Once Upon a Time – Ekamath Eka Rataka

I was wondering whether I had watched the same movie that all the rave reviewers seem to have seen or whether they had been screened something special. I wonder this because I didn’t see anything to rave about in the movie. The story line itself is of course from a short story but I felt way too much emphasis was placed on the character played by Sanath Goonetilleke. I felt that the movie was made mainly to portray his acting capabilities rather than share the limelight with the other members of the cast. I’m sure the audience would have been happier to see more emphasis on the girl and boy romance (or whatever) as opposed to watch the painstaking, long, laborious and I have to say this, boring life of Sanath and while I’m on the subject was there a necessity to show such a lot of fat, hairy, ugly leg of Sanath constantly. I think the audience would have liked to see Nirosha and the guy (whatever his name is) more.

Also I think basic logic would tell anyone if the girl believed the guy was dead and then left him in her bed until she went to a party and came back in the night and all that blah blah that the body would not have remained warm and supple and that if he was indeed not dead, there would have been some breath??

So all in all, in my opinion, the movie was a dead bore. They should have shown more of the other characters and less of the utterly long and boring bits played by Sanath. Oh I would agree that he is a good actor, but did he need to keep himself in the limelight all the time just because he directed the movie??