Bhopal was always going to be a difficult movie to make. Greats like Oliver Stone have tried (and it seems so far) given up.
The body count is known. What happened that night in Bhopal is known. The after effects and the legal battle and it's results are known. The pittance paid as compensation is known.
What makes it a tricky movie to make however is on the assignability of blame. Did the Indian workers cut corners without complicity from senior management in the States. Or was it in effect sabotage as carbide claims? Or as my MBA friends would like to tell me was it something as lame as poor communication?
The movie acknowledges that confusion but also seems ambiguous in the adoption of its decided stance ( which I assume is to not claim it knows who is to blame).
There is a certain confusion in the representation of how seemingly senior level management decisions are taken by junior functionaries. One scene has the operations chief (my guess as destinations aren't made very clear) decide to turn off the freon pump that could have been used on the fateful night to freeze off the methyl isocyanate to save costs.
This seems unlikely to have happened without management knowledge and rather a lack of management knowledge would render the action pointless for the operations chief.
Apart from this major flaw the movie does have some great moments of brilliance. The effect of the bridal mare running through a deserted dimly road with birds dropping from the sky is haunting in its beauty.
It is a very human story with several glimpses, acknowledgements and understanding of human fallibility. The visionary CEO who falls for his own faith in himself and trusts others from humble backgrounds like his to do as well with limited resources as he did. The clever greaser ( played by the co author David Brooks himself) who believes that if certain precautionary procedures can be waived using money then they weren't important anyways. The rickshaw puller who makes employee incharge of safety in a matter of days and still needs someone else telling him that doesn't bode well for safety overall.
The acting could be bettered. Rajpal Yadav tries to shake off his comic stereotype and succeeds to some extent, but Kal Penn's Indian accent is a bit too labored. Martin Sheen comes off as almost likable, but then he also managed that when he killed my childhood hero Col. Kurtz.
Is it a movie worthy of the Bhopal tragedy? No. But I doubt a movie can be.
The body count is known. What happened that night in Bhopal is known. The after effects and the legal battle and it's results are known. The pittance paid as compensation is known.
What makes it a tricky movie to make however is on the assignability of blame. Did the Indian workers cut corners without complicity from senior management in the States. Or was it in effect sabotage as carbide claims? Or as my MBA friends would like to tell me was it something as lame as poor communication?
The movie acknowledges that confusion but also seems ambiguous in the adoption of its decided stance ( which I assume is to not claim it knows who is to blame).
There is a certain confusion in the representation of how seemingly senior level management decisions are taken by junior functionaries. One scene has the operations chief (my guess as destinations aren't made very clear) decide to turn off the freon pump that could have been used on the fateful night to freeze off the methyl isocyanate to save costs.
This seems unlikely to have happened without management knowledge and rather a lack of management knowledge would render the action pointless for the operations chief.
Apart from this major flaw the movie does have some great moments of brilliance. The effect of the bridal mare running through a deserted dimly road with birds dropping from the sky is haunting in its beauty.
It is a very human story with several glimpses, acknowledgements and understanding of human fallibility. The visionary CEO who falls for his own faith in himself and trusts others from humble backgrounds like his to do as well with limited resources as he did. The clever greaser ( played by the co author David Brooks himself) who believes that if certain precautionary procedures can be waived using money then they weren't important anyways. The rickshaw puller who makes employee incharge of safety in a matter of days and still needs someone else telling him that doesn't bode well for safety overall.
The acting could be bettered. Rajpal Yadav tries to shake off his comic stereotype and succeeds to some extent, but Kal Penn's Indian accent is a bit too labored. Martin Sheen comes off as almost likable, but then he also managed that when he killed my childhood hero Col. Kurtz.
Is it a movie worthy of the Bhopal tragedy? No. But I doubt a movie can be.
No comments:
Post a Comment