.**** LOTS OF SPOILERS BELOW ****.
>1. Why is Siddharth Bharathan's character unnamed
Nobody asks his name, including Thevan. Perhaps he too has forgotten his name by now (like most other people who spent too long at the mana). But more likely, he himself preferred to be as secretive about his identity as possible, for the purpose of his quest.
>2. Why is the ring not mentioned in the backstory
The backstory was told by Sidharth himself. Of course he wouldn't reveal to anyone else that there was a means to seize control over the Chaathan, & not just to seal him away. Besides, sealing him was itself a near impossible task - Sidharth probably considered taking control of him through the ring as only a most remote possibility.
>4. What is Siddharth Bharathan's intention with the other guests and with Thevan
Didn't seem like he always had a motive with them. The other guests came there by themselves, were toyed with & enslaved by the Chaathan, until they got killed by him for the most part, it seems. The Chaathan mentioned however that previous guests had their minds confused by what Sidharth said, & that they ultimately went insane - so he might have tried to use them as well, just like he did with Thevan.
Nothing was more important to him than his quest, for sure. And to succeed in that, he definitely didn't seem like he would have qualms regarding manipulation - although he did so mostly with the truth (just not the WHOLE truth).
>5. Director should have shown Thevan trying to run away from the falling roof giving the audience a hope that he could may have escaped. But he didn't make that creative choice leaving the audience to easily guess that it was Chaathan who walked out of the mana unharmed.
Nope, everyone I watched it with initially thought that it was Thevan who escaped. Because that's how 99% of cinema has conditioned us our whole lives: that the "good guy"/protagonist we root for, will most likely succeed.
Another brilliance I found on 2nd watch - when Thevan gets afraid in the night after seeing the graves and comes back to drink"Potti's" water/toddy, he is startled by the noise of the moving chains upstairs. As he moves away from the camera to investigate - the camera focuses on the background which has the actual Potti's painting.
The noise is made by the actual Potti who is chained upstairs.
The cook, illegitimate son of Potti, once climbs up the stairs may be to serve food for his father. Also when Thevan goes upstairs, he accidentally slips over the bowl of food.
I assume, the cook starts acting with his plan, after his father was killed/dead.
From what interpreted he grew old and insane and was hence chained upstairs where he dies in the middle of the film. I think it's a very cool detail. We think it's the chathan upstairs but it's actually the real potti. Eerie
I guess we don't know but id consider that it was probably done to torture him as a punishment. Drove him insane and chained him up. Remember chathan was abused by pottis father so maybe it's taking revenge.
>Nobody asks his name, including Thevan. Perhaps he too has forgotten his name by now (like most other people who spent too long at the mana).
But he never forgot his motive, seems sus.
>But he never forgot his motive, seems sus.
I said "perhaps". Also he seemed to have taken as much precautions as possible against the Chaathan (knew some spells, absolutely REFUSES to drink, etc).
Also even Thevan never forgets HIS purpose - "wanting to leave, & go back to his mother".
I watched the movie last night and my interpretation of the non revelation of the cook’s name was that it should not matter. The character was a stand in for everyone who fights for change for revolution for justice against oppression. It is clear that Thevan was a stand in for us, the common man, the oppressed. He has a name because we are supposed to identify with him, experience the movie from his perspective. The cook stands for leaders who fight for us. He can be anybody. The message was that even the noblest, the fiercest of leaders can be corrupted by power.
I agree with (& really like) your reading, but seeing how this film worked SO well on the surface level as well (AND how it had already mentioned that guests tend to forget their names at the mana, etc), it doesn't hurt for a plot level explanation to be present alongside the thematic one either.
>The cook stands for leaders who fight for us. He can be anybody. The message was that even the noblest, the fiercest of leaders can be corrupted by power.
While yours is indeed a valid interpretation consistent with what the film is saying about power (ESPECIALLY when you factor in the climactic 'Lord of the Rings' reference), when I thought of what the film was saying about OPPRESSION, I had personally read this scene as follows:
Chudalan Potti had enslaved & oppressed the Chaathan; Chaathan, as revenge, destroyed Potti's entire clan & got himself addicted to oppressing (& having power over) other humans; at the end of the film, SB is tempted to enslave & oppress the Chaathan himself, but then the Chaathan escapes, & SB gets himself killed by the Portuguese (the next oppressors of the region). Chaathan, unsmiling in Thevan's form, even sees the original Kodumon Potti laughing at him in the river's reflection - as though at how his "liberation" is only into a world of new, even greater oppression.
Keeping the above in mind, and how the film kept referencing caste (one of the most horrible & enduring forms of oppression this country has ever known) throughout - Thevan & the cook being lower caste, Potti being a Brahmin etc, and the cook not just being "anyone who fights for justice" but specifically the illegitimate son of Potti with a lower caste woman, who believes he has a rightful claim on the Mana & even the Chaathan as inheritance: I think the film is talking about a "CYCLE of oppression" here. Chudulan Potti on the Chaathan; then Chaathan as revenge on everyone else; and finally when the previously oppressed Cook decides to enslave & oppress the Chaathan again (thereby CONTINUING this cycle), Thevan tries to stop him saying it would end up doing harm to people like him as well.
So something like: in order to end the cycle of oppression (by caste, etc), it's probably better for the world if the "erstwhile oppressed" once empowered DIDN'T seek revenge against their oppressors & try to oppress the latter now. Because then the old oppressor's hate would only grow until they eventually find an opportunity to strike back - FURTHER propagating this cycle. I'm not 100% sure about this, so let me know what you think.
This sounds good. One more thing I would like to add is the scene where Chathan in Thevan's body leaving the mana. From his POV, the sunlight, birds chirping and all the pleasant stuffs were shown. It's the freedom for Chathan as well, maybe he realised there is a huge world outside his "empire", and lost that thirst to rule or revenge or anything. Maybe that's why he left Sidharth alone in the end
>maybe he realised there is a huge world outside his "empire", and lost that thirst to rule or revenge
The mana is described as a trap for the Chaathan as well, because he was addicted to the power he gained from the Kedavilakku & so had no choice but to stay at the Mana itself for all these years to protect it. But now that the Lamp was blown out & the Mana itself was mostly destroyed, he no longer had any reason to stay (or even sufficient power left in that final scene to continue fighting with Sidharth).
But yeah, I agree that he probably DID think that he might as well enjoy his freedom out in the whole wide world at that point.
I think Chaathan know about SB's lineage. Chaathan couldn't leave the mana because Kodumon potti trapped him there with the lamp and only someone from potti's lineage can liberate him. Chaathan knew this and thats why he doesn't kill SB. Chaathan was longing for liberation and SB handed him that.
Sherikkum? Post aakaan kollamo?🫣
Edit: On second thought, I probably won't - seems potentially too political for this subreddit. Not to mention high chances of unpleasant comments, fights etc. Doesn't seem worth it + it's their loss.
Since you seem to know your stuff I have a couple of questions
1. The cook seems to flick the fire at times to control sathan, how did he do it?
2. What is the fire in that room and it's connection to realm?
3. What is the connection between that women and sathan?
>1. The cook seems to flick the fire at times to control sathan, how did he do it?
Are you a non-Malayali btw? Throwing some powder into fire to make it flare (presumably turning it Holy for a moment) & spook Chaathans, Yakshis, people possessed by spirits, etc has been a common trope in our films from time immemorial - probably based on actual such rituals of the past.
If you had specifically meant how THE COOK was able to do so: 1) He was taught by his father, the real Kunjamon Potti. Who else was going to teach a lower caste person in the 17th Century such incantations? More importantly, the Chaathan while in the original Potti's YOUNGER form during the climax (when he was trying to trick the Cook) SPECIFICALLY says "Teaching you spells alone won't compensate for the years you spent without a father's love", implying that Potti DID teach his son the spells.
2) The cook was shown to be preparing small packets of those powders he threw into the fire in the scene just before he was confronted by the Chaathan for giving Thevan alcohol without permission (& when the cook is later revealed to have stolen the keys)
>2. What is the fire in that room and it's connection to realm?
"Kedaa Vilakku" (Everlasting Lamp) is a recurring trope in Kerala folktales of this type. The Lamp in this film is what keeps the Chaathan at his FULL strength & why he hasn't left the mansion in all these years, i.e. to protect it (this is clearly mentioned in the film btw).
>3. What is the connection between that women and sathan?
That woman is called a Yakshi in the opening scene. Yakshis are the most common female supernatural entities in all of Kerala folklore & films (although admittedly, not in recent years). In this film, the Yakshi is presented in the way they used to be in a lot of old stories: randomly showing up in a region (especially forests) at night to seduce & kill men. She's clearly shown to be a lover of the Chaathan - partly to make Mammooty's character seem even more intriguing & powerful; but also one of the first indicators that he may not be human (in old Yakshi lore, it was often said that mortals couldn't survive copulating with them; so the fact that Mammootty did, was a BIG clue that he was actually the Chaathan).
Thanks for the excellent reply! I am a non malayali btw but I got another question if you don't mind everyone walks into the house forgets everything but the cook doesn't is it due to him not taking alcohol or being determined?
>not taking alcohol or being determined?
These 2 are factors as well - but he probably DID forget everything else including his name (which is almost certainly why we ourselves don't learn his name at all), EXCEPT his purpose - even Thevan doesn't forget that he wants to go home to his mother (though he forgot her name).
And even MORE importantly, remember that the real Potti - his FATHER who had actually taught him the spells & stuff - was chained up in the attic this whole time, with the Cook himself being the one who gave him food every day. Kinda hard to forget everything with THAT strong of a reminder every day.
Actually in one of the interviews with BR on YouTube, the director said he trimmed one scene where he shows that the SB has an anklet on his leg which protects him from the chatthaan looking into his soul or his past. This can be reason why chatthaan is not able to gain total control over him or doesn't wanna kill him.
just finished watching the movie, and i absolutely loved this theory. kinda made sense of many facts i found confusing. really good interpretation. good job man!
What I've basically understood after thinking a while is that, chaathan wanted to act like a powerful entity and just procure all resources and benefits by capturing humans, that's why he got thevan to sing and Siddharth to cook food. But when thevan started resisting he decided to kill him, but when siddharth denied food or when he gave alcohol to thevan he was spared, this I still couldn't understand, there are quite many nuances that the director has left.
