Bahubali 2: Whole Thing! Scene By Scene! Part 1, Opening Credits and Song

Welcome to my tedious and time consuming scene by scene coverage of Bahubali 2!  I already put up my No Spoilers review, if you want something to read while you wait to buy tickets.  And my SPOILERS review, if you want something quick to read to think about what you just saw.  This is something else, the intensive graduate-level-film-class scene by scene breakdown and discussion which will last for a couple weeks and only get a few very dedicated readers.  But I haven’t done one of these since Raees, and Bahubali seemed like an appropriate time to dust off the old analytical skills.

First, Saaho teaser!  Well, actually, first in my theater was a biryani ad.  And then a Saaho teaser.  It’s fascinating, because this is such a clear platform, given by the Bahubali team, to send Prabhas’ career off onto another level.  Which, fair enough!  He gave up more time and energy than anyone else besides Rajamouli to making this film work.  And he gave up more valuable time.  Rajamouli, as a director and general behind the scenes person, has decades to establish himself and keep working.  Prabhas, as a male star, has maybe ten years between 22 and 32 to prove himself, and then another ten years between 32 and 40 at his creative and popularity peak.  He gave up almost half that time, 4 years, to just these two films.  Even Rana was able to take a break long enough to produce and star in The Ghazi Attack.  If Prabhas can’t hit the ground running as soon as his Bahubali commitments are over, he will have sacrificed his whole career for these movies.  So it’s only right that his first follow up film is attached directly to the Bahubali “reels”, capitalizing on as much of that audience as possible.  Even to the point of allowing him to announce the start of the film by declaring “It’s Showtime”.

 

And then it really is showtime!  I love this movie, but looking back on it, the opening credits gave me a certain shiver down the spine that nothing else in the film matched.  And that is because they were calling back to the first film, to that original experience of this world.

They use a CGI effect I am sure I have seen before, I just can’t remember where.  It makes the images look like old porcelain, cracking and breaking with little brown lines.  It’s a perfect effect for this images, making them look like stories from legends, beloved family legends, like Peter Rabbit and Cinderella.  The kind that are made into tiny porcelain figures to keep in your kitchen, not bit stone statues.

The brown lines and cracking, that is also brilliant.  It gives them a flavor of nostalgia, of the kind of thing you would find in an attic when you were little.  And also of impermanence.  That this film, Bahubali 1, is over and in the past.  Remember it, but let it go.

Only I don’t want to let it go!  I want those images with the dramatic thrumming music below them to last and last.  To let me luxuriate in my memories.  I don’t think that was the intended purpose, I think it was to remind us of the plot of the last film, and then move us on with fresh eyes to this one.

One other thing I find interesting about this sequence, to me an old porcelain figure is so familiar, I can feel it under my fingers just looking at those images.  But, is it that familiar in India?  I honestly don’t know!  Do Grandma’s have figurine sets and does your mother give you an old porcelain doll when you are little?  Or is that just an American thing?  Is my overly nostalgic response just a freak of my particular background, was this supposed to be merely an interesting effect, not calling back to specific moment in childhood?

Image result for old porcelain doll cracked finish

(does this image make you a little spooked, or does it make you go “aw, Grandma’s attic”?  Or both?)

And with that, I am finally finished with the opening credits!  After less than 700 words!  On to the film proper.  Which I find I don’t remember as well as the opening credits, to my shame.  I believe that we start with a voice over, explaining that after Ramya had declared Prabhas the heir, it was time for the annual ceremony in which the daughter-in-law of the royal house carried hot coals on her head to set alit the idol of a demon at the temple. We see Ramya striding forward without faltering, slow but steady.  Her hair is coming loose, her face is dusty, and the camera pans down to show that her feet are cracked and bloody.  The people (shot of crowd) look shocked at her suffering, but are warned not to try to help, as she must do it on her own.  So instead they shower flower petals on her path, softening the ground where he feet step.  Which is the first time I figured out the point of the flower petals in path thing!  It’s not just to look pretty, it’s to make dirt roads smell and feel easier on your feet.

