Film: Three
My Rating: 2.5/5
Banner: Raj (India) Entertainments
Music: Vijay Kurakula
Editing: Tirupati Reddy
Lyrics: Vanamali
Story, Screenplay And Directed by: Shekkar Suri
Release Date: Oct 17, 2008
Cast: Rishi, Urvashi Sharma, Rajeev Kanakala, Harshavardhan, Shanti Chandra, Giri etc
My Review:
Story:
Nisha (Urvashi Sharma) is haunted by bizarre sounds and a voice that keeps warning that would kill her. Terrified Nisha seeks help from her neighbor SriRam (Rishi) who is a photojournalist with National Geographic Channel. He takes her to a psychiatrist (Harshavardhan) and diagnosis reveals that Nisha’s condition is normal. However, docs come to conclusion that she might be suffering from schizophrenia. On other hand, Nisha reveals that the voice she keeps listening is similar to that of Shankar whom she met on a trip to an island. Now, Nisha, Sriram and the psychiatrist set for finding Shankar in an island forest. After settling in a hotel in the jungle, they meet an eccentric person named Rajeev (Rajeev Kanakala). The rest of the drama is unraveling the suspense of how Nisha is connected with Rajeev, Shankar and others.
Performances:
Bollywood actress Urvashi Sharma makes the debut but she is okay. Rishi is perfectly suited for his role and he does his best. Rajeev Kanakala brings energy to the movie. In fact, his entry brings the momentum into the story. Shanti Chandra who is also producer of the movie looks like a cardboard without any expressions. Harsha Vardhan as psychiatrist tries to provide comic relief. His dialogues are not that effective though. Cinematography movie is brilliant. Cinematography by Senthil Kumar and newcomer Bhaskar Shyamala is top rate and excellent. Balloon lights (for even lighting in the night effect) are used for some scenes and even in the normal lights the camerawork is in high standards. The interesting point is that both of the cameramen have similar style of lighting and work. Vijaya Kurakala’s recording is good but at times it is loud and gimmickry. Director Shekkar Suri fails big time.
Technical Side And Analysis:
Sekhar Suri (now changed spell to Shekkar Suri) comes with super natural/ para normal thriller ‘Three’. His last film, A Film By Aravind, was a hit. After a gap of three years, he directs this thriller. Let’s get to the straight. Three is farce with pretentious technical standards. It is uninteresting, illogical, and superficial. Well, the film’s theme of ‘past life regression’ (a therapy that allows persons to go into past life and know their identity in gata janma) might be novel but the outcome is silly and illogical. Especially the climax is more like a comedy than a thriller. Other than excellent cinematography and rerecording (at times it is loud and gimmickry), Three is a wasted attempt.
The director heavily indulges in gimmickry and creates unnecessary tension for normal scenes like hero drinking water, taking a nap, etc.
The entire story is set in night but we don’t know whether it happens in one night or series of nights. Except the main characters, you don’t find any other people in the movie as if the forest is completely deserted. There are so-many loopholes in the script and the theme defies the logic. The entire first half was an futile exercise with no story.
Final Analysis:
Thrillers either should scare you or should have ‘solid script’ with logic. But Three lacks both of them. All the while, Sekhar Suri tries to mislead the audiences with his weird camera angles making us to believe something extraordinary would happen in the end but actually it ends up with silly and illogical. A very superficial film with high technical standards. If you believe ‘past life theories’ and para natural forces, you might find it is okay but those who have rational thinking would surely despise it.
1 comment:
If one believes in death and ghost, one should also believe in reincarnation(rebirth). And If one doesn't believe in neither of the things, one should not go and watch supernatural thrillers or any such kind.
When our brain is not enough to think about logics and magics, we are not supposed to blame something as "no logic". Analyze more or may be watch again.
I do agree, there are few flaws in the movie direction. But you talking about camera angles and small episodes, thats really silly.
There should be suspense maintained in all possible scenes and have the audience attention, for suspense movies. Else whats the use? Unnecessary suspense? If we think logically, suspense itself is an unnecessary thing. Suspense mostly leads to "happening unexpected things", isn't it?
Directing a suspense thriller is one of the toughest jobs for any director. Though 'A film by arvind' was commercially a flop, it was technically a hit one. Ala aa movie tho success aina oka director, chinna chinna logics miss avuthaaru antey, oka 10-20% cases lo possibility undi, climax ye logic ledhu antunnaaru. Why don't you catch up with Mr Sekhar Suri, and see what logics he meant behind the scenes, episodes, roles and dialogs
PS: You enabled 'comment moderation', you really not ready to get a comment on your reviews :-)One who is sure what one is doing will never hide oneself from the facts. Hope you understand what I meant.
PS2: Mee HOMAM and KEKA reviews maatram appropriate ga unnaai anipinchindi naaku.
PS3: Your review composing style is very beautiful
Uma Madhavi
(A Googler)
madhuthehoney@gmail.com
Post a Comment