Mountainhead begins with four tech giants meeting at a remote mountain mansion, owned by Souper or ‘Soup’, the poorest among them, in the wake of a global upheaval caused by a new generative AI, launched by Venis, the richest among them, who is also the richest man in the world. The quartet is completed by Jeff, another AI wonderkid, and the older Randall, a sort of mentor to all. Though the gathering is meant to rekindle old bonds between the self-proclaimed ‘Brewsters’, each arrives with his own agenda. As they attempt to make sense of the chaos unfolding outside, they also vie to shape the future of humanity, drawing on each other’s minds, ambitions, and secrets.
One of the most brilliant scenes in the film unfolds when Jeff questions Venis about the sectarian violence and genocidal attacks inadvertently triggered by his new generative AI. Ven responds with a disarming analogy: he recalls how, when people first saw a train on a movie screen, they ran out of the theatre in fear. But filmmakers didn’t stop making movies—they made more. “Show more,” he says, “until everyone realizes that nothing is that f**king serious. Nothing means anything, and everything is funny.”
This moment captures the essence of Mountainhead—its dark, absurdist satire and the way it confronts our current anxieties with a disturbingly casual shrug. It’s both chilling and hilarious.
Directed by Jesse Armstrong, the Emmy and Golden Globe-winning creator of Succession, Mountainhead moves with the pace of a thriller, though what unravels isn’t action, but intention. It delves into the twisted psyches of four tech geniuses, forced into a tense chamber drama where tolerance is the only currency left.
Despite its psychological weight, the film’s tone remains largely satirical throughout its under-two-hour runtime. There’s plenty to read between the lines, but Armstrong, who also wrote the screenplay, deftly keeps the atmosphere light, even as the story descends into its darkest moments. What stays consistent is the film’s keen study of powerful, hyper-successful individuals who have grown dangerously detached from reality—mirrored perfectly by the opulent, isolated retreat where they’ve chosen to gather.
Verdict:
In the midst of ongoing discussions about AI, who controls it, and whether we have a future with or despite it, this film is an essential watch.
You can watch Mountainhead on JioHotstar in India.
The second season of Paatal Lok lacks the gritty, immersive atmosphere that made its predecessor so compelling. It misses the haunting presence of characters like Hathoda Tyagi and takes time to draw you in. Unlike the first season, which gripped you from the start, this one unfolds more slowly. But once it finds its footing, it drags you deep into its netherworld and holds you there until the very end.
In this season, when Hathi Ram and Ansari first arrive in Nagaland, it feels as if they’ve carried a piece of Delhi into unfamiliar terrain. They adapt too easily, moving through this alien landscape—its politics, language, and culture—with an almost unnatural confidence. It feels off.
Adding to the dissonance is the sheer number of characters who come and go without leaving much impact, making the narrative feel cluttered and confusing. But what struck me most was how sanitized everything felt. For a neo-noir crime thriller in the vein of Delhi Crime, the raw, shadowy, and saturated visuals that defined the first season are noticeably absent. Perhaps this was a deliberate choice by the makers, but for me, it dulled the show’s edge.
That said, Paatal Lok 2 has its strengths. Setting the story in Nagaland is a bold choice, and even braver is the decision to cast several actors from the North-East—some non-actors—and let them speak in Nagamese. This adds a layer of authenticity rarely seen in mainstream narratives.
The writing also captures the region’s simmering socio-political tensions, the aspirations of its people, and the web of deceit they’ve been ensnared in for generations. In staying true to these themes, the show preserves the essence of its first season, maintaining a sense of continuity
The narrative takes a crucial turn at the end of episode four. From there, the story gathers momentum, unraveling with precision and leading to a satisfying finale that leaves the audience with a sense of closure.
The writing in the final four episodes is particularly strong—balanced, clever, and well-paced. With multiple loose ends to resolve, the screenplay ensures that every thread is tied up seamlessly, without anything feeling forced or unnecessary.
The show’s greatest strength remains its protagonist. This time, Hathi Ram Chaudhary is largely on his own, commanding maximum screen time, with a stellar Tillotama Shome in top form. But make no mistake—this is his show. The camera adores him, and Jaideep Ahlawat delivers a masterclass in acting, embodying Hathi Ram with absolute conviction.
Every detail—the weary eyes, the slight paunch, the limp, the accent—paints a portrait of a man burdened by ambition yet unwilling to compromise his integrity. He is street-smart but principled, flawed yet self-aware. One of the finest characters to emerge from the Indian OTT space, Hathi Ram feels even more layered this time around, and Jaideep surpasses his own benchmark from the first season with remarkable nuance and skill.