Also, this made me think about my South American history class in college.  The European propaganda had all these stories about the evil Mayans and their human sacrifices.  But what my teacher talked about was how it was the Mayan rulers and Priests who suffered the most horrifying torture.  Because they were “Gods”, and therefore their suffering would directly benefit the people.  If some random peasant slit his tongue and let his blood flow into the ground, it wouldn’t make any difference.  It had to be the central figure of civilization, so that the benefits would shower down on the whole country.  Which is the same thing that is happening here.  Ramya gets to live in a palace and have a lot of gold jewelry and so on.  But she is also asked to suffer, for the good of everyone, in a way that a peasant woman would never have to.  Which is a theme that keeps coming up through out the film, the price of being a Kshastriya.

Image result for aztec blood rituals

(Ow ow ow ow ow!)

Right, Ramya keeps walking, and suddenly a CGI elephant breaks loose!  The CGI in this movie isn’t bad.  It’s not the best, it’s a little jerky at times, but it’s not bad.  What makes it great is the imagination behind it.  It’s not just that they have an elephant, it’s what they do with the elephant, if you see what I mean.

Suddenly, as the elephant roars towards Ramya, the huge wooden doors start vibrating.  The pole holding them closed shatters.  A massive wooden platform bursts out from inside.  And, dragging it along, is revealed Prabhas!!!!!  He pulls it forward, single-handed, and blocks the elephants path.  Ramya keeps moving steadily forward, not concerned with either elephant or platform, and sure enough Prabhas stops the elephant before it can damage her, and places the platform so that she can walk underneath it and between its wheels without faltering.  The crowd murmurs in respect over how Ramya did not even pause, confident that the path would be cleared before her and faithful to her task.  This is the confidence she will lose in the rest of the film.

Once Ramya passes beneath, Prabhas leaps up the platform, and the camera follows him, revealing that it is carrying a massive statue of Ganesha.  Prabhas from the top of the statue showers down yellow powder on the elephant, calming and distracting him.  And then easily leaps up his trunk and onto his back.  Where he uses the elephant’s trunk to pull back his bow, and then shoots the arrow to set on fire the demons statue.

So many things to think about with this section!  Firstly, this is not the greatest opening.  The last film started with this immediately iconic image, of the baby held aloft over the raging river.  And, as I went into great detail to describe in my review, this isn’t just an arresting image, it’s a call to a subconscious level of human understanding.  The desire to protect a baby, the idea of carrying a baby away from danger, all of that is something we can understand without a lot of explanation.  But this opening, this is all intellectually based, not instinctive or emotional.  But then, this film doesn’t have to grab at our emotions to get our attention, we are already paying attention, and so we start with the message that the director wants us to get from the film.

There are 3 big messages going on in this section.  Firstly, the responsibility of a ruler to his/her people, the way Ramya is suffering and continuing on a path without hesitation is showing that.  A ruler has to be more perfect, and endure more, than any of his/her people.

Secondly, why Prabhas is named “Bahubali” instead of a more “kingly” name.  In the first film, we didn’t really see it, but in this movie it is shown over and over again that Prabhas likes getting his hands dirty, likes using his own strength and helping people.  He doesn’t rule like Ramya, or Rana.  They wear the fancy clothes and prefer to order others to do their dirty work.  At this moment, Ramya likes that Prabhas is this way, approves of it, and has faith that his “humble” behavior doesn’t make him any less of a king.  But later, her doubts will grow, she will be convinced that Prabhas is too human, too soft, and would be better in a lower role. That he is as uncontrolled and uncontrollable as this elephant.

And thirdly, Ganesha!  Not just “the elephant God” to create an amusing visual, but the God of placing and removing obstacles.  Which, again, creates an amusing visual in this moment.  That Prabhas places the statue as an obstacle to block the elephant.  Oh, and Ganesha is also a loyal son to his mother, created to serve Parvati.  But mostly, Ganesha is the God of obstacles.  And this entire film is about how obstacles are placed in the path of our hero.  Until they are finally overcome.

Image result for ganesh parvati

(Ganesha and his mother Parvati.  Also, hey! Porcelain figures.)

