If, like the story, each framing was arranged with an aesthetically rational reasoning and theoretically connected with the issues being portrayed, the visual aesthetics would have been able to balance the suspense it wished to create, rather than being so predictable.Symbolically, the director tries to thread pregnant Hasu, productive river Haldaa and mother hilsa along the same line as they all are victimised by Nader, a representative of industrialisation. This parallelism is captured well in their names as all three start with an “h”. However, in terms of visual storytelling, the thread seems loosely attached and here visual presentation loses its convincing connection. Nevertheless, in the end, Hasu frees herself, along with the Haldaa, from the clutches of patriarchy and profit-mongers by killing Nader with the strike of a “zamindari knife.” Yet, a few incidents might seem quite contrary to Hasu’s rebellious attitude. For instance, she agrees to save her family and pay off their debt by accepting a large amount of dowry money (den mohor) from Nader before getting married. Secondly, as a wise character, how can she decide to elope with Badi knowing that Nader’s people, sooner or later, will hunt them down? Probably, such an unwise decision was deliberately scripted for Nader to take his revenge by burning Badi alive as Nader is certain that Badi is the father of the child in Hasu’s womb. As for the screenplay, it is not tightly crafted either. However, some of the visuals are well-knitted through the lens. For instance, viewers learn about the “dream-hut” of Hasu and Badi, and within seconds, an existential crisis shatters the hut with the timing of her consent to marry Nader. On seeing her father becoming ill due to an economic crisis, Hasu swiftly changes her mind. Despite having a good concept, story and characterisation, the cinematography makes the film lose its cinematic look. Done by Enamul Haque Sohel, the cinematography in most of the sequences cannot strike a chord with us. It lacks detailing since the shot-division seemed to be poorly planned, which caused the visual aestheticism in the film to fall. If, like the story, each framing was arranged with an aesthetically rational reasoning and theoretically connected with the issues being portrayed, the visual aesthetics would have been able to balance the suspense it wished to create, rather than being so predictable. However, editing and colour grading, done by Amit Debnath, are well-balanced, keeping pace with the tone of the film: Nature ruined by human greed backed up by industrialisation. Even the music, directed by Pintu Ghosh, is connected to the mood. The most aesthetically as well as theoretically enriched scene in this film is the before-the-death dialogue of Surat Banu. This is the first time she shares her name with Hasu. A markedly feminist consciousness rises up in their conversation: Women are hardly called by their names once they become mothers. Nature exists as a force which has an impact on human evolution. So, through the lens, this film attempts to speak about how human culture is connected to the physical world. Just wishing that Tauquir makes the attempt to be spontaneously convincing, rather than seemingly forcible, in his future cinematic presentation! Viva La Arts, Viva La Films!
Ahmed Tahsin Shams is Lecturer, Department of English Language and Literature, Notre Dame University Bangladesh; and Associate Member, Directors’ Guild Association, Bangladesh Film Development Corporation (BFDC); as well as Director, Avant-garde Productions.
