Tag Archives: Psychological

Cinema-Maniac: Boxing Helena (1993) Review

Boxing Helena (1993) is an extremely divisive film with very little discussion surrounding it. In the realm of controversial films such titles like I Spit On Your Graves (1978), Cannibal Holocaust (1980), Natural Born Killers (1994), A Clockwork Orange (1971), and other such films draw plenty of film lovers (and sometime an uninformed outsider) sharing conflicting viewpoints, and sometime ideology gets thrown into the fold. These are the kind of films that make you ask if a film can go too far. Obviously the answer is yes they can go too far. I draw this conclusion with my experience with the 2012 Ron Morales film’s Graceland which briefly had full frontal nudity of minors. However, such cases are extremely rare as I go years without even thinking a film has gone too far with its material. You might be wondering where exactly Boxing Helena stands in terms of controversy? If we’re purely talking about the content in the film than it’s nothing special. It’s simply an experimental indie film that went to the mainstream public with a traditional Hollywood studio treatment resulting in extreme divided reaction towards the film.

Boxing Helena tells the story of an Atlanta surgeon Nick Cavanaugh (played by Julian Sands) dangerous obsession with Helena (played by Sherilyn Fenn), a woman he had a one night stand with. This is the kind of film where knowing specific parts of the story will spoil the experience on first time viewing. That sounds like a no brainer, but you’ll be amazed how many reviews for Boxing Helena from paid professionals, and amateur reviewers online basically give away 42 minutes worth material. This plot point is usually given away in synopsis (if the review has one) when the film is reviewed. That’s not even including the possible hundreds of film sites that also give away a major plot point that should be have been a surprise instead of just given away in a synopsis. Before hand, I of course went on IMDb to check what the film premise was about, and unintentionally spoiled something that should have been shocking, but instead I didn’t expect for the film to take 1/3 to get to that point. I read about the film Boxing Helena before going on IMDb when checking up a list of controversial films (I occasionally like a challenge in discussing a film) so that’s what sold me on it. However, I advise anyone who has an interest in seeing this film to be cautious when reading reviews on this film. If it sounds like a synopsis, just skip it, and read whatever left in the written review. Best advice I could give to go into this as blindly as possible.

18215movie3
Hello darkness, my old friend. I’ve come to talk to you again.

On to the actual meat of discussion in Boxing Helena story. The story is slow moving while introducing interesting concepts in the first act. Nick Cavanaugh is shown being neglected by his mother at a party, and not being affected much by his mother death as an adult by leaving his mother funeral early. Raising a question of what kind of relationship Nick had with his mother? To bad the film almost immediately stopped poking around with the idea. Last time Nick mother has anything to do with the story is a hallucination where Nick sees his naked mother in an attempt to imply they had an unhealthy relationship, but how far it went is uncertain. It’s a “connect the loose dot” form of writing done badly when there’s little foundation to connect concrete information given to the viewer. What’s concrete is Nick had a trouble relationship with his mother, but everything else in association to that is kept vague. There isn’t enough to make the connection between Nick relationship with his mother, and the type of woman he’s attracted to come off as viable. At best, it’s imaginative speculation, but at worse making something significant out of something that ain’t there to be found.

In terms of characters they’re just plot devices. To an extent all characters can be considered plot devices, but there are capable writers who are able to masked this. Jennifer Lynch was not able too. I wouldn’t need to count on my hand the amount of characters that were fleshed in this movie because they don’t exist. All supporting characters are basically one trait exacerbated too inconvenient Nick. In the film, Nick has a girlfriend, Anne Garett (played by Betsy Clark) whom he just has a relationship with. If the film dabble a bit on Nick obsession perhaps being greater than his love for Anne there would have been a point to Anne in the film. Anne, much like the implications of Nick troublesome relationship with his mother, provides little in the way of something concrete to confirm themes, and ideas. In one of the very few scene Anne is in she treats Nick in a motherly way. As mentioned before, there’s speculation to be had that Nick might have a thing for women that remind him of his mother, but there’s not enough established about the characters to make it more than mere speculation.

