I finally got around to watching Talvar after hearing gushing things
about it (not least because I subscribe to TOI, and the movie is
produced by its sister concern.
The Aarushi Talwar double murder case has been obsessed over in media
and in conversations, and will be for a long time to come. This is
not without a reason; it appears to be a perfect crime, a crime of
passion, one of alleged honor killing, also because the ineptitude of
the Noida police has been well documented.
I went in the movie with great expectations, as names like Vishal
Bhardwaj, Gulzar, Irrfan and Konkana Sen Sharma have been associated.
Plus, the pre-release hype for the movie promised a Rashomon-like
experiment, where no one theory was right, and it was a case of
perceptions. Sadly, the final product underwhelmed me.
In tackling the Talwar murder, director Meghna Gulzar takes on a
challenge that she does not manage to convincingly win. There are a
few expert punches, but overall, the director takes on an emotional
and commonly held views: that parents can't kill their children, that
the police are inept, that office politics trumps the quest for
justice.
Talvar doesn't take it's name from the Talwars, but from the talwar
that the statue of blind justice carries, that people often overlook.
In fact, the family heres are the Tandons, whose daughter Shruti is
murdered. I found this name change confusing, since the director and
the producer have said in interviews that the story is based on
Aarushi Talvar murder case. Why then did they need to change Talvar
to Tandon is perplexing. Last minute jitters about litigation?
Instead of the promised Rashomon-like differing perspectives, we get
a linear narrative of what happened. The Aarushi case becomes an
excuse to highlight a an inept police, an over inquisitive media,
nosy neighbors. Understand that Talvar is less about the double
murder and more to do with talvar that the statue of Justice holds in
her hands. The actual murder and it's aftermath are rushed through,
with more emphasis being on the CBI investigation that followed. This
is where the movie starts to come apart. Talvar posits a theory that
the CBI actually cracked the mystery of who killed Aarushi, but
professional rivalry among the officials was the reason it was unable
to present a plausible case before the courts. The theory proposed by
the movie rests easily on 'the butler did it' argument, only in this
case, it is the butler's friends that did it. This is a very
simplistic solution to the murder mystery. Aarushi was killed under
mysterious circumstances, and the idea proposed by Talvar, though
radical and requiring a leap of faith, may not be entirely wrong. But
like I said, it requires a certain leap of faith in the director for
the viewer to completely disregard what the newspapers have been
saying to their readers as well as how the courts inferred the facts
of the case. That would require a solid case against the established
facts to be presented, which the film fails in doing.
The reason the movie fails is the character development. The Talvars,
or in this case the Tandons, are cardboard characters instead of the
fleshed out persons that they needed to be. The viewer must empathize
with the characters before they agree with their arguments or
justifications, but the movie portrays them one dimensionally. The
result is a protagonist that fails to connect.
The film makers may argue that the movie is about the investigation
but even the characters that do the investigation come across as one
dimensional. It starts with the paan chewing inefficient cop who
poses for for photos and is forever on the phone. Looking at him the
viewer knows that he will bungle up, which he does. The second person
to talk about the investigation, the senior police officer is ready
to believe in heresay to make the claim about wife swapping; again
by-the-numbers.
The movie is supposed to be anchored by the CBI officer who conducted
the investigation, the one who nabbed the actual culprit. He is
expected to be a well rounded person that can engage the viewer and
make them agree with the film's position. What the viewer gets
instead is a protagonist in the classic mould of a weary and beaten
cop who has seen the ugly side of life and now lives for the small
things in life, like sharing liquor with the Chinese food stall
owner. Even his marriage is falling apart, making him a complete
nomad in the society. He has no ambition in taking up the case,
except to get to the truth. His colleagues, however, have their
motives in twisting it to meet their ends, and looking at them it
becomes obvious. While the protagonist is a loner, his colleagues
hunt in packs. Over simplification anyone? An aside: Irrfan as CBI
officer Arun Kumar in glasses is the definitive Gulzar touch. There
is no doubt about whom to believe.
In taking up the Aarushi Talvar murder mystery, director Meghna
Gulzar has shown that she has the guts to tackle a complex subject.
She instead deals with it in a manner that panders to our distrust of
those who have less than us, but who we can't do without. We tend to
blame those working for us for faults that may not be theirs without
a second thought and by taking this line, the movie panders to the
majority view. It takes certain faith to think that maybe, just
maybe, the parents might have been at fault - after all, honor
killings are a reality in our society. The inference drawn by the
movie seems to be a way of playing to the gallery, be crowd pleasing.
The parents are exonerated of any crime, the blame is on the
servants. The viewer who paid good money to watch it in the theater
feels vindicated in belief that it is the others, less fortunate ones
that commit crime.
Which is a cop out.