Verdict:
Paatal Lok 2 is a worthy successor to its predecessor. It takes time to find its footing, but once it does, it delivers a layered, immersive crime thriller that rewards patient viewers. At its heart is Jaideep Ahlawat, in peak form as Hathi Ram Chaudhary, delivering one of the finest performances in recent times.
While I am aware this might disappoint some Malayalees, I have to concede that I struggled to embrace ‘Aadujeevitham’. Despite the promising source material, I felt it lacked the captivating essence needed for compelling cinema. To begin with, converting Benyamin’s vivid prose into a motion picture seemed like a daunting task, and though I observed the effort, ambition, and grand scale, I couldn’t immerse myself in the hero’s journey. Sympathy for the protagonist was present, yet there remained a constant emotional distance. It felt as though the director got lost in his own artistry.
Blessy, is undoubtedly a talented filmmaker, whose filmography only a few can boast of. He has given the Malayalee cinephile films like ‘Thanmatra’, ‘Brahmaram’ and ‘Kaazhcha’, and we Malayalees eagerly wait for the next Blessy release. However, ‘Aadujeevitham’, fails to create the impact that those films did.
However, the dedication poured into crafting the film is undeniable. From the authentic visuals, costumes, to the locations, every aspect rings true. The actors, led by the excellent Prithviraj Sukumaran, deliver commendable performances, with Sukumaran fully embodying his character Najeeb. Unlike some of his other roles where the star overshadows the actor, here he is Najeeb through and through, a transformation that is strikingly painful to witness.
To be fair, the director does offer a few cinematic moments that Indian audiences may not have experienced before, moments that are cathartic and likely to linger in viewers’ minds long after the credits roll. It’s clearly a film made for the theatre. However, not everything comes together to create the impact it should. Some scenes tend to be overly melodramatic. Blessy, being an old-school filmmaker, which isn’t necessarily a flaw, but in a cinematic landscape shaped by the advent of OTT platforms and exposure to world cinema, the language of our films has evolved. This evolution cannot be ignored by filmmakers.
Consider ‘Dunki’ in this context, where a celebrated filmmaker like Rajkumar Hirani stuck to his signature style, resulting in a film that didn’t resonate as strongly with today’s audience as expected. Conversely, a veteran filmmaker like Martin Scorcese chooses to continuously evolve, staying relevant to the times rather than sticking to a particular style.
That being said, it would be unfair to label ‘Aadujeevitham’ as a bad film. The effort put into its making is evident on screen, perhaps too much so, as it sometimes feels disjointed from the storytelling. This, in my view, creates an emotional distance between the protagonist and the audience, despite the lead actor’s stellar performance.
Oppenheimer is the furthest, in my opinion, that Christopher Nolan has traveled from his comfort zone. The film is an amalgamation of genres—a biopic that has psycho-political undertones sufficient to qualify it as a thriller too. Whatever, genre we may choose to fit the film into, it is undoubtedly Nolan’s most human story yet. In making it, he may just have created his masterpiece.
While, there are several departures from Nolan’s earlier films; don’t be mislead into thinking that this film is not quintessentially ‘Nolanesque’. ‘Oppenheimer’ is not science fiction, even though there is a lot of science involved in building an atomic bomb. It is not futuristic; it’s historical drama mostly, but it does deliver a non-didactic message to the future. It is not action-packed and may not have a hero who is hell-bent to save the world. But it does have a scientist in a dilemma about his creation and its impact on humanity.
In short, it is a film about a man of great intellect who is believed to have changed our world forever. For good or bad, Nolan doesn’t give these answers. What he poses instead, are questions.
Lead actor, Cillian Murphy in an interview with film critic Sucharita Tyagi, mentions reading the Gita in preparation for the role, and says that Robert Oppenheimer could have found consolation in the sacred text and the infamous lines, “Now I am become death, the destroyer of worlds“. While it is debatable whether these lines were taken out of context by the scientist; by mentioning the incident, Cillian touches upon an important character trait—the confusion of Oppenheimer about the consequences of his creation. Nolan in another interview affirms, that this predicament of scientists’ vis-a-vis their creations inspired him to make this film. He further adds that the scientific community is comparing the splitting of the atom, to the creation of AI and calling it the ‘Oppenheimer moment’. This I believe is a decent starting point in trying to understand the film.
