‘Stolen' review: No good deed goes unpunished in this bleak, impressive thriller
Lynching is thought to have originated as a term sometime in the 1700s. The word conjures up an evil of the past, barbaric and unthinkable in a modern civilised society. It is, therefore, especially alarming that the term, and practice, has seen a resurgence in India over the past decade or so. This is tied to a related problem, the proliferation of fake news, willful and otherwise, through WhatsApp and other media. Just search for 'lynch mob' and 'WhatsApp'—most of the results are cases from India.
Only a handful of Hindi films have addressed the modern face of lynching. In Mukkabaaz (2018) and Afwaah (2023), vigilante groups attack a Dalit and a Muslim character respectively, who are badly injured but survive. No film has replicated the chilling aesthetic of lynching videos: self-shot on phones, victims begging for their lives, attackers addressing the camera. Dibakar Banerjee came closest with the shocking murder in the first segment of Love Sex Aur Dhokha (2010), a film where all the action is mediated via screens of different kinds.
Stolen doesn't imitate these videos, but it comes close to capturing their dread. In the opening scene of Karan Tejpal's film, a baby is stolen from its sleeping mother's side by an unseen figure on a railway platform. A few minutes later, we're told the film is inspired by 'real events'. In an interview to Scroll, Karan Tejpal said the inspiration was a lynching in Assam in 2018, where two people were killed by a mob on suspicion being child traffickers. This wasn't the only such incident around that time; there was a spate of lynchings in Jharkhand in 2017, when rumours spread on WhatsApp about child abductors resulted in the death of five people.
Gautam (Abhishek Banerjee) has come to pick up his younger brother, Raman (Shubham Vardan), from the railway station. He finds his sibling surrounded by a small, agitated group. Jhumpa (Mia Maelzer), a tribal woman, is accusing Raman, who'd picked up the abducted infant's cap, of stealing her baby. Two cops arrive and gruffly ask questions. Raman clearly isn't the abductor, but the young man is moved by the woman's frantic appeals. He pushes the policemen to do their job; the righteous indignation in his voice tells us he's in trouble before even he knows it. Sure enough, the brothers are forced to tag along on their investigation in the dead of night.
Unlike his brother, Gautam has no illusions. 'Bahut galat phase hain yaar (we're in real trouble),' he tells Raman. He immediately realises it's a situation they need to extricate themselves from, and tries to smooth-talk, then bribe the cops. If Raman is a bleeding heart liberal, Gautam stands for the practical, risk-averse upper-class Indian (he's introduced talking on the phone about afterparties). He shows no empathy for Jhumpa, not because he doesn't recognise her predicament but because she's of a class and caste whose problems he's either isolated from or can be made to vanish easily (when she asks for help, he offers her money).
Stolen has the same basic trajectory as NH10 (2015), a momentary loss of reason that plunges an urban couple into a hinterland nightmare. But where that film had a clear, sadistic villain, Tejpal, working with writers Gaurav Dhingra, Swapnil Salkar and Vardhan, doesn't offer this neat a contrast. The antagonists are either shadowy figures or faceless mobs. No one's what they seem: one of the cops, Panditji (a wonderful Harish Khanna), reveals himself by degrees to be a man of conscience as well. Jhumpa's story keeps mutating—I won't reveal more except to say the way some of the revelations are deployed reminded me of the brilliant Sonchiriya (2019), the only Hindi film in recent times that can match this one for utter bleakness.
The most interesting journey, though, is Gautam's, who proves more resourceful under pressure than one might think. The way his self-centredness evolves into a surge of human feeling doesn't feel contrived. This is in large part because of Banerjee's deftness. He's become, in short order, one of the most arresting performers in Hindi film. From the start, it's been difficult to pigeonhole him. His twin breakthroughs were as the slapstick Jana in Stree (2018) and the scary Langda Tyagi in the first season of Paatal Lok (2020). Last year, he reprised his role in Stree 2, and was also excellent as the smooth-talking, casteist politician who John Abraham goes up against in Vedaa (his gallery of villains also includes the grotesque child rapist in the 2017 indie Ajji). Stolen, for the first time, offers him a chance to do everything. He's caustically funny scolding his brother and Jhumpa, adrenaline-filled and panicked when they're being pursued (a handful of searing chases go a long way to enlivening the film's visual sameness), and stoically determined at the end, when he's been through too much to stand aside.
