The movie “Swatantra Veer Savarkar review” tells the story of a Hindu nationalist and serves as a call to action, but ultimately defeats its own purpose.

Estimated read time 2 min read

O
Out of all the hot opinions that you may encounter when you go to the movies, the suggestion that Mahatma Gandhi was not as great as people believe may not be one of the first things that comes to mind. But in this Hindi film about Hindu nationalist leader Vinayak Damodar Savarkar (directed and co-written by Randeep Hooda, who also plays Savarkar in a dedicated and engaging performance), that is exactly the argument being made. However, the film does make sure to include a statement from Savarkar: “I don’t dislike Gandhi, I just don’t agree with non-violence.” Overall, the film’s position throughout its nearly three-hour duration is that, contrary to the famous saying, the sword is actually more powerful than the pen, with Savarkar encouraging his followers to “discard your pen and arm yourselves”.

What is odd is that the film doesn’t make more use of its own subject’s principles. Much ink has been spilled over the issue of whether on-screen violence is too glamorous, too appealing– but apparently, the makers of Swatantara Veer Savarkar are unaware of what a powerful weapon cinematic images can be, because in a biopic attempting to eulogise a man they depict as having advocated strongly for violent revolution, they don’t deliver much in the way of action.

Despite the obvious opportunity to portray Savarkar as a heroic figure and promote a political agenda, this biopic chooses to focus on his academic pursuits in the UK, moments spent conversing with historical figures like Lenin in libraries, and a prolonged period of suffering in the infamous Cellular Jail where British authorities tortured political prisoners. While it may have been tempting to embellish his character into a strong, commanding type, the filmmakers have chosen to largely stick to the facts, although they seem to overlook unfavorable details such as Savarkar’s support for Hitler’s Germany. The end result is a peculiar combination of flattering portrait and lackluster filmmaking, anchored by a commendable central performance.

Source: theguardian.com

You May Also Like

More From Author