Tag: Deepika Padukone

‘Kalki 2898 AD’ Is a Spreadsheet Pretending to Be a Film

Despite the co-opting of Indian epics and folk tales, the key narratives in this Nag Ashwin ‘project’ appear to have come straight from existing Hollywood blockbusters.

Nag Ashwin’s Kalki 2898 AD has nearly all the hallmarks of what might be deemed a ‘pan-India blockbuster’.

A star cast comprising names from all film industries which have a significant footprint in the country, a deluge of green screen (used to concoct futuristic, dystopian landscapes with all the depth of a Windows ‘98 wallpaper), a few slick action sequences, and the promise of a saviour who will deliver us from evil.

You can tell a lot about a film’s collective smartness with the way it employs its star cameos. In Kalki 2898 AD, Ashwin gets two famous directors to make appearances in stray scenes. In a better film, this might have elicited laughs. But here, it is a sorry testament to Ashwin’s pummelled vision as a filmmaker – as someone possibly bogged down by the pressures of being at the helm of a Rs 600-crore project. The cameos eventually feel like winks at die-hard fans. 

All the chatter around Ashwin’s region-agnostic cast reminded me of a time in the early 2000s when I watched Amitabh Bachchan, Prakash Raj and Sabyasachi Chakraborty in Rajkumar Santoshi’s Khakee (2004). There was sheer electricity in the way three stalwarts of their respective film industries inhabited a scene, playing off of each other’s charisma. Those moments stood the test of time even two decades later.

I had hoped to feel something similar when Bachchan showed up here, and shared screen space with Prabhas and Pasupathy, and also potentially set up a face-off with Kamal Haasan in the future. Unfortunately, everything appeared so stage-managed that it hardly evoked feeling.

Kalki 2898 AD is, after all, not a film, but a ‘project’ in industry parlance. Such films are put together on a spreadsheet, with values ascertained to each popular face and how many audience members they will be able to draw. This is a legitimate way of making expensive films, but a viewer also hopes for some spark that would make them forget the money-mindedness with which such gargantuan productions are put together. The scale of Ashwin’s film is always front-and-centre in every scene, and therefore all choices are governed by its self-importance.

A still from ‘Kalki 2898 AD’.

Set 6,000 years in the future, after the last city has fallen to a narcissistic evil conqueror called Supremo Yaskin (Haasan), built along the lines of Thanos, the film opens in Kashi – the capital of his empire. The city of Kashi seems to be inspired from the wastelands of Blade Runner (1982) and Mad Max: Fury Road (2015). The currency to sustain a livelihood are ‘units’ – much like Andrew Niccol’s In Time (2011). Yaskin’s guards go around looking for fertile women, who are taken to ‘the Complex’ – the promised land hovering over Kashi (much like Neil Blompkamp’s Elysium), where the good life exists. There are a few rebels hiding and plotting to overthrow Yaskin’s reign. Like Fury Road, the dystopia thrives here because of how the antagonist preys on the people’s desperation. Most civilians are informants or bounty hunters, allowing Yaskin to maintain his stranglehold on society by capturing all dissidents of the empire. Most of them are seduced by the promise that their ‘loyalty’ will eventually be rewarded with a life in the Complex. 

Prabhas, playing Bhairava, is a wayward bounty hunter – who plays along with anyone who will pay him enough. When a pregnant surrogate from the Complex, Sumati (Deepika Padukone), escapes, she is pursued by all the bounty hunters of this land. Except, she also has the rebels looking after her, and trying to smuggle her to a place called Sambhala – a haven for the rebels who believe in a folk tale about the second coming of a god. So far, so conventional.

A still from ‘Kalki 2898 AD’.

But one place where Kalki 2898 AD differentiates itself is the reintroduction of Amitabh Bachchan as an action superstar. Bachchan’s character as Ashwathama seems almost entirely computer-generated, except for his close-ups. A lot of the ‘trickery’ to make Bachchan seem like an able action star is visible, especially how the camera cuts before a kick or a jump. However, his role reminds viewers of how good Bachchan is at playing the silent brooding type, where he communicates far better with a close-up of his eyes, than with reams of dialogue.

The film’s politics generously borrows from the Mahabharat and Ramayan. It phrases the second coming of the saviour as the arrival of a bhagwaan (god). It employs the agnipareeksha (trial by fire) to ‘cleanse’ a surrogate and turn her into the mother of god. The sound of conch shells and bells of temples become the background score for key action sequences.

But what I found most perplexing is how despite this co-opting of Indian epics and folk tales, the key narratives always appear derived from existing Hollywood blockbusters. Very rarely do these stories have something truly original or even Indian. It made me wonder if the makers are simply exploiting the fantasy of a ‘Naya Bharat’ – where India is the America of the world. This communicates an insecurity – where one beats one’s chest with pride, while wanting to become someone else. Ashwin’s film might want to be revered as a ‘risky’ film, but its derivative aspects tell us how little of uncharted territory Kalki 2898 AD wants to explore. 

A still from ‘Kalki 2898 AD’.

Which brings me to the film’s biggest liability – Prabhas. A decent action star, the 44-year-old has made little to no effort to differentiate his characters in this post-Baahubali phase of his career. Few expect him to become a method actor, but audiences do expect him, at the very least, to try to play something other than ‘the chosen one’. Prabhas is little more than an ultra-macho hero, who sports big biceps and goes through his lines with a Southern drawl. 

As Sumati, Deepika Padukone seems to have perfected the art of the playing the weepy, strong ingénue in the blinding, male-centric blockbuster. She did something similar in Jawan last year. Even here, despite all the distractions on screen, she makes her presence felt – something which feels like an achievement. Pasupathy and Anna Ben appear in small roles that feel like a disservice to their talents. Saswata Chatterjee’s role as the campy henchman for Yaskin is not self-aware enough to be enjoyable. An actor of Chatterjee’s sophistication could surely find a way to subvert audience expectations and take even a badly written role in a fresh direction. Kamal Haasan as Yaskin is chilling, channelling his psychopath voice, which he perfected in Aalavandhan (2001). 

