The Failed Promise of Indian 2

Kamal
Haasan
is
right
where
he
left
off
from
the
first
film
but
there
is
only
so
much
he
can
do
to
salvage
an
already
lost
cause,
observes
Arjun
Menon.

A
municipal
cleaning
truck
picks
up
debris
and
moves
on
in
the
very
first
images
that
we
see
in
Shankar’s
1996
vigilante
drama,

Indian.

The
shot
of
the
clunky,
dusty
machine
moving
out
the
trash
is
an
obvious
way
for
the
screenplay
to
foreshadow
the
arc
of
Senapathy,
the
film’s
elderly
hero,
who
is
on
a
mission
to
weed
out
corruption
from
the
bureaucracy
through
vigilante-style
killings.

We
then
see
the
hero
make
his
way
through
the
corridor
of
a
government
office
to
make
his
first
kill.

It’s
all
weaved
together
with
a
‘handmade’
quality
of
believability
that
cues
us
for
the
kind
of
film
you
are
in
for.

Cut
to
2024,
we
get
a
sequel
to
the
Kamal
Haasan
starrer
through

Indian
2,
where
the
actor
returns
to
play
the
freedom
fighter-turned-social
justice
vigilante
figure,
whose
penchant
towards
zero
tolerance
(incidentally
also
the
film’s
caption)
is
met
only
by
his
utopian
ideas
of
patriotism
that
thrives
on
non-violence.

But
the
sequel
begins
with
a
less-than-subtle
opening
sequence
that
frames
itself
through
a
random
day
in
the
life
of
a
YouTuber
(one
of
the
film’s
lead
characters),
who
finds
it
hard
to
attest
to
the
inhumane
degradation
of
our
daily
systems
in
the
face
of
bureaucratic
corruption.

The
staging
and
presentation
of
this
stretch
betrays
the
urgency
of
the
issue
at
hand
and
we
are
just
fed
data
points
that
deflate
the
need
for
clever
writing.

In
essence,
the
economy
with
which
Shankar
opens
the
first
film
is
replaced
here
with
a
preachy
Civics
lesson-like
template
that
the
film
follows
in
its
overall
execution.

The
first
film
dealt
with
a
father,
who
is
forced
to
kill
his
son
after
he
realises
that
his
offspring
is
yet
another
morally
compromised
hog.

The
emotional
heft
of
the
Senapathy
arc
could
have
been
fodder
enough
for
a
sequel
and
one
could
easily
see
a
reworking
of
the
moral
conundrum
at
the
heart
of
the
freedom
fighter
at
the
end
of
the
first
film,
forced
to
reckon
with
the
moral
consequences
of
his
action
that
prioritised
the
nation
over
his
blood.

However,

Indian
2
is
a
different
beast
that
is
fixated
on
themes
that
are
an
eventual
expansion
of
the
ideas
in
Shankar’s
more
successful
films.

His
filmography
has
been
dedicated
to
the
concept
of
a
wronged
vigilante
figure
spearheading
a
one-man
crusade
against
ruthless
social
institutions.

Right
from
his
directorial
debut

Gentleman
(1993)
to

Mudhalvan (1999),

Anniyan (2005)
and Shivaji:
The
Boss (2007),
the
director
has
been
engaging
with
themes
of
extremist
means
of
social
justice
as
a
remedy
for
individual
and
collective
angst.

There
is
a
method
to
his
over-the-top
antics
in
vigilantism.

The
flashy
visual
style
and
imaginative
scenarios
he
conjured
up
in
his
screenplays
helped
him
achieve
the
perfect
balance
in
these
films
and
the
off-kilter
moral
lines
were
subsumed
to
an
extent
Shankar’s
well-intentioned
messaging.

However,
when
the
storytelling
modes
stay
painfully
inert
and
redundant,
ideological
shortcomings
start
to
come
to
the
forefront.

The
delivery
device
for
strong,
socially
conscious
statements
becomes
as
important
as
the
messages
themselves.

These
antiquated
tropes
of
Shankar’s
film-making
sensibilities
hold
back

Indian
2
from
delving
deep
into
some
of
its
more
interesting
thematic
threads.

For
instance,
when
Senapathy
is
called
back
to
action
by
a
young
generation
beaming
with
frustration
at
a
malfunctioning
bureaucracy,
he
forces
his
rules
of
emotionally
distant
vigilantism
onto
the
younger
folks.
This
involves
individual
responsibility
and
clinical
adherence
to
principle
over
family
obligations,
and
that’s
when
things
start
going
downhill.

