Showing posts with label CharotarDaily Reviews. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CharotarDaily Reviews. Show all posts

Dhurandhar Review: Ranveer Singh’s Controlled Fury Meets Akshaye Khanna’s Cold Intelligence in a Film That Refuses to Play Safe


Watch Video
Watch on YouTube

Dhurandhar Review: Ranveer Singh’s Controlled Fury Meets Akshaye Khanna’s Cold Intelligence in a Film That Refuses to Play Safe

By Rasesh Patell, Founder & Chief Critic, CharotarDaily.com

Some films announce themselves with noise. Others arrive with silence and then tighten their grip slowly. Dhurandhar does something more dangerous—it waits, watches, and then strikes with calculated force.

As someone who has watched Hindi cinema evolve from broad-stroke heroism to morally conflicted protagonists, I approached Dhurandhar not as a fan, but as a critic searching for intent. This is not a film interested in crowd-pleasing shortcuts. It wants to be dissected. And that, in itself, makes it worthy of serious attention.

This is not a plot summary. What follows is a critical deconstruction—of direction, cinematography, screenplay, and, most crucially, performances by Ranveer Singh, Akshaye Khanna, and Arjun Rampal—to determine whether Dhurandhar truly earns its gravitas or merely performs it.


Direction: A Film That Believes in Pressure, Not Spectacle

The director of Dhurandhar makes one thing clear from the outset: this is not a “moment film.” There are no entry scenes designed for whistles, no indulgent slow-motion hero walks. Instead, the film is built on pressure—emotional, psychological, and moral.

The direction relies heavily on containment. Scenes often begin in tight spaces—rooms, corridors, interiors—before gradually opening out, mirroring the protagonist’s expanding influence. A standout sequence midway through the film places Ranveer Singh’s character in a morally compromising negotiation. The camera never cuts away when it would be comfortable to do so. We are forced to sit with the tension.

This approach works because the director understands that power is most frightening when it is quiet. However, the film occasionally overcommits to its seriousness. By denying itself moments of narrative release, it risks emotional fatigue in the latter half. Still, this is a filmmaker who knows exactly what kind of film he is making—and refuses to dilute it.


Ranveer Singh: The Most Restrained Performance of His Career

Ranveer Singh has built a career on volume—explosive energy, flamboyant physicality, and theatrical transformation. Dhurandhar is fascinating precisely because it asks him to do the opposite.

Here, Singh plays a man whose anger is compressed, not displayed. His voice is lower, his movements economical, his expressions often unreadable. This is not the Ranveer Singh of Padmaavat or Gully Boy. This is a performance rooted in internal conflict rather than external expression.

One early scene crystallises this shift. Faced with humiliation, Singh’s character does not react immediately. The pause—just a second too long—is devastating. It tells us everything about a man learning when to strike and when to wait.

What impresses most is Singh’s refusal to chase sympathy. His character is not designed to be liked. He is designed to be understood. This level of restraint signals a mature phase in Singh’s career—one where craft overtakes charisma.


Akshaye Khanna: Intelligence as a Weapon

If Ranveer Singh provides the film’s emotional weight, Akshaye Khanna supplies its intellectual menace.

Khanna has long excelled at playing men whose power lies in their minds rather than their fists, and Dhurandhar uses this strength brilliantly. His character operates within systems—law, bureaucracy, influence—and Khanna portrays this with chilling precision.

There is a scene late in the film where Khanna delivers a monologue that could have easily tipped into melodrama. Instead, he underplays it, almost conversationally, making it far more threatening. His eyes do most of the work. You never doubt that this is a man who has already calculated three outcomes ahead.

In the dynamic between Singh and Khanna, Dhurandhar finds its sharpest edge. Their confrontations are not loud—they are strategic. This is not good versus evil; it is force versus foresight.


Arjun Rampal: A Study in Controlled Physicality

Arjun Rampal’s role in Dhurandhar is deceptively simple—and that’s precisely why it works.

Rampal plays a character whose authority is established through presence, not exposition. He doesn’t speak much, but when he does, the room listens. Physically imposing without being cartoonish, Rampal brings a sense of inevitability to his scenes.

What stands out is his ability to convey loyalty and threat simultaneously. In a key confrontation, Rampal’s silence becomes more intimidating than dialogue. This is a reminder of how effective he can be when cast with clarity and restraint.


Cinematography: Grit Without Glorification

Visually, Dhurandhar is unapologetically grounded. The camera favours natural light, muted colours, and lived-in textures. There is a deliberate avoidance of glossy aesthetics. Violence, when it occurs, is abrupt and uncomfortable—not stylised.

One particularly effective technique is the use of static frames during moments of emotional intensity. Instead of following the action, the camera often refuses to move, forcing the audience to confront consequences rather than spectacle.