But Ganesha argues that sometimes obstacles are blessings.  Directing us towards a better path, or holding us back until the time is right.  Let’s say that Prabhas was crowned king, and married to Anushka, with no issues.  At some point, wouldn’t Ramya still have been frustrated with how Prabhas’ rulings conflicted with what she would have done?  Wouldn’t Rana still have been a thorn in his side?  Wouldn’t the seeds of dissension that went all the way back to the previous generation (when Rana’s father was passed over) still have caused problems?  Perhaps it is better this way, that Prabhas 2 was able to be raised away from all of this, and to return with no baggage, free and clear and happy.  Perhaps the “tragedy” of this film was really a blessing, as it made things happen later, but better.

Oh, and then there is a song.  It mixes images from the last film with this one.  Which is partly just lazy, but also important in tying together the different aspects of Prabhas 1.  We see him in battle from the end of the previous film.  Intercut with seeing his celebrations here, playing with children, picking flowers, gentle and kind and loving.  We have to understand that both aspects are there at the same time.  Again, it’s a little bit of a “Kshastriya” statement.  But also, again, a statement on how he might be perceived as a “bad” ruler.  Is it kingly to carry children, pick flowers, etc.?  And is just prowess in a battlefield what makes a king?  Ramya was confident in her choice at the end of the last film, that Prabhas proved himself to be both brave and also loving.  But in this film, we see how she starts to doubt that, if perhaps he is too close to the people, too soft, too loving.

 

Advertisements

37 thoughts on “Bahubali 2: Whole Thing! Scene By Scene! Part 1, Opening Credits and Song

  1. On the statues/doll comparison. No, there’s no comparable Indian tradition of porcelain dolls. Most dolls were made out of wood, then, as foreign products came in, the big deal was to have a “rubber doll” (plastic really, but this is what they were called).

    I didn’t even realize they were statues! I kept thinking, wait, why do they look so lifeless, before realizing we weren’t looking at the actual actors, but their representations. I didn’t notice any cracks. I actually thought they were statues from the Bahubali museum that is in the works. But I do agree it was a brilliant way to reprise the earlier film.

    Like

  2. I love long, in-depth analyses! And especially for something as visual as Baahubali, where there is so much to pick apart and (I can only imagine) so much care put into the smallest details. With all the Baahubali tie-ins coming out, what I really want the most is Rajamouli actually coming out and writing say, a guide to the world and/or the movie’s creation (I know there’s going to be a museum, but a book is just so much more accessible!)

    – I agree Prabhas probably deserves the publicity for Saaho after giving up so much for Baahubali: but that said, I also thought it was really clever of his team to balance both tying into Baahubali and keeping him from being typecast for the rest of his career. So Saaho (to me, at least) is evocative of “Saahore Baahubali” and like you said, Prabhas literally gets to introduce the main feature to us; but at the same time, his hairstyle is different and this is definitely a sci-fi movie instead of another epic drama.

    – I think I’ve already gushed over the credits enough, ha. But I also appreciate how each character gets their most iconic scene from the first movie represented (except Prabhas 2, who gets two. But arguably the second one is just so the audience remembers that Rana had a son who Prabhas 2 killed, so they aren’t confused when Anushka later throws the severed head at Rana.)

    -The bit about the tradition reminds me of why I liked it so much. Admittedly, after having seen the poster where Anushka has the staff and the headdress of coals, as well as the mention that it’s done every 26 years, you could easily guess it was going to come back up in the climax. But the most satisfying part was that it’s traditionally performed by the daughter-in-law of the royal house of Mahishmati. Arguably Anushka is treated terribly as a daughter-in-law; we cut to her mid-to-late pregnancy soon after the wedding, but her comments make it seem like Ramya hasn’t spoken or interacted with either of them. I assume she wasn’t at the wedding, either, but I guess we can’t be sure because the camera has such a tight focus on Prabhas and Anushka (a neat visual shorthand that I appreciate). Even when Ramya does show up to the baby shower, she delivers the most half-hearted speech ever, basically “well, I guess you’re going to give birth to the heir, so don’t die before the baby’s out, but otherwise I couldn’t be bothered”! Anushka being the one to carry out the tradition is satisfying not only because then she gets to finish off Rana, but also because it gives a sense of her finally getting the position she deserves and never got for so long.

