REVIEW OF UTHAMA VILLAIN

Mix a dance form from Kerala, with a parallel storyline on life and death with a legendary director and an equally legendary actor portraying the same on screen and sprinkle few other well known names. The result would look something like the now released Uthama Villain (villain mean archer and not antagonist and thus no tax-issues there).

Storyline: An actor attempts to make his magnum opus when his clock starts ticking.

Very few know that Tarantino's inspiration for the manga comic parts ,in Kill Bill, is Kamal hassan's Alavandhan. Such is KH's talent (acting among many others) that any movie goer will follow Sivaji Ganesan's name with none other than KH himself. This time around too he has done what he usually does best: Experimentation.

This is a rare movie where every cast (despite being such a star studded ensemble cast) is given a sizeable role and none of them is there for sake of screen filling.

Several subtextual beauties (like comparison between a dying person and an immortal in parallel stories) including plenty of wordplay makes it a repeat watch just to make sure that you didn't miss anything during the first time.

After Aayirathil Oruvan, this movie contains an abundance of pure tamil with some Telugu and Malayalam (no subtitles) to show the diversity of an actor's life. So, non-tamils please beware and don't complain later.

If my prediction pans out to be right (and I am not a astrologer by the way), then Uthama Villain might turn out to be another Virumandi or Kurudhi Punal (not received well but will treated as a gem when looked back).Slight slag can be felt in the second half's first half.

REVIEW OF AVENGERS:AGE OF UTLTRON

If you are reading this review, then 9 out of times you will watch this movie, even if I trash it to the pit. Why? Simple. Because they are "The Avengers" and we love them for that. But, am I going to trash it? Read on.

When one of Tony Stark's haywire experiments goes haywire, the Earth's mightiest heroes are given another excuse to flex their muscles, crash buildings as if they are made of legos, perform insane stunts with all possible modes of transportation, prank each other's style, confront the past, fight amongst themselves, win an unwinnable antagonist and in the process, save the world (again!).

I was one of those (few) who felt that,despite the brilliant attempt, the Avengers (2012) at 8+/10 in IMDB was slightly overrated. But the sheer pleasure of watching so many superheroes within a single frame can be happily overwhelming for anyone. But this time around, the movie is a lot more than just the superheroes.

Where the movie succeeds:

Unlike Avengers(2012), this has a much deeper storyline and gives us a good glimpse into the human side of the superheroes. This takes the story of Marvel Universe into the next stage, with the I-stone being clearly explained for the first time in a Marvel movie. Introduction of the twins adds fuel to the fire and the latter burns brightly. Taking cue from any Marvel movie, CGI and wit are the usual stand-outs. SuperHeroes, no matter how super they are , have a past and that past makes a presence here and there in the movie. Hawkeye is actually given a sizeable role rather than being a weak link (as in the previous installment).

Where the movie fails:

Too much talking in an action movie can be cumbersome for an action-buff especially if he/she doesn't care a penny as to how the characters feel. Loki's wit is definitely missed with the ever-serious Ultron. When our superheroes can't stop fighting among themselves, we doubt if they really deserve the "super" in superheroes. Cheated upon when I hoped for a Post credit scene was the ultimate disappointment. With every passing movie, I am tired of this end-of-the-world-if-we-dont-stop-him scenario. It's time someone took a fresh look at it.

Thus I have presented Black and White of said movie. You can choose either or you can choose grey (like me). But something tells me that you have already made your choice.

Let me know what you think of the movie.

PS: Someone else besides Thor lifts Mjolnir (the Hammer) (and not just once).

REVIEW OF KINGSMAN:THE SECRET SERVICE

Manners maketh a man. Gentlemen are always in demand in society, the same way gentlemen spy are in demand for action movie lovers. Inspired by 007, this group of people have set an impecabble standard and taste for foiling plots, saving the world and of course, the state-of-the-art..............................................suits. (You thought I was gonna say gadgets, didnt you. Ya that too.)

First off, let me start with a statutory warning. This genre is not Oscar material nor it is to satisfy everyone's taste bud. If this movie's trailer made you feel weird, it's best if you stay with the Oscar-worthy movies (No offence).

Kingsman:The Secret Service ,as the name goes, is a secret organization (not related to any governments) that does what it does best. When a top agent's guilt makes him recruit a hot-head youngster, things get interesting. Meanwhile evil draws a projectile which brings Kingsman into the play.

