All Good Films cannot be called as Great!. Review on Sarkar

Where the System fails, A Power will Rise.

When a common man is unsure of the surety promised by the governing system, the only option he is left with is to seek the power which exists out of such a system. Subhash Nagre works out of the government system. It’s like he almost runs a parallel government. People who could not get justice from the government, approach Subhash with their problems; and they call him….

SARKAR

In his version of the ‘Nayakan’ (I haven’t read or seen The Godfather; so my reference is ManiRatnam’s ‘Nayakan’), Ram Gopal Varma and his team have treated Sarkar as a Powerful Thought; its character and psychology has been dealt with; and a very good attempt has been made to give it a different perspective.

Simple facts behind a Good film:

== There are two striking things which I carried back after watching this film. The first is the amazing body language displayed by Krishna Kumar Menon (KK).Playing Vishnu, the first son of Subhash Nagre, wasn’t as simple as it looks to be. Because playing simple things to perfection is always difficult. His frustrated reaction at his father’s scolding, his authoritative anger over his wife, his secret enjoyment when the whole society blames his father and helplessness-expression while deciding to kill his father, speak volumes of his acting proficiency. Had the character of Vishnu not forcibly made weaker in the second half, KK would have publicly outshined the Bachchan duo. The way he talks to the film-hero on the sets, simultaneously glancing at the film-heroine who is working on her make-up; the way his eyes shiver when he knows about the affair between the film-hero and the film-heroine; the way he kicks the film-hero, points the revolver at him, points it back to the trembling film-heroine, expresses his heart-break with his eyes and expresses his anger by shooting the film-hero; the way he does all this exposes his natural talent of becoming one of the greatest actors in the history of Indian cinema.

== Amitabh Bachchan as Subhash Nagre and Abhishek Bachchan as Shankar, Subhash Nagre’s second son are examples of perfect casting. People think that ‘eyes are to see’; but in this film, the father and the son have has proved that ‘eyes are also to let see’. Every emotion that oozes out the character of Sarkar is evident in their eyes. Amitabh was perfect in meeting the expectation; Abhishek went beyond; though I would attribute the difference in levels of performance to the imbalance in the script.

== The League of Ordinary Gangsters include Kota Srinivasa Rao (as Selvan Mani), Zakir (as Rasheed), Jeeva(as Swami) and Raju Mavani(as Vishram) fitting in their roles as if they really exist. Thanks to the wonderful work behind the screen by the Factory workers.

== Supriya Pathak plays Subhash Nagre’s wife. The relieved expression she gives when Shankar assures her about Subhash’s no-danger state is exactly what is expected from the veteran actress.

== Tanisha has a minuscule role; a no-make-up, natural, lovable Avanthika, who waits for Shankar and takes care of Subhash Nagre. Katrina Kaif’s role as Pooja, Shankar’s love interest, was as small as her acting talent.

== Factory workers are experts in delivering films with technically finesse. Sarkar surpasses their own previous efforts and registers as their best. The cinematography, the background score, the editing, art-direction are underrated, if rated brilliant.

== Ram Gopal Varma should be appreciated for his effort in bringing out best out of all the actors and making the characters look authentic. Despite casting star-actors, he has not succumbed to commercial requirements. His screenplay stuck to the basics and most of the time, did not leave the theme. On the technical front, he should be applauded for capturing the finer details of the actors’ expressions with clarity of execution.

…. And the second striking thing is the Masterpiece of a Scene:

The following description should expose the expertise of Ram Gopal Varma’s direction, but please pardon me if it exposes the lapses in my writing ability.

After saving his father from being shot by his brother (Vishnu), Shankar sits before Vishnu in the living room. Shankar’s eyes are flooded with tears: of anger and depression. When he comes out of the room, his anger is quenched and his body language displays only depression. He carries the depression clenched within him along the stairs up to his father’s room. He sits beside his father. He is unable to express his depression, but it is being even more difficult to sustain the depression within him. The tears from his eyes and the words from his mouth flow at the same time. “Maine bhayya ko maar diya” (“I killed brother”). And with those words, the depression spread across the room to the people existing in it. His mother breaks down to tears; his sister-in-law (Vishnu’s wife) has neither words to utter nor tears to flow; his father is depressed, but consoles himself and then consoles Shankar by controlling his own tears. What has to be done has been done. What has to happen has happened. In the struggle to save the flame of Sarkar from extinguishing, such depressions are to be passed through and those tears are destined to come out. He asks Shankar, “Ab…?” (“What next?”)

The above narrated scene is a 15-minute scene executed with very few dialogues, wonderful performances, synchronising background score and good direction.

All good films cannot be called as Great!

Let me confess that, this part of the review deals with the lapses and loop holes in ‘Sarkar’, with respect to ManiRatnam’s ‘Nayakan’. People may say that comparisons cannot be justified. But this comparison can be justified by the assumption that Ram Gopal Varma might have seen ‘Nayakan’ several times before making ‘Sarkar’.

### continued in Comments section ###