Baby Steps

There is no getting around the actual fact - I do not seem to have the wherewithal to actually sustain writing a blog. One, or another thing keeps worrying me from writing it. Either it is a case of me worrying about writing something that is already talked about to an exasperating extent, or it is my worry that I am not going to bring in anything fresh to a discussion, or it is my worry that I might offend someone I know. I have also been telling myself in the meantime that I don't have time for all this.

Amidst all this worry, my frustration of not writing stuff keeps bubbling up. Earlier, I seemed to have had one or other form of expressing myself, like a bunch of friends I used to talk to regularly. Time, space and geography doesn't give me that luxury anymore. I didn't even realize it was one before. Then, there is the other end to this problem: when you actually put it on a forum, the number of things that can be misunderstood seems to be, frankly, more than what you are actually trying to say.

But, nothing can be as consoling as pouring your thoughts into a space you trust, so, why deny myself that pleasure? So, I am not going to.

It will probably be short, meandering in the content even, but it is going to be here. And hopefully, this renewed energy will keep it sustained.

Mid 'blog' crisis

I cannot believe that it is been so long since I wrote anything. When the first anniversary of my blog came and went, I had to let it go. I could say that life has a way of coming in between, and that I have been quite busy with a lot of personal stuff that I didn't write anything. If I do, there would only be a grain of truth in it. After all, I have always written when life was happening. In fact, some of my best writing (according to me, that is) has happened when life was a beast all by itself. But, to be honest, I have been wondering and worrying over what to write about. The main pitfall when you read too many blogs or books is that, you have this feeling of ambiguity and redundance. I have been off late besieged by this feeling that I am just repeating (for or against) a popular opinion. Until my post on dark/fair issue, I didn't have this feeling. But after that, especially after participating in a discussion about that same topic elsewhere in the online realm, I have been plagued by this feeling of redundancy. I wanted to write about how absurd our cinema treats women, about how living outside India changes our perceptions of ourseleves, about how time expands and contracts with children, about so many other things. But, the more I read, I am figuring out, that there is always someone who has already finished talking about it. It is just that, I always have a different opinion, or a different perception, or sometimes just a shade of a difference over the same opinion.

Then, I would remember one of my mother's aunts telling me that there are only seven stories in the world and that anything and everything is only a variation of it. I think, what we write about also has such limitations. I, after all, write about my experiences and very rarely fiction (even my fiction, I am sure, is one among that seven stories). And experiences are bound to overlap. I can only say about that different perception or that different shade of the same opinion. It might or might not resonate with whoever reads, I can only write, not decide upon what a person infers or even takes home with my writing. It is not that I consider myself the kind of writer who has a vast range of audience, but I do know a regular set of people who read my posts. They have mostly been emotionally blackmailed or held at gun point, to read what I write, in case you were wondering. But, knowing who would end uo reading them, also makes me hesitate to write about certain things. No, I am not worried about causing a controversy, but more about, how those little number of people would have probably heard most of it, if not all of it, already from me.

In between all these musings, I forgot why I wanted to write in the first place. I love writing. It is as simple as that. I love writing about my thoughts. Putting across my feeling in such a permanent fashion is both an exhilarating and a vulnerable experience. It is about recording to posterity what I thought about something at that point of time. Sometime later, I might have a different thought over it. After all, in the past I have held way too many things close and tight to my heart and mind that I feel absurd about now. I also have had some thoughts and opinions which remain the same and even more firmed by my life. But, it is always interesting to revisit what I thought. It is always happiness that I do get by writing. Opinions change, it is a fact of life. But, the core of what we are never does. So, why stop myself from doing what I enjoy? So, to all of you who are threatened regularly to read what I write, *insert villain laugh here*, I would continue to do so for a long time to go.

So, see you soon...

Like a gentle smile...