The film’s trailer may have done a disservice with respect to managing people’s expectations. A faction of the critics has opined that this is an anti-war film, that is not anti-war enough because it sanitizes the brutality that the bomb unleashed both on its target (Hiroshima and Nagasaki) and its place of origin (Los Alamos). Another faction calls the film too long, that digresses into unnecessary territories without showing enough of the fireworks it had promised. To an audience that went in with preconceived notions about the film, these points will hold. However, the truth is that the film is not about the bomb. It is about Oppenheimer, as promised by its title.
Based on the book “American Prometheus – The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer“, the story is character-driven. Unlike Nolan’s earlier films, this film is not plot heavy. It is easier to understand, and the storytelling is simple and yet, intellectually challenging. Nolan has fun with timelines as always to make the sequences rousing. But the absence of an obsession with a novel subject, as we saw in Tenet or Inception, is a welcome change. There is scientific jargon thrown at you but very early on we realize that that is not what the film is about.
I went in for a 6:30 morning show in an IMAX theatre. It was the second Sunday after the film’s release in India and it was a full house. I believe that it is always best to go into a Nolan film not knowing what to expect. It is the best way to enjoy his films. That way the surprises he throws at you become more rewarding.
Here the novelty was watching exemplary acting performances on IMAX. If ever, pure acting required IMAX then this is it. For most parts, we see close-ups of actors, which means that they had no room to falter. But with a stellar cast as this one, the chances of faltering were minimal. However, most of the heavy lifting is done by the protagonist, Cillian Murphy. There is something about his face and eyes that is so unique. He can say so much without really saying it. This is a career-best performance from the actor who had been waiting for such a moment to show his full range.
Several scenes in the film are bound to linger in the minds of audiences. However, the sequence that encapsulated the essence of what the film was trying to achieve is the ‘victory speech scene’ after the successful testing of the bomb. I thought it perfectly captured the conflict in the mind of the protagonist—the elation, confusion, and exasperation. It is the climactic moment of the film in which ‘Oppie’ becomes a hero for his people, and a villain in his head. Noise and silence along with a dash of magic realism are used impeccably in this scene.
The same can be said of the much talked about ‘Trinity test scene’ when the bomb finally explodes in front of its creators. Here, I thought the director used noise and silence to explore more philosophical themes. There is silence when the bomb explodes and the aftermath i.e the rumbling and violent shaking is deliberately delayed as if to say, that it will take time for the inventors to fully understand the repercussions of their creation.
As in all of Nolan’s films the antagonist in ‘Oppenheimer’ is a formidable opponent. Robert Downey Jr plays the role of the vengeful, Lewis Strauss, a businessman and philanthropist, out to destroy Oppenheimer. His character arc is written brilliantly, and Robert Downey Jr delivers an assured, nuanced performance which is a highlight of the film.
In terms of screen time the rest of the cast, which includes A-list actors like Matt Damon, Gary Oldman, Emily Blunt, Florence Pugh, Rami Malek, and Josh Hartnett play small but significant parts. If you’ve seen the post-release interviews of some of these actors, it is clear that their job was to play their role in the life of Oppenheimer. That’s it. And they do with absolute sincerity. Among them Emily Blunt as Oppie’s wife ‘Kitty’ and Matt Damon as ‘Gen. Les Groves’ stand out.
But it is the editing of ‘Oppenheimer’ which is truly a masterclass. It is deft and divine! Yes, it is a strength in all of Nolan’s films; given how he plays with time. But here there is an almost languid, poetic touch to it. Mind you, unlike Nolan’s previous films, this is not an action-packed film, and hence the scenes are not naturally stirring. They had to be cut intelligently to create that thrill without confusing audiences. Editor Jennifer Lame expertly stitches the different stages of Oppenheimer’s life in this non-linear narrative and the end product is mesmerizing.
I was content with what I saw that Sunday morning. And that contentment I noticed in the faces of people who left the theatre that day. There was pin-drop silence in the hall throughout the 3-hour run time, and that silence continued as we exited the hall.
Cinema, we know, is an art form. Perhaps the most collaborative one. It has a language of its own. And, just like other art forms its purpose is to tell a story, thereby evoking emotions within the audience consuming it. The language of cinema is distinct from the spoken word uttered by some of its most liked characters. Sadly, there are a handful of directors left who make an effort to preserve this language of cinema. Nolan is one of those rare directors who believes that his audience is intelligent.