Kalki 2898 AD is not an offensive film (like say, Adipurush). It has ambition and the scope of an intriguing franchise. But the problem here is its lack of voice, regurgitating ancient tropes (like ‘The One’, which has been punctured in The Matrix and Dune franchises only recently), and employing technologies whose impact cannot be maximised on screen. If Nag Ashwin is really going to make a ‘game-changer’ – which is being used to describe the film in its overwhelming promotional material – he will have to undergo a steep learning curve before the next film. 

Shah Rukh Khan Is Not Your Martyr

The political load that the Indian star is being forced to carry is not his to bear. Allow him to be free to be himself.

Shah Rukh Khan has delivered two blockbusters this year, which – along with Gadar 2 – have revived the fortunes of Indian cinema, as well as of the star himself, at a precarious time. For many people, though, this is not enough. It is hard not to read between the lines of numerous reviews that Khan has not spoken loudly enough, that he has not targeted the politics of majoritarianism and exclusion that has targeted him, and others. 

Many of these people are, to be fair, on Khan’s side, but it is important to note what they are asking him to do. He is being asked to respond as a Muslim, reducing him to the two-dimensional cutout that he is being targeted as. Targeted by politics, he is being asked to be political. 

Shah Rukh Khan in a still from Jawan. Photo: Screengrab from YouTube.

Whether by conscious choice, or by chance, Khan has avoided this dilemma by starring in movies that showcase his multiple identities – in Jawan, quite literally with multiple selves. While Pathaan almost excluded politics altogether, the politics of Jawan – highlighting social failures of greed, corruption, and a system compromised by crony capitalism – does not address key political parties or movements trying to undermine or overthrow the democratic republic. 

It is worth highlighting that he neither wrote the script or directed either of these films, even if his spouse, Gauri Khan, produced the second one. How much leeway he may have had in making the films in his own image is anybody’s guess, as are Khan’s personal views on politics or political parties.

Also read: In Jawan, Shah Rukh Khan Makes Asking Serious Questions Look Sexy

But what he has done is make successful films  that revolve around not just the characters he plays but about the persona he inhabits. In doing so, he sends a very separate political message, one that is far subtler a critique. By not changing, by thriving, despite the barrage of politics that would reduce him to being a second-class citizen in his own country, Khan evokes the persistence of the complex reality that is India, one where somebody like him can do what he wants and people will applaud it and will line up to pay good money to be a part of that magic. 

This persistence is no small thing. As the great Palestinian academic, Dr. Hanan Ashrawi puts it, “What drives the Israeli right wing crazy is that the Palestinians persist.”

A still from ‘Pathaan’.

This, in no way, obviates what others are doing. The brave criticisms raised by important actors such as Swara Bhaskar and Chetan Kumar about the politics of the day are heroic, and have come at great personal cost to them, as did Deepika Padukone’s decision to go to JNU when the university was being attacked. 

But it is important to understand that there is no one correct path to resistance, but that there are many different streams that make up a mighty river. The example of our independence movement proves just that. It was not one movement, but many, that reinforced each other – even if its major leaders, whether Jinnah, Gandhi, Patel, Bose, Ambedkar, Nehru, Azad – were at loggerheads often enough, with some differences that became insurmountable. 

There is also that iconic comment of Malcolm X to Loretta Scott King, in Selma, when Malcolm – mere weeks before his assassination – told her, “I didn’t come to Selma to make his job more difficult but I thought that if the White people understood what the alternative was that they would be more inclined to listen to your husband. And so that’s why I came.”

If we are to overcome this moment in India’s troubled history, we will need to do so together, despite our differences in approach. The constant critique that not everybody standing up is being the perfect politician is unhelpful. We do not, and should not, aspire to be a country of only perfect politicians, but of people free to pursue their joys in multiple ways without harming each other. 

Shah Rukh Khan is not your martyr, please stop asking him to be one. 

Omair Ahmad is an author and journalist. 

SRK, I Hear You. And So Does Everyone Else.

With Jawan, SRK seems to have finally realised that after his fans, it is his turn to make a statement – and that too a big one.

Jawan has released, and knowing my extreme adulation for the superstar, everyone asked when I was  going to watch it.  

Honestly, I wasn’t keen. 

I wanted to be in the front row of the theatres when SRK came out with Pathaan at the beginning of this year. The reasons were many – he was back on the big screen after ages and I also wanted to defy the haters.  

I dragged my teenage son and tween daughter. My children were not impressed.  

Except for the three very important things – SRK’s good looks, good looks and good looks, there wasn’t anything for me in the movie. I did understand the hype, I felt Pathaan’s success was because of the hand of divine, a triumph for love in the times of hate. 

SRK has given us Dear Zindagi, Swades, Chak De India and Raees. Or romances like Dilwale Dulhaniya Le Jayenge, Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai and, more recently, Dilwale, where he opened his arms and jumped right into our hearts. I am saying in the lowest possible decibel, I didn’t like the movie. 

For me, a few smiles, the flashing of the dimples, the subtle adabs (greetings) and some nice songs were paisa vasool (worth the money). 

I loved the atmosphere in the movie hall, I liked the fact that people were making a statement. They had come for love and were defying and denouncing hate. 

I liked that SRK had not followed the much in-vogue norm of ‘making villains of a community and a  neighbouring country’, the selling formula. Even if Pakistan was the villain, it was not the people, just a few rogue generals. Except for the reference to Article 370 , which for me as a Kashmiri is still contentious, I found the movie much saner than some of the recent hits. 

But of course, it didn’t quench my thirst for an SRK movie. 

So when people asked if I was going for Jawan, I wasn’t sure I would. 

There were no haters to prove wrong this time. The posters spoke of dishum dishum (action) as the genre and honestly, I didn’t like the bandaged or the bald look of SRK. For me, he is the suave and sexy NRI, wearing the ‘cool’ chain on his fluorescent hoodies. I was okay waiting for its OTT release. 