The loose dots could have been remedied halfway with Dr. Lawrence Augustine who is played by Art Garfunkel…I don’t know why he just is in the movie. It’s mentioned briefly that Lawrence helped with Nick on his obsession with Helena, the woman Nick had a one stand with, but to what extent is kept vague. All the viewer is told about Nick mother is that she’s neglectful, and in one instance of the film Nick see’s an image of his mother when Helena is choking him. Does that mean that Nick had an abusive, or perhaps had sexual relation with his mother? The viewer will never know since there is nothing much to Nick’s mother, nor does Dr. Lawrence provide much insight as a friend of Nick. You think Art Garfunkel, of all people to have been cast, would have imparted on Nick some wisdom about relationship, but that’s the sound of silence.

boxing-helena
Julian Sands: “Got breast milk?”

 

Another plot device comes in the form of Ray O’Malley played by Bill Paxton. Ray O’Malley is more of a possessive friend with benefits who loves having sex with Helena. Ray contribute slightly to the film’s story, but then there’s the ending which undoes virtually all his contribution in the film. For Helena who is the other main character on the other hand, throughout the film she does speak about how almost every man she comes across only love her for her looks. Helena is played by Sherilyn Fenn who is stunning in the film which makes such an idea easy to swallow. Her personality on the other hand has little to dig into as for most of the film she’s verbally, and physically fighting against Nick possessive nature over her. This mostly due to the fact that the film’s ending once again undoing what development, and characterization the viewer thought there was in the film. So Helena fears to commit to a relationship through her arc means nothing in the end. In particular, if Helena arc did mean something than it would require an incredible amount of disbelief that two people experience the same exact thing while unconscious.

The ending to Boxing Helena is single handedly the most polarizing aspect about it. It’s so fundamental to how viewers perceive their overall view on the film it’ll change your perspective into an extreme. On one hand it could simply be viewed as a cautionary tale of an obsessed doctor psyche. However, since the ending rewrites the rules it makes it come off as clueless writing when scenes not involving Nick Cavanaugh are shown to the viewers. The twist ending, despite how much it undoes still retains Nick Cavanaugh characterization, and can still be viewed as cautionary tale of being incapable to overcome his obsession. A character in the film, due to this ending, basically stroke Nick Cavanaugh ego as being a superior man holds some weight. However, because of the ending many of the implied themes, and ideas have even less of a foundation to be more than mere speculation. As you can probably tell by this review the film’s ending makes a non-spoiler review challenging to write around.

M8DBOHE EC003
Not the first time both of these get wet in this film.

Julian Sands stars in the film to good, and bad degree of acting. The good being Julian Sands is able to make his character come off as a truly pathetic person, and the bad being the material doesn’t make his character sympathetic. Another good in Julian Sands performance are some of the heavier dramatic scene that requires a burst of anger, or subdue emotion he pulls off. There’s a scene of Julian Sands with Sherilyn Fenn out on the porch in heavy rain. Sands yells at Fenn character to scream out for help, but also in the same scene he’s still comes across as vulnerable despite having power over Fenn character. A bad side to some of Sands dialogue delivery is he’s unintentionally hilarious. One moment that stands out in goofy delivery is when Sands says Helena as desperately as he can before Helena experience an accident. On the whole, Sands performance could be considered positive with occasional mishaps along the way.

Sherilyn Fenn also stars opposite of Julian Sands for a majority of the film. While the film does rely heavily on her looks, and pulls of creating a sorta seductive aura around her. Fenn comes off convincingly in later scenes too that rely less on her looks. Unlike the rest of the cast, Fenn is slowly given limitation to her performance preventing her from being as expressive as the other cast. Yet, she’s still able to be convincing in her role coming off as vulnerable, and strong. A downside to this is most of the time she’s constantly screaming her lines, and doesn’t have as many vulnerable scenes compared to Sands. It doesn’t help either that there isn’t much to Fenn character either so Fenn gradually changing into a different person sadly go to waste due to context of the film.

