Talk:Iruvar

Review of Iruvar

Iruvar (The Twosome — The Duo) (1997) is a Tamil film directed by Mani Ratnam. The film's score and soundtrack is composed by A. R. Rahman.

Considered by some as one of the best Indian movies every made, the film traces the lives of 1980's Tamil Nadu political rivals M. G. Ramachandran and M. Karunanidhi. "Iruvar" is, in equal measure, a vibrant entertainment, a superbly realized character drama and a dramatically-liberated biopic. At its core, it is the story of a friendship between two men; one, an actor (Anandan, played by Mohanlal) and the other a politician (Selvam, played by Prakash Raj). Their common, hard-fought dream of success gradually gives way to a rivalry within the political arena that lasts decades.

Superficially, this is a fictionalized account of the real-life friendship (and subsequent enmity) between two idols of Tamil dravidian culture; the film superstar MGR and the former DMK Chief Minister Karunanidi. But "Iruvar" is more interested in the spirit of history than history itself; it is more interested in relationships under the influence of history and politics, than in the minutae of political movements and historical events. Ratnam has neither the mind nor inclination to wrestle with politics in any serious or overt way; and that is why this film is such a flying success, because in understanding that his strengths primarily lie in creating human beings and not events, Ratnam has created a picture of great strength, resonance and relevance.

It helps that at the core of this massive film, there is a screen performance of such care and natural grace as what Mohanlal gives us. Mohanlal has long been one of the great actors in Indian cinema history, and this film definitely represents a career best. It gives him a range of emotions to explore, and a lifetime's worth of relationships to foster. The weight of time and experience grows on the actor's heavy shoulders and baritone, avuncular voice, and the man we see at the end is a familiar ghost of the person we met in the beginning. Lending the wonderful actor able support is the talented Prakash Raj and, in her screen debut, Aishwarya Rai, who has yet to really keep the (minor) promise she made with this film. Both Mohanlal and Prakash Raj deliver a performance worthy of a National Award, but in the end, it was Prakash Raj who walked away with the Best Supporting Actor award that year. Such is the brilliance of Mani Ratnam's abilities as a director that even noted commercial film artistes like Gauthami, Nassar and Madhoo deliver the performance of their lifetime, blending seamlessly with actors like Tabu and Revathi Menon known for their acting ability.

Mani Ratnam's work with the cinematographer Santosh Sivan (a brilliant filmmaker in his own right) and the magnificent composer A. R. Rahman meets the high standards that this team has set in the past. Sivan and Rahman have a ball exploring the musical and visual past, keeping up step by step as Ratnam explores the cinematic history of Tamil Nadu. Often, Sivan's shots are clearly informed by moments in Tamil cinema (particularly the cinema of MGR and Sivaji Ganeshan) and Rahman exquisitely captures the spirit of the songs of MGR's times, complementing them brilliantly with a stellar score that is a blend of Dravidian machismo and the sensitivity of Bach. This is probably Rahman's most intelligent work, even if the individual songs aren't palatable pop songs worthy of a listen on the car radio. That isn't the point here.

This is the only Indian mainstream picture that I think is also a thoughtful (ingenious, really) experiment in narrative. Just as the gulf between the two main characters grows and grows, so does the narrative integrity of this film splinter into vignettes; strewn across the decades like so many lost moments in a friendship turned awry. Ratnam is in full control here, and for the first time since Roja, we see him having a blast with film form. The result is riveting in every way. The sonic and visual bounds of the musical melodrama are redefined and raised to a level of high art.

The film, not surprisingly, was a box-office disaster. Aside from lacking the elements typical in a commercial film such as romance and glamour, fight scenes and melodrama, simply put, the film may have been too cerebral for the general populace fed on Rajnikanth's mindless dishum dishum films, Bhagyaraj's senseless potboilers and Kamalahaasan's over-melodramatic tearjerkers. A noted film critic, reviewing this in a leading Tamil publication, even wondered why Ratnam alternated between black and white and colour scenes in the film! (Ratnam depicted scenes that were meant to be movie reels of MGR in black and white since colour films weren't common prior to 1975).

In summary, whether you are a movie buff or an average moviegoer, a historian or a casual listener, a lover of arts or someone oblivious to arts, a Tamilian or a Punjabi, you must watch this film... for masterpieces don't come along that often!

(Inspired by and borrowed from rnair's great review on IMDB)

WikiProject class rating

This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as start, and the rating on other projects was brought up to start class. BetacommandBot 01:39, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Iruvar1.jpg

Image:Iruvar1.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 23:42, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Lead actors

Some IPs keep reverting the lead saying that Prakash Raj was a supporting actor. The fact that he won the 'Best Supporting Actor' is irrelevant and shouldn't be taken into consideration. There are numerous instances, where supporting actors got 'Best Actor' award and vice-versa. For instance, Saranya Ponvannan got the Best Actress award for a supporting role in Thenmerku Paruvakaatru. On the other hand, Appukutty, the lead actor of Azhagarsamiyin Kuthirai, was given the Best Supporting Actor award. As the film's title (Duo) implies, it's the story of two people. No matter who is credited first in the title cards. —Vensatry _(Talk) 18:50, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