But a few days after the release, I wanted to change my plans. The movie reviews told me it is an answer to all my grudges and disappointments I had as a fan, despite my unflinching love for him. 

I always wanted SRK to be like Meryl Streep but he refused and even said our expectations were unfounded. He claimed that “he didn’t understand the situation enough so he would want to keep quiet and not add to the noise”. I wanted to tell him that his words wouldn’t be noise, it would be power. I wanted to tell him that journalists might not be the same as they were years ago, but that doesn’t forgo our responsibility as a citizen. 

Yes, I wanted him to be like Robert De Niro, not that I wanted him to call someone “stupid”. I surely didn’t want him to waste a priceless answer and talk about the then US president to David Letterman while choosing to remain mum about his own country. 

I looked for a tweet after every rape, every lynching, every hate crime, every lopsided judgement, every attack on students, but there was nothing. 

Over the years, however, I did realise that his silence was better. Except for a few selfies, he hasn’t done much to stand on the side of power. I had realised, or maybe wanted to believe, that his silence was his protest. As a Kashmiri, I have understood the meaning of silences in the last five years. Maybe my silence let me empathise with his. 

So while I, like millions of his other fans, wanted to go to the movie theatre just to make a statement when Pathaan was released, the superstar did not outrightly want to make one. In the famous Kolkata event he did talk about the toxicity of social media and said ‘how positive people are sitting alive’, the message just fell a little short. 

However, with Jawan, SRK seems to have finally realised that after his fans, it is his turn to make a statement and that too a big one. Whether it was his son’s arrest or whether he realised that no matter how quiet he remained, those who wanted to question his nationalism will continue to do so. 

Or maybe because he realised that whatever he does, his name is Khan and he might not be a terrorist but he will always be questioned. Perhaps  he simply found his voice because so many others had become voiceless. 

But he has done it and how. The monologue in the climax of Jawan gave me goosebumps. Shahrukh has spoken and at the correct platform. He has spoken through his art and his platform is the 70 feet screen with hundreds of people watching, with no jingoistic anchors there to label him anti-national and no unruly politician asking him to go to Pakistan.  

When he talks about democracy and the power of the vote, he tells you to question those who want to rule you for the next five years. When he says to ask them “tum mere liye kya karoge (what will you do for me)“, he is throwing an open challenge, not just to those who want votes in the name of caste, creed and religion, but also to those who claim otherwise and end up agreeing to the same politics as ‘that is the pulse of the people’.  

He wants you to think about it when you leave the theatre and are driving home with your family. He wants you to ask the politicians what they will do to bridge the divide which has been driving a wedge between communities for years. 

He wants you to ask if the names of gods will still be used as a war cry against a community. What will you do to make sure clothes don’t define a person and identity is beyond the length of a beard?

What will they do to make sure a boycott call of communities doesn’t become a letter officially submitted to a police station? He wants you to ask them, how will they ensure thousands of farmers don’t have to stay on roads to be heard? He wants you to ask them how they will ensure we don’t find bodies floating around Ganga ghats if another pandemic hits us. He wants you to ask them what they will do to ensure Olympic medalists are not dragged on the streets of the national capital. 

Let us not belittle his message by saying when he lifts his hand, he is asking people to vote for the party with that symbol. The message is as much for that party as it is for anyone else.

When someone praised the monologue on X (formerly Twitter), he said that he didn’t want to give spoilers by talking about the contents. But SRK insisted “Desh ki bhalaai ke liye sab spoilers maaf (If it’s for the wellbeing of the country, spoilers are allowed). Everyone should exercise their right to vote intelligently and responsibly’’. 

SRK, I hear you. And so does everyone else.

Toufiq Rashid is a journalist who has covered the Kashmir conflict, health and wellbeing for top Indian newspapers for nearly two decades. She now works at @Pixstory.

With Jawan Shah Rukh Khan Crosses Over to the South, His Natural Charm Fully Intact

Director Atlee doesn’t miss a trick, including a guest appearance by another star, but some of them push the boundaries of good taste.

In a post-pandemic world, the borders between on-screen and real-life Shah Rukh Khan seem to have become more porous than ever. As we saw earlier this year in Pathaan, and now in Jawan, his eyes brim with confidence in the introductory scenes as if he can already see audiences screaming with joy after getting a first glimpse of him – much like when he comes out on his balcony in Mumbai to wave at his fans and they go berserk. A star, who would once save some of his wittiest retorts for interviews has stopped participating in them altogether, and now chooses to relish his jokes on screen instead. After floundering in the dark for years, the superstar seems to have come into his own.

Khan’s tenderness around women (on screen and in real life) is well-documented. Walking a tightrope of the dutiful son, vulnerable lover, protective brother for over three decades, it’s probably fitting that this very equation becomes the cornerstone for his latest star vehicle. 

Written and directed by Atlee, Jawan could be Khan’s most unabashed and successful foray into the southern superstar territory. This could very well have been a film starring Vijay, Kamal Haasan or Rajinikanth but this time it’s Khan who brings his customary light touch to it. 

Within the first half hour, I was already reminded of the Bourne films, The Taking of Pelham 123 – Khan channels a terrific inner Travolta, thanks majorly to a menacing bald look – Hindustani, Inside Man and Charlie’s Angels. It doesn’t matter where the ‘inspiration’ comes from. The only thing that matters is if it seems coherent, which the film surprisingly does in an especially robust first-half. 

Shah Rukh Khan in a still from Jawan. Photo: Screengrab from YouTube.

Jawan opens with a gravely injured man (Khan) being found in a river, in what we’re told is one of the border towns. While locals nurse him back to health, the village is attacked by an army purported to be ‘rebel’ forces. As the locals get hacked to death, and the elders pray to their deity for a saviour – connoisseurs of masala mainstream films already know what’s about to happen. The almost-dead man, wrapped in bandages, will rise. Cue applause in the cinema hall.

