Picture this: the British army, surrounded and under attack, decide that it is better to watch Katrina Kaif dance than retaliate. It's an absurd and laughable moment, much like most of the movie. It pains me to say it but what should've been an epic entertainer turns out to be an epic disappointment. What hype. What a cast. What scale. And what a grand mess. Aamir Khan's first release as a leading man after 'Dangal' is a wasted opportunity through and through. Of course, the blame lies with the writer and director but we expect the world from Mr. Khan and trust his instincts. Dhoka saubhav hai mera. It didn't need to be literal.
The year is 1795. The British are slowly taking over Hindostan. A few rebels, aka Thugs, aren't having it and fight back. Another thug is brought, or rather bought, in to fight those thugs. Con upon con. Battle upon battle. Time is wasted, plot holes are dug deeper, and my patience continued to be tested. The film takes a solid start. Character introductions are well thought out and Firangi (Aamir Khan) is a real treat for the first few minutes. Suraiyya is an enjoyable song and things were looking good. I was starting to believe that the story would go to great heights but it all came to a screeching halt 15 minutes before the interval. You know exactly when things go wrong and it's a sinking ship from that moment on.
As I mentioned, the blame lies completely with the writer and director, Vijay Krishna Acharya. This is the same man that made 'Tashan' and 'Dhoom 3' for Yash Raj Films. Why was he allowed to lead this project? I'm looking at you, Aditya Chopra. Dhoom 3, the weakest of the Dhooms, was still a fun ride. Plagued with childish and uneven writing, this one is definitely not fun. Every twist is unconvincing and, after a point, exhausting. And other than Firangi the characters are one tone. Post interval I kept wondering how the script was okayed...by Aamir Khan of all people.
Amitabh Bachchan's Khudabaksh is irritating. Even Mr. Bachchan can't save him and, honestly, it doesn't seem like he tries. His acting is surface level and when he's missing for a chunk of the movie I shrugged and said 'meh'. Fatima Sana Shaikh has only a few moments to show emotions and she's all right. I genuinely cringed at the thought of Firangi romancing Zafira. Yes, I know they're actors but give us a break! Dangal is still fresh on our minds. Do you remember Katrina Kaif's role in Dhoom 3? No? Oh because she didn't have one. She danced to a few songs and said maybe 3 sentences. Here, she doesn't even do that much. It should've been called a special appearance. The deceit keeps getting worse. Katrina looks lovely and dances like a dream in two songs but that's it. Ugh, I can't believe I am actually upset at the length of her role.
Naturally the sole saving grace is Aamir Khan. He breathes life into Firangi's many layers and makes you laugh even when you want to cry from boredom. Aamir gets the tone right most of the time and is thankfully used without shame in the movie. But why does the accent slip in the confrontation scene with Khudabaksh? Surely Mr. Bachchan isn't that intimidating. In 18 years, since 'Mela', Aamir Khan hasn't faulted. He hasn't taken one step wrong hence the immense trust the audience has in him. I guess you're allowed this one mistake, Mr. Khan. But please don't repeat it.
We have Hindi cinema's answer to 'Baahubali', they said. Ha! Keep trying, Bollywood. This ain't it. Annoyed, disappointed, and frankly a little pissed off. 'Thugs of Hindostan' made me feel a lot. Sitting there in the theatre, aware that the thugs were robbing us blind, we willingly let it happen. Much like the Brits I called out earlier. Can you say irony?
The year is 1795. The British are slowly taking over Hindostan. A few rebels, aka Thugs, aren't having it and fight back. Another thug is brought, or rather bought, in to fight those thugs. Con upon con. Battle upon battle. Time is wasted, plot holes are dug deeper, and my patience continued to be tested. The film takes a solid start. Character introductions are well thought out and Firangi (Aamir Khan) is a real treat for the first few minutes. Suraiyya is an enjoyable song and things were looking good. I was starting to believe that the story would go to great heights but it all came to a screeching halt 15 minutes before the interval. You know exactly when things go wrong and it's a sinking ship from that moment on.
As I mentioned, the blame lies completely with the writer and director, Vijay Krishna Acharya. This is the same man that made 'Tashan' and 'Dhoom 3' for Yash Raj Films. Why was he allowed to lead this project? I'm looking at you, Aditya Chopra. Dhoom 3, the weakest of the Dhooms, was still a fun ride. Plagued with childish and uneven writing, this one is definitely not fun. Every twist is unconvincing and, after a point, exhausting. And other than Firangi the characters are one tone. Post interval I kept wondering how the script was okayed...by Aamir Khan of all people.
Amitabh Bachchan's Khudabaksh is irritating. Even Mr. Bachchan can't save him and, honestly, it doesn't seem like he tries. His acting is surface level and when he's missing for a chunk of the movie I shrugged and said 'meh'. Fatima Sana Shaikh has only a few moments to show emotions and she's all right. I genuinely cringed at the thought of Firangi romancing Zafira. Yes, I know they're actors but give us a break! Dangal is still fresh on our minds. Do you remember Katrina Kaif's role in Dhoom 3? No? Oh because she didn't have one. She danced to a few songs and said maybe 3 sentences. Here, she doesn't even do that much. It should've been called a special appearance. The deceit keeps getting worse. Katrina looks lovely and dances like a dream in two songs but that's it. Ugh, I can't believe I am actually upset at the length of her role.
Naturally the sole saving grace is Aamir Khan. He breathes life into Firangi's many layers and makes you laugh even when you want to cry from boredom. Aamir gets the tone right most of the time and is thankfully used without shame in the movie. But why does the accent slip in the confrontation scene with Khudabaksh? Surely Mr. Bachchan isn't that intimidating. In 18 years, since 'Mela', Aamir Khan hasn't faulted. He hasn't taken one step wrong hence the immense trust the audience has in him. I guess you're allowed this one mistake, Mr. Khan. But please don't repeat it.
We have Hindi cinema's answer to 'Baahubali', they said. Ha! Keep trying, Bollywood. This ain't it. Annoyed, disappointed, and frankly a little pissed off. 'Thugs of Hindostan' made me feel a lot. Sitting there in the theatre, aware that the thugs were robbing us blind, we willingly let it happen. Much like the Brits I called out earlier. Can you say irony?