The only other noteworthy performance comes from Bill Paxton who dress up like a dated, 90s greaser in the film. Aside from his silly appearances, Bill Paxton only appears in four scenes, and is silly in all of them. He hams it up in his short screen time, and makes an impression. The other supporting actors in the film are fully onenote. Art Garfunkel doesn’t do much in terms of range, Betsy Clark doesn’t do much either with her time, and Kurtwood Smith despite playing his small part well won’t stay with you because once again, very limited screen time. Also, since it’s wholly a serious movie the whole supporting cast performances eventually mesh with each other being indistinguishable from one another.

 

1324321
Game over man. Game over.

Jennifer Lynch direction is fine for a first a time director. There are certain shots that are questionable in the way they’re frame. For example, there’s a scene of Julian Sands looking out at the front of his Mansion garden, and is unable to see a clearly visible crouching Bill Paxton behind some branches. It makes you wonder how Sands wasn’t able to see Bill Paxton when he’s as visible as he is. Another bad shot is when Helena is hit by a car, and lingering on it for too long exposes the bad effects used in the moment. Jennifer Lynch was both subtle, and heavy handed with some of her imagery. Heavy handed when cutting to a bird in cage whenever Fenn is failing to escape the grasp of Julian Sands. The subtle imagery comes in how very selective shots are framed to make it appear it’s actor are stuck in boxes. As for anything else I would say the selection of music is fitting, but none of the original music stands out. A lot of the music choices are orchestrated pieces with rare inclusion of insert tracks. The only piece of music that stands out is a cover of Bonnie Raitt “I Can’t Make You Love Me” by Venice. To Lynch credit, it fits perfectly into what she was trying to get across in her film.

This would usually be the end of the review with me posting my closing thoughts, but there’s still one other thing left to talk about, and that’s the ludicrous statement that this film is sexist towards women. The criticism came from the 90s when it was release, but as of the moment of this review being posted it’s as relevant as ever. Labeling this a male power fantasy is silly since Helena is constantly fighting back against her captor for the entire film. Helena wants nothing to do with Nick, even when holds her captive, and Nick is doing anything to prevent her from escaping. If anything, it’s actually against power fantasies since Helena fight every chance she gets. Nick isn’t rewarded for his action which is proven by the film’s ending.  Another thing that disproves the film so call “sexism” is Nick does not enjoy obsessing over a woman he had a night stand with. In his own words regarding his obsession, “I’m still haunted for my love for her”. Even if I take into account the way the film is shot it’s still part of Nick character whose otherworldly attraction to Helena is presented by those images, and having seen the film entirely Nick does not enjoy seeing Helena the way he does. It’s negative for his mindset, and negative in his life. Just imagine if the film were to be release in 2016, and it would have caused a far greater riot. I clearly don’t think highly of Boxing Helena, but there’s one thing that Jennifer Lynch didn’t come across when directing her film, and that was sexist.

Boxing Helena I see as a lost opportunity. Beneath the many faults I do feel if handled by a more experience director could have been great. By a first time director, Jennifer Lynch lacked the experience she needed to pull off such an experimental project, and couldn’t reach the high mark she set for herself. None of this is further evident with the ending, and scenes that go against the notion of the ending. Much like its title character, the film itself is trapped in a metaphorical box, but instead of going outside of the box, and sticking to it guns with an ending that would have garner it some respect, even among some detractors. It’s ending plays it safe which goes along with abstract theme of society putting people in boxes, but at the cost of giving the impression Boxing Helena is not worth taking out of its box, even among the more “artsy” film lovers.

3/10

Side Stuff: Casting Controversy

There’s also the controversy of casting when it comes to this film. I read one review that made a joke out of it for a closing statement. Granted I wanted to do the same, but someone else beat me to the punch. Originally Madonna was meant to play the part of Helena, but dropped out due to unexplained reasons. Afterwards, Kim Basinger was set to star, but once again stepped down from the role. Unlike Madonna, Kim Basinger exit from the film caused her to go to court, and file for bankruptcy. Her exit from the film cost to pay around, allegedly, $9 million dollars to the film’s producer. Given that Kim Basinger would win best supporting actress four years in 1997 L.A. Confidential I doubt Kim Basinger regret passing up on Boxing Helena.