With ‘Oppenheimer’ the maverick director goes into uncharted territories and paints his masterpiece. This in my opinion is that work that the great auteurs of the past, the likes of Ray and Kurosawa, will be proud of. They might just be giving Nolan a light applause from heaven.
The use of food allegorically in films always makes for an exciting proposition. In recent years, Assamese film ‘Aamis’ and Spanish film ‘The Platform’ comes to mind where food was used in ingenious ways to tell stories marinated in subtexts. While these films weren’t easy to watch, they were nevertheless entertaining. Director Mark Mylod’s ‘The Menu’ has a similar trajectory. OTT platform, Disney + Hotstar classifies it as horror. However, to me, it felt like a satire pretending to be a psychological thriller. To be fair, though, the film does have its horrific moments.
Moreover, the horror genre is so fluid that, to an imaginative writer, it offers the flexibility to play and invent. So in terms of newness, ‘The Menu’ is a compelling watch.
The storyline is twisted. A young couple, Margot (an escort) played by an excellent Anya Taylor – Joy and Tyler (a food blogger) played by Nicholas Hoult, travel to a faraway island to eat at an exclusive restaurant named Hawthorn, where celebrity chef, Julian Slowik, played by a menacing Ralph Fiennes, has prepared a lavish menu for his chosen guest list. Slowik serves a series of courses for dinner, and before each dish he delivers an unsettling monologue. The absurdity of it all, makes Margot wary about the chef’s intentions. He seems bull-headed, and his ‘loveless’ cooking doesn’t suit her palate. The other guests, however, aren’t as doubting. They think it’s all part of Slowik’s ‘act’!
The self-indulgent guests include a renowned food critic and her editor, a fallen movie star and his personal assistant, a group of young angel investors, and a wealthy couple who are regulars at the restaurant. To Margot’s dismay, her partner Tyler isn’t any better since he is an ardent fan of Slowik and can’t stop singing praises of him. It is not until the third course that Slowik’s true nature slowly begins to unravel. The movie gathers pace thereafter.
Much of the storytelling happens through conversations, and writers Seth Reiss and Will Tracy have used absurdity in the scenes written to keep audiences guessing. But, at its core, ‘The Menu’ is a social satire, that uses elements of horror, and dark comedy to tell a story of human greed, man’s obsession with perfection, the elite’s ceaseless need to over intellectualize, and the death of passion at the altar of ambition.
In terms of cinematic language, ‘The Menu’ reminds you of Kubrick’s eccentricity in ‘The Shining’ and Bong Joon-Ho’s dark humor in ‘The Parasite’. Also, like those films, there is a lot to be mindful of as an audience because everything is there for a reason. So this film can be demanding at times.
Yet, ‘The Menu’ isn’t a perfect film by any means. Sometimes it tries too much to marry the amusing and the bizarre. I also felt that the supporting cast, should have had a greater role to play given their interesting backstories. Even so, whenever the film wavered slightly, there comes a scene to salvage the situation. For example, the way the restaurant staff were used to heighten the tension was enterprising. But the interactions between Slowik and Margot remain the most captivating parts of the film.
To sum up, ‘The Menu’ is an inventive film with an important message which comes through to the audience, at the very end, after the story has endured several twists and turns. It keeps you invested because the actors have done justice to their parts and the makers have been able to create several thrilling moments that will linger. I would recommend the film to audiences who like intelligently written thrillers that are more than what meets the eye.
If you want to know why a cheeseburger needs to be just that, nothing more and nothing less, then watch ‘The Menu’ on Disney+Hotstar.
The last thing you want to do with a Christopher Nolan film, is to judge it too quickly. Given the high concept plots, sub-texts and layers in his films, they are bound to be inaccessible to some. In such a case a second or even a third viewing might help. However, I chose to let the film sink in for a week, and gradually assimilate whatever I had watched, before forming an opinion about it. But I have no qualms in admitting that I may not have understood all the nuances of Tenet (if that’s even possible). So, a second viewing is due. Also, I won’t be surprised if this film is considered a modern masterpiece in the future. However, at this point I can only tell you what I felt about it after having slept over it for a week. (Disclaimer – given the current covid scenario, I could not watch the film in a theatre and chose to watch it on Amazon prime video.)
All that we have come to expect from a Nolan film are present in Tenet — jaw dropping visuals, a spectacular opening sequence, a protagonist who has to save the world, and multiple sub-plots which bind together beautifully towards the end. However, there is another Nolan cliché that his films are notoriously famous for, and that is the complexity of the concepts that he explores. On that aspect, Tenet surely feels like Nolan’s most complex and mind-bending blockbuster till date.