The
ruthlessness
and
bravado
of
Senapathy’s
uncharacteristic
ways
slowly
reveals
itself
for
its
contradictions
and
practical
limitations,
distant
from
our
reality.

This
sentiment
is
strong
enough
to
hold
the
whole
superstructure
of
Shankar’s
exuberant
world-building,
and
the
presence
of
the
younger
generation
represented
by
the
satirical
YouTube
reactionary
group
Barking
Dogs,
led
by
Siddarth
should
make
for
an
interesting
film.

But
Shankar
undercuts
the
heft
of
his
themes
with
some
empty
calorie
set
piece
business
that
upends
the
film’s
momentum.

The
glossy,
over-the-top
kills
become
the
centerpiece
of

Indian
2,
which
was
the
least
flashy,
showy
element
of
the
original
film,
almost
being
treated
as
an
afterthought,
running
parallel
to
the
main
events.

In

Indian
2,
these
become
the
point
and
Shankar
spends
far
too
much
time
fetishizing
‘Varma
Kalai’
and
you
get
excessively
prolonged
kill
sequences,
where
random
rich
businessmen
are
tossed
off
by
Senapathy
with
comical
undertones.

‘Excess’
is
an
important
aspect
of

Indian
2,
as
the
enigmatic
characters
of
Shankar’s
previous
films
are
replaced
by
caricaturish
figures
who
are
supposed
to
be
stand-ins
for
the
scattered
evils
plaguing
our
country’s
economic
growth.

But
the
excess
of
the
kill
sequences,
some
of
which
expand
on
the
lore
of
the
‘Varma’
to
funny
gags,
holds
back
the
film
from
investing
time
in
its
primal
concerns.

With
time,
Shankar
has
picked
up
the
need
to
stress
the
superficial
over
the
innate
charm
of
his
well-engineered
plot
machinations.

The
result
is
scenes
focusing
on
Senapathy’s
victims
turning
into
‘ladylike’
and
‘horse-like’
figures,
as
an
aftermath
of
the
‘Varma’
that
does
not
add
anything
by
way
of
the
subject
at
hand
but
deviates
from
the
film’s
urgent
social
commentary.

Repetitions
are
an
integral
part
of
the
‘Shankar
Experience’
as
that
is
how
the
filmmaker
stresses
on
his
thematic
preoccupations.

In
films
like

Indian,
Mudhalvan,
Anniyan
and

Shivaji,
he
deploys
motifs
of
corruption
as
part
of
daily
life
occurrences.
Repetitions
of
these
events
have
a
profound
impact
on
the
audience’s
identification
with
the
helplessness
of
the
hero
figures,
caught
in
a
ruthless
cycle
of
exploitation.

But
here,
the
screenplay
has
dedicated
a
chunk
of
its
running
time
to
flesh
out
irrelevant
details
that
do
not
drive
the
plot.

Senapathy
becomes
an
extended
side
player
in
his
universe,
where
corruption
is
limited
to
gimmicky
and
exploitative
emotional
stories
involving
the
‘barking
dogs’
gang.

Each
member
of
the
gang
gets
episodic
stakes
thrust
upon
them
and
the
cipher-like
representation
slowly
mutes
into
repetitive
sermonising
and
unearned
emotional
revelations.

Kamal
Haasan
is
right
where
he
left
off
from
the
first
film
but
there
is
only
so
much
he
can
do
to
salvage
an
already
lost
cause,
starting
from
the
slightly
off-looking
prosthetic
makeup
that
soon
becomes
a
platform
for
the
actor
to
engage
in
extended
dress-ups
and
disguises.

The
immediacy
of
the
first
film
is
lost
in
this
retelling
which
could
have
been
a
perfect
engine
for
Shankar
to
Trojan
Horse
in
some
discourse
about
the
relevance
of
vigilante
figures
and
to
what
extent
Senapathy’s
strict
code
makes
sense
in
today’s
society.

The
far-reaching
promise
of
this
one
logline
is
canceled
out
by
the
noisy
background
elements
of
Shankar’s
populated
screenplay.

Indian
3
looks
more
dynamic
and
promising
in
the
brief
glimpse
provided
by
the
makers
and
we
can
only
wait
and
see
what
Shankar
has
in
store.
But
for
now,
it
feels
like
Shankar’s
late
style
turnaround
is
not
a
patch
on
his
stellar
work
from
his
glory
days.