Ponniyin Selvan — I
Why I hated the movie
Spoilers ahead
Is this a movie about the Cholas? Really? Not a single reference to any unique aspect of their actual empire — their obsessive Saivite devotion, their zeal for temple building, their patronage of art and literature, their vision for a Chola empire, their rich genealogy, nothing, nada, zilch.
Not a single frame shows the people of the chola Kingdom and their interaction with the kings, generals, and ministers which Kalki captures in the book. Not a single frame that shows a single Chola character as noble, as someone who cares for the populace or their legacy!
Is this a historical movie? Is there any frame that shows the historical importance of Kanchi where Aditya karikalan is camped? Is there any frame that shows the significance of Veeraanam/Veeranarayanapuram where Vanthiyathevan sees Periya Pazhuvettaraiyar’s retinue? Do we get an understanding of why Pazhaiyaarai is so dear to the Cholas that they never abandoned it as they moved their capitals through centuries? Does one historically significant factual event happen in this movie?
Is this a movie about real characters with motivations and human emotions? Why does Sundara Chola or Kunthavai collapse at the news of Arulmozhi Varman’s death at the end when neither of them has shown no feeling towards him until then? Why does Arulmozhi Varman jump into the water to save Vanthiyathevan who he just met? Why does young Adithya Karikalan scream Nandhini’s name when we haven’t seen any kind of love bloom between them? Why do Kunthavai and Nandhini hate each other?Why does Adithya Karikalan choose Vanthiyathevan as the spy and not Parthibendra Pallavan?
Is this a movie that travels the length and breadth of the Tamil country like the novel does? There is one shot of Vanthiyathevan riding his horse at the beginning from Kanchi to Thanjavur. After that, he suddenly pops up in Pazhaiyarai, and then in Lanka. Kunthavai jumps from Thanjavur to Kanchi suddenly. Azhwarkadiyaan joins Vanthiyathevan in Srilanka with no warning. Where are the shots that establish the distances travelled by these people? Where are the shots that show the grandeur of the landscape?
Is this a movie with a central mystery that binds the characters together? Why should we care about who the oomai rani? The Devaraalaan’s attam delivers a gruesome message, but do any of the characters realize its import? Vanthiyathevan meets Ravidasan in the underground passage way of the Thanjavur palace. But what is the mystery around this sorcerer?
Does this movie have Nanthini, Kunthavai, Vanathi, and Poonguzhali? Nanthini is a tortured soul whose mind is fragmented in a dark place in the book. Her very presence seduces all men but Vanthiyathevan and Arulmozhivarman. She simpers, flirts, cries, laughs, and sneers all in a few seconds to confuse and ensnare even the staunchest of men. In the movie, she is a good-looking crone propped up by lighting and make-up walking around listlessly in palaces.
Kunthavai is an ambitious strategist who cares for her people and kingdom in the book. When we are introduced to her in the book, she is reassuring the families of the soldiers fighting the war in Srilanka and is building hospitals in Pazhaiyaarai. In the movie, she is a woman who smiles vaguely, and talks about how important the Chola kingdom is in hollow words.
Vanathi is a frail woman with hidden strength who harbours a deep affection for Arulmozhi Varman in the novel. In the movie, I think I saw a character named Vanathi and she said something.
Poonkuzhali is a force of nature in the book. She is a mercurial wild child who is as turbulent as the sea that she loves. She pines, rages, cries, laughs, sings, and steers her boat, and the lives of herself and others all in a few pages. In the movie, she is an item girl dressed in wet skimpy clothes who has a crush on Arulmozhi. It is also highly problematic that the only female character that is cheaply sexualized is the semi-tribal Poonguzhali.
Is this a movie shot by a sane cinematographer? Almost every single scene seems to have been shot by a drunken spider. The fight scenes must have been shot by a drunken spider dancing on an electrified hot plate.
