Visually Spectacular; dramatically diminutive.

Rating: 6/10 (23 November 2012)

With all the hype of a bestseller novel turning into a 3D movie, Life of Pi would possibly be the highly overrated movie of the year. Of course, it greatly impresses with its verisimilitude of the digital imagery, which is painstakingly constructed with one step on the fantasy and another on reality. I think this is so far the best imagery shot/created for a oceanic film and Richard Parker, the tiger is a marvel. Though, I was initially disappointed with the narrower aspect ratio 1.85:1; would've been more spectacular in 2.35:1
But, where the movie (and the Novel) falls in its entirety is the drama, which is said to be constructed in tangence to spiritual overtones which justifies the Indian milieu ; the so called philosophy it offers is so very juvenile and text-bookish, (at-least that's how it would be for an Indian); the characters so flat and sketchy and casting over the top, detailing really bad and the authenticity in the soup (Tamil Talkie parts especially). Wondering if they hired a (right) cultural consultant. And this makes the first 25 minutes terrible to watch. Yes, all this is supposed to be carried from the original content by Yann Martel (which I consider an Yawn inducer).
Having read the book and unimpressed, my only reason to watch Life of Pi in cinemas was Ang Lee. The man, in one of his interviews has said, he did have an initial hesitation and did contemplate a lot before taking up this project. I think one has to follow their intuition in creative matters and wish Ang Lee did that.
So, if you've read the book, you know what to expect plot wise, and you'd be anticipating Ang Lee's visual interpretation, which is sure to enthrall you. And if you have not read the book, even better, the anticipation of 'where is this leading' might keep you engaged; only that at the end when the destination arrives, you might be left unsatisfied.
5/10 for the visual magnificence.