Bheemla Nayak movie review: A frivolous yet fun star vehicle that cherry-picks from the original-Entertainment News , Firstpost
Instead of being about two egotistical men with different backgrounds and baggage, Bheemla Nayak wants to focus on a single man and in turn loses most of its emotional heft and social commentary
Bheemla Nayak isn’t Ayyappanum Koshiyum. What made Ayyappanum Koshiyum relevant and interesting is the characters, and what they tell you about the world at large. Saagar Chandra, the film’s director, and Trivikram, who wrote screenplay and dialogues, are simply not interested in the original’s form or subtext. They merely take the opportunity provided by the source material to create a star vehicle. As a result, you might lose some of the things that made the original remarkable, but you also get a simpler and positively leaner film.
Having said that, what makes a regular template interesting is the way the generic plot is used to bring in something interesting. Stories about men with giant egos and destructive instincts are as old as time. But allow someone like Koshy/Daniel to cower in front of his father and you will get a layer that you can peel later at leisure. Here, we barely get at the dynamic between Daniel Shekar (Rana) and his aggressive father, played as flatly as written by Samuthirakani. The few random scenes between them are so reluctant that they barely convey their intent.
The same goes with the way the women are written as well. Nithya Menen’s Suguna is great fun to watch. A brash lady who just doesn’t match her husband, but surpasses him is subversion enough for a commercial film. But if it means she is just going to stay the stereotype of a loud woman—I don’t even know what she does at the hospital—or be used as a plot device, like Daniel’s “tribal” wife is, then that is disappointing. Then again, the original, too, leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the female characters. But it, at least, gives us scenes like the confrontation between Koshy and Kanamma, and the scene that transforms Jessie/Harini from a mere scapegoat to a three-dimensional character; both of which are absent here.
To his credit, Trivikram tries to retain the mythical aura of the original and not just because he loves having his heroes be called ‘Saamy’. He is very good at weaving mythology around his protagonists. They can get repetitive, but they are effective. Here, too, he rewrites the flashback to add some good old star-power to the proceedings, but he also successfully repurposes it to tie the loose ends. I also enjoyed the light banter that happens at the end. Again, it isn’t creatively exciting, but it serves the purpose. So it goes with the dialogue as well. Do we need an elaborate analogy involving Ghazni? The film doesn’t need it. Bheemla Nayak doesn’t need it. But Pawan Kalyan does. For some reason, he thinks that the best way to communicate with his fans and political supporters is through a stray dialogue that has nothing to do with the film. To each his own, I guess.
Speaking of which, Pawan Kalyan sorely misses the gravitas needed to play a character like Bheemla. He is fun and oozes swagger, but the strength that his character is supposed to hold is never really felt. Even though, Bheemla Nayak spends most of its time on exposition—never-ending lament songs calling the guy tiger/lion and people around him repeating the same—Kalyan feels too tamed. I imagine his fans look at him and see a Biju Menon, but for the rest of us, he isn’t the angry man we saw in Jalsa, who can believably plant a sword into the ground. Rana, on the other hand, has great fun playing Daniel. Even if the film doesn’t give his character the space to explore all the aspects of his personality, he plays this arrogant man, who can’t afford to display doubt, well.
Saagar Chandra’s direction leaves a lot to be desired as if he tries to make the film his own, but Bheemla Nayak is still a technically sound film. Ravi K. Chandran’s cinematography isn’t just about the airy aerial shots of the snake-like roads. He livens many scenes with great lighting choices and dynamic camera movements—especially the final confrontation. Navin Nooli’s editing is as always a job done well. But Thaman might just be the film’s biggest asset. As someone who is constantly annoyed by intrusive background scores, I am pleasantly surprised by the way the score complements the story and brings it alive.
Not many things disclose a filmmaker’s intentions as accurately as a film’s title does. When you see the words ‘Pawan Kalyan in and as’ preceding the film’s name in the titles credits, you clearly understand the film’s intentions. Instead of being about two egotistical men with different backgrounds and baggage, it wants to focus on a single man. As such, it loses most of its emotional heft and social commentary—which is a relief as the film’s idea of representation seems to be having a tribal woman wear Amarapali jewelry—but retains its familiarity, which is what most of the film’s target audience is looking for anyway. But, despite all the clues, if you expected something more, you will be disappointed and, frankly, you will only have yourself to blame.
Rating: 3 out of 5
Sankeertana Varma is an engineer who took a few years to realise that bringing two lovely things, movies and writing, together is as great as it sounds. Mainly writes about Telugu cinema.