Kuttram Kadithal has been awarded the National Award for Best Movie - Tamil, this year (2014). Awards, especially before the release of a movie, are quite dangerous. It is the equivalent of too much marketing which brings in hyped up expectancy. From my view point, it is a movie that certainly and thankfully deserves the honour it has been bestowed with. The movie has been released online (in legal online forums like HeroTalkies and TentKotta) along with the normal theatrical release - I am really glad for the producers' decision. I just hope that it can become a norm and not a rarity.

This isn't the kind of movie where the unexpected happens, but I would suggest watching it without knowing the storyline or even the actors. I am not an authority to talk about the technical aspect of any movie, but the cinematography of this movie is something to behold.

The narrative just sucks you in. Even when you know and can guess the storyline and even the reaction of the people involved, it keeps you going to see what exactly they do: this is mainly because, these people actually do what normal people do. It is infact, a blasphemy to call them characters. There are some movies where the normalcy of the character is mounted and made to stand center stage, here they just are.

I cannot remember the last movie, which wasn't directed by Mani Ratnam, where the characters actually do normal place things while they are delivering dialogs:

• The daughter packs her lunch box and doesn't forget to take some pickle for her curd rice, even while she is pleading with her mother over phone to stop fighting with her.
• Something unusual and disturbing has occured, but the wife who comes back home doesn't forget to grind the soaked rice for next morning's idli. And this is not shown to us with pointers, but by simply making her walk with her batter soaked hand to open the door for her husband. She tells him to not to worry and in the same breath asks him to have his dinner and not to forget to take his pills. You know that the man is diabetic because of this and the fact that in a previous scene they both were out for their regular morning walks. And the beauty of  it is, neither the batter nor the Diabetes is actually relevant to the context of the movie, but it is relevant to the character themselves.
• A man goes to a mother's place to find out about the whereabouts of her offspring. She is running a prayer meeting, he waits. He decides to have a smoke and then stops, he might or might not be atheistic, but that doesn't mean he is going to 'disrespect' her faith. Wow!
• An inspector is conducting a case, she is making some calls from her home. Amidst her calls, she eats Maggi. It is only after seeing the Maggi that I remembered her asking her son in a previous scene, about what he wants for dinner. When was the last time a movie showed us that normal people make plain, no vegetables Maggi for dinner?

There are many, many more of such little gems. They are never on your face and never distract you from what is actually happening, but these little things tell you that all these people have existed before this and will continue to do so after the movie is going to be done.

Bharathiyar's Chinnanjiru Killiye, which runs as a background song to the amazingly done visuals, is probably when I gave my heart to this movie. The scenes corelating to his Kannathil Muthamittal and Un kannil neer vazhindhaal part of the song actually brought a lump to my throat. The last movie that I actually cried for is Mahanadhi, and that was over a decade ago.

This is probably the only movie ever made where the women are normal. Yes, really. A mother, who lives alone, actually has a life that doesn't require her grown up daughter's presence. She drives a two wheeler and has an agenda for everyday. An inspector beautifully juggles her job and her house. A mother, one half of a couple who lost their child, is actually the stronger one. She hasn't lost her compassion, but she has hardened her heart better than her husband. Another mother, who is a widow and frail looking, is anything but. She actually drives an auto for her living, this isn't to make a statement, but it is her humble livelihood, she has her son to take care of.

In complete contrast to these women, it is the heroine who is actually frail. I call her heroine for the lack of a better word. The movie isn't about her, but she is the one who drives a bigger chunk of the story. She has married outside her religion and she herself isn't very sure about that. She loves her husband, but is confused about embracing his religion or not; it is amusing, because her husband is not a religious man. It is she who gets confused about whether or not to hide her thaali, it is she who insists that he has to put the sacred vermilion on her forehead and in the next breath insists that they need to go to the church next day. He doesn't give a damn either way, he says as much: edhukku idhelaam? He doesn't tell her to wear any religious signatures, but she wants to. And then when something untoward happens, she is convinced that it is because she has betrayed her religion. This layer in her character is quite beautiful: it doesn't judge her, but just shows that she is confused.

