Monday Malayalam: Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum Has Three Chains Each With a Different Value

Well that was an interesting movie!  Took me a really really long time to figure it out.  And then in the middle of the night I suddenly sat up and went “Of course!  It’s all about the 3 chains!”

I am so glad this was my friend Dina’s first Malayalam film in theaters.  Because it pretty much perfectly showed what is good about Malayalam film.  A plot that went nowhere and everywhere, staying in one location but bringing in multiple complications.  A sense of India as it is, with caste issues and middle-class couples struggling for money and living in tiny rooms and state busses as the main mode of transportation.  Songs you hardly notice because they support the story, not interrupt it.

And most of all, the actors!  I had primed Dina by telling her a little bit about Fahad Fazil’s background and his previous collaboration with this director and all that.  And then the movie stars, and Fahad is nowhere in sight.  And he doesn’t show up for a good 15-20 minutes.  And when he shows up, there is this amazing balance of him having clear star presence, but choosing to step back and make sure the story stays focused on the non-stars, the real life cops who play the police officers, the new discovery actress Nimisha Sajayan, and our real “hero” Suraj Venjaramoodu, venerable character actor who is good and well known, but not a “star” like Fahad.

This is something I just never see anywhere but Malayalam films.  An industry with legitimate real stars, not just popular actors like America has, but stars who are willing to step back and let the story shine.  And not a big exciting kind of story, but a small story about “small” people and small lives.

That’s the biggest point of this story.  Everything is very very small stakes.  But they are stakes that matter to these people.  And the question is, at what point do you give up your claim and at what point do you keep fighting.  And the answer is, not until the last possible moment.








We start with drama.  Drama that is quickly undercut.  Our hero Suraj is a truck driver (I think) who wakes up in his small house crowded with relatives, drives into the city for work, and sees a girl he sort of recognizes buying a pregnancy test.  He debates what to do, finally finds a mutual friend of himself and her father and tells the complete truth about what he saw.  The message is passed on to the father.  But before he can really react, he gets a call from home, he is going to be a grandfather!  There is a moment of panic, and then it is clarified that it is his older daughter, his married daughter home for a visit, who is pregnant and for him his younger daughter bought the test.

In a different movie, this would be the whole plot.  There would be a misunderstanding, Suraj would be somehow thought to be the baby’s father, multiple fight scenes, couple on the run, all of that.  And our heroine would be innocent in some complicated way although she appears guilty.

But in this movie, because it is a Malayalam film, everything is treated honestly and simply.  The story isn’t exaggerated in anyway and the misunderstanding is easily cleared up.  And then the plot moves on into the real drama, which comes about not through misunderstandings but through understandings.

(Same thing as the director’s last movie, Maheshinte Prathikaaran, you think it is going to be about some kind of revenge fight, but it’s just about life really)

Nimisha confronts Suraj and blames him.  He tries to talk to her and apologize, and she suggests they have a meal together.  And a romance blossoms.

Because I am slow, I didn’t pick up right away on all the undercurrents of this romance.  Suraj is clearly older than her, a lot older.  But I missed that he is also from a weaver/rope maker family, clearly less caste than her.  And I missed that the two of them are the only one’s from their family who take the ferry from the village to the town into work.  And I missed that our heroine is the only one working in her family, working at a store in town.

What I didn’t miss is that these are two lonely people desperate to make a connection.  Our hero is the older unmarried uncle type living in the family home.  Our heroine is young, but also old to be unmarried still.  Living a life of going back and forth and back and forth to work, and then home to a family where nothing seems to change.  They both leap at this accidental connection.  Almost the first thing they say to each other is an acknowledgement that both their families are looking for matches for them, and it is hard to find someone.  And Suraj is quick to follow up on her initial approach to him by trying to talk to her again.  While she is quick to build on that and suggest a date off the ferry, having sodas together.

