Am not sure if this is a proper yardstick at all. But when barathiraja sets out to 'say' something he becomes less of what I like him for.Quote:
Originally Posted by kannannn
For instance in NizhalgaL. The role played by RajashEkar was really memorable but the dialgues spoken (for instance when his friends desert him) let down the whole thing. Atleast with MR you know that he is trying to be clever with the lines. With BR it is bad because he earnestly means those lines.
I won't even talk about NizalgaL Ravi's romantic (!) sequences. MR would have definitely written and exectuted the scenes much much better. Am too pained to dwell on the tubby angels accompanying Chandrashekar in madai thiranthu. To borrow your expression, IR was the saving grace of NizhalgaL.
Ironic as it is, BR the groundbreaker can't resist a cliche. PudumaippeN is my least favourite film (wait, that's gaptun's thamizhchelvan).VEdam Pudhidhu is appealing not just because he had something to say , but because he said it well. After that all movies had tumbling brass pots.
BR is at his finest when he is out to tell a story. Melodrama notwithstanding Kizakku CheemaiyilE is bang of target in terms of locale. And it's not just because it was his neck of the woods. Very few movies have brought out Madras kuppams like En uyir ThOzhan. But I hate it when the yellow letters with his voice-over ends the film (with his anbudan signature). What kind of understanding of film is that ? It worked once in 16 VayathinilE and En uyir thozan (vidai thanthAl vidiyumA, vidindhAl vidai varumA) but it has ruined many (nizalgaL, vedam puthithu etc)
MR has never made a downright terrible film. Yes he has gone about explaining stuff, not trusting the viewer to make sense of the subtleties, dumb dialogues. But the disappointment has always been that the movie could have been much better or that his climaxes are cop-outs (though more variety than the invariably deathly climaxes of BR).
But BR has messed up more movies (on a per good movie basis) than MR has. He has made too many unbearably ordinary films with no 'marks' whatseover.If you imply 'mark' as a continuous pattern running all through all the works I don't quite agree such a thing is necessary at all.
MR's mark, as I see it, has been to push the cart further from where BR brought, by a greater emphasis to visual storytelling. His lasting contribution would be raising the bar on the content we see on screen. I felt in the middle of the riot in Bombay (though by the climax I also wished I had a cudgel) , I felt soaking wet watching andhi mazhai mEgam, could feel the sparks fly when the camera circumambulates the meeting between SuryA-DEvA and the collector.
Well let me rephrase. With the kind of emphasis that's been given to MR's 'crisp' dialogues, it is made to look as if all the characters in all his films speak that way. That is not true. Again I'd bring up the example of alaipAyuthE. The scene where Pyramid Natarajan visits Shalini's house is extremely well written. Usually Tamil cinema formula where the rich baddie is all overt about his prejudices or is overflowing with the milk pf human kindness. MR portrayed him (as well his proudly insecure opposite number) extremely well as the friction develops when the conversation proceeds. Such things are forgotten and MR is always remembered for "Yen ?" "DevA !". That is unfortunate.Quote:
Originally Posted by kannannn
thAkkinEnA ? :roll: I thought I had just painstakingly defended Iruvar, which was no mean achievement (I mean the movie not my defence :P)Quote:
Originally Posted by MADDY
