Ponniyin Selvan Characters & Trailer Explained ...

[dasari4kntr]

1 minute ago, Raven_Rayes said:

that's the thing dude. I don't review a movie or listen to reviews.

there are very few reviewers (none I know in Telugu) who actually try to explain a maker's work, which I think is the job of a reviewer. Not to pass judgement on a film.

one is free to like or hate a film and mock it or praise it, but it requires a keen eye and ability to dissect an artist's vision in a way that is accessible to lay audience.

does ps1 deserve that kind of review? I don't know. Its up to the reviewer to decide whether it deserves it or not. To me, I've clearly said that I don't think its a good film, but I still enjoyed it. Max I can point to areas where the visuals were underwhelming, especially night shots were below par, and scenes were vfx used didnt gel well with the overall visual tone in the film. some major bloopers like the scene where Karthi is secretly observing a palace meeting, yet his face is brightly lit.. the scene were aishwarya is first shown that has really bad pov shot with karthi standing outside in bright sunshine appearing darker than aishwarya who's behind the curtain. some of these scenes really irritated me. that's the best I can go while describing the film.

a reviewer should do something extraordinary, to catch things I didn't and explain to me the staging of a scene and how it fits with the rest of the movie etc.

so can you pls tell me if the 90min review you posted touches on any of the things I expect from a review? otherwise its a waste of time listening to people ranting about how characters weren't explained properly, or how the pacing wasn't good, or how there weren't any high points.

movies don't need high points or a central theme or anything. movies like any art has no boundaries or structure. Its upto the reviewer to give it structure and present it to the lay audience.

to me movie is art. is ps1 good art? no. but I'm not qualified or interested to do a deep dive into why it is not. people who are obsessed with maniratnam will. I will only listen to their reviews.

 

Please listen…one guy read the books before watching movie…

[Raven_Rayes]

17 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

Agree about character introduction…many has same opinion…

 

and most of the telugu people also encouraged this movie…even though they know little about chola history…

from your comment…

Tamil are blaming Telugu people for not encouraging their movie

Tamil people means not all Tamil people some section of Tamil…in the same way Telugu people means some section of Telugu…not all…

all this tamil vs telugu is silly dude. better to not get stuck into this.

people who watch movie to brag about how much it made are just losers. whether they are tamil or telugu is immaterial.

I don't understand why Telugus should 'encourage' this movie? they have better stuff to do with their lives.

just like I dont understand why makers should've given character introductions. I mean why are we pretending like we care about a movie's success?

I absolutely love maniratnam, and even I don't give a fcuk if the movie is a success or not. Why do people who hate him care?

[Raven_Rayes]

47 minutes ago, hunkyfunky2 said:

Agree...

Tamil are blaming Telugu people for not encouraging their movie ... This is my reply....

How to market a movie and prepare the audience is as important as making movie. 

People may hate me , but SSR is one step above all... Starting from eega , maryada ramanna. For the latter, though a copied movie he prepared audience in audio function itself... By creating a set on stage and enacting a long skit about the central theme. So when audience watched , they know what's coming but also accepted the central conflict point - which is silly. Movie would have bombed if that didn't happen . 

Adipurush has many issues, but they would have prepared all with individual looks - so it's not a big shock.

Tamils who are blaming Telugus for not liking the movie are assholes.

what about the telugus who use racist epithets for a silly movie? including you. all of you are idiots who are not fit to talk about movies.

 

[Raven_Rayes]

6 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

Please listen…one guy read the books before watching movie…

okay. as among the very few non-racist people in this db, I will listen to you and catch this review.

[dasari4kntr]

1 minute ago, Raven_Rayes said:

Tamils who are blaming Telugus for not liking the movie are assholes.

what about the telugus who use racist epithets for a silly movie? including you. all of you are idiots who are not fit to talk about movies.

 

Are you serious man…?

Show me where I did racial comments…

[Raven_Rayes]

27 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

Tamil are blaming Telugu people for not encouraging their movie

Tamil people means not all Tamil people some section of Tamil…in the same way Telugu people means some section of Telugu…not all…

everyone wants every film to be loved by everyone these days. lmao.

watching a film is a personal experience. this tamil telugu bs is just irritating.

[Raven_Rayes]

Just now, dasari4kntr said:

Are you serious man…?

Show me where I did racial comments…

dude, I quoted hunkyfunky. not you.

not just him, majority of assholes in this db have a strange fetish for blockbusters and a racist opinion towards tamils.

so much that even when the friends I went with for ps1, mostly hated the film and compared it to bahubali... while lampooning those who were celebrating the film in TN... I had to point out to them that they haven't seen the other side of the coin.. about how racist Telugus are towards Tamils.

 

[dasari4kntr]

2 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

Are you serious man…?

Show me where I did racial comments…

Sorry I mis read…

[dasari4kntr]

Just now, Raven_Rayes said:

dude, I quoted hunkyfunky. not you.

not just him, majority of assholes in this db have a strange fetish for blockbusters and a racist opinion towards tamils.

so much that even when the friends I went with for ps1, mostly hated the film and compared it to bahubali... while lampooning those who were celebrating the film in TN... I had to point out to them that they haven't seen the other side of the coin.. about how racist Telugus are towards Tamils.

 

Sorry I miss read…

[Raven_Rayes]

3 minutes ago, dasari4kntr said:

Sorry I miss read…

according to me, if just one person understood and loved a flop movie and can start a conversation on the movie, its much more interesting than a billion people liking it, and participating in some mass ritual of praising that movie.

