A R E S

#RAMAYANA | #CinemaWithParth | RECOMMENDED in CINEMAS from my side. Please try to watch at Biggest Screen possible and try to watch in 4K 2D for best experience. For me, Nitesh Tiwari's Ramayana works as a very good one-time theatrical watch. It has several things going for it, particularly Yash's phenomenal performance, the scale of the production, some brilliantly executed action sequences and a few genuinely spectacular visual moments. However, it also has shortcomings that prevent it from becoming the extraordinary cinematic experience it could have been. I walked out appreciating the ambition and effort behind the film, but also thinking about how much more it could have achieved with better writing, more consistent visual execution and stronger emotional depth. 1. ACTING Yash is phenomenal as Ravana. He absolutely owns every single frame he appears in. His screen presence, body language, expressions and ability to bring different shades to the character make him the biggest highlight of the film for me. What I particularly liked was his ability to express anger, arrogance, emotions and the required depth for a layered character like Ravana. He doesn't simply play him as an angry king or a larger-than-life villain. There are moments when you can see the different emotions working together, and Yash looks completely in the zone. His performance during the Jatayu sequence and Sita's abduction is particularly impressive. The CGI in several of his scenes also complements his screen presence beautifully. I do have reservations about Sharad Kelkar's dubbing, though. His voice immediately reminded me of Baahubali, and while he does a good job, I genuinely feel Yash using his own voice could have brought an additional dimension to the character. Ranbir Kapoor is a mixed bag for me as Shri Ram. I consider him one of the finest actors when it comes to characters in films like Tamasha, Wake Up Sid and Ae Dil Hai Mushkil, but I am not entirely convinced by his portrayal of Ram. His head movements during dialogue delivery become distracting at times, and he doesn't always manage to make me believe that I am watching Shri Ram. Having said that, there are some scenes, particularly after Vanvas, where he looks considerably better and brings the calmness and composure required for the character. Sai Pallavi, unfortunately, is largely ineffective as Sita. There are a few moments where she performs well, particularly during the sequence involving Surpanakha comes in Sita's appearance, but overall, I couldn't establish the connection I expected. Ravi Dubey as Lakshman and the supporting cast do an amazing job, but I would have liked the film to give its characters more time and space to develop. He got less screen time and in that less screen time, he was most impactful actor in the film. 2. CINEMATOGRAPHY The film has some genuinely beautiful frames, and I particularly liked the way several action sequences have been filmed. The scale of the compositions, the sweeping landscapes and the way the camera captures the enormous environments make certain moments worth experiencing on the big screen. The film clearly wants to create a world that feels larger than life, and there are instances where the cinematography achieves exactly that. However, I did notice an inconsistency in image sharpness. In several ultra-wide shots, the image appears noticeably soft, almost giving me the impression that I am watching something rendered in 2K rather than proper 4K. Interestingly, the close-up shots look considerably sharper and have the kind of detail I expect from a 4K presentation. This difference becomes particularly noticeable when the film moves between wide establishing shots and close-ups. My biggest technical complaint, however, is the lighting. I found the lighting inconsistent throughout the film, with characters often receiving almost the same facial illumination irrespective of their surroundings. The light doesn't always appear to have a convincing source within the environment. For example, during the Vanvas sequence, the horses receive backlighting in certain shots, but when the same scene moves to a bird's-eye view, that lighting on their backs is noticeably missing. Similarly, during the temple sequence involving Ram and Sita, when Sita brings the illuminated puja thali closer to her face, the lighting on her face remains practically unchanged despite the proximity of the diyas. I also noticed this during the Jatayu sequence, where the surrounding fire doesn't seem to create the expected changes in light on Ram's face. These might appear like small details, but they matter considerably in a film that relies so heavily on visual realism. I genuinely expected better attention to lighting continuity. 