So, with all this obvious beauty of this movie, I was quite jarred to see a caricatured Tam-Bram character. I mean, this is a movie that doesn't vilify any religion, which is pretty much an impossible feat, because the whole movie has the Christian imagery running. (Er, ok, I am not a Christian, so maybe my feelings on this subject doesn't count.) It doesn't even vilify any characters, no one is judged or punished, and then this. But, it wasn't quite distracting as I feared, the said character doesn't have many scenes, so all is well.

Oh yes, let me not forget. The circus which is shown as the media! The media has been portrayed as very on the face and downright annoying, but in the current context of the things, I am not very sure whether this was right or wrong.

Altogether, an amazing, amazing movie.

Notes:

Bharathiyar - An epic poet of pre-independence era. His song 'Chinnanjiru Killiye' is an ode to a daughter by a parent, mostly a father.

Kannathil muthamitaal - If (I) kiss (your) cheek...

Un kannil neer vazhindhaal - If tears fall from your eyes...

Thaali - Mangalsutra. Tamil films of a certain era are known for their 'thaali sentiment' scenes.

Edhukku idhelaam - This is unnecessary.

Vanilla, Caramel and Chocolate

If there is something called flogging a dead horse, it is this post: I am going to talk about our obsession with 'Fair and lovely'.

Relax, I am not about to write an essay on how 'Black is beautiful'. In fact, my problem is exactly that. There is a saying in Tamil - 'Karuppey azhagu; kaandhaley rusi', which when lossely translated means - 'Only black is beautiful and only roasted to the point of burnt is delicious'. It sounds like something that was made up by a cook after accidentally burning up that day's breakfast. This over stressing results in the exactly opposite opinion. We might even agree on the 'roasted is delicious' part of it, but the other part is extremely contrived.

Beauty has a very fluidic meaning. It changes with individual, region, country and race. But, there is a generic notion of beauty that we all usually agree on. For example, you might or might not think Jothika is beautiful, but would agree that she has beautiful eyes; you might prefer Tamannah over Sneha, but would agree that Sneha has a beautiful smile. I am taking a fair skinned woman and a compartively dark skinned woman as examples to emphasize that the discussed aspect of their beauty is not going to change with their complexion.

We always say: "She is not that beautiful but, really fair" and "She is dark, but beauiful". Our definition of beauty always seems to be fair first and dark next, so the emphasis is always on the complexion of a fair woman and her beauty is only second to it but with a dark skinned woman her beauty is always despite it. This, this is precisely what irritates and annoys me. A woman can be fair or dark, but beauty is an overall thing. It is extremely perplexing to me that people find it a surprise when we see beautiful dark skinned people and not so beautiful fair skinned people.

My major contention: to be called fair is a compliment and to be called dark is a criticism. It is considered extremely rude to say someone has tanned, well what then do you want to call it? I remember how a friend of mine (she falls in the Jothika shade in general) after a much deserved vacation to Goa came back looking all tanned and happy . Almost everyone she met began or ended the conversation with tips to regain her white, white complexion. She almost placed herself under house arrest to regain her complexion. Why all this stress? Fair or dark, she is a beautiful girl. It didn't make a difference. Well, maybe that is just me!

My baby, when he was around two or three months old, started to get darker and more dark. My grandmother had told me that all kids undergo a period where their blood count increases and this happens and 'not to worry'. I actually realized it only in the pictures I took. At that point of time in my life, he was the only thing I was looking at 24X7, how on earth would I know the difference? And every single person who came to visit me then invariably gave me million tips to get my baby fairer. It annoyed me to no end. If I explained the phenomenon, they concluded that I was being defensive and consoled me saying ofcourse, in that tone which tells you they didn't believe a word. If I went ahead and proclaimed he looks exactly like his father (which he does), it would comically end in two scenarios: if they know my husband personally or are related to him, they would lower the voice and protest that my husband is not that dark; if they were related to me and have never seen him before, they would immediately nod their head with wisdom, "Oh, of course" - it is not my mistake you see, my husband's. And ofcourse, when they saw my baby months later when we went back to India, "acho, evlo color aayitaan" (you know, phoren return, gotten fair, blah blah blah) was the usual comment. Oh yes, I forgot, I was included in this "You have gotten so fair!" compliment too. And after the first two times I stopped saying, "It has been ages since I have seen sun, it is winter there you see. This is just lack of sunshine." Yes, I understand that we all went shades paler than we were and one has a right to comment on it. But, the 'now you look more beautiful/handsome' undertone behind it is incogruous.