Sources (this side content):

LA Times: http://articles.latimes.com/1993-08-29/entertainment/ca-29280_1_david-lynch

EW.com: http://www.ew.com/article/1993/04/09/boxing-helenas-controversies

Backup Link for source: https://web.archive.org/web/20160906193722/http://www.ew.com/article/1993/04/09/boxing-helenas-controversies

Advertisements

Cinema-Maniac: I Saw the Devil (2010) Review

If there’s another genre that had a bigger fall from grace it would be the horror genre. Much like the action genre, allot of fans can agree the 80s was where it peaked in popularity. However, horror can still continue to push the boundary of what is acceptable both visually, and from a creative perspective. How much is too much when it comes to blood, and gore. How in depth of an character exploration can you create before you begin thinking like a killer. Horror has the ability, more so than other genre, to put viewers in a uncomfortable situations, and even scare them in some cases. As someone who doesn’t see allot of horror movies it’s unfortunate very few horror films from the 90s, and 2000s didn’t entice me in viewing the genre without a preconceived notion. What made matter worse is despite having seen very few horror films, most of what I was exposed to by friends, and family were generally trite films within the genre. There were eventually films that won me over like 1931 Frankenstein, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre from 1974 (the only horror movie to scare me to date), and George A. Romero’s original Dawn of the Dead which is my all time favorite zombie film. That’s why I’m happy to write about I Saw the Devil. A modern horror film that is hybrid with a psychological thriller, and succeed for all the right reasons work as well it should have.

68570181
Choi Min-sik: “Mmm, I could use this arm for a pie.”

I Saw the Devil is about a secret agent exacting revenge on a serial killer through a series of captures and releases. While not entirely a horror film, one admirable trait that I Saw the Devil accomplishes far better than general horror films is contextualizing the blood, and gore. Too often do many films within this genre disregard characters, and story for the sake of bloodshed. The film is deliberately slow paced for this singular reason. For starter, it slow pacing helps it create an atmosphere of dread over it’s main Kim Soo-hyeon (Byung-hun Lee). What it also allows for is to display impatience within Kim Soo-hyeon witnessing him losing sleep over finding his wife’s killer. Showing Kim Soo-hyeon will do anything in his position in the name of vengeance. Splicing scenes of both Kim Soo-hyeon, and Kyung-chul (Min-sik Choi) current activities in the film to never lose focus of time. Showing the two men psychology are similar in certain ways, but makes it easy to determine who the film wants you to sympathize with as Kim Soo-hyeon is going after killers while Kyung-chul goes after women to kill.

Another aspect of the story that is appealing is putting a twist on a familiar premise. In some horror films, if the victim of the deceased faces with the killer it’s either save until the climax, or becomes a film where the victim tortures the killer until someone dies in both scenario. By the end of the first act, the film victim Kim Soo-hyeon confronts killer Kyung-chul in which, surprisingly a choreographed fight scene ensues. After this confrontation, the film still continues by using a hunter, and the hunted mentality for its characters. At certain points in the film, this mind game between the two characters are discussed in the film. One attempted to be persuaded to simply let up on the vengeance, and ponder if there’s any value in it. For another he receives a taste of his own medicine while also deriving pleasure of how to get under the skin of whoever chasing him. In terms of characterization enough is given about Kim Soo-hyeon to understand his action. Simple things like having a wife, and caring for his family is as deep as it goes for Kim Soo-hyeon as a person. It’s enough to give an idea of his mentality before he decides to take revenge, and seeing how his act of revenge ultimately affects eventually becomes a dynamic characterization.

maxresdefault2
Come at me bro!