This choice aligns perfectly with the film’s thematic core: power corrodes quietly.


Screenplay: Sharp Themes, Occasional Overstatement

The screenplay of Dhurandhar is intellectually ambitious. It explores moral compromise, institutional decay, and personal ambition with seriousness. Several dialogues are incisive and memorable.

However, the script sometimes mistrusts its own intelligence. There are moments—especially in the second half—where themes are reiterated rather than deepened. The film could have benefited from tighter editing and fewer explanatory exchanges.

That said, the writing never becomes lazy. Even at its weakest, it remains engaged with ideas rather than clichés.


Genre Context: A Serious Entry in Contemporary Hindi Cinema

Within the Hindi action-drama genre, Dhurandhar aligns more with adult, politically conscious storytelling than mass entertainment. It may not deliver instant gratification, but it offers something rarer—lasting impact.

Compared to formula-driven releases, this film takes risks. Not all of them pay off, but the attempt itself deserves respect.


Final Verdict

Dhurandhar is not a perfect film—but it is a serious one, and that matters.

Anchored by Ranveer Singh’s most disciplined performance to date, elevated by Akshaye Khanna’s cerebral menace, and grounded by Arjun Rampal’s imposing presence, the film succeeds more often than it stumbles.

Its flaws stem from excess ambition, not lack of vision.

Rating: 3.5 / 5


Who Should Watch This Film?

  • Viewers who appreciate performance-driven Hindi cinema

  • Audiences tired of formulaic action films

  • Fans of Ranveer Singh looking for his most mature work

  • Anyone interested in films that provoke thought, not just applause





Superman (2025) Review: A Radiant Rebirth of Hope or Just Another Reboot? Deep Analysis of James Gunn’s Man of Steel

Superman (2025) Review: A Radiant Rebirth of Hope or Just Another Reboot? Deep Analysis of James Gunn’s Man of Steel


Watch Video
Watch on YouTube



Posted by: Rasesh Patell | Date: October 12, 2025 | Category: Film Reviews

The Burden of the Cape

Hello, fellow cinephiles and truth-seekers. Rasesh Patell here, welcoming you back to CharotarDaily.com.

Let’s be honest with one another: we are living in the age of superhero fatigue. The market is oversaturated with multiversal stakes, green-screen sludge, and cynicism disguised as deconstruction. When it was announced that James Gunn—the man who made a talking raccoon cry—was taking the reins of the DC Universe with a brand new Superman, the skepticism was palpable. Could the director known for irreverent humor handle the earnestness of the Big Blue Boy Scout?

I walked into the theater with my notebook in hand and a heavy dose of skepticism in my heart. I walked out two hours and forty minutes later, having witnessed something I thought was extinct: a blockbuster with a beating heart.

This isn’t just a movie; it is a cinematic thesis statement. Superman stars David Corenswet, Rachel Brosnahan, and Nicholas Hoult in a narrative that forces the Man of Tomorrow to reconcile his Kryptonian biology with his Kansas morality. But does it fly? Let’s deconstruct this beast.

James Gunn’s Pivot to Sincerity

James Gunn has spent his career celebrating the misfits, the outlaws, and the broken toys. With Superman, he faces his biggest challenge: directing a character who is perfectly whole.

Gunn’s direction here is a masterclass in tonal balance. He resists the urge to "Marvel-ize" the narrative with undercutting humor during emotional beats. Instead, he leans into a Spielbergian sense of wonder. There is a specific sequence early in the second act—let’s call it the "First Flight" 2.0—where Gunn chooses not to focus on the sonic boom or the physics of flight, but on the sheer joy on Corenswet’s face.

Gunn frames Superman not as a god hovering above us (a la Zack Snyder), but as a friend walking—or flying—beside us. The camera angles are often at eye level, grounding the fantastical elements in human reality. He treats the source material with a reverence that feels less like fan service and more like a religious restoration of the character’s core ethos.

A Technicolor Dream in a Drab World

Cinematographer Henry Braham, a frequent Gunn collaborator, has made a bold choice here: he turned the saturation up.

In an era of muddy, desaturated color grading, Superman pops with primary colors. The blues are cerulean; the reds are crimson. This visual language is crucial to the film’s thematic argument. The film presents Metropolis not as a dark, rain-slicked Gotham counterpart, but as a shiny, retro-futurist Art Deco city that feels like the cover of a Golden Age comic book brought to life.

A standout visual moment occurs during the film’s midway point—a montage of Superman performing "small" saves. Not catching falling airplanes, but fixing a bicycle chain or getting a cat out of a tree (yes, they went there). The lighting in these scenes is warm, bathed in the "magic hour" glow, contrasting sharply with the cold, sterile, fluorescent lighting used in every scene involving Lex Luthor’s Corp. The visual storytelling establishes the conflict before a single punch is thrown: the warmth of humanity versus the coldness of corporate cynicism.

