Jai Bhim controversies : Baradwaj bad review gets mauled and Pro Hindi guys slam Prakashraj

How can a guy get slapped for speaking in Hindi and not Tamil ? asks a twitterati. Film companion South YouTube channel film critic Baradwaj Rangan says Jai Bhim is badly made film .  Has 1.59, 850 views and 12 K have disliked while others have liked it.

Let’s us take scene where IG interrogates a pawn broker who accepted the stolen jewels. Pawn broker says in Hindi that since the guys were from the same area and before he completes it, Prakashraj who plays IG slaps him. Pawn broker asks why did you slap me and he gets the reply- Speak in Tamil.

So what is wrong in it  asks twiterrati. Is it not an Indian language ? Another goes a step forward and points out that Prakashraj being a Kannadiga should be slapped for speaking in various languages on screen.

Now those disliking Rangan’s review of Jai Bhim  attributes  caste prejudice, not knowing reality and pointing out reviews where he praised actors who were stone faced  and being not able to digest somebody being better than Mani Rathinam ( Rangan  wrote a book on Mani).

Rangan has this disclaimer at the start - having a good story and good intentions automatically do not make a good movie and if you are a fan of Samudrakanni the director then you are going to like the film. The review is for those who do not belong to this category says Rangan.

Wonder why Rangan brought Samudrakanni in to it ?.At times, Suriya does sound like Kanni. It was only recently that Kanni informed that he was going to say no to the preachy kind of roles. Probably those who hated Samudrakanni decided to hear out Rangan.

 

Now the comments are that Baradwaj  praised Malayalam film Brahmam and rated Mamata Mohandas performance to be so good that one forgot Tabu’s in the original.  Rangan terms Suriya not being involved and  being in a hurry. He says a similar subject of three people going missing ( Naayattu) was handled well by a neighboring State ( Kerala)  with finesse and is it too much to expect such from Tamil audience and go on to magnify everything. I gathered from the whole review is that he did not like the police brutality overuse, magnifying of scenes and characters and lack of giving a personal dimension to the Lawyer character. In short, he says this not  an iconic movie.

Most of his  reviews or rather 99% of it never calls a spade a spade directly and describes it many ways. I have found him to go great lengths to find some `positives’ in a bad film. The majority of his core viewers seem to have liked what  he spoke about the film and so he knows his audience well. As for Nayattu- it did not happen in a environment like in Jai Bhim. I gathered from the scenes in he film  that Lawyer Chandru is a painter and he reads Economic and Political Weekly.  Mercifully, Chandru is not a tribal song writer cum singer and the teacher ( Rajisha ) a chorus singer.