Topic started by sitthan (@ 210.187.9.234) on Mon Oct 27 22:54:46 EST 2003.
All times in EST +10:30 for IST.

Vikram's impressive character. This sycopant anger till the reach of Simran is the effort of this character's detail to it's minute. How or where did Bala fill about such a character who is secluded by the society and lives amidst burning corpses?.The slack in screen play occurred in his earlier work for the film 'Nanda' has been made alright this time. Tto give pace to his scenes, interesting dialogues and capsulated happenings for the film none of the film's scenes have suffered a set back. Especially by creating a commercial priest role amidst Vikram's murderous thrashing. Scenes in jails and a few hilarious moments in Vikram's behavior is also an example. Saving the film without inserting a song and sequence for commercial sake. Vikram does not have a single dialogue in this film. Can you believe? Its known that he is not dumb but can talk, only when he signs a 3-line song beside a corpse. His hanging of both arms while running acts to look like an animal arising to walk brings howls and cheers in theatres.The best scenes in the film? Vikram's thrashing and dragging of the Villain who terrorize Surya in front of Laila. Director does the walking. Balasubramaniam's camera penetrating of locations (especially Ganja gardens in the forest) strengthens the scenes. Eventhough excelling given when with very little space to work only in songs, the maestro has done his act as Bhishma in the film BGM. It challenges befittingly the director and the actor during the climax. This is needed in competition brace your selves folks to join this great action. It may be murmured as another sorrowful story from Bala. But Pithamagan is the best. Every one can become Dad and Mum but it's a miracle to become blessed parents. Kollywood has become a blessed parent once more.


verdict
excellent

Responses:

• From: Raj (@ atlcsn01.atl.hp.com) on: Mon Oct 27 23:42:23 EST 2003
  
  Excellent Review...Film was too good...
  
  
• From: arun (@ 202.131.115.149) on: Wed Nov 5 03:43:15 EST 2003
  
  no no no words tosay
  
  
• From: raghav (@ dialpool-210-214-128-93.maa.sify.net) on: Thu Nov 6 14:09:27 EST 2003
  
  Even Vikrams cahrecterisation in Pithamahan is confusing. Just see...the undertaker who brings him up is like a philosophy professor turned an undertaker and vikram does all kinda crap like running like a wild guerilla and all tat. Accepted he had acted well. But lil bit of confusion prevails in his charecterisation. In no way an undertaker's world can end within a graveyard. He too wud've watched film in tent kottais....eve teased gals....made frenz with ppl....but here....bala had portrayed him as a beast without any emotion. No exposure to the outer world.
  
  
• From: raghav (@ dialpool-210-214-128-93.maa.sify.net) on: Thu Nov 6 14:09:57 EST 2003
  
  Even Vikrams cahrecterisation in Pithamahan is confusing. Just see...the undertaker who brings him up is like a philosophy professor turned an undertaker and vikram does all kinda crap like running like a wild guerilla and all tat. Accepted he had acted well. But lil bit of confusion prevails in his charecterisation. In no way an undertaker's world can end within a graveyard. He too wud've watched film in tent kottais....eve teased gals....made frenz with ppl....but here....bala had portrayed him as a beast without any emotion. No exposure to the outer world. Very unbeliveble.
  
  
• From: Prathap (@ pulteney-pix.border.net.adelaide.edu.au) on: Thu Nov 6 20:42:02 EST 2003
  
  Well said raghav i even said that in this forum b4.
  
  
• From: rookie (@ palo5.pacific.net.sg) on: Fri Nov 14 12:29:51 EST 2003
  
  i totally agree..im a lil abit confused too.
  
  
• From: mala (@ 165.127.96.201) on: Thu Nov 20 14:07:26 EST 2003
  
  Vikram needs no words about his performance in this movie. I would say he is just marvellous. VIKRAM-ACTOR BORN MAN.
  
