movie- nayagan
album - idhaya kovil
Printable View
movie- nayagan
album - idhaya kovil
ipdi oru panchayathu nadandhukittirukkA?
Movies - Mouna Raagam (Biased opinion - one of the earliest movies I had a fascination for. Manohar was everything an introverted, timid schoolboy wished to be, and Divya - confession mode - was everything a teenager wished for in a girlfriend. The one film which made me a life-long fan of Revathy, a state which refuses to go away despite some incontrovertible evidence that she *may not* be all that that schoolboy thought she was - like, the best freaking actress ever in the history of cinema, for instance :-).
Subsequent viewings have been enriched by ability to 'receive' Mr. Mottai's contribution in BGM. One of the best ever for Raja in terms of BGM.
)
Album - Very difficult. Is it Geetanjali? Mouna Raagam? Idhaya Kovil? Thalapathy?.....(*after a brief fight and win against Raja bias*) Dil Se?
Even pagal nilavu stakes claim. enna seyya. Case adjourned :-)
Note - the one absentee in the albums' list above might be the dark horse.
ARR vs IR in a mani movie
similar situation and different scores.
mani movie musicnala post pandren.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i9VQ0Aa_c6U
Lovely editing by Yowan. What stands out to me is how Maniratnam chooses to depict the intimacy between his characters, even within the boundary conditions imposed by the Indian Censor Board.
Roja
The phrase 'a long cold winter' has come to signify, if anything, a lack of passion. But turning the tables on the analogy can make just as much sense. The honeymoon period of a marriage might well be akin to the cover of snow. Passion, just as ice, has this ephemeral tendency to melt away. If what remains after it has melted away is fertile land then you've got it made. Otherwise you are in for a rocky road ahead.
Mani does just this - use the cold to signify heat. This trip to Kashmir is ROjA's first unbiased time alone with her man. Much like the solid precipitation and new age background music, it is new to her. And in the larger sense much like the expansive nature of what lies before her eyes, it seems like her future is limitless and full of hope. The passion while good, at that time, only seems like it can get better. That entire song signifies hope - a hope for a life that will become worth fighting for in the near future.
Mouna RAgam
The Taj Mahal has been represented countless times in Indian film, often as a symbol of love. But these foolishly romantic notions cloud another very important feeling it symbolizes - loss.
Loss is also the feeling Divya allows herself to be defined by. She is different from Roja in that she isn't led to what she sees. She walks up to it independent of Chandrakumar. What does this building signify to someone who has lost but must live on? Her past? Or her future? The somber choral background may even be alluding to this confusion. Then follows the analogy from before - the cold becoming a gateway to heat.The questionable dance moves apart, what becomes immediately obvious is the need for Divya to heal. The wounds of the past will only be mollified by the passion in her future.
compli :clap: .
Pudhu vellai mazhai - something never seen, never heard before, swerving away from anything that existed.
to me, the closest they sounded similar in a mani movie was this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5mkv...eature=related
Ay hairathe from Guru
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ujET...eature=related
Nee oru kaadhal sangeetham from Nayagan
matter ennanaa, mani just rehashes his scenes..Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivasaayi
Compli :thumbsup:
[/quote]Quote:
The questionable dance moves apart
:lol: yeah, sick!
Adhellam vidunga...
Can we say unanimously(?)... THIRUDA THIRUDA is the mokkiest of Mani's films in tamizh...
innum nan andha padam parthadhillai... nEthu kadaisi oru 20 mins parthEn... ayyoo samee.. thangalai...
