In two decades of my living in Australia for the first time, I watched an Indian movie in theatres. After, as far as I remember, Koyi mil gaya or is it Rab ne banadi jodi? me and my son watched an Indian movie in theatres. Oh yes, a milestone event. An IMax Extreme Screen experience with family, is it worth? Well, a good question probably everyone asks after coming out of the theatre is it a good movie? Is Ramayana a good movie? Let’s unravel the experience then we will decide, is it good, bad or ugly?
Excitedly step into the theatre not knowing what to expect. Because we don’t know how our erratic Indian audience behave? Will they throw papers, whistle, shout? As we entered could see calm and sober audience slowly taking their seats with some in their hands with popcorn and coke, others with our Indian food packed for a three and half long movie. True to the Indian culture we also packed our dinner and went and settled in our seats. Thankfully no shouting when the titles started. Everyone behaved well throughout the movie, a big relief. Interestingly, theatre has some D-box seats to give 4D experience to the audience, however those seats are not for the people with heart trouble or back aches, yet we could feel when their seats are shaking, making us jump up and down. You may wonder how come the sober movie like ‘Ramayana’ sends jitters through your spine.
Because, the first thirty minutes to one hour the scenes are breathtaking. High intense fights and VFX, sound effects will capture you. You may start wondering am I in right movie? Well, you’re, you realise sooner than expected. This is the first time probably in our experience with Rama Katha, we start watching the movie in the perspective of Ravana. We never saw Kaikasi, Ravana’s mother as powerful as in this movie. A Siva bhaktini, for the first time shown as a warrior. Hmm, here goes, the interpretation of the director. Is Valmiki written her character the way showed in the movie? I don’t know. Many of us don’t know. But we really don’t care or deliberate on that issue as our eyes are following Ravana, the mighty king of Lanka.
Hands gently playing Rudra Veena, should I say forced or motivated, extends to grab sword and power. That too very easily and successfully. Thankfully the director has not spent too much of time there, as he is concentrating more on sura-asura battle and how to show them using best graphics possible. Once Ravana changes the fate of his people and Lanka, there is not much to say. So, the director now shifts his focus to the protagonist of the story, for whom the whole world is awaiting. Rama! Probably he should have ignored him for some time as audience are happy in Lanka. From here onwards they will have roller coaster feelings.
Story and scenes move so fast, or should I say in snail pace? Difficult to say. Director might have thought without showing how Rama was born he may not do the justice to Ramayana; he showed that part of the story and completely ignored his partner in crime Sita. As a Telugu audience, I would surely want to see king Janak ploughing the soil and finding Sita. But to our disappointment we find Sita waiting for Ram in Swayamvar.
Even Rama throwing tantrums for Moon, probably our favourite, bala rama scene Gummadi showing moon in a mirror sort of heart touching father-son emotions, we hardly find in this movie. Does we miss them? Yes and No. Because the story moves in such a way, you are in a space of void. It really didn’t affect you because the settings and surroundings, visuals and background music constantly takes you away from questioning. In the back of your mind, from your memories, various scenes from Sampoorna Ramayanam and other movies try to emerge are swiftly brushed aside.
Emotional and warm scenes such as a confrontation between Kaikeyi and Bharat, Guhudu crossing Rama, Lakshman and Sita the river in his boat, if you are looking for, you may disappoint. Instead, we get a very relaxed journey of Rama with his wife and brother towards forests. The scenes and settings changes so smoothly, though you realise you’re missing a portion of Ramayana, emptiness gripping, you don’t really have time to think about it.
As I told already, this movie is made in perspective of Ravana. So, unless he comes into the picture, story do not make any effort to connect with you. The moment Ravana appears on the screen suddenly you feel engaged with the story. Is it for good? Hard to tell. But you won’t disappoint much. Visuals block your visionary.
So now the big question to be answered, is Ramayana worth watching? Is it good, bad or ugly. Let’s discuss in the same order. Good things first, as everyone from teasers to trailers already figured out – Yash as Ravana, visual and sound effects and background music enhances your viewing experience. No doubt. Sobhana as Kaikasi grabs our attention for a reason I already mentioned. Another character stands out, in whose perspective also film is narrated to some extent is Jatayu. As the film overly dependent on visuals and fights, yes, the climax fight between Ravana and Jatayu again a win-win scene. What is most interesting in the movie is the art direction. The details on Ravan’s throne (simhasanam) and pushpka vimana, siva dhanush, Art director’s work is visible. Of course, many settings, thanks to visual effects.
