Wonderful character development!

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Amu is the story of a 21-year old American-Indian girl who on her staycation in India uncovers unsettling facts about her past - her roots, her identity, where she belonged. This fiction tale is woven around the true events of the 1984 Sikh genocide. A gripping narrative makes this film a compelling watch. The one hour and twenty minutes had my undivided attention. And the performances only added to it. Konkana Sen leaves me spellbound with every film. She's no different here. She plays any part with so much ease I forget I'm watching a film. Brinda Karat, our firebrand political leader and social activist, plays Konkana's mother and she it does adequately.The film explores and questions the happenings of the '84 riots, stories of which I've heard in my childhood days. Reason why I could so relate to the film. (Stories of sikhs being pulled out of houses and burnt alive, of hindus helping hide away sikhs in their houses, of wailing women and children, of widowed women being rehabilitated in what's now called the "Widow Colony"). A documentary Widow Colony was also made on this subject in 2005. It was screened at various film festivals abroad.The censor board created much noise at the time of Amu's theatrical release giving it an A-certificate and cutting out a few scenes/dialogues for reasons obvious (that you'll find out in the film and here but the film-makers gave a raw, unpeppered account of all that had happened in their DVD version in 2008 (which was not allowed to be shown on TV).Amu premiered at the Berlin and Toronto Film Festivals in 2005. Since then, it has won numerous awards and accolades including 2 National Film Awards in the Best Feature Film and Best Director (English language) categories.Pat on the back to director Shonali Bose and producer-cum-husband Bedabrata Pain (who directed Chittagong) for showing the audacity to make a film without compromising on the facts. The film steers clear of clichés and only focuses on telling the story. And it does that brilliantly! Source: http://www.balconyrow.com/2013/07/amu-2005-movie-review.html

This clearly was a movie of passion for writer-director-producer Shonali Bose, a UCLA film school grad who wanted to tell a very important story about her homeland's history after she had some personal experience in the 1984 riots that followed the assassination of Prime Minister Indira Gandhi.Bose wanted this film to appeal to audiences outside India - hence it is mostly in English - so she uses the plot device of a 21-year-old young Indian girl returning home from the U.S. for the first time. There, as she searches for her real parents, she finds out the ugly truth about her nation's recent history.It's a brave, courageous attempt to reveal what happened in 1984, when several thousand Sikhs were massacred in what was a sanctioned move, if not a coordinated effort, by the government."Amu" takes a while to get going as we're introduced to the characters and the set up. It's fine, because the characters are engaging.Konkona Sensharma is an absolute revelation. I realize that these days Aishwarya Rai gets much more coverage and publicity, but Sensharma is a much better actress, more convincing and gets thoroughly absorbed into her roles. As Kaju, Sensharma is utterly believable as a young woman who has spent most of her life in the United States. She has the mannerisms down, the accent's certainly not unbelievable and her emotions never ring false. I've now seen two films starring Sensharma - the other was "Mr. and Mrs. Iyer" (2002) directed by her mother, Aparna Sen - and she's been brilliant in both.The film's shortcomings, however, are in the supporting players. Bose did a fine job in casting Sensharma. But as Kaju's love interest, she cast Ankur Khanna as Kabir. Khanna's problem is he never makes Kabir even remotely interesting. To say Kabir is wooden would be an understatement. The lines are delivered in monotone and there's barely any emotion in this performance. I couldn't believe that someone as vivacious and sprightly as Kaju would find Kabir attractive in the least. True, Kabir tries to be a sensitive young man trying to uncover the truth, but Khanna's so flat and dull that their budding romance is difficult to fathom. When Khanna works for some emotion, it seems very forced. There's little, if anything, natural about his performance.Brinda Karat as Kaju's mother, Keya, is adequate - you can see her trying really hard to wring emotion out of her performance. The film's other fine performance comes from Yashpal Sharma as Gobind, a Hindu tea shop owner befriended by Kaju.Bose uncovers her story well, adding a few surprises here and there. I realize why Bose used the device of having an Indian American going back to India. But I wondered if it was necessary. I would've preferred if the story had been about the riots; the mystery truly was superfluous. Then again, I also understand Bose's need to get this film distributed and seen in North America and the rest of the world - other than India, I mean - and adding a western touch to it was (unfortunately) probably unavoidable.Bose certainly isn't lacking confidence in her story. There's one quiet moment between Kaju and Kabir where Bose allows the scene to unwind quietly, without any music. It's a fine moment, a poignant and strong one because of Bose's confidence. But just imagine how riveting and unforgettable that moment might have been with a better actor as Kabir. Having seen Rahul Bose and Sensharma have such tremendous chemistry in "Mr. and Mrs. Iyer," I can't help but think Rahul Bose would have been sensational as Kabir.The flashback sequences are predictable only in that you know when they're about to be revealed. On the other hand, some of them are extremely painful to watch. Seeing a riot sequence replayed in never easy, but Bose brings out the humanity and the inhumanity out awfully well. And as anyone who's lived through riots would attest, they seem very real."Amu" is an important film that needed to be told. It gets a bit didactic occasionally. More subtlety would've helped. Some of the dialogue clearly needed to be tightened only because Bose serves up lines to only be transitions to more expositionary speeches. It's forgivable considering this is Bose's first narrative feature. But the lines seem too obvious and with a little bit of tweaking, this could have been a provocative masterpiece. Bose's a good director, but she needed someone to come in and strengthen the dialogue in this film. If you're looking for some different fare, something other than Bollywood out of India, do yourself a favor and give "Amu" a chance. Bose shows a lot of promise and that's good not only for Asian cinema, but for film-making as a whole.