    – I also remember thinking that Ramya gets an amazing hero entry in this movie, and so too do Prabhas, Anushka, even Satyaraj and Nasser (Nasser when he lashes out and destroys the pillar; Satyaraj when he puts him in his place soon after). It doesn’t have to be a big violent piece, and in a lot of cases it’s not, but everyone gets one except Rana, in fact, who spends his first scene just sitting in a chair, seething, and considering killing his mother before backing off (that time, at least.) Compared to the first movie, where he has that bull-taming scene, it’s downright boring, and honestly, Rana has no big impressive scenes until almost the end of the flashback; but just like in the first movie, when he seemed an unstoppable terrifying force of evil, here we see he’s just crippled by his insecurity and jealousy and by the end of the movie, plain pathetic.

    – I absolutely agree with your interpretation of the big hero entry and Saahore Baahubali and how they’re a little more subdued, so as to introduce the themes of the film instead of the characters themselves. But I would add this too – the other parts that I think are important are the elephant as symbol of kingship (particularly when subdued but not killed by the hero – see Jodha Akbar, Rudramadevi), the fall of turmeric (an auspicious sign), and the white umbrella (also kingship). All of these emphasize over and over again that Prabhas is the rightful king, and we see Rana either not associated with them or having the symbols themselves reject him. Rana gets offered elephants as a gift by Ramya a little later and he refuses them; but we never see Rana ride on an elephant, not even to his own coronation, unlike Prabhas does here. This all comes to a head during the actual coronation where just as Prabhas swears his oath (which, as they used to trick us all, has all the responsibilities of things a king should do instead of Rana’s recited and rather shallow oath) and the people cheer him, an elephant trumpets in salute (echoed in the first movie’s interval scene), turmeric falls again, and the white umbrella breaks off Rana’s chair and falls towards Prabhas. This is on par with the world’s most ridiculously precise accidental fall of sindoor in Mujhe Dosti Karogi as a blatant sign that the gods themselves want Prabhas to be king, and I think that’s why Ramya looks terrified as she watches.

    -Finally, I kind of half-agree with you in that even without Anushka, or Rana and Nasser’s scheming, eventually Ramya and Prabhas would have been at odds. I actually doubt that Prabhas would have been truly happy as the king; as you say, he’s happier out in the middle of the action, in the midst of his people, making their lives better. Ramya on the other hand stays apart, but (at least at the beginning) is able to make the tough, impartial decisions that a ruler has to, that Prabhas would have struggled with. What’s more, even in Saahore Baahubali when he’s the king-to-be, Prabhas is sleeping while Ramya still takes care of all the business of the state, and he’s perfectly happy to let her. I’d argue it’s only in Dandalayya, when he is separated from Ramya and makes his own “kingdom” away from her, that he really comes into his own potential as a great king – I’m not sure he would have if Ramya had still been making decisions for him, or if he had had to adhere to the model of kingship that she laid out for him.

    Can’t wait for Part 2!

    Like

    • Thank goodness somebody will be reading these posts! They usually role out over the course of about 2 weeks, and the readers slowly drift away as they just get sick of reading about the same movie over and over again. But going through minute by minute is the only way I can be sure I’m not missing anything!

      -Good point about how different he looks! It’s still an epic hero introduction, it’s still violent, but it’s a totally different look and feel from Baahubali. Although, I also think it is slightly different than the kind of roles he did before Baahubali. I barely know Telugu films, but I’ve seen a handful of Prabhas pictures, and he was always the hero, but kind of a fun relaxed sort of her, not “Epic!” the way this movie seems to be setting him up. So, again, building on the Bahubali buzz while doing something a little different.

      -you’re right about the head! I loved that scene in the original, but having it come back for the first time way way at the end of this movie would be a bit surprising. Oh, and that’s another moment that made me think how Anushka is as much or more the hero than Prabhas 1 and 2. She is the first person to be seen in the attacking group, and she gets to throw the head.

      -Yes! I was thinking the burning coals were set up to be something Tamannah would do, as a symbol of how the new generation is taking over, and how she is accepted. But after watching the whole rest of the movie, it became clear that it would be much more important for Anushka to have that moment.

      -Now you’ve got me thinking about Rana’s entry. Really, it’s perfect for his character in this movie. He is always scheming, always encouraging others to do or say what he wants to do or say, but keeping his own hands clean.