A title card appears – 30 years later – and we see a similarly bandaged Khan at a Mumbai metro station. Is he the same man from the first scene? We’re told this man’s name is Azad and that he’s the jailer of an all-women prison in Mumbai. He recruits six inmates from the prison to execute his vigilante mission – holding a billionaire’s daughter as hostage along with a metro full of passengers and demanding Rs 40,000 crores. Atlee’s film is too busy to be bothered by the logistics of someone arranging Rs 40,000 crores in a matter of minutes. This is the world of mainstream filmmaking, where even such large amounts get transferred by pressing a few buttons. 

Except Khan, it’s Vijay Sethupathi who is having the most fun with his role. Playing a dialled-up, hyper-evil weapons manufacturer, Kali Gaikwad, who gets his loans written off by public sector banks, and cheerfully offers India (or Bharat?) up to corporations across the globe as a place to ‘do anything you wish’. He even gets a tremendous introductory scene where he’s speaking at the funeral of a bureaucrat who he killed the day before. Sethupathi’s part reminded me of Philip Seymour Hoffman from Mission Impossible: 3 – where the character feels like a cut-out on paper, but one that’s imbued with personality thanks to the magnetism of the actor playing it.

Vijay Sethupathi in a still from Jawan. Photo: Screengrab from YouTube.

This setting also features Nayanthara as Narmada – hardly the most competent negotiator. Tasked with walking around in flashy Ray Bans and pretending like she’s going to teach a lesson to the vigilante crew, she gets out-foxed by them on at least two occasions. I guess this is the price one pays for a blockbuster hinged on the shoulders of a male superstar – who might employ an all-female crew for the optics – but none of the women feel etched out. Except, maybe, Deepika Padukone, who seems to have figured out a way to make a mark in her limited screen-time, especially with that radiant smile. Padukone plays the part of Aishwarya, Azad’s mother.

By the beginning of the second half – Atlee throws everything at the wall. Some of it sticks. Like a special appearance by an A-list star, and a son meeting his long-presumed-dead father for the first time. The flashbacks get progressively sillier. Khan is cheeky enough to slide in a dialogue about how “before they go after the son, they must deal with the father”. It’s purely speculation here, but the line feels like a sly addition after the whole Aryan Khan controversy in 2021.

Deepika Padukone in a still from Jawan. Photo: Screengrab from YouTube.

A lot can be forgiven given the film’s mainstream visual language which shamelessly assaults its audience with manipulative choices. However, in some scenes, Atlee pushes the limits of good taste, even within mainstream filmmaking. In one scene, the camera focuses on a farmer’s face who has hung himself from a tree, his tongue hanging out and his eyes bulging. In another scene, the camera fixes itself on the faces of children, who asphyxiate because of a lack of oxygen cylinders. While a film like this needs to scream its intent for the back benches, there could surely be a more-sophisticated, less-gratuitous way to do it. 

The issues addressed in the film range from farmer suicides, billionaires defrauding banks, a barely sustainable healthcare infrastructure, corrupt politicians, and faulty, cheap weapons delivered to the armed forces. I was half-expecting Khan to wage war on unemployment and social media trolls – but perhaps even mainstream fantasies draw a line somewhere. 

The action sequences are superbly choreographed, and dare I say, even better conceived than Pathaan (which was imaginative by big-budget Hindi cinema standards). 

Jawan, in the end, exists only to service and magnify the Shah Rukh Khan myth. A lot of elaborate work has gone into ensuring that Khan doesn’t look 60, including de-aging technology, though few actors can still naturally come across as disarming while clumsily spilling coffee on themselves upon meeting someone they fancy. The action scenes notwithstanding, it’s this effortless physical comedy that makes Khan such a charmer even after three decades. 

The Underlying Political Relevance of ‘Pathaan’

Pathaan’s narrative is not politically innocuous; it is a curiously political statement masquerading as a thoughtless, or rather ‘thought-free’, action film.

Pathaan is a curiously political statement masquerading as a thoughtless, or rather ‘thought-free’, action film. Its initial allure rests largely on its action-packed thrill, and the combined sex appeal of the cast. Moreover, the film rides on the very particular star power of Shah Rukh Khan (SRK), which neither Deepika Padukone nor John Abraham, despite their immense celebrity and impressive careers, can quite equal.

As Mukul Keshavan detailed in his review of Pathaan, Shah Rukh Khan’s magnetic charisma and longstanding reputation as a kind and good citizen has worked in the film’s favour. After a six-year hiatus, during which the rumour that his career had passed its expiry date had proliferated, his return to the screen could not be more triumphant.

Pathaan locates a humdrum action-movie plotline, heavily influenced by the realities of a pandemic-suffering world, within the India-Pakistan political context. Combining scenarios reminiscent of Contagion (2011), Kingsman (2014), and the James Bond movie franchise, and building bridges between movie worlds in the style of the Marvel cinematic universe, Pathaan constructs an archetypal story using larger-than-life stunts, and a plethora of beautiful filming locations, to produce a visually impressive result. However, as it plays out, Pathaan unfolds as more than a ruckus of action-shots and visual bewitchment.

Ironically, as we shall see, Pathaan is an ode to the country (referred to as desh throughout the film, rather than Bharat) – so much so that some cinema halls neglected to play the national anthem prior to its screening. After all, why revel in a minute of jingoism when you are about to screen two and half hours of ‘Jai Hind’? But Pathaan’s patriotism (rather than jingoism) is angled differently. Two points of analysis reveal the socio-political position that Pathaan intends to occupy: its choice of how to distribute nuance, and what within it is perceived as controversial (or what is not).

