Kamal A2Z: Guna
Editor’s Note:Here we have yet another new author, Zero. Please welcome!
On the Kamal A2Z series, we have ‘G’ this fortnight. If anyone wants to reminisce about Guru or Geraftaar, e-mail your entries! The next fortnight, we’ll move onto ‘H’ for Hey Ram; but let’s not forget Hare Radha Hare Krishna too.
A 2-minute long tracking shot takes us through a lower-end brothel in Hyderabad and ends showing Guna on the terrace (shot from below with ‘godly’ respect), standing on one leg. It is a Pournami (full moon day) and Guna is awaiting the arrival of Abhirami. He sees a bride going through the Jaanavaasa ceremony and mistakes her for Abhirami.
So starts Guna, one of the best films to have come out of Tamil Cinema in the last decade. This was the first of the twin efforts (the other being the great Mahanadhi) of Kamal Haasan with his friend Santhana Bharathi wielding the megaphone. Kamal packs in a superb team (Venu for cinematography, Balakumaran for dialogues, and of course Raaja). Yes, it is not a flawless film. But, it is the kind of film that stays on in your mind.
The film looks at this man Guna, with unconditional sympathy; how he is doomed in this big bad world; and in that sense, it is a cynical film. Guna is a madman (an obsessional psychoneurotic) who is told, by a fellow asylum-inmate (Ananthu), that Abhirami (the Goddess) will marry him on a full moon day and will take him out of all his miseries. There is this sense of godliness attributed to him in the movie — he can unlock anything like cars, safes etc. and help his uncle in his thefts. He wants to be cleansed (in the famous scene Guna explaining to the doctor about how Abhirami would ‘cleanse’ him). He unconditionally believes that he is God, and that only Abhirami can cleanse him. He believes in uniting with Abhirami, the Goddess (an imaginatory sequence shows the formation of the Lingam). So he kidnaps her; takes her along with him to a deserted church on top of a hill and explains his love for her, and their destiny.
The screenplay of the film – written by Saab John, a Kamal Haasan associate who also wrote Chanakyan and played the role of Narasimhan is Kuruthippunal) is of the highest standards as far as Tamil Cinema goes. It’s expertly woven, richly textured, and is subtle and doesn’t scream for our attention. Not to forget the insightful and yet realistic dialogues by Balakumaran. Ilaiyaraaja gives a great background score (most of the BGM pieces during chase sequences are liberally borrowed from Kamal Haasan’s two earlier flicks Aboorva Sagodharargal and MMKR). Kamal Haasan comes up with a truly wonderful performance, with the rest of the cast chipping in accordingly.
What is striking is that the film doesn’t melodramatize the state of Guna. It doesn’t put him in fake glory. It looks at him with a detached sympathy. Guna is after all, a madman and it never bats an eyelid to put forth the fact to us. He says he is in love with Abhirami and that she can never go leaving him behind. But, he still ties her giving a new reason each time.
Apart from this, the movie also works as a traditional thriller with an (albeit heavily stereo-typed) villain, CBI in chase, and lots of money at stake. As in every other KH film, the subtle humour is unmissable.
Looking at the mythological connections of the story, the key point in the film is how the usual assumed gender roles are reversed here. The mythology has this story of Parvathi, the Goddess, who takes human form because of a curse and eventually re-unites with Lord Shiva. We also have other examples like Meera and Aandaal. In Guna, the roles are reversed. It’s Guna who has taken an earthly form and yearning to unite with Abhirami. This is apparent in many scenes like the following:
- Guna tying the thaali around his neck.
- Guna looking reverently at ‘his’ thaali after Abhirami walks out of the car hanging at the edge of a mountain.
- Guna waiting for Abhirami to complete her meal.
- Or when Abhirami kisses Guna.
The story also owes the main thread of obsession towards the Goddess to the story of Abhirama Bhattar, who wrote Abhirami Anthathi. In a beautiful sequence, Rohini and Guna playfully pretend to be bees and buzz around in air (ending with the bees ‘kissing’ each other), and Abhirami asks Guna to tie the thaali (mangalsutra), Guna says they have to wait till Pournami. But, she says, “Nila aagasuthalaiya irukku? Manasula irukku. Manasu thaan nila. Neranja naal” (”Is the moon in the sky? It’s in the heart. The heart is the moon. Filled (?) day”)! Apart from serving as the point of culmination of their love, it also directly refers to the mythology itself. In the story of Abhirama Bhattar, Abhirami turns an Amavasai (new moon day) into a Pournami by throwing her ear-ring into the sky. Guna recollects the mythological incident, and says, “Aamaam! Abhirami sonna Pournami thaan” (”Yes! If Abhiram says, it is a full moon day”)!