The same cannot be said for those it represent as killers since the film never bother exploring the psychological aspect of what can motivate its criminals to do the things they do. There’s a cannibal in the film who loves eating people, but that’s about as deep as it goes. All the criminals function as criminals. They’re meant to be evil for the sake of being evil in order to take pleasure in their deaths. It could be debated the intention was to to debate in the act of revenge itself is justified, but on the other hand the film does not lay down any ground work for greyness. Nothing is more evident of this than the usage of its female characters. From the victims perspectives they respect women as people, but every time a criminal interacts with a woman it’s with the intent to do whatever the criminal desire to do with them. It’s portrayal of representing both sides is one dimensional at best. Just fine for a revenge fantasy film, but when the script tacked on a family aspect to Kyung-chul character it says it wanted to be something more thought provoking. Made even noteworthy when it wants to use Kyung-chul family to get across a specific agenda that doesn’t work out since they’re only included in one before popping back up again. It hard see the film for anything other more than just a piece of revenge fantasy where viewers takes satisfaction in seeing its main character harm criminals.

Other issues within the film are specifically connected to the horror genre itself. Moments in the film required higher suspension of disbelief in order for the film to function the way it wants too. One of these problematic plot point is not Kim Soo-hyeon not killing his wife’s murderer when he’s given three good opportunities to do so. It’s given context, and established motivation for why Kim Soo-hyeon won’t simply kill Kyung-chul. What is not explained in the film is how Kyung-chul manage to find personal information of Kim Soo-hyeon within a quick span of time. There’s no mention in the film he’s connected with anyone in the police force, nor has ties with many criminals that can provide this information. Another issues comes in the form of useless police officers for the film both as characters, and narrative devices. Within the film, the police officers biggest contribution is making an arrest after Kim Soo-hyeon has another encounter with Kyung-chul. As far as usage go they give minimal remarks on how they dislike killers receiving medical treatment in a hospital despite their crimes, and does not provide additional characterization for any of the criminals. A miss opportunity for the police officers is providing a semblance of a man hunt. Rarely is there a mention of the police making progress of finding a suspect who is going after serial killers. There’s is a moment where it seems like the police are close to tracking down Kyung-chul, but it ends up being forgotten plot point. I would mention that the police did provide Kim Soo-hyeon information needed to track down his wife murderer as a positive from the police inclusion, but he’s a secret agent so information gathering wouldn’t be as difficult to obtain if he was an ordinary citizen.

image40
Choi Min-sik ain’t happy with this buried alive prank. 

I Saw the Devil is entirely reliant on talent of two highly regarded actors from Korea who are Choi Min-sik, and Byung-hun Lee. Choi Min-sik as the psychaotic Kyung-chul is a  performance that is show stealing. Portraying a psychopath whose proud, and takes pleasure in the accomplishment of his killings. Embodying the truest essence of a killer without going over the top. Choi Min-sik subdue portrayal makes his character much more memorable because of it. Coming off as human as possible making it believable in one moment he holds your best interest to then later on want to chop you up into pieces. Withholding any urge to exaggerate his mannerism, and body language. At the same time, despite how often the viewer will see him get abused, Min-sik is a talented actor that he’s still manage to make his character despicable. The character of Kyung-chul has remotely no essence of any likable traits, yet Choi Min-sik understanding of his character paints a clear understanding of his mentality. In the all best possible ways, Choi Min-sik delivers a performance is very impressive to see unfold as much as it is capable to make you immerse within the film.

Byung-hun Lee who plays isn’t too shabby himself in the film either. Lee does a excellent job displaying a character whom seem to have all life sucked out of him. Remaining calm in any situation, even when to face with the killer. Despite displaying a humanless exterior for most of the film when the situation demands it Byung-hun Lee, in a few scenes is able to be emotional. There’s a final moment as the film closes where in a single moment Lee be expresses how mentality broken his character has become. When it comes to the sequences that require to fight him against actor Choi Min-sik, and neither of whom are expert in martial arts their performance of these sequences can fool anyone. Especially Byung-hun Lee whose swift movement can make a viewer further believe he encompasses his perfectly. As for the rest of the cast they’re at best character actor being good at playing off that one specific trait of their characters. It’s no exaggeration when saying the film is essentially a showcase for actors Choi Min-sik, and Byung-hun Lee than. Given the film aims that’s not a negative. The (I’m surprise to have) stunts work in the film are have good work put into them, and in certain scenes amaze by its creativity.

