Gaami

On paper, the story of "Gaami" is impressive but when translated on to the screen, the impact is not the same. The newbie director, Vidyadhar does not allow his lead character, Shankar to connect with the audience. Never does the audience feel sympathy towards him or else feel sorry for him. By making his lead character a brooding and introvert, director does not allow the character to grow on the audience. Even with his sympathetic friends, Shankar behaves in a closed manner. There is no urge from Shankar to find a cure to his condition. He is forced to take the journey to Himalayas after he is thrown out of the Ashram. He does not own the journey and at all points of time, he tries to put a pause to his journey. With this handicap in the character graph, Director relied too much on the final twist in story to give an emotional high to the audience but by that time the final plot is revealed the audience is jaded and tired of watching the same scenes in a loop. The entire purpose of Shankar's journey is not understood. Also not understood is the existence of Jahnavi's character in the screenplay. She does not add any value to the proceedings. It is the track of the child Uma and her bonding with her mother which really gets the audience hooked to the story. I just wish the director thought of one scene where Shankar opens his heart and speaks with Jahnavi thereby connecting him to the audience. There are too many liberties taken by the director to take the story forward. He creates an impossible situation for the characters but does not show the way on how they overcome the situation. He does not allow the characters to make a bond with the audience with their tenacity and resolve when faced with adversity. That is where Gaami loses its plot.

Gaami is a story of a reclusive Aghora trying to find a cure for his condition. We are introduced to three parallel plot lines, much like an anthology, and we get to see the characters struggling at various levels. The rest of the story is about whether they would be able to overcome their struggles.

While this story had a lot of potential to be a blockbuster thriller, the director's lack of conviction in handling the subject makes this an average watch. The writers take almost 45 minutes to kick start proceedings in act 2 while not giving us anything to hold on to in act 1. While transition to act 2 starts with an interesting premise, the director could not sustain that curiosity into act 3. The movie falters quite drastically in act 2 with illogical adventure set pieces that seem ridiculous.

This writing needed good dialogues but what we get instead is a bland exposition that barely creates any impact. There are too many liberties taken which dilute the seriousness of the plot. Although the movie redeems itself a little bit in act 3, by the time it gets there all the interest is lost as there are too many unanswered questions in the end.

The director focused more on the visuals instead of focusing on storytelling. We barely get any reasoning for the events happening on screen and we are expected to somehow connect emotionally with the characters which did not happen.

Bottomline, this story had a lot of scope and potential to be a spectacle in the right hands. But director Vidhyadhar Kagita fails to deliver the impact.

The movie has good intentions. It starts out to be a story about Shankar, an agora (played by a dozing Vishwa k Sen), going on a journey, seeking a cure for his condition which prevents him from experiencing human touch. He starts to get visions of a boy stuck in a depraved research facility that experiments with mind control through lobotomy; a woman, devadasi, being sexually exploited for money by some crooked temple chief; and a little girl who winds up to be the daughter of the devadasi. Those three storylines converge in a weird and bonkers twist.

One of the fatal flaws of this film is the headache-inducing pacing, and the bland, uninteresting characters. See, I love films as art, but films pretending to be art is not what I like. The pacing is all over the place, and the music blaring in every scene. It didn't sit well. But the cardinal sin is, I couldn't even care a least bit about the characters' journeys, because I couldn't even relate to them. I don't know them. I don't know where they come from, where they want to go, what they feel about things in their past. Things just happen and it all unfolds randomly. It's as if the writers ticked all the story beats, but failed to inject character life that defines them. It's plain bad writing.

It could've been forgiven if Shankar had a least bit of character arc. Nothing, he has nothing. Oh, wait, he has. His journey is to realize a lame twist of his life. Otherwise, he's just a blank slate who moves forward with the plot, when some random doctor chick (played competently by Chandni) joins this journey randomly, out for some research purpose, which turns out to be for her 3 year old daughter, and I couldn't understand. Vague as hell. Together, they go on a death-defying journey without any safety. No gloves in the snow, zero basic hiking equipment and safety, and random death defying falls which should kill you in an instant. And after the nonsensical hike, they reach some mushroom mountain. And then after some random scenes, Shankar gets a big revelation. His memory. That the parallel running storylines of a boy in research facility, and the daughter of the devadasi, are all connected to him. In what way, I won't tell you. See the kalakand om for yourself. One of the lamest twists I have in a while is this one. A twist with no substance, excitement, nor any credible thematic relevance.

There were glimpses of something interesting. Like the red herring of Shankar being the father of the little girl of the Devadasi. The possibility of him being the husband of that devadasi was really interesting. That was a potential character backstory I could've latched on to, but no. It's disposed of, all for a lame twist.

It's as if Donald Kaufman worked on a draft of this and called it day. All these Donald Kaufman twists in these wannabe cerebral movies are driving me crazy. I don't want to see another gimmick anymore. Just give me a visceral story, with a good backstory, motives and conflict.

And that's it. Technically, it's all right. The production design was top-notch, and the camerawork was really good. I could feel the frames illuminating with vibrancy, especially for an Indian film. But, I mean, compared to the norm of world-cinema, this is just another husk. The score was competent but overbearing throughout. There were no real moments where I could actually register what I was listening to, because it just felt like some regular epic-movie soundtrack you listen to on YouTube. Other than the teaser horn hook, the soundtrack felt like a blur. It's because the movie felt like a blur. Just like the titular Shankar not remembering his past, I don't think I'll remember this movie. Probably, only if a lame twist hits me on the mind after some mushrooms, and I remember this movie. After that, I'll probably die out of hyphae-boredom-phobia instead.

Last night only I watched this movie , I didn't even watched the trailer . . From the starting of the movie to the end the experience is very good the concept is very unique and creative , the transitions between the shots are very smooth and impressive loved the acting of each and everyone , and also liked the way how they choose the better words to explain the climax scene , better not read or listen any negative views .this movie is not everyone's cup of tea so better go watch with out any second thought for sure this move " REMAINS IN INDIAN CINEMA ". Seriously hands down to the director and the editing crew for creating this absolute masterpiece.

The film captivates the audience with its stunning cinematography, keeping viewers in awe throughout. Credit is due to the actors for embracing challenging roles and infusing every scene with liveliness. The narrative unfolds with intensity, compelling the audience to decipher the connections between each storyline. The filmmaker's passion for cinema shines through in the spectacular visuals and sound design, enhancing the overall viewing experience.

However, the film falls short of meeting some audience expectations. Continuity within scenes is crucial for immersion and satisfaction, yet this aspect seems lacking at times. While the background music and elevations in certain scenes heighten anticipation, they can also lead to disappointment due to abrupt jump cuts in pivotal moments. Viewers desire to witness events unfolding seamlessly, even if they anticipate the outcome.

In essence, while the film's beauty is undeniable, it's imperative to address the need for continuity to fully engage and satisfy the audience.