      -Excellent points about the kingship symbols! I caught the umbrella falling, but I thought it was just that Rana shouldn’t have an umbrella, I missed that it was falling towards Prabhas. Also, hey! Another Mujshe Dosti Karoge lover!

      -Prabhas as ruler keeps reminding me of Abraham Lincoln. Which is an odd connection to make, but I grew up in Lincoln’s hometown, so I’m always thinking of Lincoln. Anyway, history has judged Lincoln to be one of the wisest and best presidents. But when he was alive, he was constantly being undervalued, even by his allies. Because he was too “folksy”, he liked to work with his hands, he was just as happy talking to some random folks at a dry goods store as with the leading powers in the country. That’s, I think, the problem between Prabhas and Ramya. Prabhas likes people, he likes being with people, he likes doing things. None of that takes away from his ability to make fair judgements and wise plans and so on. But it is a very different style from Ramya, who has always kept herself apart from people. If Prabhas and Ramya has been joint rulers, I could see Prabhas unhappily bowing to her decision and her plans over and over again. And eventually there would either be a conflict between them, or maybe he would just never come into his own. In the next section I will get into how odd it is that Ramya sends him away immediately before his coronation. And Prabhas questions that decision, but ultimately goes along with it. Which is what could have kept happening, Ramya making decisions and bulldozing his objections, until Prabhas never really gets a chance to be his own man.

      Like

      • Well, fortunately or unfortunately, I will most likely be there until the bitter end so you will have at least one reader!
        – Ooh, you’re right about Anushka literally leading the forces against Rana — I got distracted by the telescope in that scene, but yes, it’s very much her battle on a personal level instead of anyone else’s. I was also a little disappointed about how easily she got recaptured, but considering she just spent more than two decades living in a cage, she’d be somewhat malnourished and out of shape! (Or you could make the argument that she let herself be recaptured, to move the battle back to the city where she had always planned for Rana to die.)
        – Well, going by in-universe chronology, Tamannah will get to do the burning coals thing in about 26 years or so! Though she does technically get to do a dry run when she’s escorting/guarding Anushka, so I think that’s worth something!
        – “He is always scheming, always encouraging others to do or say what he wants to do or say, but keeping his own hands clean.”
        Yes, exactly — technically, before witnesses, he tells his dad he’s drunk when Nasser suggests killing Ramya but somewhere by the end, he’s on board with it. I have no doubt that he told everyone who wasn’t present that Ramya died in a tragic accident and he has no idea what happened to her or Prabhas’s kid, it’s so very sad….
        – Re: Ramya and Prabhas ruling together – yeah, I think eventually it would have been a total disaster, and I lean slightly more towards a Prabhas-who-never-met-Anushka actually just going along with whatever Ramya said. It’s actually Anushka who gets him to vocalize his thoughts about what the law/kingship should be, rather than what Ramya wants him to be. Which is another thing that separates this from a usual mother-in-law/daughter-in-law friction story – both Anushka’s and Ramya’s influences on Prabhas are positive, Anushka’s because it leads him into becoming his own man, and Ramya’s because she gave him the basic ethical/moral background that he relies on. If it hadn’t been for Rana and Nasser, Prabhas would likely have found his own way, shaped by both of them and the better for it. The tragedy, like you said in your first post, is completely because of the scheming male characters, not the women (who are both notably way more forthright and transparent than the male characters, in contrast with negative female stereotypes.)

        Like

        • -Another Sita parallel! According to some interpretations, allowing herself to be captured in order to bring about the final battle.

          -I did like that she was one of the people escorting Anushka. It wasn’t as good as an actual conversation between them,but it was something.

          -Rana’s character is such a great combination of massive physical power, and scheming. You see his intro, and you assume that he defeated Prabhas 1 in some big mano-a-mano (sp?) fight. And then it turns out it was all passive and mental.

          -Really, the right thing would have been for Ramya to let Prabhas 1 be coronated ASAP, once she had made the decision, and then removed herself immediately and gone to wander the world. What made it all turn bitter was when she tried to hold on to power when she was no longer needed.