Beauty is beauty, there is no 'despite being' in it. And mediocre looks are mediocre looks, there is no 'but' after it.

Yes, the next time someone tells me, 'looks are not everything, there is intelligence...there is good heart', be warned, I will make you watch Anjaan movie a million times as punishment! This post is not to say beauty is of the utmost importance. This post is about my annoyance over the world's perplexing view that fair skinned people are beautiful by default and dark skinned people are sometimes beautiful inspite of it.

P.S's:

1. If you don't recognize the names Jothika and Sneha - (a) you are underage and reading my blog, are you sure your parents will be okay with that? (b) new or not seen many Tamil movies, eh? They are slightly retired Tamil actresses, please Google them, thank you!
2. If you feel outraged that I have used 'she', 'woman' a lot, forgive me. In my limited, narrow experience, I have only seen women suffer more from this issue than men. 
3. I fall under the wheatish complexion category, which makes me the mid-scale range. I can talk about both sides, you cannot question me with 'How would you know's. I have been told "oh my, you are fair" and also "you know, something like your color" (in that derogatory tone which indicates that I lean towards the darker side of the color scale in the said person's estimate, which is bad, really, really bad!)
4. Anjaan - you don't know about this movie? You really must Google Anjaan memes. Trust me!

Oh you dark southie...

Stereotyping is in our blood. I had this epiphany quite recently. I figured it out, so it's my epiphany, ok? Don't say no, I will get offended. These days it's super easy to get offended and get you banned for anything.

Where was I? Yes, stereotyping. We have all been part of jokes about the other side, whichever direction it might be. We have all made fun of other 'groups'. Somehow, it is easier to categorize and put people in their place - square pebble in the square hole is what we assume it to be. But, it would never occur to us that the square hole in which we place the square pebble could actually be a rectangle, not much difference there, right?

It all began with Chennai Express and escalated with The Two States. As a full blooded south Indian, I was offended! Is that supposed to be South Indian style? Is that supposed to be Tamil?! And all the related blood pressure heightening questions. And then, ta-da, my epiphany - we are no less in stereotyping. No one is, actually.

I was watching Lingaa (yes, yes, horrible movie, I agree) and there is scene where a stolen jewel is pawned for and naturally the scene involved a Seth. And I thought: Do all Seths in Tamilnadu speak this "nambillki, nimbillki" Tamil? All those people living there for generations together must possess a definitive knowledge of Tamil - might be accented, but definitely there - right? Christian bar dancers, mundu wearing Malayali women, "naekku nokku" speaking Brahmins, Kongu tamilians calling every woman on the road as "ammini", sickle wielding Madurai men and the worst of all - those striped underwear wearing, cloth bags using, poor, poor, villager. We are no less, give us one community whom we do not know or barely know and we stereotype them. 

I am with Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie about this issue: "The single story creates stereotypes, and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue, but that they are incomplete. They make the one story becomes the only story." This, I can totally agree with.

Does it mean that shouting at the top of our voice and holding protesting placards make people realize this. I don't think so. The simplest thing, ofcourse, would be to ignore it. But, in this globalised world, where everyone easily has an opinion about something (even if you don't have one, all you have to do is to Google it and form a opinion on it), it seems silly to stereotype anything or anyone. But, getting offended on it doesn't seem to have any impact either. I am not trying to find a solution to this, just putting across my thoughts on how one can be a stereotype-e while being a stereotype-r. These days, I am trying to stop myself from it. As I said before it is much easier to fit people into a mould, but with everyone's knowledge growing leaps and bounds due to social media and awareness (including mine), I would probably typecast people wrong. So, not doing it definitely helps. No, it is not easy, but I feel as if it helps. Viewing the world and the people in them with new eyes probably makes me a little bit more naive, but it can't be that bad, can it?