Karan Tejpal's film premiered at the Venice Film Festival in 2023. The long wait for an India release must have been fraught—especially with Santosh (2024), another stark film about the tenuous hold of law and order in small towns, not making it past the censors this year. But Stolen is now streaming on Amazon Prime, having bypassed theatres. It's the kind of film that makes you feel some hope for Hindi cinema and none for the country.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mint
44 minutes ago
- Mint
Kuberaa Box Office Collection Day 2: Dhanush's film sees slight jump in earnings, mints THIS amount on Saturday
Kuberaa Box Office Collection Day 2: Nagarjuna Akkineni, Dhanush and Rashmika Mandanna-starrer, Kuberaa, hit the silver screen on Friday this week and scored a double digit figure at the box office right on the opening day. Kuberaa Box Office Collection Day 2 According to industry tracker Sacnilk, Kuberaa made a business of ₹10.92 crore on Saturday, June 21. Also Read | Kuberaa pre-release event postponed after Ahmedabad plane crash The film saw a 60.36% Telugu occupancy on Saturday, while overall 31.25% Tamil occupancy. Kuberaa had an overall 7.85% Hindi Occupancy on Saturday. District-wise, Kuberaa's maximum occupancy was reported in Chennai (48%), followed by Dindigul (43%), Mumbai (41.67%), Trichy (40.33%) and Vellore (34%) for the Tamil version. For the Telugu version, the maximum occupancy was reported in NCR (78.50%), followed by Mahbubnagar (77%), Mumbai (76.33%), Chennai (74%), and Hyderabad (71.67%). Kuberaa Worldwide Collection Day 2 As per Sacnilk, Kuberaa collected an overall ₹27.5 crore worldwide till Friday, which includes ₹14.75 crore (India net) and ₹10.15 crore from overseas. The film earned ₹10 crore in Telugu, ₹4.5 in Tamil, ₹2 lakh in Kannada, and ₹23 lakh in Hindi. Kuberaa cast: This film is directed by Sekhar Kammula and produced by Sree Venkateswara Cinemas and Amigos Creations. Kuberaa stars Nagarjuna Akkineni, Dhanush, Rashmika Mandanna, Jim Sarbh, and Dalip Tahil in key roles. Celebs review Kuberaa "Wishing the entire team all the very best for the release tomorrow Everything that has come out so far is very intriguing and promising. I have a SUPERHIT film feeling," filmmaker Sandeep Reddy Vanga predicted the film's fate at the box office. Mahesh Babu shared best wishes for Kuberaa in advance on social media. He shared, '#Kuberaa looks promising with everything that has come out so far….. Wishing the entire team all the very best for the release tomorrow.' Taking to X, formerly Twitter, Sai Pallavi lauded the entire film team with special mentions in her post. She wrote, '#Kuberaa is going to be special for many reasons! @dhanushkraja sir's masterclass in acting & art of picking challenging characters that only he can pull off so effortlessly. @iamnagarjuna sir, It's going to be a treat to watch you in a killer character under Sekhar garu's direction. Dear @iamRashmika, we all know how powerful & one of a kind Sekhar Garu writes his women. This is going to be a memorable character and a grand success in your streak of blockbusters. Rockstar @ThisIsDSP Garu, this will be another feather in your hat for sure.'
India Today
an hour ago
- India Today
Did you know Salman Khan's Tere Naam look was inspired by APJ Abdul Kalam?
Years after its release, actor Salman Khan made a rather interesting revelation about his much-talked-about hairstyle in the hit film 'Tere Naam'. During his appearance on the debut episode of 'The Great Indian Kapil Sharma Show Season 3', he shared that he took inspiration from India's former President Dr APJ Abdul a conversation with host Kapil Sharma, Salman said, "Ye 'Tere Naam' ka jo look hai, woh actually inspired tha Abdul Kalam saab se. (My hairstyle in 'Tere Naam' was inspired by Abdul Kalam Sir)." He also pointed out that actor Rahul Roy had a similar hairstyle in the the 59-year-old shared that he imagined a small-town hero would have long hair, as many yesteryear actors did. "I thought that small-town heroes always had long hair. All the old-school heroes had it too - that's where the inspiration came from," Khan added. Salman Khan's performance in 'Tere Naam' is still considered one of his finest. Directed by Satish Kaushik, the film is a remake of the 1999 Tamil hit 'Sethu', which starred Vikram.'Tere Naam' also marked Bhumika Chawla's debut in Hindi cinema. While the film saw moderate success at the box office, it drew criticism for the way Radhe's treatment of Nirjala (played by Bhumika Chawla) was the trailer of the episode here: 'The Great Indian Kapil Show Season 3', set to premiere on Netflix on June 21, once again promises a fresh dose of show, hosted by Kapil Sharma, also features Sunil Grover, Archana Puran Singh, Krushna Abhishek, and Kiku Sharda. The season will mark the return of former cricketer Navjot Singh Watch
Scroll.in
an hour ago
- Scroll.in
The paradox of English: It is both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language
