Keyur Seta
Mumbai, 02 Mar 2018 7:00 IST
The film proves yet again that good intentions alone aren't enough to make a good film.
Some say films should not be limited to escapist fare that is forgotten no sooner than you have stepped out of the theatre, that giving a social message is equally important.
Then we have films like Naeem Siddiqui’s Hamne Gandhi Ko Maar Diya that are so obsessed about giving a message of harmony through Gandhian values that they forget the basic requirements of the medium.
It is January 1948. Kailash (Subrat Dutta) lives with his wife (Samiksha Bhatnagar) and young daughter in Jamalpur. He was born and brought up in Narayanpur, but has been staying in Jamalpur after having a tiff with his mother (Pratima Kazmi) 10 years ago.
Kailash builds a factory after a lot of hard work. However, it is set ablaze by rioting Muslims during the post-Partition riots.
Ever since, Kailash has developed extreme hatred towards Muslims. He is sternly against Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi for his supposed soft corner towards Muslims.
Kailash has a casteist mentality too. He struggles to find any kind of work. On his wife’s suggestion, he decides to visit Narayanpur to patch up with his mother. His fellow passenger on the train, Divakar Tripathi (Jatin Goswami), is an ardent Gandhian, his exact opposite.
The basic aim of Hamne Gandhi Ko Maar Diya is to take a powerful yet gentle stand on communalism. The film speaks against the Hindutva fanatics who abhor Muslims. The message is highly relevant in today’s times (even 70 years after the period in which the story is set). Hence, the relatability factor is present.
However, good intentions alone aren’t enough to make a good film.
After the protagonist’s hatred for Gandhi, the second biggest conflict in the film is the one between him and his mother. It simply lacks the necessary emotional punch and is unconvincing. So, obviously, you don’t feel for the two characters.
A major part of the film just revolves around conversations during a train journey. More importantly, the debates not only lack grip but also conviction. Divakar Tripathi goes on preaching bhaichara (brotherhood) and insaniyat (humanity) in such a schoolmarmish manner that it becomes unintentionally funny after the interval.
The laughter reaches a crescendo when, during one such monologue, passengers encourage him by saying things like, 'Bolte rahiye' and 'Yeh bohat meetha lag raha hai'.
Talking of the passengers, it would be unfair not to mention their overacting. This is seen the most during a forceful bhajan ‘Jai Jai Ram’ when they go on clapping over-enthusiastically. A scene in which a group of Hindus in the train mistakes a man to be a Muslim because of his beard also speaks volumes about the level of sensibility in the group.
The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) plays spoilsport by muting the word 'Savarkar' during an important conversation. Only those who realize what the word is would understand the point the character is trying to make.
The production design does not appear up to the mark because the year 1948 is not reflected on the insides of the train. Nor is the filmmaker able to hide the fact that the train isn’t moving. It is easy to make out the digital footage of landscape seen outside the windows. On one or two occasions, the footage is even repeated.
The casting of the main characters is fine. But the adverse effect of the content is very visible. Subrat Dutta certainly has talent. His character's hatred for Muslims doesn’t appear forced. Jatin Goswami appears tough but at the same time shows a Gandhian attitude with ease. It is the preaching that hampers his performance.
Veteran Pratima Kazmi is dependable. Samiksha Bhatnagar isn’t bad, but she doesn’t get too many opportunities. A few other train passengers that have important parts fail to do justice to them.