Saraswathi Sabatham (1966)

Posted on by

When I started watching films which dealt with the classical stories involving Hindu Gods and Goddesses, I noticed a number of parallels with the legends I heard as a child growing up in Ireland. There are many books and articles which deal with the similarity between the two cultures, but every time I watch one of these films it strikes me all over again and is probably one of the reasons why I love these mythological films. The lavishness of the sets and the stunning costumes are other reasons to watch and enjoy but I really do appreciate the stories and the opportunity to learn more about the Hindu pantheon of Gods. A. P. Nagarajan made many successful mythological films in the sixties, and I’m hopeful that after the recent success of the restored classic Karnan some of Nagarajan’s films will get the same treatment and become more readily available with subtitles.

Saraswathi Sabatham is a little different from the other Tamil mythological films I’ve seen, as it uses a fictitious plot rather than stories from the Sanskrit epics. It still draws on the personalities and traits of the various Gods and there is a strong message behind the narrative but it’s a simple story which is charmingly told. The film opens with a lovely song featuring the Goddess of Knowledge, Saraswathi (Savitri) and her attendants.

Trouble enters into this beautiful and peaceful scene in the form of the sage Naradha (Sivaji Ganesan) who goads Saraswathi by claiming that wealth is more important than knowledge. After successfully riling Saraswathi, Naradha heads off to confront the Goddess Lakshmi (Devika) and again causes trouble by telling her that knowledge is more important than wealth. After successfully starting a rivalry between the two Goddesses, Naradha then adds the Goddess Parvati (Padmini) into the mix by claiming that wealth and knowledge are both more important than bravery. Despite some rather lacklustre protests from their husbands, Brahma, Shiva (Harnath) and Vishnu (Sivakumar), and even though they know that Naradha is a renowned trouble-maker, all three rise to the bait. Saraswathi, Lakshmi and Parvati each vow to make a champion for their cause on Earth and prove that their attribute is the most important while making the other two champions bow down before the winner.

Generally the different aspects of the three Goddesses are well depicted with Savitri appearing regal and dignified as Saraswathi. She conveys a sense of timeless wisdom in her manner, although still storms off in a huff when she gets annoyed with Naradha. Devika’s Lakshmi is playful and charming while Padmini is motherly to her children but feisty enough to challenge Shiva before Naradha intervenes with his teasing. The three Goddesses are also incredibly sparkly and although Lakshmi manages to out-glitter the other two it’s a close run contest.

Saraswathi chooses the mute son of a temple singer to be her champion. She gives Vidyapathi the power of speech and the knowledge to make him an accomplished poet who can sing her praises throughout the kingdom.

Coincidently choosing the same kingdom, Lakshmi uses her power to make a poor beggar girl queen. The ailing king, who has no heir, decides on a method of selecting his successor which will not open him to claims of favouritism. Acting on advice from his chief minister he gives an elephant a garland and decrees that the person garlanded by the elephant will be the next ruler. As he says, this is the perfect plan that no-one can object to – except perhaps the elephant who has to chase around after Selvambikar and then throw the flowers over her head.

Finally Parvati takes a total coward, Veeramallar (Gemini Ganesan) and turns him into a brave and fearless warrior, who quickly rises to be the new army chief as a result of his prowess in saving the queen when her horse bolts.

Vidyapathi, Selvambikai and Veeramallar all squabble amongst themselves as the three Goddesses jostle for power. Each character is full of their own importance and their arrogance is well portrayed by the three actors. Sivaji Ganesan is excellent as Vidyapathi. His transformation completely changes his personality and he is wonderfully condescending and self-righteous as Saraswathi’s champion.

K. R. Vijaya is beautiful, and her change from the poverty stricken beggar girl to haughty queen is just as convincing. Her Selvambikai still has an air of vulnerability despite her arrogance and pride which makes her the most sympathetic of the three and she does also get to wear some lovely sparkly costumes. I almost didn’t recognise Gemini Ganesan here compared to the young romantic in Kalyana Parisu but he has plenty of screen presence as the blustering warrior, although his character doesn’t have quite as much background as the other two.

There are clashes between Vidyapathi and Selvambikai as the poet refuses to sing in praise of the queen. More clashes occur between Veeramallar and Selvambikai as the warrior oversteps his authority, while Vidyapathi and Veeramallar are at odds from the moment they meet. Each embodies the attribute of their patron Goddess and none of them are prepared to back down. Of course it all gets resolved with a suitably moral ending, but it’s the conflicts between the various characters that make the film so entertaining. Plus the chance to see Sivaji Ganesan in a pink outfit with matching pink outfits for his guards.

The sets are fantastic and Lakshmi’s heavenly abode is incredibly golden and extravagant. Naradha walks through the clouds (although the rainbow he stands on isn’t one found in nature), and while there aren’t very many other special effects, they tend to be well used – such as when letters appear as Vidyapathi sings about his new ability to speak.

