Raavan: Rocket Science Explained!



It certainly must be rocket science, otherwise how can one explain the conflicting and bizarre feedback for the latest Mani Ratnam movie Raavan. Sample this, most Hindi audiences hate this movie, it’s a huge hit in its Tamil version down south, western critics have hailed it as a masterpiece while our popular Indian critics have trashed it. A small minority swear by this movie and a majority simply hate this movie. How is it possible that one movie can evoke such extreme reactions?

What Mani Ratnam has made is something far more controversial than the original man with ten heads. It is a debatable point whether Raavan was a bad man or a victim of circumstances, but the debate whether Raavan the movie is good or bad is even more confusing.  Let me make my stand clear at the outset, I loved this movie, probably  I am the only one to have watched it thrice already within the first week of release, twice in Hindi and once in Tamil, also not to forget the songs in Telugu that I play in my car daily. I have experienced it in all languages and am probably at an advantage compared to many of my other friends when it comes to interpreting this movie. Interpreting, wait a minute, what is this interpreting business? Aren’t movies meant for us to suspend disbelief and enjoy ourselves? Well, that’s where the crux of the matter lies. Let me explain further.

iPhone among Mani Ratnam’s movies

I heard this term when the movie Avatar released, it was called the iPhone among movies. A movie that was path breaking and unique, something that was unheard off, mainly due to the 3D technology that was used. We all agree to that. But Raavan by Mani Rathnam truly deserves the credit to be called the iPhone among all his movies. Let me talk a little bit about Indian films before i proceed further to talk of Raavan.

 “Feed a man and you will feed him forever, teach him to fish and you will never have to feed him again”

I have slightly twisted a popular saying. The same holds true with our commercial Indian cinema. Most successful Indian movies never allow the audience to use their brains, instead we have all kinds of popcorn masala movies in the form of love stories and action films where every single detail, every emotion is explained to us in great detail. We have all grown up watching such movies and identify very easily with such stereotypes. We are totally used to the idea of being spoon fed everything as an audience, over dramatisation if one can call it. We have no idea of the art of subtlety or suggestion which the west is generally used to. To simply put it, we are not used to fishing, also called as carrying our brains to the movies.

Mani Ratnam & his Movies

In this context, if one looks at the body of Mani Ratnam’s work he has made many classics but one can notice a pattern, a desire to please the commercial audience, mostly by having lavish item songs with the likes of Mallika in Guru, Sophia in Alaipayude, Malaika in Dil Se, Sonali in Bombay and so on. His mainstay was also the interplay of human emotions and attention to detail that mostly told a story in itself. What does he do differently now?

Mani Ratnam simply strips away all that flab and gets straight to the heart of the story. Infact doesn’t even bother about story this time and directly takes inspiration from the Ramayana. Does that ring a bell? Why did he make this movie? Is he a fool to make a movie with a story as simple as it seems?  Most might think that he has lost his touch and are wishing him good luck to recover for his next film. I look at it more as an evolution in him as a filmmaker. Now let’s get back to our iPhone.

iPhone & Raavan

“What is an iPhone without an internet connection? It’s a piece of junk. So is Raavan, when one doesn’t use his brain”

Mani Ratnam has made this movie to appeal at a very basic level. If one notices the goings on in the movie, there is neither any back story about the origins of any of the characters nor any detailed explanations of the feelings of any of the characters barring few scenes. This has been one major complaint for most of the audience. But why does one need a back story when you have the Ramayan to fall back upon? Make your own interpretations. The moment one starts thinking about it there are hundreds of interpretations of each situation that one can make. I for one can write a 100 different blog posts talking of each of the topics. Things like the thin line dividing good vs bad, rich vs poor, urban vs rural, man vs woman, law vs outlaw, history vs alternate history, love & jealousy, etc. Mani Ratnam tackles all these issues with tact and gives only suggestions and doesn’t make any judgements or take sides. What else does he do to call it the equivalent of an iPhone. He packages it extremely well.