This was all super sweet, but I didn’t realize how desperate it was, I didn’t see that it was also intercaste.  Which was foolish of me.  But luckily the film explained that later in a way even know-nothings like myself couldn’t miss.

(I’m not completely out of it, I did get that this romance was intercaste for instance.  But then Sonakshi was doing pottery in almost every other scene, so it was kind of hard to miss.)

And then we suddenly jump forward in time into the “real” film.  Or do we?  I’ll just tell it straight first.  While riding a bus, Nimitha falls asleep and Fahad, sitting behind her, sneaking clips and steals her chain.  When she wakes and feels it, she turns just in time to see him swallow it.  She makes a scene, the bus people join in, the bus stops at the lonely police station nearby to dump the problem on the police.  The police don’t want to deal with it, so they manage to convince Suraj and Nimitha to agree to a “compromise”, Fahad will stay at the station, have a big meal, and in the morning they can get the chain from his defecation.

Simple plot, simple solution.  But then it gets more complicated, without really moving forward at all.  Fahad does not defecate the chain, but the SI has found out that there is a potential robbery case at this sleepy little station and insists on them filing charges and forms and so on.  So now the police switch from trying to force a compromise to trying to force Suraj and Nimitha to commit to filing charges.   Fahad is still denying his guilt, so they finally take him in for an x-ray and confirm that the chain is inside him.  At which point Fahad admits his guilt and says his philosophy, he likes to hold out until the last possible minute before ever giving up.

That’s the point of the film.  All of these people are holding out until the last minute.  And this is what makes sense of the flashback we finally get of Suraj and Nimitha’s marriage.  Nimitha’s mother finds out about their romance and chases her, Nimitha runs and locks herself in the outhouse and declares that she loves Suraj.  And then her father comes home and it stops being kind of wacky and funny, but more realistic.  There is an amazing shot of her cowering in the corner of the outhouse when he suddenly bursts through the transom.

It’s very reminiscent of that famous sequence in Broken Blossoms, when Lillian Gish is hiding in the closet from her abusive father.  I don’t think it is a conscious homage, although it could be, but it could also be just what is real.  Fathers are suddenly and terrifyingly violent.  And daughter’s react by trying to lock themselves away, to hide, instead of fighting back.  And often, fathers become that angry because they feel like their daughters have been “stolen” from them, that their manhood and false pride is being questioned because their daughter has chosen someone they see as “lower” than themselves.

(Be warned, very disturbing to watch.  Also, Woo DW Griffith!  Horrible racist and inventor of the close up!)

Finally, when she is beaten so badly her ear is bleeding, Suraj and an older friend talk to her at work, tell her she has to leave, now, go to life with Suraj, marry him, and never go home again.  And so she does.

This is a romance of people who waited and waited and finally gave up.  Or gave in.  However you want to say it.  Two people so desperate and so lonely that they looked outside of their own caste for love.  And two people who waited until they had no other choice and then married.  And now they are waiting until the last minute, until nothing else is left, and then taking the bus to pawn her wedding necklace for money.

And the thing is, there is something noble in that!  To wait and wait and wait until the terrible intestinal tract of a situation you are in, pushes out a gold necklace.  As it were.

That is what Fahad’s character teaches the others, and the situation he creates teaches them, how far you can go before you give up.  And how sometimes giving up is how you win, how you find a better way.

Which is what brings me to the 3 gold chains.  Suraj and Nimitha were married with great joy.  Suraj’s family welcomes her to their tiny crowded house.  Their friend arranges garlands and meets them at the temple, Suraj delightedly fastens the gold chain around her neck.  But now, that joy is missing.  It has been a slow difficult marriage.  They left town so as not to embarrass her family and Suraj bought a tobacco field, planning to rent it out.  Only, there is no water.  They dug two wells, and nothing.  Now, with no money left, they are pawning her wedding chain for a third well.

