PremiumEmergency review: Kangana Ranaut's history lesson falters amid a frenetic and disjointed pace
Emergency review: Kangana Ranaut's directorial is a history lesson that feels lost in fast-forward, offering fascinating glimpses but rushing past its potential depth.
Last Updated: 10.27 AM, Jan 17, 2025
Emergency story:
The events depicted in Emergency actually took place in 1975. This film focuses on Mrs. Indira Gandhi, one of the most influential women in Indian history, and details the events that transpired during her administration.
Emergency review:
These days, short videos or reels on Instagram have taken over our lives, reducing our attention span to barely a minute for any content. Kangana Ranaut respectfully kept this in mind while creating Emergency, as it encompasses all of these elements. Seeing the actor-filmmaker on the big screen after a five-year hiatus sparked a sense of curiosity about the treatment she would give to the film, given her current status as a politician as well. Emergency is a film about Mrs. Indira Gandhi, who was a member of the Congress party, while Kangana currently represents the opposition.
The film's classification as "propaganda" hinges on this conflict of interest. However, Mrs. Indira Gandhi's towering personality defies easy categorisation; it has never been and will never be.
Several female actors have portrayed the iconic political figure on screen over the years, and it's a challenging role to master, particularly due to her striking appearance and unique mannerisms. The character can effortlessly transform into a caricature. However, I must commend Ranaut for bringing Mrs. Gandhi to life on screen, particularly with her constant blinking of her eyes and twitching of her lips.
But here, the actor was not just present on the screen; she is the person behind the camera too, serving as a director. When you have the time frame of nearly two and a half hours, you have the liberty to spoil the audience with details or probably lesser-known facts about Mrs. Gandhi. However, it felt as though Ranaut was reviewing the chapters, preparing us for a history exam that appears constantly in our dreams almost two decades after we graduated from school.
The story, which begins in 1929 with a 12-year-old Indira Gandhi learning about "Satta" from her grandfather Motilal Nehru, reaches the year 1975 in the first half itself, marking the commencement of the Emergency in the country.
Over the years, I have come to understand that the term "emergency" itself is complicated, making it difficult to understand what actually occurred during those 21 months in the country. No, I'm not implying that I was waiting for Ranaut to provide a simple explanation. However, even the simple yet pathbreaking incident that changed the course of the country was summarised in such a way that, when it just got interesting, we moved on to the next chapter.
Ranaut now holds the belief that an audience requires more in-depth narratives, not just potboiler commercial masala movies. To achieve this, the actor-filmmaker adopted an innovative approach. Interesting for her, definitely, for us, the audience, not at all.
When the chapter of the Bangladesh-Pakistani War of 1971 begins, we see Milind Soman as Sam Manekshaw lip-syncing to a song while explaining to his troops and Mrs. Gandhi how they will be approaching the war. This doesn't end there; Shreyas Talpade, portraying Atal Bihari Vajpayee, slams the desk and begins to sing, a move I believe would have occurred in real life, given that our former Prime Minister was also a poet. But Emergency, the historical drama film, turned into a Broadway musical in no time.
While watching the film, it constantly reminded me of the scene from Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, where Harry Potter gets inside Tom Riddle's diary, and when he just starts questioning, he is taken back to his real life, leaving him more curious.
Yes, it's challenging to depict every aspect of a person's life in a film, but this is the first time that a sequence or a year from the film is reduced to the size of a page in a book, presumably with a slightly larger font. The film abruptly defeated the entire purpose of Emergency, leaving me to question its true purpose.
Was it the editing job by Rameshwar S. Bhagat? Was it the screenplay by Ritesh Shah? Or did Kangana Ranaut's overall execution determine how much to show the audience while still making sense?
At the conclusion of the first half, I found myself puzzled by the film's rapid progression and deliberate message delivery. However, in the second half, as the aftermath unfolds and the film adopts a horror-thriller tone, one anticipates a conclusion that either elevates Mrs. Gandhi to the status of a hero or casts her as a villain. However, the history chapter proceeds by merely showcasing songs that depict significant events, thereby diminishing the impact of the entire narrative at precisely the right moments.
The ghosts I mentioned brought to mind Cillian Murphy's portrayal of Oppenheimer, who struggled to comprehend that his invention resulted in millions of deaths and the complete destruction of two cities. Here, a similar story unfolds as Mrs. Gandhi encounters a spectral version of herself, still resisting the realisation that her introduction of the Emergency has not yielded any positive outcomes, and it will continue to haunt her until she experiences a sense of remorse and ultimate redemption.
Indeed, Ranaut makes a concerted effort to maintain a balance between her roles as the lead actor and the director of Emergency. If this is the case, I would commend Ranaut for her production value, which enhances the narrative significantly. This was also evident in the opening credits, which showcased unquestionable elements that are both true and crucial to the country.
However, the basic intention of a film is to bring a slight sense of entertainment purpose, which was lacking entirely. Dramatic reactions and a thumping BGM don't compensate for the film's lack of substance.
Regarding the performances, Ranaut strives to provide depth, and to be honest, I didn't completely dislike her performance. However, her performance fell short due to the dull narrative, which hindered the film's ability to live up to its expectations.
On the other hand, Vishak Nair's portrayal of Sanjay Gandhi stood out beyond Ranaut's. The actor successfully embodied the spoilt brat and menacing attitude that the books and his constant need for ego massage reflected. Other supporting actors, including Anupam Kher as Jayaprakash Narayan, Shreyas Talpade as Atal Bihari Vajpayee, and Satish Kaushik as Jagjivan Ram, do try to bring some depth to the story. However, Talpade does manage to succeed in it to a limit. On the other hand, Mahima Chaudhry, who plays Pupul Jayakar, makes a significant return after a prolonged absence.
However, nothing can elevate a story that takes itself too seriously to the level of an Instagram reel!
Emergency verdict:
Emergency is like flipping through a history book at double speed—fascinating glimpses but with pages missing. Kangana Ranaut attempts to command attention both on and behind the screen, but the execution feels more like a state of confusion than a state of Emergency