Is this a movie about Ponniyin Selvan, the prince who became Rajaraja Cholan I, one of the greatest kings that India and the world have ever seen? In the book, Arulmozhi is modeled after Rama. He cares deeply for his subjects. He makes radical decisions such as asking for food to be sent to Srilanka from the mainland, making the idle soldiers repair the Stupas in an alien country, travels incognito deep into the enemy country at the risk of being assassinated just so that he can see the famed ancient Buddhist paintings. He breaks down when he sees the captain of the ship that came to arrest him in Srilanka die. His subjects, his siblings, his friends, enemies, everybody speak of him in awe. By the time we are given a rather unceremonious introduction to him in the book (for which Kalki breaks the fourth wall and apologizes), he is a tall mountain in our eyes. In the movie, nobody cares about him right until the end when he is supposedly dead.
Is this a faithful adaptation of the novel written by Kalki? It sticks to the plot written by him but has expertly removed the soul of his work. Look at some of the creative choices made by the movie. In the novel, Vanthiyathevan is present when Arulmozhivarman rejects the Srilankan crown. His presence defines the scene because Arulmozhivarman needs him as a witness in case anybody spreads false rumours of this later. His presence defines the scene because when he sees the noble character of Arulmozhivarman, he develops deep love and respect for the prince. In the movie, we don’t even know why Arulmozhivarman is offered the crown (in the book the monks offer it to him because he has been repairing the stupas) and Vanthiyathevan is not present. In the book, the storm that takes away Ponniyin Selvan is not just a physical storm but a metaphorical one foreshadowed multiple times before it actually lands. In the movie, the storm appears suddenly out of nowhere and makes an already confusing action sequence even more confusing. In the book, Senthan Amuthan is introduced as a kind young man with deep devotion toward Siva. Even when imprisoned, he relies on just his Siva. This is really important because when he is revealed later as the true Maduranthakan, we know that only he can be the pious son of the pious Gandaraditya Chola and is truly deserving of the throne. In the movie, he is a bumbling side character.
I can go on…
In short, this movie is the visual equivalent of a soulless Konar notes version of the book.
Imagine what a movie it would have been if it had started with this bit of narration in Kamalhassan’s baritone voice overlaid on that map we saw from the trailer.
“தமிழகம், சுமார் ஆயிரம் ஆண்டுகளுக்கு முன்பு. சங்கம் வளர்த்த மும்முடி மன்னர்கள் இருக்கும் இடம் தெரியாமல் போன காலம். ஆயிரம் ஆண்டுகளுக்குப் பிறகு நாம் இன்றும் பார்த்து வியக்கும் விண்முட்டும் பெரிய கோவில் இன்னும் கட்டப்படாத காலம். தேவாரம் திருவாசகம் எல்லாம் இன்னும் கண்டெடுக்கபடாத காலம். விஜயாலய சோழனால் விதையாய் விதைக்கப்பட்ட சோழ சாம்ராஜ்ஜியம் தழைக்க முற்பட்ட காலம். இன்று உலகே பார்த்து வியக்கும் அந்த சாம்ராஜ்ஜியம் ஒரு மர்மக் கொலையில் தொடங்கியது. யார் கொல்லப்பட்டது? யார் கொன்றவர்கள்? எதற்காக கொன்றார்கள்? இன்று வரை அவிழ்க்கபடாத அந்த மர்ம் முடிச்சு என்ன? வாருங்கள்...கால வெள்ளத்தில் பின் நோக்கிச் சென்று பார்ப்போம்..."
And after that, we had a story
where characters spoke with purpose and emotion,
where characters got an introduction that showed us who they were,
when momentous events happen in the story, we get a moment’s pause to savour them,
where the camera showed us the wonder of the Chola country through the eyes of Vanthiyathevan when he sees such lushness for the first time in his life,
where actors actually put in some effort to stick to one character, one diction that was appropriate for the era…
Imagine what a movie it would have been if Maniratnam had risen to that at least half the creative height that A R Rahman towers to!
Imagine what a movie that would have been!
