Shikara

It is BAD. PLEASE DON’T WATCH IT. It is mind-numbingly frustrating. Ishan, whom I went with for the movie, wanted to get up and leave. It is that unbearable. 

The beginning was a good concept. Other than the GoOgLy EyEd wife being astonished by routine things. It was a strong opening to tell the story, using the flashback. But then the rest of the first half could have been cut by approximately 45 minutes. Other than romance and GoOgLy EyEs nothing happens. Just bloody start-off with the action!

Also, the love-story only has love. That is a bad love-story too. Show the full story. Not a one-minute clip of them meeting, reading nazms and getting married and growing apple-trees, eating Rogan Josh, and wearing Loopy Earrings. Show the lovers’ quarrels, the teasing, the chocolate day, teddy day etc.

Thus, the movie end up being a series of romantic photos stitched together with a checklist to show Kashmir: Apples, Rogan Josh, Shikara, Apple trees, Urdu, Kashmiri, Nazm, Rogan Josh, Loopy Earrings also worn while sleeping, Rogan Josh, Hindu-Muslim bhai bhai, Apples, Urdu, Nazm. The one really interesting thing was the marriage: the songs, the instruments. The worst was the subtitles: which ruined the poetry. Oh, and hero and heroine doing GoOgLy EyEs towards each other.

Oh God the number of blackouts. Random. Everywhere. Unnecessary. Whotf edited it? And that bloody calf scene, why? What random ununderstandable metaphor was that? I would concede that some of the shots were indeed gorgeous, but hey, Bollywood has already perfected that.

And Lateef’s transformation? Seriously? So unconvincing! One incident, and he goes to Pakistan? He’s an educated, moderate person, in his twenties(?) This is too improbable. I don’t know how much the book differs from the movie. But works of fiction need to be convincing.

It was said that there might be two redeeming factors. I shall oppose them on-by-one:

1. The actress has more stuff to do in the latter half. This is false. She continues to make GoOgLy EyEs, cries now and then, and like a stupid person looks in astonishment at everything. Bro, you are an educated nurse. Of course you know the difference between a Presidential suit booking, and a presidential invitation, and are gonna verify the same. And, what about crying in anguish at your house being sold and then just saying haan ok you have sold to Zakir, and I don’t wanna make you cry and it’s our anniversary so cool. The PTSD sequence was a genuine positive though. Perhaps one of five.

Also, what about all those tickets they had bought via Agra? Did they not see the Taj then? And weren’t they supposed to go to Delhi?

Also, there was absolutely no advantage of having actual Kashmiris play the role. Their experiences were never fully utilized. There was a chance. The old man pining to go back. Like Toba Tek Singh. Nopesies daisies.

2. Finally something about the Kashmiri Pandits. Here again I protest. For the record, the Right has had its movies for a while: Uri, Tashkent Files etc. In any case, the movie IS NOT ABOUT THE KASHMIRI EXODUS. It just refers to it. It is a sickeningly and badly told love-story. The penchant and struggle to remain neutral disservices the movie. It makes it half-baked and the audience remains ignorant about the whole issue anyway.

It needed the politics. Take and show the militant Muslims, not just their shadows. There is no need to show that for every Muslim who killed or murdered a Pandit, there were equivalent or more “good” Muslims. Because if that was true, then the exodus would not have happened. Not just that, show the then Government, its military, its inaction to help the refugees. Show the Right being more preoccupied by Ayodhya and failing to come to their rescue. Unlike Jojo Rabbit, the sanitization takes away the power of the movie. The “Mandir Wahin Banayenge” was also an ugly insertion right in. There are more subtle ways.

Look at Bombay, it managed to do all that AND show a love-story.

This love-story could very well have been picked up and put in Lahore during partition: koi pharak nahi padta tha. Other than one aspect: the hit-list, which was a scary aspect unique to the exodus.
The end is also unconvincing. Imagine you are a boatman and the wife of the guy who hired you falls dead on his shoulder while they are on your boat. And you continue to just row.

There was a lot of potential, it was a virgin topic, but it was squandered. You had the chance to bring this to the fore, create conversation, VVC, you failed it. There is no need to be one-sided to make a good movie. You can still make a neutral movie by showing the complete story, and from multiple angles and both sides. Show the history, the context. You lost it with the oversweet Mr. and Ms. GoOgLy EyEs. Even Kashmiri Chai has salt in it. Your Shikara capsized.

This movie was only slightly better than Tashkent Files. The beard is only because it managed to refer about the Kashmiri Pandit Exodus in the non-Arnabian mainstream media.

Rating: 1 Beard/5