To start off with, Kashf is visually quite beautiful. while the cinematography does not always reach its full potential, Lahore is beautiful enough for the film to look gorgeous in places.
that said, its looks are ironically the only good thing about a film supposed to be about spiritual awakening. (that and the acting by Tariq Ali, who despite terrible dialogues still imbibes his character with a lot of vigour and fun)
as a Pakistani, i have always given special allowances to works emerging from the country, because it is so hard for arts to flourish there. unfortunately, there has been a recent trend prevalent in both documentaries and a handful of films to make works that are not a mirror on Pakistani society, but rather an image that is being brandied about in the west.
kashf is made not only for the festival circuit, but for western eyes only. and that observation is not merely about the language it was shot in. the two protagonists are involved with Islamic mysticism (Sufism) and lollywood, the local film industry. as far as premises go, these are quite fertile ones.
yet the film openly mocks and derides Lollywood, and is criminally negligent about basic realities concerning the industry. they didn't even pick a song that was filmi, or worse, actually showing scenes from Maula Jutt when Ali goes to watch it, instead of playing another film. in a Q&A in London, the director conceded that such details were due to laziness on her part, but it also has to do with Pakistani elites being always embarrassed, and scornful of local films.
but at least lollywood is still a commercial vehicle for art. the film's transgressions with Sufism border on the sacrilegious. you can't help but shake off the feeling that Sufism is being fetishized here - the edits and score, as well as the bizarre character played by the director, seem to suggest to the uninitiated that Sufism is more about the occult.
at times it seems to be borrowing from imagery or associations from African witch doctors. not to say that witch doctors are wrong, its just that it creates this exoticism which is not really what Sufism is supposed to be about. moreover, the entire film is a hodgepodge of crudely used Sufi clichés. (for example, there is an unnamed stern matronly character in the film whose entire purpose seems to be a vehicle for spouting inane lines such as "how is it NOT possible?")
it makes sense however, when you consider that the RAND corporation has recently advised that Sufism should counter religious extremism. such sentiments have struck a chord with those Muslims who seem to be concerned about Islam's (and thus their own) image in the West. and so there has been a spate of intellectually lazy spouting of Sufi thoughts, presenting it as some monolithic dogma which stands as an alternative to 'mainstream' Islam, when nothing could be further from the truth.
that is the fault at the essence of this film. it does not understand its subject, but rather its audience, and plays to them instead. it has been shown as much as it has because it is a film about a country and a religion about which the larger world has a preconceived notion.
but beyond that trivia, this film struggles to make a broader statement. which is a pity.
