Poi (film)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. Please improve this article if you can. (January 2008) |
| Poi | |
|---|---|
| Directed by | K. Balachander |
| Produced by | Prakash Raj |
| Starring | Uday Kiran Vimala Raman Geethu Mohandas Praksh Raj K. Balachander |
| Distributed by | Duet Movies |
| Language | Tamil |
Poi (2006) is a Tamil feature film, directed by K. Balachander.
Contents |
[edit] Review and plot
The story is about how lies can have a domino effect and how a simple harmless lie may cascade into something really dangerous and life threatening. K.B. does really brilliant mega serials and as a veteran he is trying to adapt and compete with the younger generation of directors. He does fit in in some places but then there are others where he is grossly lacking. To his credit he is one of the best directors that Tamil movie ever had for the longest time with his active era extending from 1965 through early1990s. And this movie not to be outdone by his previous hits surely has the element that makes K.B's style of direction unique but it also sadly acts as the movies flaw and downfall.
Kamban (Uday Kiran) is the son of Valluvan (Avinash) a straightforward politician who will not bend laws even if it is to get his son out of jail when arrested for no fault of his. The opposition party take advantage of this and bail Kamban out and also publicly announce Kamban joining his father's opposition party. Kamban did not know any of this would happen and he did not want to hurt his father. To escape from the embarrassment Kamban escapes to Srilanka till everything cools down a bit.
In Lanka he meets Ganguly a Bengali immigrant whom he befriends and shares a room with. During a stroll on the beach his eye catches a diary with Tamil poems and starts liking the poet. The imaginary father he had created in his mind instigates him to fall in love with the author of the poems and Kamban takes it upon himself as a challenge to make Shilpa (Vimala) fall in love with him. But Vimala who is vacationing with her brother is an achiever and does not believe in wasting time in love.
What happens? Do things work out? Does the imaginary father or the imaginary fate (Prakash Raj) that Kamban creates in his brain win? What happens to Vimala? All to be seen in the later part of the movie.
The story is no doubt a family subject. It has elements of mother sentiment, love, husband-wife doubts, imaginary father and fate, father sentiment, annoying third wheel from Bombay who claims that he was in love with the heroine since she was in 5th or 6th standard, etc. It could have been a commercial movie hadn't there been too many slowing factors. As far as acting goes everyone seems to be on the good page but then the story itself lacked the speed and interest which was lost due to introduction of many unwanted characters. It is okay for one time watch although you might be asking yourself again and again why you are doing this to yourself. Uday Kiran was a promising young Telugu actor who landed himself into trouble after breaking the engagement with Chiru's daughter and now his break into the Tamil industry seems nothing but bleak.
[edit] Cast
Artist - Character
- Uday Kiran - Kamban/Bharathi
- Vimala Raman - Shilpa
- Prakash Raj - Vidhi (Fate)
- K.Balachander - Theepori (Spark)
- Geethu Mohandas - Ramya (Shilpa's cousin)
- Shridar - Roshan
- Avinash - Valluvan
- Anuradha Krishnamoorthy - Vasuki
- Athitya - Vishnu (Shilpa's Brother)
- Renuka - Mrs. Vishnu
- Pazhani - Flower Vendor
- Badava Gopi - Mr. Bannerji
[edit] Soundtrack
Music was composed by Vidyasagar.
- Azhaghana Poigale - Ranjith
- Enna Tholaithai - K.S. Chithra
- Heetler Penne - Sujatha, Tippu
- Inge Inge Oru Paatu - Shankar Mahadevan
- Iyagunare - Harini, Sriram Parthasarathy
- Kandu Pidithen - K. Narayan
- Kannamoochi - S.P. Balasubramaniam
- Kutti Kutti Kavithai - Shalini
- La La La - S.P. Balasubramaniam
[edit] A perceptive analysis
During the 150th convocation of the University of Madras on 12 November 2007, K.Balachander was honoured with a D.Litt degree (doctorate in Literature). K.Balachander has a very simple philosophy towards film making:
Success energises me so much that I have to plunge into a new film at once. Failure stimulates me to make another attempt to prove myself. Either way there's no peace, only obsession.[1]
A simple philosophy to profess, but a hard one to practice. But KB has been doing this for more than 43 years. He became a director in 1965 with the film Neer Kumizhi ( "Water Bubble") and is still maintaining this philosophy.
Box office failure is nothing new for a creative film-maker like KB. Out of the 53 Tamil feature films he has directed, only 17 films managed to cross the "100 days" barrier. Most of his creative films fail at the box-office because of half-baked film criticism.