Also, if someone could convince these movie makers to be a little less stereotypical, it would be great. Not every guy who tiffs with this sweetheart needs to quench his tears in TASMAC. Not every person who has a drink or two throw a drunken fit, I have met people who can hold their drink, thank you. And when we are on that, not every person who doesn't want to drink is a prude, some of us just don't want to drink. And my major peeve - not everyone who works in IT have a la-la-la life in which we earn in six figures a month.

Standard disclaimer: By community, I am talking about the regional/religious/caste divided set of people. By "us" and "we" in the "we are no less" context, I am talking about Tamil movies. After all, I largely watch Tamil movies and English, Malayalam and Hindi to a certain extent.

Uttama Villain

Tamil Movie - Review

In short:

Contemplating about mortality is not new - from Hindu mythology to X-Men, it is a concept that has been dealt with fantasy or practicality. Salangai oli was probably the first movie that I saw in which the concept of "immortality through art" is achieved. After that, I am seeing the same in Uttama Villain. If you think I have spoiled the movie for you, I haven't. The How's, Why's, What's are still very much what makes this movie special. Salangai Oli did not deal with this premise directly, but passed it off as an after-thought. But here, the premise has been unabashedly embraced. Is this a good movie? It has the best possible actors (barring Pooja Kumar) in the best possible roles and they have all done their parts beautifully, the screenplay with the movie-within-movie weaving in and out is beautiful, it has got beautiful wordplay, Kamal Haasan has acted his age and is a treat to watch, but... Yes, there is a but, the problem with KH is that he always tries to bring in too much. You know how we all used to have library hour in our school days? If you were a book lover like me, do you remember how one would try to cram up on as many chapters from a book as possible in that one period? Kamal Haasan is exactly like that. And somewhere in between all that cramming, he loses focus on what he is trying to say. It is not an under cooked effort, it is an effort that has been cooked, and tasted, and spices adjusted, and tasted again and again and again that at one point of time your tongue goes numb to take in the flavors.

In long:

This contains spoliers...

Where do I begin? Kamal Haasan has acted his age, yes, yes and yes. It is so wonderful that there is no pancake to disturb us when he is emoting, it really helps to see Manoranjan with his warts and all. It is cliched to say KH has acted wonderfully, when hasn't he? But here, the acting is so seamless that only when we are seeing Uttaman, the character which he plays in the movie within this movie, do we actually feel the acting. But that is also the problem. Since the present day narration (let me call it Manoranjan's portion) is so nice and happening that when we cut to the Uttaman's portion, it is a little jarring. It is as much caricatured as against the Manoranjan's portion which is so natural. And the biggest letdown of this area is Pooja Kumar. One cannot simply take her in the slapstick, it is so artificial. Take Nasser, his character is the showcase of what a comic villain caricature looks like, but he does it so effortlessly that Pooja Kumar's acting stands out like a sore thumb. The scene where Pooja Kumar (as the princess Karpagavalli) meets Uttaman and teaches him to ride her pet tiger (no, I am not kidding), I literally closed my eyes and wished the scene to end. It was boring and such a dampener on the happening story. But the wordplay of Uttaman's portion and the Crazy Mohanish dialogues are so funny, it leaves you cackling throughout.

