No fear, not here

What's hot, what's not: If you aren't a big fan of the idiot box, you should find some gratification in the bludgeoning it gets. There are a few who would find the debate on TV soaps actually becoming a drag as the movie progresses. Too much time is spent familiarising you with the family members. But that and a lot more is to be expectedu2026 the film has an air of the sort of filmmaking that's prevalent in the south. The songs in the film disappoint. Manohar's the sort of stock characters that abound in horror flicks: the clairvoyant trying to be the protector. Neetu Chandra has her dutiful wife role down to an art. No real surprises. Poonam Dhillon doesn't really sit pretty in the maa-at-home mode and seems a miscast. The sound and background score, which is so central to most horror flicks today, is ordinary. There are no clear-cut scares. No poltergeists. Just a hyperactive TV. The flashback scenes and the supporting acts therein are some of the few things Vikram deserves a pat on the back for.

What's that! Why doesn't Manohar think of drilling a hole in the temple room wall himself rather than using a hammer? Why make the props (in this case, the hammer) the centrepiece of your story and the climax? And is Madhavan's character really that slow (it takes him several tries before realising that the fussy elevator only acts up when he's alone)? Why get the blind man and his dog's character's role in when they're altogether dispensable? And have interest rates and currency values been that constant in the past 30 years? And if they're watching the show so religiously, why hasn't anyone made the coincidental connection at all?

What to do: If fear has a new address, it sure wouldn't scare us much if we did decide to make the trip. But yeah, some stuff we see on the telly still scares us.