usa special
hyd scene

My Movie - Aparichitudu
You are at Home > Community > My Movie starts a new exciting section - My Movie. There are very few movies that touch the human being inside you. All you got to do is pen down your feelings about the movie and mail and share it with fellow visitors.You can send your 'My Movie' letters to [email protected]

6th July 2005
tell a friend


While every one in town is analyzing Aparichitudu, here is my jab at it.

Key message Shankar TRIED to convey in Aparichitudu : -be a good citizen and Samaritan.

This is significantly different from

  • Gentleman (Robin hood for education root was Corruption in education system) ;
  • Bharatheeyudu/Indian (Corruption at all levels RTO backdrop)
  • Oke Okkadu/ Mudhalvan ( Bad Selfish Leadership Political backdrop root is Corruption in Politics)

In fact, his earlier 3 had some amount of resemblance between them in the subject, in the sense that all dealt with some form of corruption. But they were told in a convincing way with some very powerful scenes. And public loved them because we always like movies that blame cops, government and politicians (even for the wrong that WE do).

Here in Aparichitudu , he tried to do something significantly different. Though the acting was great and the movie was technically sound, this movie didn't come out very powerful like his earlier ones and I'm sure many feel this way.

His message should have been more refined: Be a decent citizen by doing at least things that are 100% controllable by you as a person. i.e. No scope for blaming on politicians, government or society.

Here is my view of why I felt it was not very powerful and convincing.

Key problem in Aparichitudu Story and screenplay: The message was not clearly visioned and conveyed. I think the Garuda Puranam drove his script. He probably picked the different killings first and then tried to stitch a script around that. While his research about the Puranam was interesting and a highlight of the film, I'm afraid, that caused the script to become weak and less powerful. Also, his core person Ramanujam is a lawyer - a lawyer in India is far different from general public. He knows rules to try and handle cops and government officials, but common man doesn't. That makes it difficult for public to identify with his feelings.

Let us analyze the scenes he showed:

Not taking the injured man in a NEW Car: This is a disaster in his script. There is a difference between being human and being noble. When trying to improve the society, the first step is to try and be human not noble. 99 out of 100 will not stop their car, not to mention new car in this case, in that situation (given the implications of common mans fear of police and court). Maybe 1 noble person would. To expect everyone to be noble is not feasible. So the reason to kill him is not one bit convincing for an ordinary man.

Food Supplier: This was not very good either. But at least here he threw a lizard into the curry, to convince us that he deserved to be killed. But in reality, Aparichitudu doesn't know about the lizard. All he hates is the fact the he is providing sub-standard food for the price he charges. While it is wrong to cheat by supplying inferior food, the reason I feel that this is not convincing is because, his price is most likely driven by the bribe he has to pay the Railways, etc .. to get the supplier contract i.e. he has a finger to point to and justify the bad he is doing. This is the case with most things in our society were the corruption system has become a common thing that we live with and do not feel guilty.(He already dealt very well about that in Indian.)

Sada purchasing Land: Same as above.

Black Money: Always the get away reason is - why pay taxes for the gov that does nothing for me.

Undervalue registration: black money + partly to compensate for bribes she has to pay at the registrar's office.

Brake wire manufacturer: Not very convincing. He didnt show him go to the Dealer to get original spares. He showed him go to some local store to buy cheap product so that lost the impact. Personally, this situation itself is not convincing, but it would have been better if he at least showed him go to an authorized dealer and get an OEM part that snapped on him. The intention that people should not manufacture bad products especially when it has life threatening implications is good, but doesn't sell well with the subject he is trying to convey here. Also, to repeat again, the manufacture has to pay x,y,z bribes to set up the unit, etc leading him to make up those costs by making substandard product, like the food supplier.

These situations basically spoilt the theme of the movie and got lukewarm reception.
Things that came across well - accepted and appreciated are :

Spitting on the road.
Disobeying traffic rules.
Charlies laziness.

It would have been more powerful and convincing if he showed only situations that are clearly controllable by an individual (self- control):

The situations should have been something in these lines:

Spitting on the road: (100% attributed to the individual difficult to blame x,y,z).
Sticking Bubble gum under the classroom desk and theatre seats: Could show a student sticking a bubble gum under the desk and punished him. This is a very common action that is totally controllable by one-self.

Throwing garbage carelessly: I would have loved it if he showed Vikram killing someone landing in Madras from US/Singapore and then opening up a cigratte packet and throwing a wrapper down on the airport floor. Or a person dumping garbage over their compound wall into barren land instead of dumping it in the municipal dumpster at the end of the street.

Disobeying Traffic rules: This is an excellent area. He touched on it. He could have gone more into it and showed killing of a person here for disobeying. No reason why a person should skip red, go into the opposite lane, drive without proper papers, or proper vehicle. If we do that, then that gives a lesser chance for cop to expect a bribe and this is really a first step towards improving society.

Under-age driving without license: This would have been very powerful. People give a damn to age eligibility for driving. Everyone in our country including you and me start to drive under-age without license. Though there are rules on what kind you can drive at what age (like you can drive <50 cc vehicles from 15 I think, and need to be 18 to drive cars, etc..) we dont respect them. But we follow it religiously in foreign countries. These are the kind of things I expected Shankar to show. He should have killed the Dad (and may be the son too) who bought a bike for his under-age son. Who else can you blame for this act that endangers others lives on the road?

If he showed such situations, the movie would have been even more powerful and convincing and we would not have got the feel of deja-vu from his earlier films.

Still, Aparichitudu is a well made movie by master director Shankar.

Vijay Ilavarasan
[email protected]

More My Movie experiences:

Madhav - Aparichitudu
Hazaraon Kwaishein Aisi
Shyam - Black
Sai - Anand
Rohit - Anand & Veer Zaara
Jaya Prakash - 7GBC
Raj - Anand
Purnesh - Anand
Purnesh - The Village
Sriram - Gudumba Shankar
Purnesh - Gharshana
Purnesh - Lakshya
Purnesh - Yuva
Leenesh - Yuva
Kis - Lakshmi Narasimha
Indian Pride - Tagore
Raj - Boys
Phani - Gangotri
Phani - Khadgam
Vikram - CKR
BKR - Indra (Singapore)
Ram - Indra (Dubai)
Ranjeet - Idiot
Rahul - Indra
King Koduri - Indra
Srilakshmi Katragadda - Mitr: My Friend

You can send your 'My Movie' experience to [email protected]


emailabout usprivacy policycopy rightsidle stuff