Packaging is nothing but the production design or audio visual styling of the movie. Just like the fancy interface and apps of an iPhone, the packaging works like a dream here. Most have noticed the packaging because it is very apparent. One can hear people say that cinematography is awesome, the songs are marvellous, locations are fantastic and out of this world. It’s totally true and that alone is worth the price of the ticket. When i watched the animated movie Finding Nemo my whole perception of watching movies changed. For me it was art in motion, each frame in the movie was like a beautiful piece of art which could be treasured forever. Same is the case with Raavan, the frames are beautifully composed. Add to that the amazing background score by AR Rahman, and the lyrics are sheer poetry, choreography of one classical song is extremely aesthetic, something we are not used to seeing. Overall when put together all these combine to make one amazing product which is worth repeat viewing. And how can one forget to add to this list the stunningly beautiful female protagonist Aishwarya Rai, it’s a role of her lifetime. 

Lifetime is a nice word and we often tend to overuse it. However in the case of this movie everything is timeless, Mani Ratnam has placed it in a world without a definition of a time frame, this could easily be a movie set in the 60’s or the 90’s or anytime in the future. Be it the costumes, accessories, set designs, locations, vehicles even the Ray Ban glasses the main protagonist wears (source for unlimited spoofs), everything is timeless and classic, nothing that one can say will be outdated in times to come. This movie will look as fresh when it is seen by our grandkids as it is today.
If everything is so perfect, then why doesn’t this movie work for so many people? There are reasons for that too.

Where is the kick?

Does anyone remember the time a bike called Kinetic Honda was introduced to India in the late 80’s? No one had seen anything uglier than that on the Indian roads and men were averse to the idea of a bike starting with the press of a button. Where is the Kick? Was the question on everyone’s mind. It was seen more as a ladies bike. The rest as they say is history. 

Does anyone remember the first taste of wine or any alcoholic drink that one had? I bet it wasn’t a pleasant experience. Do you still feel the same way now? 

Or remember the time we got phones that had push buttons instead of the dials, or ask any Blackberry power user with the QWERT keypad how he feels using a touch screen interface like the one on iPhone. My guess is, the transition isn’t easy and always comes with some resistance. Incase of the phone with the dial vs the push button, one complaint was, it didn’t feel the same pressing buttons instead of inserting your finger into the dial and turning it round and round, it just didn’t feel like you were making a call. We all definitely know which the superior product is. Don’t we?

So is the case with our movie, it’s not an easy dish to have in the first instance but will grow on you once you give it a chance to play some tricks with your mind. Are we willing to do that? Am afraid, we are quite a rigid society and tend to follow the mob. And what does the mob say? It says Abhishek Bachchan fails big time as Raavan and in the same breath also says that Vikram as Raavanan in the Tamil version sure rocks. Is it as simple as that or is there more to the truth?

Tale of two Raavans and two India’s

I always believed that cinema spoke one universal language and it is the language of emotion. In this light it is interesting to note why Mani Rathnam choose to make this movie simultaneously in two languages with different actors for almost all the roles. Doesn’t he believe that India is one country and the people are the same everywhere? I guess he should have known that, yet why does he do that? Or, are we missing something?

With due regards to all sentiments of National integration and unity, I would like to state that India is not one county. There are many different India’s within the same country. The common man in Chennai is not the same as the common man in Delhi. Having spent a considerable amount of time living in both the cities I can vouch for that. Most intriguingly when it comes to the topic of Ramayan and its interpretations it gets even more complicated. This is one point that merits a separate blog in itself. Yet I will try and explain my point in brief.

What is the first feature of Raavan that comes to mind? he has a broad built of frame, a thick moustache and distinctly South Indian flavour with his Brahmin upbringing. Now contrast this with Rama, he is a clean shaven guy from across the Vindhyas, a Kshatriya, a north Indian guy. 

Leaving aside the fact about good and bad, basically Ramayan is about the triumph of a north Indian over a south Indian. This has been subconsciously embedded into our psych, if one notices all references of Raakshashas in illustrations, comic books, etc; they are of people with predominantly south Indian features. It’s a stereotype that has been created centuries ago and is still persisting. Don’t need brains to understand this actually. Surprisingly even I didn’t realise this point until my wife Anu pointed out to me few months back when we were discussing about alternate history and comparing Ram and Raavan in context to their upbringing and eventual actions and fate. Will reserve all comments on that for a later post.