There is a comedy track featuring Nagesh and Manorama which fits into the story although Nagesh’s character is more successful. Unfortunately subtitles don’t really convey Manorama’s speech patterns which are the basis for the humour in her character.  All the lead actors are excellent but Sivaji Ganesan really stands out as both Naradha and Vidyapathi. He has some wonderful expressions and a real twinkle in his eye while he teases everyone as Naradha, and he keeps the character light and mischievous. He has the same liveliness as Vidyapathi but gives a sense of smugness and conceit rather than the teasing nature of Naradha and his anguish and despair as the mute temple worker praying to Saraswathi is very moving.

The music by K. V. Mahadevan is beautiful and the lyrics by Kannadasan work well even in their English translation. As always I would have liked a little more dancing, although there is a short piece of Bharatanatyam by Padmini to enjoy. It’s probably not a film for everyone’s tastes as the story develops slowly and there is a lot of wordy interplay between the characters to establish the conflict. However for fans of Tamil mythological films, A. P. Nagarajan takes a simple story and aided by excellent performances from his all-star cast makes Saraswathi Sabatham an entertaining and appealing watch.  3 ½ stars.

Department

Posted on by

Someone needs to take all of Ram Gopal Varma’s gadgets, lock them in the toy box and hide the key. A potentially interesting thriller, Department was swamped by RGV’s ‘rogue’ methodology. My guess is ROGUE stands for Ridiculously Overindulgent Gimmickry Undermines Everything. The nauseating (literally) camerawork and a dearth of story and character development made this a disappointing experience. But there were a few positives including an excellent effort by the wardrobe department and a handful of quite good performances.

Had the gimmick of cameras mounted on actors and props been used with restraint it could have been really striking.  For example, a chase around the Crawford market area – it looked great as the camerawork enhanced the sense of speed and confusion of the pursuit. But it is hard to appreciate someone’s acting when the camera crawls up one nostril and emerges from their ear, or is spinning around the bottom of a tea cup. The background score is what I’ve come to expect from RGV – loud, intrusive and annoying so combine that with the dizzying visuals and it is unpleasant.

The story is a standard of the cop genre: a young, slightly idealistic officer is teamed up with a shady older legend on the force. Sanjay Dutt and Rana Daggubati had a good dynamic between their characters and they played off each other well. Sanjay has a brooding reserve that suited Mahadev’s moral ambiguity, and he was world weary and cynical to the core. Mahadev has his own agenda, which is revealed all too slowly. Shivnarayan was no young ratbag to be easily distracted or lead astray– he was focussed on his career and working towards his goals. But he is realising there are many more shades of grey than he expected. Rana is a competent actor, and he certainly looks right for this role. He seemed more at ease in the second half when the action ramps up.

Mind you some of the dialogue is so stilted no one could make it work. There are great insights along the lines of “A mistake done intentionally is not a mistake”. If only I had been in charge of the Cliche Department, I would have found a much more inspirational desk calendar to pinch quotes from. A subtitle that spelled gangrene ‘gang-grin’ was another highlight.

The underworld aspect is less successful. Sawatya (wildly overacted by Vijay Raaz), and his opposition – a mysterious voice on the phone – are at war. But they didn’t provide adequate tension for the machinations of the plot to make sense or be interesting. Sawatya’s deputy DK (Abhimanyu Singh) is ridiculous, stupid, and not at all convincing. People keep banging on about Abhimanyu Singh’s intensity but I think he is just a really bad actor. Even as a corpse, he hams it up.

Amitabh as Sarjay Rao spent the first half chewing the scenery and the second being enigmatic. It wasn’t the performance I was hoping for although he was an interesting character. Excessive exposition drained the potential drama and made the characters less interesting as they did little thinking for themselves. The police would get news of their target’s whereabouts apparently out of thin air. There is no consistent internal logic, too many contradictions, and the story just doesn’t hold up. RGV seems to think he has discovered the concept of moral ambiguity and the idea is pounded home. It’s clumsy and tedious.

Lakshmi Manchu was quite good as Mahadev’s wife. Satya was from a police family so she had already worked through any moral issues she may have had about her husband’s activities. Shivnarayan’s fiancée, Doctor Bharti (Anjana Sukhani) made less sense. She seemed to have few concerns about her intended being an ‘encounter king’, and no thought about what it might mean to be married to someone who was pissing off gangsters at a rate of knots. Madhu Shalini as Naseer had a potentially interesting role – a female gangster who was as tough as nails. But her motivations weren’t clear or consistent, the relationship with DK was not believable and her acting ranged from terrible to mediocre. However I don’t think anyone would have fared well in the scene where she basically fellated a kulfi as she and DK fantasised about taking over and killing everyone. It was gross.

