Spoilers ahead…
In Sujoy Ghosh’s Badla, Amitabh Bachchan (solid as always) stars as one of those high-profile lawyers who has never lost a case. His latest assignment, in this official adaptation of the 2017 Spanish movie Contratiempo, involves Naina Sethi (Taapsee Pannu), a married woman who admits to adultery but says she’s innocent of murdering the man she was having the affair with. Someone’s trying to frame her — but who? After all, there is no evidence that there was anyone else in the hotel room where the body was found. The stage is set for a twisty mystery, where clues range from one of those cigarette lighters that bursts into a tune to the Bachchan character’s very name: Badal, which simply juxtaposes the last two letters of the title.
But despite an overall watchable quality, especially towards the end, Badla is a tepid affair. I haven’t seen Contratiempo, but I’m assuming the enormous number of what-are-the-odds coincidences were handled with more conviction. Here, the characters are all stick figures, and the stakes are low — I never got around to investing enough in Naina to care about what happened to her. The dialogues are painfully strained, whether it’s the “colourful” banter between Rani (Amrita Singh) and her husband — they’re key players in the story is all I’ll say — or Badal’s incessant Mahabharata references. Which brings me to the major reason this film doesn’t work as much as it should (huge spoilers ahead, till the end). The scripture-quoting instantly establishes Badal as a man on the side of dharma (in contrast, Naina remembers but the basic “story outline”). But even more damaging to the suspension-of-disbelief factor is the casting. Badal needed to be played by someone far less distinctive. Badla wants us to believe that it’s not too hard to mimic one of the most iconic of faces and voices of our cinema. Close, but no cigar.
Copyright ©2019 Baradwaj Rangan. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Baradwaj Rangan 
Devarsi Ghosh
March 10, 2019
Yep. haven’t seen and won’t see Badla. Seen the original. I always wondered it would be ridiculous for someone to pretend to be HIM. What worked in the original was that no one was really an international star, and for most audiences world over, including Indian, the actors had fresh faces. How could Big B be cast here is… it has no sense.
LikeLiked by 1 person
anurag1700
March 10, 2019
where is the link for full article ? Even separately on film companion I coudnt find it.
LikeLike
An Jo
March 10, 2019
LikeLike
Krish
March 10, 2019
The review ended too abruptly BR…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Dracarys
March 10, 2019
The Spanish movie is on Netflix and its good.
LikeLike
An Jo
March 10, 2019
Spoiler Alert
With regard to your comment that having the most iconic face and voice of Indian cinema, I have a slightly different interpretation. If you look at the scenes between Amrita and her husband, they are ‘bantering’ around — irritatingly when considering the impact-index of a scene and I agree with you there; as though they have crossed three 7-year itches in married life but they can still keep the dialogue-baazi in life alive; and they want the world to know — mainly about their trysts with ‘acting.’ Who is the better actor? The husband or the wife? Who delivers the lines better? When Arjun Joseph’s character walks out of the bathroom in Amrita’s house, he gazes at the posters of plays stuck/hung on the walls. It has posters of Twelfth Night, etc., Everything alludes to acting. In that mould, it makes sense to have an iconic face play the role of Badal Gupta: Everything leads to it. Tapsee’s ‘wily’ character needs a match. You cannot have some random guy — who might be any FTII pass-out and be brilliant; doesn’t matter — playing a cat and mouse game with Tapsee’s Naina. You need a level playing field. It is especially revealed between the interactions of the two actors who completely hold the drawing-room play; mainly Amitabh.
Now to the point that one could guess from Mahabharat’s references thrown in by Badal on which side of the ‘line’ he stood — I could buy in that there were enough twists in the dialogues between the two to at least, on an average level, instill doubts in the minds of the audience as to who’s on which side. It’s only in the end that it becomes crystal-clear, visually, that Badal has to be on the side of Sunny Singh when he retorts to his wry glare facing the camera – away from Naina.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Piyush Pratik
March 10, 2019
Spoilers ahead
Did anybody notice that Naina’s car number ends with a ‘N4INA’, which is her name? I thought it was an extension of the motif of her unlimited power (a theme the mother constantly harps on).