 

[Telugodura456]

2 hours ago, Raven_Rayes said:

Tamils who are blaming Telugus for not liking the movie are assholes.

what about the telugus who use racist epithets for a silly movie? including you. all of you are idiots who are not fit to talk about movies.

 

Tamils dont use racist eptithets ? i have seen far worse behaviour there,

One guy from nellore told me he  tried to join a tamil coaching for iit..and the owner said iit is not for "people like you".

[Telugodura456]

On 10/8/2022 at 12:23 PM, Raven_Rayes said:

it was okay.  a regular watcher won't notice the intricacies in most of the scenes, but they are staged very well. none of the scenes are over the top as in bahubali when all the screaming makes you notice it. In this movie, none of the royals even raise their voice, except Vikram.

Trisha, Aishwarya faceoff is good only if you notice Trisha stalling the meet with some bs questions to her prime minister while walking slowly and Aish waiting for her to walk towards her. The delaying is deliberate from both ends, a show of power and its not as obvious as the facial contortions from Ramya Krishna and Anushka in Baahubali.

I would say the scene is staged well, but for some reason doesn't land, may be because of the below par acting, or the way it was conceived visually by mani. I don't know.

Trisha's best scene is her straight up walking into a mini conference of chieftains where they are planning to overthrow the current king, and completely outwit her granduncle in a couple mins with her utterence. next min she's walking away with her friend who's giggling at how she made a bunch of old men, fools with her false promises.

the movie is neither good nor bad. but it could've been way way worse.

 

Nee thalakayi. All you are saying here in screenplay of dialogues.

I dont know tamil that fluently but from translations i have seen ..they are far inferior and generally tedious to screenplay in telugu..where dialouges are crisp and pack a punch.

[Telugodura456]

17 hours ago, Raven_Rayes said:

The movie is already a humongous hit. just like brahmastra - another movie you were sure won't do well.

proves films don't have to be good to become hits, just a section of audience to connecting to it is enough.

so now to be having discussions about how it should've been promoted is pointless. Mani was never aiming for bahubali type of collections. he made 2 movies with a budget of 245cr... less than half of what it took to make bahubali.

just the movie doing well in traditional tamil markets was enough. It was not made to entice the telugu audience or Hindi audience. obvious from the low price it was sold in other markets, without any hungama.

just enjoy the movie if you can, and try not to talk about its economics. may be its time you stopped predicting a success of a movie based on your instincts. clearly they are not able to accurately model reality.

also the movie world doesn't revolve around catering to avg telugu audience taste. there's a bigger world out there, with appetite to watch films that don't look like bahubali or rrr.

so many words you use ra mental narsi. But the repeated comparision of brahmastra - a native hindi movie with baahubali a hindi dubbed movie - shows your game.

You speak with an undercurrent of jealousy and heartburn.

[Telugodura456]

2 hours ago, Raven_Rayes said:

that's the thing dude. I don't review a movie or listen to reviews.

there are very few reviewers (none I know in Telugu) who actually try to explain a maker's work, which I think is the job of a reviewer. Not to pass judgement on a film.

one is free to like or hate a film and mock it or praise it, but it requires a keen eye and ability to dissect an artist's vision in a way that is accessible to lay audience.

does ps1 deserve that kind of review? I don't know. Its up to the reviewer to decide whether it deserves it or not. To me, I've clearly said that I don't think its a good film, but I still enjoyed it. Max I can point to areas where the visuals were underwhelming, especially night shots were below par, and scenes were vfx used didnt gel well with the overall visual tone in the film. some major bloopers like the scene where Karthi is secretly observing a palace meeting, yet his face is brightly lit.. the scene were aishwarya is first shown that has really bad pov shot with karthi standing outside in bright sunshine appearing darker than aishwarya who's behind the curtain. some of these scenes really irritated me. that's the best I can go while describing the film.

a reviewer should do something extraordinary, to catch things I didn't and explain to me the staging of a scene and how it fits with the rest of the movie etc.

so can you pls tell me if the 90min review you posted touches on any of the things I expect from a review? otherwise its a waste of time listening to people ranting about how characters weren't explained properly, or how the pacing wasn't good, or how there weren't any high points.

movies don't need high points or a central theme or anything. movies like any art has no boundaries or structure. Its upto the reviewer to give it structure and present it to the lay audience.

to me movie is art. is ps1 good art? no. but I'm not qualified or interested to do a deep dive into why it is not. people who are obsessed with maniratnam will. I will only listen to their reviews.

 

Really ? I never heard that a reviewer's job is to act like a stenographer of director/artist and put in labor to explain his vision and propagandize his views.

A director already has full play of the medium of cinema to convey his vision - story, screenplay, artists, visual and audio effects, budget - why does he need people to further elaborate it ?

A reviewer job is to apply his (hopefully professional) level of understanding of film making and use that understanding to evaluate or judge the film. How can a reviewer avoid judging the film.

You neither have a commonsense understanding of review nor a scholarly one.

You first give up your underhand games of region/caste resentments then you have a chance to write better.

[hunkyfunky2]

7 hours ago, dasari4kntr said:

Agree about character introduction…many has same opinion…

 

and most of the telugu people also encouraged this movie…even though they know little about chola history…

from your comment…

Tamil are blaming Telugu people for not encouraging their movie

Tamil people means not all Tamil people some section of Tamil…in the same way Telugu people means some section of Telugu…not all…

Yes, few Tamils but they have blue ticks .. which does matter.