The Amazon prime description of Tenet reads — “Armed with only one word – Tenet – and fighting for the survival of the entire world, the protagonist journeys through a twilight world of international espionage on a mission that will unfold in something beyond real time”. So, this is a globe-trotting, action adventure shot in multiple locations around the world. These locations are important to the film, because the lead character has to save the “world” from an impending danger. “Time” as everyone knows is an important element in many of Nolan’s films, and he uses it in path-breaking ways. In Tenet, he introduces the concepts of “time inversion” and “reverse entropy” to create an absurd sci-fi landscape where the past, present and future are warring with each other in one frame, glimpses of which we can see in the trailer. However, Nolan has clarified in his interviews that Tenet isn’t exactly a film on time travel. Also, beneath all of these complexities is a very human story, and that is so easy to miss in a film as fast-paced as this one.
We all know that Nolan is not a big fan of CGI. Hence, the fight scenes of Tenet, using practical effects, have left audiences wondering as to how these scenes were choreographed to such perfection. It is believed that Nolan took inspiration from dance choreography so that stunt performers could do the movements forwards and backwards without reversing the film. The fight scenes are undoubtedly the film’s big plus point. (Ref. cbr.com)
Nolan’s go to man for the background score, Hans Zimmer, wasn’t available for this film, since he was committed to “Dune”. So, in came Swedish composer, Ludwig Göransson, Grammy and Academy award winner, known for his score in the 2018 superhero movie, “Black Panther”. I for one, did not miss Hans Zimmer in Tenet, because the score sounded so much like his. If I hadn’t googled to find out who the composer was, I would have assumed it to be Zimmer! During the pandemic, Göransson had recorded the musicians at home and what we finally get is captivating.
However, as with Nolan’s earlier films, the sound-mixing of Tenet, has received some criticism. The over-bearing sound mix has at times made the dialogues incomprehensible. I have experienced this in Nolan’s earlier films as well, but in this film, it felt a tad too jarring. But Nolan seems unapologetic about it. This was his defense of the sound-mixing of Interstellar, “Clarity of story, clarity of emotions — I try to achieve that in a very layered way using all the different things at my disposal — picture and sound. I’ve always loved films that approach sound in an impressionistic way and that is an unusual approach for a mainstream blockbuster, but I feel it’s the right approach for this experiential film.” (ref: Indiewire). Okay, but I guess only die-hard fans of the director will buy that explanation.
Visually, though, Tenet is breath-taking! Cinematographer Hoyte Van Hoytema might have just shot an IMAX masterpiece. This is the third collaboration between Hoytema and Nolan after Interstellar (2014) and Dunkirk (2017), and this is Nolan’s sixth film that is shot in 70 mm IMAX. With each film the director seems to be pushing the boundaries and taking it a notch higher. The methodology used is to find innovative ways to make a 30 kg IMAX camera portable. We have seen that in the spectacular action sequences of Dunkirk and Dark Knight Rises, and given the complex concept of Tenet, we can only imagine the innovations that went behind shooting the fight scenes.
Due to the many sub-plots, there are several characters in the film. The ensemble cast comprises of John David Washington (protagonist), Robert Pattinson (Neil), Elizabeth Debicki (Kat), Dimple Kapadia (Priya) and Kenneth Branagh (Andrei Sator) in the important roles. Although, all the actors have done their jobs well; due to the backstory, it’s the characters played by Elizabeth Debicki and Kenneth Branagh you will be most invested in. The reason you do not relate to the journeys of the other characters is because of the screenplay, which is perhaps the film’s weakest point.
Tenet is a plot heavy film, like many of Nolan’s other films. But I think he was so enamoured with the concept of this one, that beyond a point it felt like he was resorting to exhibitionism. Therefore, the film takes too long to start making sense and to unravel all its layers. There are several scenes where the protagonist is seen discussing the science behind it all with other characters, which comes at the cost of a gripping narrative. The screenplay is also so fast-paced that within the blink of an eye you can miss out important elements.
The complexity of the plot/concept also ensured that the reactions to the film were highly polarized. Some found it fascinating while others found it inaccessible and boring. However, I felt that it wasn’t the concept, per say, that was a turn off, but the excessive investment in it. Instead, if the characters were a little more layered and humanlike, they would have been a lot more relatable. Moreover, this is a human story and not just a sci-fi fantasy, which audiences will realize towards the end.
