The discussion surrounding Haneef Adeni’s Malayalam film Marco, featuring Unni Mukundan in the principal role, evokes memories of a past era when cinema had a profound impact on audiences, often provoking intense reactions. One headline states, “A woman vomited on my shirt,” while another asserts, “It’s not for the faint of heart.” This situation is reminiscent of the reactions elicited by The Exorcist (1973), which caused some viewers to faint, vomit, or leave the theatre prematurely. Those were indeed memorable times.

Additionally, claims that Marco has surpassed Kill, Animal, or Salaar: Part 1 – Ceasefire as the most violent Indian film emerged shortly thereafter. The censor board's request for the film's team to edit or soften certain scenes further reinforced the notion that it explored new and daring themes. While enthusiasts of graphic content may find it exhilarating, the question remains: is the film truly exceptional? The response is a nuanced one, encompassing both affirmation and scepticism.

Marco pushes the boundaries of violence

Commercial cinema has progressively escalated the depiction of violence, year after year, navigating the delicate boundary between extreme entertainment and sadistic pleasure. Setting aside moral considerations, both Asian and American filmmakers have engaged in this trend for years, and we are merely following suit. However, regardless of the number of limbs or heads that heroes may sever, nothing can truly prepare one for the experience of Marco.

The film commences in a familiar manner: a ruthless gangster embarks on a violent quest for vengeance following the loss of a loved one, all while striving to safeguard what remains. In one particular scene, Marco is likened to a pit bull, a creature determined to settle a score. A variety of instruments of destruction, ranging from acid and gas cylinders to chainsaws, are employed, yet there lingers a sense of déjà vu. Additionally, there are instances of literal backstabbing and power struggles before the climactic moment unfolds.

How the scene designed to evoke a visceral reaction is filmed appears to prioritize shock value over substance. Without revealing too much, it is evident that the frequency of fatalities escalates, and a residence is thoroughly drenched in blood, possibly as a tribute to Stephen King. No character is exempt from this carnage, regardless of their gender or age. This particular scene is likely responsible for the instances of nausea or fainting reported in theatres. Marco has undeniably elevated the level of gore in Indian cinema, irrespective of individual opinions on the matter.

However, aside from the increased sense of nausea, Marco offers little in terms of emotional depth, coherence, or intelligent writing. The performance and technical skills compensate for these shortcomings. The Asian films that inspire Marco (such as The Vengeance Trilogy (2002-2005) and I Saw the Devil (2010)) excel in making the audience believe that every gruesome image on screen serves a purpose. Moreover, they succeed in fostering a strong connection with the protagonist, providing a compelling reason to appreciate the conclusion.

Although Marco is enveloped in affection, the emotional weight of his loss is scarcely felt. His dedication to his family is commendable, yet his backstory requires further development.

Why Kill remains undefeated

Where Marco, both as a character and in the film, exhibited several questionable decisions, Nikhil Nagesh Bhat’s Lakshya and Raghav Juyal-starring Kill (2024) flourished. The film effectively garners support for its protagonist, an army officer, while Raghav’s portrayal allows for a complex love-hate dynamic with the contemporary dacoit he embodies. The confined setting of a train maintains a strong focus on the violence and the characters' destinies throughout the film's duration. Moreover, various objects, ranging from a fire extinguisher to a lighter, are utilized as weapons; however, Kill approaches the theme of violence with greater caution compared to Marco.

At a certain moment in Kill, the viewer becomes so engrossed in Lakshya’s emotional distress and Raghav’s escalating madness that the bloodshed depicted on-screen starts to feel secondary. There is a desire for Lakshya to exact vengeance on these individuals, potentially in the most excruciating manner, yet it is evident that such a desire is ultimately futile. While Kill dedicates more time to punishing those who merit it, Marco chooses to inflict suffering upon the innocent, which comes across as excessive.

I do not consider myself a purist; however, I would prefer a film that offers depth over one that merely emphasizes style, even though the latter holds its significance. I would much rather appreciate each (if not most) punch, kick, dismemberment, and decapitation. I seek something more unpredictable than witnessing individuals being brutally tortured for trivial motives; that is merely an easy target.

Nevertheless, Marco ventures into uncharted territory, and for that, he deserves commendation. The film experienced a remarkable increase in viewership, expanding from 89 screens on its opening day to 1,360 screens by its third week, amassing over ₹79 crore globally within 14 days, marking a triumph for Malayalam cinema. It is even set for release in Korea. Regardless of whether the film successfully fulfils its objectives, Indian cinema has undeniably embraced the concept of gore, signalling a new era.

Read Also: Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce Ring in the New Year with a Cozy Celebration

HOW DID YOU LIKE THIS ARTICLE? CHOOSE YOUR EMOTICON!