The division of films into two halves with an intermission offers both advantages and disadvantages for filmmakers, especially when it comes to crafting a seamless viewing experience. However, not all films manage to merge their halves seamlessly, as seen in “Singapore Saloon.” This RJ Balaji-starrer starts off with a mindlessly hilarious first half that transitions into a messy, cluttered, and preachy second half.
RJ Balaji’s real-life persona often influences his fictional characters, adding to their charm. In “Singapore Saloon,” Kathir (played by RJ Balaji) defies societal norms to pursue his passion for hairstyling and become his own boss, only to face tragedy. The film, theoretically, follows the journey of an underdog overcoming obstacles, with its early scenes being particularly engaging.
The film and its director Gokul shine in the first half, especially in the humorous flashback featuring a young Kathir and his friend Basheer, along with heartwarming moments with Chacha (Lal), who inspires Kathir. The narrative gains momentum when Kathir encounters his eccentric in-laws, portrayed hilariously by Sathyaraj and Robo Shankar, delivering some of the film’s funniest sequences. However, the film takes a serious turn post-intermission, losing the comedic touch and the dynamic duo’s presence.
As the story progresses, it devolves into a mishmash of ideas, resembling a collage of disjointed concepts from various films. From “Seedan” and “Arai En 305-il Kadavul” to “Maaveeran” and “Lakshmi,” the film borrows heavily, resulting in a convoluted plot. Subplots, including a makeover for rejected dance competition contestants and a parrot habitat crisis, feel contrived and predictable.
RJ Balaji’s character, Kathir, takes a backseat, lacking meaningful involvement in the narrative’s progression. The film also fails to develop compelling female characters. While “Idharkuthane Aasaipattai Balakumara” succeeded despite its stance on alcohol due to its caricatured characters, “Singapore Saloon” struggles to maintain viewer engagement beyond its initial setup.
Ultimately, the film’s second half fails to capitalize on the strengths established in the first, resulting in a disjointed and underwhelming viewing experience.
