‘Sikander’ has finally stormed the theatres, and fans are not getting enough of his swag! Superstar Salman Khan made a brilliant comeback with A. Murugadoss’s epic action thriller on Sunday. Soon after Bhai arrived with a bang on the big screen, fans went feral. Many Salman Khan enthusiasts shared clips of the star’s grand entry and gravity-defying stunts and also praised his earnest performance.

One fan said that ‘Sikander’ may be Khan’s best movie to date.

“Sikandar totally blows Salman bhai’s last few films out of the water; that entrance was insane! It’s got action, emotions, and the songs are pretty good too…” Reads the comment.”

A London-based Salman Khan, who watched first day first show, described the actor’s performance as “magnificent.”

“Just watched #Sikandar in London, and it was an incredible film and experience!!
@BeingSalmanKhan delivers a magnificent performance, supported by excellent BGM, imagery and plot! Excellent cast, including @iamRashmika ! The whole cinema was bouncing. #SikandarReview #SalmanKhan..” read the comment.

Another shared a clip of the audience going wild, clapping and hooting as Salman Khan enters the scene and gears up to beat the baddies to a pulp. “The moment #SalmanKhan steps into frame, the theater echoes with deafening cheers and whistles as fans go wild, screaming ‘Salman Bhai’ at the top of their lungs, welcoming their beloved hero to the silver screen! #Sikandar #SalmanKhan #SikandarReview,” Read the comment.

Another fan gushed, “One of the best entry scenes after Tiger Zinda Hai.”
Sikandar’s story and BGM. Solid performance, solid story, one of the best films of Salman Khan.”

Another praised the movie for it’s emotional depth along with fantastic action sequences. “Watched Sikandar and I’m blown away! Salman Khan’s most powerful performance yet, a perfect blend of emotional depth and mind-blowing action. Rashmika’s role was amazing too, and the music and BGM set everything on fire. A solid 9/10 masterpiece! #SikandarReview #SalmanKhan” #Sikandar..”

About ‘Sikander’

Helmed by A. Murugadoss, renowned for directing the 2008 Aamir Khan blockbuster Ghajini, Sikander unfolds the tale of Sanjay Rajkot, the ruler of Rajkot, Gujarat, who is also known by the moniker Sikander. A man intolerant of injustice, his world shatters when his wife, Saisri, tragically loses her life in a bomb blast.

Advertisement

Upon discovering that she had donated her organs to those in need, Sikander embarks on a deeply emotional journey to meet the recipients, navigating grief and redemption along the way.

Mounted on a lavish scale, the film boasts a staggering budget of ₹200 crore, according to reports. Alongside Aamir Khan in the titular role, the ensemble cast includes Rashmika Mandanna, Kajal Aggarwal, Sharman Joshi, Prateik Babbar, and veteran Tamil actor Sathyaraj in significant roles.

From John McDermott’s fragile psyche to the sustained excellence of Jack Nicklaus and Tiger Woods — or Woods and Nicklaus; no spoiler here on who’s No. 1 — this countdown of the top golfers is less a list than an index of insightful, lively profiles rife with anecdotes centered on their most joyous and miserable moments.

“The Golf 100: A spirited ranking of the greatest players of all time” is the 16th title by author Michael Arkush, most of them from the sports realm including New York Times bestsellers “The Last Season” with Phil Jackson and “The Big Fight” with Sugar Ray Leonard. This one is all Arkush and displays his storytelling — some sweet, some savory, a few bitter — in bite-size pieces.

He includes greats from the early 20th century. He includes greats from other countries. He includes women. Why? Because their stories are compelling, even if ranking them became messy.

So, yes, there are 100 in all, spread over 366 pages.

Lists of the greatest golfers aren’t a novel conceit. GolfDay published one a year ago. Golf Digest has its own. Folks have concocted lists on Reddit. Bleacher Report took a swing. There is even the website thealltimegreatestgolfers.com.

Times sportswriter Houston Mitchell got more than 12,000 readers to respond in 2009 to a poll ranking golfers. The top five are among Arkush’s top 10, although not remotely in the same order.

