Maareesan
Introduction
Maareesan is a character from the Ramayana who did take the form of a golden Deer to lure Lord Ram into the forest. In that regard, the new Tamil film by the same name has a rat and a snake reference at the start of the film, primarily related to the dynamics of the two protagonists in the film. In the scene, you see a captured rat finally finding a way to escape, only to enter a snake’s bill, presuming its accidental death. And that is the question that the drama wishes to pose – who is the rat in the drama? Who is the snake in the drama? Would the rat be eventually eaten by the snake? The questions remain alive even whilst you are introduced to the characters – Dhayalan (Fahadh Faasil) is a perennial thief committed to committing a crime the moment he exits the jail. Velayutham (Vadivelu) is a man suffering from dementia, wherein he can’t quite remember his son, the people around him, or his ATM number. Interestingly, the meta-reference with respect to the title of the film is an epitome of a shape-shifter (literally translated to Maareesan in Tamil), wherein a seemingly feel-good drama in the first hour transforms into a revenge saga of sorts. The only catch being that the transition is from something heartwarming to something so generic, that I didn’t feel like caring for its characters.
Story & Screenplay
The issue with Maareesan is with its inconsistent writing that tries to be ambitious beyond its simplicity in telling a heartfelt story. And it is essentially a story of the two halves here – the first half literally plays out like a feel-good Malayalam movie, only for it to transition into a generic commercial revenge saga by the end of it. The frothy undertones of the drama are only restricted to the first hour while coming with an expiry date, that doesn’t exactly come together in the second hour. The core of the movie is (and had to be) the emotional dynamic between Dhayalan and Velayutham. And it all begins with their chanced meeting at a rather odd setting and under mysterious circumstances.
The character of Dhayalan reminded me of Fafa’s character from Njan Prakashan (2018) or even Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum (2017), wherein he essayed the character of a compulsive thief. Within the first day of being set free, you see him stealing a mobile phone and a bike, only to signal his contingency plan with respect to his ‘profession’. Hence even when he encounters a secluded house in the middle of the night, the first thought that arises within him is that the house is calling him to rob it in a strange manner. There is only a hint of morality that you witness in his character, when he notices Velayutham chained in the house-hold.
Velayutham remains an interesting character too – he is apparently suffering from dementia and wishes to visit Palakkad first before switching to Thiruvannamalai. In a way, his clouted memory does pave way for a bond with Dhayalan too – even though it stems out of greed to begin with, wherein Velayutham requests Dhalayan to uncuff him in exchange for money. For Dhayalan, it is all about attaining the ATM pin to rob the riches of Velayutham. But even as the two interact with each other, you see a heartfelt bond developing which threatens to come across as a coming of age drama for the character of Dhayalan. And that ought to have been the crux of the drama too – given how Velayutham oscillates between believing Dhayalan to be his son, Kumar who is a cop himself on even hours, and Dhayalan on odd hours. It was a synergy between two characters like chalk and cheese – one who can’t make sense of his past, and the other who can’t make sense of his present with an uncertain future. But alas, the curse of the second hour sets in!
There is an interesting clue inserted almost to tease the audience on the proceedings of the second hour, whilst also doing its bit to prepare the viewers for a potential tonal shift in the drama. It circles back to the rat and snake story that did pique my interest. Having said that, the tonal shift itself felt like an after-thought from a writing standpoint – almost as if the writer did pivot towards a revenge saga because he may have hit a roadblock with the heartfelt nature of the first hour. It was a classic case of double-guessing the viewers’ interests, while following up with a drama so basic, that it just didn’t feel like the DNA of this film. It wasn’t like a systematic transition that Karthik Subbaraj had employed in Retro (2025) like a consistent theme through its frequent genre-shifting episodes. And that stalled the progress of the film here.
