 |
|
The article dissects Kamal Haasan's 'Thug Life,' directed by Mani Ratnam, as a project that, despite its impressive pedigree, ultimately falls short of its potential. The author begins by drawing a parallel to the recent IPL season, suggesting that assembling a talented team and harboring ambitious goals are insufficient for achieving success. A deeper emotional connection is crucial for both the performers and the audience to remain engaged. 'Thug Life' boasts a stellar ensemble – a legendary actor, a celebrated director, a strong supporting cast, and a genre popular with Tamil moviegoers. However, the film's inability to foster a meaningful emotional connection is identified as its primary weakness.
The review commends the film's initial approach, noting that it avoids the typical tropes of commercial cinema, such as slow-motion entrances, applause-bait dialogues, and excessive reverence for its lead actor, Kamal Haasan. Instead, the introduction of the hero is relatively understated, while the character played by STR (Amaran) receives the more conventional grandiose entry. The article highlights a specific moment at the film's climax as a true 'Thug Life' moment, where the hero nonchalantly puts on his sunglasses as AR Rahman's music plays in the background. Furthermore, the film attempts to distribute narrative space among its numerous characters, aiming to decentralize power and allow the ensemble cast to shine. However, this effort is deemed unsuccessful due to weak character development. The characters are evenly distributed but lack depth, resulting in a film that tries to say too much without conveying anything significant. The critic argues that the film prioritizes style over substance. While 'Thug Life,' like many Mani Ratnam films, is visually stunning, with dynamic visuals and stylized precision, this visual flair serves as a crutch. The film aspires to address themes of defiance and inherited trauma, but neglects the necessity of grounding these themes in human emotions. The result is intent without intimacy.
The article draws a comparison with 'Nayakan' (1987), Mani Ratnam and Kamal Haasan's previous collaboration, where the moral quandary of Sakthivel Naicker was explored in depth. In 'Nayakan,' the audience gained insight into the character's dilemma: the need to cross legal boundaries in order to fight for the underprivileged. In contrast, 'Thug Life' fails to provide similar illumination for Rangaraaya Sakthivel. While 'Nayakan' allowed viewers to witness both the violence and the kindness within Sakthivel Naicker, 'Thug Life' offers scant insight into Rangaraaya Sakthivel's inner motivations. The character is presented as the leader of a gangster group in Delhi, but comes across as unremarkable. Similarly, the evocative portrayal of Bombay's Dharavi in 'Nayakan' is absent in 'Thug Life,' despite the visually appealing cinematography of Ravi K Chandran. The article asserts that the primary failure of 'Thug Life' lies in its narrative shallowness. The characters are underdeveloped, and the emotional arcs feel forced. The film, despite being ostensibly about vengeance and legacy, fails to evoke genuine emotion. The screenplay relies heavily on aesthetics and 'vibes,' lacking moments of vulnerability, meaningful relationships, or conflicts that anchor the external chaos. Several examples are cited to illustrate this point. The protagonist's love for his wife is presented as deep and heartfelt, yet he also engages in an extramarital affair, a dichotomy that is not explored in a compelling way. The potential for conflict arising from a disciple's desire for his mentor's wife is also squandered, serving merely as a plot device. Similarly, the themes of sibling rivalry, jealousy, and grief are not effectively conveyed, failing to resonate with the audience. The extensive cast, including Trisha, Abhirami, Joju George, and others, is unlikely to feel a sense of satisfaction with their roles.
The review also questions Mani Ratnam's choice of this particular story for his reunion with Kamal Haasan, given the physical demands of a high-octane action film. The author contends that the genre clashes with the realities of aging, as the physical prowess and youthful aggression typically associated with a gangster role are difficult to portray convincingly in one's seventies. While actors like Liam Neeson have successfully transitioned into 'old man action' roles, these roles often emphasize the character's age, experience, and strategic intelligence, rather than brute force. 'Thug Life,' with its stylized action sequences and the protagonist's improbable survivals, renders Kamal Haasan's character more akin to an invincible superhero than a vulnerable gangster. This lack of genuine stakes diminishes the emotional impact and the audience's ability to believe in the danger he faces. The reviewer suggests that the gravitas of age could have been used to enhance the character's complexity – portraying him as a mentor, a haunted veteran, or a morally ambiguous leader. Instead, Kamal Haasan is thrust into action sequences as if he were still in his prime. The article argues that the denial of age, coupled with digital blurring, undermines the film's credibility. Kamal Haasan's performance in 'Thug Life' comes across as an actor pursuing relevance through genre, rather than shaping a genre to suit his current stage in life.
The article contrasts this with the success of 'Vikram,' which also featured similar surface-level characters and a genre-continuing script, but was directed by a younger filmmaker. The author posits that audiences have lower expectations of young directors, but expect both heft and heave from a seasoned professional like Mani Ratnam. Furthermore, the review suggests that the film's extensive promotion contributed to its disappointment. The marketing campaign, which heavily emphasized the iconic pairing of Kamal Haasan and Mani Ratnam, created expectations of cinematic brilliance that the film, with its narrative flaws and character limitations, could not meet. The relentless promotional blitz, which included press meets, interviews, and controversial statements, ultimately worked against 'Thug Life.' The film arrived in theaters burdened with excessive explanation, leaving little room for mystery or artistic ambiguity.
The author speculates that Kamal Haasan's intellectualism may be inadvertently sabotaging his films. This pattern, observed in the promotions for 'Indian 2' and 'Vikram,' involves Kamal Haasan framing each movie as a socio-political act, thereby stripping it of its artistic ambiguity. By the time audiences enter the theater, they feel as though they have already heard the movie described in too much detail. This over-articulation kills the mystery and dilutes the ideology, leaving the film struggling to live up to its pre-release hype. The article concludes by acknowledging that 'Thug Life' is not a vanity project that elevates Kamal Haasan at the expense of cinematic integrity. However, it fails to tell a compelling story that justifies its scale, cast, and ambition. In its attempt to distance itself from the superficiality of star-driven cinema, it overlooks the importance of strong writing as the true antidote to image fatigue. The film, in essence, is over-explained and underfelt.
Source: The Star, The Story, And The Struggle: Kamal Haasan's 'Thug Life' Doesn’t Quite Land