Also read: ‘Pathaan’ Traffics in a Sense of Camaraderie and Capacious Universalism

The most infamous example of controversy is, of course, Deepika Padukone’s ‘saffron-coloured’ bikini in one of the film’s two songs, suitably titled ‘Besharam Rang’. If the colour of the bikini, post-release, was passed off as an unintentional jibe at the highly sensitive ruling party, determined to read dissension into every detail of products outside its purview and control, the title of the song suggests otherwise. In fact, the entire song is provocative, using sexual innuendo through music and dance to depict a moment of substances and capricious (d)alliances in which both Indian and Pakistani, male and female are freely indulging. And this lustful indulgence is presented in a celebratory tone, and not as a demonstration of outright sin. This musical opposition to the puritanical ‘modesty’ that underlines BJP discourse and ideology, would seem to suggest that the ‘saffron’ bikini was no mistake, and that the song was intended to covet controversy and in so-doing, prevail.

Meanwhile, the India-Pakistan issue, which forms the principal creative fodder for the film’s storyline, is harnessed in such a way as to avoid the typical pitfalls of this age-old animosity that can breed controversy in both countries. Heroes (and I used the term ‘hero’ as inclusive of characters of all genders) and villains are constructed on both sides of the border, and in a manner analogous to the careful presentation of North Korea-South Korea relations in the South Korean TV series Crash Landing On You (2019). Given the precarious political and militaristic situation between the two countries, the series had to toe a careful line in its portrayal of the conflict to avoid a spillover from fictitious to political reality. In a similar vein, the protagonists in Pathaan from India and Pakistan face-off with their respective national antagonists, thus avoiding a classic ‘India versus Pakistan’ scenario. Of course, the principal instigator of the evil plot that precipitates the rest of the storyline, just so happens to be Pakistani. However, this too is constructed in an atypical manner.

By creating a Pakistani villain who, diseased and with only three years left to live, threatens not only India, but also Pakistan itself, his character is pushed out of his national sphere and into the dustbin of history where all those who have ‘lost their national way’ are relegated by the film. His ‘de-nationalisation’, which is recognised in disgust by Padukone’s Pakistani protagonist, Rubai, mirrors the ‘anti-national’ stance of the Indian antagonist, John Abraham’s character, Jim. Abraham’s antagonist, who has the term ‘patriot’ tattooed crawling down his neck, was once himself a dedicated Indian soldier, fighting for the national cause in the same way that Shah Rukh Khan’s protagonist still does. However, in the case of Jim, the country for which he would have willingly and dutifully given his life, failed to protect the two things that were most precious to him: his wife, and their child still in her womb. His personal tragedy then becomes the reason for his insidious behaviour, which spurs the entire plot. Nonetheless, it is ultimately still India’s misdemeanour and reluctance – rather than inability – to protect its own that is the pivotal cause for his wrath, an extra layer that is missing from the characterisation of evil in the Pakistani antagonist. Both antagonists have personal vendettas, which pushes them to act in anti-national ways. This kind of careful balancing act between India and Pakistan is maintained throughout the movie.

Also read: Fractured Times Are Never Beyond Repair

Therefore, although the entire premise of the film hangs on Pakistani character General Qadir’s mania being triggered by India’s revocation of Article 370, and the consequential threat of an Indian encroachment into Pakistan-administered Kashmir, his depiction as a tyrant who goes against his own national cause transforms the place of Kashmir in the film. When taken outside of the plot and placed against the tapestry of the film’s larger political stance, General Qadir becomes the film’s ventriloquist dummy, critiquing the action in Kashmir and the violation of the Indian constitution.

Moreover, when it comes to the question of personal identity and how religion fits into the idea of India today, the film addresses this directly. “Are you a Muslim?” Rubai enquires of Pathaan; his response is as politically lucid as his personal past is obscure: “I do not know what I am. All I know is that my country raised me.” Found abandoned in a cinema hall as a baby, much like the titular character in Oscar Wilde’s The Importance of Being Earnest is found abandoned in a handbag at a railway station, the film does not dwell on the idea of religion beyond this concise statement, because the essential point has been made. As Shah Rukh Khan himself implied in a press interview, this film echoes an ‘Amar, Akbar, Anthony’ scenario, that captures the imaginary of secular India in a similar manner to how ‘liberty, equality, fraternity’ continues to be the commonly articulated reference to France.

In a national context, therefore, the place of Pathaan is somewhat atypical to the political norm of contemporary mass cultural produce. On an international plain, meanwhile, the place of India shifts again. With principal photography for the film beginning in 2020, prior to the onset of the 2022 Russia-Ukraine war, Pathaan’s declaration that Russia is, and always has been, a steadfast ally is geopolitically in line with India’s broader foreign policy. The editing team managed to change the script from ‘the Prime Minister’s Office’ (PMO) to ‘the Minister’s office’ when the actual PMO made noises about being represented in a film that did not toe the political line. Yet, they left in the many references to Russia’s importance for India. This too was not a careless detail that was absentmindedly overlooked. In fact, what the film makes up in its subtle approach to the idea of India, it loses in its unreflective treatment of international politics, missing the opportunity to take a stronger stance on India’s position in the world beyond its own borders.

Taken as an ensemble, Pathaan’s narrative is not politically innocuous. Released on the eve of Republic Day, the obvious politicised moments are unlikely to be missed by anyone, regardless of their reluctance to look beyond the bombastic character, and their resultant dismissal and dislike of, the film. Pathaan’s record-breaking performance and mass appeal are a clear marker of India’s general political mood. Pathaan had all the reasons to bomb at the box office: a cast comprised of stars who have long been in the current government’s disfavour, an unusual popular culture depiction of the India-Pakistan dynamic, and a ridiculously large film-making budget that might have been hard to breakeven. And yet, it broke several box office records in India, a current and continuing trend yet to reach its zenith, and has already become one of the top 10 highest grossing Indian films of all time.

This is Bollywood circling back to the ‘masala films’ for which it was reputed, with an updated travelogue, special effects, and wardrobe to suit its contemporary audience. Containing representation of all three ruling Khans of golden era Bollywood – the undefeated Shah Rukh Khan as protagonist, Salman Khan in cameo, and featuring Aamir Khan’s sister in a fleeting appearance in the symbolic role of Pathaan’s adoptive mother – this film is also a visual statement on the place of Bollywood in the world of Indian cinema. Upstaged by the phenomenal performance of Telugu films in India and abroad, Bollywood is nonplussed and may be in the process of reckoning with its own identity. It is perhaps the most fitting moment, therefore, for Bollywood to assess both its cultural and political place, for which Pathaan seems like just the ticket.

