2.0: In Double Jeopardy!

A family of fans returned disappointed; I brood on the why.

As a family, we have been fans of Rajni, Shankar, Rahman from forever. Forget about their earlier movies, we have lost count of the number of times we have repeat enjoyed Robot, in Tamil & Hindi. So much so, we fondly call our silver grey, electric car, Reva – Chitti.

And yet, there was silence in the car, as we drove back after watching 2.0.

I see it as a double jeopardy. Not as in a legal procedural defence, but as in incurring risk / disadvantage from 2 sources, simultaneously.

Between a Rock & a Hard Place

It was surprising that the antagonist got a heart-tugging backstory, with a humane purpose at his core. In a world where we are increasingly becoming aware of the devastation that humans have had on this planet (the debilitating effects of plastic on oceanic life, being a recent case in point), it’s actually a masterstroke to see a vigilante take up the cause of nature, against humans.

But in a superhero movie, where does that leave the protagonist? His victory gets reduced to a selfish, pyrrhic hollow. So much so that Dr. Vaseegaran has to laud Pakshirajan’s intent & fault only his methods. No wonder, then, that many of Rajni’s swagger & style come across as villainous taunts on the hapless Akshay.

Not that superhero movies have not had such ‘victim villains’. Sandman in Spiderman 3, for example. But they were at best misguided seekers of revenge & redemption, never serving a larger cause than that of the hero.

Did Shankar want us to cheer for Rajni? Then the audience finds themselves on the same side of the apathetic humans shown in the movie. If not, you end up being against your venerated Superstar & that beloved character, Chitti – which is cinematic sacrilege! When you feel for the anti-hero, then the hero’s position lies compromised. In leaving us in this uncomfortable no-man’s land, the plot freezes us in dissatisfaction.

Digging Mountains to find Mice

After the elaborate, comic-tragic social commentary on the indispensability of cell phones in today’s life, in the 1st half, and the prolonged documentary on how the cell phone radiations are wiping out bird populations, in the 2nd half, the movie ends with a tame, 1-line homily from Dr. Vaseegaran, saying, ‘we need to respect other life on the planet’. Oh, come on!

What else could it have offered? I don’t know (I am neither the writer nor the director to resolve their story). But as an audience, my question is, why enter such long-winding cul-de-dacs, in the first place?

Our 12-year old daughter nailed it, as she lamented at the interval, ‘They took so long to say so little!’.

With such obvious flaws in the script, the rest of the movie seems like an attempt to compensate for it. The 3D, the fabulous action, the spectacular set pieces…everything seemed to be just loudly announcing the lack of soul.

Come on Shankar, we know you are far better than this. Until now, I thought there wasn’t anyone, who could exploit the superstardom of Rajni in completely new ways, better than you (evidenced from Sivaji & Enthiran / Robot, as against the disappointment of Linga, Kabali & Kaala). You might have wanted to make this, India’s biggest, Hollywood-style, action thriller, but unfortunately, families like ours might be not be keen to watch it again.