WARNING: Spoilers ahead!
The quick review is that the second part is consistent with the first one in almost all respects, good and bad.
I had written in my review of the first part that this is a fictional recreation of Kalki’s historical fiction. I was bracing for the movie to deviate from the novel. Despite my best efforts, it’s hard not to compare the movie with the novel. Someone – anyone picturizing this novel has a difficult task. It’s somewhat like Sachin Tendulkar’s son on picking up professional cricket. Being pretty good doesn’t cut it. You’re benchmarked against an all-time great!
The first movie covers roughly the first two volumes of the novel. The second part is shorter in length but covers greater ground -the remaining 3 volumes. Despite Mani Rathnam’s best efforts, some parts of the movie feel rushed. Some characters are sacrificed. And some plot twists had to be glossed over or removed altogether. Most of my complaints against the movie can be attributed to the length of the movie.
While the screenplay deviates from the novel, I should also say that I found several delightful nuggets where the movie reminded me of Kalki’s prose and dialogs.
The movie starts with a Thiruppavai – ‘Aazhi mazhai kanna’, and Nandhini’s story. It starts off somewhat slow, lingering to clarify the fate of the missing prince. But it picks up pace, and travels at a breakneck pace after a while. Actually, it may be a little too fast, as some pivotal moments seem too fleeting.
I was eager to see how the coordinated murder attempts on the Chozha men would be filmed. I wasn't disappointed - they have been delightfully made. The elephant scene at Nagapattinam is especially well done. The market, the crowd, and what looks like a town-square layout are brilliantly put together. Kudos to the art team and the cameramen.
Another great scene is Aditha Karikalan’s meeting with the conspirators on his arrival at Kadambur. The director has packed several pages worth of conversation into a few minutes, as Karikalan displays his disquiet and anger, making his host and other chieftains uncomfortable. The continuous movement of the horse is symbolic of the restlessness of his mind. The camerawork, dialog and acting are all top notch in that segment.
The screenplay removes some ambiguities as to Nandhini’s background that the novel had. The plot twist in the novel as to Madhuranthakan’s background has been dropped. The screenplay has also simplified the murder scene. I wonder if the director has simplified the horrific scene a little too much. One of the main features of the novel was the lead up to the murder scene, and, after the fact, the number of possible perpetrators. The movie has taken a simpler approach, leaving the audience as to no doubt as to how it happened. I need to watch it again to make up my mind as to how well the simplification works.
Kundavai’s meeting with Vadhiyathevan on his return to Pazhayarai is very well handled. It deviates significantly from the novel, but the scene works remarkably well.
Not all changes work well. Madhuranthakan’s change of mind feels too quick in a pivotal part of the story. The scene where Kundavai confronts her father on the identity of Mandakini lacks the delicate touch of the corresponding scene in the novel. In the novel, it’s a dialog between a remorseful old man, and an embarrassed, but empathetic child. In the movie, the daughter seems unsympathetic and impatient.
Karikalan’s character gets a longer play in the movie than in the original story. Vikram makes use of the airtime very well. The enhancement of his role comes at the expense of many minor characters. Vandiyathevan has a smaller role in the second part.
The film makers have added a battle scene in the lead-up to climax. It’s not part of the original story, but seems to contribute to the storyline.
Aniruddhaa Brahmarayar is conspicuous by his absence in the second movie. The character Manimekalai has been dropped altogether, almost certainly due to time constraints. Sendhan Amudhan and Poonkuzhali seem to have been left hanging in the end.
In the novel, Vandhiyathevan comes heartbreakingly close to persuading Nandhini to abandon her vendetta. I’d have liked to see that preserved in the movie.
Art and visuals are stunning as they were in the first part. The interior décor is well done. The rock carving depicting Ravana carrying a mountain appears in a key scene in the story. The art team has taken considerable effort to recreate it. The outdoor locations are also picked thoughtfully, except for the hilly terrain where it geographically doesn’t make sense.
Tamil diction is better with some characters, but there are still several places where the pronunciation of ‘zha’ is jarringly bad. In this part, Vikram Prabhu, playing Parthibendra Pallavan is probably the worst offender. This is Shivaji Ganesan’s grandson!!
The presence of hilly terrain in what should be Pazhaiyarai (near current Kumbakonam, on a very flat region) continues to be an irritant.
A R Rehman’s music seems more appropriate than it was in the first part. ‘Veera Raja Veera’ is fantastic. ‘Azhi Mazhai kanna’ is pleasing and well used. The Chozha Anthem which plays during the credits at the end does not fit. ‘Aga naga’ is mellifluous, but too modern for the setting.
As was the case with the first part, people who don't know the story may find the pace a little too fast. It may take more than one watch to catch the entire story. Another worry is that not everyone will remember everything from the first movie.
On balance though, I liked the movie. I’ll certainly watch it again but will wait for the release on Amazon Prime. I’ll probably catch a few more intricacies on the second watch.
It’s a massive production. No one other than Mani Rathnam could have pulled this off. This movie is definitely a milestone in Indian cinema. If encourages people to read Kalki’s original, I’d rate the movie a raging success; smaller flaws don’t matter as much.
