. Memo to the filmmakers: If you are going to make a film called Mangal Pandey please concentrate all your energies on the central character, Not on his friend Capt. Gordon and other insignificant characters/events. Is it me, or Toby Stephens had more screen time than Aamir? .No need for the bookending/flashback structure. Movie could have been told in a fairly linear fashion up to the hanging. Narrative, as it is, seems to disjointed/distended.
. Om Puri's voice-over narration was redundant. (It came to my attention that he was there to narrate the events to non-English speaking Indian audiences, but that only goes to show that the script was not well thought-out -- not enough was shown VISUALLY and Dialogues and situations alone should have been enough anyway.) . Why make the central P.O.V., Capt. Gordon's? The movie centers around Mangal Pandey, yet we spend too much time around Gordon, which results in a certain lack of focus. The film takes too many tangents. I would have loved to learn more about Mangal Pandey the Man, not about his life and interaction with people as seen through others' eyes. Again, he should have been the focus -- and that would have required a first person POV -- i.e. the camera sees what HE sees. How much more effective it would have been if the camera had been in his head (figuratively speaking) and at the hanging scene for example, shown us what he sees -- i.e. the people massed around him at the last moments of his life -- and not the people and Gordon looking at him die. It removes us too much from the central experience. Damn.
. Like the use of imagery/symbolism/metaphors (i.e. black man/white man, Brahmin/untouchable, white baby feeding off the Indian nanny, etc ) though too much is made out of them sometimes. Also like that it's emphasized that Gordon is a Catholic Scot, thus an outsider among his own peers.
. The romance angles were too incidental to the story -- they felt tacked on like an afterthought, and literally go nowhere. 30 minutes could easily have been trimmed off the total running time without the Suttee incident.
. Rani, Amisha, and Khirron Kher have nothing to do. Liked Rani's Main Vari Vari, but it doesn't come anywhere close to Madhuri's mujras in Devdas for instance -- lacks oomph -- and it's further spoiled by the director's decision to cross-cut with Aamir toward the end of the song (to mask Rani's lack of dancing abilities perhaps?) . Songs are randomly placed, picturization is average. Apart for the Mangala Ho and Maula songs, this must be one of A.R. Rahman's least memorable score in a while. Was the HOLI song necessary? . Aamir makes up for what he lacks in stature with sheer presence and gravitas. However, I cannot help but feel that he's been short-changed as Toby Stephens is given more opportunities to out-act him, lack in that court trial scene for instance -- Aamir doesn't have a big stop-the-movie-in-its-tracks scene, though that changes after intermission when his character is (finally) given prominence. That the "rising" happens after Mangal's death is a double-damn as it robs Aamir the chance to pep talk the masses and show himself a true leader (that said -- those Braveheart type scenes have been done to death, so maybe it's a blessing in disguise as it saves us another 20-minute battle. Couldn't have taken it so late in the film.) . Movie fails to generate much excitement for and stir feeling from audiences the way Lagaan did -- though both have a theme in common, i.e. ALL Indians (regardless of faith or caste) unite against the common oppressor -- cricket as a sport had that populist appeal that had audiences root for the heroes, something that doesn't happen here.
. Hate the inclusion of flag-waving newsreel footage at the end. Makes the movie shamelessly more bombastic/patriotic than it already is.
Verdict: the film Feels substantial, has some gorgeous images (Aamir rising from the water, etc...), but overall, conception/treatment/execution of film is too pedestrian/ancient. For these kind of historical epics, one needs a fresh angle to explore the story -- a unique perspective of events that would make it stand out, the way APOCALYPSE NOW stands out from all the other Vietnam pics. It merely makes the film good, and not the great epic one expected.
. Om Puri's voice-over narration was redundant. (It came to my attention that he was there to narrate the events to non-English speaking Indian audiences, but that only goes to show that the script was not well thought-out -- not enough was shown VISUALLY and Dialogues and situations alone should have been enough anyway.) . Why make the central P.O.V., Capt. Gordon's? The movie centers around Mangal Pandey, yet we spend too much time around Gordon, which results in a certain lack of focus. The film takes too many tangents. I would have loved to learn more about Mangal Pandey the Man, not about his life and interaction with people as seen through others' eyes. Again, he should have been the focus -- and that would have required a first person POV -- i.e. the camera sees what HE sees. How much more effective it would have been if the camera had been in his head (figuratively speaking) and at the hanging scene for example, shown us what he sees -- i.e. the people massed around him at the last moments of his life -- and not the people and Gordon looking at him die. It removes us too much from the central experience. Damn.
. Like the use of imagery/symbolism/metaphors (i.e. black man/white man, Brahmin/untouchable, white baby feeding off the Indian nanny, etc ) though too much is made out of them sometimes. Also like that it's emphasized that Gordon is a Catholic Scot, thus an outsider among his own peers.
. The romance angles were too incidental to the story -- they felt tacked on like an afterthought, and literally go nowhere. 30 minutes could easily have been trimmed off the total running time without the Suttee incident.
. Rani, Amisha, and Khirron Kher have nothing to do. Liked Rani's Main Vari Vari, but it doesn't come anywhere close to Madhuri's mujras in Devdas for instance -- lacks oomph -- and it's further spoiled by the director's decision to cross-cut with Aamir toward the end of the song (to mask Rani's lack of dancing abilities perhaps?) . Songs are randomly placed, picturization is average. Apart for the Mangala Ho and Maula songs, this must be one of A.R. Rahman's least memorable score in a while. Was the HOLI song necessary? . Aamir makes up for what he lacks in stature with sheer presence and gravitas. However, I cannot help but feel that he's been short-changed as Toby Stephens is given more opportunities to out-act him, lack in that court trial scene for instance -- Aamir doesn't have a big stop-the-movie-in-its-tracks scene, though that changes after intermission when his character is (finally) given prominence. That the "rising" happens after Mangal's death is a double-damn as it robs Aamir the chance to pep talk the masses and show himself a true leader (that said -- those Braveheart type scenes have been done to death, so maybe it's a blessing in disguise as it saves us another 20-minute battle. Couldn't have taken it so late in the film.) . Movie fails to generate much excitement for and stir feeling from audiences the way Lagaan did -- though both have a theme in common, i.e. ALL Indians (regardless of faith or caste) unite against the common oppressor -- cricket as a sport had that populist appeal that had audiences root for the heroes, something that doesn't happen here.
. Hate the inclusion of flag-waving newsreel footage at the end. Makes the movie shamelessly more bombastic/patriotic than it already is.
Verdict: the film Feels substantial, has some gorgeous images (Aamir rising from the water, etc...), but overall, conception/treatment/execution of film is too pedestrian/ancient. For these kind of historical epics, one needs a fresh angle to explore the story -- a unique perspective of events that would make it stand out, the way APOCALYPSE NOW stands out from all the other Vietnam pics. It merely makes the film good, and not the great epic one expected.