One of the biggest complaints that I had with the second hour was its hollow nature as far as the emotions are concerned. Yes, it does play out like a social thriller alright but because the backstory of Velayutham was kept under wraps for a while, it didn’t allow enough tine for an emotional connect to develop with the renewed antics of the character, when it is flipped. The flashback didn’t feel personal enough for me – desperately manipulating the social issue in order to tag it to the main conflict of Velayutham. Even the inclusion of the women conflict felt hacked (even though the reality tells you that it remains relevant), given how it was handled. The brutality was only felt in words but never transitioning into fury for the viewers.
The template of the second hour itself is generic – the chase gets bloodier, intentions are revealed, hammers are flung on the faces of a couple of characters, there are chains in use too, thereby leaving very little room for the heartfelt nature of the first hour. In one of the few heartfelt moments in the second hour, you see Dhayalan taking Velayutham to his home to meet his mother, that formulated a more grounded virtue that the drama wished to possess. And why this incident stood out is because the drama around that event felt grammatically outdated, even from a commercial standpoint.
This included the investigation that didn’t have any fizz or excitement to it, even with respect to the clues it wished to unravel. Even the finale twist didn’t hold on an emotional level (like, I wasn’t infuriated which was unlike what the drama wanted to make me feel), almost being convenient to the point while providing only little solace in the heartfelt bond of Dhayalan and Velayutham that atleast binds the narrative together. But if I were to look at it holistically speaking, the hollow nature of the second hour stood out like a sore thumb while overpowering the heartfelt nature of the first hour, thereby making for a screenplay that doesn’t quite come together.
Dialogues, Music & Direction
The dialogues capture the sweetness of the dynamic between the two protagonists wonderfully well. But on the other hand, I couldn’t help but think that the drama did enter into melodramatic space with respect to the social issue that was conveyed through the lines. The BGM is decent while doing just enough to hold your attention throughout the narrative. The cinematography is alright but I couldn’t help but feel the generic nature of the frames beyond the emotional connect between the two protagonists in the drama. For instance, it didn’t always play with light, or alternately make the surroundings, one of the characters in the film (remember, this is also a road movie). It just felt too generic, a trait that is synonymous with the film in the second hour.
The editing has regressive undertones to it simply because it doesn’t commit to the emotional core of the social issue that the drama stood for. There are multiple cuts injected, even as a character attacks another character with a hammer, almost cutting away to a long shot that dilutes the emotional connect of that particular scene (and this is a pattern that majorly spoils the fun in the second hour). Director Sudheesh Shankar doesn’t always allow the drama to land with its execution. While he does a pretty good job in establishing the bond between the characters, his transition from a feel-good drama to a social thriller is substandard, almost coming across as lazy filmmaking. I am pretty convinced that he didn’t fully commit to the written material of the second hour, that reflects in his reluctance for gore while not quite landing with the conflict or the investigation too. The direction is mid in the film that could have been so much more in the second hour.
Performances
The performances of actors around Vadivelu and Fahadh Faasil remain forgettable. To an extent, only Vivek Prasanna stands out outside the twin leads, but his casting also didn’t fully convince me about his backstory. But Vivek was sincere with his act. The film solely relies on the splendid performances of Vadivelu as Velayutham and Fahadh Faasil as Dhayalan. Interestingly, both these actors were on opposite sides of morality in the Tamil film Maamanman (2023), but share such a warm bond here. FaFa performs his character with a natural zing but with a measured energy that makes him affable to witness. Vadivelu is sincere and earnest while being competent with the portrayal of the emotional core of his character, and touching upon various shades with utmost ease. The two share a warm bond together, and if the film is watchable, then a large credit goes to these two brilliant performers.
Conclusion
Maareesan has left me conflicted. It boasts of a heartfelt first hour but a woefully generic second hour, anchored only by the brilliance of the Fafa-Vadivelu combo that makes the drama watchable. But if I were to look at it holistically, the drama didn’t fully work for me due to some inconsistent writing and lazy filmmaking. Available on Netflix.