Krishnaja S

Alright, I have to admit—I'm confused. This movie was not a "clean adaptation of the novel" by any means, though a huge majority of the novel is presented as it is. That is commendable, though I would like to point out: (1) The beginning of the novel and the movie are not identical. In the novel, Najeeb approaches the police office first, but in the movie, said scene is swapped to the back. That disheartened me a bit, since the opening of the novel was quite great. Najeeb manages to have some delightful moments in the prison with the other inmates, but those scenes were omitted. (2) The movie was a "maze-runner" version of the novel. In the novel, the escape lasts for about 35-45 pages (which is the perfect length) but in the movie, everything after the interval focuses on them fleeing from their masters. That's made the experience very underwhelming—since everyone in our group felt that the film lagged at the second half. (3) The novel actually focuses on the relationship Najeeb forms with several of his goats (and other animals), which were COMPLETELY omitted. For instance, he names his goats after people from home. He named the goat who punctured his rib after the local Gunda, he named the goat he milked for the first time after the local prostitute, he named a goat he helped deliver after his son. None of that is showcased in the movie. Personally, these beautiful friendships Najeeb forms with these animals was what I adored the most about the novel. It was very disappointing when they deleted all those elements. (4) The omission of any kind of humour was not commendable, at least, to me. The novel is very well-written, and the most cherishable aspect of it was the way Najeeb clings onto his hope. He makes snarky remarks, laughs at his own misery so that there is something for him to laugh at, and so on. He was a strong-willed person in the novel, who adored his animals with all his heart. (5) The scene in which his (Najeeb's) master pulls him inside the tent during the thunderstorm was, again, deleted. I do not understand the reason for doing so—since that scene was a stunning reminder of how even the cruelest of people have shreds of humanity in them. I think they went ahead and omitted it since it didn't fit the narrative. (6) The flashbacks were too often, and the romance was added for no particular reason than to add some 'color', if I quote my mother. Also—the element of nudity was unnecessary. I understand that you needed to showcase what he went through by making him strip naked, but the shot from the back could have been omitted to make it more family-friendly. It wasn't even that relevant, I think—just a shot of Prithviraj's butt (pardon my language, but that was basically it.)