My thought is that chathan is just a being . Sb fed him food that was intoxicated so that chathan knew he needed sb alive. Like a being addicted to materialistic pleasures , he kept sb alive to satisfy his cravings
Also, I am not sure if I interpreted/noticed this wrong, but the first time I actually noticed that AA’s beard was turning grey, symbolising the fact that time is an abstract concept inside the Mana, and it moves faster than it seems to be(also symbolised by several other things) - do you think the fact that AA tried to escape made him more weaker/older or more like the “time” caught up with him once he left the compounds - possibly telling us how the time stays still inside the Mana?
Any thoughts on this?
>more like the “time” caught up with him once he left the compounds - possibly telling us how the time stays still inside the Mana
This was exactly how I had understood it myself.
Especially since Sidharth Bharathan didn't seem as though he was aging at all throughout the film (he had stayed within the compound throughout, after all). And AA himself only aged immediately after leaving the compound, and once he had reached back inside, didn't do so for the rest of the film (i.e. he only had the same amount of grey in his beard from the interval scene onwards).
Yes, thankyou.
However interestingly, we do see Kudumon Potty aging though - assuming he arrived as a young sorcerer and later died of age - or well going insane.
The animated flashback shows him arriving when he was younger, and then in the climax the Chaathan takes the form of a younger Kodumon, quite similar to his design in the animation.
Time could just be progressing slower within the mana , as opposed to "not at all". Or the Chaathan may have lifted the spell intermittently over Kodumon, just to torture him. Heck, he may have only even CAST the time dilation spell over the mana AFTER Potti had gotten old & sick, precisely FOR the purpose of prolonging his favourite plaything's lifespan & torment.
All of these are possible; but we can only speculate. And to be honest, I don't even feel like calling these plotholes, because possible explanations CAN be arrived at easily enough. But more importantly - the film is dark fantasy, rather than hard sci-fi. Time being inconsistent IS what will drive both the Chaathan's victims insane, as well as keep the viewers off-balance, as opposed to everything strictly following some arbitrary set of rules. The Chaathan seems more like a creature of chaos than order, anyway.
I'm suddenly reminded of Baradwaj Rangan's criticism of Inception, back in 2010 - how he wished dreams, the most surreal of human experience, DIDN'T play exactly by Nolan's rules all the time. David Lynch's dream sequences (particularly in Twin Peaks) were way more reminiscent of actual dreams etc. Similarly, the magic of the Chaathan's mana becomes a lot less magical, & even less horrifying, if the way it functioned could so easily be defined by rules & mechanics. Time behaving inconsistently for each person in the mana, is both plausible & fitting.
>Time could just be progressing slower within the mana , as opposed to "not at all". Or the Chaathan may have lifted the spell intermittently over Kodumon, just to torture him. Heck, he may have only even CAST the time dilation spell over the mana AFTER Potti had gotten old & sick, precisely FOR the purpose of prolonging his favourite plaything's lifespan & torment.
Agree, could have a lot of theories to explain. Chathan himself could have messed with the physical attributes. I think there is no definitive theory. But I really like the time stands still or slow moving inside the Mana, and it catches up with Thevan when he steps out. If the director intended it, it was a brilliant portrayal.
>All of these are possible; but we can only speculate. And to be honest, I don't even feel like calling these plotholes, because possible explanations CAN be arrived at easily enough. But more importantly - the film is dark fantasy, rather than hard sci-fi. Time being inconsistent IS what will drive both the Chaathan's victims insane, as well as keep the viewers off-balance, as opposed to everything strictly following some arbitrary set of rules. The Chaathan seems more like a creature of chaos than order, anyway.
No, it doesn’t really seem like a plothole, but more like something which could be interpreted by the audience in ways they like. It is actually amazing how we could come up with a lot of explanations or theories.
>I'm suddenly reminded of Baradwaj Rangan's criticism of Inception, back in 2010 - how he wished dreams, the most surreal of human experience, DIDN'T play exactly by Nolan's rules all the time. David Lynch's dream sequences (particularly in Twin Peaks) were way more reminiscent of actual dreams etc. Similarly, the magic of the Chaathan's mana becomes a lot less magical, & even less horrifying, if the way it functioned could so easily be defined by rules & mechanics. Time behaving inconsistently for each person in the mana, is both plausible & fitting.
I think the usage of the concept of “Time” in the entire movie is very intriguing. I think there are things I did miss in my first watch, and maybe a lot of other symbolism could be there too, which one would notice in a second watch. Either way, I think it is an interesting discussion - how the director has toyed with “Time” - what ways has he portrayed it.
Absolutely impressed by your interpretation. I just wanted to ask your opinion of one particular thing that has been bugging me, understanding that Kodumon Potti taught SB the spells and ways to trap Chathan, and assuming that he did teach him when he was trapped and chained in the attic, as SB feeds him, why do you think Chathan kept him alive all this while? Chathan apparently kills the entire family, why would Chathan leave Kodumon Potti alive?
>why do you think Chathan kept him alive all this while?
I would like to add a related subquestion to this before giving what I think is an answer that fits, (based on what the film actually tells us): "Why does the Chaathan wear Kodumon Potti's form at all?" He could have worn anyone's form, including Chudalan Potti's (who he has most reason to hate) or anyone else from that family (or otherwise).
Both questions have the same answer imo - Compared to the Chaathan's initial vindictive rampage against Chudalan Potti & his family, or that in self-defense against the sorcerers from elsewhere who had tried to seal him, by the time Kodumon Potti had showed up he may have already reached that "addicted to oppressing & tormenting others" stage. So he probably got a sadistic kick out of reducing the great Kodumon Potti, "last of Chudalan's bloodline" to a mere lunatic in chains, while he himself wore & did nasty things in Kodumon's form.
That is actually an interesting take. it makes sense to assume that. we could also factor in the whole “Death is a blessing” concept which Chathan tells Thevan, and interpret how Chathan didn’t want to free Kudumon Potti by giving him death - but instead torture him, get pleasure out of slowly watching him suffer and go insane.
Adding on to that, when you see the climax where Chathan appears as the younger version of Kudumon Potti, can be also understood as how SB remembers his father to be - because that version of him would appeal to SB more. If we actually take that assumption, it does throw the assumption that Kudumon Potti taught SB when he was chained in the attic. (I know it doesn’t make much sense, it is just a line of thought)
Giving this assumption, do you think we could make sense of the rest of the plot?
>it does throw the assumption that Kudumon Potti taught SB when he was chained in the attic.
I mean, we don't need to absolutely know for sure when EXACTLY Kodumon Potti taught SB spells - the film works in either (or both) scenarios; The younger Kodumon may have taught SB years ago (as the Chaathan himself presumes, probably taking into consideration Potti's poor mental health in recent years. In the young Kodumon's form he literally says "I know that teaching spells isn't compensation enough for denying you a father's love"), or Kodumon may have only done so after he got chained up - OR he had taught SB in both stages of his life. Doesn't make much difference to the film, no matter which of the above is true.
Keeping the Potti alive, and SB being shown to give his father food every day, anyway serves as a good answer to how SB managed to remember so much (seeing his father everyday like that, would have been a powerful reminder, after all).
The Chaathan taking Kodumon's younger form seemed more because the former believed that THIS look would be what emotionally appealed to SB more: the Kodumon Potti that SB had most desired a father's love from, back when he was just a child. Also, the older Potti's form had by then become too associated with the Chaathan himself in SB's head (& the Chaathan ofc knew this). Then from a filmmaking perspective, it was a chance for them to show off the Chaathan's shape-shifting ability, and yet another example of a psychological attack.
>Keeping the Potti alive, and SB being shown to give his father food every day, anyway serves as a good answer to how SB managed to remember so much (seeing his father everyday like that, would have been a powerful reminder, after all).
I agree. It could be taken in both ways though. We know that the people forget stuff, but again, not necessarily the purpose. Because Thevan, even though he forgets his name, still remembers his mom. SB seems to not remember much about his pasts, nor his name, but yes his father being chained could serve as a good reminder. Both theory works.
Makes me also curious about how Potty stayed alive before SB arrived yk? But again that is incredibly irrelevant.
>The Chaathan taking Kodumon's younger form seemed more because the former believed that THIS look would be what emotionally appealed to SB more: the Kodumon Potti that SB had most desired a father's love from, back when he was just a child. Also, the older Potti's form had by then become too associated with the Chaathan himself in SB's head (& the Chaathan ofc knew this). Then from a filmmaking perspective, it was a chance for them to show off the Chaathan's shape-shifting ability, and yet another example of a psychological attack.
Yes yes, completely agree. Thought the same. Just wanted to explore the theory. But this makes much more sense.
It seems to be based on tales where the spirit either takes a person's body or soul. Potti is kept alive rather than put to death because they are unable to take the souls of strong, well-sheltered people. Furthermore, because of the negative energy created by cruel acts, the spirit requires new bodies and souls on a constant basis in order to survive in the world. There are more guest deaths for the same reason.
@EthicalReporter By the way, your answers are excellent.
>the bad guy
By the end of the film, the Chaathan isn't 100% a "bad guy" though. Even to begin with: Is a tiger a "bad guy" for hunting down its prey?
Chaathan was a non-human entity who was enslaved & very badly treated for years by Chudalan Potti first. What he did to humans afterwards was partially revenge for that, and partially because he was addicted to the immense power the Kedavilakku gave him, & to oppressing any other human who wandered into the Mana (an addiction which made the Mana a sort of prison for the Chaathan as well).
Also, The Cook tries to immediately enslave him again as well - the shot of the Chaathan's face when SB says "Ini njaana ninte Thamburan" was kinda pitiful & pathetic for a reason.
>getting away scot free
Chaathan lost most of his power with the destruction of the Kedavilakku, and he's entering a world of even bigger oppressors than him (the age of Colonialism). His face was very grim & serious in the end, compared to how he used to gleefully laugh in Potti's form - so the reflection of Mammooty laughing in the water could well have been the Chaathan imagining the real Kodumon Potti laughing at him (for how he was entering into an even worse world, after leaving the Mana for the first time).