Satyajit Ray came to be regarded as one of the world's finest film-makers ever. But he was also known for his passion for the craft. In one of his essays, he described the purpose of a film critic:
In my view, a critic performs a useful purpose only when he is able to build a bridge between the director and the audience. That is his main responsibility. A critic has to be a connoisseur since he makes a living out of making appraisals. However, unless a viewer is prompted by a personal motive, there is no reason for him to want to become a true connoisseur. Where a film is simple as well as good, the critic's responsibility is diminished because the viewer can appreciate its excellence without the critic's help. But there are some films which can be understood and appreciate only if the viewer has the necessary knowledge and perception. In such a case, a critic has to step in and perform the role of a teacher.[2]
British novelist Jeanette Winterson in her book Art [Objects] provides a more contemporary reason as to why a film like Poi fails:
It is impossible to legislate taste, and if it were possible, it would be repugnant. There are no commandments in art and no easy axioms for art appreciation. 'Do I like this?' is the question anyone should ask themselves at the moment of confrontation with the picture. But if 'yes', why 'yes?' and if 'no', why 'no'? The obvious direct emotional response is never simple, and ninety-nine times out of a hundred, the 'yes' or 'no' has nothing at all to do with the picture in its own right. [3]
The question of whether film is art is why Satyajit Ray settled for this explanation:
Even today, there are debates over whether or not cinema can be called a form of art. Those who are not prepared to give it that status claim that cinema has no soul of its own; it is a weird mixture of components taken from literature and other forms of art. The problem is over the word 'art'. If the word 'language'is used instead, I think the true nature of cinema will become clearer and there will be no need for debate. Just as a writer has words at his disposal, a film-maker has image and sound that make up the language of cinema. [4]
[edit] A understanding of abstraction
Poi is an abstract open discourse film. (i.e. A film with a resolved story and an open narrative discourse). The story involves an interrelalted series of events containing characters, actions, informants, and indices, each of which may affect individual scenes, as well as the end of the film as a whole. The film should be seen as growing out of historical observation while simultaneously remaining essentially theoretical.[5]
Lyrical fictions, metaphoric discourses, sceneries and dialogues act as informants. The opening song Inge Inge Oru Paatu sums up the abstraction of the director. Here is the English translation of this song:
"There Is A Song Here...
The Sea Is Waiting To Compose A Tune...
Is Waiting To Tell You A Story...
Who Is It Expecting here...
Is It The School of Poems?
Is It The Face of Love?
Is It The Life Beat Of The Souls?
Is It The Translation Of The Literature?
What Is This?
Who Is Going To Say It?
What Is This?
Who Is Going To Say It?
God! Is It Fair?
Is Your Heart Made Of Stone?
God! Is It Fair?
Is Your Heart Made Of Stone?
He Told His Love To The Sea
She Told Her Love To His Body
He Somewhat Won Her...
She Somewhat Won Herself...
At The End Somewhat Love Won Here...
God... You Lost... You Lost To Love...
A Tamil Poem Is Born Here...
Crossing A Sea... It Crawls Here..."
The song describes the film as a narrative poem. A story is being told, but with a poetic flair. The film is crafted to be dynamic, changing from phase to phase. The song outlines the four phases:
Phase 1: The School of Poems
Phase 2: The Face of Love
Phase 3: The Life Beat of the Souls
Phase 4: The Translation of the Literature
The lines:
"What Is This? Who Is Going To Say It?"
identifies Poi as an open discourse film.
The key to understanding some of the metaphoric discourses and sceneries is being familiar with the Literary Works of Valluvar, Kambarand Bharathy.
The opening scene of Poi ends with the caption: He is trying to empty the sea. To understand the scene and what the sea represents, the audience have to be familiar with these two couplets from Thirukural:
Kural 396:
Water comes gushing forth from the sand, the deeper and deeper it is dug; likewise, intelligence will grow, the more and more a person studies.
Kural 397:
Persons of learning can call all countries and places as their own. Why then, do not some persons care to learn?
[edit] An interpretation using poetics (Aristotle)
Aristotle in Poeticsuses Theban plays by Sophocles to define the literary concept of tragedy. Plot, character, spectacle, diction, thought, and song are described by Aristotle as the six key attributes of tragedy.
Poi provides students of literature and audience an opportunity to explore the six key attributes of tragedy.
(1) Plot
A story can have different kinds of plots. The linear plot is the simplest to follow because the story moves in a straight line. Emergence of cinema has helped modern dramatist like K.Balachander to experiment with disgressional and reversed plots.
(2) Character
(3) Spectacle
(4) Diction
(5) Thought
(6) Song
[edit] An interpretation using poetics (Tolkāppiyam)
[edit] Media reviews
[edit] Awards
 |
Please help improve this section by expanding it. Further information might be found on the talk page or at requests for expansion. |
[edit] Notes
[edit] References
- Neupert, Richard. 1995 The End – Narration and Closure in the Cinema
- Ray, Satyajit. 2005. Speaking Of Films
- Winterson, Jeanette. 1995 Art [Objects]