But Christopher Nolan is one of those directors who keeps pushing the boundaries with every new film. Perhaps his greatest attribute is that he believes in the intelligence of his audience. When directors around the world are dumbing down their stories to such levels that all you need to do is to keep your eyes and ears open, here is one director, who wants his audiences to think. He is also constantly innovating to give his audiences something new each time. This is why he is widely regarded as a modern master of cinema and deservedly so.
My final word — Tenet is a high concept, plot-heavy, visual spectacle that dazzles you several times but does not keep you emotionally invested throughout. But for the imagination and the subsequent innovations that went behind the making of this unusual film, it deserves to be watched. I will give Tenet 3.5/5 stars. It is available on Amazon prime video.
In a scene from the film, Joji asks his sister-in-law, Bincy, whether his elder brother has spoken to their father? To which Bincy replies, that their plan will never ever work and that his good days will be wasted on the kitchen slab. Joji, smirks and exits the kitchen. The camera pans backwards and a wide angle shot, complemented by a haunting background score, captures the exasperation of Bincy and Joji, in one frame. Both sulk in silence. The scene conveys the confusion lingering in the minds of the two characters, without many dialogues and screen time. Yet, it is a pivotal moment in the film!
After having watched Dileesh Pothan’s earlier two films, “Maheshinte Prathikaram” (2016) and “Thondimuthalam Driksashiyam” (2017) (both National award-winning films), one thing was clear, that he wasn’t going to repeat himself. The worlds, characters, and the cinematic language were all very distinct in his earlier films. However, what was constant is the minimalism, and that continues in “Joji”.
Shakespeare’s tragedy “Macbeth” written over 400 years ago, was about a Scottish general, who, consumed by his ambition and spurred to action by his wife, murders the King to take the Scottish throne. Widely regarded as one of the best characters ever written, Macbeth, shows the workings of the complex human mind, when blinded by desire, and the subsequent descent into madness, guilt and paranoia. The universality of the play’s messaging, allowed flexibility to filmmakers to contemporize and adapt the story, according to their sensibilities. Macbeth could have been anyone, anywhere in the world. So in the case of “Joji”, we are amidst the vast green expanses of Erumely, and inside the house of the affluent Panachel family, where we meet Joji, the youngest of the three sons of the imposing family patriarch Kuttappan PK. Physically the weakest, but deceptive and the most ambitious.
The film starts off with the disclaimer that it is inspired by Shakespeare’s “Macbeth”, which means that this isn’t exactly an adaptation, as many are making it to be. Yet, there is a lot of “Macbeth” in this film, in ways that you may think wasn’t possible, and writer Syam Pushkaran deserves credit for that. The attention to detail is immaculate, and nothing seems out of place. The intelligence of the writer shows in the scenes and intricately layered characters he has written. The narrative is sprinkled with allegories and the use of dark humour to mock traditions and show the behavioural transformation of the brothers to serve their self-interest makes for some gripping cinema.
Cinematographer Shyju Khalid’s lens, once again, manages to make the cinematic experience immersive. Close-up shots followed by wide-angle ones, is what he uses to take you into the mind of a character, and then give you the bigger picture. Also, the use of mirrors in the storytelling was very clever. The background score by Justin Varghese has a brooding, haunting quality to it. Western orchestra, mainly cello and violin, has been used to complement the moods and thoughts. Given the milieu, the background score might take you by surprise but the choice of music is definitely a masterstroke. It adds to the drama unfolding on the screen.
But in a performance driven film like this; a lot of the heavy-lifting has to be done by the actors. The ensemble cast consists of PN Sunny (as Kuttappan PK, the dominant family patriarch), Baburaj (as Jomon, the turbulent and alcoholic eldest sibling), Joji Mundakayam (as Jaison, the unassuming middle brother), Unnimaya Prasad (as Bincy, the quietly scheming wife of Jaison), Alister Alex (as Popy, the malleable son of Jomon) and Fahadh Faasil (as Joji, the complexed youngest sibling). Although, the story is centered around Fahadh’s character, the other actors also had a lot on their plate, since the scenes are written in such a way, that they have to feed off each other, giving room for a lot of improvisations. And they have all delivered superlative performances. Some of the best scenes in the film are when the family members are together in one frame.
However, a lot rested on the shoulders of the central character, and Fahadh, through his expressive eyes, physicality and body language becomes “Joji”. Due to the physical transformation, beyond a point, you fail to see Fahadh, and you see only “Joji”. It is difficult to say whether, this is his best performance because he has many to his credit. But this could be the most complexed character he has played till now, and he pulls it off with aplomb.