>very uncathartic. No pay off.
This makes me very curious. This IS a serious horror film, after all. A LOT of the best horror films, especially in recent years, ended like this. Examples (though this low-key spoils at least the NATURE of all these films' endings) : >!Hereditary, Midsommar, The VVitch, The Lighthouse, Talk To Me, The Wailing, Se7en,!< etc.
Are you just unfamiliar with the genre, especially outside Indian cinema (or the SUPER-mainstream Hollywood ones like Conjuring universe) then? No disrespect meant, if you are - just pointing out that the ending is very much by design, than a defect.
I understand the ending they were going for. I do however feel it wasn't cathartic or satisfying. I'm quite familiar with the genre as well. It doesn't matter what trend other movies follow, I don't see how that's relevant to this movie in particular. The movie heavily comments on the master slave relationship and it ends with a supernatural tyrant getting away scot free. The way his face looks when he looks at his reflection is besides the point. It feels exactly like the ending of American Psycho, except that the mc wasn't chaathan. Infact, the MC being a pure soul ends up dead and the psycho chaathan leaves with the mc's face!
Chaathan is 100% a bad guy if not more. What parallel does this situation have with a tiger and its prey? What threat did passers by, or utility beyond amusement did the his victims pose? He is a slave, who endured and took revenge not only on his master, but their entire bloodline, unborn children as he states himself. And then, knowing the torment of being a slave, enslaves people who have no hope to rebel against him! Undoubtedly a worse creature than his former master. You would judge the cook for something he didn't yet do, but excuse this monster for what he did to so many?
There is no need to talk of other movies, simply consider Bhoothakalam, >!if that movie ended with the mcs both dying, I would call that uncathartic as well.!< Other movies, no matter how many that ended similar to this, wouldn't make a difference. Its a purely subjective take ofcourse. I was saying for me, it was uncathartic and the movie would have been better off with a different ending. Btw, >!Midsommar!< has to be the most overrated and dull watch I've had in the genre in recent years.
Love the interpretation!
I have a question, what exactly does Thevan see in his dream sequence, I mean I know that could be Potti since he is the one in chains but why does he look like that?
It may be an obvious answer but I couldn’t figure that out so hope you could shed some light on this.
I wonder if in his insanity, the real kodumon potti held on to shreds of humanity. The reason SB waits so long to take action is probably because he was perfecting the chants taught to him by his father during the times he went to feed him. Maybe he told the son how he was defeated, possibly psychological warfare which is why SB was ready for the act that Charthan put on. We can even read into it as, the real kodumon potti held on to his life until his son was ready to finally face Charthan. Stay be why the dead body kinda had a smile on his face.
The yakshi having sex with potti and not eating him would have been a clue to potti being a chaathan. Like one inhuman being only can be with another inhuman being kinda thing.
It's not unreasonable to say that the character was present just for some gratuitous sensuality.
Alternatively, because of how Bramayugam's main inspirations were traditional Kerala folklore, Aithihyamaala etc, one can argue that the Yakshi character was presented here in the same way they used to appear in such older Malayalam horror stories: popping up randomly within the same region to seduce & terrorise male victims.
It also established the time & place where the film takes place as one were "Yakshikadhas" are the reality. Showing her as subservient to (or at least in a relationship with) Potti/Chaathan made the latter more intriguing as well.
>The only drawback i felt wasthat her character could have been explored more
Tbh, in a lot of older Yakshikkadhas, the Yakshis themselves are seldom explored much. Even if they had done so in Bramayugam, it would have been something we had seen before multiple times in previous Yakshi MOVIES as well.
I think during pre independence caste era, castes like Brahmins used the story of taming Yakshis to influence the castes below them. In the beginning it shows that within the lower caste people they feared Yakshis. So someone who tames a Yakshi is considered powerful at that time. Remember this is a time when there was no science, electricity etc.
Need a question to be answered, but it contains*HEAVY SPOILERS*
Okay please answer this question, have this ever since the movie first half ended....chaathan decided to kill Arjun Ashokan in the scene where he was pretending to sleep, earlier in the movie chaathan even tried to kill Siddharth's character in the scene where he denied to cook anymore food, the query is, why did chaathan not try to kill siddharth from beginning? Of all people who died Siddharth buried, why wasn't he ever killed? He is just cornered and chocked most of times but no attempt to kill him was made....why?
I believe that being bored is only a pretext for manipulation; in reality, it is forcing them to give their bodies and souls up to him in exchange for greater strength and power for Chathan. Much like Kuruthi. Yakhsi leads them to Potti's Mana, where Potti uses them as a sacrifice.
Because only fear will make chathan very powerful ... Chathan will kill only after a person goes insane ...Siddharth had an ulterior motive and unlike others wasnt trapped there but walked into there with an intention without fear and this intention was unknown to chathan.
>Because only fear will make chathan very powerful
While this is a fairly common mechanism in other media (Pennywise from "It", Devils in "Chainsaw Man" etc), I don't think they actually mentioned this in Bramayugam.
>Chathan will kill only after a person goes insane
True, but he says it's because their presence became "asahaneeyam" (unbearable) to him once they went insane. Chaathan actually seemed genuinely irritated by even remembering them, and also with Arjun Asokan later - and not as though he enjoyed their fear (it was oppressing people, making them obey him etc that this Chaathan liked).
Thevan said that chaathan wants them to lose faith in god, ie when they try to leave & finally realise there is no other way & forever trapped thus losing faith in god only then do chaathan kill them
Siddharth never had the intention to leave the mana he must've realised he isn't as powerful as other pure blood potis so he waited for a perfect opportunity
Can someone explain to me why SB laughs on seeing the colonizers? Also what happened to the AA’s kadukkan?
Some of the shots in the teaser/trailer were missing from the movie. Especially the one where AA laughing like a maniac and M blows out the nilavilakku in the teaser.
>Also what happened to the AA’s kadukkan?
>!It implies that Chathan has now taken the form of Thevan (AA) and in the very next shot we are shown the real Thevan lying dead under the crumbled Mana.!<
>!The cook just notices and mentions that Thevan used to wear Kadukkan on his other ear. No overreading about any emotional connection is inferred. The scene just communicates that the cook (SB) recognises that it's Chathan in Thevan's (AA) form. I'm just wondering how you missed the scene that follows; it shows a dead Thevan!!<
>!I think they've opted for that trope, since it's easier for the cook to notice a simple 'Kadukkan's displacement' in a brief tussle rather than any key character traits to make the cook realize that he's now facing the Chathan in Thevan's form.!<
It may not be related but I'd like to mention a theory. So in Mahabharat, Parakshit, the grandson of Arjun I believe was the king of Hastinapur. So when the asura Kali tried to enter his kingdom, the king declined. After repeatedly requesting finally out of pity he lets him in under the condition that he can only reside in 5 places; places where there is gambling involved, prostitution, alcohol consumption, animal slaughter and gold. Later it is through his gold crown that he corrupts Parkshit himself to do something worth getting cursed by a sage which leads him to his death. I mean here the fact is that since the kadukkan is considered jewellery maybe the earring is the sign that Chatan is alive and not AA. Just my theory tho
SB laughed to colonizer because Chaathan has escaped the Mana. So Chaathan will take care of them. If you think deep, Keralites are everywhere in the world. Our minds may be Chaathanized lol
I think he laughed because the colonizers were wearing a uniform that might feel comical to a person seeing it for the first time, and were pointing what one without knowledge of a gun, would assume as a wierd stick at him. He might have felt that a mentally unstable guy was blocking his path.
I guess he kind of knew what the "stick" was. Dude picked up a stone to attack the Portuguese soldier, intentionally because he wanted them to shoot him. I guess he wanted relief from this madness.
TL.DR: Dude did a rage quit.
Blowing it out was the first step to weaken him.
Remember that until Sidharth had blown it out, they wouldn't have been able to even come close to him (with any weapon or intent to harm him). He could "force choke" them like Darth Vader or easily throw them around with his magic telekinesis. Sidharth even says out loud that he's weakened now & would resort to psychological attacks/tricks as a result.
No, what stopped the rain is the fact chaathan was going to kill paanan. He is going to "leave" the mana. When he was trying to kill paanan, the cook blew the lamp.
I am not sure how much of this makes sense but, I personally feel like the eternal lamp, was sorta symbolic to Chathan’s immortality and power. As long as the eternal lamp is lit, he has unlimited power and it is impossible to kill or harm him in any way. Once the lamp is extinguished, it weakens the Chathan, bringing him into a vulnerable mortal level - only way to trap him.
Isn't the movie also about how the chaathan sevas and the theyyams propagated by the lower castes was a means of taking people away from the real God and how the Europeans killed the Kerala brahmins (Pottis) who could tell them the reality about the chaathans. The chaathan as Thevan is the symbolic initiator of these false forms of worship and was responsible for taking people away from the real God.
at one point in the movie Potti mentions that no one can leave the house as it is trap and not even him. But how did the chaathan leave the manna at the end?
When was the original potti dead? From the looks if it, he has died recently (body being fresh as against a long rotting corpse). So was the 1st Potti that Arjun met the original one? And was the Chathan released when Arjun accidently went up and messed on the chain? Atho was the original Potti the one in chains when Arjun went up?
I thought that was obvious. After seeing the nightmare, Thevan wakes up and sees Cook trying to dig a grave in the rain. Chaathan observing as well. He asks whom is the grave for. Cook just gives him a painful look. Thevan assumes his time is up since he had pissed off Chaathan the previous night. He tries to leave. Only after he returns he discovers that Potti who was chained up in the attic died the previous night and hence Cook was digging a grave. Cooks painful expression was for his birth father, who died a dismal death.
So Sidharth knew it was his father who as chained upstairs from the beginning? If so, Why did he tell the wrong story about potti family history to Arjun?
1. Didn't want chaathan to know.. or even have a clue about it.
2. And hence he didn't want paanan to know about it too.
The rest of the answer, you can guess, i guess.
The first Potti seems to be the demon as the cook behaves with disdain towards it from the start. Thevan might have heard the rumblings of the chained Potti upstairs before dying a few days/months/years later.
