Character Revelations – Padmarajan and Scorsese..
There is this quiet passage in Padmarajan’s Thoovanathumbikal, where Jayakrishnan ,the film’s protagonist seats himself, and quips gently to Thangal (a more benign version of the “archetypical pimp” in movies) , “You guys don’t know me. There was this one woman I loved and she left me. If I loose Clara too I would end up ruining myself”..
It is the line, “You guys don’t know me” , that is the truest line in the film. We really dont know Jayakrishnan completely. Right from its onset to a certain point in the film, we the viewer, in conjunction with the allied characters in the film make a conscious effort to know Jayakrishnan. And despite our strenous advances, Jayakrishnan remains an arcane entity.
We see him, in the opening scene arguing vehemently with a local over petty money. Padmarajan introduces Rishi, a friend of Jayakrishnan’s who runs an electrical shop in the city. Rishi sees Jayakrishnan as somebody just like him. An individual with grey desires, but with no courage to go forward and satiate them. Jayakrishnan brings up a mention of Thresia Jose, a native of Rishi’s town. Rishi pours out all the miseries of his colourless life with a belief that Jayakrishnan too is in the same mould.
Cut the next sequence,a chain of events, that can be best described as one of the most intense psychological studies ever done in Indian cinema. The next day we see Jayakrishnan visiting Rishi at his electrical store and whisking him away under the pretext of drinking Lime Juice. There, in the shop he argues with the seller over not putting ice in his drink and in a fit of rage takes Rishi over to a bar, a sleazy dim-lit place in the town-ruins. The mild and gullible Rishi is petrified over the thought of being seen in the bar by acquaintances of his. Jayakrishnan appears miffed over Rishi’s anxiousness and asks, “Damn it man, why are u so scared. We are just having lime juice here”..
Jayakrishnan orders for two glasses of lime juice and asks playfully, “Dont we guys deserve a bit of enjoyment, man??”..
What follows are a turn of events that brings out the duel-facedness of Jayakrishnan’s personality.
Jayakrishnan orders for two beers, gulps one down like orange juice while Rishi takes in two sips. Rishi watches Jayakrishnan with a sense of disbelief. For him, time stays frozen. A chain of events seems to make him traverse a parallel world, a world he had no idea about . Jayakrishnan, in that parallel world wasn’t the Jayakrishnan he had come to know of up untill that moment.The viewers too feel a sense of hapless revelation being dished out onto their concience. More surprises follow. Jayakrishnan and Rishi are soon sorrounded by a set of creepy, strange and stark-looking people, all of which turn out to be Jayakrishnan’s close friends. We see Jayakrishnan merrily swinging in their company and introduce them to Rishi at the same time. Rishi’s past observations of Jayakrishnan crumble down one by one and we the viewers too follow suit. Next we see Jayakrishnan readily signing away bills that he and his friends had incurred that evening inside the bar. Compare that charitability with the frugual Jayakrishnan of the opening sequence and we get the irony of et al.
A sequence which starts with such a lazy sheen to it ends up having darker undertones. It finally concludes with Jayakrishnan taking Rishi to a lodge-room in a bid to infuse that zing that Rishi was waiting for in his listless life. He had mentioned about it to Jayakrishnan the day before and Jayakrishnan had made a note of it. Waiting inside the lodge-room is , Thresia Jose. Yes, the same Thresia Jose about whom Jayakrishnan had mentioned to Rishi the day before..
Jayakrishnan is played by Mohanlal. Bypassing all those innumerable qualities that have been oft-mentioned about this actor, I see him as the only performer in Indian Cinema, who can display a rare masculine sensuality just by bringing out the abstract quality that defines his characters. Whether it is the nefarious nature of his character in Devasuram, power in Iruvar or the non-chalance cum desperation in Dasharatham. Here’s an actor who brings in all of his great protrayals a distinct sense of rugged sensuality that is so intricately associated with the traits of his characters and so removed from his own physicality.
In Thoovanathumbikal he fills the passages in the film with a libido that arises out of his character’s myseterious undertones initially and later through his vulnerability ( about which I am not mentioning here)..