  
• From: Sella (@ wc09.mtnk.rnc.net.cable.rogers.com) on: Thu Nov 27 20:38:23 EST 2003
  
  As far as Vikrams acting is concerned he has done it well. His acting is not at all extra ordinary.Any actor can do it as he did butI wonder how a man who is an undertaker and a guy does that kind of job in a crematorium behaves like a jungle man. A beast like. Are crematoriums in Indian villages in the midst of dark jungles where it is hard to see mankind and the worker who works there has no asociation with mankind.
  
  
• From: Will (@ 61.1.203.72) on: Thu Dec 4 01:52:25 EST 2003
  
  This is my personal review of Pithamagan:
  
  Actually, I hadn't yet seen Thirumalai, but, I had seen Pithamagan long before.
  
  And, I just couldn't help but comment that it would have been better had I seen a BBC Documentary instead of this film.
  
  Let me back up my comment:
  
  First of all, I shun the very idea of the director Bala's self-escalating his directorship.
  
  It was hard to watch the Pithamagan Promotional Piece on SunTV on Diwali day, with everybody praising Bala for his perfectionism. For, every person who had tried to achive it knows that it is impossible to be perfect. A famous scholar (whose name I currently don't remember, but I will tell you if you insist) once told "Don't worry about perfectionism. You will never achieve it". And, everybody in that episode were commenting that Bala took shots UNTIL "he" was satisfied that it was "perfect". Well, well, well!
  
  Very Next thing was, I couldn't see a single of that thing in that film (in settings, etc.). Only the camera showed some touches of professionalism but, that could well have been that of the cameraman!
  
  Moving onto the film itself, first thing you note is the vulgarity depicted in the film. The times when Vikram fights with people (especially him trying to tear the mouth of a jail-worker), and women being beated thrice in the movie (especially Laila being beaten by Surya).
  
  Immediately follows, is the vulgar dialogues of Surya (thank god, atleast Vikram had almost no dialogues in that film, or Bala would have urged the writer to include vulgar dialogues for him too). This is especially evident when Surya goes as a pedlar and also when he speaks to Laila at the jail.
  
  Those were the things you notice on first look. If you look a bit more deeply, you can find that the film has absolutely no story line at all! Two friends meeting, and one takes revenge for the murder of another. That is the story? Well, again!
  
  The only appreciable fact is the bondage between two friends of different bringing-up, being shown in a sort of different but adorable fashion.
  
  And, of course, not to mention about the screenplay. Now, people are comparing Bala with Shankar and Manirathnam! Definitely, anybody who knows what screenplay are would not say anything of this sort! Atleast anyone who had admired the "screenplay" of films like Roja, Nayagan, Agni Natchatram (wow! what a screenplay that was!), Indian, Gentleman, Mudalvan, would never even compare them with the screenplays of Sethu, Nandha, and Pithamagan.
  
  The screenplay was, at the best, sluggish! How did Laila and Surya start loving each other? Or, how did Laila like Surya, when he insulted and badgered her at every given oppurtunity? And that too, immediately after that jail scene! Maybe, the director thought that the audience would understand something that he doesn't depict in the film or he thought people would concentrate on the main part (surya+vikram friendship) and leave the other minor parts, I do not know!
  
  It is concentrating on every minor aspect that makes a "good" director.
  
  And, finally, people are talking about excellent characterisation. This is agreeable to a certain extent, but still, this could be done with a "little" bit of imagination or by actually visitng places like lunatic asylum, or even some really OLD villages or the like places, watching many people there, merging their characters and going on from there.
  
  But, definitely, Vikram's acting was simply excellent. Three cheers to him! In this thing, I will appreciate the director a little, cause he is the one who usually influences in(or even makes) artiste's acting.
  
  So, finally, I give a rating of 5 Stars for Vikram, 1 Star for Bala (for the daringly different way he had shown the bondage between friends + for making Vikram act the way he had), and 1 Star for the film itself.
  
  Thanks, and I would like very much to hear your comments. Please post them in this thread: http://forumhub.com/tfilms/18008.01.40.02.html , for this is where I will be checking back for replies. Thanks again.
  
  

Want to post a response?