Abhishek vs Vikram 

Now let’s come back to our two movies. Your guess is as good as mine, the Tamil audience would obviously love to see the predominantly South Indian actor Vikram take on the clean shaven Prithviraj who because of a lack of background story for him can be assumed to be someone from the north. Fits the stereotype and works well for a South Indian audience. What about the north Indians who watched the Hindi version?

This is where the trouble for Raavan starts. We have two highly competent actors essaying the roles of Raavan/Beera and Ram/Dev but the built and personality of the characters are confusing for a north Indian audience. Both look similar to each other, moustache and all. There is a huge loss of connect and it tends to confuse the audience. Sadly Abhishek Bachchan has to bear the brunt of this criticism whereas the root cause lies elsewhere. Curiously the audience in the west don’t know anything about this and take the movie only on its face value and hence it appeals to them immensely. They only see Ram/Dev and Raavan/Beera as two characters. 

Another very startling discovery I made the day after I watched the first show of Raavan was when I listened to the songs in Telugu. Entire lyrics were different for the songs. Not just the words but the meaning conveyed in them.  I wish I could go on writing about the differences but looks like I have already made it such a long post. Do try and listen to or read the translated lyrics of both the versions of the Title song Beera as well as Behene De and you will understand what I am talking about.

Conclusion

Mani Ratnam would have done best if he simply made the movie in Tamil and released it with subtitles for the rest of the country and the world. It would have still worked its magic and not confused the Hindi speaking audiences. Ideal cast would have been a clean shaven Abhishek as Ram and Vikram as Raavan. Maybe he was trying to create a movie as ambiguous and controversial as Raavan himself. Looks like he has succeeded big time. As someone rightly said on Twitter.

"Raavan is all about Mani taking the mickey out of Valmiki"

I assume he is doing the same with us too. The more we criticize Mani Rathnam and Raavan the more he must be laughing at all of us. 

Cheers!
Kartik Dayanand

Spread the word:


Comments

  1. It is true,that Raavan is a huge hit in the south(Vikram was the bad guy in its Tamil version).One wudnt disagree with this fact that in south, typically movies r all filled with the masala.Beautiful locales,few melodious songs,dancing damsels,action Matrix- type form the core of the film which isnt surprising as we have tasted that in Hindi films too.there are all hits in the south whether its a remake of any hollywood flick or a tamil/telugu/malayalam/kannada version of a hindi.They follow the simple rule -show what the audience wants to see.Unlike Ghajini,which was a giant hit despite its Tamil version released much earlier than hindi. 'Raavan' has excellent cinematography,beautiful visuals e'thing yet faills to deliver its magic the way it was hyped. .It was just like watching a 21st century 'Ramayan' where Ram,Sita & Raavan have taken re-birth.

    so,kartik in short I kind of agree with u:)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nikhil SrivastavaJun 27, 2010, 3:36:00 PM

    Sir, I like your blogs!
    Loved this one!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Dude! one more awesome blog.....couldn't agree more that jr AB took the brunt of the confused audience. I personally feel he delivered his interpretation of the character and at that very naturally so with all the imperfections.

    Are we perfect in our feelings of our love and hate? aren't they all circumstantial. Of course the movie is incomplete in giving a conclusion or summary, leaving it to audience to interpret it.....just like real life!

    ReplyDelete
  4. disagree in entirety. problem with raavan is not lack of acceptability , but plain boredom it brings along. the story does not move forward after the premise of sita being captured is established in first 5 minutes and the last 10 minutes when sita returns back to Raavan. nothing actually happens in between.(apart from silly attempt to show govinda as monkey man, which shows blatant lack subtlety in maniratnams direction) ur inference of raavan being south indian and ram being a north indian and the role reversal making the movie unacceptable to hindi audience is perhaps affected by self imposed bias. why abhishek failed to pull off the character was mainly due to lack of his histrionics rather than him having a north indian appeal (which nobody gives a damn about ). infact i liked vikram as dev in spite of his accented hindi, coz his obvious screen presence, a quality ab is not known for.

