Navneet Prasad

Watched it, rewatched the ending 4-5 times, and then watched the whole film in full again! We are probably so used to seeing formulaic good/bad/black/white characters portrayed on screen, that even while watching such a wonderful piece of art, we automatically take sides: demonise some characters, and root for some others—all based on our own biases and interpretations. I initially did so too. The filmmaker has stated on record that the ending is open to the audience’s interpretation; and in my view, so is the morality of the characters. Each character is dealing with the burden/privilege of human existence in their own way, each displaying shades of grey, and each trying to make the best lemonade out of whatever lemons life has thrown at them. We are presented with a two-day peek into their lives: utterly insufficient to pass any firm judgment on any of them, but thanks to brilliant filmmaking and acting, we feel as if we know them intimately. This is an indie film, thus more artsy than the usual Hollywood-studio fare. Moral ambiguity has been a feature of excellent drama at least since Aeschylus’s time; refer to his Oresteia plays, wherein the viewer is left to ponder over the morality of dutiful, but violent revenge. Shakespeare’s works too, frequently feature such conundrums, and we adore them even more for it. And in present times, we have films such as Anora—and long may such traditions continue! So watch it, but with an open mind: embrace ambivalence and ambiguity, because such is life itself!