(Of course, thanks to Dil and over the top Hindi films like that, my instinctive reaction was “no! Not the wedding chain!  Terrible things will happen!”)

The first reaction to the theft is to turn on each other.  Suraj blames her for being careless.  Nimitha hides her hurt, but then turns it on him later.  The argument revolves around the chain.  Nimitha declares that she doesn’t want it any more, not after it has gone through Fahad, she wants him to buy her a new one.  Suraj declares that she has to have it back, it is the chain he tied around her neck with love.  He no longer even wants to pawn it, they will sell some land in the home village to raise the money.

Later that night, Nimitha’s father calls it seems he might have forgiven them, but no.  He just wants to say that he will send them as much money as they need, so long as Suraj doesn’t come back to town as he would have to to sell his property.  They are an embarrassment to him.  Nimitha tearfully hangs up and says she doesn’t want his money.  And then Suraj gently pulls her down on his lap and strokes her head.  They next time we see them, Nimitha is wearing a wedding chain again, but not a gold one, a simple black thread.

The fight was because Suraj felt she was rejecting his love and only looking at the physical gold chain.  And Nimitha felt he was placing the chain above their love.  But the answer was to give up the chain.  To give up the monetary value altogether.  A black thread can be just as meaningful so long as it was tied with love.  They didn’t need to hold on to it any more, not to the significance this object used to hold.  It is their future, it is their well, it is nothing else.  Their love is more than that.

Meanwhile, at the police station, Alencier Ley Lopez is the A.S.I. in charge of their case.  He went from taking it slow and trying to get it over with, to avoid filing charges and get it resolved simply, to taking it more and more personally, the way Fahad just refused to break.  And Fahad could see he was getting to him, and used it.  He escaped, adding more stress to Alencier who is days away from retirement but could lose everything as punishment if he lets their only prisoner escape.  And when Fahad is recaptured, and an x-ray proves that the chain is no longer in his stomach, Fahad calmly accuses Alencier of “telling” him to run, and to leave the chain behind.  Alencier, we learned, had been already punished by this re-assignment to a tiny nothing police station for brutality.  But after his son died in a motorcycle accident, he seemed to leave that behind him.  Until Fahad brings it up again, brings up that ugliness so he can truly be done with it.

The best filmed scene of the movie is when the police corner Fahad in a file room, 4 men holding him down as the camera moves in and out of the struggle, and Alencier’s furious face.  It’s this knotted moving angry mass.  And Alencier finally comes out of it and over to the other side.

That night, while talking to his wife, he gives up.  Gives up his identity as a cop, gives up everything he has been holding on to.  He just needs to finish this case cleanly, hand in his report, and then he can take leave until his time is up, go visit his daughter and grandchildren, be done.  It’s time.

And then we have our 3rd chain.  The one that symbolizes just a gold chain that is evidence of a crime, nothing else.  Alencier buys it himself, and asks Suraj and Nimitha to accept it as their own, to clear his name and put Fahad in jail using this as evidence.  But Suraj and Nimitha don’t care, about any kind of a gold chain.  This is the first scene where we see Nimitha wearing her simple black chain, that is all they need.

Image result for black marriage thread south india

(It’s also clearly not that valuable of a chain.  Not in the grand scheme of gold jewelry.  Enough to pay for digging a well, but also something a police constable can easily buy from his savings)

But they eventually agree, because they see that this chain, the new gold chain, may be valueless to them, but it has value to Alencier.  And in their “wealth”, having let go of their own desires, Nimitha and Suraj can afford to help him.  And Fahad, our thief, discovers the same thing.  He is about to go to jail, he has nothing else to lose, which makes him generous.  And he tells them where he left their chain, during the brief moment he is alone with them.  It’s partly another tactic, to gain their sympathy before asking them to tell the truth in court, that this isn’t their chain.  But it’s also, I think, a little because he does like this couple.  This couple that was willing to give up their chain because they don’t need it any more, not if it will hurt others, now that they have the real value of their chain back.

