Zakhmi Aurat seeks to tackle a national pandemic in India: rape. And it also offers a solution: castration as a viable form of punishment, although we all know it's not very plausible in the civilised world. Through the main character of Kiran Dutt, a brave police inspector who is brutally gang raped and later denied justice within the formal confines of the legal and judicial systems, we see a harrowing story of frustration followed by Kiran's decision to unite with other rape victims for the execution of their own revenge plan: castrating the rapists one after the other. While the women's actions are shown to have a positive influence in the country in terms of significant decrease in rape rates, interestingly they do not receive universal approval even within the film itself as even her fiancée tells her this isn't the right way to handle the situation, and her boss, the police commissioner, explains how wrong it is to take the law into their hands, which will eventually lead to chaos.
It's a little funny that the director once called it an anti-rape film. Can there be a different message behind a film about rape? Is there anyone who would heaven forbid endorse such a harrowing crime against humanity? Obviously not, but the reason for his clarification is the fact that Zakhmi Aurat faced accusations of sensationalising rape, and I can understand why, although I can also definitely explain why this isn't the case. The main problem with the film is quite simply the same problem found in the great majority of Hindi films from the 1980s: its the artistic quality. Indeed, Zakhmi Aurat is outrageously unrealistic, as it collectively employs every single of the usual tropes of mainstream Hindi film, from ridiculous action sequences which would hardly make sense even in a fantasy film, with all the dishum dishum sound effects, which today will be cringe-worthy to the average viewer. The dialogue is stagy, highly melodramatic, and many scenes are lacking basic logic.
And yes, indeed, that rape scene, which wavered somewhere between childish caricature and sensationalist ploy designed to attract as many potential (male) viewers as possible, is a low point in the film. This is one of many glitches in the narrative, among which the court sequence, which is handled like a school play, is also most embarrassing. The same goes for the execution of the revenge; the reaction of the first rapist to be castrated to the punishment he had been inflicted with, is most unrealistic and is even presented as some sort of comic relief, which is ridiculous and definitely not the right way to be shown. Likewise, in one of the film's predictable but interesting episodes which convey the message of 'what goes around comes around', the daughter of the lawyer responsible for the release of Kiran's rapists is in danger of being herself violated. That he ends up needing specifically Kiran's assistance and is forced to actively approach her for help is another absurdity that wouldn't make sense in any reality.
Now hold on! There's a twist: after having said all that, beware as the film is likely to grow on you, and it has some sort of consistent messaging that does work. But before that, despite the regular flaws, one must note some of its technical aspects which are really good. The quality of the camera work is surprisingly good, the cinematography is excellent and the art direction, set design and overall production values are better than expected. Everything, from the way newspaper headlines are presented to how the houses are designed, makes for a nice visual experience. Script-wise, Kiran's grief upon being raped, as well as the scenes showing her return back home and the experience of having to relive what she had been through, are portrayed exceedingly well. Even her gradual recuperation process and the execution of the mission are displayed well. Moreover, that the film doesn't take one firm stand for or against the women's acts of revenge is probably a good choice, too (although the general approach is quite clear).
While the moral of the story couldn't have been more simplistic, honestly, within the context of the film and despite the many pitfalls, it's enormously cathartic. Despite being an ultra-commercial film with all the usual ingredients all squashed together, the film still somehow manages to maintain its status as a movie with a social message, and a real one at that. That it caters to the wide audience almost inevitably requires that populist sensationalism would be its immediate form of communication with its potential viewers. But the message is there, and it is, believe it or not, effectively presented within the given context. In this regard, Zakhmi Aurat is a social movie which makes tremendous artistic concessions to be geared to the masses, giving them valuable and educative entertainment. If that could have evoked some sort of understanding back in the day or scared even one less educated individual from engaging in such hideous and criminal activity, then so be it, it's good enough.
And speaking of redeeming qualities, how can one go on without mentioning the one who gives Zakhmi Aurat its primary meaning and conviction, mostly not warranted by the script. Dimple Kapadia shines despite every possible mistake the director insists on making. She is really, really strong in the part, portraying every ounce of Kiran's grief, frustration, resilience and redemption with credibility and inspiring self-assurance. That she is an actress endowed with tremendous good looks and indelible natural charisma on the screen is obviously a great bonus, but it's more than just that - even though it would be almost impossible to believe that within the limitations of such a poorly constructed narrative an actor could take a role so seriously, she does just that, and she succeeds. Her staunch supporter, Raj Babbar, is fantastic. Interestingly, a few years later he would play a very similar part opposite Kapadia, that of a worldly man who despises the distorted moral principles of the surrounding society in the masterful Rudaali.
Among the rest of the players, all the rapists are written and presented as crude caricature villains, and so is Anupam Kher as the lawyer. Kher specialises at playing those mega-annoying characters who later realise and regret their misgivings. Many years later he'd play a similar part in the beautiful romance Veer-Zaara. The other female players, on the other hand, specifically those forming the avenging sisterhood, including Aruna Irani and Rama Vij, are all quite good. The ending sequence is one I didn't even imagine would not be there - it just goes without saying that a film of this sort would end up giving the heroine a larger-than-life monologue which would recap the entire story and all the injustice in one short speech full of pathos. I didn't like it, but I liked Kapadia. Zakhmi Aurat is obviously her film all the way, and while it isn't a good film in and of itself, it is quite watchable. Needless to say, there is one primary reason which enhances its watchability and it is Kapadia herself. She makes much of it forgivable.
