Ponman movie review: Basil Joseph and Sajin Gopu lead a technically brilliant but deeply problematic film

Although Steffi’s mother had pinned her hopes on the cash gifts received at the wedding, the family falls short of money for 12 pavan, forcing Ajesh to demand that much gold back. But the situation takes an unexpected turn when Steffi refuses to return the ornaments, leaving Ajesh in a fix. When he attempts to intimidate them, he discovers that Mariyano is not just a prawn farm worker but a ruthless criminal with no intention of parting with the dowry he received. The remainder of the movie follows the gripping struggle where deceit, desperation and power dynamics collide, leading to an unpredictable chain of events.

Ponman is, in all honesty, one of those films that deserve appreciation for its technical brilliance and stellar performances, yet its glaring misrepresentations and the glorification of wrongdoings highlight how a well-executed film can subtly reinforce harmful ideas. While the movie shines in many ways, it is also deeply flawed and these flaws cannot be overlooked.

Watch Ponman trailer here:

One of the key issues is the film’s unclear stance on dowry. While Indugopan, who co-wrote the screenplay with Justin Mathew, includes a token line at the end suggesting that women don’t need gold to shine, the film as a whole never clearly condemns dowry. Despite showcasing Steffi’s emotional struggles and her family’s financial plight, no character or the narrative ever in/directly questions the practice or its damaging effects; instead, all are shown busy in the race to obtain the gold. Even Bruno, portrayed as a member of a Leftist party, does not decry the practice; instead, he is also involved in it. While this could be interpreted as a commentary on how even progressive groups adhere to such wrongdoings, the makers’ failure to explicitly denounce dowry weakens their critique and leaves their stance hollow. Although Ajesh tells Mariyano at one point, “Don’t raise dogs by seeing the shit in others’ butts,” which seems to criticise dowry, it’s clear that, given his business of lending gold for dowries, the line is born out of his frustration and anger, not from any opposition to the practice itself.

Even more troubling is the portrayal of Mariyano and the people of his island, reinforcing stereotypes about socially and economically disadvantaged Christians, especially those in coastal regions engaged in aquaculture. Not just that the locality is ominously named Thalavettichira (meaning “dyke where beheadings happen”), to which there is only one entry and exit, but it is depicted as a place where the men are seasoned criminals, though they are involved in other livelihoods too. Mariyano himself is presented as an almost biblical Goliath in stature and a ruthless and remorseless villain in spirit, entirely fixated on Steffi’s gold. His cruelty is emphasised through moments such as the one where he stabs Ajesh and leaves him to bleed without fear of consequences, mercilessly beats three young adults and publicly assaults his wife while seizing her gold — all without a hint of remorse. At the same time, the women of Thalavettichira too are similarly portrayed as greedy and unfeeling, with the exception of Mariyano’s father who has little influence in the family. This skewed representation extends beyond Mariyano’s island; other Christian characters too are depicted just as unfavourably — Bruno as jobless and his mother as both an enabler of the dowry system and a fraud for cheating Ajesh.

In contrast, the rakhi-worn Ajesh is framed as an underdog, representing the working class caught up in the situation created by Bruno and his family. Even though his business is completely illegal, the film consistently portrays Ajesh in a sympathetic light, never acknowledging the full extent of his wrongdoing and always framing his actions in a favourable way.

Where the film succeeds is in its portrayal of the different shades of masculinity and male bonding. While Mariyano embodies toxic masculinity, Bruno represents the aimlessness in men and Ajesh reflects the survival-driven masculinity that justifies any action for self-preservation. Despite Bruno being the one Ajesh made a deal with, the latter “understands” his “situation” and they bond over drinks. He later arranges a job for Bruno and even saves him from suicide. However, Steffi, despite being the actual victim here, never receives any such empathy from Ajesh for a long time. Nonetheless, Steffi eventually confronts Bruno, exposing his lack of worth, which contributes significantly to her predicament, revealing that he isn’t the “good one” in this scenario.

At the same time, the makers have also managed to provide an impressive portrayal of Kollam, focusing on its ethos, with the “Kollam song” offering a 360-degree view of the city, similar to how Leela (2016) used the track “Vattolam Vaniyare” to capture the essence of Kottayam. From the practice of pirivu (collection), where guests gift money to the bride and her family, to the tradition of dumping leftover food into the sea after events, Ponman sheds light on various nuances of the locality with brilliance.

However, the writing suffers from a novelistic style and Indugopan and Justin fail to fully do justice to the screenplay. While some moments are impactful, the cohesiveness falters in several places, a common flaw in adaptations. This lack of coherence affects Ponman’s high points, including Bruno’s climax entry. Character development also suffers, with Ajesh being the only fully realised character. While Steffi shows strength amid vulnerabilities, her arc lacks consistency. Steffi’s mother too has her moments, but her character feels underdeveloped. On their wedding night, she’s shown standing anxiously outside her daughter’s room, fearing Ajesh will cause trouble, while Steffi consummates her marriage with Mariyano. Despite hearing the man’s mourning as he reaches orgasm, she doesn’t move — while Bruno sleeps elsewhere not bothered by anything — highlighting her plight as a mother. However, her character doesn’t get such impactful moments later.

Despite the poor representation of his character, Sajin Gopu delivers an extraordinary performance. Not only does he portray Mariyano with a Goliath-like presence and attitude, but he also conveys his occasional helplessness, handling these moments better than the makers did. While I’d love to see Basil play a completely humourless character like he masterfully did in Joji (2021), in Ponman, he comes very close to achieving that. Since he doesn’t embody the typical macho image expected from Malayalam actors, there’s a relatability in his portrayal and his precise performance enhances this, particularly with his role as Ajesh. Sandhya Rajendran also gives an exceptional performance as Bruno and Steffi’s mother. Lijomol is excellent in her role, though her character could had much more space to be drawn out. Anand Manmadhan’s portrayal, on the other hand, comes across as artificial.

Since Basil Joseph doesn’t embody the typical macho image expected from Malayalam actors, there’s a relatability in his portrayal and his precise performance enhances this, particularly with his role as Ajesh. (Credit: Instagram/@ibasiljoseph)

Director Jothish Shankar shines in his role as production designer too, accurately capturing the nuances of the locality. Justin Varghese’s music greatly enhances the movie’s atmosphere, which is brilliantly captured by DOP Sanu John Varghese. Nidhin Raj Arol’s editing, Melwy J’s costume design and Sudhi Surendran’s makeup also deserve recognition. Phoenix Prabu’s stunt choreography, especially the well-executed and shot climax fight, is another highlight that deserves praise.

Ponman movie cast: Basil Joseph, Sajin Gopu, Lijomol Jose, Deepak Parambol, Anand Manmadhan
Ponman movie director: Jothish Shankar
Ponman movie rating: 2.5 stars