Statistically, enough people within India have seen it to comprise a large cross-section of its citizens, and the wide spectrum of political opinions that they represent. If solidarity with Shah Rukh Khan and/or Deepika Padukone was the principal reason for the film’s commercial success, as many have argued, that sentiment of camaraderie has reached far beyond the small community of voluble opponents of the BJP regime. This may not be intended as a politically intellectual film like Anubhav Sinha’s Article 15 (2019), nor an outrightly one-sided depiction of history such as The Kashmir Files (2022), but its dampened critique of the current status quo, housed within an inordinate patriotic display, has appealed to a far larger contingent of India’s public than either of the other two. And in that mass popularity lies its power.

As the clever epilogue metaphorically suggests in the discussion between Shah Rukh Khan and Salman Khan (or perhaps, as an aside, between their respective characters, Pathaan and “Tiger” Rathore), the purpose of this film is to entertain while staying (politically) relevant. It is so confident in its own outrageous version of fictionalised reality, that it does not take issue with being ridiculed so long as it can have the last word. It is moments such as this, when the sheer popularity of cultural products, like film, upstage other discourses deemed more ‘politically appropriate’ or ‘relevant’, that suggest that the idea of India amongst its populace may be more sagacious and multiplicitous than political polemics would imply. Pathaan might just have accomplished what no political opposition could.

Paroma Ghose has a PhD in history from the Graduate Institute, Geneva.

Does Pathaan’s Phenomenal Success Mark the Start of a Pushback Against Hate?

The film’s success, despite the best efforts of some political leaders to spread hate and divisiveness, shows Indians can and will reject hate after a point – especially if its object is to vilify that which they hold dear.

The verdict was out on the very day of its release. Pathaan, the Shah Rukh Khan starrer, was set to be a blockbuster. And so it is – in the first week after it hit the theatres, the film has grossed over Rs 600 crore worldwide, and over Rs 300 crore in the domestic market.

It is shattering all manner of box-office records as screaming, ecstatic fans throng cinema halls everywhere and lap up the gorgeous King Khan’s latest turn as a Mission Impossible-style action hero (but did we ever see such jaw-dropping abs on Tom Cruise?), a patriot nonpareil, prepared to shed the last drop of his blood to save his country, and, indeed, the world.

The monster success of Pathaan is not just an affirmation of the 57-year-old Shah Rukh Khan’s mesmeric hold on the public imagination. It is not merely proof that even after three decades in the film industry, SRK has what it takes to deliver a giant hit and lift Bollywood out of the doldrums into which it had fallen in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Also read: With Pathaan, Shahrukh Gives His Fans What They’ve Been Missing All These Years

The success of Pathaan is also exhilarating because it shows that despite the best efforts of some of our political leaders to spread hate and divisiveness, Indians retain their essential humanism. They can and will reject hate after a point, especially if its object is to vilify that which they hold dear.

Hindutva activists at a film theatre screening Pathaan in Madhya Pradesh. Photo: Video screengrab.

The right-wing fusillade against Pathaan started more than a month before it was released. Narottam Mishra, the home minister of Madhya Pradesh, who is usually first off the block when it comes to banning this or that for their alleged moral turpitude, decreed that the film’s song Besharam Rang, featuring a stunning Deepika Padukone in a variety of skimpy swimwear, was picturised with noxious intent. Her saffron bikini was particularly objectionable, the BJP leader said, and declared that unless the offensive bits were excised, the film may not be shown in the state.

What happened next followed an all too familiar pattern: the call to oppose the movie was quickly picked up by the proxies of Hindutva groups and their troll armies on social media. Until the movie released on January 25, #BoycottBollywood and #BoycottPathaan trended on social media, right-wing goons ripped off the movie’s posters, and one wondered if Pathaan would suffer the same fate as Aamir Khan’s Laal Singh Chaddha, which got a lukewarm reception, due in part to a vicious campaign against yet another Khan who bestrides Bollywood.

Also read: Bollywood Is a Major Target for Right Wing Groups Looking for Signs of ‘Hinduphobia’

But perhaps the common man had had enough. When the guns were trained on one more beloved icon, who happened to be Muslim, perhaps it simply did not go down well with people. Perhaps they recalled SRK’s ordeal in 2021 when his son Aryan was kept behind bars and denied bail for almost a month, on charges of drug use which could not be proven. Perhaps they remembered the way the superstar had maintained a dignified silence on the episode, even though it stank of unabashed persecution. And when Pathaan released in the face of this pumped-up, manufactured hate, perhaps people decided to repudiate it by showing up in droves at the theatres.

Sure, the movie is a fast-paced crowd-pleasing cocktail of spectacular action scenes, deshbhakti, evil Pakistani general, a deadly tussle between “good Indian” and “bad Indian”, and a comely Pakistani spy (played by, who else, but the long-stemmed Deepika Padukone). And it has a subtext that is of significance in these communally polarised times. The hero is an orphan – he does not know if he was born a Hindu or a Muslim – and was christened ‘Pathaan’ after he saved an Afghan village from a missile attack. In other words, his only identity is that of a patriotic Indian who will always be on the side of the good.

That Pathaan is a hit is not a surprise. But would the scale of it have been as mind-boggling if King Khan not been perceived to have been unjustly targeted? After all, the film is also gloriously mindless in parts and requires you to suspend disbelief in large doses.

In truth, the euphoric response to Pathaan, one that is pushing its revenue collection to stratospheric levels, is an outpouring of love and support for a superstar who shuns controversy but has evidently not pledged his fealty to the powers that be. The mood of the people was not lost on the politicians, and BJP leaders, including the prime minister himself, suddenly started urging people not to give calls for boycotting films.