          Like

          • I don’t know if Ramya could have brought herself to wander the world – it absolutely would be the right thing to do, especially as by the point she has tested Prabhas enough to know he has the knowledge and warrior skills and good instincts to be a great king who doesn’t need her longer, but by that point I feel she put so much of her identity into being the power behind the throne that there was nothing else in her life but that. Even narratively, as soon as she gives up her power and position to take the baby and run, she dies almost immediately afterwards. There is literally no Ramya without Mahishmati and her responsibility to it.

            Like

          • I think that might have been part of her instinctive conflict with Anushka. She saw her taking her place. Not as the woman in Prabhas’ life, but as the power behind the throne, the wise advisor and strong personality and so on. Ramya would have probably picked out a nice docile bride for Prabhas, someone who would “tell him fairy tales” and keep him happy, but leave Ramya to be his conscience.

            Like

          • Adding to Avani’s comments and what Margaret had talked about us noticing Mahishmati’s flaws in the second movie, I think the way Sivagami is presented to the audience metaphorically represents the state of Mahishmati. We start off with her death, and at this point the city is in Rana’s control subjected to his tyranny. In the second half of the first movie. Mahishmati is this wonderful happy home of Prabhas 1, and Sivagami is his perfect strong mother. Only in this movie do we see Sivagami cracking and realise that Mahishmati’s laws (v/s Dharma debate), the barbaric policy of guilty until proven otherwise along with the entire system of Kattappa* having to be blindly obedient is terribly flawed. It is a gradual decline, by the time Sivagami falls to Rana, so does Mahishmati.
            *I wish they had addressed Kattapa’s slavery in his last scene with Rana’s dad, by him rejecting his cruel king’s whims and choosing to do the right thing (Dharma) instead of following the law as his ancestors. I thought it was too convenient that Ramya’s final act proclaiming Prabhas 2 as rightful king gave Kattappa kind of an easy out, instead of him making a conscious decision.

            Like

          • On your last point, I fixed that! In the deleted scenes I made up for the film, I free Kattappa along with fixing all the other problems. Or “fixing” “problems”. Because I feel like the film works fine as it is, it just seems like there are additional scenes we should have/could have scene as well.

            Like

      • Beautifully written. Exact thoughts not a word here or there I had as an avid reader of chandamama and later Amar Chitra katha. I felt all the movie told us was bout the brave courageous righteous people of Bharat.

        Like

    • Oh yay! I’m so glad! Both that you saw it, and that I’ll have someone reading my tedious detailed posts.

      On Mon, May 1, 2017 at 5:46 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

  3. I love reading these since I feel like I’m able to notice a lot more layers in the movie. I thought you wouldn’t begin this until next week after you watched a second time.

    That biryani ad was really funny 🙂
    Prabhas did have those more “epic hero” type movies but they either haven’t done well or turned out to be really bad movies. For example, I think Rebel can be considered as one of those movies and it’s like the worst Prabhas movie that I’ve seen. But I do think Baahubali will make a huge difference for Prabhas in terms of fan following and popularity, and Saaho is definitely going to benefit. I would say that before Baahubali, Prabhas is like Ajay Devgn while Mahesh Babu, Pawan Kalyan, and Jr. NTR are like the 3 Khans. I mean like Ajay Devgn has a large loyal following but not at the same level as the Khans but at the same time not as small as a Ranbir. I’m curious to see how well Saaho does. Especially since the producers are spending 150 crores on a movie with a director who’s only made a movie with a 4 crore budget before. These producers, UV Creations, are Prabhas’s cousins and childhood friends and they’ve previously made Mirchi with Prabhas. One sentiment in the Telugu industry is that any actor who works with Rajamouli ends up with a flop in their next movie.

    Good point about Ganesha being the God of Obstacles, I never thought about that actually.

    Like

    • Ganesha being the God of Obstacles was one of the first things I learned about Hinduism, and one of my favorite things. That sometimes it is good not just to have obstacles removed, but to have them placed in front of us.

      Rebel was terrible! That’s probably why I ended up watching it. Not that I thought “I want to see a terrible movie!”, but that a friend had the DVD because it was on sale and lent it to me. And no doubt it was on sale because no one wanted to buy it.

      I really loved Mirchi though, and thought Prabhas was used very well there. So I have high hopes for him working with those creators again.

      On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:02 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

      • From what I learned, the Rebel interval fight is really popular among Prabhas fans. I’ve even seen a couple recreation videos on Twitter. But I really don’t like any part of the movie. I think it was the only flop out of Prabhas’s movies since Darling came out.

