“Indians don’t know how hard a lawyer fought for justice on behalf of those who died in the Jalianwala Bagh massacre.” That’s a reasonably fair claim. And it is a shame, too, considering there is so much that went on. It did bother me in school that General Dyer pretty much got away. When I heard of this film, I wondered if he did suffer more than was let on—was that the untold story? Oh well. Even so, the story is dramatic in itself and dramatising it the Hindi-filmy way took away from it. A lot.
Feels more like a wannabe “A Few Good Men” than holding on its own merit.
Firstly, because the focus moved from Sankaran Nair, the lawyer, to Akshay Kumar. Were it not so, we would have known a little more about Sankaran’s backstory. Why did he take pride in serving the crown? What turned him over? The transformation shown in the film feels incomplete, superficial, taken for granted, even.
Let’s say the intent was to tell us about this lawyer. Then, the fact that, were it not for him, General Dyer wouldn’t have faced any repercussions at all needed to be spelt out. Its omission was rather conspicuous.
Now, I understand that both these things could have made the film take cliched routes or make the film hagiographical. But, Kesari Chapter 2 is not that bad a film that we give it points for not doing something. Surely, there is enough talent out there that could have included these things without taking the usual routes.
Oh! And why does the film’s title have “Kesari”? What has Kesari got to do with anything? I looked it up a bit, and aside from the thematic connection to the first film titled Kesari, there’s little justification. Even if we shrug a “whatever” at that, the usage of the word in the film is highly sus.
Anyway, other than the remarkable story, which could have used a better screenplay over a broad overview, there is nothing much to hold on to. You have seen Akshay Kumar do his intense brooding far too many times. So often that I am bored of wondering, “how he cannot be bored doing it when I am bored writing about it.”
Ananya Panday doesn’t have much to work with, and she fumbles through the one scene that focusses entirely on her. The gold that Regina Cassandra wears seems to play a bigger role than her character’s existence in Sankaran’s life. Similarly, Amit Sial just exists. If I remember anything from this film other than the story, it will be R Madhavan’s short but effective act.
It’s not that bad a film that we give it points for not doing something.
You have a decent-ish courtroom drama. But, it feels more like a wannabe “A Few Good Men” than holding on its own merit. The theatrics overshadow and distract from the substance.
Then what you are left with is…is the core story enough? Yes, but might not be for the right reasons. It is unlikely that there will be another film made on this story. And the story is one that needs to be heard and told. Even if it might not be the whole truth…or even if it might be more than “nothing but the truth.”
– meeta, a part of the audience