3. SOUND DESIGN & MUSIC The music is one of the biggest disappointments for me. When you have AR Rahman and Hans Zimmer coming together for a project of this scale, expectations are naturally enormous. Unfortunately, the overall musical experience doesn't quite deliver. I couldn't find a consistent musical identity that stays with me throughout the film, and the songs don't have the impact I was hoping for. There isn't a track that immediately makes me want to revisit it after leaving the theatre. I expected the music to become one of the film's defining strengths, but that doesn't happen. Having said that, I wouldn't dismiss the background score entirely. There are certain sequences where the BGM is genuinely excellent and elevates the experience considerably. In fact, there are moments when the background score is so effective that it almost makes you forget the shortcomings in the music elsewhere. I particularly appreciate the way the score supports the scale and intensity of certain scenes. The soundscape serves the larger cinematic experience, but I wanted the musical contribution to be much more memorable and consistent. This is one department where the film had enormous potential but didn't fully deliver for me. 4. STORY & DIRECTION Nitesh Tiwari deserves appreciation for attempting a project of this scale and taking on the responsibility of bringing the Ramayana to the big screen. This isn't an ordinary filmmaking exercise. It requires enormous planning, coordination and an understanding of how to present a story that generations of Indians have grown up listening to. I appreciate the ambition and the effort that has gone into creating this world. The action sequences are particularly well handled, and there are several moments when the direction allows the scale of the film to speak for itself. However, I feel the storytelling could have been considerably stronger. The narration moves from one event to another without always giving the characters enough time to establish themselves. The film often feels like a continuous change of shots and locations without sufficient narrative backdrop. It almost assumes that everyone watching already knows the Ramayana and its characters, overlooking the importance of developing their relationships and emotional journeys on screen. I also felt that the Vidyut Jiva sequence was unnecessary in the way it was presented. Ravana's conflict with him could have been communicated through a brief dialogue or a verbal reference rather than spending valuable screen time on an elaborate sequence. There were opportunities to use that time to develop other characters and give more weight to important events. The film also struggles with the balance between its different narrative threads. I appreciate the decision to explore Ravana's world, but the story needed more room for Ram, Sita and the other characters as well. The Vanvas sequence, in particular, deserved much more attention. The film has several impressive individual moments, but they don't always come together as a satisfying emotional journey. For me, direction is not about how much you put on screen; it is also about knowing when to pause, when to let a moment breathe and when to allow the audience to feel something. 5. PRODUCTION DESIGN This is one department where I have very little to complain about. The scale of the film is genuinely huge, and the production design is impressive. The depiction of Lanka is particularly good, and I liked the architecture, costumes, environments and the overall detailing that has gone into creating these different worlds. You can see the effort behind the visual presentation, and the film rarely feels small in its ambition. The costumes also complement the characters and their respective worlds quite well. What I particularly appreciate is that the makers have attempted to create an entire cinematic universe rather than simply placing actors in elaborate sets and calling it a mythological epic. There is a clear attempt to give each environment its own identity. The production design, combined with the scale of the action and the visual effects, gives the film several moments that genuinely deserve to be experienced on the big screen. Full credit to the producers and the entire team for backing something this ambitious. 6. VFX & CGI The VFX is a mixed experience for me. There are some sequences where the CGI is absolutely spectacular, and you genuinely appreciate the amount of work that has gone into creating them. Ravana's origin, the opening battle and several of his sequences are particularly impressive. The Jatayu sequence also stands out for its scale and visual achievement. There are moments when the creatures, environments and overall imagery look extraordinary, and you can see the potential of what the team has achieved. However, the quality is far from consistent. Some CGI shots look exceptional, while others look like something straight out of a video game. There are moments when you actually question whether you are watching the same film. Certain creatures and monsters also appear rather from a game, which takes away from the visual realism that the film is trying to establish. I don't want to dismiss the overall effort because there is some genuinely outstanding work here. But when a film sets such high expectations for its visual effects, consistency becomes extremely important. You cannot have one sequence looking world-class and another looking noticeably inferior. The difference becomes even more apparent when the film moves between its strongest CGI shots and weaker visual compositions. I also feel the visual presentation could have been more refined in certain wide shots. Ultimately, I appreciate the ambition and the work that has gone into the CGI, but I expected a more consistent result across the entire film. 7. 