    ReplyDelete
  5. To add, perhaps Raavan doing better is south indian version is more to do because of the lead actors depiction of Raavan. Raavan required some seriously charismatic actor to pull off the role of an eccentric, on the run, rebel, tribal leader which abhishek was not able to pull off. Someone like jhonny depp in pirates or heath ledger in dark knight. u take the two actors out of both the movies and they do not remain as interesting and watchable as they are. and that was the problem with raavan. the actor chosen to play the title role was not strong enough to carry the burden of a movie that very largely was dependent on the actors performance rather than actual story or theme as it was already known to the audiences before the movie even started( i.e it was based on Ramayan)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Hey Kartik, its Mani Ratnam without the 'H' (spelled Rathnam in the concluding sentence)..:D

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Karthik,

    Have written an extremely long blog on the movie but have talked very little about the storytelling or the film making involved. When you have given the movie an international boost, it is going to be compared on par with international movies. The acting comes no way close to what we see the American, French or the Germans are able to do. The editing as such is flimsy and very linear. I am a big movie buff and can sit and watch movies below par but this movie kept urging me to walk out of the theater. Loved the cinematography but he has wasted a lot of it in showing useless scenes, like the fake Govinda jumping around or the supremely fake boat crash. Mani dips in creativity whereas his crew reigns supreme in their work.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I havent seen Raavan but I certainly dont think it failed coz of the factors u have listed. Regionalism is not prevalent in North India as much as it is in south and west. We dont care if 'Ram' and 'raavan' are clean shaven or not. But we do care about the movie itself. Movies like 'A wednesday' were hits while 'Kites ' flopped. It proves something aint it? The story and its presentation is the paramount thing.

    If you have to talk about movies which flopped coz people didnt use their brains.. talk about 16 Deember, or Pyaasa (Guru Dutt) , Jaane bhi do yaaron , Andaz apna apna....... certainly not Raavan.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Don't agree with anyone who labels Raavan a bad movie. That hyperbole should be left for silliness like My Name Is Khan. I recommend reading this blog for some great analysis of Raavan and Raavanan
    http://satyamshot.wordpress.com/

    ReplyDelete
  10. Bro

    rightly said... the critics have blasted this movie..but its not a bad experience and the north / south divide has made the movie as a flop in hindi... the effort and the kind of story telling that this movie has shown... people in north can not relate to it..they want srk chasing the goons in a rickshaw and catching up with them who are travelling in a scorpio... absolute bakwaas.. now if u bring this up then they will compare it to ranjikant's movies...

    ReplyDelete
  11. I must say, that was great analysis, not of the movie that was presented to us though, but of the story it's supposed to be based on. The analysis clearly spewing from the writers vast knowledge of the epic and his clear understanding of the dynamics between the characters.. in the epic.

    Anyway, I would never term this attempt by Ratnam as silliness. For sure, there's enough of that going around. This, in my opinion, is a rare failed attempt by Ratnam. Everything aside, his idea of what a movie needs in terms of content, didn't work. Mani Ratnam, by virtue of his filmography, has all the right to indulge in this fashion. It doesn't make him infallible though. On a last note, any film, be it adapted from a book or inspired by a well known story, needs to stand on its feet. If not, all we have is a good looking documentary, with the actual story doubling as a voice over.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Boss..sounds rude wen u say all ppl who didnt liked the film as they forgot taking thier brains..

    After all, ultimately, a film should be able to engage the audience no matter what, and Raavan/Raavanan both failed doing so..

    ReplyDelete
  13. I enjoy the article. Right from the beginning I predicted Raavan is going to be classic movie. Oscar deserving.

    ReplyDelete
  14. good post... :) liked it... :)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Such a fantastic article on one of my favourite film

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Please let me know what you think of this post

Trending posts this week

3 Idiots: Confusing a Nation!

Telangana Ki Daaredi

Beyond Bhaag Milkha Bhaag!

The De-Evolution of Ram Gopal Varma

Secret ingredient for great movies - Ala Vaikunthapurramuloo and more!

Maggi and the Tyranny of Truth!

God sent me a friend request on Facebook!