I watched Article 15 several weeks ago in the cinema and for hours after the ending credits rolled, I was speechless and in intense thought. It’s been a while since a Bollywood film urged me to be contemplative and I was completely taken aback (in a really good way) by the experience. Apart from a few imperfections, there are so many good things about this film that set it apart from other “socially-relevant” dramas which deserve to be further dissected and discussed.

 

Article 15 is a film that deals with the issue of casteism in Indian society through the eyes of police officer Ayan Ranjan who, along with a team of other officers, is trying to bring resolution to a rape and murder case in a small North Indian village. Now, although the social message is a central motivator of plot and character development, this film avoids most of the pitfalls expressed by other commercially successful films dealing with social problems. 

 

Often times, films seeking to showcase issues such as gender inequality, corruption, and cracks in the judicial and educational systems unfortunately end up becoming ‘typical’ Bollywood films with silly action scenes, nonessential song and dance sequences, and a completely unrealistic black-and-white staging of the issues. Many times, the entire film sounds like a rant and is quite condescending towards audiences. Rather than presenting the beautiful and complex tapestry that is India, these films resort to caricaturing a ‘good guy’ and ‘bad guy’ and then proceeding to scold the audience for two and a half hours for being responsible for these societal problems. To make it worse, upon release these films are praised for being ‘risk-taking’ and actors are buried with compliments for their ‘strong’ performances while screenwriters, sound designers, cinematographers, lighting designers, and directors are left unmentioned. One of the first things that struck me about Article 15 was the conscious effort made to exclude the theatrics of ‘typical’ Bollywood cinema and instead focus on telling a complex story where answers aren’t easy.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

 

This film uses its characters as a means for ideological debate and motivates audiences to consider the definition of activism. One prime example is the character interaction between Ayan and his girlfriend Aditi. Ayan is a police officer who is unsure of his purpose and is abruptly dropped into a rural setting completely removed from the urban life he is used to. On the other hand, Aditi is a strong-headed gender-rights activist in urban India. When they initially discuss the case, they both agree on how ‘backwards’ these villages are in terms of caste discrimination. But as Ayan is increasingly immersed in the harsh, daily realities of rural life, Aditi’s socially-progressive comments seem to be more and more patronizing and self-important than actually helpful or motivating. This prompts the audience to ask questions like what it means to be a hero, what it means to ‘make a difference’, and how ‘development’ is different for different contexts. This clever use of characters and dialogue allows for the establishment of ideological gradations that engage audiences in difficult conversations.

 

Another aspect that I loved in this film was the thoughtful use of cinematography. In contrast to many other Bollywood films, which use dialogue as the primary vehicle for plot progression, Article 15 actually engages the camera to be an active part of the storytelling process by setting the atmosphere and introducing some recurrent motifs. The lighting sets a dark, dim, dingy setting that very much reflects the gritty realities presented in the film. Moreover, screentime is consciously devoted to shots of dew and rain as well as fog, thus establishing important motifs related to purity/cleansing as well as obscurity and suspense (respectively). This cerebral use of the camera as a tool not only for capturing action but being a contributor to it was very refreshing and added a much needed depth to dialogue. 

 

Article 15 is also very conservative with its use of comedy; avoiding farce and employing smart humour in very selective scenes where the comedy heightens rather than detracts from the main message. There are two scenes that immediately come to mind, the first of which takes place when Officer Ranjan asks whether he is the same caste as a local politician. As he begins asking questions and figures out the nonsensical complexity in the divisions of caste, his frustration is a source of comedy that highlights the fallacy in caste systems. The second scene that comes to mind is the last scene of the film, where Officer Ranjan, after solving the case with his team, sits down to a fresh meal and mid-meal, and asks the cook her caste. Her answer is blocked from the audience’s knowledge by a strategically placed car horn but on screen, instead of causing conflict in the caste-minded police team, it causes them to burst out in laughter, thus expressing how casteism has ceased to be of importance in this group. This tasteful use of comedy as a means for reinstating the purpose of the film allows the audience to laugh not for entertainment but for a greater purpose.

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

​

 

That being said, there are still some aspects of Article 15 that I take issue to, the first of which is the scene of Ayan preaching to CBI officer and make-shift antagonist Panikar. There were several dialogues in that scene which were gut-punches but as a whole, I didn’t feel the scene was necessary. It was too heavy-handed for my taste and hammered a message which, for the rest of the film, was so beautifully delivered. It also attributed a sense of invincibility to Ayan’s character as the epitome of heroism and morality, which undid a lot of the complexities that the previous screen time had put together so thoughtfully. I also noticed an overuse of music to build suspense and an overuse of static shots without much experimentation in blocking, which made some scenes overly repetitive. Moreover, there were way too many shots of moving cars and vehicles. I wasn’t sure what their purpose was and I don’t believe that they added any value to the plot. It was kind of random, actually. 

 

As a whole, however, Article 15 delivers a strong and sensitively crafted message which doesn’t shy away from using the camera itself to add complex nuances to characters and plot. It is a prime example of how effectively paired technical and artistic elements can create thought-provoking realization and much-needed conversation.