Such were the quality of movies in 2017 that Pink was the only one I saw in a theatre.
Padmaavat was the first Hindi film of 2018 that I watched with family, and expectations were naturally high — given the controversy, the scale, and Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s reputation for visual opulence.
Observations
- Overstretched runtime: At 2 hours and 45 minutes, Padmaavat tests patience. Several sequences — especially the indulgent visual montages — linger far longer than they should. With tighter editing, this film could comfortably have been a crisp two-hour experience without losing any emotional or narrative impact.
- Bhansali and the period-drama fatigue: There is a sense that even Bhansali himself might be weary of the genre he once mastered. The trademark slow-motion walks, symmetrical frames, and operatic background score feel more like a checklist than inspiration. The spark that once elevated his period films now feels routine.
- The unnecessary 3D experience: The decision to release Padmaavat in 3D feels purely commercial. Unless the storytelling is immersive, 3D becomes an obstacle rather than an enhancement — and here it adds nothing except discomfort and distraction.
-
The three central performances:
- Deepika Padukone: Regal, statuesque, and visually stunning — but emotionally distant. The performance seems designed more to preserve an image than to explore a character. She looks the part perfectly, but the writing gives her little room to breathe.
- Shahid Kapoor: Royalty personified. Shahid brings dignity and restraint to Maharawal Ratan Singh, but the role itself is underwritten. One wishes the screenplay had invested more in his inner conflicts rather than using him merely as a moral counterpoint.
- Ranveer Singh: Loud, ferocious, and committed — yet familiar. For all the praise his performance received, this Alauddin Khilji feels like an extension of his Bajirao energy. Effective, yes; transformative, no.
- Overall impression: Despite its flaws, Padmaavat remains watchable — largely due to its scale, production design, and performances. But it never quite rises to greatness.
- An unanswered question: If Gaffoor could shoot arrows at Ratan Singh with such ease, why didn’t the Rajputs return the favour and aim for Alauddin Khilji? Cinematic liberty, perhaps — but logic does take a hit here.
In the end, Padmaavat is a film that looks magnificent, sounds grand, and leaves you curiously unmoved. A visual spectacle, yes — but one that mistakes grandeur for depth.
Comments