Also, the theme of the father being an actor pays off really well. Early on, the couple have an argument over who is the better actor, and this culminates really well, as the father pulls off an incredible ‘performance’, according to the film.
Moreover, did anyone notice the poster of Twelfth Night on the wall of the couple’s house? The drama involves role playing as well, a motif in the film.
And finally, the decision to reverse the characters (making the male character in the original the female one in this, and vice versa) goes down well. Taapsee Pannu is very transparent to portraying the (apparent) vulnerability of her character. Of course, she doesn’t come across as a scheming villain at the end, that balks.
I loved the detailing. The optical illusions (vortex) placed everywhere on the walls of Naina’s room extend the theme of ‘illusion’, and perhaps denote the theme that whatever you do to cover up a single mistake sucks you deeper into a whirlpool.
The Mahabharat references don’t fit in such an intimate story. How is this mother figure related to Draupadi? Just because she is a female character? Clearly, more thought needed to be put into this angle.
The name of the character, Naina, sits very well. Early on, Nirmal tells her he is blind, and she would act as his ‘eyes’, ans whatever she ‘shows’ him would be his truth. And this also works in the climax, in retrospect, where we realise that the lawyer isn’t who he claims he is, that he isn’t as ‘blind’ as we think he is.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Piyush Pratik
March 10, 2019
The film fits into Sujoy Ghosh’s thrillerverse (Kahaani, Kahaani 2 and now, this), and clearly, Ghosh is fond of these tropes:
He is fond of mythological references. While Kahaani explicitly invokes Durga, and tangentially references Arjun (the police character, and the thing about double identities is also used in that scene), Kahaani 2 has a character named Durga (Durga Rani Singh, to be precise. And here we have a character named Rani Singh, another vengeful mother out set things right). And this film is Mahabharat reference storehouse, while I’m amazed Sujoy didn’t put in any reference of the Agyaatvaas (given the theme of disguise, that could have fitted really well in the film’s context).
He loves creating characters who come across as innocent but are actually women on mission. They invariably involve some degree of playacting. And of course, they help him discover the theme of identity. He gives them a complete profile, name and profession, and residence, and even background story, but it turns out to be an elaborate lie by the end. He seems to be deconstructing our processes of idenitfying a person, he’s perhaps trying to see what deception is enough to overcome one of our most basic instincts: identifying a human.
Motherhood is clearly a theme he loves. All the leading women in all the three movies are mothers, and maternal instinct (that gets stronger after losing the child, or seeing her harmed) is what spurs them to action.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Enigma
March 11, 2019
spoilers I have seen the original Spanish film. Was a huge shock when the identity of the advocate is revealed. Not surprising that they have switched genders of the main protagonists.
LikeLike
An Jo
March 11, 2019
Ques: One hears of Ranveer Singh living and breathing his roles these days… or getting into character, I am sure many of your roles would have required major preparation, for instance Pa or Black, if you could explain your craft for such difficult roles?
Mr Bachchan: I have no craft and no idea of what the others do in what they do so brilliantly .. I have followed as diligently as possible the written words of the writer, and the direction given to me by the directors! For Black, we learnt the sign language! Badla is a different genre, a thriller which for years now has hooked us, for someone of my generation, Mahal remains embedded in memory recesses since it was a cult film from 1949 starring Ashok Kumar and Madhubala with seminal music. They have been part and parcel of Hindi cinema’s strong fabric. Obviously Alfred Hitchcock was the master of this genre. Thrillers are an integral part of the history of universal cinema. (In his formative years Mr Bachchan himself acted in two very powerful suspense thrillers – Parwana and Gehri Chaal.)
Ques: You have always said that you have been fortunate in your acting career – me akela hi chala ja rha tha, log judte chale gaye aur karvan banta chala gaya – is that the credo that has determined your life?
Mr Bachchan: I do not know the meaning of credo in my profession… I do know that I have been fortunate…
Ques: During a large part of your peak years, you actually had a very difficult relationship with media, including a major part when media boycotted you… and you now have a fabulous relationship with media. Explain this paradox, and did you work towards bridging the divide, what led to it in the first place?