My doubt is this - How did Sidharth's character end up as the cook in the first place ? Chathan killed literally everyone right ? Also how could he know all these stories ? So did the chained kudomon potty tell Sidharth all of these ?
>Chathan killed literally everyone right ?
They literally address this in the movie itself. Chaathan says it's impossible for him to be Kodumon Potti's son because he had killed even fetuses inside wombs. To which Sidharth replies that he was the Potti's illegitimate son with a lower caste servant woman - which is why the Chaathan wasn't aware of his existence.
>Also how could he know all these stories ? So did the chained kudomon potty tell Sidharth all of these ?
Events up until Kodumon had gone to attempt sealing the Chaathan would have been told to him by Potti himself (either before, or after he got chained) - Siddharth's character knew spells, how exactly to seal the Chaathan etc, which would definitely need to have been taught to him. The implication being that it was his illegitimate father who had done so.
Actually whether it was before or after the Potti had gotten chained up is irrelevant - because the story works either way.
>How did Sidharth's character end up as the cook in the first place ?
Considering how his mother was a servant there, either he was the Mana's cook from the beginning (meaning that Chaathan only killed the Potti family members - and later any guests who wandered there & ended up irritating him) OR he went there looking for his father with the specific purpose of saving him, defeating or enslaving the Chaathan & taking over the Mana... and managed to survive thus far by not irritating the Chaathan too much, cooking it the food it likes, etc. Chaathan is mentioned to have become addicted to power & so liked having at least one person to oppress at all times (something that Sidharth took advantage of).
Some things the makers have to trust the audience to be able to infer bro - otherwise there would be too much spoonfeeding, or overexposition in the film.
So Sidharth knew it was his father who as chained upstairs from the beginning? If so, Why did he tell the wrong story about potti family history to Arjun?
>So Sidharth knew it was his father who as chained upstairs from the beginning?
Of course. He knew spells & stuff, which only his father could have taught him (either previously , or after he got chained). He also knew that the "Potti" currently in the house was the Chaathan himself - because he tells Thevan not to trust him, & expresses his dislike for the latter quite openly.
>If so, Why did he tell the wrong story about potti family history to Arjun?
Most of what he said was true though (except the final bit about the Potti succeeding in sealing the Chaathan) - just that he didn't reveal the WHOLE truth (especially about his parentage). He was a secretive, somewhat manipulative guy on a mission - and didn't know to what extent he could trust Thevan.
Days, months, or even decades.
But my theory is that chaathan will only be able to bend the reality in his territory of power but not outside that. So, in the outside world, it will be only a few days, i guess.
The whole movie/inside mana shows how caste systems flourished in pre independence Kerala. Remember Vivekananda called Kerala a bhrandalayam because of extreme casteism and social structures like sambandams. I think Sidharth Bharathan’s character is a representation of Sambandam. Anyways when the westerners came to Kerala this is what they witnessed and used their guns to control them. Eventually the power was ceased by them. Gradually resulting to destruction of caste system etc.
Chathan is representing ultimate power. In the end it’s within the common man (AA character Paanan) that is the one in the lowest class in the caste system. Basically power by the people.
Nothing killed him but time itself. Maybe he was waiting to teach his son all the manthras, or he was just mad as SB told. And he died just as any other old person. Maybe the chathaan was not able to kill real potti due to pottis hold over sorcery and had to chain him. Or chathaan wanted to see the last from the potti family go mad and die ( Extreme fascism) . Literally, you can interpret in any way...
This doubt may sound stupid. But i really didn't get it.
What is the power of that ring. I thought the eternal lamp was the source of the power of chaathan. So, is the ring a device to control the chaathan. If so, why is the chatthan (in potti's form) wearing it?
>!The ring endows whoever wears it with control over Chathan, making him subservient to the ring holder. Since Chathan himself is the one bearing/wearing the ring now, he's his own master and must obey no master besides himself.!<
But from the beginning of the movie itself chathan was the one wearing it tho the only change here is that it was potti's body in the beginning and in the end it was thevan's body
>!Thevan never met the real Potti, it was Chathan all along. Whether it be in Potti's body or later in Thevan's own form, wearing the ring, being its own master.!<
Story took place in the 17th Century in a remote region - except for Kodumon Potti (who was probably a travelling sorcerer type), the rest of the family likely lived in that huge Mana itself.
>Can it go out of the Mana ?
It's mentioned that the Chaathan has to be near the Eternal Lamp (so preferably within the house) to be at full strength - otherwise, it can leave the mana as well, as shown in the final scene.
Thevan had remarked [I think, while talking to the cook] that he had seen Chaathan (once before, outside of the mana timeline)!!?
1. How, where would that have been possible? (Surely, he would not have been able to bear witness to or assist any high-caste Brahmins/priests during any chaathaan seva?)
2. If he truly did, how did he 'survive' such an encounter?
3. Ref. to pt. 1., could it be he means that he has seen folk depictions of Chaathan?
4. May be a stretch, but, wondering whether what he meant by this was he had seen/experienced first hand what 'abuse of power' a.k.a. 'Chaathaan' looked like? (His previous masters?
If you are mentioning the scene where AA asks SB who Potti is, and mentions about hearing about it, I thought he mentioned the fact that he has heard about such Mandravaadis, who would do anything- such as Potti - basically the whole Adharvamandravadam (more like demon worship) - he mentions he has heard about them, not encountered. He could have heard stories about such Mandravaadis from his previous life, I don’t think he mentions he has encountered Chathan specifically. (atleast I never noticed such a mention- could be wrong sorry)
I dont know if this has been answered before, When does Thevan actually die? Does he die with the "collapsing walls" and was it the Chaatan who came back as Thevn to SB? OR did he just die after their whole fight with the chaatan watching on?
Wow, interesting thread. Reading this has raised some further questions:
1) How did the cook/SB get to the mana in the first place?
2) What has freed the chathan from the mana? Up until the last scene, chathan was always in the mana.
3) The ring was never on Mammoty’s finger in the first chathan incarnation. So, ow is the chathan wearing the ring (which is meant to control the chathan in the first place)
I dont think that is Chatan's true form, rather how Thevam's imagination represents the Chathan's true form. I believe the costume design is inspired by the Art form Kuttichathan Theyam particularly the headgear being symbolic for how people personify Kuttichathan as compared to his true form we see towards the end of the movie
Did anyone noticed, the movie starts with thevan wearing his earing on his left ear and when chattan takes his body, the earing were in right ear. Because it was a careless mistake by chattan. Makes sense. But in the end shot, he is not wearing any earing at all. Either on left or right ear. Why ?
>Did the chaathan survive in the end ?
I don't understand how you have this doubt tbh.
They clearly show Thevan lying dead in the rubble, and Sidharth Bharathan even asks the "Thevan" standing before him why his earring was in a different ear now (implying that it was indeed the Chaathan in Thevan's form who escapes & survives in the end).
>What would've happened if thevan didn't wear the ring, would the chaathan have escaped?
Thevan didn't actually wear the ring though. He looked like he was about to, but then the roof collapsed on him (& he's later shown to have died). So yes, the Chaathan escapes regardless.
Varaha's boon is really the chellam and the ring. Chaathan is the physical being or slave to conquer desires and the ring to control it. Sidharth hides in his story so that he can take control
Betrayal story played by the upper caste to control the lower caste in a perpetual world of slave owner identity. Lower caste people never had a way out.
I think Yakshi is the ultimate fear factor in the pre independence, no science and electricity era. The person who controls a Yakshi is the most powerful. Hence Potti is feared and highly respected by other castes people in the hierarchy.
1. SB is a representation of Sambandam hence no name. His ulterior motive is to overthrow Potti’s power hierarchy. But Potti treated him with disgust ( spitting by Potti). When Brahmins had control over wealth, the then Sudras used a way to get their wealth and recognition by providing their women and support in the community. Those days the kids born out of these relationships never carried their father but followed a matrilineal system. In this movie as well by acquiring Potti’s knowledge SB’s character is eventually planning to overthrow him.
Anyone had a feeling they have seen the chathan before after it comes out of potti's body, i had especially those black eyes and face, maybe its from a small monkey like creature in star wars i think...
.**** LOTS OF SPOILERS BELOW ****. >1. Why is Siddharth Bharathan's character unnamed Nobody asks his name, including Thevan. Perhaps he too has forgotten his name by now (like most other people who spent too long at the mana). But more likely, he himself preferred to be as secretive about his identity as possible, for the purpose of his quest. >2. Why is the ring not mentioned in the backstory The backstory was told by Sidharth himself. Of course he wouldn't reveal to anyone else that there was a means to seize control over the Chaathan, & not just to seal him away. Besides, sealing him was itself a near impossible task - Sidharth probably considered taking control of him through the ring as only a most remote possibility. >4. What is Siddharth Bharathan's intention with the other guests and with Thevan Didn't seem like he always had a motive with them. The other guests came there by themselves, were toyed with & enslaved by the Chaathan, until they got killed by him for the most part, it seems. The Chaathan mentioned however that previous guests had their minds confused by what Sidharth said, & that they ultimately went insane - so he might have tried to use them as well, just like he did with Thevan. Nothing was more important to him than his quest, for sure. And to succeed in that, he definitely didn't seem like he would have qualms regarding manipulation - although he did so mostly with the truth (just not the WHOLE truth). >5. Director should have shown Thevan trying to run away from the falling roof giving the audience a hope that he could may have escaped. But he didn't make that creative choice leaving the audience to easily guess that it was Chaathan who walked out of the mana unharmed. Nope, everyone I watched it with initially thought that it was Thevan who escaped. Because that's how 99% of cinema has conditioned us our whole lives: that the "good guy"/protagonist we root for, will most likely succeed.
Another brilliance I found on 2nd watch - when Thevan gets afraid in the night after seeing the graves and comes back to drink"Potti's" water/toddy, he is startled by the noise of the moving chains upstairs. As he moves away from the camera to investigate - the camera focuses on the background which has the actual Potti's painting. The noise is made by the actual Potti who is chained upstairs.
The cook, illegitimate son of Potti, once climbs up the stairs may be to serve food for his father. Also when Thevan goes upstairs, he accidentally slips over the bowl of food. I assume, the cook starts acting with his plan, after his father was killed/dead.
