The hype was always going to be high for this one - no matter how much they tried playing it down. From the expensive sets, high level CGI, and to the inclusion of Akshay Kumar, 2.0 is never going to hide itself from a huge expectation to deliver - and Director Shankar doesnt shy away from facing the challenge either (the film literally starts showing off the fact that it was shot on 3D with the title, and the ensuing name credits being shown on a journey like a roller coaster).
For starters, 2.0 does have it's heart in the right place. Director Shankar, who would have regretted ending Endhiran the way it did tries his best to make sure 2.0 feels like a genuine sequel. From recreating the same laboratory that Dr.Vaseegaran had, to him even maintaining the same facial hair style. He even maintains Sana (played by Aishwarya Rai) in the picture by making her 'study' in a far away land - attempting to justify her lack of presence in the sequel.
We also get the introduction of Nila, Dr Vaseegaran's sexy humanoid secretary (Amy Jackson) who probably got casted because Shankar felt the need to have a fair looking girl and hey, whats' a Rajinikanth film if he doesnt have a heroine?
2.0's biggest problem as expected comes in the form of it's core content. For a 2 hour film, Shankar takes a painstaking time to set the film in context. The problem with this approach is that fact almost 20 million people have seen the movie's trailer - and is already aware of the fact that 2.0 is going to be talking about a villain who is taking revenge against the society for killing birds. So when the film 'tries' to be mysterious about Akshay Kumar's identity and slowly builds up to finally reveal him in the interval, you can literally hear the audience go "Get to the point already!"
The film also suffers from it's inability to understand Superstar Rajinikanth's physical ability. At an age where he would definitely find certain action stunts difficult, sometimes impossible - the action sequences in which requires him to run comes across completely cringy. This is a robot (Chitti) after all, but all we see is a man who is running beyond his physical ability. This contrast unfortunately makes the incredible CGI lose some of it's finesse.
Akshay Kumar, on the other hand delivers on the role that is given. When the first photos of his look surfaced a year ago, many of us feared the worst. But he produces a performance that allows you to buy into the fact that he is a 'super force'. Special credit also needs to be given to Shankar for having the guts to have a film that at some point devotes a big chunk of it's scene solely for Akshay, making Rajinikanth play second fiddle.
Akshay's flashback portion, a signature Shankar touch (Anniyan, Gentlemen all had their fair shares of flashbacks) is also a draggy affair. As much as the make up on Akshay looks spot on and he convincingly pulls off the character, the portion (running close to 25 minutes) gets boring after a point. The flashback unfortunately doesnt allow you to emphatise with Akshay Kumar, especially as he turns from an elderly bird loving person to a killing machine - the transition looks very forced.
All said and done, 2.0 somehow manages to make itself watchable due to the efforts of one man - Superstar Rajinikanth. In one of his most underplayed characters, he maintains the same poise and 'averageness' as the nerdy Dr Vaseegaran, which is applaudable. But he truly comes into his own in playing 2.0, the robot with the negative shade. He brings with him the villainic laughter, and a sense of IDGAF attitude which actually sets the screens on fire. One could not help but to wonder why Shankar did not have a longer screen time for 2.0.
AR.Rahman, on the other hand continues to cast a doubt on his enthuasiam to create meaningful and memorable background scores for Tamil films. The film's only exciting background music moment came when Endhiran's background music gets repeated in the existing film - apart from that, the film lacks any real punch in that department. It definitely goes down as one of the poorest Rahman-Shankar films. The songs, as decent as they were did not feature in the film, and what a relief it was.
In summary, 2.0 is easily the best Indian film made when it comes to visual extravaganza. It boasts a sense of quality that is unmatched - with sound designing by Resul Pookooty and VFX quality that can hold it's ground on the world stage.
But, unlike Endhiran, Shankar takes a rather draggy approach and fails to create memorable scenes that makes an impact. You also tend to ask the question on whether it was neccesary to make this film as a sequel? Could Shankar have told the story in a different film without bringing in the Endhiran franchise? You take away the glossy VFX and animation, and the film suffers without a strong screenplay.
We also continue to ask questions about the role of movie trailers and the fact that many of it act as major spoilers to a film watching experience these days. Would we have enjoyed the film more if we did not know about Akshay's character? Would the film been more exciting if the whole 'mobile phone' angle was kept as a suprise?
It might have just been the case.