Why did Ramya do Lucky? Someone who’s been determining success, should have known better
It's finally being accepted, reluctantly though that Ramya's presence in a film other than arousing interest also adds commercial value to it. I say reluctantly because heroines are seldom given their due and producers prefer girls who're putty in their hands rather than professionals who can also perform. I spoke to a few trade pundits who opined that “Johnny Mera Naam” and “Siddlingu” did reasonably well only because of her. “If ‘Lucky' got a decent opening it was surely because of her,” said a veteran distributor. Ramya has come a long way but having reached here should she be seen in an enterprise like ‘Lucky'? She essays a role that's all style and no substance. She has to be prudent in her selection of films purely because she can no longer afford to disappoint her loyal fan following.
Now “Lucky” is a film that defies description. The keyword when a director sets out to make a love story is ‘different'. Dr. Suri's plot is wild. It's a triangle and the third angle is an adorable pug called Zuzu! Lucky, our protagonist is the typical hero, a vagabond with a bizarre beard donning clothes we wouldn't dare wear. He zooms around on his noisy bike literally stalking the heroine who has eyes only for her pug. Hero decides to transform, turns decent, gets a job in her company and occupies a plush pad opposite hers. When he professes love she coolly confesses that she loved his previous ‘avataar', but could not accept him because her pet couldn't stand him! Don't worry I'll not reveal the climax!
Yash is a talented young actor who tries too hard. He's loud and over the top. He should realise that bone and back breaking dance movements are passé. Ramya has little to do and obviously enjoys petting the pug rather than the hero. The onus of course lies on the director. His mistaken assumption is that audiences share his single digit IQ. He has absolutely no sense of story and is unable to sew plausible scenes into a sensible screenplay. The only solace is a lilting song pleasantly shot. Directors should realise that it's getting difficult by the day to woo audiences into theatres. I hear the producers of “Lucky” threw a party to celebrate the success of the film barely a week after its release despite the trade declaring it a ‘washout'. You're lucky if you haven't watched the film.
Siddarth, more in the news recently for his off-screen escapades has bounced back with “Kadhalil Sodhappuvadhu Yeppadi” (Love Failure) in Telugu. It's a film for and about the ‘Gen Text'. It's a predictable campus romance about a couple who meet, fight, fall in love, part and re-unite.
The film is attracting teenagers because it's easily identifiable. The hero looking into the camera and sharing his angst with audiences has struck a chord. The way teenager's love lives have been taken over by texting is well brought out. Nothing is overdone. The parallel track about the heroine's parents is not too well handled, but the rest of the film more than makes up for it.
Siddarth and the talented Amala Paul are excellent as the lead pair. Having co-produced the film and finishing it on a shoe-string budget, other than making a pleasant film, Siddarth is also laughing all the way to the bank.