Some movies leave you refreshed and motivated. Some others leave you disturbed, amused and puzzled. Ore Kadal belongs to the latter. I am wondering whether the director knew what he was getting into. One is amused to find criticisms on its implications, its take on extra-marital. Touches a raw nerve leaving the naive in our tabooed society disturbed.
The director or the writer has only presented the events. He does not draw any conclusion. I mean he realizes that himself. Ask him why meera chose nadhan? I believe he cannot possibly know. I think he was wise in narrating the events as it is. The flick taunts your intelligence. Come, comprehend me!
Well, I am not giving up.
The movie is a mirror. Some find it honestly disturbing. Meera's inability , her choice. Some find it liberating. Some others might even find it amusing. Like people who have been there already. So the movie is like a mirror ; exposing ourselves and our prejudices. The movie never suggests. It only narrates.
Come to think of it, we always try to and want to understand a movie. We feel, only then, the endeavor was worthwhile. Or maybe, we do not want confess that we didn’t understand. So one might even conclude it’s a stupid movie with the wrong message. True. Unfortunately the movie does not offer any excuses as to Meera’s choice and you are left dangling. You can ransack your mind to nail a reason. Looks like the director has succeeded in making us realize the futility of it all.
Is there is reason for choosing the drunkard, someone not given to emotions, someone who has not shown any commitment but now is willing to. He might as well go after another person. Can there be a reason for leaving her faithful husband? Any justifiable reason? Branding her morally weak would be an insult to that character.
There are ample reasons but maybe you realize there can be no ‘justifiable’ reasons. Her reasons are her own reasons. It is not up for judgment. That’s all.
For example. Meera realizes life is for living. Its hers. Not the society's. Of course she makes a fool of all the faithful women who pull on for the sake of the sacred institution of marriage (speaking of values) , for the sake of children ( mind you, Meera left with her kid). Is it then The Society versus The Individual. When we talk about society, it includes her responsibilities as a responsible mother to her child.
This is no solution for the society but it is her life. Life is the pursuit of happiness. There are no guarantees that Nathan offers nor (more importantly) Meera seeks. Maybe she is taking a risk. And by taking it, she is ‘living’ in the present. If she had compromised, she would have stopped ‘living’ anyway. Reminds of Kazantzakis’s Zorba.
I did read somewhere the director’s take on the movie. Like they found love under extreme duress and it changed them. It is possible, yet, I think it needs to be told that nothing is final . I believe it is just that they decided to ‘live’ or ‘pursue happiness’ or ‘rediscover the meaning to existence’ in the present. It is not that Nathan is the man for Meera, except for the moment. But then you ask, isn’t that sluttish?
You think it is not. Yet, you don’t know it is not.
The director or the writer has only presented the events. He does not draw any conclusion. I mean he realizes that himself. Ask him why meera chose nadhan? I believe he cannot possibly know. I think he was wise in narrating the events as it is. The flick taunts your intelligence. Come, comprehend me!
Well, I am not giving up.
The movie is a mirror. Some find it honestly disturbing. Meera's inability , her choice. Some find it liberating. Some others might even find it amusing. Like people who have been there already. So the movie is like a mirror ; exposing ourselves and our prejudices. The movie never suggests. It only narrates.
Come to think of it, we always try to and want to understand a movie. We feel, only then, the endeavor was worthwhile. Or maybe, we do not want confess that we didn’t understand. So one might even conclude it’s a stupid movie with the wrong message. True. Unfortunately the movie does not offer any excuses as to Meera’s choice and you are left dangling. You can ransack your mind to nail a reason. Looks like the director has succeeded in making us realize the futility of it all.
Is there is reason for choosing the drunkard, someone not given to emotions, someone who has not shown any commitment but now is willing to. He might as well go after another person. Can there be a reason for leaving her faithful husband? Any justifiable reason? Branding her morally weak would be an insult to that character.
There are ample reasons but maybe you realize there can be no ‘justifiable’ reasons. Her reasons are her own reasons. It is not up for judgment. That’s all.
For example. Meera realizes life is for living. Its hers. Not the society's. Of course she makes a fool of all the faithful women who pull on for the sake of the sacred institution of marriage (speaking of values) , for the sake of children ( mind you, Meera left with her kid). Is it then The Society versus The Individual. When we talk about society, it includes her responsibilities as a responsible mother to her child.
This is no solution for the society but it is her life. Life is the pursuit of happiness. There are no guarantees that Nathan offers nor (more importantly) Meera seeks. Maybe she is taking a risk. And by taking it, she is ‘living’ in the present. If she had compromised, she would have stopped ‘living’ anyway. Reminds of Kazantzakis’s Zorba.
I did read somewhere the director’s take on the movie. Like they found love under extreme duress and it changed them. It is possible, yet, I think it needs to be told that nothing is final . I believe it is just that they decided to ‘live’ or ‘pursue happiness’ or ‘rediscover the meaning to existence’ in the present. It is not that Nathan is the man for Meera, except for the moment. But then you ask, isn’t that sluttish?
You think it is not. Yet, you don’t know it is not.
Comments
Post a Comment