Mahaveeryar Malayalam Film Review - A Promising Experiment Gone Terribly Wrong

Spoiler Alert : Details of the climax are revealed below, so if you don’t want spoilers, please don’t read.

I avoid writing bad reviews for films, because whether or not I liked the movie, it involves the hard work of a lot of people.  So when I do end up writing a bad review, then something about the film, usually its plot, has enraged me to the extent that I need to respond.

Mahaveeryar is one such film. With two of Malayalam’s favorite actors, Nivin Pauly and Asif Ali in the lead, both of whom have given us some wonderful movies to cherish, I had high hopes for this film. The work of director Abrid Shine in the past has also been promising. 

This movie is an attempt at an experimental storytelling method that uses satire to poke fun at societal structure. The trailer promised a courtroom drama intertwined with intriguing elements of a mythological story involving time travel. And the first half of the movie did live up to the hype. It was funny, entertaining and also managed to generate a certain intrigue of a supernatural nature.

However, the second half of the film was a train wreck, though it started off on the right track. Depicting a king with his posse as the defendant in front of a judge in a modern day court of law was a unique and interesting idea. There were plenty of comedic opportunities that this situation provided, some of which were handled well, generating laughs from the audience. But mostly, the story lagged in the second half, forcing me to sit up from a very comfy lying position, covered in a blanket and pillow on my recliner lounge seat in the theater, because I didn’t wanna fall asleep. 

The absurdity depicted on screen kept increasing as the second half went on. Where the movie totally lost me was after the judge, played by Sidhique, gives his verdict on the accusations brought against the king by a young woman and her father, who accuse the king of kidnapping and torturing the girl. The verdict required the girl to provide tears for the king’s needs and the shenanigans that unfolded in the “court of law” led by the “judge” was insanity! 

I can imagine the discussion amongst the directorial team on this film regarding the portrayal of the climax scene, which I assume went something like this:

Person 1: “We need to make the girl cry in the climax. What’s the best way to do it?”

Person 2: “Let’s pinch her.”

Person 3: “I have a better idea. Let’s rip her blouse off and make her stand topless in front of the whole court.”

Person 1: “Awesome! Great idea! And now that she’s topless, let’s whip her bare back.”

Person 2: “Yeah, that’s good. But what if she doesn’t cry because of any of this? We need a unique way of making a woman cry.”

Person 3: “How about we tickle her with a feather?”

Person 1: “Huh? You think a woman who didn’t cry after being disrobed in front of a whole courtroom and has her back covered in whip marks will cry because of tickling?”

Person 2: “Hmm, maybe we can give it a sexual undertone. Instead of tickling the woman with a feather, how about if she is caressed with a feather? Arousal would have to result in tears, right?”

Person 3: “Who knows? But we can show a woman being caressed with a feather on the big screen for a good 10 mins. The audience would love it.”

Person 1: “Yeah, she’s already half naked, so that’s a good idea. Let’s show the joy on her face and the teardrops welling up in her eyes as the feathering intensifies.”

Person 2: “How many teardrops do you think a woman would produce when caressed with a feather?”

Person 3: “A few, probably around 10 max.”

Person 1: “No, if caressed properly, I think a woman could give a cup full of tears, maybe even more.”

Person 2: “That sounds about right! Let’s do it.”

What the hell kind of bullshit nonsense are they depicting in the climax? Did neither the director, the script writer or any of the actors who accepted this movie think that maybe having the judge order the disrobing of a woman in a court of law with the purpose of acquiring her tears would be inappropriate? I understand that this is satire, but still wonder if no one could come up with a less creepy way to make a woman cry?!! 

Very disappointed to see this star studded cast stoop so low. I don’t know how female audiences with even an ounce of self respect could avoid cringing at the happenings that were unfolding on the screen. 

The filmmaker also never successfully ties together the two stories or reveals the verdict of Nivin Pauly’s theft case. And the entire time travel aspect is limited to one scene where there is a flash of light and the king and his posse abruptly appear in the courtroom with no explanation whatsoever. Overall, I felt that there were a lot of loose ends.

Even though I applaud the filmmaker’s attempt at making an experimental satirical film, the lasting impression I will have of this movie is the feeling of disgust as a judge orders the disrobing of a woman in a courtroom full of men, followed by the feeling of wanting to puke, as I watched a man almost kinkily caressing a strange woman’s bare torso with a large feather, and the caressed woman simultaneously laughing and crying a bucket full of tears.

In the first half of the movie, there is a funny reference stating that a character had his “kili poyi” (Malayalam slang for someone who has lost their mind) when he became intoxicated after taking some special drugs given to him by Nivin Pauly’s character, “Apoornananda”. Watching the happenings in the climax, I wonder if the filmmakers had also taken Apoornananda’s special drugs and had their “kili poyi” while they were making the second half and especially, the climax of the movie. Now that would explain a lot!!