The Struggle of "The Human Way"

The screenplay, penned by Gunn himself, tackles the prompt’s central conflict head-on: Reconciling alien heritage with human upbringing.

The script avoids the tired "origin story" tropes. We don’t see Krypton explode. We don’t see the rocket land. We start with Clark already at the Daily Planet. The genius of the writing lies in the dialogue. Gunn writes Clark Kent not as a bumbling disguise, but as the real person. Superman is the mask; Clark is the soul.

The thematic meat of the film is the clash between Superman’s "old-fashioned" values and a modern world that views truth and justice as subjective commodities. There is a brilliant exchange between Clark and Perry White regarding a news story where Perry demands "the angle," and Clark insists on "the truth." It’s a meta-commentary on modern media, handled with surprising nuance.

However, if I must critique, the third act suffers slightly from "CGI Army Fatigue." While the emotional stakes remain high, the screenplay falls into a conventional beat-em-up resolution that feels slightly at odds with the pacifist philosophy established in the first two acts.

The Holy Trinity

David Corenswet as Superman/Clark Kent
The elephant in the room is Henry Cavill. Comparisons are inevitable. But let me say this decisively: David Corenswet is the Superman we need right now. While Cavill played the burden of being a god, Corenswet plays the joy of being a helper.

Corenswet utilizes his physicality beautifully. As Clark, he slouches, making himself small, flashing a goofy, farm-boy grin. As Superman, he expands, his posture radiates authority, but his eyes remain gentle. In the scene where he confronts his Kryptonian holographic father, Jor-El, Corenswet delivers a monologue about choosing Kansas over Krypton that is so raw and vulnerable, it anchors the entire CGI spectacle in human emotion.

Rachel Brosnahan as Lois Lane
Brosnahan is a firecracker. Channeling the fast-talking energy of 1940s screwball comedies (and yes, a bit of Mrs. Maisel), she makes Lois Lane the smartest person in the room. Her chemistry with Corenswet is electric. It’s not just a romance; it’s an intellectual partnership. She isn’t a damsel in distress; she is an investigative journalist who happens to date a demigod. Her performance proves that Lois is not Superman’s weakness, but his tether to humanity.

Nicholas Hoult as Lex Luthor
Hoult offers a chillingly different Lex. He is not the campy Gene Hackman or the twitchy Jesse Eisenberg. Hoult plays Luthor as a tech-bro narcissist with a messiah complex. He is calm, softly spoken, and terrifyingly pragmatic. Hoult plays the jealousy perfectly—he hates Superman not because he is an alien, but because Superman gives things away for free (hope, help, safety) that Luthor believes should be sold. It is a villain performance for the late-stage capitalism era.

Contextualizing the Legacy

To truly understand this film, we must look at where it sits in history.

  • Vs. Donner (1978): Gunn borrows the optimism and the score’s grandeur (referencing Williams without copying him) but strips away the camp.

  • Vs. Snyder (2013): Man of Steel asked, "What would happen if an alien landed in the real world?" (Answer: Fear). Gunn’s Superman asks, "What would happen if a truly good man landed in a cynical world?" (Answer: Inspiration).

This film feels most akin to Captain America: The First Avenger, but on a galactic scale. It proves that a character doesn't need to be "edgy" to be interesting. In the context of Gunn’s filmography, this is his most mature work. It lacks the nihilism of The Suicide Squad and replaces it with the found-family warmth of Guardians Vol. 3.

Final Verdict

Superman is a cinematic miracle. It is a sweeping, romantic, action-packed epic that dares to be uncool in its pursuit of kindness. While the third-act action gets a little busy, the emotional through-line never snaps.

Rasesh Patell’s Rating: 4.5 out of 5 Stars.

James Gunn has not just rebooted a franchise; he has rebooted the idea of the superhero. He reminds us that while it’s fun to see a man fly, it’s more important to see a man stand up for what is right.

Who Should Watch This?

  1. The Jaded Fan: If you felt burned by the DCEU’s inconsistency, this is the apology letter you’ve been waiting for.

  2. Families: Finally, a superhero movie you can take your kids to without worrying about excessive grimness. It’s a true four-quadrant film.

  3. Cinema Purists: If you appreciate visual storytelling, color theory, and distinct directorial voice, there is plenty here to analyze.

  4. David Corenswet Skeptics: Go watch it. You will be converted within the first 15 minutes.

Copyright © 2024 Movie Reviews | CharotarDaily.com. All Rights Reserved.