Shankar is at his imaginative best for the number 'Pareshan ayya.', but he falters when it matters most: the romantic-tragedy with his captive. One song situation is about Vikram and Amy acting in ads which look like an inferior attempt at force-fit surrogate advertising. Rehman never had so weak song situations as here in his tryst with Shankar, unarguably the best after Mani Ratnam when it comes to inspiring the Mozart to deliver the best-est. The six avatars (Vikram's excluded) are arguably more important than Rehman's five songs. The shock value is delivered in installments and the hair-raising prosthetics can end up disgusting the weak-hearted. 'I' is, sadly, the make-up man's film, too. The largely insensitive revenge outings, punctuated by Santhanam's trademark humour, is all what the film has. The emotional core is particularly attention-deserving. He emotes with eyes and body the ugly avatar is heart-wrenching more so because the character shows pathos through both eyes and choking voice. After 'Sethu', 'Shiva Putrudu' and 'Aparichitudu', this one is his career best. Vikram gets to play one of the few intense, author-backed roles he has played so far. Lee, scorching the small screen and becoming more popular than John - narrated in an un-Shankar manner, again. Soon, the rustic Lingeswaram becomes a suave, chiseled Mr. Pushed to the wall, Diya lists in Lingeswaram (in quite an un-Shankar moment) as her male model for her next big project, helped by her casting director. Diya is made overtures by John (Upen Patel), a star model who can demolish her budding career if she doesn't submit herself to him. India and is a fan of Diya (Amy Jackson), a budding model. It is intriguing (at least mildly) that the film juxtaposes a decimated Vikram with a hunchback and a muscled Vikram thriving with optimism. The film is narrated in a non-linear fashion. The screenplay style sticks to that of 'Aparichitudu'.
Watching 'I' is like watching this scene several more times, a more cruel version of the scene, actually. In 'Okkadu', there comes a scene where Arjun and Manivannan threaten more punishment to a character who believes his leg has just been chopped off. Unfortunately, this aspect goes missing in 'I', apparently because a sadistic streak is built into the lead character, Lingeswaram. For all the dispensers of punishment that his Bharateeyudu and Aparichitudu were, there was a human face about them that hit it off with all sections of audiences, cutting across age, sex and class. There is a sensibility about his lead characters.
There is a reason why Shankar has always been seen as a Master - it's beyond the style and substance that his films eminently throw up.
0 kommentar(er)
