‘Indian 2’ is a disappointing parody of desire and talent. Indian 2 is a textbook illustration of how good intentions may be hindered by poor execution. The film’s odd graphics, incoherent plot, and overreliance on the show over substance make it a poor follow-up to the beloved original.
Indian 2, directed by S. Shankar, was a highly anticipated sequel to the legendary 1996 Tamil vigilante action thriller Indian. The original film, starring Kamal Haasan as the righteous vigilante Senapathy, captivated audiences with its outspoken anti-corruption stance. However, Indian 2 fails to live up to its predecessor’s legacy, becoming a comedy of ambition and extravagance.
The film begins with a good concept. Actor Siddharth plays Chitra Aravindhan, a YouTuber who operates the satirical channel ‘Barking Dogs,’ which seeks to expose corrupt politicians. This modern twist on activism appeared to be a daring and timely option, reflecting the present era of social media-driven accountability. Unfortunately, the execution falls short, transforming potentially bold concepts into lackluster parodies.
Shankar’s vision, known for its grandeur and extravagance, becomes a double-edged sword in Indian 2
One of the early scenes depicts a man in a golden suit using a golden toilet before racing around a golden room like a horse. Similarly, a calendar shot in Taipei included barely dressed ladies dancing. Shankar’s vision, recognized for its grandeur and extravagance, turns into a double-edged blade in Indian 2.
- Advertisement -
The film’s vast scale, lavish settings, and action sequences are visually amazing, but they don’t make up for the lack of a cohesive plot. The tale meanders for about 90 minutes before reaching any meaningful point, and terrible editing adds to the uncertainty. Before the intermission, the narrative’s back-and-forth structure makes it difficult for the audience to follow.
A great actor, Kamal Haasan does his utmost to carry the film, including going nude for a stunt scene. However, his performance is marred by excessive prosthetic makeup and a role that necessitates spectacle over depth. Siddharth, a great performer, is limited to uninteresting parts, and Rakul Preet Singh’s character is underutilized.