Let me start by saying I lived in New Delhi during the time of the riots, and had close Sikh friends whom we had to care for at the time of the mayhem.That said, I went to watch the film with no preconceived notions. I was pleasantly surprised. It had its share of low spots, but that is the beauty of watching a first time director's work, you see them grow. Shonali is going to be a writer director to be reckoned with.Like all good 'Films' that are based on true events this film walks the fine line of not getting too caught up in the heat of actual events. Instead it tries to dramatize or fictionalize the effects of the events on people lives. A fact that some audience don't seem to grasp. Especially, a substantial number of Indian audience (amply demonstrated on this site by the stupid review by ajaysaxena1960)! I sat through a Q&A session with the director where people wanted to know why the director did not name names of all the MLA's involved in the massacre. Or if the director could through her film, get the International tribunal to try Indian government for crimes against humanity. SHE IS A FILM MAKER. NOT A HISTORIAN OR A CRUSADER.The film took 8 years to fund and make (a crusade in itself), for that alone I admire the director. But of all the films done by writers and directors based in America, Shonali's film most certainly stands head and shoulders above the rest. She has a strong voice and a crisp sense of film-making.A director most certainly worth watching!

I've seen many politically charged films. The one thing that always gets to me is that a cause drives a project to greater awareness of an issue or event. But what bothered me incredibly about "Amu The Film" was that the script was so benign that the history was getting a fairly weak treatment. Shonali Bose, the writer director should have stuck to directing as the handling is mostly first rate. However, the insipid dialogue, the forced romantic angle between Kaju and some horribly wooden actor playing Kabir (are we supposed to buy that she would fall for this chap?), and politics which unravel through a mystery that simply is too over-dramatic in its unfolding make me wonder if "Amu The Film" was trying too hard to please too many people.I was amazed by the responses here as people seem to be eating up the contrived emotions and the forced responses we are supposed to feel for these characters and the situations. While the 1984 riots is absolutely a topic that needed further examination "Amu The Film" fails miserably.As much as I tried to like the film, it just lacked the spirit. And the spirit is what drove me to see the film in the first place.