• TN Santhosh’s Kanithan resembles his mentor AR Murugadoss’s Thuppakki in a lot of ways. The heroes and the villains of both the movies keep playing mind-games. They don’t confront each other till the climax. The pub songs – etc., etc. – look similar. But Atharvaa’s film is not as grippy as Thuppaki due to the badly-written screenplay.

  • A potential script and actors are wasted because of an indifferent treatment in Miruthan.

  • After watching Bangalore Naatkal, the first question that pecks the mind is that what is the need for remaking films like Bangalore Days and Premam?

  • Thoongaavanam, which should have been done and dusted in 90 minutes, is dragged to fit the conventional time-expectations of the Indian audience. The French film’s script doesn’t stick with the three-part film grammar, which is prevalent here. The interval block becomes fatal to the flow of the film.

  • The problem with making a film based on history is the amount of liberty the filmmaker can afford to take, in order to tweak the history so that the film appeals to a wider audience. If the story and the characterisation breach a certain boundary, and if the infused fictional elements overshadow the facts, then the film fails to do justice to the genre. Rudhramadevi seems to have bumped into a similar problem.

Viewing item 1 to 5 (of 5 items)