely run of the mill stuff with above average writing but there are many scenes where the older Mohanlal character just stands out .
One could feel the weight of failure and his dignified acceptance of destiny in his potrayal.
I am glad you feel that Vikram made you feel he performs at those levels. I havent seen one.
I have seen may thorough, professional performances from Vikram for sure.
I am interested to know what you might consider his best work . I would like to watch it .
Till then I guess we can agree to disagree. Anyways my opinion is just as subjective as anyone else's and just as irrelevant in the larger scheme of things.
Firstly, I have got to appreciate Mappi and OnMyWay for the wonderful posts. Here is my two cents on the discussion.
Acting in general can be seperated into two- Presentation and Representation. The Representational actor deliberately chooses to imitate or illustrate the character’s behavior while the Presentational actor attempts this through a use of himself, through an understanding of himself and consequently an understanding of the character he is portraying. The Representational actor finds a form based on an objective result for the character, which he then carefully watches as he executes it while This has been very vivdly explained in Uta Hagen's book- Respect for Acting. Each one has its own clear cut USPs. It is clearly the representational acting that makes the audience sit up, take notice, hoot and clap.The presentational acting is more more mellow in comparison to the former but clearly infuses the much needed subtlety, restraint to the performance.
Traditionally,TFI's comprised more of Representational performances. Sivaji's majestic performance onscreen are major examples. But even in those times of theatrics, there have been performances that have infused the much needed subtlety- a Ranga Rao performace is a good example be it any role. In modern times however, this whole concept has been miscontrued, butchered and overused and that speaks of the quality of acting that's present onscreen.
Of all actors today, very few have balanced both aspects well. Sivaji and Kamal come to mind as actors who had the mastery of both. Muthal Mariyathai is a good example of his presentational acting skills. Kamal's experiences in Malayalam cinema definitely brought the much needed subtleties to his acting, the ironing out of the rough edges from his teenage theatre experience.
Vikram is probably the only actor in Tamil Cinema nowadays to have come close to sharing the stage with the above two interms of talent, the effort and dedication put into each role. He's pulled off highly representational ones onscreen as seen in Sethu, Anniyan, Pithamagan and probably in I but is yet to shine in one that brings in the presentational aspect. Probably that's the reason as to why he comes across as a difficult actor to watch and appreciate. You know he is acting his heart out, tooth and nail but its sometimes hard to ignore the fact that the acting is just skin deep and the much needed soul is missing. Here is where the presentational skills of an actor come to the fore and this is why no one, not even an actor of Vikram's caliber and dediction can match the above two that I have mentioned. Conversely If we were to discuss the modern definition of acting which is 'Living truthfully under imaginary circumstances' as popularised by Sanford Meisner, I doubt if any of Vikram's performances had hit the bulls eye. They've been entertaining for sure, but once the dust has settled you only see an actor trying to live out the character when not living it actually.
King back on top..chinna pasagala..yaar kitte :lol2:
https://twitter.com/SonyMusicSouth/s...66845886930944
:huh: he was not there only for couple of hours on 18th.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahen
Arr is best no doubt and a celebrated music composer across india..so not a big deal for him to stay top in I tunes...wat anirudh achieved in this short span is quite remarkable and laudable to be top even for some hours....intha chinna pasangala dialogue yellam chumma manasae thethikathan....oru vela appadi iruntha antha chinna payana ivalo periya padathuku pada ARR kuptrukamattar
manasa thethikka ithala onnum illa praboo sir,athuthane unnmai..irunthalum aniruth engga thalaivaru-ikku chella payyan vera..ellam namma payathan nalla valarathume.
Anand sir naan yenna solla varana anirudh ha ARR kuda compare panradhu seri illa...anirudh succeeded in his own way ...bang bang ,happy new year albums thandi ARR Ku appuram namba alu oruthar irukarthu kandipa periya vishayam than
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arvind Srinivasan
Thanks for the post. And special thanks for bringing Ranga Rao's name into the discussion. total respect to the man.
nothing against anirudh..VIP no 1 iruntha kuda im ok because there were some good songs in it..but Kathi was bad..the album became no 1 because of Vijay..DSP music potta kuda it would have been no 1..so i couldnt digest the fact KAthi was above I for a few days..Quote:
Originally Posted by praboo
few days bro...Quote:
Originally Posted by Siv.S
bad ha...right vidunga...Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahen
Neenga nalla illainu ninaikirathu unka thani padda vishayam... we get that point. Athukaka entha vithathilum thaguthi or interest illamal oru padam first-a vara mudiyathu.. :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by Mahen