Alongside their offensive against Urdu, India's language nationalists appear to have turned their ire on English. That is what one could conclude from the declaration by Union Home Minister Amit Shah at a book launch in New Delhi on Thursday, when he predicted that 'soon a time would come when those speaking English will feel ashamed'. 'In our lifetime, we will see a society in which those speaking English will feel ashamed, that day is not far,' he said. 'I believe that the languages of our country are the ornament of our culture. Without them, we would not have been Bharatiya. Our country, its history, its culture, our dharma – if these have to be understood, it cannot be done in foreign languages.' Shah's statement quickly sparked a political backlash. Leader of the Opposition in the Lok Sabha, Rahul Gandhi, countered forcefully: 'English is not a dam, it is a bridge. English is not shameful, it is empowering. English is not a chain – it is a tool to break the chains.' Other opposition figures, including Trinamool Congress leaders Derek O'Brien and Sagarika Ghose, echoed this sentiment, slamming the home minister for what they saw as a regressive and divisive stance. Echoes of Mulayam Singh Shah's remarks recall a moment 35 years ago when Mulayam Singh Yadav, who was then chief minister of Uttar Pradesh, launched his own crusade against English. In May 1990, Yadav infamously declared English to be 'the language of foreigners and the elite', blaming it for perpetuating socio-economic disparity and cultivating feelings of inferiority among non-English speakers. His one-point mission: Angrezi hatao. Banish English. In a curious twist, Yadav, a self-declared supporter of Urdu urged Urdu-speaking communities to unite with Hindi speakers to oppose English. Urdu, having only recently been granted official status as Uttar Pradesh's second language, was now being weaponised against a new linguistic rival. This contradiction is not out of character for Indian politics, where language often becomes a proxy for identity, power and culture. The disdain for English in some Indian political circles can be traced back to the 1950s and '60s, to socialist leader Ram Manohar Lohia and even earlier, to Mohandas Gandhi and the Indian National Congress. Gandhi viewed English as an alien imposition that had displaced indigenous languages from their rightful place in Indian society. At Independence, the Indian Constitution made Hindi the official language, but allowed English to continue for a transitional period of 15 years. This compromise was pragmatic, not sentimental. English was seen as a necessary link language in a culturally and linguistically diverse nation. However, the efforts to impose Hindi on South India in the 1960s sparked widespread resistance and deepened the North-South linguistic divide. Even today, English continues to be viewed by many as a colonial vestige, despite its extensive indigenisation. The Lohia doctrine Lohia considered English to be not just a colonial leftover, but a barrier to original thought and mass education. He argued that true educational reform and people-oriented governance were possible only if conducted in the people's languages. Recognising India's cultural diversity, Lohia made exceptions for South Indian states, allowing them to retain English for inter-state and central communication for 50 years. However, his nuanced vision was distorted by his followers. The anti-English frenzy gained renewed vigour in Uttar Pradesh and Bihar, leading to draconian steps like removing English from school curricula altogether. In Bihar in the 1970s, Chief Minister Karpoori Thakur reduced English to an optional subject, resulting in a generation of students branded as the 'Karpoori class' – matriculates without English proficiency. Mulayam Singh Yadav resurrected the campaign in the 1990s, giving it a political legitimacy that had long-lasting social consequences. Misplaced stereotypes Yadav's campaign also triggered unwarranted attacks on Christian institutions, which were accused of using English as a tool for religious conversion and elitist education. This conflation of English with Christianity mirrors the equally irrational equation in the Hindi heartland of Urdu with Islam. Such logic ignores the complex realities of Indian linguistic identity. English may have arrived with colonial Christians, but it soon became a key vehicle for political awakening and nation-building. It was through English that India's founding leaders – from Raja Rammohun Roy to Nehru – engaged with global currents of nationalism, democracy, liberty and modernity. The same language, intended by the British to produce obedient clerks, ended up producing freedom fighters, thinkers and reformers who led India's struggle for independence. More Indian than foreign? Despite its origins, English in India has long shed its colonial skin. It is the medium of scientific advancement, legal systems, administrative governance and higher education. It has played a vital role in the country's post-Independence progress – particularly in the globalisation era. Ironically, many politicians who publicly denounce English still prefer to send their children to English-medium schools. Even in the Hindi heartland, English remains a key administrative language. Today, English enjoys a paradoxical status: both a foreign tongue and a deeply embedded Indian language. English is also the mother tongue of the Anglo Indian community, a recognised minority in India, and serves as an official language in states like Nagaland. As globalisation continues to shape India's economic and cultural landscape, English remains the country's primary interface with the world. To treat it as a threat to Indian identity is to ignore the multifaceted reality of modern India. Language should be a medium of unity, not a tool of discord. English, like all Indian languages, must be valued for its integrative potential, not vilified for its past. The country does not need another round of linguistic chauvinism. Instead, India should recognise the multilingual richness of English – and the maturity to embrace it.