77437
I’m huntin wabbits!

The film is directed by Jee-won Kim who also has a writing credit in the film. His direction in the film is basically flawless. Despite sporting a beautiful look thanks to Mo-gae Lee it still manages to create scenes that master of the horror genre would be proud off. One important tool in Kim framing of a horror sequence is lightning, and showing specific details of the environments. In the opening sequence, Jee-won Kim makes it clear how helpless one of Choi Min-sik victims is in the environment. A recurring feeling Jee-won Kim goes for is making the viewer feel trapped in certain environments. Rarely showing what’s on the outside of an car, or building when a horror set piece is in place. His usage of wide shots is minimal in the film mostly being reliant on close on medium, and close ups whenever in buildings, and cars. What it accomplishes is not showing any blind spot to where an escape route is possible. Another aspect Jee-won Kim avoids is the common horror trope of people tripping while they run. Since there isn’t a high death count that never becomes an issue. If there’s any moments where Jee-won Kim becomes indulgent it’s mostly towards horror fans. He makes up for the lack of kills by going all out in showing good practical effects of body parts, makes sure lots of blood is spilled, and doesn’t cut away from hard to watch sequences. There’s a scene there you see a character cutting off an Achilles tendon, and the viewer sees the entire process. Another standout sequence execellent direction revolves around Choi Min-sik riding in a taxi with suspicious characters. Without being specific, this particular is carefully constructed to be bloody displaying Choi Min-sik stabbing people multiple times in a taxi, and having little blood spill on the camera as it spins around taxi. Jee-won Kim is relentless where it counts, but not overboard to the point where it’s indulgent on blood, and gore.

I Saw the Devil is wonderful combination of horror, and a psychological thriller understanding the best of both genre. The horror elements allows it to go into dark places as well as be bloody in presentation. Balance elegantly with the psychological mind games of two characters who simply hate each other guts to fuel it story after its first act. It’s a wonderfully twisted cat, and mouse game even when it’s clear at points it wants to be more than just revenge fantasy entertainment. On a technical level alone it offers two great performances from two good actor which alone makes it worth viewing. If you haven’t seen a good usage of horror within films, or simply a fan of horror movies I Saw the Devil will satisfy viewers who simply want the blood, and gore, while also offering viewers who are looking something more than just meaningless bloodshed.

8/10

Cinema-Maniac: 1: Nenokkadine (2014) Review

Psychological stories are among my favorite forms of storytelling along with the Western genre, Samurai films, and martial art films. This is mostly contributed to personal preferences as these four type of films, if everything is done correctly, hit all my sweet spots of what I’m looking for in a film. Western films in particular I consider the genre to find the best examples of writing in films for in depth narrative, and character exploration while martial art films can get me emotionally invested in events than a traditional action movie. Psychological stories what they tend to offer, besides the occasional intelligent writing, is endless possibilities in writing, and countless pondering thoughts once the film ends. When psychological films are done correctly you’ll have example likes Inception where debates over an ending among other elements are still written about. Clues that could have been missed the first time further can make you appreciate a film. Whereas other examples can fall into M. Night Shyamalan’s The Sixth Sense category of thinking it’s smarter than actually is. Despite it being well received, I still hold on my beliefs that it’s a film that is poorly written, and badly directed since it build around a single gimmick. That brings me to write about today’s film that falls into the later category of psychological films I dislike that are unable to use their key element in the story in any meaningful way. While not uncommon, it’s never a welcoming sight to see the exact moment where a film fall apart.