Do visit the link below for watching the entire sequence on U-tube.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=eJ6H5n41G-Y
I never understood the significance of this sequence as a child. I never could share the magic that people associated with this movie either. But as I have grown up,my childhood judgement stands shattered, much like Rishi’s initial judgement of Jayakrishnan’s personality. I get a rare sense of connection that this sequence signifies. It goes beyond cinema, it goes beyond literature and enters the realms of human psyche..
Why is this scene so hauntingly real even when the experiences of the characters may not be our own? It is so, because, even through the confines of cinema, Padmarajan was able to bring out a distinct sense of truth. There is a technique in the story-telling here. Introducing a central character ( Jayakrishnan, here) through the eyes of a peripheral character( Rishi). A technique which if weilded properly can hit any discerning viwer on the gut-level.
I believe its the same technique that Scorsese uses in Goodfellas, in the CopaCabana sequence, where Lorraine Braco gets a glimpse of Ray Liotta’s lifestyle and personality by witnessing his behaviour in public. Its the same theory here. You get to see a character in a film unfolding through the eyes of an other character. You, the viewer are for that moment in time a character in the film.
On a psychological level its visceral. On screen its cinema..
|
No related posts. |
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
wow…
first adoor, murali and now padmarajan musings…
niiice
u have pretty much confined urself to mahanlals character definition, portrayal and subsequent unfurling in this post which in itself is well worth the time..
something i have always cherished in this movie is the rain…
its use is poetic to say the least…
it pours at the mere thought of sumalathas character or her arrival…
i could go on and on… mebe later
Sreehari Chetta, ^:)^ I liked this post very much. This movie is still mystery to me, I often wonder is JK is attached to Thresia of the guilt of pushing her into flesh trade or are they in love in the real sense of the word? One more intriguing thing is the mention of mad man crying in the distance.
Hi DPac,
I could go on and on abt Thoovanathumbikal. The rain sequences are just one part of it…
But, what I am trying to hilite here is something else. This piece is an ode to the “answering to the subconcsious” theory wrt creative appreciation..
I think that scene that I have mentioned is a gr8 lesson in character development. The thing is, there r so many budding film-makers here, me included who seem so enamoured by the technical side of cinema delving hard into terms like shot composition. Big terms.. overhead camera, crane shots, split screen and fanaa fanaa stuff.. But somewhere down the line, all this seems like stepping into level 5 bypassing the primary levels, like preaching in the cathedral of commerce. Story-telling, character development, introduction into a character’s psyche, ways to create a documentary of the human mind, all remain the primary basis of good cinema. For me that sequence in Thoovanathumbikal is a gr8 example of all those primary stuff that make up those basics. And for me it holds a mirror to the Copacabana sequence in Goodfellas too..This piece shud never be read as a review of Thoovanathumbikal. And I also believe such is the magnamity of the film, that it shud be analysed part by part, segment by segment. Cos I believe the film has undertones that r quite deeper than what we percieve it on the external. This sequence here is just one of those many segments that make up the gr8 film. I thoought it deserved a solitiary mention
//This movie is still mystery to me, I often wonder is JK is attached to Thresia of the guilt of pushing her into flesh trade or are they in love in the real sense of the word? One more intriguing thing is the mention of mad man crying in the distance//
Gattu,
The gr8ness of any gr8 movie lies in the latitude it provides for every viewer to interpret the movie on their own terms. In fact, any gr8 creative piece shud always be open for interpretations..
I have come to wonder whether JK’s emotions for Clara can actually be described as love. Its perhaps a combination of lust and respect, more than love. Till the point where Clara comes into the movie, JK actually remains a very mysterious entity for all of us. In fact, he chooses to be that way. Padmarajan decides against letting him out in the open for all of us. But, no sooner does Clara come into picture, than JK is let free. He is judged and becomes submissive to that judgment. He in a way feels defeated by this woman. And that defeat, he finds worth savouring.
ActuallY TT doesnt qualify to be a love story or a “love traingle” as some people choose to put it in a derogatory manner. It essentially is just the story of a cross-section of people stitched together by a common character ( Jayakrishnan). It is his story..
//One more intriguing thing is the mention of mad man crying in the distance//
What was the exact dialogue there??. ” I want to be like the wound on that mad man’s legs. An un- healing wound which has only one singular relationship with the chain”..
