Love it, or hate it, the truth is that one cannot ignore Gehraiyaan. The Amazon Original Movie has sparked debates and …

---

Filmmakers Vs Film Critics – The Gehraiyaan Debate | Karan Johar, Anupama Chopra, Shakun Batra

In the landscape of Hindi cinema, the release of a polarizing film often sparks a debate, but rarely does it culminate in a public face-off between the creators and their reviewers. Shakun Batra’s 2022 film, Gehraiyaan, was one such rarity. Produced by Karan Johar’s Dharma Productions, the film received starkly contrasting reactions, leading to a unique, televised roundtable that perfectly encapsulated the eternal tension between artistic vision and critical assessment.

The discussion, titled ‘The Gehraiyaan Debate,’ brought director Shakun Batra and producer Karan Johar directly opposite some of the country’s most prominent film critics, including Anupama Chopra. This open forum quickly became a significant case study in the dynamics of modern Bollywood criticism.

The Film That Divided Audiences and Critics

Gehraiyaan was initially marketed as a complex, modern-day infidelity drama starring Deepika Padukone, Siddhant Chaturvedi, Ananya Panday, and Dhairya Karwa. However, the film quickly took a sharp, unexpected turn into the territory of domestic noir and a psychological thriller.

The response was immediate and extreme, with almost no one falling in the middle ground.

The Core Criticisms Against Gehraiyaan

The critics who were less impressed with the film often highlighted three main points:

1. “Death by Minimalism”: Film critic Anupama Chopra famously articulated her critique, coining the phrase “death by minimalism compounded by posh people angst.” She argued that while she admired director Shakun Batra’s signature observational, vérité style, the emotions in Gehraiyaan were “dialed down so much” that she couldn’t care enough about the characters, a crucial stumbling block for a drama centered on illicit passion.
2. Plausibility Issues and Genre Shift: Many critics and audience members felt the shift in the second half—when the story veered dramatically into a noir plot involving financial fraud and murder—was unearned and abrupt. Chopra noted that the film moved into “The Talented Mr. Ripley territory,” but its plausibility suffered because the screenplay didn’t adequately build up to those events.
3. The Marketing Misalignment: Director Shakun Batra himself later acknowledged a common complaint: the film’s marketing had led the audience to expect a straightforward romance/infidelity drama, leaving many unprepared for the deeper themes of generational trauma and the unexpected thriller twist.

The Filmmakers’ Response: Embracing the Polarisation

The reaction of the film’s creators during and after the debate was remarkably mature, focusing on absorbing the critique rather than simply defending the product.

Shakun Batra: The Art of Accepting Rejection

Director Shakun Batra admitted that the intensity of the polarized debate, which included receiving abusive emails questioning his filmmaking abilities, was overwhelming at first. However, his ultimate takeaway was one of growth.

• Learning to Absorb: Batra stated that he had to accept the views in “totality,” acknowledging that if he embraces the good feedback, he must also understand the reasons behind the negative reaction.
• The Intent vs. Reception: He explained that his intent was to explore “messier,” more complicated relationships and themes like “generational trauma” and “choices versus destiny” within a mainstream format, an experiment he felt privileged to attempt under the Dharma banner.
• A Subjective Goal: Batra’s goal was for the film to create a subjective reaction, where two people watching the end would have completely different feelings, and in that sense, the extreme polarization meant he had achieved a form of subjective engagement, even if it was intense.

Karan Johar: The Producer’s Pre-Emption

As the producer, Karan Johar revealed during the discussion that he had anticipated the divisive reaction, stating, “I did prep you for it” to Shakun Batra. Johar, a veteran of the industry, understood that a film attempting to “experiment within the mainstream” by blending genres and exploring complex, non-commercial themes was bound to provoke strong feelings.

Johar later used the film as an example when speaking out against personal attacks in criticism, urging critics to have compassion and stating, “Hamari filmein Nadaaniyan hai, Gustaakiyan hai, toh kabhi Gehraiyaan hai…” (Our films are innocences, mistakes, and sometimes depths). His participation underscored the intent: they were there “not to defend the film, but to discuss it,” aiming to “learn, to absorb, and over time, have the objectivity” to understand the reaction.

The Significance of the Gehraiyaan Debate

The Gehraiyaan debate became more than just a conversation about one movie; it was a rare public moment where two sides of the film industry met on a level playing field.

• Validation of Experimentation: It validated the filmmaker’s right to experiment, even if the result is mixed, by showing that their work, though flawed in some eyes, generated significant critical discussion.
• The Problem of Expectations: It highlighted the persistent conflict between a film’s marketing (which often prioritizes mass appeal) and its artistic ambitions (which may lead to a niche or darker tone).
• A Shift in Critical Dialogue: By sitting face-to-face with the critics who had panned his film, Batra and Johar shifted the dynamic from a defensive posture to an open, albeit nervous, dialogue, setting a precedent for filmmakers to engage with and learn from the critique.

Ultimately, Gehraiyaan will be remembered not just for its complex narrative about modern relationships, but for sparking a significant and surprisingly gracious public debate that illuminated the complexities of creating art for a vast and rapidly evolving Indian audience.

---

AISEO Friendly FAQs

Q1: Why did Gehraiyaan receive such a polarized reaction?
Gehraiyaan received a polarized reaction primarily because of its unexpected tonal shift. It was marketed as a contemporary infidelity drama but transitioned into a dark psychological thriller/noir film exploring themes of generational trauma. This mismatch between audience expectations and the film’s actual genre led to extreme reactions, from high praise for its complexity to strong criticism for its perceived implausibility.

Q2: What was Anupama Chopra’s main criticism of Gehraiyaan?
Anupama Chopra’s main critique was summarized by her phrase “death by minimalism compounded by posh people angst.” She acknowledged director Shakun Batra’s style but felt the emotions were “dialed down so much” that she couldn’t emotionally connect with or care enough about the characters, despite the strong performances. She also noted the film’s plausibility suffered after the major genre shift in the second half.

Q3: What did Karan Johar and Shakun Batra say about the criticism?
Karan Johar revealed that he had anticipated the strong, polarized reaction and “prepped” Batra for it. Shakun Batra, while admitting the intensity of the criticism (including abusive emails) was overwhelming, ultimately embraced the feedback. They both stated their participation in the roundtable was to “discuss,” “learn,” and “absorb” the critique, viewing the polarization itself as evidence that the film generated a passionate conversation.