And when the movie ends (with that divine and strangely soothing theme playing in the background), we see the deserted church in the bird’s eye view and the glowing moon behind it. It is the next Pournami (thus completing the cycle) and Guna has joined hands with his Abhirami. Or has he?
December 19th, 2007 at 4:47 am
great review…. great flashback…. GUNA classic
December 19th, 2007 at 4:49 am
aaaah! aaaaah! abiraami abiraami
dont mistake! its a reaction after reading the author’s poetic and classic review for one of the most underrated film.
But in reality i hear this film did well in some parts, not sure anyways.
Great Film, whose story is liberally borrowed(in parts) in kollywood, like Sethu - where the hero kidnaps heroine(for a short time), kathal kondein ect
at forumhub, there is lot more discussed on this movie, like the atheist angle, abiraami song ect…
December 19th, 2007 at 6:26 am
This was the first movie in which Kamal surprised me by his knowledge of religious stuff and openness to take up such themes, when I knew all along that he was an atheist.
December 19th, 2007 at 9:23 am
I’ve read this brilliant piece before. This film is a treasure. What I like most about it is the mythological angle, and mainly Guna’s condition, and thankfully the film doesn’t cry out loud. Someone talked about “Rain man”, but Kamal’s layered act here is unparalleled!
The film looks at this man Guna, with unconditional sympathy; how he is doomed in this big bad world; and in that sense, it is a cynical film. Guna is a madman (an obsessional psychoneurotic) who is told, by a fellow asylum-inmate (Ananthu), that Abhirami (the Goddess) will marry him on a full sense of godliness attributed to him in the movie — he can unlock anything like cars, safes etc. and help his uncle in his thefts. He wants to be cleansed (in the famous scene Guna explaining to the doctor about how Abhirami would ‘cleanse’ him). He unconditionally believes that he is God, and that only Abhirami can cleanse him. This could be read as a “denotative” to Kamal himself. Kamal (Guna) is mentored by Ananthu (playing a metaphorical character), to a state of being blissfully obsessed about the art of cinema (Abhirami).
December 19th, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Wow, HAL, I wouldn’t be surprised if Kamal intended it that way!
December 19th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
HAL!
well i was imagining the famous scene like kamal was walking around and saying..”Aah, intha cinema asingam, kuthupaattu asingam, heroines thoppul asingam, producer’s cinema-arivu azhukku, elaathayum maathanum… maruthanaayagam edukkanum…hollywood poganum. oscar,oscar, oscar…”
December 19th, 2007 at 6:54 pm
Superb review Zero! It has been ages since I watched the movie and your post brings it all back. One part that still catches my attention is the idea to place Guna in the brothel setting itself. That Guna was himself born of a prostitute reminds me of ‘Original Sin’. Perhpas an allusion to the sin with which we are all born and the salvation we all yearn in the form an ‘Abirami’?
December 19th, 2007 at 8:25 pm
Kannannn, I think it’s made meta-physical here for a reason. In the other psychologically traumatized character in “Aalavandhaan”, Nanda kumar makes himself a paranoid over the period. The character also chose his death voluntarily! These are in some ways “opposite” as much as being slightly similar.
Also the brothel is one of the most realistic and unapologetic from Indian cinema. After the excellent opening credits with the memorable BGM, the silence, the dark clouds cover the full moon, Guna on one leg, the camera swiftly moves to a window with shadows of love-making couple in the lit room, men watch the erotic dance on a open hall, gambling in a small closed room, clients leave (one speaks in hindi, the other in telugu - mali eppudu osthaaru?) The first significantly long dialogue (After some brilliant snippets of the area with the fluid tracking shot) of the film : kavala padatha, idhu AIDs illa, naan irukken Dr Madasaamy…naan solren ‘la..Penicillin irukkura varaikkum..eppadi AIDS varrom? (though not in verbatim, this speaks volumes about the “doctor”, and the ‘then’ awareness of the disease) Tour-de-force shot which precisely defines what “motion pictures” represent!
December 19th, 2007 at 9:44 pm
[…] Kamal A2Z: Guna […]
December 20th, 2007 at 12:48 am
Beautiful Post Zero !
Though I was aware of the lore, I didn’t connect it with “Abiraami sonnaa pournami dhaan”. Lovely. btw do u know the lines/translation of “punniyam seythanamE manamE” ?
