2.0 review: Shankar should focus more on story than technology, it is a 543 crore dud!

While watching the film, I was constantly recalling Sivaji directed by Shankar. The film loud, but still it was funny and interesting. Even Robot too was interesting. <i>2.0 </i>is dull and a drag

By Pragati Saxena

A film that says, “come my selfie lovers, I will set your screens on fire, proves to be a dud on the silver screen. Alas, so much money spent on making it seems wasted!

Shankar is back with 2.0 as a sequel to his film Robot (Enthiran). As is normal, you expect a huge larger than life spectacle from him. Well, that 2.0 is. And the underlining element of this supposed sci fi is the same as in every Indian film- good always wins over bad and there is always this struggle between the positive and negative elements in human world.

This film is no exception, only that it says simple things with lots and lots of special effects. But well, the magnificent 3D effects can be fascinating for children and through the movie you can actually tell kids the negative aspects of mobile phones. And a villain made of cell phones can be projected in children's minds to scare them away from the excessive use of and dependence on mobile phones.

Except this, the film unfortunately does nothing. That is our problem.

Our film directors often get rather swayed too much by technology--the very thing they are condemning through their film! Had the director paid more attention to the story and scientific details and complexities, the film could have been much more appealing. Remember Mad Max: Fury Road? The director of this amazing post apocalyptic film George Miller made this spectacular action with not much of special effect.

Well, let’s come back to 2.0. It unfolds the story of an environmentalist an ornithologist to be specific who wants to save birds from the radiation of cell phone towers. When he is not paid attention to he commits suicide and becomes a negative energy destroying all cell phone towers. Dr vashikaran revives Chitti to fight this birdman. But then its quite confusing-- who are we fighting? Are we fighting against those who want to save the environment, that too with artificial intelligence? The lip service to environment at the end by Dr Vashikaran sounds all the more offending.

Superstar Rajnikant has started looking old and worn out despite all the special effects. It's better that he now maintains his legend by staying away from films. He may have some future in films with the help of the BJP but not in films unfortunately.

Now we come to Akshay Kumar. The Hindi dubbing of his dialogues seems faulty and unimpressive. He seems weak as a staunch environmentalist fighting the system for birds, survival. The ‘mahvari’ (instead of maahvaari) speaking Akshay kumar should work more on his pronunciation as he is not even able to pronounce ornithologist properly. But he looks impressive as the villain - Pakshirajan

It's funny when the home minister calls the hero, robot Chitti an avatar. And the 'love connect’ between the two robots is sillier. Come on, we do not let two humans love in the name of caste, religion and community, how can we let the robots have fun!!

Then, in our country, where the government funding for scientific research has been cut almost by 50% in recent years, the state of the art vans with all the impressive equipments look ridiculous and unreal.

Well, funnier is when Dr Pakshirajan's spirit enters the positive Dr Vasikaran's body. But on screen the visual looks impressive, we should grant this much to the director. These are some redeeming moments of the otherwise a dull, drab and irrational so-called scientific fantasy. It's a super-hero movie gone dud.

In the end of this film we can just heave a long sigh and repeat what Pakshirajan says, “oh, Chitti, what a pity!”

For all the latest India News, Follow India Section.