When I was a child, I used to ask for stories to eat. Not just any stories, but exciting, never before heard stories every single time. And this responsibility fell squarely on my father and my chithi’s shoulders. So three times a day, seven days a week, they were in the unenviable position of making up stories. These stories needed to be just long enough to see through the food on the plate. If it was short, I would stop eating and demand a new story. And if the story was too long, I would demand that they continue the story even though the food was done.

I still remember the blood donation story my father made up. Some one was in an accident and they needed blood. Since the victim had a rare blood group, they had to screen people one by one by one by one till they found a match. As I finished all the  food on my plate the right donor would be found and all would be right!

The next random story I remember was  my chithi’s story about the Kamakshi temple in our street corner and the suspicious looking man who came to the temple every day just around dusk, stood there with his eyes darting, nervous, twitchy and anxious. After a few minutes he would walk away melting in to the darkness. He repeated this routine for many days, where the number of days would be exactly the same number of spoons of food on my plate. Just as I spooned in the very last morsel of food, the man would decide to do what he was dilly dallying about for so many days, namely dropping a one rupee coin in to the hundiyal and walk away.

So many parallels between the made up stories I heard as a child and 2.0.  Lack of substance. Monotonous repetition. No logic whatsoever. When you think back you realise that the teller has conned you. But you are no longer five years old and you can see the con through the 3-D glasses as you are watching the movie.

2.0 starts off with the title credits and extreme close up of something… no one knows what it is but it gives you an impression of sitting in a virtual reality Disney ride and leaves you mildly nauseous to the preamble of cellphones disappearing. And the case of the disappearing cell phones is shown O.N.E  B.Y  O.N.E. India is a populous country. Of the 130 crore people in India about 65 crore people use cellphones. So much like the nursery rhyme “1 kodam thanni oothi 1 poo poothudham, 2 kudam thanni oothi 2 poo poothudhaam….” the disappearing cellphone drama goes on and on for a painfully long time. After 30 minutes and what might very well be the 500th cellphone, I am not sure, I slept off, as you are about to scream, “Enough! We get that ALL cellphones are disappearing. We really don’t care why, but we GET IT. MOVE ON!”, the story moves on to deaths.

Not just any deaths, but death by devices. Murder by mobiles.  Homicide by the handset.

Now, Shankar has in the past has been particularly (un)imaginative about murders scenes in his movies, the degree of sins committed by the victim being directly proportional to the randomness of mythological association. Like a split personality Vikram opening an umbrella to create a buffalo stampede in Anniyan. (This has been rightfully made fun of in Tamilpadam1.) Thankfully no Garudapuranam references or Chithraguptan chithravadhais in 2.0. Some netas die and you kind of guess that they are crooked and hence they die, but you are not the least bit interested in the 5Ws that hooks a listener to a story. Instead the predominant Ws in your mind are WTH, Will I get my money back?, Worry that the director might play “1 kudam thanni oothi” with us and show people dying one by one and it might go on for a V.E.R.Y  L.O.N.G  T.I.M.E!

There were many things I found unacceptable in 2.0.

It is one thing to be inspired by Salim Ali, the bird-man of India, but this character called Pakshirajaan based on Salim Ali is blasphemy. While Salim Ali is a Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibushan recipient and one of the greatest ornithologists, Pakshiraajan is a defeated old man who later turns in to a revengeful….. ghost(??!!). As you study the character of Pakshiraajan you end up in a Nayagan connundrum wondering, ‘Yivar nallavaraa, ketavara? Yivar nalladhu seiyyarara ketadhu seiyaraara?* Do I do what he does or only listen to what he says?’ When one writes a character based on a pioneer and his life’s work, it is basic decency to show respect. What is been done in the movie is all crass, no class half baked version of what Salim Ali represented.

One must learn from movies like Pari Yerum Perumal to see how beautifully the story has been told, class issues discussed and how it ends with a glimmer of hope. But it is typical of Shankar, to speed read a Wikipedia page and immediately commercialise it without worrying about gaining any deep understanding or developing an inkling of conviction. In the past he has made movies about irregularities that exist in the education system, corruption, need for transparency in government etc without having really stood for anything. The issues have always been handled as something that he can make money out off, not something that addresses the problem, never has he given hope.  2.0 falls along the same lines. A gargantuan 600 crore production that took 6 years in post-production that used up every bit of help technology can offer to preach to the public how as a society we are over using technology to kill the environment. Irony much?! This is as confusing as the the old people who over use Whatsapp, mobile phones and TV serials comment how the younger generation(which made all this technology these people cushily use possible) is going to the dogs because of over work, misplaced priorities and technology addiction! And without missing a beat forward posts that says that cellphone technology, nuclear bombs, rockets and airplanes existed in the time of Ramayana and Mahabharatha. And not even for a minute one can buy weak arguments about how this movie translates in to employment and development for people in an industry.

It is a bit sad to see Rajinikanth being time and again trapped in the Superstardom and getting choked by it. No matter whether he works with Ranjith or Karthik Subbaraj, this is a man who will never be allowed to do the roles that his heart truly desires. In 2.0 he is used strictly as a brand without any of his usual flair or punch dialogues. While the black-sheep and the bleating were entertaining in Endhiran, the bird impression he does in this is pathetic. His words are slurring a bit as he delivers his dialogues. Even Baba and Kuselan which were all time flops of Rajini, there was meat to his character. But in this movie Shankar has misappropriated every one’s clout and the only thing that comes through and slaps you in your face is how much money has been spent and how Shankar has pulled it off.

Last but not the least the director did not make a stupid movie, but he has made a movie thinking WE are stupid and would take anything sitting down with our 3-D glasses on! Sparrow giving CPR to a still born infant? Ghosts entering cellphones? The rouge Robot comes back to life and the first thing he does is to pull down Amy Jackson’s zipper? Exorcism of cellphones? Such silly dialogues? (I will not even go in to the sending positive signals in to space to attract good aliens and positive EMR and negative EMR cancelling out!)

Hopefully there is no 3.0!

PS:

*The famous Nayagan movie dialogue where a small child asks Kamal if he is a good man or a bad man.