[ad_1]
The director Murugadoss is well known to have this one interesting sequence that is the result of a strong idea. In Thuppaki we saw this when Vijay got help from his colleagues in the army to prevent terrorist attacks from occurring in the city. In Kaththi we saw it when Vijay forces older people to interrupt the city's water supply. Even in the recent Sypder, we saw the hero (Mahesh Babu) get help from housewives to end a crime.
Sarkar a a long time but does not contain this 'Brand ARM' sequence that could have changed the tone of the film. After 163 minutes, this looks more like a political brochure.
Vijay is called Sundar Ramaswamy in the film. He is world renowned for being a "corporate monster" who takes control of companies wherever he goes, but he is now in India to vote. But there is a problem: his vote has already been expressed.
This has already been revealed thanks to the trailers, and the first half of Sarkar happily goes even further. There is an evil politician (Masilamani, portrayed by Pazha Karuppiah and as cliché as they come) who is ready to ruin the state. Sundar – with all his business experience (he calls himself a "corporate criminal") – can he stop it? Can Sundar's wisdom be helpful in rectifying abusive practices prevalent in polls in Tamil Nadu?
This is a promising and indispensable principle, because we all aspire to change and development, but Sarkar. simply scratches the surface by telling a story based on some recent incidents occurring in the state. This hijacks laws and electoral processes (there is a telling section on Article 49P) just to support Vijay's decision to stay in Chennai and clean up the system.
The problem with Sarkar is that he has no well-defined characters. Keerthy Suresh has nothing more to do than keep walking with Vijay (literally) while Yogi Babu has a winking appearance. It's Varalaxmi who steals the cake by trying a smooth performance. Sarkar would have been better if it had been introduced earlier.
Dialogues, while powerful, take place much longer than they should. What could have been said in two words: Go to vote (certainly an indispensable social message) covers the entire length of the film, filled with dancing and fighting. There is a whole sequence in which Vijay tells the story of a tomato that has received applause, but looks strangely out of place. But in these heavy sequences of dialogues that Vijay stages – his control over the emotional sequences is admirable, while he's aggressive in those that make him go a little too far.
The songs of AR Rahman are not expensive. It helps a lot – aside from the "Oru Viral" call number, they do not do much to advance the story. Looking at Sarkar I was still thinking of a film much appreciated by many before Murugadoss, Ramana (2002), in which Vijaykanth was attacking corrupt officials. This had the protagonist as a teacher, but it is Sarkar that resembles the lecture.
[ad_2]
Source link
