Nag Ashwin’s Mahanati is a spellbinding biopic that celebrates the life of Savitri in sumptuous colour with haunting re-enactments of her most famous scenes. Keerthy Suresh invokes the magic of Savitri’s screen presence while Samantha ties it all together as a journalist researching the legendary actor’s life for a newspaper article. At just under three hours, the film still only scratches the surface of Savitri’s story, but with an impressive cast and convincing dialogue, Mahanati is a mesmerising look at one of the most successful film actors from the South.
The film opens with Savitri falling into a coma and being taken to a hospital whose bemused staff have no idea who they have just admitted. One year later, on the anniversary of her illness, journalist Madhura Vani (Samantha Akkineni) is given the task of writing about the film star for a short article in the newspaper. Vani is shy and frumpy, struggling to make her mark in the male-dominated profession of journalism and she is dismayed at what she thinks is a throw-away assignment. But once she starts speaking to the people who knew Savitri, Vani becomes intrigued by the star and her generous and compassionate personality. As she learns more, Vani draws inspiration from Savitri and becomes empowered to make changes in her own life and stand up for herself. This interweaving of Vani’s story into the life of Savitri is ingenious and allows Nag Ashwin to focus on the more positive aspects of Savitri’s legacy, although he doesn’t avoid the drama either.
The film shows Savitri’s early life after her father dies and her mother goes to live with relatives. Even as a child, Savitri was a force to be reckoned with. Her determination and will to succeed is demonstrated as she learns to dance despite the dance instructor telling her she lacks discipline and will not be able to master the skill. I loved these early scenes and the young actor playing the child Savitri who is a real find. She is full of life and totally charming with plenty of attitude – perfect for the role!
Savitri is shown taking part in theatrical shows under the supervision of her Uncle, K.V. Chowdary (Rajendra Prasad), and her abortive first trip to Chennai to become an actress is also depicted. This is beautifully done, with Savitri in full fan mode as she tries to get glimpses of her favourite actor Akkineni Nageswara Rao (Naga Chaitanya), and being almost totally oblivious to the man who takes her photo, Gemini Ganesan (Dulquer Salmaan).
Nag Ashwin doesn’t dwell too much on Savitri’s rich film history but focuses instead on the real-life drama of her marriage to Gemini Ganesan and subsequent estrangement from her uncle. Her iconic roles are shown in a montage and Keerthy Suresh does a fantastic job in re-creating these accurately, including a poignant song from Devadasu and the wonderful scene in Mayabazar where Savitri is playing Ghatotkacha impersonating Sasirekha.
I’ve been waiting for a film that showcases Keerthy’s talents as an actor, and finally she gets her moment to shine. She really is amazing here and completely nails a wide range of emotions. From the early bubbly and happily carefree girl all the way through to the devastated wife who turns to alcohol, Keerthy makes us live every moment and completely believe in her portrayal of a legendary actor. A standout is the moment when she learns Gemini Ganesan is already married and her dreams of romance turn to ashes. This, and her subsequent difficult decision to marry the man she loves despite everything are simply perfect, with none of the actors overplaying the emotion, but still managing to make the audience feel every heartache and each moment of elation.
Dulquer Salmaan is also a perfect choice for the ultimate romantic actor of the time; Gemini Ganesan. He has plenty of charm and when he sets out to woo Savitri, she doesn’t stand a chance! Their romance sparkles on screen and Dulquer is just as convincing when he portrays Gemini Ganesan’s jealousy at his wife’s success and subsequent alcoholism. The story is told from Savitri’s viewpoint, so Dulquer has less screen time after Savitri finds out about his affairs, but throughout it’s an excellent performance that makes the drama and emotion behind their relationship very real.
The secondary story of Madhura Vani and her struggle to be accepted as a serious journalist is well integrated into the main plot. Nag Ashwin uses Vani to introduce key witnesses to events in Savitri’s life that allow the film to move back into flashback. But is also emphasises the importance of Savitri as a role model and inspiration, while Samantha’s success over the other, male reporters is an important step for Telugu cinema. Here is a film that has a female lead who isn’t defined by her romance with a male character and who is allowed to have a personality and story of her own. Although there is a romance (with Vijay Devarakonda in a very bad wig), it’s very much part of Vani’s own story and important mainly as a way for her to assert her independence from her father’s plans.
There is a plethora of other actors who appear in cameo roles as various screen legends of the time. Just a few are Mohan Babu as S.V. Ranga Rao, Prakash Raj as director/producer Aluri Chakrapani and Krish appearing as K.V. Reddy. It’s a real who’s who of Telugu/Tamil cinema of the time and I was inspired to read up on some of these directors and producers whose names I recognised when I left the cinema. Mickey J. Meyer’s music fits the film perfectly too and Dani Sanchez-Lopez does an excellent job with the cinematography. The effects team have managed to recreate Chennai in the fifties and the costume department deserve special mention for the wonderful outfits worn by Keerthy and Dulquer. The end credits juxtapose shots of Savitri with those of Keerthy in the same film role and the resemblance really is astonishing.