And so Suraj gets his chain back, just in time to have it melted down so they can pay for another well.  Which hits water.  Their bad times are finally over.

Alencier leaves the station and plays with his granddaughter, out of uniform and smiling.  His bad times are over too.

And Fahad dictates a thank you note to Nimitha, his bad times finally over too, and walks away, disappearing into the humanity of India, to upset and ultimately bless the lives of other people throughout the country.  By showing them what really has value and what does not.


38 thoughts on “Monday Malayalam: Thondimuthalum Driksakshiyum Has Three Chains Each With a Different Value

  1. When I initially asked you for a one or two word review, what you said led me to believe this would be in the vein of the current wave of Malayalam “romance” films, simple and sweet, and for a while it was like that. But, as the situation with the police case kept getting more complicated, and brutal violence kept escalating, I kept debating whether I wanted to stay till the end or leave. I finally left during that beating in the file room. Listening to people screaming in agony is just not my thing.

    So at least I’m glad I can read the spoilers here and know the final resolution of the plot. But it also seems like there was at least another hour of film after that scene during which I left, making this a three hour film! (I left after two hours). Was it really that long? At any rate, I am very glad that I did leave when I did. This was not a film for me in terms of violence.

    I want to make two other points. One, your usage of actor’s names instead of characters’ names was extremely confusing here. Since the film’s credits were all in Malayalam, I didn’t know who was playing which role, so didn’t know who the “star” you were referring to was. In future, can you please consider a compromise (assuming you don’t want to come around to my perfectly reasonable suggestion to use character names throughout. 🙂 Seriously, it makes it very weird to read, for example, your review of Mr. Perfect where you refer to Prabhas being self-centered or whatever, right after you’ve kept referring to how noble and self-less “Prabhas” was in Bahubali 2. I found it very disorienting when reading the Mirchi review) — write the character names the first time you refer to them (with the actor’s name in parenthesis); then all subsequent references can be with the actors’ real names. I still don’t understand why you insist on doing this. As I said elsewhere, I think it is very disrespectful of the film and the actors’ work. And indeed you confirm that interpretation when you say that you don’t want to bother with the character names because the actors are just playing themselves, anyway, which is not the case even for the biggest of superstars.

    My second point is also a complaint of sorts. More and more in recent posts, I’ve been stumbling over your use of “America” for the U.S.A. I’m sure you’re aware of the irritation felt by inhabitants of the rest of the American continent when inhabitants of the U.S.A. appropriate this term to their exclusive use. While I don’t advocate such awkward terms as “U.S.ian”, most of the time you are talking about the country, not its people, so why not just say U.S.A.? Or U.S., or “the States”? So if you want to talk about film production or distribution practices of Hollywood, just say, “in the U.S. they do it this way.” Then the times when you are making a more personal statement, such as “As an American, I think/feel…”, you can keep to the more conventional usage. But since you don’t make those kind of statements very often, I don’t think they would bother me as much.


    • It was a long film indeed! I am jealous of your ability to walk out in the middle of a film. I didn’t want to leave this film, because I knew the director and knew it would take an interesting twist, but there have been other times I have wanted to walk out and I couldn’t make myself leave it undone.

      I will try to keep in mind the use of “America” versus USA, I’ve heard that comment before and it does make sense.

      For the actor’s names, you will just have to accept that this is how I write. For your comment about not knowing their names, that is kind of the point. I hope that in order to follow this review, you took a few seconds to google the cast list and learn who Fahad Fasil is. He is a major star in Malayalam cinema, as I said, so if I helped you to learn his name and face, that’s great! That’s one of the main reasons I do it, to help people learn names of actors, to take that one step further in film knowledge. Other readers learned Prabhas’ name, or other Telugu stars who you might already be familiar with, because they had to take the step of googling the cast for my other reviews. And, for the Malayalam audience that makes up the majority of the readers for my reviews, saying “Fahad” instead of his character name (which in this movie wouldn’t even be possible since he doesn’t have a name) is as clear as saying “Salman” for a Hindi film.