Most rankings are based on point systems, assigning weighted numbers to categories such as total tournaments won, top-10 finishes, player of the year awards, career longevity and performance in the four majors — the U.S. Open, Masters, British Open and PGA Championship.

Arkush prioritized the majors, writing in the forward that they “feature the strongest fields and, more often than not, are staged on the most demanding courses. When history is on the line.”

Still, Arkush allowed himself license after covering professional golf for 30 years (he was an entertainment reporter for The Times from 1988 to 1995). Once the numbers were tabulated, he shuffled the deck by employing subjective criteria such as a golfer’s impact or contributions to the sport.

“I was similar to a juror who, despite a stern warning from the judge not to let evidence deemed inadmissible be a factor in the verdict, couldn’t help its affecting his thinking in one way or another,” Arkush wrote.

An example is his inclusion of Francis Ouimet, a name unfamiliar to all but the most serious golf history buffs. He won the 1913 U.S. Open at the tender age of 20 over Harry Vardon, a British golf titan credited with inventing the modern grip and swing. Bobby Jones, the epitome of class, came along next, and the pendulum soon swung to the U.S. side of the Atlantic.

Like so many writers, Arkush was loath to let numbers get in the way of a good yarn, beginning with ranking McDermott at No. 100. The cheeky son of a mailman became the first American to win the U.S. Open in 1911 — at age 19 — one year after he finished second to Scottish immigrant Alex Smith, telling him as they exited the course, “I’ll get you next year, you big tramp.”

McDermott’s penchant for popping off soon got him in trouble, and that was followed by a steep fall. He embarrassed the more genteel of his countrymen by bragging about his Open victories in the presence of Vardon. Then he was saved by a lifeboat after being a victim of a shipwreck. Then he lost a fortune in the stock market. Then he was committed to a sanitarium in 1916 and was never the same.

Arkush concludes the profile describing a chance meeting between an elderly McDermott and a gracious Arnold Palmer that provides a poignant connection between the infancy of professional golf in America and its elevation in stature to the “Arnie’s Army” level by 1970.

Only 99 to go.

The list includes 15 women, trailblazers and champions such as Mickey Wright, whose 82 Tour victories included 13 majors and whose swing was lauded as the best of anyone regardless of gender by no less than Ben Hogan.

Pioneers of the sport, firmly planted in the wellspring of 19th-century Scotland, are given their due. While the Union and Confederate armies were preparing for war across the pond, Willie Park Jr. and Old Tom Morris exuded geniality and competence on the green, dominating the British Open from its inception in 1860 through more than a decade.

Old Morris passed on his mashie niblick — an early term for a seven iron — to his equally talented son, Young Tom Morris, who won the British Open four times from 1868 to 1872. They are the only father-son combo among the 100.

Americans began to hold their own by the 1920s, and professional golf has increased in popularity as a spectator sport to this day. It’s also an endeavor that nearly anyone can try and many become passionate about.

One hundred is a somewhat arbitrary number to cap excellence, impact and irresistible storytelling. It’s plenty for Arkush to mine, though, and relate the history of golf through the very best golfers.

As for the thorny task of comparing golfers across generations and even centuries, Arkush leans on the wisdom of Jones, whose words can be extrapolated fairly to include women as well as men:

“I think we must agree that all a man can do is beat the people who are around at the same time he is. He cannot win from those who came before any more than he can from those who may come afterward.”

BOTTOM LINE
Impactful But Drags

RATING
2.5/5

CENSOR
U/A, 2h 42m

---

What Is the Film About?

Set in Medicharla village during the jathara time, the story of Veera Dheera Sooran happens over the night. The SP Arunagiri (SJ Suryah) is fed up with Ravi (Prudhvi Raj) and his son Kannan (Suraj Venjaramoodu) and wants to encounter them. Ravi sensing the SP’ plan, asks Kaali’s (Vikram) help to save his son.

Who is Kaali? What’s his background, and how does he help Ravi? The movie’s basic plot is what happens to these characters over the course of the night.

Performances

Vikram is in his element, playing a role that suits his age and has no external burdens to showcase him in a wildly different manner.

