‘Draupathi’ movie review: A bland outing that has very few cherishable moments

Rishi Richard in ‘Draupathi’  

Watching Draupathi, I was reminded a bit of Bharath and Sandhya from Kadhal, a couple from a town trying to eke out a living in the big, bad city that’s full of crime and mischief mongers. Now, imagine if Bharath and Sandhya were a ‘fake couple’? Heck, what if Sandhya did not exist at all?

Sounds confusing? Draupathi is making a lot of noise on social media because of its caste-based connotation – and you’d be tempted to think so, going by the fiery dialogues in the trailer – but in essence, it is an average revenge tale that is built around a scam that not many people are aware of.

Director Mohan does a Murugadoss-style plot when he gets Prabhakaran, acting as a tea-seller in the premises of a registrar office, to approach the powers-that-be for a marriage certificate. On surface, it’s a simple scene, but a vital commentary on how things function in a registrar office.

  • Cast: Richard Rishi, Sheela, Karunas
  • Director: Mohan G
  • Storyline: A person accused of murdering his loved ones wants to take revenge

In another film, this would have served as the core plot to move things forward. But Draupathi seems to be least worried about the storyline, and rather wants to be a cheerleader for a certain community and pitting them against another.

While the first half primarily revolves around Prabhakaran (Rishi Richard, who looks so different from his Kadhal Virus days) and why he’s in the city doing what he is, we get a sneak peek into the ‘real hero’ Draupathi, after whom the film is named, only in the second. The performance is ordinary (Sheela plays Draupathi) but there’s still some satisfaction of seeing the lead woman get so much footage and relevance in a predominantly tepid revenge tale. She goes about life with courage and she shoots videos of injustice that she witnesses. It might come across as a case of Facebook-activism, but just to see someone in the rural hinterland shooting videos exposing inadequacies that she hopes would be seen far and wide, was heartening.

But then comes the director’s decision to prolong the flashback, which bogs down the film that has a tedious running time. The silambam sequences look out of place and the mandatory ‘farmers vs corporate’ issue that Kollywood has dealt with in 1618 films raises its ugly head yet again.

The climax court sequence, which seems to last an eternity, doesn’t help things either. And the end demand that is met by the court — something that everyone in the theatre cheered for — is something that ought to be the natural result of today’s times. That Draupathi chose to invest two and a half hours to make us see that change is quite farcical.

This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | May 7, 2021 5:11:14 PM |

Next Story