Archive

Archive for the ‘Drama Reviews’ Category

My response to the Review of my play ‘ID’ in The Hindu by Suganthy Krishnamachari

The review of my play, “ID” published in The Hindu dated 8th May 2015 is far distanced from reality and is negatively biased. This review has been a trigger for my detailed response and rebuttal of the points raised. Please note that I respect reviews and have never done a reply for any of the 21 plays scripted by me. I do understand censure and appreciation are part of any review intended to promote a good product.

TAMIL THEATER in its entirety needs constructive feedback and criticism and not flippant reviews slamming the creator and the artistes without any logic. Such reviews do not augur well for the future of TAMIL THEATER which I represent with undying passion and commitment.

Given the limitation of a theatre play, my efforts to bring a complex technical subject in a simple manner was well received by the audience but surprisingly to the reviewer, everything seems to be “riddled with holes”. The reviewer has raised points that were answered emphatically in the play and many others from her figment of imagination, raw understanding and inattentiveness.

Though I have the necessary points to answer every statement in her review, I am picking out few to highlight the IQ level of the reviewer.

“When you are talking about hawala and terrorism, wouldn’t the engagement be at the highest level, with Ministers and perhaps even the Prime Minister being kept informed?”

My police officer Parameswara Iyer, a true representation of plainclothes men, is from the CYBER CELL and his duty is to inform relevant departments of any such plans to prevent them from happening. Why would he go to ministers and PM every time he gets an input? It is made clear in the play that he speaks to the concerned departments to thwart the attacks.

“How can a lone hacker, operating from his house deal will all this? “ – This statement shows that the reviewer has absolutely no knowledge about what a hacker is. I want to reiterate here that even this technical subject was explained in simple terms by the hacker Divakar and understood by many including senior citizens witnessing the play.
Also, from the points raised and from the above question, it is evident that the reviewer was not paying attention to the dialogues nor the story.

Further, the reviewer seems to have caught up some words and dialogues now and then to raise it up as issues to cover HER inability to understand the subject, thereby bringing the whole concept of creative freedom, characterization, and my efforts in the play to question.

Theatre substitutes situations and time lapse through dialogues many times and it is for the viewers to keep attention to the dialogues and every theatre lover does it and that is why I am still in theatre.

And the audacity of the reviewer to comment on the Humane Police officer depicted as Cool headed, Intelligent and Tech Savvy as “a concern about the future of our country” is immature and her statements are hampered by her affinity to Masala movies far cut from reality. It also highlights her incapability to review drama that draws on realistic characters and situations.

“Hampered by a bad script and half-hearted performances, ‘ID’ was a complete let down.”

From the explanations above, one can understand the purpose behind this review and as such no answer for this statement is necessary. I am still surprised that she could not find one positive thing to write about the whole play, which also throws light on her mental frame and psychological status.

I am open to stage my play for people who are interested in seeing the validity of my response to the insensitive review of Suganthy Krishnamachari.

Read the review here https://kvivekshankar.wordpress.com/2015/05/17/the-hindu-review-of-id/

The Hindu Review of “ID”

Confused ID
SUGANTHY KRISHNAMACHARI

Prayatna’s ‘ID’ (story and direction Vivekshankar), was riddled with holes. Police officer Parameswara Iyer ropes in a freelance hacker, to unravel hawala transactions and foil terrorist plans; the wrong man gets killed; the hacker seeks refuge in a village, to escape the bad men – the story stretches one’s credulity to the limits. When you are talking about hawala and terrorism, wouldn’t the engagement be at the highest level, with Ministers and perhaps even the Prime Minister being kept informed? How can a lone hacker, operating from his house deal will all this? Kalivaradan, who works in the Secretariat doesn’t know what a laptop is, and calls it a harmonium! Too much!

