SPOLIER ALERT: This review contains spoilers for “Raavan”. In case you plan to see it, don’t read it. I am going to do you a huge favor and tell you : Don’t see it !
I am and have been a die hard Mani Ratnam fan. From the day I saw “Mouna Raagam”, through “Agni Natchathiram”, ” Bombay” ,”Roja”,”Naayagan”, Iruvar” , “Guru”. I loved the recurring elements : the feisty heroines, naughty grandmas, the mature understanding of the man – woman relationship in all its forms, gorgeous vistas in the rain, excellent music. So with a heavy heart , I have to ask : Mani Ratnam: What the hell happened to you?
I want the near-to-3 hours of my life spent watching Raavan back. I never thought I would ever use “ham-fisted direction” and “Mani Ratnam” in the same sentence. But there you go. The premise is interesting. A retelling of the “Ramayana” to show both sides of the story. The titular “Raavan” in the film is Beera – a sad combination of Veerappan and a Naxalite, played atrociously by Abhishek Bachchan. Jr. Bachchan starts off with an imitation Amitabh – in – Agneepath – growl that inexplicably disappears in the latter part of the film – along with all semblance of plot, logic and common sense. Abhi grimaces, twitches and makes a complete ass of himself. Amitabh he is not – never was and never will be. In what was thought of as a casting coup, Aishwarya Rai (of the Shrimati Aishwarya Bacchcan Kanya Mahavidyalaya fame) – his real -life wife – plays Ragini – the wife of police officer Dev ( Get it ? Dev = God = Ram) Sharma ( played by a blank look aka Vikram). Beera abducts Ragini thereby setting the stage for a retelling of the Ramayana epic. Aishwarya starts out strong and her acting ( presumably impacted by Abhi’s lack of acting) gets progressively weaker. The twist in the tale is that Beera has good and justifiable reasons for wanting revenge against the police. Ragini develops a serious case of Stockholm syndrome. Dev rescues her and then questions her fidelity. The movie ends with Ragini’s deeply held beliefs being questioned. In other words what appeared bad maybe good, what appears good maybe bad. Which is fortune cookie philosophy at its best.
( ASIDE DESIGNED TO BRING A HINDUTVA FATWA ON MY HEAD: What is godly about questioning one’s wife’s fidelity at the drop of a hat? How can Ram be “Maryada Purshottam”( Ideal man) if he abandons his pregnant wife ? And does no one see the inherent misogyny of the basis of Sita’s abduction?That she dared to cross an imaginary line drawn by an in -law? But that is probably fodder for another post!)
I cannot in good faith believe THE Mani Ratnam directed this nonsense. I have a sneaky feeling that one of his directorial assistants must have taken over and Ratnam -ji must have franchised his name ( a la McDonalds). The camera angles are atrocious and MTV-video like (in the days when MTV actually showed Music videos as opposed to crappy reality dating shows). Govinda is completely wasted in a cameo appearance as Sanjeevani (aka Hanuman), an alcoholic forest guard who practices some kind of parkour.
Ragini’s and Beera’s relationship is never properly developed. He acts all caveman and Tarzan-ish, winging from vines. She is happy playing Jane- looking remarkably put together despite being in a jungle,where Beera’s hideout is. Why on earth she feels any sympathy for him is unclear. The ONLY redeeming feature of this movie is the locations. The jungles of Kerala and Tamil Nadu are glorious, lush and damp. The movie is only damp.
The music pretty much sucked. There are plot holes large enough for a truck to be driven through. For example: How is Ragini able to make her way back to Beera super secret hideout (after Dev questions her fidelity) when the entire Indian Police Force is unable to? And of course the original Ramaayan plot hole: If Sanjeevani could find Ragini, why did he not simply rescue her?
Loading ...