One of the great things about this movie is that, even though it is the chronicle of Manoranjan, some of its best scenes are those in which Manoranjan is not present - the space that has been given to co-artistes sans KH is pleasantly surprising. And all those who have been credited with such scenes have done it so beautifully. Urvashi (as Varalakshmi, Manoranjan's wife) and M.S.Bhaskar (as Chokku, Manoranjan's manager) are outright awesome. Andrea, quite surprisingly does her role justice. Parvathy Menon (as Manoranjan's illegitimate daughter) has been given a small role but she is perfect for it. Jayaram, in that one scene where he asks, ungallai Ranjannu koopdalaama, naan en magallai dhaan Mano nu koopduven (can I call you Ranjan, because I call my daughter Mano), proves what one dialogue with the right nuance can do. KB is a little staccato in some scenes but when he tells Manoranjan oru dhadava naan solradha kellen (just listen to me once), you know the caliber of the man who created Rajnikanth and Kamal Haasan. K. Vishwanath has no such consistency issues, he is the right mix of the shrewd businessman and loving father. Who is that guy acting as KH's son, after the trailer and even in the beginning of the movie I never really expected him to act, but he wows you with his performance.

It has so many beautiful moments that it is difficult to pick one. Take the scene where Chokku (M.S.Bhaskar) comes to know about Manoranjan's Brain Tumor, he tells Arpana (Andrea) he knows why Manoranjan didn't tell him the news himself. And she asks him why, the way he says adhu engallukkulla (that is between the two of us - himself and Manoranjan) is a sheer treat. The guilt combined with the helplessness is perfect. So, is the scene between him and Varalakshmi (Urvashi) where he breaks the news to her unknowingly. It is just perfect, nothing else can be said about it.  Parvathy (as Manonmani) has really less to do, but is just right for her role. She tells Manoranjan that she is not like him at all and that she takes after mother. And immediately after that she realizes that the stance in which she is sitting is the exact replica of Manoranjan's and immediately shifts, it is so subtle, you would miss it in a blink of an eye.

And despite all this, the movie is neither flawless nor is a seamless watch. It tries to do too much in too little time, much like the protagonist: Manoranjan needs to make up with his wife, son, daughter, father-in-law and his mentor, he needs to ensure his immortality, he needs his fans' adulation, the Uttaman story needs to unfold and wrapped up in a satisfactory way. There is the sheer volume of poetry and prose that this part involves, it is difficult to take it in a single go. And it is not because that it is bad, but that it is too overwhelming. There is just no respite, every single scene right from the beginning till the end has a footnote that you start to feel suffocated. Epiphanies don't make a movie.

This is the story of a prima donna. Yamini loved him enough to bear his child and dream a life with him but couldn't, Varalakshmi loved him like a child loves candy - she wanted him and went after him without a sense of right or wrong and got him, Arpana loves him despite the cynicism that he has garnered over the years and the fact that she would never get him - she knew that she can't be his Varalakshmi but it is indeed sad that she can't be his Yamini either. It is not that he didn't love any of these women, it is just that he always loved Cinema more that he couldn't put any one of them or even himself above it. So much that when he wants immortality, he decides to gain it through his love - Cinema. If his love towards anything can be compared to his love for cinema, it is probably the love for his children. It is because that Arpana understands this, that she hugs his kids when she feels like breaking down in the end.

How old are you?

Malayalam movie - review

In short:

It was a string of Vijay's movies (Tamil) that first gave me this impression: the last one was infinitely better than the current. It went from bad to worse to worst and at one point of time I just gave up trying to watch his movies until he redeemed himself in Thuppakki. After Vijay, it seems to be the women empowerment themed movies: first was English Vinglish - I felt it was a movie that should have been taken about a decade back and had issues with the caricatured characterization of the protagonist's family. And then comes this one. What do I say? It is not that this is a bad movie, far from it. It has its heart in the right place and some things are just beautiful, and then some things come out of nowhere that one gets boggled with the narration. It is a simple story with a wonderful protagonist - Manju Warrier, is in a word, awesome. She just looks apt, acts apt and just IS apt. It is only when she gives her soul for the movie, you feel that it could have been better for her sake. And this movie ought to be watched, if for nothing else, at least to know what female actors, who can actually do their jobs, when given roles with meat can actually do.

In long:

This is full of spoilers...