The cast has brought a lot of variety into the movie. Colin Firth (yes, the King from King's Speech) pumps the screen with adrenaline, which is actually unlike him, but enjoyable none-the-less. Michael Caine does what he always does. Samuel Jackson is the icing on cake, with his short-tongued English and allergy to the sight of blood (yes, a villain who can't stand blood) is a fun to watch, right till the end.Michael Caine's lack of character usage is felt , not while watching, but while post-morteming it.
Mark Strong is another strong presence.

When a middle-eastern-fort starts blowing, the bricks fall down and forms the words of "20th-century-fox", it's clear that the movie is all about fun, despite the guns and bloods. The beauty of the movie is that it doesn't try to be something else. It sticks with the fun till the end.
An Ex. Sam Jackson shoots a man and starts walking away because he can't stand blood. He, then asks his assisstant.
Jackson: Is he dead?
Assistant: That's what happens when you shoot someone in the head. Feels good, doesn't it.
Jackson : No it's feels f**king aweful.

Sarcastic humours is sprinkled all over. A dog with the name J.B (which Michael Caine abbreviates as James Bond, Jason Bourne), an almost direct reference to Obama, sarcasm on Newspapers too (Look out for the paper cutting on the wall with headlines "Brad Pitt ate my sandwich").

Bullets, guns, blood dominate the screen which gets gory at times. So, fair warning.

This isn't a "Wanted" style action movie nor is it Jackie Chan styled. It's somewhere in the middle but makes a mark of its own.

You are bound to enjoy it.

REVIEW OF "I"

An upcoming innocent body-builder is tricked into a lethal injection,without his own knowledge, that turns him into a hunchback. What he does when he discovers is the subject matter of this 4-year-in-the-making movie.

Vikram has given his heart and soul throughout the movie and the result is clearly visible. Right from the mammoth of a body build to the trimmed version of that of a model's to the entirely trimmed version of that of a hunchback, his transformation baffles everyone. Vikram will win the Best Hunchback category and also Best Body Build Category alongside the Best Acting Category.When it comes to being in the wrong place at the wrong time, Lingesan (Vikram) is the "Bruce McClane" of Tamil Cinema. When it comes to loosing and gaining weight, Vikram is the "Christian Bale" of Indian Cinema.
In short our I-bro raises for Vikram.

Amy Jackson's lack of inhibition persona perfectly fits the mould of a model. Anyone else would have been just a namesake model. Santhanam, though devoid of a separate comedy track (which I guess is loss in editing) does his best in the last quarter of the movie. Upen Patel, along with the good looks, also has a natural villanous face that will come in handy if he decides to become a full time villain.

Last seen in Dheena, Suresh Gopi is a pleasant surprise (given his absence in trailer and teasers) but his mild persona did not sit along with his stature and before the twist was revealed, I was able to smell a rat.

Released at 189 mins, the editing department would have been put to task and one cant imagine the length of the uncut version.

The S factor in Shankar's movie is missing. The last time , when I felt this emptiness, was with Shivaji-the Boss. Being a Rajni movie absence of S factor was reasoned with Superstar's larger than life image. But this time around, I couldn't find a suitable excuse. Little more trimming would have given a crisper version.

All in all, I is a 3hr Vikram treat. But I cant guarantee that you would like it.

REVIEW OF "DARLING"

A group of like-minded-suiciders go to a beach house to full stop their life. When intervened by supernatural, things take a turn for worse and the rest is.....

Darling, the first film in the recent Tamil History to come with an English title, falls in the comedy-horror genre, a genre that attained popularity with Yamirukka Bayamey, Aranmanai. Surely this is not the last of this genre and some more can expected from Tamil Cinema.

The movie succeeds on many steps: The humour has been used to such effect that any outside listener would find it hard to believe that a horror movie is being screened inside.. (given the laughs and claps.)

But the traditional Horror stereotypes could have been avoided say the 12'O clock sharp-supernatural-appointment , the excessive kajal around the eyes of the supernatural, the cracked plaster make up, closing of doors.

It is pleasing to see Karunas back after a brief hibernaton as an avid suicide enthusiast. Noteworthy of his scenes is when he pranks a religious custom (still worried how it will be received).

GV Prakash's (yes, the now familiar musician) debut has very little scope for acting given the only expression that he throws at us (while being thrown across the room several times) is "shock". Not shocking at all.

Nikki Gilrani's debut would have been more acting friendly, if we could somehow peer through the plaster make up (which does a good job of hiding her expressions well).

Several movies have been referenced (I, Puthiya paravai, Thuppaki, even a spoof TV show). Most surprising is when a movie referenced (I) runs in the next screen.