      I don’t find the use of an actor’s name disrespectful in this context, I can see how it might be confusing to someone unfamiliar with a particular film industry, but I just don’t see the insult. It’s clearer for the reader in many contexts, it helps you learn who these people are if you don’t know the,. That seems like it is perfectly respectful to me. It could be confusing if you read multiple reviews back to back, as you said, but in most cases that isn’t happening, and it might be helpful to be reminded who this actor is that you haven’t thought about for a while.

      On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:33 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:



  2. When they showed the flashback to their wedding, he ties a yellow thread around her neck, which is what everybody does (at least in the South) — the thread has been dipped in a turmeric paste, making it sacred. Then later on the pendants (which are what are tied during the wedding ceremony) are transferred to a gold chain. So in point of fact the “wedding chain” doesn’t have any symbolic value, just the pendants attached to it (which are also gold). I also kept thinking, while they were waiting for the guy to poop, who would even want a chain that’s been through that, and I expect that the couple would immediately sell it off for money and get a different chain for her to wear around her neck.


    • I think they had the fight about that in the part you would have seen? She doesn’t want it any more, wants him to buy her a new one, for exactly that reason. But he feels like that is rejecting their past.

      But yeah, in the end they just melt it down and sell it.

      On Mon, Jul 17, 2017 at 10:39 PM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:



  3. Good work.It takes some effort to write reviews for such films where it is not easy to figure out the central theme.I don’t think Sreeja wanted her husband to buy a new chain(maybe I missed it).According to me,she was furious with Fahad and was not ready for a compromise with him(In the station,Fahad offers to return the chain for 5000 rupees).But Suraj is a little tempted to the deal and that leads to their argument back home.


    • That’s the argument exactly! Only, Suraj wants to compromise, pay the money, get the chain. Nimitha wants to prosecute, to punish Fahad, doesn’t care about getting the chain back even if they are tied up in court for a year. Suraj responds with hurt that she doesn’t want the chain that he tied around her neck with love.

      And then the resolution is that we see Nimitha wearing the cheap chain to symbolize their love, and neither of them care about getting the chain back, or prosecuting, because they have made up their argument and that is more important.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Yes,they love each other so much and can’t be arguing for long.Also did you notice a difference in the malayalam the characters(except the couple and Alencier) spoke in the film?It is a Kasargode accent which is not used in many movies because not many are shot in Kasargode.It is a rather remote district in the state.


        • Were the police officers who were hired to play police officers from that district?

          On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:51 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:



          • Yes they were from Kasargode and Kannur,a neighbouring district which has pretty much the same slang.Thattathin Marayathu is set in Kannur.I’m from there as well.And yeah,they are real police officers.


          • Yes, they are. The movie was appreciated for that aspect as well.
            Fahad really is a director’s actor, isn’t he? No compromise when it comes to his character or how people will react to a ‘star’ going through the things he’s gone through in the film. Makes me respect him all the more!
            And thank you for the beautiful and insightful review!


          • Thank you for commenting! One of the things I like about Fahad is what varied kinds of roles he is willing to take, here he isn’t the “hero” in that he isn’t on screen for the majority of the film or a main character. And he also isn’t a “hero” in that he isn’t a very good person.

            On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 8:14 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:



    • Beautifully filmed! I was already planning to watch it, this just makes me more eager.