Malayalam cinema is truly having a golden run at the moment, challenging even the late 80’s and 90s golden era. No wonder, they have got the attention of filmmakers and movie lovers across the world. Through sheer technical brilliance, they seem to have the ability to make a 5-crore film, look like a 50-crore one! They also have the best content, and some of the most naturally gifted actors. “Joji” is another feather in the cap of Malayalam cinema, and with it, director Dileesh Pothan has hit the ball, out of the park, for a third consecutive time! For its powerhouse acting performances, technical brilliance, engaging screenplay and minimalism, “Joji” deserves 4 / 5 stars. You can watch it on Amazon Prime video.
Ever since the trailer of “Jallikattu” had released on YouTube it had captured my imagination. I was eagerly waiting for its release because in my opinion its director Lijo Jose Pellissery is bit of a genius!
An 11-minute continuous shot constituting the climax (watch the making) of his 2017 film “Angamaly Diaries” (its on Netflix) will forever remain etched in my memory. It was unlike anything, I had seen before – original, audacious, innovative and visually spectacular.
Post this, Lijo came to be known as the “master of chaos”. You will have to watch Angamaly Diaries (2017) and Jallikattu (2019) to understand why he has been given that title?
Poster of “Angamaly Diaries”
I knew that the chances of watching this film in a theater were very slim given the number of screenings Malayalam films get outside of Kerala. Hence, I had to wait till the film released on Amazon Prime Video. And, as soon as it did, I watched it.
I will try to keep this review as spoiler free as possible.
Note: there are links in this article in case you are interested in diving a bit deeper into the topics discussed.
The Story:
The premise of the story is very simple. A buffalo which is about to get slaughtered escapes from the slaughterhouse and unleashes havoc. It runs amok on the roads of a quaint little town, on the outskirts of a forest, ravaging property and gravely injuring the locals. Everyone who becomes a victim of its wrath, turns vengeful and selfishly wants a piece of it. Thus, begins a massive bull hunt. Sounds simple? – Well, in a way it is!
However, as with any good cinema there are multiple layers, nuances, sub-plots and symbolism attached to all what is unfolding on-screen.
A mesmerizing scene from “Jallikattu”
The story moves at a break-neck speed. In the beginning it is humorous and satirical and towards the end it becomes dark and murky, as the lines between man and beast, start to blur. The locals become increasingly desperate due to repeated failures and are overcome by greed, mistrust and finally rage.
At times, it felt, with each passing scene the director is peeling a layer off to show what we humans truly are at our core – “Animals”.
You might be driven to think at this point that this is art house cinema. Boring and too nuanced. Well, let me assure you, that it is not. The movie is just 94 min long and from start to finish it is a roller coaster ride.
Moreover, the director is not shoving anything down your throat. You can take whatever you want from the film and derive meaning out of it basis your understanding of the world.
By the way the title of the film, just like it’s trailer, is a bit misleading and purposefully so. The film has nothing to do with a traditional sport played in Tamil Nadu except for some symbolic references.
Technical Aspects:
Cinematography:
This movie is quite literally carried on the shoulder of its DOP. Cinematographer Gireesh Gangadharan is undoubtedly the hero of this film. It is quite evident that the director came up with some insane demands and the DOP said “yes” to all of them. Some of the shots in this film will compel you to think, “How the hell did they shoot this?”, given the fact, that Malayalam films like these are made on small budgets. It is clear, Lijo and Gireesh, are a great team.
One many of the many spectacular shots in the film
Some scenes in the film reminded me of “The Revenant” and the pairing of director Alejandro González Iñárritu and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki. Not that this film has anything to do with “The Revenant” but the sheer audacity to imagine certain scenes – like the famous bear attack scene or the scene where Leo falls off the cliff with his horse (a top down shot), is where I find the similarities.
The “Bear Attack” scene from “The Revenant”
Much like “The Revenant” there are many jaw dropping scenes in Jallikattu albeit not of the same scale. This is essentially a sound and light show. For most parts, you will see massive crowds running through the forest, holding torch lights, passing by waterfalls and mountain streams creating anarchy in a jungle. Its a minimalist approach (with no or very less CGI) yet it keeps you hooked throughout. An animatronic buffalo was used to shoot some of the bull attack scenes, where you see the chaos through the bull’s eyes.
