I am a typical Indian, I love movies. I love seeing them, whatever their type and genre (except horror). Otherwise a home bird, I love going out for a movie, I adore the whole movie-going experience (indulged in an earlier blog).
I love mass movies as much as I adore movies with a message (they were called art movies, not sure what they are called now). I don't mind movie-makers taking liberties in the movies, else what would be the difference between real life and reel life? We are used to the exaggerated stunts of Rajnikant, Salman Khan, and Akshay Kumar. Thanks to Matrix and Fast and Furious imitations, we have grown to like the impossible stunts of Ajay Devgan and Rohit Shetty's movies. Post the angry young man era of Bachchan saab and slapstick times of Govinda, I started loving movies with no story-line. The thing I like about all the above mentioned genres is the fact that they never claimed to be more than what they were. You knew what to expect and were not disappointed.
When Rajamouli's Baahubali was declared as a milestone in the Indian movie industry for its technical finesse as a visual treat, I was naturally excited. I watched the beginning and today, a week after its release, I saw the conclusion. What a let down... I don't care why Kattappa killed Baahubali (don't worry I am not about to reveal it here), I just want to know why Baahubali, the movie, is referred to as a magnum opus. I have seen all the movies made by SS Rajamouli and enjoyed them especially Eega, Magadheera and Yamadonga. When a director of such caliber makes a movie, you go with an expectation of something beyond the ordinary, other than the hype. So what was Rajamouli thinking? People are fools, they will lap up anything thrown their way? Sadly, box office collections and reviews are endorsing his thinking. I would have excused the lack of plot and character development, if it really was a visual treat. There were so many fallacies in both the movies, that defied the basic laws of physics. You can not increase your speed mid-jump especially when jumping up a level (in beginning when Prabhas leaps over cliffs to reach Tamanna), nor can you climb up an incline leaning backwards (in the conclusion when Prabhas climbs up the elephant trunk). You can use graphical imagery to depict a mad elephant running amok, but it should be as close to reality as possible, else what is the point in using graphics. I could have gone to an animation movie.
Want to see a visual treat, watch Life of Pi, want a fantasy with ultimate technical finesse watch Avatar, want to see some amazing action scenes watch Transporter series, want to see sci-fi thriller see Star Wars. If you think I am being unpatriotic, then here goes my list of Telugu movies with mind blowing special effects - Maya Bazaar, Patala Bhairavi, Apoorva Sagodharargal. If we could achieve Maya Bazaar and Patala Bhairavi in 1950s, why are we not able to replicate it after almost a century? Why do I feel that we are going backwards in our movies instead of forward despite all the development in technology? They say the talent behind the visual effects of Avatar and Star Wars is from India, so where is it? Why are we not able to see it in any Indian movies?
And to quote my Dad, with all the hype created around Baahubali, I feel guilty saying I didn't like it, people will think I am mad or senile.
