Fans and distributors alike are livid that Kuselan was marketed as a full-fledged Rajnikant starrer

Duniya Suri is undoubtedly one of the most talented filmmakers here. He’s one of the few technicians who treats cinema like a visual medium and takes care of the aesthetics on-screen. “Duniya”, a run of the mill tale struck a chord thanks to his interesting characterisation and narrative. Today the film has a cult following and it’s proven in the fact that when fans meet him they don’t mention his second film, “Inthi Ninna Preethiya” but rave about “Duniya”. His second film too had a promising premise and the first half was riveting. It was all downhill in the second when the hero who loses the girl he loves starts worshipping Bacchus and never recovers. It was self indulgent with Suri borrowing generously from his personal experiences. The film was a disaster but the industry bigwigs did not lose hope. Rockline Venkatesh’s faith in Suri’s abilities is unshakable. “I’ve seen plenty of newcomers but this guy has the ability to take Kannada cinema places,” says Rockline Venkatesh, who’d signed Suri immediately after watching “Duniya”. Rockline’s muhurath’s are never a grand affair so Suri has quietly started the shooting the film titled “Junglee”. The chirpy Aindrita is the heroine. The ubiquitous but gifted Rangayana Raghu of course plays a key character. Vijay whose career nosedived after “Duniya” thanks to indiscreet choice of films desperately needs a hit too.
“Kuselan” is a con job and as predicted is a box-office disaster. Fans and distributors alike are livid with the director for marketing the film as a full-fledged Rajnikant starrer. The superstar right from the beginning had been reiterating that his was just a guest appearance but nobody was in the mood to listen. Distributors in Tamil Nadu have banned Kavithalaya pictures, the producers, till they are compensated. They have urged Rajni to intervene and arrive at a settlement. I call it a con job because the film with a budget of less than ten crore rupees was sold for a whopping sixty crore. The main culprit is the director P. Vasu who shouted himself hoarse claiming the film would have all the ingredients of a usual Rajni film. Theatres wore a deserted look on the second day. Fans were disappointed with Rajni contradicting himself about his political ambitions. Rajni requested the director to cut the offending portions but it was too late. Now the ball is in the superstar’s court. Large hearted that he is he’ll probably forego his remuneration in a bid to compensate the aggrieved.
On the other hand, the distributors ought to be taught a lesson by making them realise that it’s their greed that’s led to their downfall. The unrepentant director Vasu still lives in a world of his own with statements claiming that “Kuselan” should have been called ’Kuberan’ but distributors I’m sure would love to rechristen him “Kamsan”.

S. SHIVA KUMAR
sshivu@yahoo.com

Moggina Manasu shifts between the sensible and the banal

The most disappointing film in recent times is “Minchina Ota” mainly because of the expectations thanks to the tall claims of director Ramesh. The best of technology cannot help an inept plot. Sadly, even the technology is not used properly. That the use of a ‘Super 35’ camera cannot enhance the quality of the cinematography is displayed here. Veteran Rajan’s work behind the camera leaves a lot to be desired. Ultimately the entire blame for the monumental waste of money lies on Ramesh. It leaves you wondering if he’s the same director who made “Cyanide”. The climax inspired by Spielberg’s “Duel” is a damp squib. For once even the gifted Rangayana Raghu who brings to life the most inane of characters looks numbed.
It’s difficult to make up your mind about “Moggina Manasu”. By the way is it a co-incidence or superstition that the title sounds similar to producer Krishnappa’s monster success “Mungaru Maley”? Anyway the film vacillates wildly between the sensible and the banal. For a change you get to watch a film from the female point of view. It’s about four girls taking wobbly steps into the world of adulthood, passing through a phase of muddled minds and the urge to impress males with surging testosterones. You could call it the female version of Shanker’s “Boys”. Making a film with four female protagonists and trying to give them equal screen space is a writer’s nightmare, but director Shashank manages pretty well. The positive point is that the preaching is subtle and not in your face except for a professor who lectures about the difference between love and infatuation. There’s the village belle who transforms overnight into a city slicker and even acquires an accent. She’s seduced and deserted driving her to suicide. Then there’s the lass who uses and discards men because someone cheated her sister. The third has a control freak for a father. She leaves her home to live in with her boyfriend only to discover his insecurities. Last but not the least is our heroine who desperately seeks love but gets entangled with a jealous and possessive lover. This and the experiences of her friends put her off love permanently or so you feel till a persistent suitor appears.
The flow in the narrative suffers only because director Shashank does not have enough confidence in his abilities.
The film looks disjointed because the censors have chopped off chunks including a song. The so-called comedy track involving Sharan is as pathetic as the puerile sms jokes that are circulated and has nothing to do with the plot. The heroine’s possessive lover swears he’ll spoil her peace of mind when she walks out but strangely disappears from the film. On the positive side, the performances of the female protagonists especially Radhika Pandit is first rate. She uses her eyes eloquently and never goes over the top though she gets ample opportunities. Her underplaying is even more surprising considering her sitcom background. Here’s another actress who proves that it’s only if you need oomph you have to import actresses but for meaningful performances there’s enough local talent. Shuba Punja is endearing.
The male performers are terrible except for Yash who’s good but aping Ganesh’s ‘mouthful of marbles’ dialogue delivery, which will take him nowhere.
S. SHIVA KUMAR
sshivu@yahoo.com