Nathalia Kaur got a lot of (RGV generated) publicity for her debut. Her assets are obvious and just in case you missed anything that camera gets right in there (the gold undies were unexpected and I am so glad she was wearing them). But for an item girl she lacks sensuality and relies on making what I can only describe as ‘porno face’.  Even with the minimal demands of the choreo, her ‘dancing’ was terrible. I don’t usually have a problem with the skanky item, and appearances by the likes of Mumaith Khan, Malaika Arora Khan, Rambha and others are often a highlight. This made me uncomfortable as between Nathalia’s performance and the dirty old man camera gaze creeping all over her body, it is just nasty.

Luckily someone in wardrobe realised the movie was off the rails and took a bold step that almost saved the day. Nasia and DK form their own gang – we dubbed them the Fashion Gang.

 

They dress really badly, over accessorise and spend too long fussing over their clothes when they should be running away from Rana. Meanwhile Shivnarayan has had an epiphany. He had temporarily lost his mojo once he was out of uniform and in civvies. There was some unfortunate double (acid wash) denim, and a regrettable lurex bandanna incident. But by the second half he had developed a signature style and was teaming jeans and a simple (very snug across the shoulders) linen shirt or a (so tight it looked painted on) polo shirt with minimal accessories – watch, shoes, belt and gun.

 

Classic and classy. He became the Fashion Police! He pursues and kills members of DK’s Fashion Gang – the guy in the green and purple stripy shirt, the guy in the gingham bandanna, the bedraggled beardy man, finally the leaders themselves. So when Sanjay Dutt turned up wearing double acid wash….well. It was riveting. Not enough to make this a film worth seeing, but it did keep me entertained just when I was giving up.

I feel bad for the actors in Department, especially Sanjay Dutt, Rana, Deepak Tijori and Lakshmi Manchu who I think gave solid performances. It’s a shame they have been undermined by RGV’s self indulgent antics and the lack of quality story and dialogue. Honestly I can’t recommend this is worth seeing. Unless you enjoy seeing those Crimes  of Fashion soundly punished!

Devadasu (1953)

Posted on by

So many people recommended versions of Devdas when I started watching Indian films. Prior to seeing the Telugu Devadasu, I’d watched a few of the various adaptations in Hindi. I have mentioned before that the role of Tight Slap Administrator could be a dream job for me, but honestly I would have been exhausted about an hour into any film version of Devdas. I prefer romances to involve people I can care about to some extent, otherwise why bother? Whether we’re talking whinging Dilip Kumar, tear drenched Shah Rukh or aggressively self centred Abhay Deol, Devdas is one of my least favourite characters. This is a drawback when the story is just a long wait for Dev to work out how to drink himself to death. So it was a bit of a surprise to find myself not exactly liking but empathising with Devadas (Akkineni Nageshwara Rao) and feeling quite kindly towards Parvati (Savitri). Maybe it was the lack of subtitles that let me reshape the story to suit myself. I certainly had no trouble following the story –  there are so many adaptations of the book by Sharat Chandra Chattopadhyay it’s almost a plague – and it’s easy to find a synopsis if you need one.

Director Vedantam Raghavaiah’s version opens with Devadas and Parvati as little children, partners in crime, tormenting their teachers and causing mayhem. Devadas demands her obedient following, Parvati demands to be spoilt and adored and generally that is how things go. If one upsets the other, they retaliate with no thought of the consequences. And that sets the tone for their whole relationship even as they grow up. When he was sent away to school, he seemed to become that rich kid who funded his friends’ adventures and went with the flow. Meanwhile Parvati waited at home, confident he would come back and she would be part of his life.

ANR’s Devadas is a man who knows he has screwed up and has no one else to blame. He conveys the frustration of a young man caught under the thumb of his domineering father (SV Ranga Rao), and the weakness that paralyses him. He and Parvati realise that they can’t continue to be inseparable as they were in childhood without formalising their relationship. There are some really lovely scenes early on when he and Parvati are rediscovering each other, as in this song.

There is also the infamous scene where Devadas strikes Parvati in retaliation for her pride. ANR looked appalled and remorseful after lashing out so viciously and Savitri portrayed a mix of shock, anger and sadness that spoke volumes about the way their relationship still played out. Her parents proposal is rebuffed as they are of a lower social status, and suddenly time is running out.

Parvati sneaks into his room to beg him to marry her before she is married off elsewhere but he cannot stand up to his dad (or whoever chose these pyjamas for him).

And so he loses her, cuts ties with his family and is ripe for a decline into self pity and booze.

Later, when Devadas returns home following his father’s death, he sees the married Parvati. They have a beautiful scene together where suddenly the old Devadas is visible just for a moment. They light up in each other’s presence even as they break down. He has no resilience or motivation – he is carried by the currents of luck and money and when the luck is bad, he doesn’t know how to change things.