Narasimhan (T.D. Sundarrajan), neighbour of hacker Divakar, makes his entry every now and then, turns towards the audience and launches into a torrent of abuse. What is his role and who is he abusing? And there is Janaki, whose complete lack of sorrow, so soon after her brother’s death, is puzzling. The Panchayat Chief’s family doubts Parameswara Iyer’s credentials. So how is it that they point to their backyard, when Iyer wants to do his ablutions? And how can anyone suddenly materialise and take such liberties?

Thank God, the police officer is only an imaginary character. If he were real, we would have to be concerned about the future of our country. The play was billed as one about the dangers of the internet, with the title suggesting identity theft. But where was all the tension and pace that such a play should have? Hampered by a bad script and half-hearted performances, ‘ID’ was a complete let down.

 

 

Prayatna Stage’s “ID” – Review by Siragu Ravichandran

“ID” PLAY REVIEW BY SIRAGU RAVICHNDRAN (POPULAR CINEMA/DRAMA CRITIC)

Vivek Shankar shared Siragu RaviChandran’s post.
May 1 at 11:13pm •

ID 8

விவேக் ஷங்கரின் ஐ டி ( நாடகம் )
சிறகு இரவிச்சந்திரன்
0
சளைக்காமல் நாடகம் எழுதுவதிலும், அதை மேடையேற்றுவதிலும் விவேக் ஷங்கரின் பிரயத்தனா குழு ஒரு முன்னுதாரணம். இப்போதுதான் “நதிமூலம்” பார்த்த மாதிரி இருக்கிறது. உடனே இன்னொரு புதிய நாடகம். இம்முறை நதிமூலம் இல்லை! நாசவேலைகளின் மூலம், பவுத்திரம் எல்லாமும்!
ஹாக்கர்ஸ் எனப்படும், கணிப்பொறி வலைப்பதிவுகளில், கன்னம் வைப்பவர்களின் கதை. அதன் மூலம் சமூக விரோதிகள் தண்டிக்கப்படுவது மெசேஜ்! இன்செப்ஷன் என்று நீங்கள் கத்துவது தெரிகிறது. ஆனால் தமிழ் நாடக மேடைக்கு இந்தக் கரு ஒரு எக்ஸப்ஷன்!
ஒரே பெயர்.. இரு கதை மாந்தர்கள். அதனால் ஏற்படும் ஒரு கொலை. இதுதான் மைய இழை.
திவாகர் ( சூரஜ்) ஒரு கணிப்பொறி ஜீனியஸ். எந்த வலையிலும் புகுந்து புறப்பட்டு, சேதமில்லாமல் தப்பிக்கும் தந்திரம், அவனுக்கு அத்துப்படி. ஆனால் அதை பயன்படுத்தி, சட்டப்படி தண்டிக்க வேண்டியவர்களை, சிறையிலடைக்க அவன் உதவுகிறான். அவனுக்கு உறுதுணையாக இருக்கும் காவல் அதிகாரி பரமேஸ்வரன் அய்யர். ( கிரீஷ் ). திவாகரின் அறை நண்பன் கலியவரதன். ( மது ). பிள்ளையை அமெரிக்கா அனுப்பிவிட்டு, தனிமையில் வாடும் மேன்ஷன் பெரியவர் நரசிம்மன் ( டி டி சுந்தரராஜன்) இவர்களது பக்கத்து அறைக்காரர்.
