The Kashmir Files

Why did I see The Kashmir Files? I did not want to give them money. I do know the insidious nature of the bile the makers regularly spout. I know they are dangerous to the Union. And me watching their movie probably would in some Rube Goldebergian way encourage them. But as charcha on this movie was always had, with whomsoever I met and wherever I went, and I could argue on principle, there was a gap. An unfulfilling, and according to me an unforgiving gap, which at least in the argument would act as convenient tank to a snide Javelin: "You are saying all this, have you seen the movie?" To cover that flank simply, and to buttress my argument complexly, I saw the movie.

All arts and films in particular are political. They are biased from the POV of the makers. They are in some way, some form of emission and publication of ideas, and hence propaganda. Jhund, Sairat were.  Pink, Hum Saath Saath Hai, Sholay, Dev. D were. Uri, Maachis, Udta Punjab, the Apu trilogy were. Propaganda becomes dangerous when the State gets involved with malice to achieve anti-constitutional, anti-human rights aims. Hence whatever cinematic merits The Kashmir Files might have, it is a dangerous movie.

(You can skip this para too if you are in for the movie review strictly). I believe we cannot fully analyze a movie in a vacuum, without the political context it is made in. There are two things I would like to bring up here:
a. One has to admit that the current political system in India has enabled a wider public discourse regarding the atrocities the Kashmiri Pandits experienced. Other than being brought up by the Right Wings (only) during election times pre-2014, this topic was generally absent, and often indeed dismissed or rarely discussed except in debates. I may be wrong. But for me, that was indeed the case. I had little reason to even read up on the issue. I do not think such a large commercial film was possible pre-2014, solely because the Whatsapp forwards, and the BJP IT cell tweets were not there to publicize it. Every political era increases or decreases or encourages or discourages certain films to be made or from being made. The State is always an intrusive critic in all art. Regarding factual accuracy, I will address that later.
b. The other side is the use of this film, as a weapon to assault an already marginalized community. Obviously, the government and producers and the director of this film were not oblivious of the effect of this film in this sphere. I daresay, that was also one of the objectives of the film. One, therefore, has to be careful while coming to a judgment call at the end of the movie, which it does force the audience to make.

Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri has certainly evolved and upskilled in the propaganda department since the Tashkent Files days. Read the review of that horror here. This time, it is way more subtle, and tightly tied to the story. It is not shoehorned, but easily build: factoid upon factoid, then a layer of Shankhnaad hypothesis, then a 2 Rs Twitter troll outrage, followed by a P. N. Oak-style reveal, which just enough hint of "we are showing both sides". I can see people believing some part of it, and that some part, when argued against with logic, will make them believe a significant part of the movie. The mass is already primed daily. The director has used pathos like a Hattori Hanzo sword. And that slash to the heart is difficult to disbelieve. The actors need credit for this as well and we will come to them. 

I did like the merging of different timelines as different parts of the stories were recalled and told to the protagonist. Those were quite seamless transitions. The overall feel of the agony of the exodus and different moments were well crafted to exact maximum emotions from the audiences. This brings us to factual correctness. There have been reports and reviews that Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri has actually played down several atrocities that were committed. Those shown can be verified online. Personal experiences are many, and even though there has been liberal cinematic interpretation, the fact remains that the atrocities were committed. The extent to which...is a very painful and pointless debate. Regarding the figures, going by official figures is foolish. If the government today can fudge figures, the authorities then can do so too. Suffice to say that even if we go by the lowest figures, whatever has happened is horrible. Regarding the communal aspect of it, that I do not think is up for debate. If people say Muslims were also killed, or some Muslims did help, that is true. But that cannot be expected from this film as it is meant to be on-sided. However, it must be noted that the salt to be had is that singular experiences, however horrible cannot be generalized to the oppressed or oppressor. Moreover, all governments were at fault, including the Janta Party. What were they doing then instead of helping/bringing to the government's notice or agitating for this? That is an adventure for you.

There are three ways we can see how the movie works:

1. As a cathartic recalling: I cannot speak for this. But I am sure that people who experienced this exodus (or genocide as the director repeatedly claims) can attest to this. The feeling that their story has been finally heard, and in a mainstream way, their atrocities were seen alongside them, I am sure it works well. In this case, one can compare it to Shikara which released in 2020. This does it better. Read the review of that yawn-fest here.

2. As a piece of propaganda: This it does very well. Now I will mention a few things which were nicely insidious and a few random words which could have been better utilized. During the JNU scenes, there were plenty of posters of Mao, Lenin etc. Points, the Left is the villain, the JNU students constantly painting the same are too. Including something true and sensitive like the poster replication of the naked women from Manipur protesting against the Army rape cases, conveniently makes people think: this is also a leftist conspiracy. The Indian Army gets a nice whitewash too when Bitta lies saying that the Army was responsible for the protagonist's mom and brother's death. That was refuted, consequently, every allegation against the army is refuted. There is mention of no internet as well as the incident when a Kashmiri was tied to the jeep. But since in the end, the right wins, these are left unanswered. There is passing mention of Dalit activism and Dalit rights randomly thrown in. I did not understand that, surely he doesn't expect us to believe that those are also conspiracies. And Humanism? If by humanism, he means human rights, that has not come through well. But maybe it worked on audience members who were not thinking that much.

3. As a movie experience: There is a story. There is emotion. There is good acting. So yeah, it might work for some. The long take where we see almost fifteen people being shot, one-by-one, and the mother being sawn in half will be taken away. The audience around me (a gang of seven middle-aged women) had tears in their eyes and were silent at the end (as compared to when they entered).

Among actors, Anupam Kher shows his chops. He might behave questionably off-screen, but his acting is convincing. Pallavi Joshi who has already played a similar role in The Tashkent Files: a leftist intellectual again plays a  brain-washing villain with 'contacts'. Brilliant idea of making her a 'Menon'. Chinmay Mandlekar also gets points.

The ending scene by Darshan Kumar is a mess. I think Vivek Ranjan Agnihotri tried to create his own Haider moment (the Shahid soliloquy) - perhaps a counter to that. But the acting was not up to the mark. You can see the attempted parallel. The other reason is that it becomes a Whatsapp forward script-wise. So yeah, the last scene does not land, but the scene previous to it carries the movie through. 

Where next from here? Bharat may have ignored their plight, but since 2014, we have a government that cares. Now as Anupam Kher's character wanted, even Article 370 has been abolished. Since 1997, we also have te Jammu and Kashmir Migrant Immovable Property (Preservation, Protection and Restraint on Distress Sales) Act, 1997. Yet there has been no large-scale return of The Fled. Terrorist attacks still continue, and why would you move to a place where there is almost no internet? Of all the people, Mohan Bhagwat recently said the time has come closer, but not yet, and the Pandits must not make haste. So when? Electorally, once they return, this issue will be resolved, and can't be raked again. And once they are settled in the Valley, what if they start asking for actual development? Anyway, that is just cynical speculation.

Watch this movie at your own risk. And cheaply.

Rating: 2 Beards/5

Addendum (7/4, 13:45): I was shocked and impressed by the gall of their choice to use the song Hum Dekhenge in such a context. The beautiful history of Iqbal Bano singing it against Zia ul-Haq is besmirched. Also credit to Pranav Pawar who once quoted Kabir Khan to me, "Every single frame of a film reflects director's politics." that has influenced parts of this review.