nidhi_india

This movie is carried almost entirely by its cast. Each actor, including the ensemble cast, plays its part to perfection. The lead actors are brilliant in their work, and the father of Saggi deserves a special mention, as does the guest appearance lawyer.

Jimmy Shergill proves yet again why he is the Lord and Master of all he surveys. To play a soft-hearted, simple village person so effortlessly is way tougher than it sounds. One of those movies that you start watching with the mobile in hand and put the mobile away to focus on the screen. Well done, all 3!

The inspiration from "Ek ruka hua faisla" hits you instantly - the dim lighting, the dusty wooden long desk, et al. But that is where the cinematic inspiration ends. After that initial inspiration is over, Tashkent Files emerges as a film that stands up for itself - and in more ways than one, sets standards for others to follow. While the former film deals with peeling out layers of the personality of each juror and how those layers contribute to their understanding of a simple crime, in this case, what was revealed, layer by layer, was not the personality of the committee members, but the facts of a really complicated case.

Perhaps the greatest thing about the movie is that it is well-edited. This makes the story telling taut and keeps the viewer engaged. You could not take a break in this movie without missing something important. It is rare for a reviewer to say that a technical aspect was the best part of the film, but in this case, it really was. This movie owes a lot of its success to the ruthless editor.

The second great thing that this movie does is, keeping the narrative focused. It asks one question, and uses all the characters in the film, all the episodes, every single frame, word, and action, to answer that one question. No time is wasted on sub plots, no pointless song and dance, and nothing to just 'entertain'. Just great, gripping story telling. The third thing that works for the film is casting. There is one heroine, but she merges into the ensemble cast effortlessly. The actors are well chosen, and being the veterans that they are, they get everything from body language to accent right. Each one of them brings the character alive. Casting is yet another technical aspect of film making and is easy to overlook. One can, obviously praise the acting, as one should. But this movie was gold because that cast was put together in such a perfect way by the casting director. And then every member of the cast worked hard to bring their character alive - be it the quiet menace of Naseeruddin Shah, or the volatile anger of the young politician.

The fourth great thing about the film is its insistence on sticking to facts. My interest in the topic of Shastri's death is old, so much of the information presented was known to me. There were some new elements that I hope to read more about soon. But the thing is, evidence like this can be dramatized so easily, especially since the episode itself is very dramatic. But the movie didn't do that. It presented the facts and asked the questions.

After ages, here is a movie that does not insult the intelligence of the viewer - in fact, it engages the viewer and is a delight for the little grey cells that sit starved in every movie theater.