        I really like Mirchi but it’s been a long time since I’ve seen it. It’s one of the few action movies where I actually enjoy the fight scenes quite a bit! Yeah, UV creations has made a couple of other smaller-budget movies while waiting for Prabhas again and they’ve done quite well for themselves. They are primarily known to make stylish and entertaining movies.

        What do you think about Mr. Perfect? I think it’s tied with Mirchi as my favorite non-Baahubali Prabhas movie.

        Like

        • I think Mr. Perfect has a really interesting concept for a love story. That it’s never going to be “perfect”, and that’s kind of the beauty of it, making adjustments and making sacrifices. There’s a review of it somewhere in my archives.

          My favorite non-Bahubali Prabhas movie, really my favorite non-Bahubali Telugu movie, is Bijjugaddu. And I don’t even have a good reason why. I think the directing is really interesting, with split screens and freeze frames and cool stuff like that. And the plot is amusingly over the top. And Prabhas and Trisha make an entertaining central couple. But it’s also just a bit of a “one of the first Telugu movies I really saw so I am sentimental about it” thing.

          On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 10:38 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

          >

          Like

          • Oh really, I’ll check it out then 🙂

            I like Bujjigadu and I think it’s a fun movie but at the same time it’s kind of forgettable for me. Have you seen Ek Niranjan which is the second movie in the Puri Jagannadh-Prabhas combination? I don’t like it as much as Bujjigadu but it’s similarly fun.

            Like

          • Prabhas and KANGANA RANAUT??????? Oh I HAVE to see this! Especially to see Kangana, always-ready-to-find-an-insult, in a Puri Jaganaddh movie!

            On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 9:57 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

            >

            Like

          • Yup, it has Kangana in it. She was asked about how it was to work with Prabhas after Baahubali came out, and she said that they never got along and that they always used to fight. I can’t imagine someone not getting along with Prabhas! Along with Kangana, Ek Niranjan also has Sonu Sood as the villain 🙂

            Like

          • Based on the most recent stories, I can’t imagine someone NOT fighting with Kangana. It must have been a really “unstoppable force meets immovable object” kind of situation.

            On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 8:34 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

            >

            Like

  4. Apropos of nothing, really, but i just saw this tweet from Rajamouli which I think explains the secret of his success:

    rajamouli ss‏Verified account @ssrajamouli 19 May 2014

    If the audience are expecting something,
    Fulfil it..
    But If they predict something,
    Surprise them..

    Liked by 1 person

    • So cool! And that’s exactly where his success is, he fulfilled everything we expected but in a way we could never predict.

      On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 11:04 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:

      >

      Like

  5. Pingback: Bahubali 2 Full Detailed Summary Part 3: Enter Anushka! – dontcallitbollywood

  6. Pingback: Bahubali 2 Scene by Scene Detailed Analysis: Part 4! Anushka and Prabhas’ Unique Romance – dontcallitbollywood