In other words, if the pushback against hate is strong enough, its purveyors will backtrack. And therein lies the real triumph of Pathaan. You never know what will trigger a popular revolt against the poison of divisiveness. Maybe, just maybe, Pathaan marks the beginning of that turnaround.

Shuma Raha writer is a journalist and author. 

Torn Posters, Chants, Threats: Release of ‘Pathaan’ Sees Scattered Protests Across India

Videos uploaded to social media showed members of Hindutva organisations chanting slogans, some of which appeared to insult Islam, outside various movie theatres.

New Delhi: As Pathaan, the film starring Shah Rukh Khan, released today, January 25, multiple film theatres in north India saw violent protests by Hindutva workers.

Videos uploaded to social media showed members of Hindutva organisations chanting slogans, some of which appeared to insult the Muslim Prophet, Mohammed.

Protests against Pathaan had begun much before the film’s release, with Hindutva groups leading a concerted campaign against it, on social media and through protests involving vandalism, citing the fact that an actor in it, Deepika Padukone, appears in a song in a saffron bikini.

Journalist Kashif Kakvi has tweeted videos, purportedly from Indore, Gwalior and Bhopal – cities in Madhya Pradesh. In Indore, the Hindu Jagran Manch appears to have led a round of devotional songs outside the INOX film theatre. The Bajrang Dal demonstrated outside a mall in Gwalior.

Madhya Pradesh home minister Narottam Mishra had said in December that the costume worn by Padukone was “highly objectionable” and that if the scenes are not “corrected” then the film may not be allowed to be released in the state.

Posters of the film displayed in Bhopal were torn amidst cries of ‘Jai Shri Ram’, a video tweeted by Kakvi showed. Viewers were allegedly turned away.

Journalist Rajan Chaudhury tweeted that Bajrang Dal members were using slogans that insulted the prophet.

Indore Commissioner of Police Harinarayanachari Mishra said an FIR will be lodged on “objectionable slogans” raised by Bajrang Dal workers at the Kasturi Cineplex. It is not yet clear if the above incident is the one he meant.

The news agency PTI quoted Assistant Commissioner of Police Dishesh Agrawal as having said that protests by Hindu Jagran Manch and Bajrang Dal led to some morning shows being cancelled in Madhya Pradesh.

In Agra, the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, who had earlier issued an ultimatum against screening Pathaan, congregated at the Meher cinema hall and threw ink on a poster on January 24. An FIR was registered against some unidentified people, Hindustan Times reported.

The Gujarat unit of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, meanwhile, withdrew its protest against the film, expressing satisfaction over the removal of “objectionable” contents from the film on the Central Board of Film Certification’s direction, Indian Express has reported.

Odisha TV has reported that in Bhubaneswar, activists of the Kalinga Sena staged demonstrations in front of several movie theatres, tore Pathaan posters and urged people not to watch the film.

Poster burning was also seen in Bengaluru, by Vishwa Hindu Parishad protesters.

On January 22, a day after he refused to comment on violent protests against the film in Assam’s Narengi, Assam chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma had said that he had assured Shah Rukh Khan of peace during the run of his film.

With Pathaan, Shahrukh Gives His Fans What They’ve Been Missing All These Years

The movie tells its story in a dramatic register without scoring cheap political points or using its star as a crutch.

Even the most ardent Shahrukh Khan fan will concede that his last decade was far from satisfactory. For someone largely immune to the star’s charms, I thought that period was disastrous. I don’t need to say anything more; the films do the talking: Ra.One (2011), Don 2 (2011), Happy New Year (2014), Dilwale (2015), and Jab Harry Met Sejal (2017) were not just shoddy movies but filmmaking embarrassments.

These failures seemed even more disconcerting because Khan, well into his 50s, could no longer use his romantic shtick. Worse, a series of big Bollywood flops over the last year shook and shocked the industry. So Siddharth Anand’s Pathaan rolls two anticipations in one, both comebacks: Khan’s big screen appearance after four years and Bollywood’s chance to reassure its audiences that it can still entertain. So much is at stake here that the 146-minute movie seems like a singing hashtag: #NoPressure.

So it almost feels like an inside joke when an early scene features Pathaan (Khan), a retired RAW agent, telling his senior (Dimple Kapadia) about Kintsugi, the Japanese art of repairing broken pottery. Because there’s a comeback within this story, too: Pathaan launching a covert mission with a few “broken soldiers” to hunt a new feared terrorist, Jim (John Abraham), who, like him, was a RAW agent.

Pathaan takes some time to find the meat of the story. Till then, it gives its audiences their star: Khan, like a vintage hero, living more than once – now an action hero. Fistfights over speeding trucks, a car chase, a helicopter stunt – it’s all in there. The action sequences are sharp and slick, keeping you in the story. And if people had any misgivings about their leading man, then Khan assuages them all. After a long time, Pathaan gave me the feeling that Khan was directing himself. Because he doesn’t do a lot here – he isn’t trying to be something; he just is. Whether it’s the blazing action set-pieces or his flirtatious conversations with Deepika Padukone’s character (an ISI agent, Rubina Mohsin), Khan – in this charged espionage drama that sporadically resembles a heist film – is a portrait of impressive restraint.

Even the supporting actors, such as Kapadia and Padukone, shine. Unlike many star vehicles, Pathaan doesn’t make them rally around but with Khan. The most surprising element though is Abraham. He starts off with a homage to Dhoom – “in a different life, we might have been friends” – and then nails Pathaan’s tone and tenor: that it’s a simple mainstream entertainer. Simple, however, doesn’t mean superficial or lazy. His Jim has all the qualities of a good villain: he’s credible, cruel, funny – and springs surprises with ease.