His refuge in alcohol initially makes him happy as he hallucinates seeing Parvati. Once the addiction has hold of him, the euphoria starts to disappear and he becomes a shambling wreck. ANR portrays the gradual descent into self destruction very well. While I think Devadas is an idiot I had to look away in some scenes because he was so painfully frail and damaged.

Parvati is a minx and gets her own way but she isn’t completely obnoxious. Savitri does a wonderful job of showing Parvati using her childish impulsive ways but aware of Devadas’ attraction to her, experimenting with her sexual appeal. When she sees Devadas after he has been at school for so many years, her affection is obvious. They talk about his father’s objection to her proposal and there is little game playing when it counts. When she is married off to an elderly widower who really seems to want a nanny more than a wife, her grief is evident but she tries to fit in.

I wasn’t quite sure about the physical side of her marriage – her husband mostly treats her like a niece or daughter, but there was one scene where he said something and Savitri looked quite ill and horrified so I wondered if a conjugal visit was on the cards. She is affectionate towards her stepchildren and wins over her jealous sister-in-law. She really does make the best of it and the kids seem very fond of her so her life isn’t shown as empty without her first love. In the final scene where she realises Devadas is near and tries to see him before he dies, the family seem to stop her because they are worried, not to punish her or protect their honour. Thanks to Savitri’s nuanced acting I really felt for Parvati.

Lalitha, one of the renowned Travancore sisters, is Chandramukhi, the other woman who loves Devadas. Her role is important but doesn’t occupy as much screen time since Devadas usually prefers to pity himself in solitude.  She is flirty and practiced, a woman who knows what men want and knows she has it. Despite her commercial nous, she can’t resist the misery of her newest and most reluctant client. While he initially rejects her, a relationship of sorts does grow over time. She is prepared to lose her livelihood over him and argues with her staff, including a comically inclined orchestra, as she cuts back on working. When Devadas really deteriorates she searches for him and brings him home, offering practical care to keep him comfortable. Lalitha has great physical presence and really suits Chandramukhi’s self aware femininity. Her dancing is assured and she displays her body with confidence, again a perfect fit for this character.

I liked the less grandiose sets in this version as they suit the characters and allow them to be the focus. The music is lovely and as the duets often take the place of conversations, they fit the mood of the scenes. The dances at Chandramukhi’s brothel are quite simple and she performs alone to entertain her clientele – it’s clear what she is selling but the scenes aren’t overly vulgar.

It is really hard to comment on the technical aspects of the film as the DVD picture and sound are so bad, and there are clearly some scenes missing and abrupt edits. Once again I will have a whinge about the terrible print quality of a classic film, and wonder why this is almost the norm. If so many people can recommend a movie as a classic of their industry, why doesn’t anyone take on the task of preservation and restoration? I’m not sure who most of the supporting actors are, but they were all very good and suited their roles.

Anyway – I’ll never wholeheartedly love the story of Devadas and Parvati, but this is my favourite version to date. See it for the excellent acting that made two silly fools seem more relatable than I expected, and for some beautiful melodic songs. 3 ½ stars.

Heather says:  Devdas has never been my favourite story, perhaps because the first version I saw was Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s extravagant epic and I found it difficult to relate to the characters. However I’ve appreciated some of the earlier Hindi film versions a little more, and now agree wholeheartedly with Temple that this Telugu version is the best.

Devdas is certainly not an attractive character at all. He’s arrogant and selfish; almost child-like in his inability to deal with the world and ANR captures this perfectly. In the early scenes his conceit takes centre stage and despite the lack of subtitles his inability to deal with his family’s disapproval of Parvati comes through clearly.  As Devdas falls into self-recrimination and takes up a decadent lifestyle, ANR’s portrayal of the shattered and hopeless alcoholic almost manages to wring some sympathy, despite knowing that he brought it all on himself. So even although I want to dislike Devdas (and usually do), ANR makes his weakness understandable to such an extent that I end up pitying him. It really is an outstanding performance.

I agree with Temple that Savitri is excellent here as Parvati, giving her innocence and a child-like adoration of Devdas which makes her later actions more reasonable. I also loved Lalitha in her portrayal of Chandramukhi, but my favourite actor is the little girl who played the young Parvati. Her eyes were incredibly full of expression for such a young actor and every emotion was written loud and clear on her face. I ended up watching her scenes over and over again and would love to know who she was. Anyone know?

It is such a shame that this film isn’t available with subtitles as much of the beauty in other versions of the story is in the dialogues. I will add my plea that someone needs to please restore and re-release all these old films before they are too far gone to salvage, preferably with English  subtitles too. This really is a classic and should be required viewing for everyone interested in Telugu cinema! 4 stars.