Review: ‘Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway,’ starring Rani Mukerji

April 8, 2023

by Carla Hay

Rani Mukerji in “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” (Photo courtesy of Zee Studios)

“Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway”

Directed by Ashima Chibber

Hindi, Norwegian and English with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in Norway and India, the dramatic film “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” (based on a true story) features an Indian and white cast of characters representing the working-class, middle-class and wealthy.

Culture Clash: A married mother, who is an Indian immigrant living in Norway, loses custody of her two children to the Norwegian government over cultural conflicts, and she fights to get her children back. 

Culture Audience: “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in watching badly edited and melodramatic movies about child custody battles.

Rani Mukerji, Irha Ali, Anirban Bhattacharya and Yuvaan Vanvari in “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” (Photo courtesy of Zee Studios)

“Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” ruins a lot of audience good will meant for the title character by making her look entitled to some of her awful actions. Assaulting a law enforcement officer and kidnapping don’t mean that you should win a child custody battle. And what’s even worse is that “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” is based on a real-life custody battle that makes the real mother involved look a lot worse than she probably is, just for the sake of having melodrama in the film. Unfortunately, all of the performances in the movie match the bombastic screenplay and direction.

Directed by Ashima Chibber, “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” is based on the real story of Sagarika Chakraborty, an Indian immigrant mother who waged a two-year custody battle (from 2011 to 2013) against the government of Norway to regain custody of her son and daughter, who were both under the age of 7 during this ordeal. In the movie, the real people’s names have been changed. Chibber, Sameer Satija and Rahul Handa co-wrote the “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” screenplay and made this mother look like every worst stereotype of a shrieking, irrational ditz who does so many things she’s been told not to do that end up hurting her case and delaying the legal proceedings even more.

“Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” also has horrendously choppy editing that jumps back and forth in the timeline, creating an unnecessarily jumbled narrative. The movie begins with a scene where Debika Chatterjee (played by Rani Mukerji) is seen frantically running out of her house in Stavanger, Norway, and chasing after the three Norwegian social workers who have taken away her two children: 5-month-old daughter Shuchi (played by Irha Ali) and 4-year-old son Shubha (played by Yuvaan Vanvari). Predictably, to add to the drama and to make Debika look more pitiful, she falls down in the street as the social workers and the children speed away in a car.

The movie circles back to that scene of the child snatching and car chasing much later in the story. “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” then shows how and why Debika and her husband Aniruddha Chatterjee (played by Anirban Bhattacharya) lost custody of their kids. Debika and Aniruddha are both natives of India, but their children were born in Norway. Aniruddha works for an oil rigging company, where he does a lot of manual work outside. Debika is a homemaker. Subha happens to be living with autism.

As “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” makes abundantly clear, because it’s repeated so many times in the movie, Aniruddha’s top priority in life is to get Norwegian citizenship. Therefore, he doesn’t want to do anything that would put his citizenship application in jeopardy. And so, this husband and wife have very different opinions on how they should deal with the Norwegian government after their two children are taken away by the government. You know where this is all going, of course.

Life seemed to be going so well for the Chatterjee family, who were living in a comfortable, middle-class home. This family seemed to be very stable and loving. But then, as shown in the movie, Debika became the subject of gossip among some mean-spirited mothers at Subha’s pre-school. They noticed that Debika would sometimes feed her kids with her bare hands, instead of using utensils. It’s an Indian custom for kids to be fed with bare hands, but someone reported Debika to child welfare authorities as an unfit parent.

And so, an investigation was opened at Velfred, Norway’s national child welfare service. Two Velfred officers named Sia Larsen (played by Kärt Tammjärv) and Matilda Magnusson (played by Britta Soll), who are both psychologists, had to visit the Chatterjee home every week for one month to interview Debika and Aniruddha, as well as observe these parents with their children. Aniruddha is irritated because he has to take time off from work for these child-welfare visits.

During these visits, Sia and Matilda notice that Debika is very involved in the childcare, but Aniruddha seems emotionally detached from these responsibilities. Debika explains that they have a traditional marriage where she is expected to do all the housework and other childcare, while Aniruddha is the household income earner. Sia and Matilda asks Aniruddha if he ever offers to help Debika with her domestic responsibilities, and he says somewhat defensively, “I earn. She takes care of the house.”

Sia and Matilda explain that this patriarchal attitude isn’t very acceptable in Norway, which has a culture that promotes gender equality in as many aspects of society as possible. Aniruddha and Debika are polite but firm in saying that the arrangement that they have works best for them and it isn’t hurting anyone. However, Sia and Matilda give each other looks that indicate this isn’t an acceptable answer.