The single most whistles in the movie goes to the cameo appearance of "Naan kadavul" Rajendran as Ghost Gopal Verma with an entry , credits to the graphic designers of Ghost Rider (yes, that Nic-Cage movie). With just two scenes he leaves the audiences in splits alongside a strong impression (his "I am waiting" was the first eye-turner for this low profile movie).

On the whole the movie has overwhelmingly satisified the viewers and is definitely worth a watch. A fair warning though, the comedy-horror genre slowly develops into comedy-horror-romantic genre towards the end.

The only flaw (which comes only in the post-movie-post-mortem) is that excess humour can dissatisfy few (not sure of how much) who go in expecting a full-blown horror movie.

Darling: Dear Devil.

REVIEW OF P.K.

An alien struggles to accustom to human tradition while searching for his stolen remote.

PK- a movie in making for close to five years has overwhelmingly satisfied all its expectations. Gems like these are rare and whether or not it is considered Oscar-worthy, the movie should be preserved as a case study for future film makers.

Just like his production house's logo (puppet show), Raj Kumar Hirani's films are simple in theme yet very attractive by means of its presentation. He has a magical lens that peers into the Indian Diaspora and tears down its misbeliefs elegantly, no matter how high it is held. It wouldn't be an overstatement when I say, " he is one of the very few in the business who consistently satisfies both producers and (global) audience."

Hope was seeded in me during the movie. Every time a religious belief was opposed there was claps and whistles from all around the screen, a clear sign that the general population is becoming increasingly logical rather than being superstitial. With several close-up shots (especially in the Belgium episode), Anushka's pout was hard to miss. Don't be surprised if she wins the Best Pout Award.

From a broader perspective it's not just an alien who would struggle in this world. For the sake of argument, imagine bringing back one of the early humans to the present world. He would face the same dilemma that Aamir does in this movie. Clearly it's our evolution (with plenty of revolutions in it) that is to be blamed (or praised).

Despite being a sci-fi "based" movie with love and emotion it is humour that persists till the end. Be it the dancing cars that act as Aamir's ATM cum wardrobe, his search for God, the slipper that he steals when his own are missing, his questions to god-men, all of them no matter how serious an issue, are presented in a humorous enjoyable way. But irrespective of  how much the movie takes upon god-men it doesn't hurt the basic ideology of religion.

Various modulations of accha ("Good"), I love Chicken, Anushka'a analogy of PK with child are worth mentioning among many such beautiful lines.

But tell us Aamir, why did you settle for an outdated transistor radio when there were plenty of other cool devices.

AAA: Despite being a U-rated movie, three A's ruled the movie. Aamir,Alien,Atheism. Enough said.

PS: A surprise cameo awaits you at the end.

REVIEW OF HOBBIT: BATTLE OF FIVE ARMIES

After rescuing Erebor from Smaug, it’s now upto Thorin and Company to defend it, come what may.

Where the battle was lost:
1.      Bilbo throwing stones at Orcs and stopping them.
2.   Thorin Oakenshield becomes Middle Earth’s second psychiatric patient (first being his grandfather). 
3.   The end which never ends. Jack Nicholson quoted after the LOTR trilogy, “What happened at the end?” referring to the lengthy end. There’s something similar here but not as long as the former.
4.     Despite being a battle it was uncomfortable looking at the bleeding face of Tauriel who went left and right through the same set of Orcs a few days ago (as per the movie).
5.      Lack of a scenic change (battle ground throughout) is another low note in this finale.
6.    I am not in for spoilers. So, here’s the thing. It’s a pity that something like this should happen to someone so big, so soon (Go figure).

Where the battle was won:
1.      CGI stands apart, be it when Smaug ravages Dale, or when elves gather outside Erebor in their shining golden armor, or when Galadriel and co fight shadow monsters it’s CGI that makes the 3D glasses worth its while.
2.    Unlike its predecessors this one goes easy on the viewers with a runtime of just 131 minutes (excluding the credits). 
3.      Legolas’ duel stands apart for its choreography while Thorin’s physical balance act with Azoc is another memorable moment.
4.      Most impressive of all is how the Hobbit was placed in the middle of all this mess. He is, after all that he has been through, still a hobbit and not a hero. Peter Jackson could have just given him a blade (not the letter opener that he already has) and made him fight orcs. But rather the Hobbit is moving between camps, using the ring to the fullest and playing a vital part in the battle without actually fighting and thus justifying the title.

Having presented the pros and cons of the battle, I leave it to your better judgement to decide whether or not this battle is worth fighting (watching).

PS: People die, People with a capital P (duh it’s a battle, what do you expect?).