PS1
If you have read the book(s), you would know that one of the reasons for Ponniyin Selvan still being the most popular piece of Tamil literature even after 70 years of its release is the inherent goodness that Kalki manages to infuse throughout the book. There are no real evil characters. There are only unfortunate situations that some of these characters find themselves in, which they go on to regret later. There are characters who hold dark intentions and vengeance only to realize later how wrong they were with their intentions. I mean, you may start disliking a character from the way they get introduced in the book, but as you read more and more, you are likely to start empathizing with that character’s actions for various reasons. Even the Pandyas, who are the antagonists in the story, and the ones who are out on a mission to destroy the Chola empire, have a justification for what they intend to do. Kalki’s writing style is light and intentionally frivolous at times, and it makes the readers get through even the most dreadful passages without clearly being able to pit good v. bad in black and white terms.
Yes, the story is all about war and territorial gains, empire building, love and despair, hate and revenge, religious faith and devotion, and familial bonding. But at the center of the book(s), i.e. in its core, there is something else.
Ponniyin Selvan is a story that tries to balance multiple value systems being represented by the three siblings. Aditya Karikalan is an ambitious warrior and he is focused on expanding his territories. He is driven by battle conquests and wants to increase his land possession. He believes he can do it easily because he is egocentric albeit somewhat self-reflective.
Arunmozhi Varman is a man of justice, is full of restraint in action, and most importantly, a man of compassion.
Kundavai, the sister, the middle sibling, is a bit of a traditionalist. She wants to keep the reputation of the kingdom in tact first before doing anything else. She wants prosperity and stability first before expansion of the kingdom.
The success of the book(s) is largely because of how the author masterfully engages the readers with these value systems without the readers realizing it, while the war, empire building, succession, and others are only in the backdrop. Kalki weaves in the conflict of these value systems through a breezy character called Vandhiyathevan. As a reader, you get to engage with all the three value systems through Vandhiyathevan’s journey and mission.
What the movie adaptation of Ponniyin Selvan does so well is how it keeps the focus on the conflict of these three value systems just like the books do. You do not realize it when you are watching it. The movie engages with the audience through this conflict of value systems. If you are watching the movie without reading the books, you may or may not have much drawing you to invest emotionally in each character, but it should not take you much time to connect with the value systems that these three main characters represent and their conflict.
From what I have read, Mani Ratnam has been wanting to make this movie for almost 40 years. Imagine. 40 years. A film-maker/screenplay writer of his caliber has been sitting with an already written story for 40 years. How much would he have internalized the book in these 40 years!! How much!! And that shows in each and every scene in PS1. Each scene has been a carefully constructed screen version of multiple episodes in the book(s) or ideas in the book. The screenplay of PS1 is not a page by page reproduction of the book. And the more I think about the screenplay, the more in awe I am.
The scene where “Kundavai makes a surprise entrance into the secret meeting of the small kingdom chieftains and masterfully breaks their nexus by throwing in an idea of a marriage proposal” is not from an episode in the book at all. But those three-four minutes of screenplay is masterclass on how to internalize a book in order to bring out the essence of a character. Or the scene where Nandhini looks at the sword and the throne. No words spoken. Just the camera zooming in on Nandhini as she looks at the sword.
I do not know enough to explore why this conflict is important in the books with relation to the Tamil culture and history — this conflict among ambition, compassionate justice, and stability. But if I look at them closely, it’s quite apparent, that the Tamil culture as I know it today is also centered around the same conflict of these value systems. Maybe this is another reason why this story continues to strike a chord with the readers even today.
When a popular entertainment filmmaker like Mani Ratnam tries to make an economically viable film version of a popular historical fiction that delves into depths of such a conflict, there is no way he would get into the documented history of the relevance of the value systems and their conflicts in their times. In a movie, he can only fictionalize those values in the most engaging way possible. And he does that artfully in PS1.
PS1 the movie, builds a high-point for Aditya Karikalan at the end of the first half and does the same and so very well for Arunmozhi Varman by the end of the second half. To end the movie on an even higher note, Mani Ratnam introduces the Mandakini character (Oomai Rani, who resembles Nandhini) briefly to leave a hook for the audience to come back for PS2. The two characters that the readers talk about the most, Vandhiyathevan and Nandhini — though they do not play a central role in the conflict of these value systems, they are the ones who carry the story forward. The movie adaptation of the story does full justice to the essence of these two characters.
The three value systems that are in conflict are brilliantly represented visually throughout the movie, thanks to some spectacular camera work by Ravi Varman. Red and Brown mud tones for Aditya Karikalan and his ambitiousness, Green for Kundavai and her stability and prosperity, while Blue tones for Arunmozhi Varman, and his even temperance and social justice with compassion.
By essentializing the books and by retaining the core of the books, PS1, the movie, highlights why it is not a story like Baahubali. I know it’s unfair to make the comparison but since there is a section of the audience who is hellbent on making this comparison, let me just add that Baahubali was built on the mythological grandiosity of heroes. The movie had no conflict of values. It was a simple story of good v. evil. The characters were written for the visual medium so they could make the antagonist a bit cartoonish when they needed to and make the hero’s actions super-hero like when they needed to, just to make them dramatic on screen. There was no philosophy at the core of the story, so the visual focus was only on the sentiments and the action. The movie was entertaining and visually engaging for these reasons. Unlike Baahubali, PS1 is not a bloody and muscular revenge drama but is much more layered. The battle scenes are jagged and impressionistic, and they take you right in the middle. You are not a spectator sitting in the gallery and getting entertained. You are fully immersed, caught breathless, and have no time to applaud.
Jeyamohan is the dialogue writer of this movie (in Tamil) and his words are packed with the right amount of linguistic modernism so not to lose connectivity with the audience as he effortlessly injects humor at the right places. The screenplay writers’ (Mani Ratnam, Kumaravel, Jeyamohan) and the editor’s (Sreekar Prasad) exemplary work to keep the pace of this 2 hours and 40 minute movie well-modulated needs a special mention.
Production must have been a gargantuan undertaking. From costumes to weapons to jewelry, from props to sound design, from stunning camerawork to crisp editing, from gripping background score to addictive songs (perhaps a separate post on AR Rahman’s music for PS1 and PS2 is needed), the amount of research that has gone into each area is simply stunning. I must have watched/listened to a few dozen interviews of the main technicians who worked on this. So, my appreciation for the work that has gone behind the making is much high. To quote a few examples for the amount of research that went in — There were no potatoes in the 9th century, there were no metal armors in the 9th century, what kind of commodities were traded in open markets back then? Research was needed for every single aspect of this period, even if they appeared on screen just for a few seconds.
Movies in such genre are not going to be made often due to the costs involved. But when a movie does get made by a master craftsman named Mani Ratnam, and his team of abundantly talented technicians, one can’t help but marvel at the exuberance in the movie’s substance and style.
