'Brahmastra' offers some awe-inspiring CGI action but is butchered by a dreadful script

When I first saw the trailer for Ayan Mukerji's 'Brahmastra: Part One – Shiva', I remember wondering why it chose to focus on visuals of characters hurling magical light at each other and there was hardly any information about the plot and dialogue. Now I know the answer. ''Brahmastra' has a few halfway-decent ideas, good world-building, and eye-poppingly good visuals. But it is not the saviour the Hindi film industry needed. Clocking at around 167 minutes -- while somehow feeling even longer -- Brahmastra' is a slog throughout. Borrowing from Hindu myths was an interesting decision in my view, if a little hazardous in a country where many seem to be yearning to take offence from something and boycotting every movie with a big star. But 'Brahmastra' squanders the potential.

The world-building in 'Brahmāstra' is derivative

Add WION as a Preferred Source

Hinduism has had a long history and there are thousands of tales and legends about gods, demons, supernatural creatures, and so on -- pretty much everything needed to build a cinematic universe that Mukerji intended. And indeed, the world-building in 'Brahmāstra' is not exactly bad, but it does not feel fresh. It has borrowed from several movie franchises from the west like 'Harry Potter', 'The Lord of the Rings' and, of course, the Marvel Cinematic Universe'. The film has lifted the Chosen One trope from western pop culture as well. Sometimes, the 'inspiration' goes too far. For instance, the powers of Mouni Roy's villainous Junoon, the Queen of Darkness, carry a strong resemblance with Elizabeth Olsen's Scarlet Witch in MCU to a suspicious degree. When is a piece of creativity a homage and when does it become derivative? 'Brahmāstra' does tend to blur the lines.

Despite being too "inspired", the mythology built in 'Brahmastra' has potential

However, I did not mind the derivative part much and had actually expected that. The mythology of the intended AstraVerse, as the cinematic universe is named, does throw up a few fascinating ideas. It revolves around a bunch of MacGuffins. In this world, the LotR-style prologue tells us, sages and warriors called forth the powers of heavens eons ago and were gifted with weapons of untold power, each representing an element -- like fire, wind, light, and water -- or some diety like the Nandi Astra that harnesses the powers of Nandi.

There was a weapon more powerful than any other: the 'Brahmastra' (One Ring to rule them all, haha), with the power to obliterate all life in the universe. One person wanted it all to himself but was stopped by another. In the process, Brahmāstra was broken into three pieces, each of which was entrusted to members of a secret society called Brahmansh. The weapon will stay dormant until the pieces are joined. And the destruction of the cosmos will follow. Which is not what the protagonists want.

Also Read:'Brahmastra' movie review: Ranbir Kapoor-Alia Bhatt's film works for its special effects, not for its story

Cut to the present. Ranbir Kapoor's Shiva is a man with a mysterious connection to fire. A DJ by profession, he spots Alia Bhatt's Isha among the audience and falls in love with her. Shiva is accustomed to strange visions and one evening sees a scientist being ambushed by two assassins clad like ninjas and none other than Roy's Junoon -- as it is happening. The scientist, we are told, was one of the Brahmansha and had a piece of the Brahmastra. Shiva and Isha then go on a journey to save Nagarjuna's Anish Shetty, who is awaiting a similar fate in Varanasi. Later, they find Amitabh heading what remains of the Brahmansha in the high Himalayas, with Big B's character serving as Gandalf to Ranbir's Frodo (the parallels are eerie, I tell you).

Visuals are the highlight

'Brahmastra' knows what kind of movie this is and where most of the money, I presume, has been spent. The visual effects are truly awe-inspiring at times. And it is not just the magical beams and fireballs and everything else computer generated. It is also the more quotidian stuff. For instance, a scene in which hundreds of devotees dance during Durga Pooja to the tunes of Shiva looks absolutely spectacular with a camera. The cinematography, by multiple people according to Wikipedia, provides gorgeous imagery. It is so good that even the high-quality CGI-driven visuals look gaudy and distracting aftera while.

'Brahmastra' is sometimes excessive -- throwing everything at the audience that it deems would be enjoyed

Despite the consistently splendid imagery, 'Brahmastra' can be excessive. Mukerji, who earlier directed Ranbir in 'Wake Up Sid' and 'Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani', is not a fan of subtlety, I gather. Every single scene has to be overwrought and filled with import. Perhaps that was the studio demand? I don't know. In one scene, Shiva is just walking in the streets and Pritam is playing drums in the background.

The dialogues are atrocious

As I said above, the writing is fine as far as the world-building goes, but it's the dialogues that truly sink the movie. You know, you have to expect poor writing when you are going to watch a big-budget Hindi movie. It is a given at this point. But even by that standards, 'Brahmastra' is terrible.

There is one piece of conversation that I am not likely to forget anytime soon. Shiva jokes to Isha that she got burnt in her love, pointing to a burn she got on a shoulder during an engagement with the assassins. To this, she responds something along the lines of 'long back'. 'Pyar ki aag' is a phrase I thought I would never hear outside of 90s' Hindi cinema. It felt to me at times that Ranbir and other actors are doing a bit -- they must be -- or the movie is simply an overlong SNL sketch. Or perhaps the words coming out of their mouths are meant to be ironic or campy? No, none of that. Everything is uttered with a straight face. Whatever the jokes the movies have don't land. The actors act like the budget could afford two or three facial expressions.

Oh, and everything has to be spelled out. Every. Single. Thing. Repeatedly, just in case the audience did not get what the titular weapon does in the last dozen times. The script is chock-full of exposition and did not have the decency to make the conversation remotely interesting.

I don't ask this question lightly: did they hire a turnip to write the dialogues?