Adapting an iconic film based on a classic text is always a delicate balancing act, given the layers of comparisons that are bound to arise. Srijit Mukherji’s Shotyi Bole Shotyi Kichhu Nei grounds the incidents of Basu Chatterjee’s 1986 film Ek Ruka Hua Faisla in the cultural context of modern-day Bengal with all the socio-political complexities that come along with it.
The story is simple on the surface. Brojeswar (Kaushik Ganguly), a sitting judge at the high court in West Bengal, has to deliver a verdict in a murder trial. While he has almost made up his mind about the accused, there is a doubt in his mind that lingers. The night before he is to pronounce his verdict, Brojeswar has a dream where he revisits the case with a “jury” comprising 12 people from his closest circles.
The jury — even the term ‘jury’ is incorrect, as Brojeswar reminds us that the jury system was abolished in India in 1973 — needs to reach a consensus. While 11 members decide the accused is guilty, one person, Satya (Parambrata Chattopadhyay), believes there is further scope to debate the case. What begins is a series of deliberations, which often lead to verbal clashes between the dozen members.
The table comprises Koushik Sen’s Dhiman, an economist with the World Bank whose elitist arrogance is at odds with Anirban Chakrabarti’s Mr Aggarwal, a Marwari businessman who is constantly reminded of his ‘outsider’ status by the other members.
Ritwick Chakraborty’s Sumit is a survivor of religious riots which accounts for his dislike of Muslims, while Rahul Banerjee’s Sadiq is a well-to-do Muslim man whose religion defines his social identity.
Ananya Chatterjee’s Roopa is a socialite who finds faults with the city she lives in at every opportunity and wants to settle in Mumbai. Suhatro Mukhopadhyay’s Abir is a sheepish professor of physics who fumbles in voicing his opinions.
Then there is Sauraseni Maitra’s Arundhati, a survivor of child sexual abuse who has turned into a “feminazi”, and Phalguni Chatterjee’s Habul is a senior citizen who has been packed off to an old-age home by his family. Arjun Chakrabarty’s Koushik is a suave corporate employee, while Kanchan Mallick plays Brojeswar’s efficient assistant Taposh.
The star of the film is Satya — played with a flourish by Parambrata Chattopadhyay — a gay man who draws out the biases of each of the jury members and reveals how these are actively shaping their perspective of the accused. Their homophobia, their fear of immigrants and outsiders, their prejudice against religious minorities. Satya is not just a provocateur, he is also someone for whom this is a lived reality.
The exchanges between the characters are taut, filled with tension and layered with thoughtful reflections, and the focus shifts from the accused to the decision-making process that is as flawed as the social systems that this motley bunch of people are a part of. Srijit drives home the discomforting truth that there is no absolute truth and that one’s perspective is shaped by one’s reality.
The film’s visual design complements this intensity. Cinematographer Prosenjit Chowdhury devises a setting that doesn’t feel claustrophobic. Instead of a jury room, the discussions take place in locations that are special for Brojeswar — the golf course he regularly visits, a flyover where he rescued an old man from hooligans, a beach where he holidayed with his family, a forest where he went on an expedition, and a theatre where he watched the play Mindgames (the last is a nod to a stage production that Srijit had directed). The use of shadow and light emphasises the moral ambiguity at the heart of the film, with characters often framed in half-light and their expressions etched in uncertainty.