Test Movie Review: Potential Was There, Success Was Not

A movie has come out on Netflix, called “Test”. Which has Siddharth, Madhavan, Nayanthara in its cast. There are big actors and actresses. How was this two and a half hour movie? Is it watchable or not? Does it deserve your time or not—I will talk about all these. Before that, let me tell you a little about its story—an India-Pakistan Test is being held in Chennai. The Test is a very important Test. This time, a case of fixing is involved in this Test. The lives of three people hang in the middle of this Test and the fixing, a life-or-death struggle. Siddharth and Madhavan take it, but they...

Click to Watch

Movie Story

The question is, why do the lives of these three people get stuck in the middle of this Test and the fixing? To get the answer to this “why”, you have to watch the two and a half hour movie on Netflix. This time, there is no positive or negative side to it. There are definitely some positive aspects in the whole movie. But what I personally feel is that despite having a good subject, despite having good casting here, this movie does not come across as a good movie. Why is that? I will talk about that when I talk about the negative aspects. Because it has many negative aspects.

Positive Aspects

First, there are some positive aspects that need to be talked about. First, I like the way the cricket is shown here. It feels like we are watching live footage. That is how the cricket was shot, or it was brought from live footage and made there. I don't know how they shot it with VFX. But it would be nice to see the cricket in the moment it was brought, the way it was shown. You will feel like you are watching a live match. The performances here are the backbone of the entire movie. And the one who has the best performance is...

Madhavan. Underrated actor. But whenever he has been used, whenever he has been given any responsibility, he has done an outstanding job. Here he is playing a gray-shaded character. And he has played it outstandingly. His facial expression in every place, his mannerism in every place, the way he has tried to portray his character—the way he has tried to portray those things, that is, within that space, it is outstanding. His character could have been written better. There is negligence in the writing here. I will come to that later. But even in that weak writing, the way he has tried to portray his character—if it had been written better, it would have portrayed this character better—and Madhavan is outstanding.

After seeing this villainous character, I became even more excited to see the character who is going to be the villain in “Kesari 2” in the coming days. How will he play the villain character there. Because here he is outstanding as a villain. Nayanthara has supported him well. Siddharth has supported him well. And the chemistry of these three is very good. You are going to get quite good performances.

The BGM is good in some places, it works in some places. Again, there are some places where the BGM has ripples. I will come to that later. But in some places the BGM is good. In some places it uplifted the movie. And there are some moments in this movie, those moments work. Only some moments in a two and a half hour movie. There is a place here, where Madhavan will talk to Nayanthara. He will tell Nayanthara about his mistakes, which you also made. There it is being shown that Madhavan is a bad person. He is standing on this side. And Nayanthara is good, she is standing on that side.

Now a bad person is manipulating a good person to listen and make him bad. And that good person is also getting bad, he is standing in the same place. And the two are standing in the same position. The way this place is designed is good. There is a scene at the very end of the movie, where a shot is taken in the field. And here, a shot is taken in the present time, in normal life, in Madhavan's life. The way these two shots are connected is good. It is nice to see that. When you see it, you will understand. I did not say it completely openly, it will be revealed. Because there is a twist there.

So, there are some moments that are good. Some dramatic moments, some emotional moments—they work. In some places. This was the positive side. This is where the negative side starts. Here, everything works in some places. The drama is in some portions, the emotion is in some portions, the characters that are changing—they are filled in some portions. But in the whole movie, they lag. Because of the writing. The writing here is not good at all. It is a thriller movie.

Negative Aspects

I mean, there is drama in it, there is emotion, and there is also a thriller portion. These thriller portions could not be written. The edge-of-the-seat moments are not pulled off anywhere. The characters that are changing here have changed drastically overnight. The changes that are happening, those changes are not felt. If those changes are not felt, later on when those characters are taking emotional space or trying to make people feel emotional—how will those emotional spaces be felt? Because those changes seemed drastic to me. I couldn't feel those changes.

Here is a normal person—here Madhavan is a scientist. A scientist is doing such things that even big criminals would sweat when they try to do them. There Madhavan is doing these things fluently. That he has probably been doing these things since childhood. He doesn't have any problems. Things that you don't see, it seems very lacking. That you will feel a problem when you see them. That how can a normal person, a normal scientist do things like this? His field is different, his practice is different, his upbringing is different. How can he do such things so fluently?

The movie is wrapped up very quickly towards the end, hoping to end it. Those parts are not shaped well. That is why the emotions do not connect properly. Even though there is a drama portion, they do not connect properly. An attempt has been made to uplift it with performances. Since the look and feel is good—it has come to Netflix, money has been spent—an attempt has been made to uplift it with look and feel. But if the writing of a movie or a story is bad, no matter how good the story is, no matter how good the basic plotline is, no matter how good the performance is—no matter how well the rest of the things are kept here, they do not work. Because they have kept them right, but they could not keep them in a balanced way.

Here the portion of drama or emotion is shown, that is, it is being shown. The character changes, it changes overnight. Meanwhile, the movie is slow paced. Meanwhile, the movie is slow burn. But there is a character change, there is no time given. The way things end like magic in the end, the way a character does whatever he wants, no one can catch him, he is working like a professional—your rhythm breaks when you see them.

I don't like watching the movie. Despite having a good story, good performances, and some good moments, this movie is an average movie for me. Which you can watch once if you get time. For this performance, for the story, for the treatment of some of its good scenes, you can watch the movie once. But I can't call it a must-watch or an outstanding movie—this level of movie. Despite having a good story, for the performances, it is a below-average movie for me. Which you can watch once if you have time, or not. You won't like it.

Conclusion

This was the review of the movie “Test”. A good movie could have been made, but a good movie couldn’t be made. It could have been a better movie. This movie had potential. This was the review of “Test”.