oru visayam parkka nalla irundhadhu.. 2 playback singers together in a scene (SPB & malaysiya vasudevan)
I will watch Thiruda Thiruda anyday when aalaipayuthe or kannathil muthamitaal are given as other options.Quote:
Originally Posted by HonestRaj
TT is :thumbsup:
music wise, probably the best of any MR film :2thumbsup:
ARR-Maniratnam is a ceaseless downpour until Guru happened. cant really pick a best out of these gems. i dont know where to place Roja - i cant think of a life if Roja hadnt happened :PQuote:
Originally Posted by NOV
mokkiest Mani film has to be idhaya kovil. closely followed by idhayathai thirudaadhe. i heard mani was completely hand-tied while shooting idhaya kovil. ironically, thats the only koundar-mani movie we will ever have. Idhayathai thirudaadhe - ive never seen mani getting stuck at a point without knowing how to move forward. shocking
Maddy, pagal nilavu had probably the worst gounder track ever so idhayakovil has company as a mani-kounder movie.
As I never tire of quoting "aaLukku oru vettu vettiyAl gningaL adayALam theriyAmal pOvum" :lol:
Actually Mani did not write IK's script so he is pardonable on that account. Mokkaiest mani movie IMO is pagal nilavu closely followed by thirudA thirudA. I thought Dil Se was the mokkaiest until I revisited it last year.
Idhayaththai thirudaadhE is my most favorite Mani-Romaans film. To me its the most quintenssential Mani film - has all the ingridients.
சிறந்த படைப்பு என்று தனியாக குறிப்பிடமுடியாததால்
சிறந்த காட்சி:
க.முத்தமிட்டால் : சிறுமி அமுதா (கீர்த்தனா) தன்னைப் பெற்ற அம்மாவிடம் (னந்திதா தாஸ்) கேள்விகளை கேட்டு பதில் வாங்குவது.
சிறந்த இசைப் பாடல்கள் தொகுப்பு:
இருவர் : நறுமுகையே நறுமுகையே, பூ கொடியின் புன்னகை, கண்ணைக் கட்டி கொள்ளாதே, ஆயிரத்தில் நான் ஒருவன், உன்னோடு நானிருந்த, உடல் மண்ணுக்கு
தனது படத்தில் வரும் காட்சிகளின் தரத்தைப் போல, பாடல் வரிகளும் தரமானதாக இருக்கவேண்டும் என்ற சிரத்தை இருக்கிறதே அந்த ஒரு காரணத்திற்காகவே, மணிரத்னத்தை மற்ற சக படைப்பாளிகளுக்கு மத்தியில் உச்சத்தில் வைக்கிறேன்.
எடிட்டிங், இசை, வசனம், ஒலிப்பதிவு, ஒளிப்பதிவு, பாடலுக்கான கவிதை என எல்லா கலைகளுக்கான கலைஞர்களையும் மக்களிடம் முன்னெடுத்து சென்று விழிப்புணர்வை ஏற்படுத்தியவர். அந்த விதத்தில், மணிரத்னம் ஒரு ஆலமரம். அவரிடத்தில் பணியாற்றும் சிறு விழுதுக்குக் கூட அதற்கான கௌரவத்தையும் வெகுமதியையும் வாங்கிகொடுக்கும் வெளியை ஏற்படுத்திக் கொடுக்கும் சிறந்த படைப்பாளி.
தமிழ் சினிமா இல்லையில்லை.. இந்திய சினிமாவின் அகராதியிலேயே "மாற்றம்" என்றால் அதற்கான அருஞ்சொற்பொருள் மனிரத்னமாகவே இருக்கும்.
//Indian Prime Minister while giving away "Indian of the year award" to ARRahman on CNN-IBN stage, recited lyrics from Dil se song - sitaro se aage jahan bi hain.
goosebumps*infinity since this is a song not know to many people. Mr. Prime minister should be a keen follower of Rahman and Mani for sure... A great honour for thalaivar and again we, fans feel proud abt it :D //
:)Quote:
Originally Posted by MADDY
Indian of the year winning over all other winners... nethiyadi!