The film name Saving Private Ryan doesn't mean that Matt Damon (Ryan) is the lead actor. Mohanlal was nominated and missed the National Film Award for Best Actor, only the actor performed in leading role will be shortlisted for best actor. And Prakash Raj was nominated and won the National Film Award for Best Supporting Actor. Mohanlal's character (Anandan) has more screen presence than Prakash's character (Tamizhselvan), and plot centres in the life of Anandan and goes in his perspective. The friendship between Anandan and Tamizhselvan is a strong point in the film, hence the name Duo. Also remember Mani Ratnam initially named the film Anandan (Mohanlal's character name), its in the article. --49.15.197.136 (talk) 19:17, 28 November 2015 (UTC)

I said let's maintain the 'status quo'. It's not that you revert (by making a contentious change) and ask me to discuss. Do you have any official sources which say Mohanlal was nominated for the 'Best Actor' award? Besides, as I said earlier that's irrelevant as nobody is questioning Mohanlal's role in the film. The film is about the friendship between two personalities who held a high influence in Tamil cinema and Dravidian politics, so don't frame your own theories. —Vensatry _(Talk) 06:00, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

This is a subjective claim, yet look at some of the sources which say both Mohanlal and Prakash Raj were lead actors: [1], [2] (opinion of the singer though), [3]. [4]. —Vensatry _(Talk) 06:59, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

This man wants to prove that Prakash Raj has equal importance as of Mohanlal in the film on the sake of the name Iruvar (The Duo). How can you tell that ? What if the name represented Mohanlal and Aishwarya Rai (who done the role which represented Jayalalitha), the female lead opposite Mohanlal, her role was also a duel role. Or what if it meant Anandan's (Mohanlal) duel personality as an actor and a politician ?. A name can represent many things. These may have be the reason why Mani Ratnam changed the film title from Anandan to Iruvar (The Duo). And the sources you listed doesn't matter at all. For example, Prabhas does the lead role in Baahubali, and Rana Daggubati done a supporting role, but i can show you sources saying both Prabhas and Rana as the lead actors IndianExpress, DailyNewsandAnalysis, DeccanChronicle - these doesn't mean both of them are main lead. Mohanlal was considered 13 times for NFA for Best Actor that including Iruvar. Here is the source.--106.66.161.132 (talk) 10:56, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I'm not trying to "prove" anything. We should go by what sources say. As I said earlier, nobody is questioning Mohanlal's significance in the film. Sure, the plot moves from Anandan's perspective, but we shouldn't list Prakash Raj's name alongside Tabu, Gouthami, Revathi and Nassar. The NFA thing doesn't really matter to this discussion. The claim (from the unreliable vernacular source) is probably a factoid. The comparison with Baahubali is irrelevant as both are different films. —Vensatry _(Talk) 13:44, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

The title Duo clearly represents Anandan and Thamizhselvan, not Anandan and Aishwarya Rai, combined or separately as you presume. Don't formulate your own theories. If you believe that's true, please show me a reliable source. —Vensatry _(Talk) 13:49, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

That said, I don't have a problem if someone wants to include Aishwarya Rai too, provided the claim is cited using a reliable source. —Vensatry _(Talk) 12:46, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Looks like you are not going to end this. It's always better to use a format like this. In these types of disputes, the cast are usually arranged in the series manner like the film credits order. And don't make your own opinion on the reliability of a website. You cannot find an official source for nomination list for NFA as the they never officially announce the nominations like The Oscars or Filmfare. So you should rely on secondary sources.--106.66.158.220 (talk) 16:14, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

Why should I end when your intentions are clearly POVish? Clubbing Mohanlal, Prakash Raj, and Ash would make sense, but not Nasser, Tabu, Revathi, and Gauthami. They are secondary characters for sure. As for 'Filmibeat', it's not considered reliable in WP. If you want you may ask at WP:RSN. So it's clearly not just 'my opinion'. If we don't have official sources, we shouldn't assume things on our won either. Mags and blogs hype things up. —Vensatry _(Talk) 17:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Iruvar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.tamilsonglyrics.org/movies/f-j/iruvar_songs_lyrics/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:19, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Iruvar. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120320055240/http://www.cscsarchive.org:8081/MediaArchive/art.nsf/%28docid%29/24DFE2FA7D520FBD65256940004C8AEE to http://www.cscsarchive.org:8081/MediaArchive/art.nsf/(docid)/24DFE2FA7D520FBD65256940004C8AEE
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110211010127/http://outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?200778 to http://www.outlookindia.com/printarticle.aspx?200778
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121021045913/http://www.cscsarchive.org:8081/MediaArchive/art.nsf/(docid)/3D32A24E3D89BB4A65256940004C8AE5 to http://www.cscsarchive.org:8081/MediaArchive/art.nsf/(docid)/3D32A24E3D89BB4A65256940004C8AE5
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121021044431/http://www.cscsarchive.org:8081/MediaArchive/art.nsf/(docid)/0BBEC4DD18D5643165256940004D0E04 to http://www.cscsarchive.org:8081/MediaArchive/art.nsf/(docid)/0BBEC4DD18D5643165256940004D0E04

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:17, 13 January 2018 (UTC)