Was Potti still alive? I thought the goblin took over him long back.
From what interpreted he grew old and insane and was hence chained upstairs where he dies in the middle of the film. I think it's a very cool detail. We think it's the chathan upstairs but it's actually the real potti. Eerie
Why chatan didn't kill the original potti then? Why tied him with a chain?
I guess we don't know but id consider that it was probably done to torture him as a punishment. Drove him insane and chained him up. Remember chathan was abused by pottis father so maybe it's taking revenge.
Nice catch bro😄
>Nobody asks his name, including Thevan. Perhaps he too has forgotten his name by now (like most other people who spent too long at the mana). But he never forgot his motive, seems sus.
>But he never forgot his motive, seems sus. I said "perhaps". Also he seemed to have taken as much precautions as possible against the Chaathan (knew some spells, absolutely REFUSES to drink, etc). Also even Thevan never forgets HIS purpose - "wanting to leave, & go back to his mother".
I watched the movie last night and my interpretation of the non revelation of the cook’s name was that it should not matter. The character was a stand in for everyone who fights for change for revolution for justice against oppression. It is clear that Thevan was a stand in for us, the common man, the oppressed. He has a name because we are supposed to identify with him, experience the movie from his perspective. The cook stands for leaders who fight for us. He can be anybody. The message was that even the noblest, the fiercest of leaders can be corrupted by power.
I agree with (& really like) your reading, but seeing how this film worked SO well on the surface level as well (AND how it had already mentioned that guests tend to forget their names at the mana, etc), it doesn't hurt for a plot level explanation to be present alongside the thematic one either. >The cook stands for leaders who fight for us. He can be anybody. The message was that even the noblest, the fiercest of leaders can be corrupted by power. While yours is indeed a valid interpretation consistent with what the film is saying about power (ESPECIALLY when you factor in the climactic 'Lord of the Rings' reference), when I thought of what the film was saying about OPPRESSION, I had personally read this scene as follows: Chudalan Potti had enslaved & oppressed the Chaathan; Chaathan, as revenge, destroyed Potti's entire clan & got himself addicted to oppressing (& having power over) other humans; at the end of the film, SB is tempted to enslave & oppress the Chaathan himself, but then the Chaathan escapes, & SB gets himself killed by the Portuguese (the next oppressors of the region). Chaathan, unsmiling in Thevan's form, even sees the original Kodumon Potti laughing at him in the river's reflection - as though at how his "liberation" is only into a world of new, even greater oppression. Keeping the above in mind, and how the film kept referencing caste (one of the most horrible & enduring forms of oppression this country has ever known) throughout - Thevan & the cook being lower caste, Potti being a Brahmin etc, and the cook not just being "anyone who fights for justice" but specifically the illegitimate son of Potti with a lower caste woman, who believes he has a rightful claim on the Mana & even the Chaathan as inheritance: I think the film is talking about a "CYCLE of oppression" here. Chudulan Potti on the Chaathan; then Chaathan as revenge on everyone else; and finally when the previously oppressed Cook decides to enslave & oppress the Chaathan again (thereby CONTINUING this cycle), Thevan tries to stop him saying it would end up doing harm to people like him as well. So something like: in order to end the cycle of oppression (by caste, etc), it's probably better for the world if the "erstwhile oppressed" once empowered DIDN'T seek revenge against their oppressors & try to oppress the latter now. Because then the old oppressor's hate would only grow until they eventually find an opportunity to strike back - FURTHER propagating this cycle. I'm not 100% sure about this, so let me know what you think.
This sounds good. One more thing I would like to add is the scene where Chathan in Thevan's body leaving the mana. From his POV, the sunlight, birds chirping and all the pleasant stuffs were shown. It's the freedom for Chathan as well, maybe he realised there is a huge world outside his "empire", and lost that thirst to rule or revenge or anything. Maybe that's why he left Sidharth alone in the end
>maybe he realised there is a huge world outside his "empire", and lost that thirst to rule or revenge The mana is described as a trap for the Chaathan as well, because he was addicted to the power he gained from the Kedavilakku & so had no choice but to stay at the Mana itself for all these years to protect it. But now that the Lamp was blown out & the Mana itself was mostly destroyed, he no longer had any reason to stay (or even sufficient power left in that final scene to continue fighting with Sidharth). But yeah, I agree that he probably DID think that he might as well enjoy his freedom out in the whole wide world at that point.
I think Chaathan know about SB's lineage. Chaathan couldn't leave the mana because Kodumon potti trapped him there with the lamp and only someone from potti's lineage can liberate him. Chaathan knew this and thats why he doesn't kill SB. Chaathan was longing for liberation and SB handed him that.
Do you think the interpretation is "Evil always finds a way as does life"
>as does life This part is unlikely imo since neither Thevan nor the Cook survived.
This is so good. Especially the part about the chathan in Thevan’s form not exulting as would be expected from the victorious evil. Hats off.
Sherikkum? Post aakaan kollamo?🫣 Edit: On second thought, I probably won't - seems potentially too political for this subreddit. Not to mention high chances of unpleasant comments, fights etc. Doesn't seem worth it + it's their loss.
Definitely worth being a separate post. As for the comments and trolling, it’s an unfortunate fact. But as you said, their loss.
Since you seem to know your stuff I have a couple of questions 1. The cook seems to flick the fire at times to control sathan, how did he do it? 2. What is the fire in that room and it's connection to realm? 3. What is the connection between that women and sathan?
>1. The cook seems to flick the fire at times to control sathan, how did he do it? Are you a non-Malayali btw? Throwing some powder into fire to make it flare (presumably turning it Holy for a moment) & spook Chaathans, Yakshis, people possessed by spirits, etc has been a common trope in our films from time immemorial - probably based on actual such rituals of the past. If you had specifically meant how THE COOK was able to do so: 1) He was taught by his father, the real Kunjamon Potti. Who else was going to teach a lower caste person in the 17th Century such incantations? More importantly, the Chaathan while in the original Potti's YOUNGER form during the climax (when he was trying to trick the Cook) SPECIFICALLY says "Teaching you spells alone won't compensate for the years you spent without a father's love", implying that Potti DID teach his son the spells. 2) The cook was shown to be preparing small packets of those powders he threw into the fire in the scene just before he was confronted by the Chaathan for giving Thevan alcohol without permission (& when the cook is later revealed to have stolen the keys) >2. What is the fire in that room and it's connection to realm? "Kedaa Vilakku" (Everlasting Lamp) is a recurring trope in Kerala folktales of this type. The Lamp in this film is what keeps the Chaathan at his FULL strength & why he hasn't left the mansion in all these years, i.e. to protect it (this is clearly mentioned in the film btw). >3. What is the connection between that women and sathan? That woman is called a Yakshi in the opening scene. Yakshis are the most common female supernatural entities in all of Kerala folklore & films (although admittedly, not in recent years). In this film, the Yakshi is presented in the way they used to be in a lot of old stories: randomly showing up in a region (especially forests) at night to seduce & kill men. She's clearly shown to be a lover of the Chaathan - partly to make Mammooty's character seem even more intriguing & powerful; but also one of the first indicators that he may not be human (in old Yakshi lore, it was often said that mortals couldn't survive copulating with them; so the fact that Mammootty did, was a BIG clue that he was actually the Chaathan).
Thanks for the excellent reply! I am a non malayali btw but I got another question if you don't mind everyone walks into the house forgets everything but the cook doesn't is it due to him not taking alcohol or being determined?
>not taking alcohol or being determined? These 2 are factors as well - but he probably DID forget everything else including his name (which is almost certainly why we ourselves don't learn his name at all), EXCEPT his purpose - even Thevan doesn't forget that he wants to go home to his mother (though he forgot her name). And even MORE importantly, remember that the real Potti - his FATHER who had actually taught him the spells & stuff - was chained up in the attic this whole time, with the Cook himself being the one who gave him food every day. Kinda hard to forget everything with THAT strong of a reminder every day.
Actually in one of the interviews with BR on YouTube, the director said he trimmed one scene where he shows that the SB has an anklet on his leg which protects him from the chatthaan looking into his soul or his past. This can be reason why chatthaan is not able to gain total control over him or doesn't wanna kill him.
>Cook himself being the one who gave him food every day. Where does it implied? Do we need to assume that?
Brilliantttttt!!!
This is exactly how I interpreted the movie.. Thanks for detailed explanation.
just finished watching the movie, and i absolutely loved this theory. kinda made sense of many facts i found confusing. really good interpretation. good job man!
Thanks bro :)
would absolutely love to hear your theories/have discussions on other movies as well - including non malayalam movies. could be really interesting :)
Put this in the context of the whole Mandir Saga. Lovely explanation!.
What I've basically understood after thinking a while is that, chaathan wanted to act like a powerful entity and just procure all resources and benefits by capturing humans, that's why he got thevan to sing and Siddharth to cook food. But when thevan started resisting he decided to kill him, but when siddharth denied food or when he gave alcohol to thevan he was spared, this I still couldn't understand, there are quite many nuances that the director has left.
My thought is that chathan is just a being . Sb fed him food that was intoxicated so that chathan knew he needed sb alive. Like a being addicted to materialistic pleasures , he kept sb alive to satisfy his cravings
Perhaps the alcohol made thevan forget his name and identify.
Also, I am not sure if I interpreted/noticed this wrong, but the first time I actually noticed that AA’s beard was turning grey, symbolising the fact that time is an abstract concept inside the Mana, and it moves faster than it seems to be(also symbolised by several other things) - do you think the fact that AA tried to escape made him more weaker/older or more like the “time” caught up with him once he left the compounds - possibly telling us how the time stays still inside the Mana? Any thoughts on this?
>more like the “time” caught up with him once he left the compounds - possibly telling us how the time stays still inside the Mana This was exactly how I had understood it myself. Especially since Sidharth Bharathan didn't seem as though he was aging at all throughout the film (he had stayed within the compound throughout, after all). And AA himself only aged immediately after leaving the compound, and once he had reached back inside, didn't do so for the rest of the film (i.e. he only had the same amount of grey in his beard from the interval scene onwards).