:clap:
Rahman must appoint someone on a full time basis just to collect rewardu... :razz:
:lol: You mean awardsu?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bala (Karthik)
rendum onnuthanunga... kozhappureengaleQuote:
Originally Posted by groucho070
Old interview of Mani Ratnam. A good read
His recent honest endeavour, "Kannathil Muthamittal", has not received the kind of response it deserves. But Mani Ratnam takes it in his stride, as he reveals in this unusual interview with GOWRI RAMNARAYAN, wherein he answers queries from celebrities in the film world.
MANI RATNAM has no film school training. But he is acclaimed for his individual style, social awareness and original treatment of themes from the explosive ("Bombay", "Dalapati") to the tender ("Alaipayudhey"). He brought Western sophistication and tempo to deal with essentially Indian themes. He is one of the few mainstream filmmakers who has centrestaged the child ("Anjali", "Kannathil Mutthamittal"). Critics fault him for commercialising serious issues in the popular mould, but cannot deny that he has brought national recognition to Tamil cinema.
The Hindu: What is your reaction to the charge that in your attempt to be visually savvy, you sacrifice the story and replace smooth narration with episodic structure?
To make a film visually interesting is not a sin! That's what everybody should be doing. I can't be blamed if others don't use the visual in the same way! The idea is not to make the visual dominant, but to craft a suitable visual form for your story. Look at how this makes a ``Nayakan'' different from an ``Agni Nakshatram''. A senior director once said that Bharatiraja's ``16 Vayadhinilae'' scored because it was made in colour. As if colour alone was responsible for the total impact! The charge you mention is just as ridiculous. I feel that in Tamil cinema there's a wrong kind of emphasis on the story. To me the story is merely a vehicle for the theme it underlines, along with many other elements, an excuse to make what you want to make. The less story you have the better. Some themes even demand a documentary style of piling incident upon incident. Pieces of life put together can become lyrical. In ``Udhiri Pookkal'' the scattered images made fantastic poetry...
Shyam Benegal: You were accomplished in cinematic grammar from the start. How did you get the Tamil audiences (habituated to theatricality, histrionics and rhetoric) to transcend conventional ways of looking at cinema?
The credit for weaning the audience away from theatricality goes to predecessors like Sridhar, K. Balachander, Bharatiraja and Mahendran. Balu Mahendra broke new ground with his sense of composition, movement, balance and aesthetics. To see ``Mullum Malarum'' (shot by him) was to realise how zooms can be caressing, how vital composition and lensing can be, how shooting 35mm with a slightly reduced form can give the film a wide screen impact. I remember one sequence in Balachander's ``Apoorva Ragangal''. The shadow of the woman upstairs drying her hair falls across the path of the rebellious young man sneaking out of the house. It is enough to stop him. This scene could have been dramatic, with lot of dialogue. Instead you get a silent visual. Such moments have gone unnoticed because they have been part of other things.
Also, parallel cinema's minute attention to authenticity and detailing — in visual, sound, cinematography, art, costume, lighting, character, realistic performance — have had a tremendous impact on mainstream cinema. When I first made a period film I knew there was a ``Bhumika'' before me, a benchmark.
K. Balachander: In present day mainstream productions music has taken away the credibility of cinema and the genuineness of the medium. Is music an inevitable evil in Indian cinema? Who is responsible for the extreme use and abuse of music?
In Indian cinema the music comes from the same oral tradition which inspires all our arts. It may seem forced to a Westerner but we have all grown up with it. I don't think we are using or misusing music more than we have done before. I decided that I'd not be ashamed of song sequences but use them to my advantage. I do them to entertain myself as much as the audience. You have to build these sequences into your screenplay, and at a point where it will give you the pause you want, lift a moment or emotion, provide a link or a leap. It's a licence to transcend dramatic logic, use abstraction. Don't you do that in literature? If using songs makes it easier for people to grasp what I'm doing I don't mind using that language. Think of it as a compromise — or as a method of communicating.