It is a simple yet intense act, and Vikram does it with ease all the way. There is drama and action in equal doses, along with a small mix of fun, too. The actor delivers, as usual, besides getting a few moments to show his versatile acting skills. Some of the scenes in the second half are testimony to these. Nothing is done over the top, and everything is well under control here.

Dushara Vijayan plays the wife character. She, too, gets decent footage in the male-dominated set-up, apart from sharing the emotional anchor with Vikram. Whenever she is given a chance, she delivers even if it feels like going slightly overboard at times.

---

Analysis

SU Arun Kumar of Chithha fame directs Veera Dheera Sooran. It is a rural action thriller interlaced with drama. The whole narrative taking place overnight gives it a unique touch.

The movie opens on a confusing note initially. It takes time to settle down, as multiple things seem to happen simultaneously. They are grippingly executed, though, which makes one curious as to what is happening instead of scratching head for the same reason.

The pacing is slow, yet the narrative feels cacophonous initially. It is when the proper motives are revealed and stakes are set that we finally get comfortable with the happenings.

The core point is simple, and once the main track starts, things heat up pretty quickly. The drama escalates within the given duration, and we are engaged in the proceedings despite the pacing issues. The minor exchanges involving the major characters are crucial here.

For example, when Vikram and SJ Suryah meet each other for the first time, the way the whole sequence is handled leaves one with thrill and joy, simultaneously. It is not the case throughout the duration, though. Scenes like this come from time to time, and that helps a lot in the overall scheme of things.

When we get into the flashback mode after almost an hour and a half, a massive sense of drag is felt, but the director brings the interval in the most unexpected and quirky way possible. It makes one look forward to the rest.

As things are paused right in the middle, everything is resumed as it is post-intermission. The entire Dileep block is neatly executed and helps us understand some of the actions in the first half. However, things stagnate post this neat portion. It feels as if the moments are happening in a loop, missing a smooth flow.

The scenes are lengthy, and they end with a punch. If the desired effect is achieved, the entire sequence feels fine, but when it doesn’t, the whole stretch looks like a drag. We have this issue majorly in the second half.

By the time we reach pre-climax, it feels like an eternity. And it is far from over as the climax is yet to arrive. However, the good thing with the ending is that the punch is delivered. It gives that little positivity that helps one overlook the lengthy stuff that happened before it.

More than anything, the major issue is uneven tone as the director tries too many things despite the whole thing looking simple. He wants the movie to be realistic, yet incorporates typical mass moments. There are sappy emotions and traces of black comedy.

Despite the length, inconsistent narration and drag, the major reason for one to hook into the proceedings is the characterisation of major players. The way these characters interact with one another holds attention despite the issues, in general.

Overall, Veera Dheera Sooran offers a fresh packaging of a routine premise seen usually in rural, semi-rural backdrop fares. It works well in parts, also there is a lot of lag, making it an average fare, in the end. Vikram holds it together, and if you like him, give it a try.

---

Performances by Others Actors

Apart from Vikram, we have SJ Suryah, Suraj Venjaramoodu and Prudhvi Raj playing key roles. SJ Suryah, who is the form of his life, delivers yet again. The good thing, additionally, here is that he doesn’t go over the top much. They are present, but spaced out with normal, intense acting taking the front for a change.

Suraj Venjaramoodu and Prudhvi Raj, playing the father and son duo, are good. The former is reliable, whereas the latter surprises. The Telugu audience is used to seeing Prudhvi in comic roles. To see him do such a serious part without any comic undertones is an eye-opener. The rest of the casting, which involves small bits and pieces parts is also fine.

---

Music and Other Departments?

GV Prakash Kumar provides the music and background score for the movie. There are few songs, to begin with, and the ones they have give a pleasant vibe. The background score is better, and it elevates the proceedings whenever necessary. The cinematography is good, capturing the rural festival atmosphere and the natural, dark mood. The editing is okay. The writing is also fine, despite actually standing out.

---

Highlights?

Direction

Performances

Casting

Drawbacks?

Uneven Narrative

Drags At Time

Length

---

Did I Enjoy It?

Yes, In Parts

Will You Recommend It?

Yes, but have expectations in check, especially considering the run time and tone.

Veera Dheera Sooran Movie Review by M9