Now bad things, Arun govil as Dasaratha, I felt mismatch. He has not come out of the role Rama that he played long back. Kajal as Mandodari I don’t even know why she agreed to be part of the movie. Any jr. artist is enough. She hardly has any dialogue in the movie. If we closely pay attention probably one dialogue, one close-up we could think of. So why such a leading lady is taken for that role? Unless director thought he can’t compromise any less actor next to Yash. Or maybe she has some part to play in the part 2. Otherwise, she is just added burden on budget. Coming to Surpanaka! Till now we only know that she is the catalyst for Ravana kidnapping Sita. Beyond that no director gave any extra weightage to that character. So Why Nitesh Tiwari extended her role? Does it make sense? Not exactly! Should Rakul Preet as an actress be given more screen space than Kajal? Answer is simply no. Then why, director obsessed with that character? In fact, he made ‘Sita mata’ inferior to her. Minor characters overpowering protagonists is debatable, a weaker link in the movie along with Ranbir as Rama, who fails to show any emotions. As if Ram, doesn’t have any emotions. Probably, the director and actor has misunderstood the meaning of Sthitaprajna (wisdom).
Ugly part, many people trolled, verbally abused Sai Pallavi, who played the lead role, ‘Sita.’ Does she deserve such treatment. NO. Is she fit in that role? To me yes. The way sita’s character is designed in this movie; we can’t compare her with our own Anjali devi or Chandrakala or for that matter Nayantara. They are purely formed from the brush strokes of Bapu. These actresses played the role of sita, who is soft and vulnerable. But in this movie sita is shown as Xena, a warrior princess. An independent woman who questions Ram, expresses her mind (so called feminists may like!). To play such role I don’t think anyone else better suit than Sai Pallavi. Her screen presence many a times dominate Ranbir as Ram. Standing next to strong portrayal of Ravana probably she is the only one who can withstand and make her presence felt. The problem is people are unable to distinguish between Sita and Sai Pallavi, that is the reason she is getting more hatred from people. With very limited dialogues she is expressive.
Coming to dialogues. This is yet another weakest link of the whole movie. Except Ravan, none of the other characters have good dialogues. I happen to see the movie in its original form that is Hindi. So unable to comment on Telugu dialogues. But Hindi dialogues are bizarre. Some places you hear Urdu words. Is it because Urdu words are now part and parcel of Hindi language? People questioned the costumes, jewellery, makeup and what not but completely ignored the below standard language. Though its relief songs come and go without notice, not troubling you much. But this type of movies demand songs, atleast for Telugu audience. We’re brought up on songs like ‘Ramaya tandri’, ‘Sitaramula Kalyanam choodam rarandi’.
Finally, Ram and Lakhan. Well, Lakhan is a comic relief. Ram is there. Nothing much to tell. They are visible but their presence is not felt. May be that is what more objecting part of the movie. I’m not detailing every creative liberty that director took. Nor questioning is it acceptable? For me film is a creative form. Director’s interpretation is unavoidable. Yet, where to draw a line depends on one’s own wisdom.
At the end the question remains to answer is the movie worth watching? Yes. Especially for people like my son, who wants to have a cinematic experience than facts. Who are not bothered about deviating from the original story or should I say Sampoorna Ramayanam but looking at a visual feast. For those audience who rate Bahubali and RRR very highly for their visuals, this movie makes them happy.
For my generation comparison is obvious. But comparing previous films with this one is not correct. This movie is only targeting audience who either not know the story of Ramayana or a generation who is growing on video games. Adrenalin pumping is what director really concentrated on. And he took his chances.
For me, this movie is a fractured fairy tale. So questioning is it depicted the Valmiki Ramayana or not is useless. Looking for answers from Valmiki Ramayana, is not worth. This is the time for the audience to separate religion, self-beliefs from the fiction. Nitin Tiwari’s Ramayana is a fantasy based on a mythological story. Nothing more nothing less!
Sowmya Sri Rallabhandi