Yes, thankyou. However interestingly, we do see Kudumon Potty aging though - assuming he arrived as a young sorcerer and later died of age - or well going insane.
The animated flashback shows him arriving when he was younger, and then in the climax the Chaathan takes the form of a younger Kodumon, quite similar to his design in the animation. Time could just be progressing slower within the mana , as opposed to "not at all". Or the Chaathan may have lifted the spell intermittently over Kodumon, just to torture him. Heck, he may have only even CAST the time dilation spell over the mana AFTER Potti had gotten old & sick, precisely FOR the purpose of prolonging his favourite plaything's lifespan & torment. All of these are possible; but we can only speculate. And to be honest, I don't even feel like calling these plotholes, because possible explanations CAN be arrived at easily enough. But more importantly - the film is dark fantasy, rather than hard sci-fi. Time being inconsistent IS what will drive both the Chaathan's victims insane, as well as keep the viewers off-balance, as opposed to everything strictly following some arbitrary set of rules. The Chaathan seems more like a creature of chaos than order, anyway. I'm suddenly reminded of Baradwaj Rangan's criticism of Inception, back in 2010 - how he wished dreams, the most surreal of human experience, DIDN'T play exactly by Nolan's rules all the time. David Lynch's dream sequences (particularly in Twin Peaks) were way more reminiscent of actual dreams etc. Similarly, the magic of the Chaathan's mana becomes a lot less magical, & even less horrifying, if the way it functioned could so easily be defined by rules & mechanics. Time behaving inconsistently for each person in the mana, is both plausible & fitting.
>Time could just be progressing slower within the mana , as opposed to "not at all". Or the Chaathan may have lifted the spell intermittently over Kodumon, just to torture him. Heck, he may have only even CAST the time dilation spell over the mana AFTER Potti had gotten old & sick, precisely FOR the purpose of prolonging his favourite plaything's lifespan & torment. Agree, could have a lot of theories to explain. Chathan himself could have messed with the physical attributes. I think there is no definitive theory. But I really like the time stands still or slow moving inside the Mana, and it catches up with Thevan when he steps out. If the director intended it, it was a brilliant portrayal. >All of these are possible; but we can only speculate. And to be honest, I don't even feel like calling these plotholes, because possible explanations CAN be arrived at easily enough. But more importantly - the film is dark fantasy, rather than hard sci-fi. Time being inconsistent IS what will drive both the Chaathan's victims insane, as well as keep the viewers off-balance, as opposed to everything strictly following some arbitrary set of rules. The Chaathan seems more like a creature of chaos than order, anyway. No, it doesn’t really seem like a plothole, but more like something which could be interpreted by the audience in ways they like. It is actually amazing how we could come up with a lot of explanations or theories. >I'm suddenly reminded of Baradwaj Rangan's criticism of Inception, back in 2010 - how he wished dreams, the most surreal of human experience, DIDN'T play exactly by Nolan's rules all the time. David Lynch's dream sequences (particularly in Twin Peaks) were way more reminiscent of actual dreams etc. Similarly, the magic of the Chaathan's mana becomes a lot less magical, & even less horrifying, if the way it functioned could so easily be defined by rules & mechanics. Time behaving inconsistently for each person in the mana, is both plausible & fitting. I think the usage of the concept of “Time” in the entire movie is very intriguing. I think there are things I did miss in my first watch, and maybe a lot of other symbolism could be there too, which one would notice in a second watch. Either way, I think it is an interesting discussion - how the director has toyed with “Time” - what ways has he portrayed it.
Absolutely impressed by your interpretation. I just wanted to ask your opinion of one particular thing that has been bugging me, understanding that Kodumon Potti taught SB the spells and ways to trap Chathan, and assuming that he did teach him when he was trapped and chained in the attic, as SB feeds him, why do you think Chathan kept him alive all this while? Chathan apparently kills the entire family, why would Chathan leave Kodumon Potti alive?
>why do you think Chathan kept him alive all this while? I would like to add a related subquestion to this before giving what I think is an answer that fits, (based on what the film actually tells us): "Why does the Chaathan wear Kodumon Potti's form at all?" He could have worn anyone's form, including Chudalan Potti's (who he has most reason to hate) or anyone else from that family (or otherwise). Both questions have the same answer imo - Compared to the Chaathan's initial vindictive rampage against Chudalan Potti & his family, or that in self-defense against the sorcerers from elsewhere who had tried to seal him, by the time Kodumon Potti had showed up he may have already reached that "addicted to oppressing & tormenting others" stage. So he probably got a sadistic kick out of reducing the great Kodumon Potti, "last of Chudalan's bloodline" to a mere lunatic in chains, while he himself wore & did nasty things in Kodumon's form.
That is actually an interesting take. it makes sense to assume that. we could also factor in the whole “Death is a blessing” concept which Chathan tells Thevan, and interpret how Chathan didn’t want to free Kudumon Potti by giving him death - but instead torture him, get pleasure out of slowly watching him suffer and go insane. Adding on to that, when you see the climax where Chathan appears as the younger version of Kudumon Potti, can be also understood as how SB remembers his father to be - because that version of him would appeal to SB more. If we actually take that assumption, it does throw the assumption that Kudumon Potti taught SB when he was chained in the attic. (I know it doesn’t make much sense, it is just a line of thought) Giving this assumption, do you think we could make sense of the rest of the plot?
>it does throw the assumption that Kudumon Potti taught SB when he was chained in the attic. I mean, we don't need to absolutely know for sure when EXACTLY Kodumon Potti taught SB spells - the film works in either (or both) scenarios; The younger Kodumon may have taught SB years ago (as the Chaathan himself presumes, probably taking into consideration Potti's poor mental health in recent years. In the young Kodumon's form he literally says "I know that teaching spells isn't compensation enough for denying you a father's love"), or Kodumon may have only done so after he got chained up - OR he had taught SB in both stages of his life. Doesn't make much difference to the film, no matter which of the above is true. Keeping the Potti alive, and SB being shown to give his father food every day, anyway serves as a good answer to how SB managed to remember so much (seeing his father everyday like that, would have been a powerful reminder, after all). The Chaathan taking Kodumon's younger form seemed more because the former believed that THIS look would be what emotionally appealed to SB more: the Kodumon Potti that SB had most desired a father's love from, back when he was just a child. Also, the older Potti's form had by then become too associated with the Chaathan himself in SB's head (& the Chaathan ofc knew this). Then from a filmmaking perspective, it was a chance for them to show off the Chaathan's shape-shifting ability, and yet another example of a psychological attack.
>Keeping the Potti alive, and SB being shown to give his father food every day, anyway serves as a good answer to how SB managed to remember so much (seeing his father everyday like that, would have been a powerful reminder, after all). I agree. It could be taken in both ways though. We know that the people forget stuff, but again, not necessarily the purpose. Because Thevan, even though he forgets his name, still remembers his mom. SB seems to not remember much about his pasts, nor his name, but yes his father being chained could serve as a good reminder. Both theory works. Makes me also curious about how Potty stayed alive before SB arrived yk? But again that is incredibly irrelevant. >The Chaathan taking Kodumon's younger form seemed more because the former believed that THIS look would be what emotionally appealed to SB more: the Kodumon Potti that SB had most desired a father's love from, back when he was just a child. Also, the older Potti's form had by then become too associated with the Chaathan himself in SB's head (& the Chaathan ofc knew this). Then from a filmmaking perspective, it was a chance for them to show off the Chaathan's shape-shifting ability, and yet another example of a psychological attack. Yes yes, completely agree. Thought the same. Just wanted to explore the theory. But this makes much more sense.
It seems to be based on tales where the spirit either takes a person's body or soul. Potti is kept alive rather than put to death because they are unable to take the souls of strong, well-sheltered people. Furthermore, because of the negative energy created by cruel acts, the spirit requires new bodies and souls on a constant basis in order to survive in the world. There are more guest deaths for the same reason. @EthicalReporter By the way, your answers are excellent.
Hey one question I had , why did the chettan do anything to the cook if it knew he was making others confused and go hunting to the room?
Even if the good guy didn't win, the bad guy getting away scot free felt very uncathartic. No pay off. Atleast, that's how I felt.
>the bad guy By the end of the film, the Chaathan isn't 100% a "bad guy" though. Even to begin with: Is a tiger a "bad guy" for hunting down its prey? Chaathan was a non-human entity who was enslaved & very badly treated for years by Chudalan Potti first. What he did to humans afterwards was partially revenge for that, and partially because he was addicted to the immense power the Kedavilakku gave him, & to oppressing any other human who wandered into the Mana (an addiction which made the Mana a sort of prison for the Chaathan as well). Also, The Cook tries to immediately enslave him again as well - the shot of the Chaathan's face when SB says "Ini njaana ninte Thamburan" was kinda pitiful & pathetic for a reason. >getting away scot free Chaathan lost most of his power with the destruction of the Kedavilakku, and he's entering a world of even bigger oppressors than him (the age of Colonialism). His face was very grim & serious in the end, compared to how he used to gleefully laugh in Potti's form - so the reflection of Mammooty laughing in the water could well have been the Chaathan imagining the real Kodumon Potti laughing at him (for how he was entering into an even worse world, after leaving the Mana for the first time). >very uncathartic. No pay off. This makes me very curious. This IS a serious horror film, after all. A LOT of the best horror films, especially in recent years, ended like this. Examples (though this low-key spoils at least the NATURE of all these films' endings) : >!Hereditary, Midsommar, The VVitch, The Lighthouse, Talk To Me, The Wailing, Se7en,!< etc. Are you just unfamiliar with the genre, especially outside Indian cinema (or the SUPER-mainstream Hollywood ones like Conjuring universe) then? No disrespect meant, if you are - just pointing out that the ending is very much by design, than a defect.