1: Nenokkadine is about a rock star who must overcome his psychological inhibitions to seek revenge for his parents’ death. The film waste no time drawing in viewers into the story starting with a kid running away from adults shooting at him. You immediately wonder why, and the opening sequence does it job in setting up the psychological elements without faltering. However, after the flashback is over it’s immediately followed by a musical number. Now the first song does have context since Gautham (Mahesh Babu) is performing at a rock concert. So the transition into a musical number isn’t jarring. Unlike the rest of the film where musical numbers just happen out of nowhere. While it is par for the course for Indian movies to insert musical numbers into a number of their films it is also common for some of the films to insert them accordingly. This film feel no need to fit them in so it’s spontaneous when it occurs. At least the first song while it contribute little narratively was an enjoyable, energetic track about finding yourself. Whereas the other 4 musical numbers are simply about love with corny lyrics. Except the last song in the film which could have been cut out since it contributes nothing.

Now before the film reaches the 41 minute mark it’s story is actually intriguing. It strikes a nice balance playing with Gautham psyche without over complicating matters. The streamlined story is constantly making the viewer wonder if its leading character is imagining events, or if they actually happened. Every major event within the first 41 minutes serve to play a mind game with the viewers. Presenting events in careful manner to not reveal the truth of Gautham memories. It’s also everything pass those first 41 minutes that the film entirely falls apart. Due to a simple scene the psychological angle the film started with is absolutely gone. No longer will you question if Gautham can’t tell the difference between imagination, and reality. This is one moment with Samira (Kriti Sanon) explaining her method to coworkers on how to get an interview with Gautham destroys any doubts you might have had of Gautham psychology being unstable. It’s so plot breaking that further events in the film that attempt to play with the idea of Gautham imagination with their only being one reasonable outcome from that one that scene in the film. Ultimately you end up seeing a film that thinks it’s more intelligent than it actually is. Throwing plot twist as every major turning point. If the film wasn’t trying to be a psychological thriller first than the issue wouldn’t as glaring. However, it would still be an overblown love story.

1-nenokkadine
It’s not you, or me, but the musical numbers I can’t handle.

A major chunk of the film is focus on romance that is overblown. The script doesn’t give the protagonist, and love interest enough time before they fall in love. In context, these two character share a single musical number, and a single action scene which is enough for the protagonist to basically die for his love. This is despite the fact after he learns his love interest has been deceiving him simply forgetting the fact that he been lie by this woman a majority of the time they spend together. After a scene where the damsel in distress get rescue consciously for the first time the romance becomes lovey-dovey. It’s further embarrassing seeing adult characters written like teenagers saying romantic to each other like they were little kids.

Then there’s a subplot revolving around Hydrogen Cyanide getting mixed into seeds causing infertile land causing inedible food in the background that only appears if neede to make progress. That’s a mouthful for sure, but it doesn’t end there as the flimsy attempt to tie in this subplot into its main storyline becomes over the top. Before it eventually evolves to a possible ego stroking film that’s only made to make it star look good. If main character Gautham who is constantly refer to as Rockstar in the film can find the Golden Rice than he can stop world hunger. You might be wondering how a film about a rockstar trying to find his parents killer ended up becoming a green environmentalist action film. The answer is simple as I went to the film IMDb page, and see nine people were given credits. Nine people writing a single film that almost three hours explains allot. It explains why the film never bother explaining how a rockstar just has the skill of a secret agent. This also explains why the film uses of flashbacks several time in the film, withholding certain information, and explains why a film that is wholly serious gives up attempting to balance a serious tone with comedy. Also, explains why despite Gautham popularity he doesn’t have any fanatic fan that would stalk him despite apparently being describe as Indian biggest rockstar.

giphy

Characterization for leading character Gautham is surprisingly dynamic. He has an conflict that is both external, and internal that he is desperate to find the resolution for. Despite the story placing importance on overblown romance Gautham turmoil is a driving force for the film. While the film doesn’t spend much on telling us about Gautham himself his conflict in the film is enough to make him an interesting character. Changing his minded goal of revenge into something more personal like remembering their faces. Touches like this make Gautham far more interesting than hardened person who already has his mind set on killing only to possibly change his mind in the end. That’s another aspect to his character that is great. Gautham deciding whether or not to take revenge isn’t the climax of his character. The storytelling isn’t coherent consistently, but Gautham as a character is easy to understand. It’s just a shame Jeremy Zimmermann, Arjun Y.K., Suneel Madhav, Thota Srinivas, Palnati Surya Pratap, Venkateswararao Potluri, Hari Prasad Jakka, Jakka Hariprasad, and Sukamar (who also the film’s director) nine credited writers couldn’t think among themselves how to create a good story to along with him. The other characters, are not even worth mentioning since they’re treated as plot devices, and nothing more.

