His eyes feast on her while his heart begins to throb violently. A bus happens to stop by, she gets on it. He runs after and gets on too. She leaves her handkerchief behind. Lucky him, right? He offers to return it. She declines. He visits her the next day with a friend and a love letter. I don't have to tell you where this potboiler is heading and how things eventually turn out.
For some reason, good acting in Kollywood isn't synonymous with inhabiting a character or helping tell a good story. It's getting the facial expressions right even if it's the same way for every character. This is Vidharth's third movie in, a little over, a year that's set in a village. He's played the same character thrice under three different pseudonyms. The first time, he dug to its soul. The other two times he was satisfied with bringing to his face suitable expressions as and when the situation demanded.
In Kollaikaaran, Vidharth is Kollywood's village hero. He does those things that village heroes do. And to show that Vidharth's character has character, a mentally disabled sister is put under his care.
Kollaikaaran has no substance. You need to keep shuffling about to pay attention to this film and there is nothing to see in it. What drives talented actors in Kollywood to balance good work with crap? Do they think, "I need to make THIS movie,"? Or do they think "I need to make another movie," and take the first opportunity that comes their way? It must be menial work. Are they really that uninspired? Or do they believe that their talent is a finite commodity (not a prized possession) and they've got to do what they can while they still can? Kollaikaaran is a staple product from hack-haven Kollywood; which is why the questions it raised applies to the majority.
NOW PLAYING | MOVIE REVIEWS