Jailer Review (2023)

Why do we make films?

If we see from the beginning, when the Lumiere brothers found the camera for motion pictures , it was at that time a piece of technology which was something that could record reality. In the begining, the images shown primarily were images of daily life events like the working of firefighters etc. One of the most famous films of that time, a film called " Train Arriving At Station", which shocked the audience such that they ducked when train was shot arriving at the station as they thought it would crash into them.

Then we had George Melies, arguably one of the earliest "filmmaker" , who was before this, a magician and was fascinated by films when he saw the made by Lumiere Brothers (part of his life story is covered in Scorsese's Hugo). His films had him show magic through cinema and used deft editing to make his magic even more magical

Then The Soviet Revolution Of Cinema happened as the Soviets introduced the revolutionary Soviet Montage Theory. From there 99% of film-philes saw the power of editing and advocated editing as helpful in manipulating audiences, Andre Bazin, A French Critic, and one of the most revolutionary voices who could probably be called the Father Of Film Critisicm, advocated film as one of the best mediums to capture Reality, strongly advocating against editing and wrote that in the years to come "films wouldnt be of reality rather reality would be film".

And then we Have Jailer.

Whose mistake is it that, cheaply made useless ( Majority) Insta reels and an expensive industry making movies would gradually become the same? I struggle with this question, and when I see films like Jailer, that question becomes doubt, doubt becomes sadness and sadness becomes anger. Doubt about the future of cinema, sadness about its degradation to an Insta Reel ( or other short videos) and anger at the fact that at such a time , when we indeed must be beginning to initiate another French New Wave, we see a film which tries to present an age old story.

Now is that a problem? Not so when the form or the way the story is presented is interesting. But here we have a film, where the death of the protagonist's son doesnt have any noticeable impact on the family and the dead son's son goes to have ice cream after school with his grandfather, which is ofc our Rajni, still dashing and stylish and particularly well presented during the Tihar Jail Flashback. Anirudh is the second hero here with his absolutely brilliant bgm and songs karai ething the film along with Rajni's presence.

We then follow Muthuvel Pandian (Rajni) go on one of the strangest revenge journeys i have ever seen. I dont want to comment any more on this to not spoil the film but the same problem of Beast is present here to a smaller degree.

I know it seems like Im expecting an Iruvar from A Mass Film, but even then, we have a film like Maaveeran, which brilliantly mixed mass cinema and great writing.

Where is the aspiration that we so yearn from cinema?

Where is the life that we envily want to live? Is the future of cinema down to being similar to trashy, disposable Instagram reels or will we also make films that affect us?

Like the pain of the Makkal Padai? Like the formidable spirit of Manikandan raising his single child? Like the sadness of Kennedy suffering from a strict father? Or even the crisis that befells the Slum People Of Sathya?

Is It alright to make just passable mass films? Is it not our duty to pay respect to the cinema that we use? Is it not our mistake that we allow it be compared to short length entertainment videos because of our leniancy?

"Workinsgmen Of All Country! Unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains" said Karl Marx.

We must unite for cinema not because we have something to lose but because we may lose that which shows and tells to us what life itself is.