As for the matter of feeding the children with bare hands, Debika assures these social workers that her hands are always clean when she feeds the kids. However, she acknowledges that people in Norway might not understand this Indian custom. Debika says she’ll feed her kids with utensils in public, so she won’t offend any Norwegians. There is underlying racism in the social workers’ judgments of the Chatterjee family, but no one says it out loud because Debika and Aniruddha want these child welfare officers to give them a good evaluation and then just leave the family alone.

However, during one of these visits, interview questions uncover that the marriage of Aniruddha and Debika isn’t as happy as they want people to think it is. Debika reluctantly admits Aniruddha has a temper and he can get a little rough with her. This statement is more cause for concern.

It doesn’t take long before Sia and Matilda tell Aniruddha and Debika that a Barnevernet senior officer named Aliis Ramsfjord (played by Tiina Tauraite), who is another psychologist, will be coming from Oslo to join Sia and Matilda on the next visit to the Chatterjee home. And that’s the day that Aliis, Sia and Matilda take Shubha and Shuchi away, with no advance warning. Velfred quickly puts Shubha and Shuchi in foster care.

The rest of “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” is a series of scenes showing Debika having various meltdowns while she tries to get back custody of the children. Lawyers get involved, of course. And so do the families of Debika and Aniruddha. And so does India’s external affairs minister Vasudha Kamat (played by Neena Gupta), who has a press conference interrupted by Debika pleading for Vashudha to help Debika.

At first, Debika and Aniruddha get a court-appointed lawyer named Sunil Kapoor (played by Namit), who doesn’t last long on the case. It doesn’t help that Debika is the type of client who will speak out of turn in court and have outbursts in front of the judge, thereby making things harder for her. There are small victories, such as Debika and Aniruddha getting limited visitation rights, but the spouses will have disagreements over how they should handle the case.

The lead attorney representing Velfred/the Norweigian government is Daniel Singh Ciupek (played by Jim Sarbh), who is somewhat arrogant and likes to win at all costs. The case goes through twists, turns and other complications, usually caused by Debika. She gets into legal trouble regarding the case, including getting caught kidnapping Shubha and Shuchi.

Debika also gets into physical altercations with people (including assualting law enforcement officials) and sometimes has to be restrained during her temper tantrums. What’s so atrocious is that the movie makes this violence look acceptable because it’s “a mother fighting for her children.” But the violent ways that Debika lashes out are all so counterproductive because Debika just makes herself look like an unstable mother.

In other words, Debika’s “loose cannon” temper and her willingness to commit serious crimes to get her kids end up really hurting her case (and her children) in the long run. It’s hard to feel complete sympathy for someone who has such a nasty and violent temper. Debika also has an obnoxious attitude that she shouldn’t be stereotyped as hysterical and unstable when she in fact does act hysterical and unstable. She’s not a horrible person, but is someone who is lacking in self-awareness about how she can be her own worst enemy in her case.

To be clear: This criticism of Debika is only about the character in the movie, not the real-life person who went through this terrible ordeal. And there’s no doubt that the mother in this movie (and in real life) was mistreated by a system that is portrayed as taking kids away from parents out of greed for money that the government gets for adopting out these children. If any good can come out of “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway,” it’s in exposing the vulnerabilities that immigrant, non-citizen people have with governments that take advantage of non-citizens.

However, “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” comes across as less-than-honest when it tries to dismiss any blame that Debika deserved for nearly ruining her own case by committing a serious crime (kidnapping) that she deliberately planned. The movie makes it look like Debika expected this crime to be excused just because she cries a lot in front of judges and lawyers. Had she not committed this kidnapping, the case would have been resolved a lot sooner. And there probably would have been a lot less screaming hysterics in this over-the-top and over-acted movie.

Zee Studios released “Mrs. Chatterjee vs. Norway” in select U.S. cinemas and in India on March 17, 2023.

Review: ‘Vadh’ (2022), starring Sanjay Mishra and Neena Gupta

January 17, 2023

by Carla Hay

Neena Gupta and Sanjay Mishra in “Vadh” (Photo courtesy of Yash Raj Films)

“Vadh”

Directed by Jaspal Singh Sandhu and Rajiv Barnwal

Hindi with subtitles

Culture Representation: Taking place in Gwalior, India, the dramatic film “Vadh” features an all-Indian cast of characters representing the working-class and middle-class.