What do u think it implies???
i am not countering what u wrote nor did i consider this a review Sree…
i was just sharing something else..
and yes it is a great piece of character depth and development
“Story-telling, character development, introduction into a character
//however much i love padmarajans cinema these past few years i have been forced to admit all of his works are great stories rather than great cinema//
Hmm.. I dont understand these demarcations..Also I believe the story of every Padmarajan film can be narrated just in a line. Whether it Thoovanathumbikal or “Vineyards for us to dwell”..
Its not the story per se.. Its the way the sequences in his films are framed to bring out a sense of re-occurrence, a sense of irony, of progression of human emotions with time..
And that I think is the hallmark of any gr8 director..
The sequence where JK writes a letter out to Clara.. How do you dissect that part and put it into compartments? Is that a part of the story or is it a directorial virtue? What is it?? If you found that sequence beautiful, it was only because that sequence found itself in this story the director wanted to say, it was put in the right place, was whot beautifully and was performed with a certain degree of discresion…. Now how do u distinguish what part of Padmarajan was working well here? The story-teller part or the director part? I have never understood the dissection of gr8 movies based on certain discrete elements in it… Maybe u cud appraise me based on that self-study:)
no particular demarcations per se sreehari..
you take every movie around the 70s-80s, we have brilliant stories n scripts, enacted by even greater actors and good directors..
all of that is given…
but think – this is mainstream mallu films..nothing more..
you mentioned all the technical jargons earlier, theres no use of them here…
you put the camera in the scene and get the actors rolling and embark on a narrative…
plain and simple story telling done wonderfully well…
now think about movies around the same time by adoor, aravindan, john, and the like , u see the distinct difference in cinematic language there..
on top of the narratives u see layers and subtext and what not…
i hope u r getting wht i meaning :-)
//but think – this is mainstream mallu films..nothing more..
you mentioned all the technical jargons earlier, theres no use of them here
Sreehari, the seqience wudnt have been as effective if not for the “sing-song” thrissur malayalam…
Sree hari
Thanks a lot for that wonderful post . I agree with you that the JK of TT was one of the most powerful character of I would say Indian Movies.
I feel the Mallu movies of 80’s (Bharatan , Padmarajan , Sathyan Anthicad ) can be a referal point for art of movie making.
Thanks once again.
Choices reflect mindsets and your choice of this sequence speaks volumes for your own as it is, indeed, quintessential of Padmarajan’s command over his craft! Walking that line (or should it be mocking that line?!!) between “commercial” and “art” his failures were as spectacular as his success (remember “Season”?). And yet, and yet…
There are few movies that haunt me as much as “Thoovanthumbikal”. Saw it years ago but it refuses to leave me. Now, there are innumerable movies with brilliant scenes, shots, sequences. However, for the totality of the experience, this one takes the cake. The style is direct and yet, the undercurrents, the shades of grey throughout are just so compelling. I can think of Aravindan’s “Chidambaram” as another example.
I take exception to DPac’s argument that it was simply yet another movie of its times. Let us not forget that the likes of LaBella Sajan and P.G. Viswambharan were dishing out unadulterated nonsense in the 80s. Good stories alone not a great movie make! The story needs to grip you from start to end…
Usually, I much despise the invocation of Freud (most of the blokes I know who do so at the drop of a hat are prone to sophistry – in simpler terms, it is somewhat like M.G. Sreekumar waxing eloquent about ragas and non-nasal singing {ahh..the mother of ironies}) but in this movie Padmarajan seems to be going full steam with a Freudian analysis of the character. And Papettan SOO TRUTHFULLY depicts what he finds.
Bottom line, aside from his genius, it is this utter honesty as he explores his characters that set Padmarajan apart, I think. Your thoughts?
Hey Subbu,
Attaining Freudian Totality in Indian movies is a rather tough proposition. But, there are sly, subtle references to ‘Wit and its relation to the unconcsious’. The way JK’s character reacts to Radha and Clara’s allure is different. That is because both of these characters have a different kind of drawing ability. With Radha, he believes he deserves to get accepted while with Clara he believes he ought to win over her acceptance…
Its a subtle reference as I said, but very poignant..