The last quality percolates to the film as well. Pathaan is busy and purposeful. Anand never lets his story drag, infusing enough surprises that stay true to the movie. Like Khan, the filmmaker keeps a tight control over his excesses. You won’t find superfluous songs or other narrative paddings, signalling star wattage. That’s so because Anand is confident with what he has: a fascinating take on the well-trodden espionage genre. I don’t need to tell you how most Bollywood directors treat their films the moment “national security” is involved. Anand isn’t so burdened. He’s assured enough to show us an ISI agent who isn’t Evil. There are no booming dialogues on deshbhakti or Pakistan-bashing. Jim is, in fact, originally Indian – someone who later says he doesn’t belong to any country. A “terrorist without a country”? You don’t see such films every Friday.

Also read: By Tackling What Cannot Be Said, ‘Trial by Fire’ Emerges a Show of Stirring Merits

But it’s not as if Pathaan is flawless. In stretches it buys into the espionage genre a bit too hard: It introduces a twist, then injects another twist cancelling the first, and so on. Its sharp spies contradict their intelligence to make the plot race forward. Rubina, for instance, tells Pathaan about Jim’s main plan. He listens to her and just… agrees. (He regrets it later.) Later in the movie, his gullibility recurs. Pathaan, now distrusting Rubina, again listens to her version and just… agrees. Padukone is magnetic on screen, but her character demanded more thought and finesse. At times, the writing falls into an explanatory mode: a protagonist, a pathos-ridden flashback; another protagonist, another pathos-ridd… you get the idea.

More crucially, for a movie that talks about Kintsugi, Pathaan doesn’t own its scars – or tries too hard to be perfect, sometimes to its own detriment. Just take a look at its action sequences: everything is matched, coordinated, choreographed. There’s nothing inherently wrong with such an approach – and the set pieces are visually arresting – but after a point, they lack the ability to surprise. The settings just look like passive pretty things. Anand does break the pattern once – in a bike chase sequence on frozen water – but a thriller like this needed more such dynamism.

The overall feeling, however, I got while exiting the theatre was not something I’m ordinarily used to. Here was a Bollywood ‘mass-ey’ movie that told its story in a dramatic register without insulting my intelligence or scoring cheap political points or using its star as a crutch. A lot of credit rests with Khan himself. He leads like a captain, moves like a cool cat, bites like a ravaged predator, and charms like a veteran. The 57-year-old ‘thirst trap’ himself looks thirsty for artistic credence. And his audiences, like him, have waited for long. Now that wait is over, and both the well and the parched can’t stay still.

Hindutva Activists Vandalise Ahmedabad Mall Over ‘Pathaan’ Posters

Five members of the mob were detained by the police and then later released.

New Delhi: Members of the Bajrang Dal and Vishwa Hindu Parishad on Wednesday (January 4) allegedly vandalised a mall in Ahmedabad, tearing down posters of the upcoming Shahrukh Khan and Deepika Padukone-starrer Pathaan.

According to PTI, five members of the mob were detained by the police and then later released. It is unclear whether an FIR has been registered against those involved in the vandalism, The Hindu reported.

In a video of the incident, shared by the Bajrang Dal itself, Hindu right activists can be seen tearing down posters of the film and stamping on them, while waving saffron flags in the air.

While the movie itself is yet to be released, Sangh parivar groups had objected to the music video for the song ‘Besharam Rang’. Their unhappiness appears to be based on the fact that in the video, Padukone at one point is wearing an orange (or saffron) outfit while dancing with Khan, who is a Muslim.

“We will not allow Pathaan’s screening in Gujarat. Today’s protest against the movie’s release in Ahmedabad should be taken as a warning by all the theatre owners across the state. They must stay away from releasing the movie in their theatres or multiplexes,” Gujarat VHP spokesperson Hitendrasinh Rajput had said, according to PTI.

CBFC Asks Pathaan Makers to Make ‘Changes’

The CBFC has asked production banner Yash Raj Films to submit a revised version of the spy action thriller in accordance with board guidelines, Prasoon Joshi said in a statement. He did not detail the changes suggested to the makers.

Mumbai:  The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) has directed the makers of Shah Rukh Khan starrer Pathaan to implement “changes” in the movie, including its songs, chairperson Prasoon Joshi said on Thursday, December 29.

The CBFC has asked production banner Yash Raj Films to submit a revised version of the spy action thriller in accordance with board guidelines, Joshi said in a statement. He did not detail the changes suggested to the makers.

Pathaan found itself battling controversy and calls for a ban after the release of its song ‘Besharam Rang’, also featuring Deepika Padukone, on December 12. A sequence in the song showing Deepika in a saffron bikini led to protests across India for allegedly hurting “Hindu sentiments”.

“The film recently reached the CBFC examination committee for certification. The film went through the due and thorough examination process as per the CBFC guidelines.

“The committee has guided the makers to implement the advised changes in the film including the songs and submit the revised version prior to theatrical release,” Joshi said in a statement to PTI.

The aim of the CBFC, Joshi said, was to strike a balance between the creativity of the makers and the sentiments of the audience and accordingly find a solution.

“I must reiterate that our culture and faith is glorious, intricate, and nuanced. And we have to be careful that it does not get defined by trivia which takes the focus away from the real and the true.”

“And like I have said earlier as well, that the trust between creators and audience is most important to protect and the creators should keep working towards it,” Joshi added.

The certificate for a film, according to procedure, is issued after required modifications are carried out and the final material submitted.

Those who expressed their displeasure over ‘Besharam Rang’ and demanded changes in it include Madhya Pradesh home minister Narottam Mishra and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad. The Madhya Pradesh Ulema Board also sought a ban on the film for “misrepresenting Islam”.

A complaint has also been filed before a court in Bihar’s Muzaffarpur district, seeking the registration of an FIR against Shah Rukh, Deepika, and others for “hurting the religious sentiments” of Hindus in the song.

The makers of the film last week released another song, ‘Jhoome Jo Pathaan’.

Last week, the head priest of an Ayodhya temple said he would “burn alive” Khan for disrespecting the Hindu religion.

Pathaan, which also stars John Abraham, is scheduled to hit the theatres on January 25.

(PTI)