Sreekar Prasad: When you first came on the scene what you produced was so new that it was really experimental cinema, which was also commercially successful. But now are you taking enough risks to be creative, or do you play it safe? What are your current goals — I mean, what next Mr. Mani Ratnam?
(Laughs) At first all you want is to make a film. You have something to say. If it happens to be something new and different, fine. But going to Cannes is not my goal. Commercial success is not a bad word! If I'm dealing with a serious issue I must do it in a language that is understood by the people around me. What I'd like to do — whether I'll achieve it or not I don't know — is to communicate and still retain sensitivity. Fantastic films are being made in the world. You get inspired and say the limit is THERE! Take two steps in that direction and you are happy. But you want to do that taking the people along with you.
``Iruvar'' was really about idealism when you are young and fresh, you have nothing, and nothing to lose; you get corrupted as you become successful. At some point you switch off and ask, what happened to my idealism? You move on but you have to constantly look back to see where you want to go. Is this the kind of film I want to do? I'm trying to grow. To be very honest with you the film I shot last was as tough to shoot as the first. Then I was struggling to find a way to bring the qualities I appreciated in the films I had seen into my work. I still struggle, I still don't know how to do it, I grope, I try to do it better.
I don't know whether my fear of failure is greater now. I want to ensure we have a chance to make better films. You try something different. It fails. That stops not only you but others too from attempting something different. So what you do has to be positive, push film-making in that direction. If you're making a slightly sensitive film it should bring in more sensitive cinema into the field. I shouldn't close the doors — to myself and to others!!
Vairamuthu: What is the role of the lyric in your film?
The lyric need not replicate the emotion or situation. I want it to be a lateral extension, a counterpoint to the visual and dialogue, or an abstract form of what the visual is saying, and vice versa.
Mammootty: In the present day climate of magnifying everything to reach the masses, do you feel you need not just technical excellence but technical terrorism? And can you make a film on violence without showing even a trace of violence?
(Laughing heartily) If you read a book and say the English is good, it doesn't say much about it. Technique is just one element in film-making, along with the screenplay, music, rhythm, symbolism and performance. If the film is interesting enough people forget the technique and watch it. The crucial thing is to create that magic. Avoiding violence is not my objective in making a film. Look at the newspaper or TV, you have violence everywhere, why shy away from it in cinema?
Buddhadeb Dasgupta: Indian cinema has given us great masters. Why did Tamil cinema have to wait so long to get a Mani Ratnam for national recognition? Also, isn't it time to do something more lasting, bring more sensitivity to your images?
National recognition has nothing to do with what we do here but with what people see. The fact that they were not open to seeing ``16 Vayadhinilae'' can't be held against the maker of the film.
It's just that ``Roja'' and ``Bombay'' dealt with issues closer to them ... got translated into Hindi. If I get anywhere near what Mahendran did in ``Udhiri Pookkal'' I'll be a happy man. Sensitive images...? I'm trying...all the time... Let me see if one day...
Adoor Gopalakrishnan: I expect a lot more from you. After all, you got the best performance from Mohanlal to date. What I miss in your films is the feel of something essentially Tamil. Why, when you start off with the real thing, do you get straitjacketed into the routine?
I'm trying to do something better while staying within mainstream cinema, between the two worlds. You ask me why I can't step out and do something different. Maybe I can. I don't know how well I can do it. Some day I'll try. (Reflectively) Coming to think of it I didn't know how well I could handle popular cinema when I started...(chuckling) I still don't know how well I'll do whatever I do next.
Bala: With ``Kannathil Mutthamittal'' for the first time you have made a sincere, honest film. How do you feel when it is rejected by the same masses, which applauded those films in which you had made compromises?
True, ``Kannathil Mutthamittal'' has the least amount of balancing. I thought its emotional track was enough for communication. That doesn't mean there's no honesty behind ``Bombay'' or ``Roja"! Nor do I think this is better cinema because there's less compromise here in your terms. I don't want to do something relevant to our times just to feel I have made good cinema. It's much more satisfying to share that emotion with the common man. If I have not done that very well this time or any other time then I should improve.
