A Wednesday! (2008)

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Like many other people, the reason I came to watch "A Wednesday" was because it features in the current IMDB top 250 list. The film was also necessary viewing for the top 250 lists of 2016 and 2017 previously. I was quite confused, and immediately sceptical, as to why this 2008 Indian film was only recently coming into the spotlight. For most other movies, this usually indicates a film of high quality. However, as my 5/10 (average) rating suggests, "A Wednesday" is a film FAR removed from the quality required to merit such a position. It is notable to say that of the 198 films I have seen of the current top 250, this film has received the lowest rating from myself.With that context in mind, I shall now talk about my assessment of the film. The most egregious aspects of "A Wednesday" are definitely in the "action" set pieces. The physical confrontations (one interrogation scene and another chase scene) are woefully uncoordinated to the point of parody. The acting in these scenes fall under heavy scrutiny, unfortunately, as a direct result of this and is entirely unconvincing. The sound editing is perhaps the worst part of these scenes (it sounds like it's come directly from a children's toy/soundboard). It is so jarring that it would have undermined the action scenes even if they had been well choreographed. The special effects are also unconvincing but, since it has a minute presence, it doesn't hinder the film too greatly. I am also unaware if there were budgetary limitations the film had in its making so I don't think it would be entirely fair for me to condemn it for that. Luckily, there is little action to corrupt the entire film but this has led to some reviewers stating that the film is a boring office set piece as a result. I'd be inclined to disagree as the film's premise out with the action offered the greatest potential that the film ultimately failed to fully fulfil. A further, but more pervasive "flaw" is in the film's editing. There is an overabundance of slow-motion footage and abrupt cuts. However, I would say that although the film's editing will come across as a bit cheesy it is still of an adequate quality. This could be as much a case of time working against the film if anything (although I doubt that is the case).I will now address the more positive aspects that the film has to offer. The acting from the main cast is decent for the most part; Anupam Kher and Naseeruddin Shah play the police commissioner (Prakash Rathod) and the "terrorist" known only as "The Common Man" play off of each other well. The script is decent and has some interesting dialogue (one scene comes to mind were Rathod tests his officer's commitment to finding the bombs was a highlight) but I felt that the concept had a lot more potential than its final product. The villain's motivations were interesting and certainly more 3 dimensional than your typical action movie, however, again, I felt that they could have gone into more depth into his character. The conclusion seems to inspire a profound sense of patriotism in the Indian people (hence its high rating) when the two stars finally come together. Whilst understandable, I was a bit disappointed that they didn't go further with the moral conflict here and didn't attempt to provide a more nuanced argument. The film reminded me of the anime "Death Note" to some degree and I was hoping to see a high stakes battle of wits unfold similar to the likes of "L" and "Light Yagami" or between "Sherlock Holmes" and "Moriarty". The secondary villains (a group of terrorists) are played well enough but I felt that they were more 1 dimensional in presentation. I'd also finish by saying that the cinematography for the film is suitably engaging and the camera is dynamic enough to keep your concentration during the film's slower segments.I'd like to finish on a more positive note as I attempt to lend some support to this film. I noticed that "A Wednesday" had a 5.4 rating from the "top 1000 voters" on IMDB with the highest percentage (22.5%) of those giving the film a rating of 1/10. In the same way that I have criticised people who have overrated this film (resulting in its unjust placement in the top 250) I feel that I also need to criticise those who are being equally unreasonable in their negativity. Objectively speaking, this film does a lot of things fairly well and others poorly thus warranting its 5/10 (average) rating from myself. "A Wednesday" is a competently enough made film with a coherent story, decent acting and cinematography etc so it could DEFINITELY be a lot worse. I wonder how many top 1000 voters have seen the IMDB's BOTTOM 100 movies as a frame of reference. I've even seen top 1000 voters give the likes of "Jaws" and "The Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" 1/10 ratings! To summarise, this film is highly overrated on IMDB and shouldn't be on the top 250. At the same time, it is a decent enough movie which works well enough within its limitations- I doubt "A Wednesday" was made with the intent of becoming an all-time great film! Just a simple, honest thriller. I found it moderately enjoyable, if forgettable, and think it should be recognised as such. Don't take out your anger out on the film for its high rating, it's not its fault, so I just ask reviewers to be fair in their assessment. If you're the kind of person to give this film a 1/10 rating just to take it off of the top 250 then you're just being hypocritical! Be consistent and objective in your criticism and, hopefully, this will encourage others to do the same.

I was intrigued enough with this film to watch the phone conversation between Prakash Rathod (Anupam Kher) and The Common Man (Naseeruddin Shah) more than once, the one in which the The Common Man explained his rationale for taking out four terrorists selected at random. Perhaps here in America we haven't been affected by terrorism to the same degree as some countries in Europe and the Middle East, so this film may serve as a warning of sorts.Though it's already almost a decade old now, the story explains the frustration of the average citizen who's simply fed up with the way government agencies and authorities deal with the completely irrational acts of destruction committed by rabid extremists. The Common Man states it very simply - "... what do you do if a cockroach enters your house?" It's a very good analogy, but political correctness and undeserved compassion often intrudes on rational decisions, and as The Common Man frustratingly observes, it sometimes takes ten years to convict a murderer when observable fats are clear enough to see by anyone willing to see them.The scene in which Rathod and The Common Man eventually meet is also a powerful one, with the viewer contemplating the outcome, wondering whether the police commissioner will do his legal duty or opt to let the matter rest, secure in the knowledge that The Common Man represents not a particular religion or sect, but the common humanity of all good citizens who obey the law and strive to be decent members of the community. I probably would never have known about this film if I hadn't been following IMDb's list of the Top 250 films, and in this case, the viewers here pointed me to a very worthwhile film experience.

In recent years the film A Wednesday has been much talked about. The subject is contemporary, and overall the director manages to weave an engaging fare. While watching the film I found it quite riveting embellished by great performances by Anupam Kher and Naseeruddin Shah.However, when the film ended and I pondered over it, some thoughts/question came to my mind for which I didn't find a convincing answer. If the character of Naseeruddin Shah is representative of the common man, how come he got hold of so much explosives – RDX – which he kept inside a 'J & K' marked bag in a police station (as shown in the initial portion of the film). The greyness of the character of Naseeruddin ought to have been hinted at – this I felt a weakness of the film – the lack of character development of its main character. Moreover, the hacker engaged to trace the calls of the mastermind concedes towards the end that Naseer is the best (and so by implication he is unable to trace his whereabouts), then how come Anupam Kher lands up in the same building which Naseer used for his operations as shown in the end?

This movie was brilliant and entertaining but I enjoyed watching the film and movie scenes of comedy film scenes movie scenes with comedy film movie movie and movie was hilarious titter of Editing and direction both amazing screenplay storyline good screenplay is also great Jimmy shergill was best in his character anupam was superb nasserudin shah was amazing other were awesome Don't this blockbuster film it's actually the best movie ever 9/10