Mr Bachchan: I am certain you are more than aware that one can never be too close to the media or too far away from them! The media is the fourth estate, the conscience of the nation. I shall have the capacity, or the audacity to live with my conscience, but not that of the media’s. It would be foolish of me to think so.
Ques: Fifty years of greasepaint and yet the fire remains undiminished. Where do you get your energy from? Or is it respect for work which defines your underlying ethic?
Mr Bachchan: I am at loss as to why you or many others ask me this question?
https://www.ndtv.com/entertainment/amitabh-bachchan-sums-up-journey-from-saat-hinustani-to-badla-another-day-another-job-2005482?pfrom=home-movies
LikeLiked by 2 people
Deepak Jeswal
March 11, 2019
This is a scene by scene , shot by shot, dialogue by dialogue remake of The Invisible Guest ( available on Netflix). Except for gender reversal and a bit of Mahabharata peppering in dialogue.
So what u see here is there in the original as well. Ya, too many coincidences in the plot. Wasn’t impressed by original.
LikeLike
Moy
March 11, 2019
Why so short review.
LikeLike
Roopa Vinoth
March 12, 2019
Rangan Sir, not relevant to this post but still wanted to ask.Since there is good content available in digital platforms these days, would you consider doing amazon/netflix web series reviews as well?
LikeLike
brangan
March 13, 2019
Roopa: I don’t see myself doing reviews of streaming shows. It’s just the time. I stilll haven’t watched MADE IN HEAVEN. 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 17, 2019
Spoiler alert
Have been too busy juggling professional and personal commitments last few weeks but this movie brought me back to the blog. Hmm, it seems like whenever I do agree with AnJo, we both disagree with BR. I didn’t have a problem with AB’s casting because the real Badal Gupta bore enough verisimilitude with AB for it to be plausible that Naina – who had ostensibly never met him before – would mistake him for the real person. The notion that Nirmal wore prosthetics and impersonated the lawyer – enacted by AB – is also fairly plausible and if it isn’t, it’s more for the reason that it’s hard to believe that Nirmal would be so well prepared to play the part of a seasoned lawyer. But then again, we don’t REALLY know what Nirmal does and who he is. Just as we only have Naina’s convoluted lies designed to let her get away with murder, it’s equally possible she only thinks Nirmal works at a hotel because that is the version she has received via Arjun.
I also want to comment on how rare it is that this sort of film misses the bus with the critics but wins over the audience. That usually happens with outright commercial fare like the Bhai films or comedies like the Golmaal series but this kind of film is pretty demanding to watch. So I find it puzzling that it doesn’t seem to have stretched the audience’s attention span but that of the critics. The set up itself – of the events being narrated to you by the two characters taking up most screen time – is not engaging but I found it so because of the way Sujoy Ghosh filmed it. The same air of unease and suspense that pervaded Kahaani is found here too. He makes the beautiful English countryside appear scary. Though it is an official adaptation – wow, didn’t know Bollywood folks believed in crediting the original film/writer – it still takes guts to make a film like this which has the potential to fall flat. But as far as I could tell, the almost housefull crowd at the afternoon show that I went to found it as gripping as I did. Lastly, it was good to see AB in top form. I think I am starting to get jaded of watching him in so many films over the years but then he hits a role like this out of the park and I enjoy the heck out of it. I had found him a little laboured in Pink but here the energy and intensity was there from the start.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Anu Warrier
March 18, 2019
I have to agree with both Madan and An Jo. I really did like the film. Though I thought AB went a bit overboard in some scenes (and for that I fault the director), this was still a gripping performance and I was glad to see him back in form. There were slight gestures/expressions amidst the louder performance that showed us what this actor is capable of, if left to himself, or if directed by a really, really good director.
Taapsee continues to impress me, and I’m beginning to want to watch a film solely on her name. That’s rare for me.
