It’s a good-looking film but as they say, beauty doesn’t last forever, background score that keeps you awake at times when there’s a lot of nonsensical chaos happening on screen & every performance is good in parts.
Set in 1795, Thugs Of Hindostan is the story revolving around revenge of a daughter for British had killed her father. Zafira (Fatima Sana Shaikh) – the daughter is a master-archer trained under Khudabaksh aka Azad (Amitabh Bachchan) and 11 years later, somehow they intersect their path with Firangi Mallah (Aamir Khan). As Aamir himself said recently, Firangi is someone you adore but can’t be friends with him.
His jade colour coat is an indication that he’s a chameleon & you can’t tell when he’s lying. He gets hired by the Britishers’ head John Clive (Lloyd Owen) to capture Azad and his army of rebellions. Firangi demands a hefty amount of money and the release of his friend Chawani Prasad (Mohammed Zeeshan Ayyub). From now it’s all about the chameleon-like trait of Aamir and whether or not is he on the side of British.
This movie had every ingredient of being a blockbuster apart from a good story. ‘Baap ki maut ka badla’ is so 90s but revenge thrillers could of this scale work well if written well. There’s a scene in which Aamir Khan’s Firangi says, “We should always expect to get backstabbed and that’s the hint of how they already had planned to fool us.
After Dhoom 3, Vijay Krishna Acharya does something similar – visually brilliant but technically a sinking ship. The whole Firangi being a backstabber is so overdone that after a point of time you know he’s not as bad as the makers are trying to show. Cinematic liberties are taken as grandly as its budget and it just gets annoying with every scene. An Eagle is used as a metaphor for Khudabaksh’s bravery and Aamir starts talking to him; it doesn’t stop here, the Eagle, in the end, delivers a locket to Amitabh. These weren’t spoilers, these were just hints why you can skip this movie.