  7. Pingback: Bahubali 2 Detailed Summary (SPOILERS): Part 5, The Love Triangle Begins! – dontcallitbollywood

  8. Pingback: Bahubali 2 Detailed Scene by Scene Summary Part 6: Most Romantic Battle Scene Ever – dontcallitbollywood

  9. Pingback: Bahubali 2 Complete Summary in Detail Part 2: Let’s Go on a Road Trip! – dontcallitbollywood

  10. Pingback: Bahubali Posts Index – dontcallitbollywood

  11. This is an outstanding analysis!! I am thoroughly impressed by your understanding of “kshatriya dharma (duty of a kshatriya)” and also the puranic knowledge of Parvati and Ganesha being the God of obstacles!! Kudos to you. The value that a kshatriya has to uphold is personal sacrifice
    for the welfare of the people of the kingdom and you have expounded on this beautifully. Thank you for bringing up the great Mayan example. I have great respect for the Mayan culture.
    One small thing I want to mention is that the ritual of the burning demon has a very important purpose which is to rid the kingdom of the evils of drought. It was actually mentioned in both telugu and hindi versions when Kattappa while narrating says that the royal household’s daughter-in-law has to burn the drought demon (“karuvu rakshasudu” in telugu and “akaal rakshas” in hindi). Drought was and is a huge deal in India. India primarily depends on agriculture and agriculture depends on monsoon rains which are unpredictable and hence, drought had to power to make a very prosperous kingdom to starving and dying in a matter of couple of years if there were no monsoons. I know a story of a small king in olden times in a small region in Tamil Nadu, India. He had a wealthy and prosperous kingdom which was hit by drought. He used all his treasure to feed his people for two years but the drought did not end. He went to a Shiva temple and prayed and took a sword and cut-off his own head as a sacrifice to bring rains. Within tow months there were heavy rains and kingdom was saved. I don’t know if this is a true story or a fairy-tale but it definitely highlights how sacrificing a kshatriya should be and also how threatening is drought in India.
    Also, there is a deep intense meaning in the lyrics of the song oka praanam played in the credits scene. It is mentioned here: http://chaibisket.com/oka-praanam-lyrics-explained/ . Unfortunately this website is in telugu (script is english but language is telugu). If you have someone who knows telugu and make him/her translate it, your mind will be blown!!! Believe me.

    Like

  12. You ask:
    “One other thing I find interesting about this sequence, to me an old porcelain figure is so familiar, I can feel it under my fingers just looking at those images. But, is it that familiar in India? I honestly don’t know! Do Grandma’s have figurine sets and does your mother give you an old porcelain doll when you are little? Or is that just an American thing? Is my overly nostalgic response just a freak of my particular background, was this supposed to be merely an interesting effect, not calling back to specific moment in childhood?”

    Things that are passed down generations are kept locked away or displayed in glass cases. BUT the sentiment you’re talking about isn’t unfamiliar. The opening sequence, to me, felt like flipping through old family albums. Where every picture has been seen a thousand times before and every time it is viewed again, the people you’re going through the album with tell you the story behind the picture in great detail using the same exact words they have used thousands of times before. You hear the story and in a flash you remember every time you heard it before like a flashback that ties all those previous times together and in an instance you see yourself travelling through time. I loved the nostalgic frozen in time visuals in the opening.

    Like

  13. About Amarendra’s intro in this film. i dont know if people watching it in other languages felt the songs in the original Telugu contributed massively to the advancement of the story’s themes but when i first read the translation for Saahore I literally felt cheated. The Hindi lyrics just do not establish the bond between the mom and adoptive son the way the original ones do.

    He is an orphan. He needs everyone to love him. He doesnt have a father figure (Uncle king hates him) so he makes Kattappa his mama and father figure. The love he feels for his mother is the same one he feels for his people. Sivagami understands that which is why she decides to send him on the tour of the kingdom. Would she do that if she was worried he’s already too folksy? Probably not. She wants him to understand the way the people live even more than he does at that point. He has already seen the kingdom before (trip to Singapuram in BB1) but he was just one of the princes then. He now needs to look at things like a ruler.

    But he ends up going to Kuntala, an independent kingdom, for a girl he fancies. This proves that Sivagami was right in sending him on the tour because he’s still kind of a kid (just 25-26?) and he needs the exposure and a dose of the real world. He expects everyone to love him and he “cutes” his way a lot. Manohari in BB1 is where Bhallala is the responsible adult and the child Amarendra is distracting everyone with booze and dance. His courting of Devasena is also him “cute-ing”. He didn’t know the kingdom would be attacked. What was his game plan with Devasena had the attack not happened??

    In the court clashes between Devasena and Sivagami, amarendra is the child parroting what his mother taught him and he’s just going “but mom, that’s not what YOU said before”. He’s backtalking to his mom and winning the argument using the rules she gave him. No wonder she’s so pissed at him! And like a child, he couldn’t even fathom that his mother could betray him or be angry at him “for real”.

    Like

    • i like that phrase, “cute-ing” his way through things. As I saw it, he really did have more going on under the surface the whole time, that soft childlike exterior was just his personality. But he was always capable of standing up to others and so on, they just didn’t realize it because he didn’t have the same “I have said it, it is the truth” kind of attitude that his mother and brother did.

      That’s what shakes Ramya, that she sees him as having been corrupted by Anushka, because she doesn’t believe he could ever think for himself.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s