3D EXPERIENCE The earlier trailers showcased some phenomenal 3D, and I genuinely expected the theatrical experience to be on another level, almost comparable to what we associate with Avatar. Unfortunately, the final film doesn't deliver on that promise. The depth and parallax effects are fairly average, and there are several shots where the character separation doesn't look convincing. At times, the characters lack visual depth and appear artificially placed within the frame rather than naturally integrated into the three-dimensional environment. I also noticed issues with depth in certain shots, which makes the overall experience less immersive than it should have been. For a film of this scale, I expected considerably more attention to the 3D presentation. It isn't particularly bad, but it certainly isn't the experience the trailers had led me to expect. I wouldn't specifically recommend watching the film in 3D, nor would I tell audiences to avoid it altogether. For me, it is an average conversion. 8. AREAS FOR IMPROVEMENT The biggest area where the film needed improvement was its screenplay and emotional development. The narration is slow, yet important moments and character relationships are rushed. This might sound contradictory, but that is exactly how I experienced the film. It spends time moving between events and establishing different subplots, but doesn't always give the audience enough time to understand or feel the significance of those events. Most of the characters don't get enough time to make us feel anything for them. Before you can establish an emotional connection, the film moves on to another scene, another location or another event. The Vanvas sequence deserved considerably more screen time, and the relationship between Ram and Sita needed more emotional depth. The same applies to several supporting characters. The film also needed a better balance between Ravana's story and Ram's journey. I appreciate the attempt to give Ravana a layered character arc, but certain portions could have been shortened to allow the central emotional journey to develop properly. Even the Sita Haran sequence could have carried much greater emotional weight. For an epic like the Ramayana, spectacle alone cannot replace the emotional and spiritual connection that makes the story so special. There are also inconsistencies in characterisation that I would have liked the makers to address. Initially, Sita is shown lifting Shiv Dhanush with a single hand, establishing her strength and warrior-like abilities. However, later during the encounter with Khara and Dushana, she struggles and doesn't demonstrate the same strength or willingness to fight back. If the intention was to present her as a warrior, that characterisation needed to remain consistent. Similarly, it was Meghnad who defeated Indra, not Ravana, as depicted in the film. I would consider the latter a creative liberty, but it is something I noticed. Finally, the inconsistent lighting, uneven CGI quality, soft-looking ultra-wide shots and disappointing 3D conversion are technical areas that could have received considerably more attention. These issues don't completely ruin the experience, but they do prevent the film from achieving the visual consistency expected from a project of this scale. FINAL VERDICT Overall, Ramayana works for me as a very good one-time theatrical watch. I genuinely appreciate what the makers have attempted, and there is enough in the film to make the big-screen experience worthwhile. Yash is phenomenal, the action sequences are brilliantly executed, the production design is impressive and certain CGI moments are genuinely spectacular. However, the screenplay, inconsistent visual execution, music and lack of emotional connection prevent the film from reaching its full potential. I walked into the theatre hoping to experience not just a grand cinematic spectacle but also the emotional and spiritual depth of the Ramayana. While the film succeeds in delivering several moments of visual grandeur, it doesn't consistently make me feel connected to the characters. And that is where I feel it loses an opportunity. Nevertheless, I would recommend watching it in theatres. There are enough positives to appreciate, and I genuinely hope the film succeeds commercially. Projects of this scale need the support of audiences, and I would love to see the makers return with an even stronger second part. Rating: ⭐⭐⭐🌟 3.5/5 ( I do not rate spritual or religious movies, but since it does not have that divinity hence I am rating it)