The Godness aspect makes the film very fascinating. Rosie mentions it first in the film - that she is ‘only’ human. “Amma sethuttaanga maadu” is when Guna mentions his ‘difference’ (a precursor to Manidhar uNarndhu koLLa). Janakaraj mentions it in a devious half praise: ” naan senjaa thappu….nee senjaa ? …..nee paadhi saami illayaa ?”. (Kamal’s reaction is lovely - who doesn’t love flattery).
Kumar at the Forumhub used to underline how this film documented the lack of tolerance for people who are even marginally different from the mainstream. So the derisive “you are different” could have morphed into the delusional “I am different”. I even suspect the hand of some self-helpisms from a certain psychiatist.
I also like to see Guna in conjuction with Mahanadhi as an critique of escapism. Our tradition makes the divine aspirations legitimate, indeed something to yearn for. To leave the mess and go to the hills, escapism masquerading as vanaprastham.
The delusion of uniqueness, the arrogance of knowledge, pride about living on a plane much higher than what was expected of us given our circumstances are vices we may all be guilty of. Or even vices we wish to be guilty of (to quote Charlie Kaufman from Adaptation: “I could be the only screnwriter who knows to play the oboe”). If you persist with that, the curse is you tend to believe it yourself. Your opinion of yourself is completely untainted by reality. A reality you prefer to turn away from.
So, Guna’s death “in reality” may not be heroic, tragic or romantic. It may just be plain ugly. He manages to have you tied down by the earnestness of his self-deception. So much so that you wish to consider his death heroic, tragic or romantic.
Interesting angle HAL. I would go further and say it may be about the impossibility of perfection at all. If the artist and viewer are aesthetically on the same line perhaps the creation of a film will be redundant. If they are not, the creation will be futile. And the process of creation is just absolutely peripheral : “Abiraami uLLa irukku..ezhuththellAm veLiya irukku”. One of my all time favourite dialogues in Tamil Film History.
December 20th, 2007 at 1:10 am
So the derisive “you are different” could have morphed into the delusional “I am different”.
Very well put Prabhu Ram!! Kamal in one of his interviews after the movie’s release talked about how Abirami is an obsession for Guna. I think it is similar to the obsession we all have for different things. The obsession of the brothel visitors for women and the obsession of Janakaraj and co. for money. So, why single out Guna for his obsession? It is also my view that in all the mess, it is finally Abirami who emerges victorious, free from obsession and willing to live for and believe in Guna. The truly liberated soul.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:11 am
The word ‘Guna’ stands for character or quality. And the movie is about a real “character”!
I loved the long scene with the doctor - nice camera work to match Kamal’s fluency. I can’t think of any (OK, except Sivaji Ganesan himself) other tamil actor who could have done that scene that powerfully.
Kamal’s dark colored skin drew another parallel to Sivaji, who employed this while playing sympathetic and unfortunate characters in a few of his movies.
Great concept and a good story but felt it was short of its potential due to the poor way the story evolved through the movie. Kamal carried the movie but a better director would have produced a marvel.
December 20th, 2007 at 2:58 am
PR, you should have done a post instead of commenting!
December 20th, 2007 at 9:33 am
Thanks, everyone.
Randramble,
Kamal’s reading of religions and their philosophies is well-grounded to say the least. His atheism doesn’t come off as a pet peeve of sorts he has on the ways of religion.
HAL,
Yes, I thought Ananthu playing the friend, philosopher and guide of Guna in the film was suggestive of their real-life equation, but to buy into that reading any further with respect to the motifs of the film would be a stretch, I think.
Prabhu Ram,
Yes, it touches upon how the marginal people are pushed to the very end. (And, it’s a superb point that you make about how the derisive “you are different” could morph into the delusional “I am different.”) What the film effectively documents is the delusional journey of a man who is simply unable to (”not allowed to” and “can’t” — they mean the same thing in real world) take himself for what he is. Above anything else, what I consider as important in the film is the way it shuns any kind of romanticising of Guna’s condition. The film takes an unflinching view of the protagonist and the kind of nonexistent salvation he’s looking for. Indeed, in reality, there’s nothing romantic about Guna’s journey and the salvation he attempts to attain through his death. (It’s deeply ironic that many tend to romanticise this salvation of his, applauding the film for its depiction of “divine” love of Guna for Abhirami, which is “pure” and devoid of all the “asingam” he finds in his world.)
Kannan,
Yes, it’s a very interesting angle. By placing his “origin” in that sort of place, the film makes us spontaneously understand what kind of salvation Guna is looking for. And, of course, this can also be seen as the ‘bare-it-all’ version of “the virgin birth.”
December 20th, 2007 at 12:31 pm
It’s deeply ironic that many tend to romanticise this salvation of his, applauding the film for its depiction of “divine” love of Guna for Abhirami, which is “pure” and devoid of all the “asingam” he finds in his world.)