Culture Clash: A retired schoolteacher and his wife, who are in heavy financial debt to a loan-shark thug threatening to kill them, become in involved in the murder of the thug. 

Culture Audience: “Vadh” will appeal primarily to people who are interested in crime dramas about murder cover-ups and don’t mind if the story is long-winded and disjointed.

Manav Vij in “Vadh” (Photo courtesy of Yash Raj Films)

“Vadh” has moments that can appeal to viewers interested in crime dramas, but the editing and storytellng for this overly long and tedious movie don’t quite come together in a cohesive way. The movie’s total running time is 170 minutes, when the story could have been told in a movie that is less than 120 minutes. Too many things about “Vadh” are repetitive. It’s also fairly easy to predict how the movie is going to end.

Written and directed by Jaspal Singh Sandhu and Rajiv Barnwal, “Vadh” (which means “slaughter” in Hindi) takes place in Gwalior, India, where retired schoolteacher Shambhunath Mishra (played by Sanjay Mishra) and his wife Manju Mishra (played by Neena Gupta) live quietly and modestly. Shambhunath and Manju have been married for 40 years, but trouble is brewing in this couple’s seemingly peaceful existence. Years ago, Shambhunath and Mishra borrowed a lot of money from a ruthless loan-shark thug named Prajapati Pandey (played by Saurabh Sachdeva), in order to send their only child Guddu (played by Diwakar Kumar) to college in the United States.

After graduating from college, Guddu decided to permanently reside in the U.S., where he lives with his wife and their baby daughter Erica. Guddu has a unnamed job where he earns enough money to easily pay back his parents for the college expenses, but Guddu doesn’t think of offering to repay his parents. Instead of being grateful to his parents, Guddu is arrogant and unappreciative.

Shambhunath and Manju are heartbroken that Guddu has a dismissive attitude toward them. Guddu also refuses to got to India visit his parents. In a video chat with Guddu (which Shambhunath and Manju have to do at an Internet cafe because they can’t afford Internet service at home), Guddu has this excuse for why he won’t visit his parents: “Do you know how expensive flights to India are?”

Meanwhile, Prajapati has gotten impatient with Shambhunath and Manju for taking years to pay off their debt to him. He starts making violent threats to the couple to demand payment in full, or else he says they will be tortured and killed. Fearing for their lives and desperate for money, Shambhunath and Manju beg Guddu to pay them back for some of the money that they spent on his college expenses. Guddu coldly refuses.

As already revealed in the “Vadh” trailer, after Prajapati assaults Shambhunath and does some other terrible things, Shambhunath brutally kills Prajapati. It’s a crime that Shambhunath and Manju cover up by dismembering the body and hiding everything. Shambhunath goes to the local police department and confesses to the crime, but the police deputy on duty—a buffoon named Sitaram Gadariya (played by Nadeem Khan)—doesn’t believe Shambhunath (who looks like a harmless old man) and doesn’t record the confession. Shambhunath goes home and thinks he’s gotten away with murder.

When chief police inspector Shakti Singh (played by Manav Vij) finds out about this confession, he’s infuriated and slaps Sitaram hard in the face. Inspector Singh then orders Sitaram to get Shambhunath back to the police station to record the confession. This time, Shambhunath denies knowing anything about Prajapat’s disappearance. And so begins a “cat and mouse” game between the police and the Mishra spouses.

One of the problems with “Vadh” is that the tone is so obvious in wanting the audience to root for Shambhunath and Manju. Therefore, every plot development seems too calculated to lead to a predictable conclusion. The acting in the movie also ranges from very good (Mishra gives a fairly credible performance) to mediocre (most of the cast) to downright awful (some of the cast members in supporting roles). The movie also tries to have some darkly comedic moments that just seem out of place with the rest of this grim story.

The scenes just drag on and on, with a lot of repetition. Inspector Singh is the type of generic police investigator that has been seen in countless other movies. Shambhunath and Manju made their problems worse, but they have a self-pitying attitude that gets very irritating after a while. “Vadh” tries to be a suspenseful film, but when the protagonists are presented from the beginning as elderly people who deserve sympathy just because they’re elderly and regardless of how many horrible things they do, there’s no suspense at all in how the movie is going to end.

Yash Raj Films released “Vadh” in select U.S. cinemas and in India on December 9, 2022.

Copyright 2017-2024 Culture Mix
CULTURE MIX