Posted:
Shyamala,
I started watching Ramayana with the first episode, wasn't convinced too much, and let it go. But, started again after the adult Rama came in, and I must say, am liking it quite a bit. The actors that are chosen for this version are all very well suited. Especially, Rama, the actor is so regal, aristocratic, and also looks benevolent at the same time, I would say he is the best suited for this role among all that I have seen. Arun Govil in Ramanand Sagar's version was OK, but not the best. As far as acting goes, the talent f the lady playing Sita's role is yet to be seen. She has hardly said much so far. Today, Bharat's emotions were not very clear, I thought. He seemed upset a few times which I don't think is what he intended to portray.
As far as the story goes, there are a few surprises for me, at least. I have seen quite a few versions, so far, but in this there are certain incidents that I was not aware of happening. The writers must have done their due diligence, of course, as they cannot afford to mess with this story as they do with others. So, I am not doubting them. One of them is the second marriage of Rama, because the actual marriage was not performed at the auspiscious time and the other was what was shown today, the competition between the brothers to find the single faced rudraksha. I was not aware of these stories before. It could be that my exposure to what I know is not enough. One other aspect is the role increase of Mathara. I only knew that she was the instigator to kaikeyi about the Vanavas, but was not aware that she was that way throughout.
The Lankeswaran play, that you cite, is very interesting, and makes you think about the possibility of it happening. It is of course, tangential to what is believed as Ravana's reason to kidnap Sita, but this could very well have been the reason. Very intruiging, indeed.
I hope that the interest can be retained by the quality of acting, for I would love to follow it through all the way.
I started watching Ramayana with the first episode, wasn't convinced too much, and let it go. But, started again after the adult Rama came in, and I must say, am liking it quite a bit. The actors that are chosen for this version are all very well suited. Especially, Rama, the actor is so regal, aristocratic, and also looks benevolent at the same time, I would say he is the best suited for this role among all that I have seen. Arun Govil in Ramanand Sagar's version was OK, but not the best. As far as acting goes, the talent f the lady playing Sita's role is yet to be seen. She has hardly said much so far. Today, Bharat's emotions were not very clear, I thought. He seemed upset a few times which I don't think is what he intended to portray.
As far as the story goes, there are a few surprises for me, at least. I have seen quite a few versions, so far, but in this there are certain incidents that I was not aware of happening. The writers must have done their due diligence, of course, as they cannot afford to mess with this story as they do with others. So, I am not doubting them. One of them is the second marriage of Rama, because the actual marriage was not performed at the auspiscious time and the other was what was shown today, the competition between the brothers to find the single faced rudraksha. I was not aware of these stories before. It could be that my exposure to what I know is not enough. One other aspect is the role increase of Mathara. I only knew that she was the instigator to kaikeyi about the Vanavas, but was not aware that she was that way throughout.
The Lankeswaran play, that you cite, is very interesting, and makes you think about the possibility of it happening. It is of course, tangential to what is believed as Ravana's reason to kidnap Sita, but this could very well have been the reason. Very intruiging, indeed.
I hope that the interest can be retained by the quality of acting, for I would love to follow it through all the way.
Anupamaa