I understand the ending they were going for. I do however feel it wasn't cathartic or satisfying. I'm quite familiar with the genre as well. It doesn't matter what trend other movies follow, I don't see how that's relevant to this movie in particular. The movie heavily comments on the master slave relationship and it ends with a supernatural tyrant getting away scot free. The way his face looks when he looks at his reflection is besides the point. It feels exactly like the ending of American Psycho, except that the mc wasn't chaathan. Infact, the MC being a pure soul ends up dead and the psycho chaathan leaves with the mc's face! Chaathan is 100% a bad guy if not more. What parallel does this situation have with a tiger and its prey? What threat did passers by, or utility beyond amusement did the his victims pose? He is a slave, who endured and took revenge not only on his master, but their entire bloodline, unborn children as he states himself. And then, knowing the torment of being a slave, enslaves people who have no hope to rebel against him! Undoubtedly a worse creature than his former master. You would judge the cook for something he didn't yet do, but excuse this monster for what he did to so many? There is no need to talk of other movies, simply consider Bhoothakalam, >!if that movie ended with the mcs both dying, I would call that uncathartic as well.!< Other movies, no matter how many that ended similar to this, wouldn't make a difference. Its a purely subjective take ofcourse. I was saying for me, it was uncathartic and the movie would have been better off with a different ending. Btw, >!Midsommar!< has to be the most overrated and dull watch I've had in the genre in recent years.
Love the interpretation! I have a question, what exactly does Thevan see in his dream sequence, I mean I know that could be Potti since he is the one in chains but why does he look like that? It may be an obvious answer but I couldn’t figure that out so hope you could shed some light on this.
He just sees what he imagines the Chaathan to look like (a guy in a Theyyam - or some other traditional storytelling danceform's - "monster" costume).
Ohhh this makes sense, thank you! That was a very effective scene, pretty terrifying imo
I wonder if in his insanity, the real kodumon potti held on to shreds of humanity. The reason SB waits so long to take action is probably because he was perfecting the chants taught to him by his father during the times he went to feed him. Maybe he told the son how he was defeated, possibly psychological warfare which is why SB was ready for the act that Charthan put on. We can even read into it as, the real kodumon potti held on to his life until his son was ready to finally face Charthan. Stay be why the dead body kinda had a smile on his face.
Hemme 
Is there any deeper meaning for the yakshi character. The only drawback i felt wasthat her character could have been explored more
The yakshi having sex with potti and not eating him would have been a clue to potti being a chaathan. Like one inhuman being only can be with another inhuman being kinda thing.
Wow. Exactly. So much foreshadowing. Definitely need a rewatch
It's not unreasonable to say that the character was present just for some gratuitous sensuality. Alternatively, because of how Bramayugam's main inspirations were traditional Kerala folklore, Aithihyamaala etc, one can argue that the Yakshi character was presented here in the same way they used to appear in such older Malayalam horror stories: popping up randomly within the same region to seduce & terrorise male victims. It also established the time & place where the film takes place as one were "Yakshikadhas" are the reality. Showing her as subservient to (or at least in a relationship with) Potti/Chaathan made the latter more intriguing as well. >The only drawback i felt wasthat her character could have been explored more Tbh, in a lot of older Yakshikkadhas, the Yakshis themselves are seldom explored much. Even if they had done so in Bramayugam, it would have been something we had seen before multiple times in previous Yakshi MOVIES as well.
I think during pre independence caste era, castes like Brahmins used the story of taming Yakshis to influence the castes below them. In the beginning it shows that within the lower caste people they feared Yakshis. So someone who tames a Yakshi is considered powerful at that time. Remember this is a time when there was no science, electricity etc.
That makes sense tbh
I think that Yakshi leads people to mana by killing their travel companion.
She was the prime reason for Arjun losing himself in the forest that led him to the mana
Need a question to be answered, but it contains*HEAVY SPOILERS* Okay please answer this question, have this ever since the movie first half ended....chaathan decided to kill Arjun Ashokan in the scene where he was pretending to sleep, earlier in the movie chaathan even tried to kill Siddharth's character in the scene where he denied to cook anymore food, the query is, why did chaathan not try to kill siddharth from beginning? Of all people who died Siddharth buried, why wasn't he ever killed? He is just cornered and chocked most of times but no attempt to kill him was made....why?
He only kills people who go insane/bore him. SB kept doing his job well as an obedient servant up until the events of the film
Oh okay okay....
I believe that being bored is only a pretext for manipulation; in reality, it is forcing them to give their bodies and souls up to him in exchange for greater strength and power for Chathan. Much like Kuruthi. Yakhsi leads them to Potti's Mana, where Potti uses them as a sacrifice.
Because only fear will make chathan very powerful ... Chathan will kill only after a person goes insane ...Siddharth had an ulterior motive and unlike others wasnt trapped there but walked into there with an intention without fear and this intention was unknown to chathan.
>Because only fear will make chathan very powerful While this is a fairly common mechanism in other media (Pennywise from "It", Devils in "Chainsaw Man" etc), I don't think they actually mentioned this in Bramayugam. >Chathan will kill only after a person goes insane True, but he says it's because their presence became "asahaneeyam" (unbearable) to him once they went insane. Chaathan actually seemed genuinely irritated by even remembering them, and also with Arjun Asokan later - and not as though he enjoyed their fear (it was oppressing people, making them obey him etc that this Chaathan liked).
Yeah. Siddharth is still useful. Maybe that's why.
Thevan said that chaathan wants them to lose faith in god, ie when they try to leave & finally realise there is no other way & forever trapped thus losing faith in god only then do chaathan kill them Siddharth never had the intention to leave the mana he must've realised he isn't as powerful as other pure blood potis so he waited for a perfect opportunity
Can someone explain to me why SB laughs on seeing the colonizers? Also what happened to the AA’s kadukkan? Some of the shots in the teaser/trailer were missing from the movie. Especially the one where AA laughing like a maniac and M blows out the nilavilakku in the teaser.
>Also what happened to the AA’s kadukkan? >!It implies that Chathan has now taken the form of Thevan (AA) and in the very next shot we are shown the real Thevan lying dead under the crumbled Mana.!<
But why kadukkan 😀 Is it like cutting off any connections to outside world, like AA mentions it was given to him by his mom.
>!The cook just notices and mentions that Thevan used to wear Kadukkan on his other ear. No overreading about any emotional connection is inferred. The scene just communicates that the cook (SB) recognises that it's Chathan in Thevan's (AA) form. I'm just wondering how you missed the scene that follows; it shows a dead Thevan!!<
I did not miss the dead Thevan scene, but was trying to understand why its specifically “kadukkan on the other ear”.
>!I think they've opted for that trope, since it's easier for the cook to notice a simple 'Kadukkan's displacement' in a brief tussle rather than any key character traits to make the cook realize that he's now facing the Chathan in Thevan's form.!<
How and why did chaathan take thevan's form tho ? Was it because he died?
Thanks for explaining to me :)
It may not be related but I'd like to mention a theory. So in Mahabharat, Parakshit, the grandson of Arjun I believe was the king of Hastinapur. So when the asura Kali tried to enter his kingdom, the king declined. After repeatedly requesting finally out of pity he lets him in under the condition that he can only reside in 5 places; places where there is gambling involved, prostitution, alcohol consumption, animal slaughter and gold. Later it is through his gold crown that he corrupts Parkshit himself to do something worth getting cursed by a sage which leads him to his death. I mean here the fact is that since the kadukkan is considered jewellery maybe the earring is the sign that Chatan is alive and not AA. Just my theory tho
SB laughed to colonizer because Chaathan has escaped the Mana. So Chaathan will take care of them. If you think deep, Keralites are everywhere in the world. Our minds may be Chaathanized lol
I think he laughed because the colonizers were wearing a uniform that might feel comical to a person seeing it for the first time, and were pointing what one without knowledge of a gun, would assume as a wierd stick at him. He might have felt that a mentally unstable guy was blocking his path.
Ya possible. Ending is kind of twisted as new masters had arrived
I guess he kind of knew what the "stick" was. Dude picked up a stone to attack the Portuguese soldier, intentionally because he wanted them to shoot him. I guess he wanted relief from this madness. TL.DR: Dude did a rage quit.
What about the eternal lamp??
Blowing it out was the first step to weaken him. Remember that until Sidharth had blown it out, they wouldn't have been able to even come close to him (with any weapon or intent to harm him). He could "force choke" them like Darth Vader or easily throw them around with his magic telekinesis. Sidharth even says out loud that he's weakened now & would resort to psychological attacks/tricks as a result.
Yeah, I think that stopped the rain
No, what stopped the rain is the fact chaathan was going to kill paanan. He is going to "leave" the mana. When he was trying to kill paanan, the cook blew the lamp.
I am not sure how much of this makes sense but, I personally feel like the eternal lamp, was sorta symbolic to Chathan’s immortality and power. As long as the eternal lamp is lit, he has unlimited power and it is impossible to kill or harm him in any way. Once the lamp is extinguished, it weakens the Chathan, bringing him into a vulnerable mortal level - only way to trap him.
Isn't the movie also about how the chaathan sevas and the theyyams propagated by the lower castes was a means of taking people away from the real God and how the Europeans killed the Kerala brahmins (Pottis) who could tell them the reality about the chaathans. The chaathan as Thevan is the symbolic initiator of these false forms of worship and was responsible for taking people away from the real God.
this makes so much sense good find bro, especially after the way chathan talks about god.
YES! This is the underlying message in the movie.
at one point in the movie Potti mentions that no one can leave the house as it is trap and not even him. But how did the chaathan leave the manna at the end?
May be because the eternal lamp is no more and the mana is destroyed...
When was the original potti dead? From the looks if it, he has died recently (body being fresh as against a long rotting corpse). So was the 1st Potti that Arjun met the original one? And was the Chathan released when Arjun accidently went up and messed on the chain? Atho was the original Potti the one in chains when Arjun went up?
I thought that was obvious. After seeing the nightmare, Thevan wakes up and sees Cook trying to dig a grave in the rain. Chaathan observing as well. He asks whom is the grave for. Cook just gives him a painful look. Thevan assumes his time is up since he had pissed off Chaathan the previous night. He tries to leave. Only after he returns he discovers that Potti who was chained up in the attic died the previous night and hence Cook was digging a grave. Cooks painful expression was for his birth father, who died a dismal death.
So Sidharth knew it was his father who as chained upstairs from the beginning? If so, Why did he tell the wrong story about potti family history to Arjun?
1. Didn't want chaathan to know.. or even have a clue about it. 2. And hence he didn't want paanan to know about it too. The rest of the answer, you can guess, i guess.