LikeLiked by 1 person
MANK
March 18, 2019
i haven’t seen the original, but i enjoyed this film as long as it lasted. I found it very gripping all the way through, though i always had that sinking feeling now and then that i am being played. I didn’t think casting Bachchan was such a big mistake. It helps that Bachchan was terrific. He is 76 years old now and still maintain such a high level of artistry. The voice , the body language , its still in top form.The worst part of the film is Tapsee. I dont know how she is getting cast in these complex roles, when she just dont have the talent to pull it off.Bachchan deserved a better ‘rival’ . Her last film,Mulk also had the same problem with a fantastic Rishi Kapoor
P.S. i was quite kicked to see the mard duo of Bachchan and Amrita Singh together as ‘husband’ and wife.’Kis mitti ke bane hue ho tum’ and ‘mard ko dard nahin hota’ kept ringing in my head 🙂
LikeLiked by 2 people
Rocky
March 18, 2019
watched it yesterday , Superb suspense and brilliant performances by Bachchan, Tapsee and Amrita Singh. The quotes from Mahabharat were immensely pleasing to my ears. Once you know the truth and rewind back to the reactions , you understand how good these artists are. I was a bit apprehensive about having the movie set in Britain, but I guess in the end it did not matter. Planning to watch Invisible guest this week.
P.S.- Badla lena har baar sahi nahin hota, lekin maaf kar dena bhi har baar sahi nahin hota!!
Uri !!!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anu Warrier
March 19, 2019
@MANK – entha aniyaa – what do you have against Taapsee? 🙂 I find her extremely talented and quite able to hold her own. In fact, her court scene in Mulk was fabulous.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
March 19, 2019
I found Tapsee much improved from Pink. Maybe she suffered a little in contrast to AB as her reflexes were not as fast as his but again, that speaks more for the quality of HIS performance. I don’t believe a more non description looking actor without those skills could have held your attention the way AB did in this role. Considering she was up against the 800 pound gorilla, Tapsee held her own here.
LikeLike
MANK
March 19, 2019
what do you have against Taapsee?
Oh nothing personal 🙂
She was okay playing the innocent girl trapped by circumstances, but she couldn’t nail the ‘transformation’ at all, which is the heart of the character.
And , i think she just wasn’t up to it in Mulk either. i mentioned that in that thread itself. the role required someone like Vidya Balan.
LikeLike
Sreehari
March 19, 2019
I thought the innocent girl part was where she croaked. She is a 4 Rasas actress, basically. And is especially unconvincing when the situations in a movie seem to be going against her characters’ calculations.
She is very ‘effective’ when she has to act for the camera, but not very good when she has to play off a co-actor. ( And there are at least 20 actresses just in Bollywood who can do both, really well).
And I just did not get the big deal about her “physical acting” in Manmarziyaan. Walking confidently with a hockey stick in hand isn’t exactly “physical acting.” (Rasika Duggal gives you so many moments of ‘physical acting’ in a single frame, but without any of that strutting around).
LikeLike
Rocky
March 19, 2019
OT- The Bachchan fan in me was upset when Tapsee was getting an upper hand in the beginning, and then he smacks her down by the -two types of client and blah blah , and then saying do NOT try and be smart with me, because you are not. Kasam sey, Bada dil khush hua.
It also reminded me of an anecdote at the time of AAA release, there was pin drop silence in the theatre when Vinod Khanna beats Bachchan and comes out of the shed carrying him on his shoulder, then a guy yelled – arrey bada bhai hai toh peeteygaa hee Na , and there was a huge understanding amongst the audience and they continued watching the movie .
LikeLike
praneshp
March 20, 2019
@Sreehari: curious who 5 of those actresses are!
LikeLike
monika584
April 18, 2019
It was going ok until that ekta kapoorish style ending ruined the movie for me. It always happens in a suspense genre movie that you can’t trust anything but this level of suspension of disbelief, that too not related to an incident but with a person and his face itself may garner applauds from an audience whose idea of loving a suspense movie is how much unpredictable n bizzare it goes, is actually quite stupid and childish.
LikeLike
Ganapathy Parameswaran
May 31, 2020
I haven’t watched the original. Bur for me, up until the point where Badal questions and brings out how unreliable a narrator Naina is, I wasn’t that into the narrative. It is only after this point that I got into the film. The dialogues were too long and got me looking at the time. As far as the final reveal, I too found it ridiculous that anybody could impersonate Big B. As @br says, it is a tepid mystery that’s watchable – just once mainly because of the Big B and Tapsee Pannu.
LikeLiked by 1 person