JOIN OUR WHATSAPP CHANNEL
OPINION: Movies like Aattam and Maharaja prove great films don't always need big marketing
Are audiences more motivated to watch content-rich movies like Maharaja and Aattam with minor promotions?
The trends in cinema have always changed quite often, depending on the audience it caters to. Sometimes, films and plots that worked 10 years ago might not hit the same in today’s age.
The same reasoning is likely to be cyclic and repeat in the future. However, considering the trend we have today, is the general populace of the audience more inclined towards watching content-rich movies?
Films like Maharaja in Tamil and Aattam in Malayalam are much-loved despite not depending on promotions and star power. Does the inclination of the audience towards such films indicate a shift in the film market as opposed to earlier times?
Are audiences more interested in the substance of films than style?
Talking in general about recent cinema hits in India, many movies accepted and celebrated by the audience made it big without much promotion. The recent blockbuster Maharaja, starring Vijay Sethupathi, is a prominent example.
The film, which had one of the best screenplays in Tamil cinema, took us on a cinematic ride packed with action and emotion. Despite the film not having a humongous promotional campaign, it went on to grab everyone's attention with the content it presented.
Check out Maharaja trailer:
Similarly, the Malayalam movie Aattam, a suspense drama that was also a chamber flick loosely based on the style of 12 Angry Men, also captured the attention of many. The film’s content was packed with emotion and took us to the top brink of suspense despite not having any big names attached to its cast.
The biggest boon for both these films was undoubtedly the screenplay and the execution they had. The conviction of the actors surrendering to the flick and being a part of it emphasized their creative nature and gave a space for organic content to be generated.
The creative freedom given to the creators of the film allowed them to experiment with the genre of movies, which also gave actors center stage for performing well. In all respects, the authenticity of the content they had is reflectable as audiences watched and praised these movies.
Check out the trailer for Aattam:
In this sense, it is quite safe to assume that people are more in love with the creativity offered via cinema rather than being a formulaic potboiler. Rather than taking the story template of any generic movie and slapping it with a new name with a new cast, these movies preferred to understand the grammar of films and their making.
The consistency of these kinds of films being a hit not only in theaters but also through streaming platforms also depicts some positive reception towards the acceptance of such movies. Not just Aattam and Maharaja but movies like Kill, Bramayugam, and more are also worthy examples of people loving content-driven films.
Even in Maharaja and Bramayugam, the movies are led by cinema stars who can easily stick to their established persona and generate revenue with formulaic films. However, both of them embraced the scripts and were subjected completely to the characters. Even taking in a movie like Malaikottai Vaaliban, which wasn’t well-received by the audience, Mohanlal submitted himself to immerse in the character.
The change of tide in actors’ acceptance of scripts also seems to indicate how movies and the audience are changing towards appreciating and welcoming movies with rich content.
What does it mean for future movies?
Even when movies like these are welcomed by audiences, various people still live for the fanfare and celebrations of a film. The duality of the same could be taken by identifying how Mammootty himself did Turbo, a commercial potboiler, and made it a success.
The dual nature of the audience to accept movies from the far end of each spectrum also personifies that movies need to be executed properly rather than relying on superstars. For consideration, a film like Indian 2, which had Kamal Haasan as his iconic character, made the audience come to the theaters because of how the first part made an impact and the extensive promotions.
However, the film dealt with a generally negative approach from the viewers for the lack of conviction, creativity, misrepresentation of characters, and wariness towards the trend in writing. Rather than trying to understand the demographics of people and catering films to their preferences, the commercial film faltered by spoon-feeding what was already distasteful.
This seems to stand as a ground for makers to identify how to make their content speak concerning the genre and how to be more creative in their crafts. When style and substance go hand-in-hand as a balance, it would surely be appreciated by audiences who prefer one over the other.
Latest Articles