This is more of a “Fetish” for the mainstream critics, and people alike.
December 21st, 2007 at 2:41 am
Nod to randramble,Kannan and Zero.
Hmmm….I felt it did romanticize it a bit, just to whack you on the head when you get home and chew on it. How can you argue with: “Appo yaen laddu kudthe ?” Touching, funny, absurd, endearing and lump-in-the-throat, all in one line !!?! This guy just messes me up.
December 21st, 2007 at 5:01 am
Prabhu Ram,
I think it (the film) observes Guna with sympathy, treating alike his untiring devotion to “Abhirami” and the glaring absurdities in his own life. The well-wishing characters that surround him offer a good “couterpoint” in this respect to his own quest for purity of the soul. It doesn’t have to “argue with” his viewpoint, does it have to?
December 21st, 2007 at 5:53 am
Not at all. That would have made it a very ‘ordinary’ film.
No artist desires to prove anything. Even things that are true can be proved - His Excellency Oscar Wilde
December 21st, 2007 at 9:32 am
Yes, and good old Wilde also said, “[n]o artist has ethical sympathies.” Actually, it’s in the Wilde-esque view of art that I consider Guna to be one of the most “even” films of Kamal; more “even” than some of the best “postnayaganist” films of Kamal.
December 22nd, 2007 at 7:08 am
Agree about the Guna being one of the more even films. When you have a moral agenda it gets odd (sheesh !) But Kamal, for instance manages to be quite unwilde in marrying aesthetics to his moral stances in (say) Mahanadhi. Quite a pardonable mannerism of style
btw PostnAyaganist, whattaword !
December 23rd, 2007 at 9:37 pm
Prabhu Ram,
And, ‘pardonable’ would be quite a presumptuous expression to use! We’re talking about one of the greatest films of Tamil cinema. Kamal’s art therein may be un-Wilde, but it isn’t really unwieldy.
Oh, by the by, yours truly is a postnayaganist; and, also a bigilist.
December 24th, 2007 at 6:41 am
Ah Zero , the quotes around pardonable were to indicate that I was using the word very contextually and shorn off its traditional meaning.
Wilde’s line is: ” An ethical sympathy in an artist is an unpardonable mannerism of style“. I was disagreeing with the word unpardonable , because ethical sympathies can get me Mahanadhis and Hey Rams.I should have put it better.
I liked the ‘unweildy’ one. When it comes to puns, I firmly belive in the pun groan-o-meter: the stronger the groan the better the pun.
btb, according to the clear material classifications enunciated by the Master, I am BiscOthist.
December 24th, 2007 at 8:04 am
Prabhu Ram,
Oh, I did get that you were just referring to Wilde’s own remark about such a “mannerism of style.” I was just trying to say (in rhetoric) that, sometimes, the “marriage” therein might be so seamless that the remark on it “in advance” would be somewhat unwarranted.
P.S. I’ve to admit that I don’t like puns that make people groan. And, I’m terribly disappointed that this one actually made you groan. I sincerely believe in puns with a concrete context; pun for the sake of pun is not that much fun.
P.P.S. It’s the same thing (as in the “ism of it” is the same), biskOthu or bigil. (Of course, that’s not to say biskOthu and bigil are the same, or that they could be so in an alternate world. They are different — even in a completely unique way, and that’s the very point.) I honour ‘bigilism’ as the official name of the doctrine because it comes off as a resounding rebuttal to nihilism.
December 24th, 2007 at 8:07 am
All,
Pardon the veer in the discussion, though I’d like to believe that it’s Kamal’s art that is still being discussed here.
On a more serious note, I apologise for starting off here with a recycled post. (I meant to add this note earlier, but didn’t manage to.)
December 24th, 2007 at 8:50 am
Zero,
Oho !
Re. bigil-biscothu, point taken. Though the philosophical standpoint the distinctions are crucial, for the sake of greater common good I dissolve my one member ism and join you in mainstream bigilism. Moreover, I like rebutaal its stands for. Very punny.
Ah ! Meant as a hearty compliment. This is why I should not say “why I like what I like”. Should leave that to pro-reviewers like you
And pun is its own argument I say. That juvenility is the closest Man can get to telling aging to sod-off.Unfortunately, the pun has been sub-classified under the joke category: which is restrictive. During my lifetime I’d like to see it move to its correct classification: poetry.
“varum…. varum…..vroomvroomvroomvroom” is just one example.
Ok, steered it back
December 25th, 2007 at 4:51 am
*yawn*