The weathered, time-honoured textures of a 50s village, the battered costumes, the awkward looks shared by neighbours, all in Pallichattambi is painstakingly put together. It leaves a promise that the story is going to be this detailed. It is at this point where the film starts to slip. The tension under the surface is quite interesting, and communism is not only presented as a political faction but also as a danger to itself. But that emotional volatility is never fully exploited in the story. I was more impressed by the craft than the conflict. The movie appears to be breathing in each frame and hardly alive in its narration. It puts you in a state of admiration and indifference.
The main character of this play is Krishna Pillai, who comes to the village with the name of Christopher. His coming is supposed to break the dogmas of belief and shake the foundations of prejudices. The premise is compelling. It offers a journey of change, defiance and the thin line of fear and knowledge. The narration however follows a very disappointingly linear path. All the narrative rhythms are foreshadowed. The surprises and emotional involvement are rather few. The conflicts are easy to predict and solutions are provided right at the right time. This predictability undermines the overall impact.
The most notable is the production design. The work that goes into the creation of this world is apparent. Costumes to set design, all aspects will be a tribute to the period. The village is natural, inhabited, and historical. This realistic nature gives believability to the environment. Meanwhile, it reveals the greatest flaw of the film. It is even more obvious when the world-building is this rich, and the lack of an engaging narrative stands out.
Tovino Thomas gives a realistic and restrained performance. His portrayal is very natural and not too farfetched, which befits the internal struggle of the character. His gestures and facial expressions are never overstated and that nonchalance is to his advantage. Nevertheless, he is restricted by the screenplay. Occasionally, there are glimpses of more emotional depth but they never actually materialize. He brings with him a bunch of scenes, though the emotional reward is seldom commensurate to his effort.
Kayadu Lohar appears briefly but makes a mark. Her acting is clean and well-put together especially in her delivery of dialogue. The little screen time however would not allow any meaningful connection to be established. Her character is not even given a chance to take notice of the story.
Technically, the movie displays glimpses of skill. The mood has been well captured in the cinematography, particularly in the climactic scenes where framing and movement bring about a little tension. The editing tries to keep the rhythm, however, the pacing is a problem. Scenes can be longer than they need, and this influences the engagement. Sound design is practical and lacks the experience.
The background music seems to be a wasted chance. Music might have been an important element in a story that has difficulty in creating emotional highs. Rather, it is quite forgettable. I was continuing to wait in anticipation of a hint that might intensify the drama, but it hardly came.
The action scenes are unimpressive. Since the action choreography of the current Malayalam cinema had developed, I was looking forward to more energy and dynamism. Rather, these instances are outlived. Even passages that are meant to create a mass reaction fail. The introduction sequence is quite weak in the beginning, as it does not pack the punch that it should have. I never felt that instinctive excitement which these scenes require.
Technical inconsistencies that break the immersion also exist. The dubbing by Kayadu Lohar is not to be commended. The lip-sync is particularly out of sync and the voice usually does not feel connected to the character. This incongruency turns out to be a repetitive distraction.
Another thing I liked is that the film tries to answer some of the perceptions about communism. It shows communists as not an enemy or traitor, but as a person who crosses over the borders of religion and is a part of something bigger in the human identity. It is an applicable and significant concept in the context of the film. The performance is, however, shallow. It is not delved into with the sensitivity it deserves, but the message is clear.
There is one important cameo, which is presented in the film. Its position is good and the look is surprising. Nevertheless, it is afflicted with the same problem as the rest of the film. It exists, but does not leave a lasting impression.
Interest declines significantly as the story passes the second half. The rhythm is slowed down even more, and the absence of strong development is more pronounced. It does not help to laugh and bring some relief, there is no captivating moment to get the viewer back to the screen and nothing to reward patience emotionally. The experience starts to become two-dimensional and farfetched.
By the time the movie reaches its climax and begins to give indications of a follow-up, one is left feeling more of a question mark than a thumbs up. The thought of a follow-up does not create expectation when a significant part of this instalment already seems to be lengthy.
Finally, Pallichattambi has its own merits but it never sticks. It provides hints into what it might have done, especially in its premise and visual design. These glimpses are not realised. The movie is anchored in a more classic storytelling style not due to its setting, but rather to the decisions it makes on the storytelling level. That, above all, is the greatest drawback to it.
Rating: 2.5 out of 5
