Ek Ruka Hua Faisla (1986 TV Movie)
5/10
What a sham!
31 October 2016
Warning: Spoilers
I have some grave problems with this remake of the classic- "12 Angry Men".

1. Overacting from all quarters. The original had subtle performances from each of the actors acting as jurors. But this movie had excessive had movements, tongue lapping, advancing toward one another to hit, giggles and laughs on cringeworthy jokes, and so on.

2. Departure from logic. In the original, the fact that only one of the jurors was bespectacled turned out to be a pivotal point since he was able to testify that the marks on the nose could only be a product of being bespectacled. Since he was on the guilty 'side' earlier, it proved to be a damning indication to the fact that the evidence against the defendant was lacking in substance. But in this movie, half the jury is bespectacled- which is fine. Fine if they had just omitted one bespectacled juror asking another one if people who have specs sleep with their specs on! Dude- you should know yourself- you have specs too!

3. Jury system in India. Since time immemorial, we have had the judge ruling concept; not the jury decision concept. Factually inaccurate. Copying just for the sake of copying with no customization!
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed