La Diplomate

The Diplomat is a disturbing film in multiple ways. At its most immediate, it is a story of a woman betrayed by the one she loved and subjected to terrifying abuse - and whose escape from it then hangs by a thread due to the cold logic of nationalism. It is thus a cruel irony that the act of telling such a story, of honoring those labouring to save her, can itself serve as a fuel for the very kind of nationalism which elevates the passions about these stories and turns them into zero-sum contests.

At the same time, it is natural for people to want to honor the achievements of their countries - and in that sense, it is far, far better to honor the quiet and subtle decisions made by the diplomatic staff in the service of a moral cause than the usual path taken in cinema (let alone video games), which is to honor the "warriors", whose righteous gunfire supposedly solves the problems without fail - no matter how mixed the real-world evidence is. Fundamentally, those at the embassy could have had easily looked the other way, claimed it is not their place to intervene in "family disputes" or dismissed the strange veiled woman as getting what she deserved for both following the wrong religion and then compounding the error by leaving India behind. It is to their credit they do not do so - even as Pakistani media takes the opportunity to paint them in the worst possible light anyway, and husband's mountain tribe threatens real violence.

(If you are from the Subcontinent, you can probably skip to the next paragraph, as you likely already know everything I'm about to write for the benefit of whichever "outsiders" happen to see this review). It is also to film's credit that it is explicit the evil of Tahir, the Pashtun who meets Uzma in Malaysia only to lure her to his village, does not represent all of Islam (since obviously, Uzma is Muslim herself, yet could scarcely imagine of a society functioning the way that village did) but all or even most of Pakistan, as the country's civil society at large (including the court system) does not defend the real Tahir but the image of him they see through the media, and side with him only as long as they can believe in the fiction of the Hindu embassy kidnapping Uzma out of pure prejudice and against her will. It may sound like a low bar, but consider how many Western films still fail to make such distinctions - i.e. I challenge you to draw any such nuances from Garland's Warfare.

Thus, it is all the more disturbing to see how Pakistanis who cannot defend the conduct of Tahir and his ilk on the merits can nevertheless view him as a necessary evil for nationalistic reasons. This perspective is exemplified through the film's depiction of the Director of ISI (often described as the world's most effective intelligence agency due to the sheer amount of power it wields across the entire region), who is clean-shaven, urbane, dressed in the finest Westernized clothing and in short couldn't be more different from Tahir and relatives. Yet, he does his best to conceal his undeniable disdain, thinking of them as a tool necessary to safeguard Pakistan's independence - while Uzma's case becomes a piece on the never-ending chessboard, a way to not only mollify their power but to get even with India after an embarrassing counterintelligence failure, knowing his harshest critics would gladly accept him branding Uzma a spy and taking credit for "catching" her if it meant saving face.

This depiction is not a subtle point, but it's a valuable one. Nowadays, it's not hard to find broad proclamations that sacrificing others "for the greater good" is immoral, that the seductive consequentialist calculus can be altered in any number of ways to justify practically anything (i.e. The self-proclaimed "effective altruists" claiming the most effective thing they could do for the world is buy multiple castles to make themselves look more appealing to the donors) and that it is only easy when you don't believe you'll be one of those sacrificed. Actually seeing this process play out in front of us, in a real-world case for real-world reasons, is both eerie and forces one to consider where else we - or those we consider to be representing us - have followed the same kind of logic as the Director of ISI did in this narrative.

I wish I could have rated this film even higher, but it remains a flawed work. Some issues are fairly minor (i.e. The attempt at comic relief with the titular Diplomat's son is rather hit-and-miss, but not a huge distraction) but the misguided attempt at elevating tension in the final act is much harder to overlook. The temptation to "spice up" the final act in even historical dramas where that does not belong is common, but here, it's done in a way which makes Argo's "police cars attempting to chase the passenger plane on a landing strip instead of ordering the traffic controller to ground the flight" look downright restrained. Perhaps the next film of this kind from the region will avoid it, but I'm not holding my breath.

The plot feels overly stretched, with noticeable plot holes. Given that the film is partly inspired by actual events, I tried to look up the real story to better understand what truly happened, however, I couldn't find all the details. It's understandable that certain elements were added or modified for dramatic effect-after all, it's a cinematic adaptation-but unfortunately, the dramatization doesn't always succeed in holding the viewer's attention. At several points, it lacks the narrative pull that could have made the story more engaging. Most actors did their job well or at least fine, but the plot failed them.

Shivam Nair's "The Diplomat" is a gripping cinematic retelling of Uzma Ahmed's harrowing ordeal in Pakistan. It masterfully balances drama and realism, delving deep into the tense corridors of Indo-Pak relations without succumbing to melodrama. The film's razor-sharp focus on storytelling, paired with stellar performances and meticulous direction.

From the very start, Nair sets a somber and urgent tone, avoiding unnecessary embellishments. The absence of songs and other distractions works in the film's favor, ensuring the narrative stays taut and the tension palpable. The background score is particularly commendable. The cinematography is another highlight. The second half of the film soars, culminating in a nail-biting climax that keeps viewers on the edge of their seats. The final act is both satisfying and applause-worthy.

John Abraham's portrayal of a diplomat navigating this complex web of international relations is outstanding. Sadia Khateeb, as Uzma, is the heart and soul of the film. Her pain, fear, and resilience are portrayed with raw authenticity. Revathy's portrayal of the late Sushma Swaraj, though limited in screen time, leaves a lasting impact. Kumud Mishra adds warmth and reliability, while Sharib Hashmi and Vidhatri Bandi provide solid support. Jagjeet Sandhu stands out as the abusive Tahir, delivering a chilling performance that adds to the film's tension.

Direction 4/5 Acting 3.5/5 Editing 3/5 Story 3.5/5 Screenplay 3.5/5.

A movie with this type of story is usually made into a big mass action film, this however takes a different turn, the film keeps the story realistic and displays the story without any over the top action or intense scenes.

Something like this was missing from John Abraham's last film VEDAA, John Abraham plays the normal character of a diplomat and that's that, in fact John Abraham is not even included in any action scenes, he's just a diplomat.

The film doesn't intensify itself but still maintains curiosity in the viewer's mind, we all know the ending, but how is it gonna occur that's the main question and that's where the film exceeds.

The acting performance are very good for the main characters, John Abraham feels in place alongside Sadia Khateeb who has given justice to her character.

The background score feels week but the film itself manages to maintain itself without the need of background music helping the story feel more intense.

Overall a great watch, more films like this should exist.

One cannot question anybody's performance in the movie. Everybody does a great job. It's a tailor made role for John Abraham. Man kills it with such ease and style. He is complimented well with the antagonist who's equally talented and his performance successfully depcits the menacing nature of his character. The female lead is a hit and miss though. The supporting cast was well chosen.

Few witty one liners does hit the right spot. They are carefully sprinkled all over the movie. The dialogues are smartly written and well performed. No over dramaric patriotic or one man army, hero saves the day kind of dialogues.

Now the problem arises with the writing. The movie could've easily been a crisp - nail biting thriller but somehow it seems like the writers felt compelled to add unnecessary emotional sub plots that totally hinders the viewing experience. Instead they could have spent more time in some character building to the female lead.

The music is barley noticeble. Overall, it's still a decent try which could have been much better.