Great analysis on your part indeed…
I seriously could not argue with Dpac anymore on his claims that the movie was just another ordinary Malayalam movie of the 80’s. It broke many a grounds with respect to codes of morality and exploring the human mind by implications to sly masochism and nascent bondage. In many a ways, it was to Malayalam Cinema, what “Last Tango In Paris” was to world cinema..
Subbu.. dont get me wrong… i wasnt equating pappan padams with the rest of the crap that was going on then… rather to the good ones which kept coming out regularly by bharathan, andikad, kg george, sibi malayil, balu mahendra, hariharan, MT et all…
if you note every person mentioned above was a narrator (a superb one at that)…
then if that was not enough we had adoor/aravindan/john exploring the language of cinema
we could go on and on about the refreshing content and stories of those times..but that was not the point i was trying to make here
i hope u and sree understand the delineation i am trying to make here.
//rather to the good ones which kept coming out regularly by bharathan, andikad, kg george, sibi malayil, balu mahendra, hariharan, MT et all
“Thoovanathumbikal was just way beyond all of that”
of courseeeeeeee no doubt on that count!!
it is way up there among the pile i was talking about
//it is way up there among the pile i was talking about//
So maybe your argument is directed at the fact that I was being too loud about this movie while there were also other films being made arnd that time say an “Amma Ariyan” which did in many ways display a gr8er amnt of “veering from the usual” and was equally or more brave..
But, my aargument is different. Morality or maintenance of it was always an issue. See, like I believe, there r always two ways of approaching an incident in films. You can either, record it or u can interpret it. Adoor, John Abraham and Aravindan did in many ways find newer ways to record truth. But their truths were all still in sync with a certain moral code or soceital state of being..
Padmarajan tried neither of the two. He just picked up characters and tried shedding them off the oft-defined moral set-up and still made them real and presentable. Their behaviours were scrutinized by putting them in situations not often traced in cinema.
There is an element of fantasy even while recording truth in his films. That “What if it was so?” question is omnipresent in all his films, an attrib that is missing in say an Adoor’s film..
not going into ‘morality’ ‘interpretations’ et all sreehari…
i was merely segregating the diaspora into 2
one, a subliminal narrative format which failed to tackle a ‘visual’ cinematic language and technique and another one which did.
as simple as that..
my comments shouldnt be construed to be anything even remotely as trying to disseminate padmarajan movies..
if this doesnt get the point across…:((
i rest my case
I just saw this movie and I
Travis saaaaale….
will take 3-bundi double shots as fee for that!! :-)
hehe yeah sure Dpac… I’ll give you a full bottle of your favourite beverage if you can get all Pappans movies :d
u r on!!
did u watch the ‘mindblowing’ movie ehehe
DPac,
Appreciate your efforts in articulating yourself. Certainly, I see your point better now and my earlier, rather uncharitable interpretation of your comments stands regretfully withdrawn!
Your elite list from the 80s set me thinking. Balu (the master cinematographer that he is) was stunningly visual! Some of the frames from “Yatra” are still frozen in mind. But then of course, the ambience of a hill station suggests a thousand stories even to the naked eye so the possibilities on camera are exponential (on this, anyone remember Serbjeet Singh’s camera in his DD serial Himalaya Darshan of yore?!!). But with Padmarajan it feels as if he had only minimal use for the camera – the characters usually transcended the technology of cinema!
Also would like to hear what folks here think of “Masoom”, that Gulzar classic.
Sree, thanks for the kind words. Art is, I believe, subjective by definition . As much as one tries to establish a dialectical framework, the overarching subjectivity seems inescapable. Thus I feel that all of our thoughts are just opinions – in other words, projections transient and “steady state” based on moods, faith, canons and God knows what else! Yet, like pleasant overnight train journeys (in non-A/C coaches, one must insist!
) they are pleasurable while they last!!!
Subbu,
You dont write here?? If u dont, its a shame( unless of course u have chosen not to)
Those final lines that made up your last comment were so amazingly put…
Reminiscient of that “bible quote” from “Vineyards for us to dwell”..