It's a little funny that the director once called it an anti-rape film. Can there be a different message behind a film about rape? Is there anyone who would heaven forbid endorse such a harrowing crime against humanity? Obviously not, but the reason for his clarification is the fact that Zakhmi Aurat faced accusations of sensationalising rape, and I can understand why, although I can also definitely explain why this isn't the case. The main problem with the film is quite simply the same problem found in the great majority of Hindi films from the 1980s: its the artistic quality. Indeed, Zakhmi Aurat is outrageously unrealistic, as it collectively employs every single of the usual tropes of mainstream Hindi film, from ridiculous action sequences which would hardly make sense even in a fantasy film, with all the dishum dishum sound effects, which today will be cringe-worthy to the average viewer. The dialogue is stagy, highly melodramatic, and many scenes are lacking basic logic.
And yes, indeed, that rape scene, which wavered somewhere between childish caricature and sensationalist ploy designed to attract as many potential (male) viewers as possible, is a low point in the film. This is one of many glitches in the narrative, among which the court sequence, which is handled like a school play, is also most embarrassing. The same goes for the execution of the revenge; the reaction of the first rapist to be castrated to the punishment he had been inflicted with, is most unrealistic and is even presented as some sort of comic relief, which is ridiculous and definitely not the right way to be shown. Likewise, in one of the film's predictable but interesting episodes which convey the message of 'what goes around comes around', the daughter of the lawyer responsible for the release of Kiran's rapists is in danger of being herself violated. That he ends up needing specifically Kiran's assistance and is forced to actively approach her for help is another absurdity that wouldn't make sense in any reality.
Now hold on! There's a twist: after having said all that, beware as the film is likely to grow on you, and it has some sort of consistent messaging that does work. But before that, despite the regular flaws, one must note some of its technical aspects which are really good. The quality of the camera work is surprisingly good, the cinematography is excellent and the art direction, set design and overall production values are better than expected. Everything, from the way newspaper headlines are presented to how the houses are designed, makes for a nice visual experience. Script-wise, Kiran's grief upon being raped, as well as the scenes showing her return back home and the experience of having to relive what she had been through, are portrayed exceedingly well. Even her gradual recuperation process and the execution of the mission are displayed well. Moreover, that the film doesn't take one firm stand for or against the women's acts of revenge is probably a good choice, too (although the general approach is quite clear).
While the moral of the story couldn't have been more simplistic, honestly, within the context of the film and despite the many pitfalls, it's enormously cathartic. Despite being an ultra-commercial film with all the usual ingredients all squashed together, the film still somehow manages to maintain its status as a movie with a social message, and a real one at that. That it caters to the wide audience almost inevitably requires that populist sensationalism would be its immediate form of communication with its potential viewers. But the message is there, and it is, believe it or not, effectively presented within the given context. In this regard, Zakhmi Aurat is a social movie which makes tremendous artistic concessions to be geared to the masses, giving them valuable and educative entertainment. If that could have evoked some sort of understanding back in the day or scared even one less educated individual from engaging in such hideous and criminal activity, then so be it, it's good enough.
And speaking of redeeming qualities, how can one go on without mentioning the one who gives Zakhmi Aurat its primary meaning and conviction, mostly not warranted by the script. Dimple Kapadia shines despite every possible mistake the director insists on making. She is really, really strong in the part, portraying every ounce of Kiran's grief, frustration, resilience and redemption with credibility and inspiring self-assurance. That she is an actress endowed with tremendous good looks and indelible natural charisma on the screen is obviously a great bonus, but it's more than just that - even though it would be almost impossible to believe that within the limitations of such a poorly constructed narrative an actor could take a role so seriously, she does just that, and she succeeds. Her staunch supporter, Raj Babbar, is fantastic. Interestingly, a few years later he would play a very similar part opposite Kapadia, that of a worldly man who despises the distorted moral principles of the surrounding society in the masterful Rudaali.
Among the rest of the players, all the rapists are written and presented as crude caricature villains, and so is Anupam Kher as the lawyer. Kher specialises at playing those mega-annoying characters who later realise and regret their misgivings. Many years later he'd play a similar part in the beautiful romance Veer-Zaara. The other female players, on the other hand, specifically those forming the avenging sisterhood, including Aruna Irani and Rama Vij, are all quite good. The ending sequence is one I didn't even imagine would not be there - it just goes without saying that a film of this sort would end up giving the heroine a larger-than-life monologue which would recap the entire story and all the injustice in one short speech full of pathos. I didn't like it, but I liked Kapadia. Zakhmi Aurat is obviously her film all the way, and while it isn't a good film in and of itself, it is quite watchable. Needless to say, there is one primary reason which enhances its watchability and it is Kapadia herself. She makes much of it forgivable.