The climax scene just like in Lijo’s “Angamaly Diaries” will leave you stunned!I can’t give that away as it will be a massive spoiler.
Sound Design and Background Score:
The other stand out feature of this film is the background score by Prashant Pillai and the sound design by Renganaath Ravee. Again, very simplistic yet arouses the desired response within the audience.
There isn’t much music at the first place. Just chants of “Hoo” and “Haa” but perfectly in sync with the mood of the crowd and the intent of the scene. The overall effect is guaranteed goose bumps.
Editing:
The opening scene of the film testifies the contribution of editor Deepu Joseph to this project. At the crack of dawn, the bulbs switch on, the clock ticks, eyes open, ants crawl and the characters are introduced. Their jobs, their routines and their lives in perfect sync with the stellar background score and all of this happens in 8 minutes straight. The world of “Jallikattu” becomes crystal clear to the audience. Everything moves at a fast yet required pace.
Production Design, Action Choreography and Costume design:
The production design by Gokul Das helps you stay engaged with the place, its people and happenings. The scene (spoiler alert), where the crowd works in unison to pull the bull out of a well is worth mentioning here.
But the way the movement of the crowd was choreographed within the jungle, at night, and the subsequent anarchy that unfolds, is simply breath taking and more than made up for some of the flaws.
The costume design by Mashar Hamsa was apt for the characters of the film. It was rustic, raw and relatable.
Writing:
The film is based on a short story named “Maoist” by S. Hareesh who is the screenplay writer of this movie along with R. Jayakumar. Research suggests that creative liberties have been taken with the original story to make it more cinematic and engaging.
The final product is crisp and packs a punch.
Direction:
A Scene from “Jallikattu”
I think enough has been said already about the technical know-how and craft of Lijo Jose Pellissery.
To add, I’d just like to say this, that when you can make the simplest of things like the opening of eyelids, crawling of insects, cutting of meat or the dripping of sweat, cinematic and immersive, you know that there is someone gifted managing the show.
From there, when you take the story forward and mount it on a grand scale what you end up getting is a visual spectacle. Lijo proves again that you don’t need big bucks to make a good movie. What you need is honest intent.
Acting
Although, known faces like Chemban Vinod and Anthony Varghese are part of the cast, they are also part of the crowd.
In many ways the crowd is the only actor.
Hence, you cannot really pin-point, one great acting performance, because actors keep coming and going out of the frame within the blink of an eye. Moreover, it does not feel that the actors are really acting. It’s as if a real bull was let loose and their reactions were being captured.
Criticism:
It is not that the movie has no flaws. All you need to do, is to ask, what these people were chasing at the first place?It was just a buffalo and not a tiger or leopard!
So, what was the fuss all about? To add to that, when you know that 90% of this film is based on this premise you might be inclined to question the logic of it all. In a way, I do agree that this criticism is justified.
A gripping moment from the movie
But the counter to this point is that the writers may have had no intention to take you through this chaos into a real world at the first place. Maybe, it was all meant to be a bit surreal.
Towards the end there is a scene (spoiler alert) where an ailing old man looks out of his window and finds the buffalo with a halo around its head. A case to support the surreal theory or was it just my imagination? I will leave it up to you.
Verdict:
Let me assure you that I can be very critical when it comes to cinema. I usually choose not to speak about movies which I didn’t like and let them pass. Also, I am very choosy with the movies I watch and the books I read. So when I do venture to see a movie, I expect the makers to respect my time and money. My only demand is to be entertained.
Furthermore, I don’t believe in classifications like art house and commercial cinema. I think there can only be two classifications – good and bad cinema. Language, country, state, region etc don’t matter to me because I like good cinema and watch all kinds of movies from around the world. I think only people who are okay with mediocrities, associate with these kinds of meaningless classifications.
So, did “Jallikattu” entertain me?
I think it did – with its creativity, innovation and originality along with a nuanced and layered story line. It has its flaws but the vision of the director and the craft of the DOP keeps you engaged and invested till the end. I will give 4/5 for Lijo Jose Pellissery’s “Jallikattu”. It is a visual spectacle and an immersive cinematic experience not to be missed!
Before I end:
The film premiered at the Toronto International Film Festival in September 2019, where it got a standing ovation from the audience. It was also showcased at the BFI London Film Festival and the Busan International Film Festival and got widespread critical acclaim. The film released in India on 4th October 2019. It has been given a 7.7 IMDb rating and you can watch it on Amazon Prime Video with English subtitles.
Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of 
Siddhartha Krishnan is the author of 
