Bhool Chuk Maaf – Review

quick review:

Two elements exist. The time-loop concept and the “moral of the story.” Whichever came to the makers first, the other feels terribly forced. In either case, what’s the case for the loud story-telling, the stretched-out pacing, the thoughtlessness of it all?

(Streaming Partner: Amazon Prime)

Review

I have so many questions, all of which can be summed up with, “What were they thinking?”

Why is Titli (Wamiqa Gabbi) in love with Ranjan (Rajkummar Rao)? The man has no redeeming qualities. And the writers knew there was no reason for her to love him, which is why they narrate the love story through animation in the title sequence. Cool, it is, but it’s not followed up with anything worthwhile. The bigger question is…

Why is it accompanied by extra loud music? Why does the entire movie have extra loud, extra slapstick and extra random music? The music is so loud that it feels like even when the shooting was on, the actors couldn’t hear each other. This would explain why they all ended up shouting at each other and over one another throughout the film. And it’s not like they have anything of import to say.

It is to their credit that despite the lack of depth in the writing, at least a few times in the film, I wondered if they weren’t made to shout, we would have seen some very good performances. They deliver the few good lines with decent timing. But there’s only so much they can do because yelling-contests are marked by regressive, problematic one-liners—from misogyny and body-shaming to classism and casteism.

What made them give away the crux of the film in the trailer when they were going to spend half the film on the set-up? The first hour seems atrociously long—I couldn’t wait for the interval break. The second half picks up pace, but it’s too late by then.

What was the whole preachy speech in the end for? It is not like Ranjan did what he did out of the goodness of his heart. He is pretty much forced to do it. He didn’t really have a moral compass, even a tiny one. And the film itself uses a suspicious mechanism to bring its “moral of the story,” into play. Sure, “do your deeds, don’t expect results from them,” is a good go-to mantra to make a “message” out of. But the other one seemed highly dubious.

Was Varanasi chosen as the backdrop to bring the end “angle” into the works? Because it is not like Varanasi had anything to do with the rest of the story. Just like the other angle. It could have been any other town, just like it could be a person with any other name. Maybe just like Ranjan, the makers wanted to feel good about themselves.
~ ~ ~
Oh, and wait, why was a break-up song chosen as the end-credit sequence?

– meeta, a part of the audience

Source link