கலியவரதனின் சொந்த ஊரில், திருநெல்வேலி பக்கத்திலிருக்கும் கிராமத்தில் வசிக்கும் ஒரு குடும்பத்தில் ஐ ஏ எஸ் தேர்வு எழுத சென்னை வரும் திவாகர், அதே மேன்ஷனின் ஒரு அறையில் தங்குகிறான். ( இது என் யூகம். இது நாடகத்தில் தெளிவாக விளக்கப் படவில்லை ) கணிப்பொறி திவாகரை பழிவாங்க ஏவப்பட்ட கூலி படையன், ஐஏ எஸ் திவாகரைப் போட்டுத் தள்ளிவிட, தலைமறைவாக இருக்கும் ஒரிஜினல் டார்கெட் திவாகர், கொல்லப்பட்ட திவாகர் வீட்டிலேயே தங்குவது சின்ன டிவிஸ்ட். ஆனால், இதில் பழைய சிவாஜி படம் மாதிரி, உணர்ச்சிகளுக்கு எல்லாம் இடம் தராமல், கதையை ஜெட் வேகத்தில் நகர்த்திக் கொண்டு போகிறார் இயக்குனர் விவேக் ஷங்கர். கடைசியில் கூலிப்படை ஆள் பிடிபட்டானா? இறந்த திவாகரின் குடும்பம், இந்த திவாகரை மன்னித்ததா? என்பது க்ளைமேக்ஸ்.
சின்னதாக ஒரு திருப்பம் வைத்திருக்கிறார் ஷங்கர். தலைமறைவாகும் திவாகர், தன் பெயரில் உள்ள ஒரு நபரின் புகைப்படத்தை, தன் அடையாளமாக மாற்றி விட்டுச் செல்கிறான். அதனால் கிராமத்து திவாகர் கொலையாகிறான். இது ஒரு காட்சியாக அமைக்கப்பட்டிருந்தால் இன்னமும் தெளிவாக புரிந்திருக்கும் பார்வையாளர்களுக்கு. ஆனால் இரண்டு வரி வசனத்தில் அதைச் சொல்லி விடுகிறார் விவேக் ஷங்கர்.
கொல்லப்பட்ட திவாகரின் கிராமத்து அக்கா ஜானகியாக பிரேமா சதாசிவம். அனுபவம் அவரை முதலிடத்தில் நிறுத்துகிறது. வழக்கம்போல கிரீஷ் பாஸாகிறார். ஆச்சர்யம், கனமான பாத்திரத்தில் கதை நாயகனாக நடித்திருக்கும் சூரஜ். சபாஷ்! புலம்பல் தாத்தாவாக வரும் சுந்தரராஜன், அரங்கில் அதிகம் கைத்தட்டல் பெற்றவர். யதார்த்தம் பாராட்டைப் பெறுவதில் அதிசயம் ஏதுமில்லை!
தினேஷின் இசை நாடகத்திற்கு பக்க பலம். இன்னும் கொஞ்சம் இசைத்திருக்கலாமோ என்று தோன்றுமளவிற்கு அற்புதம். சேட்டா ரவியின் ஒளி ஜாலங்கள் மேடைக்கு மெருகு.
விந்தையான கதைகளை யோசிக்கும் விவேக் ஷங்கர், அடுத்தது ரோபோக்களை வைத்து நாடகம் எழுதுவாரோ? ஷங்கர் என்று பெயர் இருக்கிறதே செய்தாலும் செய்வார்!
நூறு நிமிட நாடகம். நறுக் வசனங்கள். இயல்பான நகைச்சுவை. தேர்ந்த நடிப்பு. வெற்றி பெற இவைதானே ஃபார்முலா! நம்பர் ஒன்னாக வரும் இந்த ஐ டி! வாழ்த்துக்கள்!
0
Like • Comment • Share