It starts out really good. Unlike EV (please forgive the comparison, it is impossible not to) Nirupama, the protagonist, is actually flawed. She is lazy and eensy weensy mean, which is actually nice. I sat up thinking, "here...here is a lady with shades in her character" and also assumed that the transcending arc of the story would be in her losing those negatives and finding her strengths. How wrong I was! It is yet again a story of a woman who is pulled down by her family, in particular her husband. It is so trite and cliched, it makes you wince. The place where Rajeev shouts at Nirupama for her expired license is so unbelievable. He knows that she is not tech savvy or even latest news savvy. How on earth did he presume will she know about her license thingy? But even when he was shouting at her for her lack of interest in the world around her, I was still hopeful. After all, this man wants her to learn or show interest in things that interest him. But no, right in the middle of the story, he switches to become this cruel hearted person who would snatch away her daughter from her to Ireland. Really? The worst of it is, the daughter character is actually beautifully fleshed out. She loves her mother, she is not ashamed of her, she just wants her mother to dream of things that can be done and get going there. She even nudges her to think with her "I-wont-tell-what-the-question-is" routine she puts up. The mother-daughter argument post Nirupama failing her Visa interview is actually beautiful and very real. When Lakshmi (the daughter) tells her mother that her mother shouldn't be blaming Lakshmi for her lack of dreams, it is so true. The question - so, no woman, after becoming a mother has chased her dream? Don't blame me for your laziness - is probably the most defining moment of the movie. Why wasn't this extrapolated much further? After all, it is she who stopped doing it and the movie actually tries to say that you shouldn't stop dreaming and work on it. But, it takes this stupid turn - the husband becomes the villain! He decides to take Lakshmi with him to Ireland - good move, after all the girl wants to go there. So, why couldn't he simply discuss it with Nirupama (like she herself says towards the end of the movie)? Instead, he hoodwinks her into a dinner and pours it on her head like a tonne of bricks - such a queasy thing to do. And Manju Warrier is just beautiful in this portion - when she says that for her, taking care of Rajeev and Lakshmi is the only thing to do, you actually empathize with her. She might be educated quite well, she might have been a bold girl in her college days, she might be a working woman today, but for her, the life revolves around her husband and daughter. She doesn't know anything else - she has barricaded the world away from her. This just shows in her expressions, an excellent piece of acting. And the scenes post this - in airport, the mother-daughter talk, her talk with her friend are all beautiful. Now, she all by herself could have analysed her life and come up with why she is the way she is. Instead, we get a silly what-for sentimental scene between her and a bus-mate, organic farming and lectures on chemical-infused agriculture and her becoming so successful that she gets to meet the President of India. Sigh!

In EV, the success was of a smaller scale, it was a personal victory. One of the most beautiful dialogues of EV - I don't need love right now, I need respect - it is the cry of women post their mid-thirties. She doesn't want the world's acceptance, just the family's. Why is it that this discovery of oneself, needs to be so widely acknowledged is my issue. Self-discovery doesn't mean you become the headlines but that you discover your potential to be more than what you are right now and to be at peace with oneself. Why is it that when it is women empowerment, the husband is always the one who has pulled down the woman from her dreams? Yes, circumstances and family are always a major influencing deal for any person. But, it could have been simple things - like him expecting her to slough through her work and home. Then, through the course of movie, the people in the house could have realized that their participation is critical for her success (whatever that might be). Instead it's a project that is so outside the realm of whatever we have seen till then.

The problem that I see in this movie is that it tries to mix in self-discovery and success and treats them as the same thing. And another problem is that "success", it tries to tell us is always large-scale, which involves the whole world. That isn't true either. It takes up too many premises: One, dreams are to be chased; Two, self-discovery; Three, women in general have more issues when it comes to attaining more. And because it bites more than it can chew, it becomes a hap-hazard business in the end,

Manju Warrier's performance and some scenes which have been carved so beautifully are the two things that kept me rooting for Nirupama till the end.