Eega (*ing A CGI Housefly, Samantha Prabhu, Nani, Sudeep)

jjake61: Here is my blog post:

tollywoodismybollywood.blogspot.com/2012/07/eega-dir-ss-rajamouli.html

A perfect blend of live action and top rate animation. I loved the tiny and at the same time gargantuan world Eega had to maneuver in. Really creatively done. The movie was very funny and had some emotional and tension filled moments.

It is a very unique film and a complete visual treat. I can't wait for other BW-ers to see it and start posting.

Prem Rogue: I loved it. Endlessly inventive and very funny. The CGI was very well-done too. Not just the fly, but the birds attacking him, and many other sequences. The initial love story is set up in the typically cursory style, but that's fine, since there's so much more after that, and Samantha isn't merely a bystander to what the fly is doing. Sudeep plays the villain with the perfect mix of menace and comically eye-bulging frustration.

Between Maryada Ramanna and Eega, it is clear that Rajamouli is one of the few Indian directors who knows how to make comedic films with serious stories, without letting the seriousness fatally overtake the film.

Zombeaner and I saw it on a 35mm print with no subs. I wonder if ANY of the prints shown in the US were subtitled. Not that you'll need them. Like JJake said, they're not necessary.

Dil Bert: If you're saying it's not repetitive and quickly exhausts its welcome, I can try to see it this weekend.

zombeaner: It didn't for me. The sequences with the fly are all very inventive, and do not run together at all. I can't wait to see it again, subs or no subs.

bollywhirl: I totally agree. I loved every second of Eega - the humour and threat are so well balanced, it was suprisingly gripping. And I appreciated Rajamouli's excellent judgement about when and how to employ the various effects.

For everyone tossing up whether a fly can really carry a whole film - YES! See it if you get a chance!

More ramblings at cinemachaat.wordpress.com/2012/07/07/eega/

I completely agree with everyone else -- I really enjoyed it. I don't usually enjoy animated movies very much; I generally just don't connect with them the way I would with a film that wasn't animated. I thought this one was really clever, though.

NewLaura: We didn't have subtitles, either, but I agree that you don't need them. A lot of the scenes don't really even have any dialog.

They had 3 or 4 prints at my multiplex, and they were all sold out last night, I think. As usual, there were lots of children in the audience, but this time it was really adorable to hear all of their happy shrieks and giggling. And there was a LOT of shrieking from women in the audience when Nani appeared.  

I was surprised and disappointed at the time that Nani disappeared so quickly. He really just had a cameo in the film. But I have to hand it to Rajamouli (and to Nani for taking the small role) -- I think it was the right thing to do. I expected Nani to have a continuing role, either in flashbacks or thought/dream sequences or something. But maybe the animation worked better for me because the fly wasn't talking or being merged with the human version in any way? I never thought about it before, but maybe having an animated animal character have a human voice is part of what usually alienates me from the character and film.


Dil Bert: I'm sorry y'all had to see it without subs. We...didn't have them either. The movie was fairly entertaining, but without subs it felt a bit drawn out and repetitive (i.e. fly attacks man, fly gets away, repeat until the end). Not in any way saying it's a bad film; I'd still recommend seeing it with reasonable expectations.

If you go see it, be sure to bring earplugs. The theater I saw it at had the soundtrack painfully loud, and several young children got upset during the film. Without earplugs I would have had to get up and leave.

"I was surprised and disappointed at the time that Nani disappeared so quickly." This was another part which felt too long to me (but probably wouldn't with subs). Too much dialogue from comedy friend.

The training sequence was quite good, but I particularly liked the dance routine at the end using an iPhone for the stage display in front of which the fly did well-known dance moves.

There were all these elaborate attacks in the film, but why couldn't the fly just coat itself in poison and fly down Sudeep's throat?

The 'black magic' sequence with the enchanted birds was a nice touch.

NewLaura: Anyone know what the beginning and ending voice overs were? Was a child generally asking his father to tell them a story? Was he asking him to tell the story of when dad met mom?

I loved the dance sequence bit. And the bit where the camera focused on the intro footstep of the fly.

Dil Bert: idlebrain.com/news/2000march20/eega-sreekanthd.html

"1. Titles – a girl asking her father (Rajamouli’s voice over) to tell a story"

Zombeaner: That last little Rajamouli greatest hits dance mix was pretty great. I didn't mention it in my review because Twitch's main audience wouldn't have understood it at all.

NewLaura: I liked that Samantha was making miniatures and how that fit in with the fly later.

I don't know anything about special effects and all that, but I appreciated the restraint with which they were used in Eega (as compared to, say, Ra.One).

[re: the storytelling voiceover] Thanks -- that's pretty cool it was Rajamouli's voice.

[re: Dil Bert's idea of the fly poisoning Sudeep] Ha, now that you mention it, that was one typical annoying fly behavior they didn't use: landing on your food. He could have landed in bacteria, then walked around in the villain's food, making him sick, etc. 

Dil Bert: Perhaps that wouldn't have been sufficiently heroic.

Sam made him little steel hooves; it's a shame she couldn't have made him a tiny ornate axe a la many recent Telugu films. OTOH maybe Sudeep would have seen the fly posing with it and made the connection to the miniature art he was gifted.

NewLaura: Yes, but they did manage to work in some impalings! Wouldn't be a true Telugu film without an impaling.

NewLaura: [re: the idea of making Sudeep sick with bacteria] Good point. It wouldn't look very heroic to have the hero walking around in $%!^ to collect the bacteria.

Prem Rogue: [re: fly with axe] He couldn't hold objects in the traditional sense. He could hook his arms around the handle of the little basket with weights in it, but holding an axe would have been difficult.

Dil Bert: Yes, but Sam could have made a version of one of those steel hooves with an axe attached to it.  

[re: the idea of making Sudeep sick with bacteria] The fly did gather up those poison pellets and drop them in the drink.

I think SSR missed a trick by not having Sam make the fly a little shirt or bandanna so he could pop it.