[Disclaimer: This review of the movie Padmaavat is entirely unapologetic, and the author takes complete responsibility for his words. He intends to offend the sentiments of the folks who blindly waste millions on movies that not deserve even a penny of anybody’s hard earned money. Nothing is fictional, if there is anything, it is purely coincidental. Readers with an eye for truth can read the rest of the review, for the rest, the less said the better!]
It’s really disheartening to see our able and diligent reviewer fall ill so often, but that’s the fate of our ultra secular reviewer Gurmeet Shankar Khan. Having survived the horrors of ‘Half Girlfriend’ and ‘Jab Harry Met Sejal’, Gurmeet has just come out of hiding, only to see the nationwide protests against Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s latest movie, ‘Padmaavat’. A devout follower of the principle, ‘First Taste, then Comment’, he decided to see the movie himself. Following is what Gurmeet experienced, in his own ultra secular way.
Gurmeet Bhai [rubbing his hands for warmth]:- Damn this cold, I have a simple question for Bollywood: When will you start being O-R-I-G-I-N-A-L? When, may I know? I swear on Wahe Guru, if I’ve ever seen something as boring and unoriginal as Padmavati. I could and would rightly term this as a ‘Poor Man’s Bahubali’, with a stretched too far length of more than two and a half hours, caricatured characters, and more attention given to the opulence of the background, rather than the content or even the acting.
Dear Karni Sena, I’m very sorry to say this, but you barked up the wrong tree. Padmaavat in short, is much ado about nothing, a cringe fest which should be avoided for your own healthy life. You know what’s common between Karni Sena and Pahlaj Nihalani? The fact, that both gave unnecessary attention to below average movies and gave a green card to the dirty slugfest that followed their cringy decisions. I swear on Nanaji, that I wasn’t as disappointed with either ‘Lipstick Under my Burkha’, or ‘Jab Harry Met Sejal’, as I was with ‘Padmaavat’. It surely proved the detractors wrong, but on a horribly boring note.
Padmaavat Review: What’s Bad:-
To start with, there is the storyline. Even though predictable, and based more on Malik Muhammad Jayasi’s Padmaavat, the movie failed to keep the audiences engaged for its total length of almost a quarter to three hours. At times, the slow pace reminds the audience of the even more boring ‘Mirzya’, making the opulent sets and some decent special effects almost useless.
While the Karni Sena will have certainly. I’m averse to giving spoilers, but this movie is so boring and unbearable, that some of its best scenes are ironically the ones that either come before the interval, or during the end, like the Jauhar one. The romantic scenes between Rawal Ratan Singh and Rani Padmavati look more forced than genuine. I swear on Yahweh, if you’re craving more for Allauddin Khilji’s arrival than the romance between Ratan Singh and Padmavati, you know how unimpressive the story is.
Also, the supporting actors, unlike Sanjay’s previous outings, were nowhere close to striking a good note. While Aditi Rao Hydari as Mehrunissa, Alauddin’s wife, was just okay, Raza Murad, who played the ill fated Sultan Jalauddin Khilji, induced no reactions at all. Except for Anupriya Goenka, who played Ratan Singh’s first wife, Nagmati, there are no other noteworthy performances in this film that are worth remembering.
Padmaavat Review: What’s Horrible:-
Even if ‘Padmaavat’ was based on Malik Jayasi’s epic, the execution was almost bland to speak the truth. If Sanjay Leela Bhansali couldn’t do justice to history, at least he could’ve been accurate to the epic only? But no, the Bollywood ego of serving anything in the name of entertainment will neither leave him, nor the lead actors of this movie.
Almost every reviewer has praised Deepika’s performance in this movie (Including tfipost.com’s very own Tushar Bhai), but I don’t understand why. Who asked Deepika to give a tough competition to Katrina Kaif? Like Shraddha Kapoor from ‘Haseena Parka’r, Deepika Padukone has done little justice to her titular role. When even significantly minor actors like Anupriya Goenka look better in their roles, you know how bad Deepika was in terms of acting. Except for a few scenes, including the Jauhar, Deepika was nowhere close to outstanding in this movie, and that really hurts, given her previous outing of Mastani in ‘Bajirao Mastani’
When Vicky Kaushal was expelled from the movie, my blood was boiling beyond the permissible limits, especially on the flimsy grounds of his not having star power. However, when I was done with the whole movie, I felt quite glad he wasn’t a part of this slugfest. What has for God Almighty’s sake happened to Shahid Kapoor? He is nowhere even close to the talent he displayed in Haider or Udta Punjab. Why Shahid, why did you do this?
Also, what’s with this obsession for Urdu? Sanjay bhaijaan, this is Mewar, Mewar from the early 13th century, where Urdu was as familiar to Rajputs as mercy and compassion was to our British rulers. Okay, I understand your flare for such dialogues, but how do love songs come only in Urdu? None of the songs were even close to hummable. The ‘Ek Dil Ek Jaan’ looked more of a qawwali rather than a romantic number, and involved more of shrieking than some beautiful vocal chords. Even the Ghoomar was so boring; I almost caught a nap during the entire song length. Is it too difficult to substitute taakat with BAL, samundar with samudra, dushman with shatru, and so on? Is it too much to ask, dear Bhansali?
One of the biggest crimes, however, was the exclusion of the valor of the warrior uncle and nephew, Gora and Badal as prominent roles. Even if Sanjay Leela Bhansali was sticking to Padmaavat, it is a criminal mistake altogether. Interestingly, once Rawal Ratan Singh is taken away to Delhi as a prisoner, the way Rani Nagmati blames Padmavati for the incident is more hilarious than poignant. I mean, if you’re really showing Rajput pride, this is certainly not an acceptable liberty. However, we tend to forget, it is the same Sanjay Leela Bhansali, who made a normally bedridden, and arthritis suffering Kashibai dance an entire sequence of Lavani in ‘Bajirao Mastani’.
Padmaavat Review: Is There Anything Good As Well?
Three things stand out: opulent sets and costumes, background score and Ranveer Singh. Yes, Ranveer Singh. Probably the only role for which Sanjay worked hard was Ranveer, who is both repulsive and macabre as Alauddin Khilji. The way he exudes evil from his breath is certainly a sight to see, though that comes at a heavy cost to the other actors. Whether it was his dialogues, or his mad acts, or even his violently intimate scenes with Mehrunissa, Ranveer was perhaps the only actor in the entire movie even close to seriously. Or maybe it is the director who focused all his attention on creating a monster out of Allauddin Khilji.
Even Jim Sarbh, who portrays the role of Khilji’s male lover and his loyal general, Malik Kafur, went a little overboard. At some points, Ranveer’s beastly performance invoked disgust as well, but only with the character. Had it not been for the other clumsy notes in the movie, Ranveer’s performance would’ve been the equivalent of Heath Ledger’s Joker in ‘The Dark Knight.’
The other portion, where Sanjay did some hard work, was the background, and the sets, which didn’t look anachronistic in terms of the era in which the movie was set. If he could do the same with the content in hand, Padmaavat wouldn’t have been the bore it was, and probably even Karni Sena needn’t have to resort to anarchy over the movie.
If grand sets, opulent costumes and props, and background score were the only prerequisites for a brilliant movie, ‘Bombay Velvet’ would’ve been a blockbuster by that logic, no? I’m still of the opinion that our Honb. PM, Shri Narendra Modi should institute a gallantry award for the people who manage to survive such films, now that Padmaavat has joined the list of such tortuous movies. As a sane person, don’t even try Padmaavat.
