Vanaprastham

Vanaprastham (1999) : Brief Review -

A supreme legacy of Mohanlal blends mythology with an amazing art form but fails to condemn the infidelity. Vanaprastham is a rich experience overall, actually it is one step higher than what we deserve in late 90s and therefore it deserves that fan following. But the fact that the film being too specific about Mahabharata's ideology where having an sexual affair outside arrange-marriage is termed okay is totally absurd. I am shocked to see many critics and movie buffs not mentioning this ridiculous factor anywhere in their reviews. Additionally, it is linked to Mythology then i guess it deserves even more bashing than what I've just done. In a film we see an illicit relationship between a Kathakali dancer and a young woman from an upper caste family resulting in an illegitimate child. He faces hardships when she refuses to let him see their child and then seeks for ultimate salvation. Isn't it a big joke that he seeks salvation for his own mental peace and not for his sins? How ethical it was from the woman's side to hid the child from his father for her own mistakes and how etihical it was from his side to have this extramarital affair and not feeling sorry when he's living with his wife and a daughter? This part didn't make any sense to me even if i assume historical references of Arjuna and Abhimanyu. Come on, this was 1950s and you don't apply Mahabharata theories here. Thankfully, Vanaprastham is blessed by Mohanlal's legendary performance and Shaji Karun's skillful direction. These two overtake the weak writing and makes Vanaprastham an absolute cinematic experience of poetic proportions. Overal, Vanaprasthan has absurd theories to tell but Mohanlal's acting and Karun's direction have saved the ship from sinking. A very good attempt to bring new modulation in Indian Cinema of late 90s.

RATING - 7/10*

By - #samthebestest.

A very good movie, that rarely occurs in Indian cinema. A striking aspect about the movie is its cinematography. All the colors associated with the dance form KATHAKALI were shown in their true form, giving that real, authentic look to the movie. Hats off to Santhosh Sivan and Renato Berta.

The story is about a Kathakali performer(this is a dance form, where performers enact a play or story from mythology), who is the illegitimate son of a higher caste brahmin. From birth, he is refused his right as a son to his father(although the father secretly prides his son who is a rising Kathakali performer). He has a discontented family life(with an unhappy wife), parallel to his rising Kathakali career. In the midst of all this he happens to meet Subhadra during one of his performances, who is enamored by the character that Kunhikuttan plays, Arjuna, and not Kunhikuttan. An affair ensues, and Subhadra gives birth to Kunhikuttan's son. But now that the magic of his performance is over and Subhadra gets to see the real, exhausted Kunhikuttan, and not the character that he played, Arjuna, she disavows him and refuses him to see his own son. Kunhikuttan was refused his right as a son, now he is refused his right as a father. What ensues is best watched, with all the agony the protagonist feels in him, depicted so powerfully, yet subtly by the performer who reverts from hero characters to negative ones...

One very important part that made this movie memorable was the stellar performances given by everyone in the movie. Mohanlal as Kunhikuttan has performed so well(and shown his CALIBRE), that i wonder, why hasn't he got the respect that is due to him? He is one of the best performers i have ever seen in cinema, although his talent has rarely been tapped. A terrible waste... Suhasini as Subhadra is also a treat to watch(as expected). All other actors in the movie have contributed in their own respect to make this movie WORK.

And last but not the least. The director has performed so well, that you don't feel his presence in the film at all. Shaji N. Karun has given us a very good movie.

P.S. I would have given it a 10 had it not been depressing.

Just watch it for his eyes...and that's enough reason.

Vanaprastham was already told, reviewed, judged and all and it seems inappropriate to talk now. I went through the film some years ago and now without any reason, I want to revisit and that was the purpose for me. One thing with no compromise and no objection I can entirely see Kunjhikuttan and his each Kathakali character. The films blend in his character he performed as Arjuna but it begins with his shifting from female character and then other shift from Arjuna to a Villian character (kathakali character). Overall it is completely a shifting of Kunjhikuttan along with Kathakali characters to his behavior. Shaji N Karun, a well-crafted filmmaker who is so much cared about the assembly of all other flavors for the film. Especially the Cinematography, Music, etc are so peculiar and all are done by the Veterans.

Is a beautifully and articulately cinematographed formalist piece of drama that does the Indian tradition of melodramatic film proud. It is a film of mirrors ..where the strict defined roles hold up a mirror to undefined, imperfect humanity with no answers...and no questions.Where formal Indian dance(kathakali) holds up a mirror to classics so perfect that humans define themselves in the melodramatic masks of epics. and formalist concepts of art, such as truth, nobility and beauty defines themselves into the drama in such a way that what is left for humans that wear the masks is only weakness, bewilderment ...duty and weariness.

The film is structured as a set of pure cinema (and minimal and melodramatic) events intercut with Kathakali dance performances that reflect the basic emotional drama underlying the scene. The director makes sure that we understand that this is no mere narrative device. the characters in the film don and disturb the masks and makeup of characters in the play...and in myth easily as if they have a very blurred line between present time and fictional reality.

Wwe end up looking for the truth in reflected, broken mirror fragments, reflecting it off one another- one side colored with formal myth, the other with minimalist melodrama. The failing of the film is in its certainity that objective truth can be found in art (it is by no means certain...we are all,IMO, and to quote newton , just children playing in the sands of time amusing ourselves with the discovery of a colorful shell here and there...). The tension with this film is that it succeedes as the formalist art that it critiques , thus, holding a mirror unto itself.