Off beat cinema going the
commercial way or rather the commercial gateway opening for the realistic
cinema, both can be said for movies such as NH10. Brave attempt of the team to
make a movie on such a theme, commendable direction, power pact performances,
wonderful cinematography and many more applauds to the film.
But, I came back with rather a
heavy heart. The fact that it was realistic cinema was rather too overwhelming
for me. The idea of the plot being the reflection of a part of our society was
rather disturbing.
No, I wasn’t being much practical
about it. I was representing that sentimental lot of the audience. Pretty much
driven into the movie and carried away by the story. But, if such a believable
up close face of my society is not going to move me, then what else will. Honour
killing, Khap, domestic violence, eve teasing, corruption; things that we hear,
that we read, that we talk of, were all right there.
I could hear laughter in between
quite a few scenes which made me ask myself that isn’t it a movie after all. I
mean till it doesn’t really happen with me, even though if I was sitting just a
few kilometres away from that supposedly highway in the same city and state,
what’s the point of taking it so seriously. I mean the movie did have some
pretty funny lines.
Most of the social issues mentioned
above, majorly and popularly have to do more with the women. But, one of the
striking realities shown in this movie was that even where women are in power,
the other women are no safer. Compassion cannot be driven by a gender or by any
one specific half of the world. The ability to feel for another human is not a
particular gender’s sole responsibility. No movement against one gender, one
caste, one nation, or a particular part of society is going to make us any
better than the rest.
The interesting thing which drew
my attention to the movie’s plot more was its climax. The protagonist of the
movie goes beyond her physical and mental tolerance. She was angry and
agitated. Ultimately she reached an extent where she loses it all. Then, comes
the time when the rod changes the hand. She is in power now!
Earlier, she fought, ran and hid
to protect herself and her love. Now, she fights to vent her anger. She fights
back for more than just that. She wants revenge. She gathers her will, strength
and courage to hold the rod against the wrong doers.
One side of the story:
She served them right. She lost
all that she had because of those cruel men. Even if they did or did not come
after her, there was no way that she could have let them be, to go ahead and do
the same with anyone else.
The other side of the story:
Is there any other way to treat
such criminals? Is there anything possibly existing that can change the mindset
of such people who commit crime on the basis of what they think to be right and
on the basis of, “Jo karna tha so karna tha”?
Every criminal, from Nirbhaya’s
(Jyoti) rapists to the terrorists, do what they have to do to claim some or the
other belief to be right. Just like the protagonist at the end of the movie.
Did she have a thought of the
greater good when she killed those men? It is doubtful to believe so from the
cold looks which she gives while smoking a cigarette right before she takes
down the last man.
Violence occurs not because it
necessary, but mostly because it is enjoyed, enjoyed by the one who has the
power, the one who has the rod.
But, then this was one way to
make the common innocent man (woman) feel empowered and strong.
Would it be too optimistic to see
the poor daughter in law of the Sarpanch’s house to have said that she wanted
to leave with her or the protagonist to have asked her to do so, when she was
leaving?
Perhaps yes. Not too realistic.