Sujata: How do you feel when some films are criticised just because you are Mani Ratnam, without acknowledging their true merits?
When I go to see Balachander's work I have expectations that I wont have with a newcomer. Audiences will have the same attitude when they I come to see my work now. I'm not saying that it is easy to take criticism. The ideal thing is to make your film and get away! But if the critic is knowledgeable and unprejudiced, then it's always an input. With emails and websites the number of critics has grown enormously. Everyone who sees the film can criticise it. You are a lot more accessible now, people can reach you and say you've made an excellent or a terrible film. You learn to cope with both.
Manisha Koirala: How do you work on your characters and their relationships? Where does the sensitivity come from?
You do it in stages, involving the writer, actor, director and editor. The idea of a story comes with a glimpse of the characters. There's more clarity when you write the dialogue. But a character takes shape only with a person performing at a certain space. Ilaiyaraja has the score perfectly conceived — it merely needs execution. Rahman has a sketch, he guides performers through it, and gets something extra from them. He treats everyone as an artiste. Creativity can be anywhere in that spectrum. I'm somewhere in between! Sensitivity? If it's not in the seed it can't be in the tree. It's based on your value system, background, the people around you, what moves you in life, literature, cinema... You pick things out of anywhere, unconsciously, it takes a certain form in a particular characterisation.
Karan Johar: I loved ``Dil Se'' immensely but do you think that the language was a deterrent to its commercial success? Would you attempt mainstream Hindi cinema again?
The mistake was in the script, not in the language. It was as easy or as difficult to make that film as any other film. If you don't know the language you trust the actors a bit more... which is probably all for the better. I will definitely make another film in Hindi if I have something, which I think will work well in that language.
Nalla intree :clap:
Nice answer to buddhadeb's ignorance.
Chappai questions from vm, garan jogar.
Good question from adoor and well answered too.
this article never bores u - very insightful of Maniratnam, the master's vision of filmmaking and peep into who his masters were really:
brilliant answer!Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemaster1982
infact it was this interview that made me watch a lot of BR films again......and look at his admiration for Mahendran :bow: .......Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemaster1982
apram enna paa - panjayathhu over.....Adoor-e sollittaaru......Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemaster1982
i dont know if it was put across by Hindu improperly or Bala himself told thisQuote:
Originally Posted by littlemaster1982
nethhi adi :clap:Quote:
Originally Posted by littlemaster1982
Nice to re-read. Thanks LM.
Agni Natchathram paththi innum konjam pEsirukkalaam.
Was watching some parts of Yuva yesterday. It is my humble submission that AE was better. The performances are far better.
Devgn (the artist formerly known as Devgan) was the definition of bland -with cool aspirations. Surya edhirpALargaL idhai oru thadvai paathuttu uNdiyalai kudunga.
Enough and more has been written about 'Lallan'. It's no great shakes. IMO Madhavan was more impressive.
Two scenes:
Trilok asks his sister to stand in the election
Minister meets Michael scene.
Michael and co. threaten Lallan's brother
"infininitely dense matter" scene
It was as if a good scenes from an original had been remade by a lesser director. Edgy acting, timing miss, quite unimpressive.
Most important grouse was that Om Puri was not a patch on BR.
"naan dhaan selvanaayahem...amaicharu" :clap:
i love pasta with mushroom sauce, do you? :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
hmm, need to revisit yaa.......Yuva dialogues were written by Kashyapji and he is no less to Sujatha IMO.........but i do understand what you are hinting at - i felt the same after watching Saathiya......Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
PR, naan erkanave solliyirukken, AE is better than Yuva-nu. You are right on all counts there, including one on Surya. I agree Surya is waaaaayyyy better than whatsisname.