Hey Travis,
How do those chain of sequences that u have mentioned hint at existentialism? Maybe my knowledge of existentialist concept is rather concise, SO… HOW??
Repeat after me
Travis Dear,
Well u just proved that selective misreading and misinterpretation of a genuine, innocent query ain’t that different from each other…
I did not in any way try to evoke such a queasy response from your side. I honestly wanted to assess the merger of art and existentialist theories, to the extent of unearthing a point of concurrence. And, that was an honest attempt on my side to ask something I didn’t understand completely. Maybe it was the manner in which I had phrased my question, maybe it was the way that your acumen reacted to it, but your interpretation of that four-liner was nothin but gross miscalculation….
For the time being however, I consider it a case of impaired construction of words, and apologize for any unintended form of tarnishing…
I just hope that “God’s Lonely Man” ends up a feeling a tad better
Sree hari
Whats your opinion about CHAATA ….one of the very best work of Bharatan….
Sorry Jayakumar,
Haven’t seen Chaata… But, all of Bharathan’s films that I have seen, I find too direct and too made for one-time viewing. There’s no magic in revisting them again, no sensuality thats beyond definition. Except for Palangal, which I think is terrific..
He was a great visualist maybe, but then that ain’t all that gr8 directors r abt…
!!!!!!!
Sree i would have agreed but for ONE film…
hope u didnt forget ‘Thazhvaaram’..
im still looking for a dvd of the same
i keep saying to friends its the Wonly BEstern Movie Made in India!!
Dpac, Thazhvaram was good.. The wide landscape and stuff like that captured on screen made for immense eye-candy.. But, u knw.. there wasnt that thing about Bharathan’s movies, a sequence which cud hold u and torment ur psyche… he played with visuals, and sometimes fell prey to its usage and failed implications.. he was a trier, he was good… There r films of his that I enjoyed once, but cant really sit thru now that I try watching them.. a Vaishali, An oru Minaaminunginte Nurungu Vattam, an Amaram.. But i cant watch them today, they fail to grow on me… I am hit by the beauty of it, but thats it…
Padmarajan was a master, uncomparable…
watched “tin drum”.how well has the director shown the unwillingness of a small boy to grow up.however the one character i am talking about had no other option other than just submit to the basic trivialities of life..i think that is were he went wrong!!
well hi!!sreehari this is nadir!!
Read ‘Playboy- The year-end edition’.. How wonderfully has the fotographer displayed his affinity for bootstrapping a reader into visuals that stem out of his grey subconcsious and veer him towards forced promiscuity. The one model I am talking about is this petite, polymorphously perverse lass who believed that sexual intimacy is more of a man’s karma to start off with and something a women can latch on2 only in time and follow suit…
Well Hi Nadir, Salutations accepted!!!
hi nadir,
your previous comment reminds me of the movie that i had watched..”rebecca”.
well i would like to come atthis movie a bit later in bytes rather than bits and pieces.
firstly i think that the sexual intimacy that u were trying to point out in your comment is not a mans karma;but more appropiately it is the karma of “A” man who has not even thought of venturing into the deep dungeons of his sub-conscious mind. and “THE” man who was brave enough about whom you have talked in bits and pieces in the first few lines of your comment is the one who has a sole aim of climbing up his spiritual mountain and watch the sun shining right on his face of different dimensions.this man-whose journey to the top of his own spiritual mountain will force a lot many conflicts to regenerate themselves in form of;maybe;women,drugs or maybe even his other self.
the man that u have talked about is a fearful creature looking at things with a closed mind and having no courage to have his OWN perceptions regarding things.
men have to think their own way:and not the way the surroundings would want them to think..
the biggest fallacy is this that women are never looked at as creatures bringing about a conflict but more appropiately as creatures spreading love.
conflict is very much required but not for a man..
it is a necessity for women and not for men.(once again a movie comes into me little imagination-a few good men).
oops there was a mistake.
it should have been-;hi sreehari.
you see this is what it is and it can be answered by remaining glued to the who and finding out the which,where,what and WHY?-;
Sreehari,
Quote-//It is the line,
INetIdentity.. nice analysis
Excitement for the unknown, attraction for the hidden, ascribing a feeling of sensuality towards something thats not easily accessible, r emotions, sometimes indescribable that find mention in many a Padmarajan movies… Like the young girl’s attraction towards the celestial being in “Njaan Gandharvan” or Solomon constantly watching Sophiya working in the garden thru his bedroom window and enquiring abt her with his mother and Vineet, in “Wineyards for us to dwell”.
