Kannathil Muthamittal – A treat for the eyes and ears [image: Krithi] KRITHI <http://passionforcinema.com/author/krithi2409/> | MOVIES<http://passionforcinema.com/category/movies/> | MAY 19, 2010 AT 10:25 AM [image: Print this article!] PRINT<http://www.printfriendly.com/print?url=http://passionforcinema.com/kannathil-muthamittal-a-treat-for-the-eyes-and-ears/> ------------------------------
A strong, unusual story coupled with fine acting sets the stage for a wonderful time in front of the screen. In Kannathil Muthamittal, director Maniratnam has woven a fine tale of the various dimensions of the human tragedy caused by the decades-long civil war in Sri Lanka. Mainstream Indian cinema has been rightly accused of trivializing and/or avoiding real issues more often than not. Only some of them earn a certain reputation for being more true and appreciably sensitive. Mani Ratnam is one such star whose sparkle shines through all the tinsel. <http://passionforcinema.com/kannathil-muthamittal-a-treat-for-the-eyes-and-ears/kannathil-muthamittal/>In “Anjali” he was lauded for looking into the world of a mentally ill child. But it was a very short look – the story had her die in the end. In “Dil Se” (“Uyire” in Tamil) his heroine was a suicide bomber. A gorgeous one, the very sight of whom compelled the hero to chase her to the ends of the earth. In “Kannathil Muthamittal” too, Mani Ratnam chooses to enter the issue of terrorism but refuses to take a side on it. Films like Gulzar’s “Maachis” also turned terrorists into key players who sing songs in their spare time. But these directors insist they are not glamorizing misguided youth simply because they have written their deaths into the end of their scripts , as if the futility of an endeavour is enough to convey its wrongness. In this movie, what Mani Ratnam would like us to believe, is a child’s view of the world. In the meanwhile, simply because his story considers it necessary, the issue of adoption is treated with excessive emotion and little credibility. Amudha (for that is the name of the adored girl) is told on her birthday that she is an adopted child. This pivotal scene is handled with amazing callousness . The child is taken alone to a secluded part of a beach, the mother refuses to participate saying she cannot face her and the father announces in one irritating moment of distracted child’s play ”nee yenga ponnu illai” (you are not our daughter). Would any adoptive parent choose those words to make such an announcement? The scenes of Amudha’s extreme reaction, which follow, confirm exactly that. Such cinematic flourish is more than self indulgence which is then used as a vehicle to address the director’s warped take on terrorism. Amudha runs away from home on two occasions and literally forces her parents to fly to a beautiful and war-torn Sri Lanka searching for the woman who abandoned her (all captured brilliantly by Ravi Chandran’s camera). Amudha witnesses disturbing events in Sri Lankan soil as the Tamil rebels fight against the military dictatorship, and the plight of innocent people losing their lives in the depressing onslaught. Even then, Amudha remains obstinate to meet her mother. Here they go searching, in the middle of heart-rending strife and evacuations, for the missing mother. She is conveniently traced of course, and the climax centres around the meeting between a desensitized woman (who must have caused the deaths and orphaning of hundreds of other Amudhas) and her biological child, with whom she has no wish to maintain contact, much less be reunited. That, however was only a part of the story. The other part was the media coverage of it. Eminent reviewers of even leading papers gave it uniformly splendid ratings. One even called it a superb film that is enriched with many issues, among them, war and adoption. The girl (Keerthana – Amudha in the movie) grows up in a foster home in the Madhavan-Simran household, with two younger brothers for company. She simply was a heart-stealer. Whether it was being peeved with her parents or while bullying her brothers, Keerthana was a wonderful performer. Madhavan lived the character of the writer he portrayed, shedding off the Maddy image he had so often conveyed. Nandita Das tugs at your heart strings when she tries to answer her little daughter’s questions as to why she deserted her daughter for her motherland and her husband. Mani Ratnam had drawn out the best from Simran, who had been focusing more on glamorous roles and was shying away to prove her versatility on screen. Kannathil Muthamittal did not have any Humma Humma (Bombay) or Chhaiya Chhaiya (Dil se) or old dancing women (Roja & Thalapathi). AR Rahman’s music provided the vital strength as usual to this movie too. May it be on the background score of for the songs, ARR’s work was flawless. “Oru Deivam” and “Vellai Pookal” left the audience dumbstruck. “Vidai kodu engal naade” showed the depth of sufferings faced by the tamils in Sri lanka and left the viewers heart broken. The cinematography of the song was spine chilling! Amidst all the masochistic and futile movies that were being released in India, Kannathil Muthamittal was a predominant exception. The film was premièred at the 2002 Toronto International Film Festival and was selected as India’s official entry to the 2004 Cannes Film Festival. The film went on to win six National Film awards and best film awards at six International film festivals. The whole crew of Kannathil Muthamittal deserve these accolades for taking Tamil cinema to a height of superiority. http://passionforcinema.com/kannathil-muthamittal-a-treat-for-the-eyes-and-ears/ -- - Regards ~ ~ A.R.Rajib ~ ~