Rakesh, here's wishing you a much much better 2010 :cheer:
Thanks, NOV. Same to you. Athan, angga wish panniyache :D Thanks anyway.
indha criteria-la paatha, all tamil actors including jai akash are better than all indhi actors including Irfan Khan.....im sure there is a urge to see "tamil acting" in indhi actors which leaves you disappointed.....im not saying, indhi actors are by default good or that is the right way to acting but i just feel we tend to read them with our own criterias....Quote:
Originally Posted by groucho070
Enna maddy surya in ae better than devaganam in yuva - why does that warrant a sei aakasu level reaction?
Actually, in the same movie*n the hindi actors playing the other 2 lead male roles were better than the tamil counterparts - I am sure grouch will agree with this;-) so no need for extreme reaction ;-)
Yeah, same film, same script, same meesic, same director, same....you get the pix, but different actors. Sure, it warrants comparison. But at the same time, intha Gauvaram dialak mindla vanthuduthu:
Kannan: Ungga kooda enna compare panaatheel.
Rajinikanth: Yenda badava, en kooda compete panna porel, compare panna kudathoo? :?
adhu ennadhu adhu tamil-acting/hindi-acting. :confused2:Quote:
Originally Posted by MADDY
Assamese-nA eppidi irukkum ?
I deny the existence of any such classification. Only 'good' and 'bad' exist. And this is the same movie !
namakku pachchai paavam-naalum hara paap-naalum unseletted unseletted dhaan.
Kashyap dialogues worked only here and there. The scene where Lallan's brother feels threatened was attempted humour ("there's nothing in the world that can't be talked out","sit here, we will talk it out' etc.). Made a caricature of that guy for a laugh. Made me realize how 'real' the scene was in Tamil. He gets up from his meal very angry and is cowered by the crowd and even his 'begging' is subtle (there are women and children in this house).
Btw I even like Siddharth-Trisha better than Kapoor-Oberoi
The major difference is Om Puri again. Seemed all about pronouncing "poshchim bongal" and very little about the essence of sliminess.
BR: Look I am very much proud of you :lol: and his look at Surya saying "irundhu..?" :clap:
It's like the essence of that scene was totally missed.
P_R, Deva gaNam vs Suryar; Oberoi versus Iyer(dhAnE?), Kari vs Tiri - idhellAm ogay.
Mugerjee versus sasmin comparison-ai studious-A avoid pandrInga(whenever you discuss Yuva)?
(I think I know the answer, still unga vAyAla sollidunga :lol:)
:lol:Quote:
Originally Posted by Plum
Guys,
This is not a remake. Pain on the $$$ to shoot both the films parallelly for any film maker. It gives me heart attack if I think about it Thank God he managed. MR has his merits and demerits in shooting tamil and hindi films in casting, extracting performances, technicians etc....and not to blame hindi associates. If you guys want to prove that Surya is a better actor switch forward to Perazhagan. Thats a remake!
how abt "dramatic" and "non-dramatic" , im somehow convinced that we tend to prefer "dramatic" more.......thats why i felt maybe by bland u meant "non-dramatic".....i have to revisit Yuva to really see how Ajay Devgan was.......Quote:
Originally Posted by P_R
i dont think i would agree to much of "best actors" being disscused here....
Yeah, I also felt Madhavan was "dramatic" while Apisek Pachan was "non-dramatic", and therefore, better, in AE/Yuva ;-)
(JK, Maddy.)
enakku sathyama YUva nyabagam illa.......i watched it during release and thats it :D .........but why being "bland" is not good-nnu dhaan ketten..... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Plum
Lets forget the terminology - devagaNam was poor in Yuva. "Surya was better than DevagaNam in that role" is an understatement multiple times over. It is not a compliment at all, and doesnt capture Surya's performance half-adequately.
Similarly with Puri vs Chinnasamy.
Every other possible 'acting' comparison in the hindi vs tamil versions of the movie can be considered a contest, at the least.