In Thoovanathumbikal, there is a segment in the relationship that builds on between JK and Radha. Radha, who is initially miffed at JK for his unruly behaviour starts feeling attracted to him when her brother decribes the other side of his personality. “He has a small underworld of his own, you know that?”, he asks her.
She hears about him in awe and recreates his personality. Maybe she accords upon him this feeling of a mythological character she had read about as a kid, a typical male with valour and enigma attached to him. she builds on a third-party opinion about him and gets drawn to him…..
The term thats used in the movie for the slow allure that JK builds upon Radha is ‘Provocation’ but actually Padmarajan manages to uncover a bigger truth than that..
The most powerful character of this movie is still not JK, but Thressia. Jayakrishnan is a morally trapped person who keeps ‘moral ethics’ such as he had decided to marry the first woman he touches etc. Thressia, however, breaks the moral hypocrisy of the society. She does not feel guilty of committing herself to prostitution. She is so mature that she could make JK a toy in her hands (she even fools Thangal) but still she is aware of her place that society would give her and thus did not want to ruin the life of JK.
I would say Thressia is one of the most powerful women characters Indian cinema ever had.
//The most powerful character of this movie is still not JK, but Thressia. //
Jo,
I believe u meant Clara and not Thressia? Thressia Jose is just a one-scene character in that film..
My bad! Yes, it’s Clara. :-)
I kinda agree with Jo. Clara’s character stands out. And I think she ran away after Jayakrishnan proposed to her, cuz she realized tat JK wanted to marry her not outta love, but outta guilt.Or more like, he considers himself as a man of principles, and doesn’t want to stray! (He had already confessed his love for Parvathy’s character!) On realizing his good intentions (of not wanting to be spoil Clara), she probably felt that he deserves more!
Lia,
There are no standout characters here. There r no power equations here. Every character in Thoovanathumbikal for me are mere instruments used to liberate the somewhat mystical character of “Jayakrishnan”…
His thought process, his ideas, his relentless search for love or redemption. Jayakrishnan’s strength is Radha’s source of vulnerability and admiration while his weaknesses are the source of Claara’s strength.. Like I said, it is his story and there r no power equations here
The most appealing to me about the movie was that it is so much in close connection to the very foundation of “The Man-woman relationship”.. It casts a very probing eye on the general and yet somewhat subtle details that make a “Man woman relationship”..
And a person who hasnt actually dug deep into the basic idiosynchrasies of the man-woman relationship might not enjoy the movie..
As a matter of fact I dont think a Gay person can actually like Thoovanathumbikal.. Of course I am not stating that the converse is essentially true. That everyone who doesnt fancy the movie wud have to be necessarily gay…But Gays wont enjoy Thoovanathumbikal for sure..
Let me see if I have got the allure of the movie correctly decoded:
You are supposed to live abiding to the rules of the righteous world around you. But there are ocassions when you cross that implied line of righteousness and enter into a world that doesnt base itself on the principles u were brought up. Inside that new,exciting, almost parallel world, you discover the pleasure and happiness that u were always looking for within your mandatory state of survival. Then what do you do? I guess you just fight it…
Two wonderful sequences from the film.. There r no subtitles here but I guess the visuals and the B/G score makes up for all that..
http://youtube.com/watch?v=lqavhg29AFY&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=VSAMehpGjAg
I heard an unanswered question here, about “the madman crying in the distance”
Basically, Clara wants to be like that wound of the madman, which is linked only to the chain binding it.
She is attached to so many men physically, though she does not regret it initially, she regrets it now, and wishes she was just linked to one man alone( Is that man Jayakrishnan ?
Maybe, Maybe Not.
I too was confused by this dialogue, but it dawned upon me suddenly while I was reading Udhakapola by Padmarajan himself ( on which the movie is loosely based)..
Anyways nice question, hope my interpretation makes sense..
Cheerz..