Yes, that was quite clever.
Kamal trusts the intelligence of the viewers to tell his story. Alas, most viewers expect to get spoon-fed and don't really use their brains to understand what's being conveyed to them.
But the problem isn't with the viewers. It's with the film makers. Majority of filmmakers spoon-feed their viewers and as a result, their brain becomes idle and when they watch a movie that doesn't spoon-feed them in any way, they don't understand what's going on and begin to hate it.
While coming out from the hall, I over-heard people criticizing Kamal for the screenplay that shifts back and forth in time. They were also asking "Why couldn't he keep things simple?"
In other words, they didn't like the movie because they expected to get spoon-fed which Vishwaroopam doesn't do.
I loved the movie precisely for this reason. Besides, the movie ends with clippings from part 2. So part 2 probably would fill the gaps and answer the unanswered questions in part 1.
It's high time Indian film makers started thinking out of the closet and I believe Vishwaroopam's success will encourage them to do so.
Kamal was bold enough to venture into unexplored territory thus setting an example to his peers. Although movies dealing with terrorism aren't new, I don't think any Indian film maker explored the subject in such detail and boldness.
reply
share