      On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 7:38 AM, dontcallitbollywood wrote:


      Liked by 1 person

  4. awesome review..made me want to watch the film again.
    2 scenes were really disturbing..but as a whole it was a feel good film for me. every character transformed to a better person in the end with a better understanding of life.and a graceful fahad fazil fading out to crowd generated some positive vibes.
    its always nice to see the real life of policemen , the way in which they interact with each other and with superior officers..they are really cool people . there were a lot of funny moments in the film. i am not sure whether subtitles are effective in translating humour.. but this film made me laugh more than by some recent comedy entertainers.
    director’s debut film maheshinte prathikaram is one of my all time favourite film. i wont say this one is as good as the first film..but still its a brilliant film…

    i watched ‘tiyaan’ too..and i didnt like it.. it had a good concept some good messages about secularism real meaning of hindu religion etcc…but as a film it was heavily disappointing.. overlong and is around 3 hours..and good amount of time is spent for build up and glorification of each character..too much slow motion and loud background music will test your patience,,characters were lifeless and dull and everything is predictable… keep your expectations limited if u r going to watch it..


    • You are the first bad review I have gotten for Tiyaan. I was planning to see it no matter what. I am still planning to see it, but maybe not “no matter what”. This weekend really taught me that I can’t do 3 movies in one weekend without paying the price somewhere. So I’ll see when it finally comes to my theater, and if I have time that week.


      • I gave you a mixed response for Tiyaan.As I said then,the film is very demanding on the audience.But you can certainly take it as I won’t put you in the category of ‘general audience’.Assuming that you would have watched super-flop Indian movies over the years,Tiyaan will be alright.But yes if you have to choose b/w this and another better one,can be skipped.


        • Well, it will most likely be a choice between this and Munna Michael or Mubarakan (depending on which week it gets here). So definitely NOT a better film. But a film my friends really want to see, and which will get me more blog views. So it’s a toss up.


  5. Pingback: Box Office Report: Jagga Jasoos Lays an Ostrich Sized Egg | dontcallitbollywood

  6. Its said that the role donned by Fahad Fassil was destined for some other actor, but when Fahad he came to know of the movie he requested the director for the role knowing well that the role was not of the lead actor


  7. Pingback: Film Reviews | dontcallitbollywood

  8. Pingback: Monday Malayalam (on Tuesday, I’m behind this week): Take-Off, Women Who Were Hostages Long Before They Were in a War Zone | dontcallitbollywood

  9. there is no caste discrimination in the story but the class and age difference as well as father’s possessive love for her daughter turned into angry sorta thing. Caste in Kerala is not a big thing, but yes there are exceptional cases too, but here class plays the role than caste i guess


  10. The age difference and inter caste issue isnt an issue as in the way you have grasped it to be. The locality in which the story takes palce is populated with members of both caste in almost equal proportions. The character played by sreeja is in her early 20s and is in now way yet reaching spinster territory. As it is ,substantial percentage of girls dont fall into any romantic realtionship due to the social mentality . Here she happens to fall in love due to his character and is not viewed by her as a desperate last attempt . Also he is a farmer by trade . His caste and her caste are the two castes which pretty much led the communist movement in kerala. What happened as a result was the redistribution of land in a more equitable manner compared to rest of india. The nair caste (hers) was the ones whose land were redistributed. And it is his caste(ezhava) that gained a lot of the land. So there is a casteist hatred prevalent among older generation who viewed their resources being repatriated for an ideology that had failed. So there is nt really a class issue here , and the little caste issue is related to her father . They move to kazargode because land is cheap in kazargode +him being a farmer. They were never going to sell the necklace , but were only going to pawn to start tobacco farming.
    also nimisha isnt the sole bread winner of her family. Her father is an auto driver. The profession of her sister isnt alluded to.
    Also could you state your top 5 indian movies


    • Interesting background, thank you!

      I couldn’t possibly list a top 5, they change almost daily. I will be doing a “best of 2017” series once 2017 is fully over.


  11. How did the mother find out about the love affair. She was talking to another lady and then she just comes back and starts whaling on her. I rewatched that scene a few times and could not figure that one out.


    • I can’t remember at this point. Either the other lady says something, or the mother sees something. Maybe another commentator can help?


Leave a Reply

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

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

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.