Review for LAW:
•Language: KANNADA.
•Duration: 02 Hour 07 Minutes.
•Genre: Suspense Legal Drama.
• PREMIERED ON AMAZON PRIME VIDEOS.
• REVIEW BY ARUNJYOTHI.R.VALIYAVEETIL.
•POSITIVES:
1: Story.
2:Twist and suspense.
3: Performance of actors.
4: Cinematography.
•NEGATIVES:
1: Direction
2: Screenplay.
3: Editing.
•ONE WORD: A one-time watch movie offering plenty of loose ends.
•DETAIL REVIEW:
LAW tells about the story of Nandini a law student who is raped by a gang. Instead of hiding she comes forward and decides to fight for justice and the rest of the story unfolds different path lead by her to punish the culprits.
Like a flip of a coin this movie also had two sides exemplifying both good and bad. The good thing is the story and the bad thing is the screenplay and direction. Looking into these both sides the story was great and it was having every component for a perfect suspense thriller but the other side of the average direction and poor writing of screenplay made the movie in ending up to an average level of category.
The story penned by the director Raghu Samarth was brilliant with many suspense and thrilling factors but when he comes to the screenplay the depth of the story was spoiled by the poor writing. The various scenarios he had written in the screenplay was not having a proper strength to maintain the impact of the plot. Most of the twist was big enough to give surprises but the circumstances leading to that twist look amateurish. While watching the film it’s is clearly noticeable that the inexperience of writing a good screenplay was missing, if the screenplay was made by an expert this movie had been turned out into a nail-biting thriller.
The same sort of immature was seen on the direction, not at all happy with the impassionate making of Raghu Samarth. He shouldn’t have been done the direction, his formulating way of making the movie was intermediate. At some point, the making style maintains its momentum but those grasp in making was not hold flawlessly every time. The major drawback in the direction was the unnecessary usage of cliché factors especially songs, he could have been focused more to avoid these faults. The songs had never matched with its outlines which would have been avoided by the maker.
The pattern of direction was different in both first half and second half. The first half was not up to the mark, most of the occurrences were hard to believe and also the making looks unpleasant. But after the twist and turn the way of the implementation by the director was balanced but still, the several ideas which the maker had implemented for setting up to the content and to the climax shows the depletion of credibility. From the second half, most of the aimed factors for setting up the suspense started to get predictable which had happened because of the shoddy way of screenplay writing. Looking into the dialogues were jotted down brilliantly especially those powerful words in the climax and ending. The crisp and sharp dialogues during the trial were effectively implemented. The talks denoting the affection of parents were also nicely made but the humour conversation we’re felt unwanted.
The court plays an important part in this film and one the most disgusting thing about the movie is the horrible portrayal of court decorum, in some of the scenes the arguments between the advocates and judge look unrealistic. Also, the judge who had shown in the film was horrible, none of the qualities of a district court judge was seen. A judge cracking the jokes and having the personal call in between the time of cases was so pathetic to watch. The lack of acceptances in the investigation lead by the first police inspector is also a further con configuring the dearth of realism.
Ragini Chandran as Nandini did a great job, the intensity was seen on the whole performance. As a lawyer, she did a pretty good job and the personality of a lawyer was fair. Also the emotional scenes we’re acted out properly. Siri Prahlad also did a notable performance. Mukhyamantri Chandru as the judge, Achyuth Kumar as the father of Sir and Avinash as the father of heroine did justice to their supporting roles. Both Krishna Hebbale as the police officer and Rajesh Nataranga as the advocate did a terrific performance. Rajesh Nataranga deserves a special mention for his outstanding acting, the characteristics of a dominant advocate were undertaken brilliantly.
The cinematography of Sugnaan was fine but nothing special to mention, a normal camera work. Some of the close-up shots and camera placement were ordinary. The editing by Srikanth was tragic, the cuts to the next scene were mismatching and these mistakes had happened in various part of the movie causing a disturbance in viewing also the sudden cuts were totally awful. The background score tuned by Vasuki Vaibhav was moderate, the BGM used in the court scenes were fitting to set the tone but the tunes at the emotional scenes we’re average. The track ’Happy Song’ was unwanted in the film but still the song good to hear and felt a feel good.
So overall to conclude I felt ’Law’ is a half baked movie in all manner which had given me a mixed experience. The dull writing in the screenplay, mediocre direction and the worst editing had spoiled a good story but still, the movie is watchable which can be acceptable for a one time watch.
•VERDICT: AVERAGE
•RATING: 2.5/5.
