Accuse me of writing off
Kangana Ranaut as an average actor, whose films are most suited to occupy the
slots in the year when star studded or intellectual cinema does not make an
appearance in Bollywood. Not to mention, a sneak or two of a controversy that
she manages to rake in the magazines constantly chasing her to cover a section
of news which appears to particularly weird sections of the film fans. It is
this image of petulant occupier in the medium budget film space (usually
deserted by creative, socially conscious or meaningful scripts) that works to
the advantage of Kangana as well as the film - Queen.
In the opening thirty
minutes, you know not much to expect of the Rajouri Delhi girl who has spun her
life around the wedding expectations which leaves her in a lurch immediately
after the audience has settled down in their seats. You expect some sulking,
drinking and driving with a song or two on a bike with her hair against the
wind on the urbane streets, which is so expected of Kangana trademark. This coupled
with some heavy moments in the dark locations, without much dialogue that
reinforce her vulnerabilities and creates gloom associated with typical
fall-outs of relationships calls for a mediocre bollywood script.
Instead, the cynical
audience (in me) is disappointed by Rani taking up a mindless exploration
immediately after a sulk or two. This, she terms as her “honeymoon” for which
she has been diligently planning. The single honeymoon exploration to Amsterdam
via Paris which she undertakes is slightly different than one usually
attributed to scripts taking to outdoor locations. While she does that, the
logical brain is totally cut off giving way to discovering new places and
people, without being judgmental of them. In between are the moments, where she
conveys her self-proclaimed theory of a single Rajouri girl, delivered with
great poise, confidence and true to her beliefs. A streak or two of moments
interspersed in the plot, where she takes her lonely pursuits that help her
regain her confidence bit by bit.
This swift transition, builds
towards the climax, where one is almost convinced of her deciding not to return
back to the marriage and give back a solid refute. But, Rani seems to be in no
hurry. She does it in her own stride. Gloom, disappointment is eventually shed off
by her and she cannot be more grateful, that this actually happened to her.
So, what changed in the
trip between India-Paris-Amsterdam is actually my belief that intellectual
cinema is a craft attributed only to nuanced actors and a seasoned script? “Queen”
is one of the rare scripts set in urban settings - unique in the sense that it
raises an issue that attributes over importance to “tying the knot” ritual in
urban India that unknowingly renders undue pressure on the women and makes them
design their ideas of perfect lives around it.
The reason that Kangana has
been able to do complete justice to the role of Rani, is probably due to label
of mediocrity that she has been associated with. I doubt, this kind of an
impact could have been rendered by her contemporaries like Kareena, Vidya Balan
or for that matter Deepika Padukone, usually pigeonholed in strength,
equality and revenge. Kangana’s underdog label brings an element of unknown
surprise that completely dazes off the audience who has come to expect
unmindful drinking and biking from the actor.
The colourful
mosaic of Queen’s unapologetic appeal during the 146 minutes is held together
by two sets of distinct and often contradictory beliefs - the beliefs that she
gathered while growing up in the bounds of Rajouri (Delhi) and what she
encounters on her single honeymoon venture. While doing so, Rani echoes the
inherent contradictions of urban Indian women who attempt too hard to fit in to
either stereotype.