Overall there is fantastic attention to detail for both the scenes in the early eighties and Chennai in the fifties that ensure the film feels authentic, although I did sympathise with Samantha and her selection of ruffled shirts and long skirts. Everything about the film seems to have been well researched and the sets dressed to add plenty of authentic flavour. Including the film segments in black and white also adds to the whole period feel of the film and emphasises just how much impact Savitri had at the time. I also have to comment on the excellent subtitles by Rekhs that ensured the drama of each scene was well conveyed. After the last few Telugu films I’ve watched where literal translations have made a mockery of important scenes it is such a relief to have proper idiomatic English that makes sense and doesn’t detract from the dialogue. Until I can learn Telugu (a vain hope given my lack of success with Tamil) Rekhs subtitles are the next best thing to understanding the dialogue myself and I always cheer when I see ‘Subtitles by Rekhs’ appear on screen.
Mahanati is an excellent dramatisation of the life of one of South India’s best known and well-loved actors. I don’t know enough about the details of Savitri’s history to comment on its accuracy but from all I have read, Nag Ashwin has captured the essence of Savitri’s story while Keerthy Suresh has brought her memory to vivid life. It’s ultimately a sad story but also a lovely tribute to Savitri and a reminder of what a wonderful actor she was. Mahanati is a real treat for fans of both classic and contemporary Telugu cinema – don’t miss it!
I have been intrigued by this film ever since I read about it. Keerthy looks remarkably like Savitri. Will keep an eye out for it. Especially if a Tamil version is playing. (It’s supposedly a bilingual, isn’t it?) Thanks, Heather.
Its Tamil version Nadigaiyar Thilagam has been released. Do watch it. Having said that, it is not a bilingual. Keerthy confirmed that the film was shot in Telugu and was subsequently dubbed into Tamil and Malayalam. This would hurt, if you come across Pasamalar and if you would care for it.
BTW, Thanks for the review, Heather. Rekhs’ subtitles are always a plus, but her emoticon work for Kabali was a riot!
Always good to have subtitles that make sense. I’ve been rather despairing lately with so many of the big releases having poor subtitles. Surely with all the money they spend they could afford to get someone to check!
Thanks for all the info about the Tamil version. It doesn’t seem to be playing anywhere here, but I didn’t look very hard as it was a dub rather than a true bilingual.
What did you think about the film?
It’s better than I expected – I think because Nag Ashwin doesn’t try to fit everything in. He also focuses many on Savitri and doesn’t clutter the narrative with too many side-plots, apart from the one involving Samantha. That’s also kept to a minimum and is used really well to keep the focus on Savitri. Plus Keerthy Suresh is fantastic 🙂
Let me know what you think when you do get a chance to watch. Cheers, Heather
Heather and others, my views on Mahanati:
Using letterboxd as a place to keep such informal reviews these days. Hope you might find some of the points in agreement with your views.
‘Nag Ashwin doesn’t dwell too much on Savitri’s rich film history but focuses instead on the real-life drama of her marriage to Gemini Ganesan and subsequent estrangement from her uncle.’
‘It’s ultimately a sad story but also a lovely tribute to Savitri and a reminder of what a wonderful actor she was.’
The above statements about what the film focuses on are contradictory. Given the details of the plot, I would assume the first statement is the appropriate one-that the film was more about her personal life than about her as an actor(or a director)And if that is indeed the case then isn’t the statement that was used to describe Samantha’s character(‘Here is a film that has a female lead who isn’t defined by her romance with a male character and who is allowed to have a personality and story of her own.’)a big contradiction to how Savitri’s story is told. Instead of focussing on her rich film history, the story is ultimately about her needing a father figure, romance with Gemini Ganeshan & how it eventually led to her downfall. What more do the audience get to know about the actress or filmmaker that Savitri was than what is already in Wikipedia?
Thanks for your comment. The two statements aren’t contradictory as they’re referring to different aspects of the film. The story does focus on Savitri – her romance, which after all was a defining moment in her life – but also her relationship with her parents, her friendships and her struggles with money in the later part of her career.
There is a montage in the middle of songs from famous movies starring Savitri, but what I was trying to get at is that the film makes you remember Savitri and her wonderful performances in a variety of roles. Over the credits there are images of Savitri side by side with copies of the same picture with Keerthy, so that as you leave the cinema, it’s with Savitri and those iconic roles in your mind. It’s in making us remember what a great actress she was that Nag has crafted a beautiful tribute to her work, while also exposing the realities of her life.
I don’t get your reference to Wikipedia – if I wanted to know more I’d do some proper research and read a biography.
That’s definitely one way of knowing about a celebrity. But this movie is supposed to be a remainder or be an inspiration to the younger generation on a legend. Also apart from being an actress, she had directed some 40 films-with all female crew. So it would have been pretty inspiring to know how she managed all that in those times in the very patriarchal South Indian film industry don’t you think? The story being told here is very similar to the usual rise & fall story that we associate with many of the old legends. But Savitri was much more than the usual legend-is my understanding. Even within her story, Gemini Ganeshan already was involved with Pushpavalli & his first wife(two sets of kids from each relationship already there)when Savitri entered his life. She went in knowing his relationships. So the whole idea of her feeling betrayed is preposterous. There are several factual inaccuracies to whitewash the real relationships. I’m just questioning the creative choice that thought the audience today needed a wide-eyed, naive but talented heroine who was cheated & hence went a downward spiral than a bold, creative, multifaceted woman who still would be an inspiration for the newer generation.