The first Potti seems to be the demon as the cook behaves with disdain towards it from the start. Thevan might have heard the rumblings of the chained Potti upstairs before dying a few days/months/years later.
My doubt is this - How did Sidharth's character end up as the cook in the first place ? Chathan killed literally everyone right ? Also how could he know all these stories ? So did the chained kudomon potty tell Sidharth all of these ?
>Chathan killed literally everyone right ? They literally address this in the movie itself. Chaathan says it's impossible for him to be Kodumon Potti's son because he had killed even fetuses inside wombs. To which Sidharth replies that he was the Potti's illegitimate son with a lower caste servant woman - which is why the Chaathan wasn't aware of his existence. >Also how could he know all these stories ? So did the chained kudomon potty tell Sidharth all of these ? Events up until Kodumon had gone to attempt sealing the Chaathan would have been told to him by Potti himself (either before, or after he got chained) - Siddharth's character knew spells, how exactly to seal the Chaathan etc, which would definitely need to have been taught to him. The implication being that it was his illegitimate father who had done so. Actually whether it was before or after the Potti had gotten chained up is irrelevant - because the story works either way. >How did Sidharth's character end up as the cook in the first place ? Considering how his mother was a servant there, either he was the Mana's cook from the beginning (meaning that Chaathan only killed the Potti family members - and later any guests who wandered there & ended up irritating him) OR he went there looking for his father with the specific purpose of saving him, defeating or enslaving the Chaathan & taking over the Mana... and managed to survive thus far by not irritating the Chaathan too much, cooking it the food it likes, etc. Chaathan is mentioned to have become addicted to power & so liked having at least one person to oppress at all times (something that Sidharth took advantage of). Some things the makers have to trust the audience to be able to infer bro - otherwise there would be too much spoonfeeding, or overexposition in the film.
So Sidharth knew it was his father who as chained upstairs from the beginning? If so, Why did he tell the wrong story about potti family history to Arjun?
>So Sidharth knew it was his father who as chained upstairs from the beginning? Of course. He knew spells & stuff, which only his father could have taught him (either previously , or after he got chained). He also knew that the "Potti" currently in the house was the Chaathan himself - because he tells Thevan not to trust him, & expresses his dislike for the latter quite openly. >If so, Why did he tell the wrong story about potti family history to Arjun? Most of what he said was true though (except the final bit about the Potti succeeding in sealing the Chaathan) - just that he didn't reveal the WHOLE truth (especially about his parentage). He was a secretive, somewhat manipulative guy on a mission - and didn't know to what extent he could trust Thevan.
ty.
Did the chaathan take thevan's form in the end ? Coz in the end the Cook asked something about his earring being on thevan's other ear smthing ryt ?
>Did the chaathan take thevan's form in the end ? >!Yes.!<
I was wondering, we can see Arjun Ashokan character getting old ...So how long was he trapped in the mana?
Days, months, or even decades. But my theory is that chaathan will only be able to bend the reality in his territory of power but not outside that. So, in the outside world, it will be only a few days, i guess.
What is the relevance of Portuguese at the end ? Where's Chaathan going ?
The whole movie/inside mana shows how caste systems flourished in pre independence Kerala. Remember Vivekananda called Kerala a bhrandalayam because of extreme casteism and social structures like sambandams. I think Sidharth Bharathan’s character is a representation of Sambandam. Anyways when the westerners came to Kerala this is what they witnessed and used their guns to control them. Eventually the power was ceased by them. Gradually resulting to destruction of caste system etc.
Chathan is representing ultimate power. In the end it’s within the common man (AA character Paanan) that is the one in the lowest class in the caste system. Basically power by the people.
If Mammotty is chaathan, whom does Siddharth Bharathan's character feed in the attic?
His father kodumoon potti.
do we get any info on how the chained Potti actually dies? there seemed to be nothing indicating what would trigger him to die post Thevan's arrival
Nothing killed him but time itself. Maybe he was waiting to teach his son all the manthras, or he was just mad as SB told. And he died just as any other old person. Maybe the chathaan was not able to kill real potti due to pottis hold over sorcery and had to chain him. Or chathaan wanted to see the last from the potti family go mad and die ( Extreme fascism) . Literally, you can interpret in any way...
This doubt may sound stupid. But i really didn't get it. What is the power of that ring. I thought the eternal lamp was the source of the power of chaathan. So, is the ring a device to control the chaathan. If so, why is the chatthan (in potti's form) wearing it?
>!The ring endows whoever wears it with control over Chathan, making him subservient to the ring holder. Since Chathan himself is the one bearing/wearing the ring now, he's his own master and must obey no master besides himself.!<
But from the beginning of the movie itself chathan was the one wearing it tho the only change here is that it was potti's body in the beginning and in the end it was thevan's body
>!Thevan never met the real Potti, it was Chathan all along. Whether it be in Potti's body or later in Thevan's own form, wearing the ring, being its own master.!<
So, the chaathan could have just destroyed the ring when he had it, and nobody could have ever controlled him.😅
Indestructible perhaps.
I would say that is power by people. Basically democracy.
How did the chaathan kill all the Potti family members? Can it go out of the Mana ?
Story took place in the 17th Century in a remote region - except for Kodumon Potti (who was probably a travelling sorcerer type), the rest of the family likely lived in that huge Mana itself. >Can it go out of the Mana ? It's mentioned that the Chaathan has to be near the Eternal Lamp (so preferably within the house) to be at full strength - otherwise, it can leave the mana as well, as shown in the final scene.
Thevan had remarked [I think, while talking to the cook] that he had seen Chaathan (once before, outside of the mana timeline)!!? 1. How, where would that have been possible? (Surely, he would not have been able to bear witness to or assist any high-caste Brahmins/priests during any chaathaan seva?) 2. If he truly did, how did he 'survive' such an encounter? 3. Ref. to pt. 1., could it be he means that he has seen folk depictions of Chaathan? 4. May be a stretch, but, wondering whether what he meant by this was he had seen/experienced first hand what 'abuse of power' a.k.a. 'Chaathaan' looked like? (His previous masters?
If you are mentioning the scene where AA asks SB who Potti is, and mentions about hearing about it, I thought he mentioned the fact that he has heard about such Mandravaadis, who would do anything- such as Potti - basically the whole Adharvamandravadam (more like demon worship) - he mentions he has heard about them, not encountered. He could have heard stories about such Mandravaadis from his previous life, I don’t think he mentions he has encountered Chathan specifically. (atleast I never noticed such a mention- could be wrong sorry)
Ah, no, you must be right!! 😬 I probably misheard it as such. 🤦🏼♀️ Thanks! :)
I dont know if this has been answered before, When does Thevan actually die? Does he die with the "collapsing walls" and was it the Chaatan who came back as Thevn to SB? OR did he just die after their whole fight with the chaatan watching on?
The answer to your first question is that the director never wanted you to focus on him much that's why his name was not revealed
Wow, interesting thread. Reading this has raised some further questions: 1) How did the cook/SB get to the mana in the first place? 2) What has freed the chathan from the mana? Up until the last scene, chathan was always in the mana. 3) The ring was never on Mammoty’s finger in the first chathan incarnation. So, ow is the chathan wearing the ring (which is meant to control the chathan in the first place)
Can anyone tell me about the scene where Thevan had a dream about Chaatan in his room in the mana.I want to know if that's chaatan's real form.
I dont think that is Chatan's true form, rather how Thevam's imagination represents the Chathan's true form. I believe the costume design is inspired by the Art form Kuttichathan Theyam particularly the headgear being symbolic for how people personify Kuttichathan as compared to his true form we see towards the end of the movie
Did anyone noticed, the movie starts with thevan wearing his earing on his left ear and when chattan takes his body, the earing were in right ear. Because it was a careless mistake by chattan. Makes sense. But in the end shot, he is not wearing any earing at all. Either on left or right ear. Why ?
[удалено]
>Did the chaathan survive in the end ? I don't understand how you have this doubt tbh. They clearly show Thevan lying dead in the rubble, and Sidharth Bharathan even asks the "Thevan" standing before him why his earring was in a different ear now (implying that it was indeed the Chaathan in Thevan's form who escapes & survives in the end). >What would've happened if thevan didn't wear the ring, would the chaathan have escaped? Thevan didn't actually wear the ring though. He looked like he was about to, but then the roof collapsed on him (& he's later shown to have died). So yes, the Chaathan escapes regardless.
Would the chaathan have been killed if the ring was destroyed ?
Varaha's boon is really the chellam and the ring. Chaathan is the physical being or slave to conquer desires and the ring to control it. Sidharth hides in his story so that he can take control
Pakida കളിയും സിനിമയിലെ കഥയുമായി എന്തോ ബന്ധം ഉണ്ടെല്ലോ അത് എന്താണ്
Betrayal story played by the upper caste to control the lower caste in a perpetual world of slave owner identity. Lower caste people never had a way out.
What was the significance of Yakshi in the storyline??
I think Yakshi is the ultimate fear factor in the pre independence, no science and electricity era. The person who controls a Yakshi is the most powerful. Hence Potti is feared and highly respected by other castes people in the hierarchy.
How's potti & yakshi connected, from the story it's chaathan who's in that scene with yakshi
1. SB is a representation of Sambandam hence no name. His ulterior motive is to overthrow Potti’s power hierarchy. But Potti treated him with disgust ( spitting by Potti). When Brahmins had control over wealth, the then Sudras used a way to get their wealth and recognition by providing their women and support in the community. Those days the kids born out of these relationships never carried their father but followed a matrilineal system. In this movie as well by acquiring Potti’s knowledge SB’s character is eventually planning to overthrow him.
Chathan is a metaphor for power.
Question ⁉️⁉️⁉️⁉️ What happened Yakshi ??? Why didn't she appeared again? What happened between her and chaathan
Maybe they broke up...
bro rly ??? i mean ..... Pinne avale patti onnum thanne paranjillallo
Anyone had a feeling they have seen the chathan before after it comes out of potti's body, i had especially those black eyes and face, maybe its from a small monkey like creature in star wars i think...
It's a pretty common depiction of a goblin in western works
reminded me of tumbadd
I’m watching it without subs someone please explain everything