Skip to main content

Natholi oru cheriya meenalla (Malayalam)

Natholi oru cheriya meenalla is a 2013 Malayalam film written by Shankar Ramakrishnan and directed by V. K. Prakash. Among the people I know, very few enjoyed the film. The general opinion is quite negative. IMDB rating is just 5.5/10. However, I loved the film. I have already watched the film 4 or 5 times. People are surprised by the fact that I loved the film. They often ask "How could you like it so much?". This is my answer!

There are spoilers ahead. So, those who have not watched the film and hate knowing the story, please come back after you have watched the film. But, I would say, don't worry too much. In my opinion, knowing the story is not going to make the movie less enjoyable. In fact, I hope, my article will help you enjoy the film better. I also promise that I will reveal as little as possible.

The movie is about Preman (Fahad Fazil) who is an aspiring writer. However, he becomes a caretaker in an apartment to meet daily needs. He develops hatred towards the residents after various incidents, but he has no way to retaliate. He chooses to take revenge through his story.

This basic plot in itself is amazing in my opinion. In life, we can seldom retaliate the way we want. We can only get back in our imagination. And, a writer has no dearth of imagination. He can let it go wild.

Thus, Preman makes residents of the apartment characters of his story. In the story, he dictates the destiny of the characters. He showers misfortune on all those he dislikes. And, he finds great joy in it.

Soon things start to get even more interesting. When Preman is not writing, the story proceeds on its own, as if the characters were alive. Around the same time, we can see an interview in Preman's TV, in which P. Balachandran says "An author creates a character, but later the character starts governing him". This is the theme of the second half of the movie. I found it interesting that, in the introductory scene inspired by the famous parrot-shooting scene from Mahabharatha, P. Balachandran also plays the role of Dronacharya while Fahad plays the role of Arjuna. At various parts, he comes and gives suggestions to Preman. So, he is Preman's mentor. I am not sure if this was intentional, but I felt this increased the importance of the stray dialogue in the background.

I thought about this idea of the character governing the author. Perhaps, the phenomenon can be explained as follows. Once we define certain traits of a character in certain scenes, consistency forces the character to behave the same way in future. Some amount of discrepancies are fine as it is common to find inconsistencies in human beings. However, gross discrepancies would make it unrealistic and uninteresting. So the author is shackled by himself. Once the story is published and accepted by the readers, they start sharing some power over the character. The burden of their expectations is placed on the character and the author. So, the freedom of the author in future publications is restricted. This, I felt, can be another sense in which a character governs the author. I invite you to share your thoughts on how a character might govern the author.

Anyway, getting back to the story, to Preman's displeasure, the characters behave in ways he does not want them to behave. Angered by this disobedience, he forcefully changes the story so that the outcomes favour him. This too was very interesting to me. In many stories we hear or read or watch we see such forced outcomes. I felt this is a plausible explanation for that phenomenon.

The rest of the movie is about the characters and the author(Preman) resolving their conflicts and coming to an understanding. There are some nice insights about the psychology of Preman in this part. Overall I found the movie extremely wacky and thought provoking. I would highly recommend it. Those who have watched it already, consider giving it a second chance.

Poster from IMDB


Popular posts from this blog

Naruto; the saddest death

For me, the saddest death in Naruto, is undoubtedly, Yashamaru's death. Let me say a few words about why I think so. For me death by itself is not sad. I would in fact say that death is a blessing for the one who is dying. It is sad for those who are left behind. From that perspective I think Yashamaru's death is the saddest. Yashamaru was the only comforting figure in the life of Gaara. The moment it is revealed that the assassin who tried to kill him was that same Yashamaru was heart breaking. The way Gaara cries "Yashamaru.." still resonates in my mind. Loneliness is one of the central themes of the anime. And, that scene captures it so magnificently. One of the most touching moments in the anime. There are several other deaths for which I shed a lot of tears. Like the deaths of Haku or Zabuza or Jiraiya or Obito. But they truly shine through their deaths. As Jiraiya himself says "The true measure of a shinobi is not how he lives but how h

Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha

Kettiyollaanu Ente Maalakha is the story of Sleevachan (Asif Ali), a good-natured individual ignorant of the ways of romance and sex.  Although he had avoided marriage until 35, he decides to marry to care for his ageing mother.  The rest of the movie is about his struggles in the journey forward. I would like to get a bit into the story as some of it begs discussion.  Thus, there will be some spoilers, but I believe they would not really spoil anything. Soon after fixing the marriage, he starts panicking.  He even confesses to the local priest that he is feeling stressed because of his ignorance.  However, the priest casually dismisses these worries.  After marrying Rincy, he is unable to initiate a physical relationship, causing even more stress.  Sleevachan's struggles were cracking up people all around me, and I felt, perhaps that was the director's intention.  Those very same scenes were, however, making me extremely uncomfortable.  Stealing Naruto's words, &quo

The Good Place

The good place is a great entertainer - especially the first season. The climax of the first season was the highest point for me. Things did start going downhill (in my personal opinion) but the show managed to keep me hooked till the end. I certainly wanted to know how the show ends. However, I have some beef with the basic premise of the show - it is either flawed or they took the easy route. To discuss these issues, I will, unfortunately, have to divulge the intricate details of the show. So, needless to say, this post is full of spoilers . So, if you plan to watch the show, it would be better if you read this article after you finish watching the show. Else, the article might give a neat summary of the interesting ideas in the show. The basic premise of the show is that the criteria for deciding who goes to the good place are flawed. The main justification for the claim comes from two observations: For the last 500 years, no one has been to the good place (think heaven