The rest of the cast isn’t worth discussing in depth since they play pretty straightforward roles. Kriti Sanon who plays Samira is given a role where she plays an woman infatuated with her love interest. As some point in the film it seemed she would be required to do more than smile, look pretty, and bubbly when around the Mahesh Babu, but it doesn’t last long. So she overshadow in every possible way when she shares scenes with Mahesh Babu. Her biggest praise would be she could sing, and dance well, but so can her co star Mahesh Babu. Nasser who plays the film antagonist doesn’t appear in the film until the climax. While screen time is a contributing factor to his lack of an impression is his bland portrayal of a villain makes an easy part of the film to forget. Kelly Dorji is more of the same playing a villain, though his final scene allows him to mix change his dialogue delivery. Supporting actors in general from Anu Hasan, Pradeep Singh Rawat, Sayaji Shinde, Krishna Murali Posani, Gautham Ghattamaneni, Anand, Ravi Verma, and Srinivasa Reddy give the impression they’ll be given roles before disappearing from the film with pure ease.

Sukumar as an director at least nailed down making good music videos in the film. They look stylish as well having good dance choreography to showcase. Playing up a particular aspect in different musical numbers, including the corny love song where he films like a cheesy romance movie. Devi Sri Prasad did an excellent job creating the music. The action scenes in the film all good stunt work, but an issue in all of them is editing. In virtually all the action speed, and quick cuts are played around with. For example, there’s a fight scene where Mahesh Babu has to defend his love interest from a group thugs. Within the same fight scene there’s good practical effects that make the lack of psychics look convincing. This particular fight scene is unable to hide the fact actors in the background simply standing around waiting for their que to be in the scene. Also, this particular fight scene repeats the same shot of its own fight within the same sequence. What is not fun to see is seeing an entire action scene not being allowed to play out by itself without being tampered in some way. As oppose to the film first action sequence where playing with the motion of speed wasn’t abused while it played out.

Another issue is some of the bigger set pieces lack creativity. There’s a set piece in a parking lot having our hero fight off a gang motorcyclist trying to kill. Despite showing some of the motorcyclist carrying guns they never fun them while riding the motorcycles. That sequence in particular plays to traditional to the run, shoot, and cover style of action choreography without changing much in how it plays. Finally, the final action set piece requires you to disbelief the fact that our hero is couple of feet away from armed guards shooting at him, in a wide open space, and somehow not getting shot. The choreography in the final action sequence is sloppy unable to hide the fact that Mahesh Babu should have gotten in despite not hiding behind cover. If the sequence showed Babu dodging bullets by showing some bullet pierce on the ground, or destroy some light to distort vision it would have been easier to swallow the nonsense. There’s also some bad CGI in a sequence with a ship is burning then exploding, and some set pieces being filmed way too close to tell what’s going on. They’re done in a way where it’s easy to lose coherence while viewing them. It’s a shame too since they have some good stunt work in them, though in a nearly three hour film a couple action sequences won’t do much to salvage a bad even if they edited, and filmed correctly. Especially when a long chase sequence is only showing Babu running after someone without spicing it up in any way.

1: Nenokkadine is an overlong film with a psychological angle that shoots itself in the foot 41 minutes in the film. It’s think it smarter than actually is resulting in a film where it length is noticeable. The overblown romance, the bad psychological aspect, and the lackluster subplot of finding Golden Rice to stop world hunger aren’t an exciting mixed elements like they should have been. Mahesh Babu performance alone cannot out do the damage done by jarring transition into musical numbers, and badly edited action sequences. While star Mahesh Babu demonstrated he has talent. It’s unfortunate that none of the filmmakers, and especially it credited don’t have any of it to produce something worthwhile in a nearly three hour film.

3/10