With its 80's Bollywood meets graphic novel / videogame sensibilities, Animal reminded me a good deal of Kill Bill. It bears that same element of homage / masturbatory pastiche Quentin Tarantino legitimized as its own art form.
The first inspiration is of course The Godfather. Reddy's film borrows swathes of narrative from that classic (As Baradwaj Rangan's review puts it, "...the trashy Mario Puzo novel and the classy Coppola adaptation that followed"). Ranbir Kapoor's Vijay is Michael Corleone to Anil Kapoor's Don-like tycoon father Balbir Singh. Like Michael, he as a child idolizes the dad, gets estranged from him and then returns when that father is murderously attacked, to take on the family mantle and go after his father's enemies with a vengeance. Of course, one could say Vijay's hotheadedness and penis-driven thinking also make him a Sonny Corleone; And like Sonny is admonished by Don Vito, he is frequently rebuked by Dad Balbir.
Old-school masala movie grammar runs in full vein in the depiction of the father-son relationship. There is a cloying, fetishistic edge to how much the son adores Balbir, stopping just short of attaching himself to and humping the dad's leg. Of course, like most tycoon dads in Indian movies, Balbir can't give his kids time of day, and Vijay's early misdemeanors (as a high school kid, he fires an assault rifle in his sister's classroom to rattle the fellows ragging her) seem like desperate attempts to get his dad to pay attention, even if it is only to give him a dressing-down. Surprisingly for a bigshot business magnate based in Delhi, Balbir actually believes his son he could be imprisoned for a crime. If the Manu Sharma and Sanjeev Nanda cases have taught us anything, it is that rich connected kids can (at least before a major public outcry) get away with murder.
And in the Animal universe, the law simply doesn't exist. I don't think I saw a single police character, not even when the rich tycoon's son-in-law goes missing (SPOILER: he and Vijay don't get along) or to investigate the aftermath of the pre-interval bloodbath in which Vijay trashes a hotel and mows down 300 masked blokes (ANIMAL masks, get it?!) with the help of axes, assault rifles and later a golf cart mounted with a gazillion belt-fed Gatling guns. This sequence with its complete disregard for proportion (and an involved gag about underwear) is fun, though not as engrossing as Oldboy's corridor fight because what really should have been a series of uninterrupted takes is edited to bits.
Post-intermission, we see a more humanized Vijay - his injuries in the hotel massacre have him dependent on a catheter and urine bag, he grows a belly and makes references to needing more frequent pad changes than his wife (Rashmika Mandanna, more on her later). For some reason, he now requires a heart transplant. Of course, he's still (hah!) cocky, but it makes a lot of emotional sense here, him trying to hold on to his alpha-maleness (oh yes, the movie is sufficiently self-aware to give us early on a mini-dissertation on the subject from Vijay's POV). This part of the film was to me the most interesting character-wise, and I would have been interested to see vulnerable Vijay for a longer span. But Reddy has other plans.
After a pointless subplot about a mistress (Tripti Dimri, wasted), the film unveils the major antagonist, another alpha male. This one is played by Bobby Deol: Age and a beard lend him personality and the part is written to his strengths. Now the stage is set for a showdown between Vijay and this guy. It's a more stereotypical contest of beefy biceps and obligatory shirt ripping. It tries to have its moment when Vijay offers his enemy the chance for a cessation of hostilities (they're actually related - elements of the Mabhabharata here). But you know what the bad guy's answer will be.
I was hesitant to see Animal because the reports of Reddy's previous hit Arjun Reddy glorifying a self-centered misogynistic prick kept me away from that one. But while dominated by the conflict between alpha-males and featuring a vulgar brand of humor, Animal does not legitimize them. Vijay's willingness to shed pools of blood to protect the family doesn't necessarily win him their adulation. His position towards women is a little murky. He criticizes his sister for being doormatted by her husband, but that seems more an expression of territorialism - How dare someone outside of the family disrespect her? As his wife, Rashmika Mandanna displays a lot of agency. She accepts his alpha-male status but is ready to hit back when he crosses her boundaries. A telling moment is when she lashes out at her mother, justifying her devotion to her blood-crazy husband, because he stood by her in her moments of need when her own parents deserted her for their social standing. She also gets a great scene when she confronts Vijay about his infidelity - it doesn't justify the time wasted on that subplot (which has a laughable conclusion) but it's engaging and Mandanna gives a solid account of her dramatic talent - I also appreciate that Reddy retains her original South Indian accent instead of a generic dub. The chemistry between her and Ranbir Kapoor supports the volatile and intense relationship of their characters, and I wish more of the film could have been told from the perspective of this couple and how it affects their dynamic than from the traditional all-male angle.
Ranbir Kapoor obviously commits to the lead part. Why wouldn't he, it's like Al Pacino playing Scarface's psycho-gangster, a colorful OTT actor's showcase - he even gets to do the body transformation bit (or wears a convincing fat suit). One part of Vijay's life the film keeps behind closed curtains is the time between his leaving home after he is thrown out by his father (thrown out in style though, he at least gets to keep an airplane) and when he returns in the wake of the father's attempted killing. This is the period when Vijay supposedly lives an independent life in the US with his wife and raises two children. While it might have been nice to see a different facet of his personality (and how he functioned outside of his family), Reddy adds to the script's intrigue by not exploring that segment. He does refer to it in a telling exchange between Vijay and Balbir towards the end when Vijay calls out his father's complete ignorance of his life away from the family and of the person he could be when not drawn into conflict. Sadly, Anil Kapoor gets the short end of the stick. The father-son relationship is a crucial dynamic of the film and at the heart of the protagonist's actions, but the part of Balbir Singh is flat and under-written. He is mostly a reaction board to Vijay's doings, reduced to either sounding out Vijay or lamenting his misdeeds. You don't get an overall sense of the man, who seems remote to his family, but is apparently so loved by his employees, they whoop with joy when his son proclaims vengeance on his attackers.
Some of Reddy's editing choices are strange. A crucial killing in the film is shown much ahead of time with a jarring jumpcut - the scene goes from just-married clean-cut Ranbir angling his honeymoon plane over a steep slope to him suddenly all bearded and mean heading a convoy of cars and armed henchmen out to cause murderous havoc. The narrative later backtracks to explain, but the overall effect is of needless complication in the name of style and reduces the impact of the scene. The second half starts get tiresome with all the convolutions (and a post-credits sequence that steps into parody territory). I respect that Reddy wanted to tell the story in a messy way, but too much is often just too much. For better or worse, the score of the film is in tune with its loud sensibilities - there are occasions where the music drowns out the dialog, and moments where you dearly wish for a pair of earplugs.
That said, Animal at least strikes me as a work that reflects the vision and sensibilities of an individual movie-maker and not a collection of box-office choices. The fact that I could sit through this 200(!) min slogathon without at the end wanting to kill myself tells me that it was doing a few things right. Your mileage may vary.
As usual its a pleasure to go through your take on a film. Interesting connects you have pointed out from yesteryears classics.
ReplyDelete