Nadhimoolam Play Review By J.R. Devendranath

devendrn J.R.Devendranath – 76 yrs.
Frd4onb@gmail.com
B-2, 2nd Floor, ‘Eden Plaza’,
165, Perambur Barracks Road,
Vepery, Chennai – 600 007.

(Mobile – 97880 38397)

Nadhimoolam – drama – A layman’s opinion

A drama based on reincarnation and karma interspersed with lighter moments got off initially with a bang by Ashok (Madhu) and after many twists concluded that the best way of punishing Gopi (Girish) for his misdemeanor is not by killing him but allow him to live and undergo the ordeal of rebirth in the last scene with killing effect. This reminded me that of late some of the learned judges instead of sending the accused to the gallows they hand out life imprisonment till his natural death.

The director has shown human frailties at its best especially when it relates to the ladies in the character of PremaSadasivam. Though she is practicing psychiatrist she gives in an rather enjoys when Ashwin praises her sartorial taste and elegance. Likewise Ashok who suffers from insomnia advises his brother meticulously to the last detail of DOs and DON’Ts before he leaves for office. But I could not understand why Jothi was not astonished and dumbfounded when her father said that she was adopted by him. This could have been avoided if Jothi was made to go through the manuscripts of her fathers autobiography (சுயசரிதை as he says) while he was doing “Dyanam”. This could have been narrated by way of soliloquy by Jothi.

Finally when Gopi asks the artist (Madhu) who is ‘Nadhi’ which has been written in the sketches drawn by him the explanation given was very pleasing.

Let the Nadhi becomes perennial and bring forth good and lively dramas in the days to come. My honest appreciation for all the stage actors and behind the scene actors who have performed very well and there was never a dull moment.

– J.R.Devendranath

Nadhimoolam Play Review By Mrs. Ravi Shanker

Nadhimoolam:
Wish to highlight somethings
The usage of stage was too good and meaningful.
Two parts of the story in two ends.
The part which brings them together in the middle.
Also quick change in scenes using light and dark
The story/plot became prominent as all other things were subdued: music, costumes, stage props(aesthetic)
Nothing overpowered the plot.
The effect of the flashback with shadow showing grill. You gave artists good scope for showing their talent without overcrowding scene and without loud dramatic back ground score
The suspense teasing the audience……
 you know…you don’t know….you think you know… you wonder who all knows ….and what all they know 
Oh my God!
Costume change very aesthetic
I was totally overwhelmed on the karma angle……CLASS ENDING.
I had goosebumps. SUPER! SUPER! SUPER!
—- Mrs.  Ravi Shanker
A Theater Lover

Nadhimoolam Review by Geethmalika Theater Troupe

February 27, 2015 Leave a comment

Namaskaram I have seen your new play ‘ NADHIMOOLAM’ on inauguration. Thanks for your kind invitation. Nadhimoolam a well knit subject, very neat presentation and well performed play on stage … Congratulations.

Smt. Prema Sadasivam as a Psychiatrist Doctor and Sri. Sivaji Chadurvedi as a retired Police Officer remarkably lived in their roles. I have seen their acting in Sri. Kathadi Ramamurthy’s plays several years ago but even at this age, they both threw a challenge to the present generation of artists by their matured performance. So much dedication, involvement and sincerity … WHAO HATS OFF TO THE VETERANS . Please convey my wishes to them.

GIRISH A real backbone of your play. His personality voice culture, gesture, delivery of dialogues … superb Girish

MADHU As an artist, engineer, mentally disturbed man has clearly shown the difference in acting both normal/abnormal perfectly. well done MADHU.

HARINI KRISHNA: as Jothi has done justification to her role

NARENDRAKUMAR: AS Aswin has also done well.

Scene sets Lighting and makeup a pleasure to watch on stage.

Music by Giridharan has proved again, that he could give noiseless but useful musical effects for the success of the play…… Keep it up Giri

Dear Vivek, this play is one more feather on your cap

WELL DONE GOD BLESS YOU

—  Rajaram
Director
Geethmalika

Nadhimoolam Review by Satish Chandrasekaran

February 27, 2015 Leave a comment
NADHIMOOLAM:
At the outset I should certainly say that this is one of the most interestingly plotted plays given the limited space and time in relation to stage play is concerned. At the end I was really surprised that 2 artists were introduced for the first time in stage. Their acting was so proficient that it was hard to believe this fact and I personally feel that the credit goes to the director who has brought about the best from a novice. AS far as the philosophical part of ‘every person answerable to his guilt’ and ending with a note that ‘there could be no greater punishment than one being made answerable to himself for one’s actions’, I feel that this is a tough subject matter remaining untouched by any writers till date- to my limited knowledge and belief. Though writers have found it tough to portray philosophy(pertaining to conscience and guilt), religious beliefs(relating to rebirth) and truth(relating to admittance of crime) the same has been deftly handled in a proficient manner.
—- Satish Chandrasekaran
Advocate