Easwara Narayanan

Was fortunate to discover this movie accidentally while browsing Fire. I must compliment the makers for being bold enough to come out with such a different theme. The story is set in a pristinely simple and nearly fabled era. With only good Samaritans around and no villains, the village reminds you of Malgudi. The story centers around Keshav, an astrologer and medical practitioner who is immensely popular as a good soul. Equally central to the theme is his bicycle. He is supposed to have inherited this cycle directly from his medical practitioner grand father who had received it as a gift from an English man for having cured him of an ailment. The story begins with an introduction to Keshav's humaneness. Sensing from the chart that the poor villager who had come to consult him is penniless and is not slated for good tidings in the near future, he does not hesitate to slip all his father's pension money into the poor man's bag unnoticed. All goes well till a couple of robbers make a clean sweep of jewelry and idols from one of his neighbors.. But, what kicks off the story is that they steal Keshav's most precious possession in life, his bicycle. Keshav is entirely distraught, unable to concentrate on his profession and decides to set out on a journey in search of his cycle. The crux of the story is what happens to the thieves. The cycle gets identified by the repairer first when they approach him to fix a punctured tyre. He begins sounding skeptical about their identity reiterating that Keshav would part with anything else but his cycle. They spin a story that they are Keshav's paternal cousins. They stick to this story all along with the provision merchant, tea seller and every one else who quips them about Keshav's cycle. Such is the regard people have for Keshav that they are showered with love and hospitality by villagers wherever they go. Their experience at the school proves to be too much even for the hardened thieves. Children crowd them, spotting Keshav's cycle as Keshav used to distribute sweets whenever he visited the school. The teacher even asks them to address the students, Overwhelmed by their experience, the thieves start debating which of the two was more popular, Keshav or his cycle.. The only contrarian experience they have is with the rich money lender who requests Keshav's paternal cousins to be his guests for the night. The next morning, much to their dismay, they find their bag having been cleaned of all the jewelry. They debate, introspect and finally decide to return the cycle. They leave the cycle with a shop owner along with a letter addressed to Keshav narrating their experience and seeking his apology. Meanwhile, Keshav during his sojourn witnesses a grand mother in her dying moment and a grand child being born in a house at the same time. He sees the poor villager whom he had donated his father's pension. With his dilapidated house completely blown over, he recalls Keshav's own advice that one should not a victim of materialistic attachment. Keshav realizes that the piece of advice is more relevant to him now. As he nears the boat jetty on his way back home, the shop owner calls out to him to say that his cousins had left his cycle there. He finds a boy adoring his cycle. He leaves for home without his cycle. As he reaches home, his distraught family and friends have managed to fabricate a cycle looking almost like his. They claim to have traced his cycle. He feels the cycle and the paint sticks to his hand. He smiles, appreciatively. Good acting, Good camera work.

It is one of the most well made movies I have seen recently. The theme is refreshingly different. The craft is commendable in that there is a natural flow, be it in the screen play or dialogues. Actors are also at their natural best. I do not understand why some reviewers have brought in religion here. The story happens to be in a Muslim setting. This is not the first time that a Malayalam movie is being made in a particular religious or community setting. It is age old. Any attempt to view a work of art through a religious or communal prism is unacceptable, either way. The best part of the movie is that the director has refrained from being judgmental about anything it depicts, be it the values of the community or the story or the screenplay or the characters. The result is the transparent narration of an attempt by a section of the community to make a halal movie and the halal love story that follows. The depiction of the society and the catharsis it is undergoing in terms of the assertiveness of the women in family and society, emergence of a more balanced equation between the husband and the wife in a marriage, the candor to have a conversation between them on even sex and the loosening grip of taboos in the society all form part of the natural narrative. Nothing looks contrived or imposed. That the director of the movie being made in the movie smokes, drinks and leads a wayward life is a gentle pointer to that fact that diversity is not entirely lost even in a community of adherents. Coconut breaking that signals the first clap of the movie that is being made in an exclusive Muslim neighborhood is a piece of humorously loud irony. Dialogues are natural and carry the local slang. The ones between Sherif and Suhara make you sit up and notice for they are laced with her sense of humor and candor. One cannot resist a smile, when she asks him if he suffered burns as he carried the vessel with hot water, It is not entirely incidental that this matches the timing of the director appreciating her performance and he looks a little sheepish. Another instance of her assertiveness is when he cites entirely illogical excuses for his hypocritical behavior. She appeals to him not to go down further in her esteem. All the actors have done well. Grace Antony as Suhara excels in one of the best roles of her life time. Indrajit could not have performed better as a flawed husband, having to play second fiddle to his wife. Joju George, who plays the role of the director in the movie inside the movie, has stopped acting for some time now. He lives any role he takes on. This is no different. His story of separation from his wife is best abandoned by the Director midway as it only helps to set the societal context and is of little value to the movie. Music is good and does not distract. A strong recommendation, if you are looking out for a good movie which is different from what you are used to watching.

Mysskin deserves an award for messing up the end of an otherwise exceptionally well made movie. He must have struggled to do it. An emotional flavour does not fit into the theme at all. One gets to see only the brutal side of the killer all along the movie. Worse still, the reason trotted out for the murder of so many girls looks too frivolous and weak to evoke any sympathy for the serial killer. One, therefore, feels only revulsion and distaste in the mouth when the kidnap victim expresses unwarranted sympathy for the killer. Brilliant directors do not need to compromise.