Movie Review: Yevano Oruvan

We all know the common thread running across Indian, Anniyan, and Gentleman – a fight against corruption in the Indian society. All these movies empowered us to talk about corruption in public, but empowerment didn’t not translate into long term fighting the epidemic with conviction and bravery. We are all here waiting for more Anniyans and Indian thathas to sprout and fix the country. And as a result we have complacency has set in, corruption and bribery has become the way of life and a must for survival in India.

But what is different in this movie Yevano Oruvan? It is a perfect battle between human revolution and social reformation. Though it falls under the same genre of movies (social reformation), but the movie clearly elicits out what Gandhiji once said, "Be the change that you want to see in the World". It has been more than 50 years since this message was delivered, but this is the first time the message has manifested in the movie script.

Yevano Oruvan is a story of a lower middle class hero who fights to make both ends meet. He abhors reservation, corruption, extending favors for money and vehemently fights for his fundamental rights while piously adhering to ethics and values. A series of small events brings out the sleeping Tiger in him and he goes rampant questioning authorities and trying to fix the problem overnight. Was he successful in his mission? You must watch the movie for more.

Madhavan graduates from his chocolate and lover boy image into a responsible middle aged man and a father of two. The script accurately brings out the husband-wife struggle that happens in every household with to respect kids, managing finances etc. Women playing workhorse and men playing bread winner in a household, though a cliché were portrayed with care and candidness. The battle between wife and values intensifies and the dichotomy tears him apart. But he decides to stand by his values. But what is the fate of India is the question left for the viewers to decide - Human revolution or social reformation?

Pinning down the subject in a conservative Brahmin colony in Nanganallur makes it very realistic and enjoyable. But there is a flip side to it which I will discuss later. Camera luminously captures the busy and monotonous Chennai lifestyle, its threatening water scarcity and treacherous suburban rail commute. Wow, Chennai metamorphoses from being a sleepy, orthodox city to a busy city under the blanket. Honest portrayal of Chennai.

The script deftly narrates and focuses on struggles of common man - school admissions, private hospitals, never ending water lorry queues, dream of owning a home, fortunes spent on kids’ school tuitions and saving for the rainy days.

Dialogues in the movie were razor sharp and piercing the cerebrum. In the last scene on the train he says, "to get a window seat one will have to lose his life and gives a contented blank smile".

The dialogue he makes looking at the sky addressing the almighty asking him to be relieved from this planet was very touching. Inability of humans and Almighty to fix the virulent virus in the society was brought out with anxiety and concern. Redemption was a ?

Background score was in-sync and un-intrusive with the script and theme.
Choice of actors needs a special mention. Sangeetha brought out the pangs of a struggling mother with dialogues, anxiety and tears.

Astute editing kept audiences intact and engrossed in a movie devoid of songs and comedy.
The sidewalk artist sketches a pictures of Ganesha and there are no takers, but when he sketches Vasudevan's image people generously share their change with him. Does it mean that people have turned aethist? Does it mean that people want instant justice like instant lottery? Does it mean that people beleive in overnight heros more than God? There could have been little more clarity in this depiction.

A few rough edges in the movie could have been trimmed:
1. Why do Brahmins always have to be portrayed as the bellwether when it comes to social reformation? Avoid stero typing of Brahmins. Right from the days of Gentleman, Anniyan the lead character comes from a Brahmin background. Does it mean that other people from other community can't rise up as leaders to question atrocities? Brahmin background failed to help the script and could have avoided.

2. Policemen in the script have been portrayed as corrupt and sloppy individuals, but when it comes to the Assistant Commissioner there seems to be a confusion. He keeps going from one end to another end debating between ethics, morality and reality. Audience were confused and misled with the depiction of this character. The director should have taken a firm stand.

3. The sidewalk artist sketches a pictures of Ganesha and there are no takers, but when he sketches Vasudevan's image people generously share their change with him. Does it mean that people have turned aethist? Does it mean that people want instant justice like instant lottery? Does it mean that people beleive in overnight heros more than God? There could have been little more clarity in this depiction.

When I left the movie hall I was reflecting on a few prevalent practices in India. We have taken bribery as way to get things done – both lawful and unlawful. The word bribe is rephrased as donation, fund raiser to underplay the effect of money. Mutation has removed guilt and ethics from our DNA and we don’t seem to need them anymore. I was ashamed, but I had to recall Darwin "only the fittest survive" other perish like our hero Vasudevan. That which was brushed under the carpet for generations was yet again brought to the table, do we change or ignore is in our hands. Human revolution or social reformation?