Disclaimer: My family knows a crew member.
Very rarely does a movie make you want to pick a favorite moment from the director.
The intestine does not twist. You are watching rape on the screen. Although it is not explicit, it is quite detailed and relatively long. And yet it doesn’t make you shiver. No, it’s not because the movie isn’t well made. On the contrary. It’s because it has become normal to read/watch news about the subject of the film, rape. That’s exactly the point of the movie…rape is being normalized and called culture. And the film makes this point repeatedly and yet effectively.
Rape is common. Our blood boils at the thought. But when it comes to us and our systems, are we doing enough? Are we even asking the right questions? So wants to make this point clear. That too, without preaching too much. It engages us well and encourages us to introspect as a society with philosophical questions. It also goes ahead and cleverly breaks down concepts into chewy, bite-sized thoughts without necessarily oversimplifying them. Some of his understated statements are notable. He who treats rape like a funeral will stay with me for a long time. And then there were the very nice death stares between Raavi (Taapsee Pannu) and Judge Vasudha (Revathy), some even in the background.
Another power move was not offering solutions. He points out what he believes is the wrong direction to go. The arguments for and for some solutions have a living room debate quality. But they work because they are short. They make the point clear and get out of the way.
So, surprisingly, the only thing that bothered me about its final version is that it was too subtle about the core problem. He never directly points out the real problem. He doesn’t clearly state why he thinks we are where we are. I was surprised that he wanted me to tell a little more after everything he showed. I recognize that it is me demanding that of creators as part of society. However, for a well-made and well-written film, they have done their part to bring out what they want to say. For the rest they want us to answer for ourselves. And here perhaps the fact that I am a woman comes into play. I don’t want the message to be left in the hands of the audience who “gets” it. Maybe that’s why I liked the movie so much: I think it’s good that it’s my voice and I speak louder.
Otherwise, the film is riddled with mature lines. And it is “perfect.” Anything more, quantitatively or qualitatively, would have felt overwritten. Many of the characters are also perfect shades of gray. This applies to those who always try to do the right thing and who have a credible streak of violence and/or corruption. The same goes for some villainous characters who have a human streak, however slight.
Of course, this is due to the great performances of AZ. Naming even the protagonists without naming the entire team of actors seems unfair.
…deftly breaks concepts down into chewy, bite-sized thoughts without necessarily oversimplifying them.
In fact, except for the first half hour or so of the film, the writing delivers in every aspect. The sequences are well paced and flow smoothly. Only the context at the beginning felt a little rushed, as if they wanted to get to the main point of the movie with the least amount of detail. For example, it bothered me to no end that these seemingly sole criminals and their support system knew all too well how a cover-up can be managed. So He doesn’t even spend much time chasing. And these seem like deliberate calls. Some may not have worked for me, but others did. And how.
Very rarely does a movie make you want to pick a favorite moment from the director. Here I’m oscillating between the usual reminder: a great way to break the fourth wall; and the delivery of the long-awaited monologue: the decision to lay bare the hapless frustration rather than adopt the usual holier-than-thou approach.
– Meeta, a part of the audience.
