Indian 2 Review Ratings: Disappointing Return Of Vigilante, Kamal Haasan’s Film Falls Short Of Its Predecessor

Indian 2 Review: “Indian 2,” directed by S. Shankar and co-written by B. Jeyamohan, Kabilan Vairamuthu, and Lakshmi Saravana Kumar, is a Tamil vigilante action film that premiered on July 12th. Released under the title “Indian 2: Zero Tolerance,” it marks the highly anticipated sequel to the iconic 1996 film “Indian,” featuring Kamal Haasan reprising his role as Senapathy, an ageing freedom fighter turned vigilante. The film is released in Tamil, Telugu, and Hindi, titled “Indian 2,” “Hindustani 2,” and “Bharateeyudu 2,” respectively.

Plot Summary

The narrative of “Indian 2” picks up 28 years after the original film, with Senapathy, who has been in exile in Taipei, returning to India. He comes back to support a group of social media activists led by Chitra Aravindhan, portrayed by Siddharth. Chitra’s group has been exposing corrupt politicians through online videos, aiming to bring about change by shedding light on various societal issues.

Opening Scenes and Themes

The film opens with a montage of scenes highlighting societal ills such as littering, pollution, corruption in waste management, education, and the health sector, as well as bureaucratic corruption, environmental exploitation, cronyism, and student suicides due to the failures in the education system and predatory lending. These scenes underscore the systemic problems plaguing the nation and set the stage for the return of Senapathy, who is seen as the only hope to combat this rampant corruption.

‘Dual Narrative Tracks’

“Indian 2” follows a ‘two-way track mission,’ as described in the film. The first track involves the youth, inspired by Senapathy’s advice, fighting corruption, starting within their own families. The second track focuses on Senapathy’s own brand of vigilantism, characterised by violent means.

Strengths and weaknesses

While the film’s intention of speaking out against corruption is commendable, it falls short in several key areas. The writing lacks freshness, and the narrative becomes tedious and repetitive, diminishing the impact of its message.

The prosthetic makeup of the titular character, Senapathy, which was a significant attraction (despite its shortcomings) in the 1996 film, is now a major letdown. In today’s era of advanced technology and makeup artistry, the prosthetics in ‘Indian 2’ appear outdated and unconvincing, and it also suffers from significant continuity issues. Interestingly, in one scene, Senapathy uses prosthetic makeup to deceive law enforcement, and this transformation is much more convincing than the main character Senapathy’s appearance.

Additionally, the face replacement technology used for late actors like Nedumudi Venu and Vivek fails to deliver a realistic portrayal, especially in scenes where Nedumudi Venu’s character appears, such as the airport scene. The technology did not convincingly replace the legendary actor, which was disappointing.”

Lack of Entertainment and Overemphasis on Sloganeering

“Indian 2” struggles to balance entertainment with its social message. The film leans heavily on sloganeering against corruption, often at the expense of engaging storytelling. Despite its critical stance on corruption, the film paradoxically promotes superstitions, homophobia, and misogyny, undermining its own moral standing. The emotional scenes fail to resonate with the audience, and the music by Anirudh Ravichander, along with the action sequences-especially the chasing sequence featuring electric unicycles-lack any impact.

Questionable Motivations

Senapathy’s vigilantism in the original ‘Indian’ was rooted in patriotism, making it convincing within the narrative. However, in ‘Indian 2,’ his motivations appear less credible and more psychopathic. In one scene, Siddharth’s character, out of frustration, labels Senapathy a psycho-a sentiment that the audience might share, given the character’s increasingly weird, violent, and irrational actions.

Technical Merits

Despite its narrative flaws, “Indian 2” does have some redeeming qualities. The cinematography in many places is visually stunning, capturing grandeur, which is characteristic of Shankar’s moviemaking. The editing by A. Sreekar Prasad is tight, ensuring that the film maintains a brisk pace despite its lengthy runtime.

Final Reflections

The movie concludes with a post credit teaser, announcing the third installment in the “Indian” series, leaving the audience with a glimmer of hope for a better follow-up. Overall, “Indian 2” is an underwhelming sequel that fails to live up to the expectations set by its predecessor. While it tackles important issues, its execution is marred by outdated makeup, lacklustre writing, and an overemphasis on sloganeering.

Most likely, not only the general audience but also nostalgic fans of the 1996 film ‘Indian’ and its memorable theatre experience, particularly the enduring A. R. Rahman music, will find ‘Indian 2’ disappointing. In essence, ‘Indian 2’ represents a disappointing return of the vigilante hero.