UlagaNayagan KAMALHAASAN in ||"UthamaVillan"|| Directed by Ramesh Aravind

[nickraman]

Doctor was the best. I have never encountered such honest fans like him before. Critical at the same time, provided insight. I humbly wish that Dr. returns to the hub. Gave us lots of behind the scene info too.

[Srimannarayanan]

Doctor was the best. I have never encountered such honest fans like him before. Critical at the same time, provided insight. I humbly wish that Dr. returns to the hub. Gave us lots of behind the scene info too.

Exactly . I never seen such an honest fan and Best Critic of KH.

[kumarsr]

That is the genius of Kamalahassan - in the likes of Kannadhasan, he draws a parallel between his life and the Hiranyakasipu episode.

என் உதிரத்தின் விதை - The seed of my blood
என் உயிருதிர்த்த சதை - The flesh of my flesh
வேறொருவனை பகவன் என பொறுத்திடுவேனா - How will I tolerate you calling another your lord

As for Nasser character, he is just another facet of Manoranjan - remember, he is both Uttaman and Villain!
A reflection of Manoranjan who is dying but wants to leave behind his immortality.

May be, but another interpretation would be that Nasser is the straight villain in Uttama Villain while Mano/Uattaman are the Uttamans. Manoranjan is certainly not the villain both at the start of the movie nor in the end. Mano drinks, has extramarital affairs, may have sold out by doing commercial films and not the ones with Margadarisi, etc. But these are all not crimes. Even with Yamini and her child, they show that he is not irresponsible.

I am not sure Nasser can be taken as a reflection of Mano. Nasser wants physical immortality while Uttaman/Mano want to achieve that through their Art - a big difference.

[Arvind Srinivasan]

^I beg to differ slightly. Mutharasan is a sort of a symbol to the the standards of tamil cinema today, its over indulgence in bringing out films that look for commercial viability over artistry. Mutharasan's ascension to the throne is through short cuts, making compromises. He hardly has political acumen, qualifications for a good ruler but still makes it through by killing the king. He to a good degree is always surrounded by the crassness of his subjects- the sycophancy and the blaring trumpets and drums just like Manoranjan who's both a victim and a proponent of mediocre film making . The biggest giveaway however is the tiger getting curd rice. Remember Kamal describing Sivaji saying 'Pulikku thayir Saadham koduthu keduthutom" ? Muthurasan (Manoranjan) is the tiger that got used to the thayir saadham, lying in the dumps of his mediocrity and absolutely ignorant of what it requires to be a king . He's a ear short literally and figuratively.

[irir123]

The Uthaman character feels like a cross between the 'thenali' and Raja (mechanic character from Aboorva Sagodharargal) characters - and further a nod to the Kikuchiyo character in Kurosawa's 'Seven Samurai' -

[avavh3]

very honest interview by RA.

http://www.behindwoods.com/tamil-act...aghuraman.html

[cinema]

@cinemarasigan -There r some ppl who didn't have respect from the beginning..we all know about RC and he will be respected by us...he is kamalhaasan best critic as well we all know..
as I said earlier padam release aanathukku apram vanthu selective comments padichi araiyum kuraiyuma purinjikuravanga kitta pesi prayajonam illai..

Another thing is, without even watching the movie, provoking people based on some silly reviews and calling them as neutral. Bringing box office results when no one is interested about in this thread because box office is the only place where Kamal can lose to other actors. IMO kolai seyyuravana vida kolai seyya thoonduravanukku thaan dhandanai adhigam kidaikkanum but in the hub that is not the case. I am just wondering why people hate Kamal so much, here are the reasons.
He is the only actor who speaks proper Tamil and top of it he tries to promote the language also.
He is the only actor who has guts to expand the boundaries of Tamil cinema without too much concerned about the results.
He is the only actor who has the guts not to act as saint like others.
Unfortunately no one can save this hub and that has been the case for the past few years. We lost all sensible hubbers and now all we have is irritation.

[irir123]

அவனவன் முக்கி முனகி in trend MD / director எல்லாம் வச்சு படம் செஞ்சு படத்தை ஓட்ட வைக்கும் போது, கமல் மாதிரி சரக்கு உள்ளவங்கள பார்த்து - சரக்கு இல்லாதவங்க படர வயத்தெரிச்சல் தான் காரணம்

[kumarsr]

^I beg to differ slightly. Mutharasan is a sort of a symbol to the the standards of tamil cinema today, its over indulgence in bringing out films that look for commercial viability over artistry. Mutharasan's ascension to the throne is through short cuts, making compromises. He hardly has political acumen, qualifications for a good ruler but still makes it through by killing the king. He to a good degree is always surrounded by the crassness of his subjects- the sycophancy and the blaring trumpets and drums just like Manoranjan who's both a victim and a proponent of mediocre film making . The biggest giveaway however is the tiger getting curd rice. Remember Kamal describing Sivaji saying 'Pulikku thayir Saadham koduthu keduthutom" ? Muthurasan (Manoranjan) is the tiger that got used to the thayir saadham, lying in the dumps of his mediocrity and absolutely ignorant of what it requires to be a king . He's a ear short literally and figuratively.

Of course, one can, metaphorically, imagine anything with anything else...including comparing a tiger's condition to Mano etc. But in my view it is a big stretch, an over-interpretation and likely misinterpretation as well. Many a times, it will appear to me that even the makers (in this case KH and RA) may not have thought so much at specific points. Plus, not many, besides Kamal's fans, would remember statements made by Kamal regarding Sivaji in some interview totally outside of the context of the movie. To me that scene was there to supposedly evoke some laughter but failed miserably (one among many in the supposedly comedy film). But, there is joy in interpreting a work in various ways, I understand. But it can't be so abstract that not many would be able to relate to. And certainly, that's not the maker's intention (they, after all, want everyone to come see the movie and relate to it).

The movie is simply about the life of a movie star who faces personal challenges. Since the primary challenge deals with mortality, the star wants to make a movie that outlives his physical being. The movie within a movie, while trying to provide some comic relief is themed to stress this point about mortality. So we have an evil king who wants to live forever (physical) while there is Uttaman who comes as an Artist who lives forever (metaphorically, his Art lives forever). While the king dies, Art/Artist is not vanquished. That is all there is to it!

So the evil king who kills off everyone in his path to the throne and who tries to rape the princess is not a reflection of Mano or his art form or his current status as a sell-out superstar in any way. May be, he was mocking the "talentless lucky star" Just my wild guess. But, frankly, Mano is very likeable from the very first scene and he has not committed anything close to a murder (or shown to remove anyone in his path to super stardom). If anything, he is a bit selfish and not brave enough to stick to the righteous path. That notion (not being brave) is also quickly dispelled by the letter he had written to Yamini and by revealing that his wife is an obsessive freak who would end her life rather than let Mano slip away. Mano is very likeable (he is not arrogant, does not abuse his fans etc. etc.)

On the whole, the physical life has to come to an end for everybody. But "Life is beautiful" (another quote from Kamal in a recent interview when talking about UV). Bitter Chocolate would have been a much more apt title. I can almost bet that the Yamini-Manonmani thread may have been something that had evolved over time and added to the main script.

[ramdas2005]

@hattori-Did you watch the movie? Any reviews/thoughts...