Remember the atmosphere, not the result. Nitesh Tiwari’s experiment to develop a new subgenre of semi-documentary films of European scope in the Indian film industry was just so successful that his new film was not allowed to enter the country’s cinemas, but quietly came out on Amazon’s streaming platform. However, to disguise his provocative project Nitesha still failed, the hype around him broke out not weak. The excitement of the public began from the moment the trailer appeared online, in which scenes and phrases about the Second World War slipped. On the one hand it was intriguing, and on the other it was alarming. For the first time, except for one Tamil film Burma Rani (1944), Indians chose to cover a war not based on the Indo-Pakistani conflict. After RPP, which grandiosely describes the victory of India over the British Empire, it is likely that films about the victories of the national army and on other fronts will be born, which would be especially relevant against the background of the country’s growing authority in the world political arena. At the same time, many were skeptical about the ability of Indians to qualitatively recreate the European tragedy of the last century. And yet, interest in the project as an opportunity to see the events of past days through the eyes of representatives of the former British colony, which India was listed at the time of the WWII, did not weaken for a minute.
Sadly or fortunately, Nitesh Tiwari’s film does not bear the historical details of India’s involvement in the fighting. Documentary is rather a decor, or rather a tool for changing the consciousness of the main character of the picture. Never in the whole film did anyone remember an Indian soldier or anything that had anything to do with India. And this was partly a rebuke from patriotic viewers, who found the propaganda of Western heroes inappropriate. Although, the word "propaganda" sounds too harsh to demonstrate events devoid of fiction. Perhaps Indian audiences expected the heroization (in a good sense) of their own nation, which is typical of their cinema in the format of social projects. However, Tiwari tried to minimize the purely ‘Indian’ theme through a European approach to filming. And here's what happened...
Critics of the film were almost unanimous. The main reason for their discontent was the Holocaust. To understand what this has to do with, let’s turn to the story. It has nothing to do with the war. This is an ordinary melodrama about family problems and dissatisfaction with their lives. The main character exudes negativity around him, does not appreciate what he has, and this is the main idea that will be pulled through the entire script. A young man is married to a girl with a "defect" who is tyrannized in every way, well, he just doesn't beat. And here they are in Europe, in memorable places of the WWII in order to create an atmosphere of tumultuous teaching activity on behalf of a talentless teacher (the main character), who is threatened with being fired from work for incompetence and assault. But in the course of the action, learning the terrifying details of Hitler’s campaign, he will rethink the true meaning of family values. As you can see, the story is very primitive. If it was not to his advantage (or, as it turned out, to harm) to weave fragments from the fields of the Second World War, it is unlikely that someone would react so violently.
And then the stars came together. Not only is Bollywood “not the same” for many, but the swing on the world event was counted as a miss. Is this how to link the Holocaust to some grief teacher? Screenwriters did not stint on philosophical statements in dialogues, although in some places they, according to critics, turned wrong. For example, comparing living people to Hitler, and drawing a parallel between his “greed” for neighboring territories and our greed for worldly goods. It turns out that the Holocaust is just one of the manifestations of greed of the founder of the Third Reich. This is the conclusion made by the heroes, seeing (and internally experiencing) the horrors of war. The inappropriateness of such a comparison was due to the one-sidedness of their reasoning on only one single topic of a person’s personality and his fanatical self-concern. As the saying goes, “Whoever hurts, he talks about it.”
Now we move away from the theme of war (I repeat, it is sidelined, although very convincingly and heartfeltly presented) and in the dry remnant we get two main characters with a vague life position. The character of Varun Dhavan remained an unknown subject. Despite the clearly received post of teacher, in the final it does not condescend pedagogical genius. On the contrary, he proves his incompetence many times, and even voices his “reports” from the scene in other words. The same goes for his personal life. He didn't show up as a hero. If in every possible way the ennobled heroine Janvi Kapoor was put in the position of forgiving virtue, then Varun, in addition to emotional outbursts, did not commit real actions proving that he changed not only his views, but also his manner of behavior. The scene in the gas chamber does not convince him that in his homeland, where everyone knows him, he will behave the same way. And in general, when everything in the life of the hero is safely resolved by itself without any effort on his part, all interest in his person fades in an instant. This also applies to the weak character heroine. She is too pliable that at some point she becomes annoying. For the lack of colorful episodes with the manifestation of feelings for each other on the part of the spouses, there is no need to talk about love between them. There may be attachment, but no more.
In the rest - technically and visually - the film is very well edited. If you exclude criticism of controversial moments, you can evaluate the cheerful pace of the story, the absence of unnecessary episodes and healthy humor compatible with life. You can't get into the cast either. Even being dissatisfied with the position of the main characters in the story itself, neither Varun nor Janvi will have any complaints. It may seem (and it is) that Varun is stuck in this image of the “golden youth”, but rather it is a rock that haunts all star children. They are usually filmed only in projects suitable for their status, which excludes radical experiments with genres and roles. As for the actors of the second plan, I note their complete and harmonious correspondence to their images.
Let the director and screenwriters made obvious flaws in the event plan - did not bring their hero to the state of Hero, lowered some important events on the brakes, simplified the climax, making it memorable - but this does not mean that the film itself is not worthy of audience attention. I would recommend evaluating it from a technical point of view rather than an artistic one. The previous collaboration “Dangal” from the same creators was received with great enthusiasm and received many praise. Yes, the stories are incomparable, but the skill of the film crew has not gone anywhere, which means that the current film is also able to cause emotions in the audience, everyone has their own, but they will, no doubt.