"I" movie review , directed by Shankar , Vikram , Amy Jackson, Suresh Gopi, Upen Patel,Santhanam and Ramkumar Ganesan , 14 January 2015 , Bollywood best VFX & special effects , Filmed in locations like: Chennai, Bangkok, Jodhpur, Kodaikanal, Pollachi,Bangalore and Mysore.
I (2015) - Movie review: Vikram , Amy Jackson, Ace director: Shankar
My Facebook page My Youtube channel
I | |
---|---|
Theatrical poster
| |
Directed by | Shankar |
Produced by | V. Ravichandran D. Ramesh Babu |
Written by | Shankar Subha |
Starring | |
Music by | A.R. Rahman |
Cinematography | P. C. Sreeram |
Edited by | Llewellyn Anthony Gonsalves |
Production
company | |
Distributed by | Aascar Film Pvt. Ltd |
Release dates
| 14 January 2015 |
Running time
| 188 minutes
(3 hours 9 minutes)
|
Country | India |
Language | Tamil |
Budget | 1 billion (US$16 million) |
I is a 2015 Tamil romantic thriller film produced and distributed by V. Ravichandran under his production company, Aascar Films. The film is written and directed by Shankar and features Vikram and Amy Jackson leading an ensemble cast which include Suresh Gopi, Upen Patel,Santhanam and Ramkumar Ganesan portraying pivotal roles. The soundtrack album and background score were composed by A. R. Rahman. Production design was handled by T. Muthuraj. P. C. Sreeram was the film's cinematographer and editing was done by Anthony.
The visual effects are designed by V. Srinivas Mohanthrough Rising Sun Pictures. Weta Workshop had worked on the digital and prosthetic make-up and background arts for the film. The dubbed versions in Telugu and Hindi are also titled I. Principal photography commenced on 15 July 2012. The filming lasted for two years and eight months, during which shooting was done extensively in China. Further schedules were filmed in locations
The film released on 14 January 2015 and tells the story of a former model, played by Vikram, who after being deformed , extracts revenge upon those who turned him into a hunchback.
The filming lasted for two years and eight months, during which shooting was done extensively in China.
Further schedules were filmed in locations in Chennai, Bangkok, Jodhpur, Kodaikanal, Pollachi,Bangalore and Mysore.
I Movie Review:
STORY: A bodybuilder ends up falling madly in love with a supermodel, but some scheming villains maim him. Is he able to overcome his physical handicap and win back his love?
REVIEW: Lingesan (Vikram) is a bodybuilder from a small town in Tamil Nadu, who dreams of winning the Mr India title for bodybuilding. Besides dumbbells, his only other love is supermodel Diya (Amy Jackson).
Life throws up a pleasant surprise to our sweet little simpleton. After winning the Mr Tamil Nadu contest for his perfect physique, he bags plum modelling assignments. Lo and behold, Lingesan gets a chance to model with Diya. How does he land this windfall?
Well, the ruling male supermodel John (Upen Patel) is a chauvinistic pig. When Diya refuses to sleep with him, he threatens to blacklist her. But Diya outsmarts him - she befriends the local bodybuilder, rechristens him Lee and takes him to China on a commercial shoot. Further, she feigns love for him and turns the otherwise shy guy into a charismatic screen icon.
In his journey to fame and money, Lee makes more than a few enemies. An irate bodybuilder at his local gym, John - the model whose position he usurped, an egotistic advertising guru whom he offended with his principles, a gay makeup artiste whose advances he spurned - all of them want Lingesan dead.
This scheming quartet, along with a fifth guy (whose identity is suspense), takes revenge on Lee. They turn him into an unrecognizable ugly being (bearing an uncanny resemblance to Ephialtes from the Hollywood movie 300) in the hope that his life becomes a living hell. But, don't despair just yet; our hero also schemes to get back at those who stole his love and his looks.
Suspend your disbelief and get into this fairy tale that is told by Shankar (the maker of magnum opuses like Indian, Sivaji-The Boss and Enthiran) on a grandiose canvas. Shot mesmerisingly by PC Sreeram on virgin locales in China and India, with world class CG work, this spectacle works because at the core, it's a romantic-thriller told simplistically.
While the waif-like Amy looks mesmerising, Vikram bowls you over with a heart-wrenching performance whether he is handsome or disfigured. Santhanam provides the perfect comic relief. The first fight in a local gymnasium and the BMX bike fight on Chinese rooftops are an adrenaline fix. This is pure escapist fare but will resonate with those who read fairy tales at bedtime.
About actors:
Vikram may have worked tirelessly gaining and losing weight for his role, but that doesn't make the film any less disappointing. In both the roles, as a body builder and a hunchbacked man, he makes one take notice of his potential and how far he can go for cinema.
Amy Jackson chips in with a surprisingly decent performance and has worked hard on her lip sync, at least in some crucial scenes. Upen Patel, Suresh Gopi and Ramkumar come across as misfits in their respective roles. There are far more good looking local actors who could've played Upen's part convincingly.
Given the lavish budget, I is visually grandiose and that's not a surprise. But the visuals don't make up for the weak script. Even AR Rahman's music doesn't make much of a difference but for remaining mostly soothing and melodic. Returning after a gap of three years, Shankar should've gauged the pulse of the audiences who now prefer short stories over a three-hour film.
Amy Jackson chips in with a surprisingly decent performance and has worked hard on her lip sync, at least in some crucial scenes. Upen Patel, Suresh Gopi and Ramkumar come across as misfits in their respective roles. There are far more good looking local actors who could've played Upen's part convincingly.
Given the lavish budget, I is visually grandiose and that's not a surprise. But the visuals don't make up for the weak script. Even AR Rahman's music doesn't make much of a difference but for remaining mostly soothing and melodic. Returning after a gap of three years, Shankar should've gauged the pulse of the audiences who now prefer short stories over a three-hour film.
Comments
Post a Comment