The Fakir of Venice

----- In today's times, getting a right release for your film is as crucial as shooting and writing it.

THE FAKIR OF VENICE it's the first-ever film of actor Farhan Akhtar, even before he shot for ROCK ON 2008 which eventually became his debut flick, but releasing on 8th feb 2019.

THE FAKIR OF VENICE is the story of an Indian fixer who has a life-changing experience. Adi Contractor (Farhan Akhtar) works in films as the production controller. His job is to ensure that the bizarre demands of the producers are met. He once manages to get a monkey from China as per the requirement of an urgent film shoot in the Himalayas near the border on the Indian side!

The Fakir of Veniceis based on an apparently true story of an art installation at the famous Venice Biennale. It will follow an Indian con man is hired to find a fakir, who can bury himself in sand for an art installation. He finds a Bombay slum dweller and manages to successfully deceive the European art community. What follows is the relationship the two develop over time.

A lot of dialogues have abuses which have been muted, courtesy the CBFC. Hence, it is difficult to comprehend some of the sentences muttered by the characters.

The film is just 98 minutes long and the first half is breezy and light-hearted and does engage viewers. However, the second half gets too heavy and bizarre. Sattar repeatedly waking up with a scream becomes repetitive.

Technically too, the film is not sound and the dated feel also kicks in at certain places. Although the film ends on a good note, it is too late in the day to make the desired impact.

A R Rahman's music makes no impact.

On the whole, THE FAKIR OF VENICE boasts of an interesting plot and bravura performance by Annu Kapoor. But the flawed execution, festival-style narrative and most importantly the delayed release will go against the film heavily.

I saw this film at the Indian Film Festival of Los Angeles. Annu Kapoor was excellent and the film definitely has some nice moments, but overall the film lacked a cohesive direction and suffered from a poor sound mix and sloppy editing. I understand that the film's producers were not working with the largest of budgets, but one would think that a portion of the money which must have been spent to shoot on location in Venice would have been put towards hiring decent film and sound labs. I also thought that many of the supporting characters and subplots were poorly developed and in some instances, simply mistreated by the director. An example is the two "boy/girl" Italian art fans who play an important role in the film but are characterized in such an over-the-top manner that the audience cannot take them seriously.

There's some real wisdom thrown around in Fakir of Venice (Monk of Venice), a story of a downtrodden building painter (Annu Kapoor) who is hired by an unscrupulous and opportunistic young man (Farhan Akhtar) to fake act as a religious ascetic from India as part of an art exhibition in Venice. The narrative introduction from the point of view of the man cements his character as snobbish as you are taken into the journey from India to Italy where the exhibitionists and connoisseurs fall for the grace of this monk who can stay trapped underground for hours at a time. Kapoor and his character steal the show as they shine light into the world of petty jobs in India and elsewhere in the world. "The world doesn't let us work and live peacefully, does it?" quips a character when asked about why anyone would sleep under mud for a living and why there has to be a vigilant second person when someone does a stunt like that. A bit of self-reflection is also a part of Fakir of Venice as one of the character says, "I didn't know dying would be so difficult," but then the good points of the film comes to an end as the narrator goes on and on about why he did what he does, making you anxious with boredom. Looking at the Venetian locales is a treat but the lack of fluidity and coherence makes Fakir of Venice a film that should have stayed maybe even 10 more years back in time, in 1999. TN.

An art gallery in venice has come up with a novel idea n is attracting huge crowds. People r here to watch an indian fakir, whos fully immersed in sand, with only his hands sticking out. But who exactly is this fakir? Is he a sage? Whys he so eager to bury himself? Does he wish to die? Whos the man who brought him from mumbai to venice? Good performances by akhtar n kapoor, an interesting narrative n a short running time, r the plus points of #TheFakirOfVenice. Watch it. Rating 3/5.

If you are one of those who think Farhan Akhtar was good in Rock On! or Luck By Chance, you are so wrong baby. Cause The Fakir of Venice is Farhan's best work to date.

Directed by Anand Surapur of Phat-Phish (he's also the producer of Quick Gun Murugan), the story begins with etching out Akhtar's character, a "ho-jayega" production guy who can get things done for any production unit, be it getting a monkey from across the border to getting "pot" for the "foreign" unit out in India to shoot a movie.

The core story kickstarts when an Italian museum needs a fakir who can be buried in sand for hours together. They have a weeklong exhibition and need such a man. Enter Akhtar who searches high and low for such a guy and when he's almost about to give up lands up at the door step of Annu Kapoor (brilliant performance), a slum dweller who paints buildings for a living.

The journey of getting Kapoor trained for the job entitles, making him look like a fakir, practicing under the sand, getting his passport ready and above all battling Kapoor's alcoholism.

Surapur in the entire story keeps the mood simple and the story straight, though there were ample places where this story could have been hacked to create some rip roaring laughter, Surapur's focus seems to be different, instead stressing to tell his view of the story which takes us into the darker secrets that Annu Kapoor, as the Fakir, holds in his chest.