Lion (2016)

An interesting true story. Film starts well and ends well. In the middle, there is a rapid acceleration from being a boy to being a man that misses out on a lot of an explanation as to how he ended up being the person he was. Quite boring in the middle of the film, which is a shame since the young actor was excellent.

**Lost in India, found in Australia!** Based on the book 'A Long Way Home' that tells the story of a young Indian boy who lost his brother in a railway station in the night and the next morning he woke up thousands kilometers away from home. Not knowing the language or the address and the names of his family, he struggled from various threats in the society. After that he got adopted from an Australian family and the rest of the film revolved on his true identity. Haunted by his past, how he rediscovered his originality was emotionally told. Very impressive film. The families should not miss it. Even though it is a must see by all ages. I am not a big fan of Dev's performances, even in his debut film 'Slumdog Millionaire'. After that success, he had survived in the film industry doing decent roles, for like a decade. But it was 'The Man Who Knew Infinity' that changed his career. For the first time I liked him very much in that, and again he was pretty impressive in this. The second best performance in his career. Though his part comes only after the half way mark. Yet in that one hour, he did great, particularly in the sentiments. I was wondering why it was called 'Lion'. And I got answered only just before the end credit. So you should be patient to learn why, if you are yet to see it. It was not until the 90s the India began to see a real change. This story takes place in the mid 80s, only the opening half and those parts were raw and cruel, especially in the eyes of an 8 year old boy. That kid was so good. Just like Jacom Tremblay, a year before who impressed us with his performance from the film 'Room'. It was a feature film debut for the director and he was wonderful in this attempt. The film splits into two, the first half was about lost and the following half is about finding the road back to the home. Less dialogues, but well written in those necessary parts. The music was good. Only negative was the film was out of depth. Yeah, all the events were like fast forward. If they had focused on details, the narration would have reached at least 3 hours. Especially I wanted the Australian mother's perspective on how she went through to raise those kids. Now I'm waiting for the 2020. I mean 2008 was SDM, 2012 was LoP and 2016 was this one. The 4 years later, surely there will be another India related western film would come. Despite this film nominated for the 6 Oscars, it had won nothing. That's very sad. Overall, I strongly suggest it. One of the best films of the Year. _9/10_

**A film of great quality, although marked by the duality of the script and by an excessive emotional appeal.** This film, for me, has one big point for it and one big point against it. The point in its favor is that it is consistently based on a true story, and as far as I can tell it has been relatively faithful to events. The downside is the fact that it is one of those films that constantly appeals to the public's emotions in order to have some ability to capture our attention. It's not particularly pleasant having to watch a movie that almost forces you to have a box of Kleenex next to you from start to finish. The script tells the story of an Indian child, very poor, who likes to play with his brother by the train tracks. It so happens that, one day, things go really wrong and Saroo – that's the child's name – ends up trapped in a train that starts moving, taking him to new places, and separating him from his brother and family. Lost, not knowing how to get back in touch, he ends up in an orphanage. There, he will be adopted by an Australian couple, and raised with all the sweetness. But he never forgets his mother and, as an adult, he decides to return to India to find her. After the success of “Slumdog Millionaire”, it seems that Western cinema is permeable and open to what is best done in Bollywood. This film is not Indian, but it has actors of Indian origin and was well received, with good reviews and a good box office. The film “cleaned up” the Australian film awards and won some BAFTA awards, but lost the Oscars for which it had been nominated and was categorically ignored by the Golden Globes. By the way, while we're at it, it's quite difficult to understand how Dev Patel and Nicole Kidman – the film's protagonists and its main actors – ended up being nominated for Oscars in the Supporting Actor/Actress categories! The only reason I see for this “disqualification” is a possible attempt not to put them on the path of “favorites” to the two figurines, namely Ryan Gosling, Emma Stone and Casey Affleck. In any case, the film was one of the “losers” of that year's Oscars. The film is solidly starred by Dev Patel, an actor who thus consolidates his status as an international star and who guarantees him a place, if he wants, in American cinema. He only appears near the middle of the film because the story begins in the character's childhood, yet he didn't hesitate and confidently embraced his character with charisma and talent. For her part, Nicole Kidman also does not miss the opportunity to do another job very well done. Less interesting, David Wenham and Rooney Mara did what they could with two rather underdeveloped characters. One of the film's problems is its duality: developed in two halves (the first focused on the main character's childhood, and the second on her search for her mother, already in adult life), they are quite different from each other. I'm not going to say which one is the best, I think that's something relative and that says more about the viewer than the work, but I can say that I liked the second one better, even if it seems less coherent than the first one, more solid, but also more melodramatic. In this regard, it is necessary to praise the work of the young Sunny Pawar who, with an interpretation of demanding characteristics in which he shone, sustains a part of the film that, without him, would be much less interesting. Technically, what I most appreciated and feel commended for is the quality of the cinematography, which is clean, sharp, excellently framed and in magnificent colors. The sets and costumes are also very good, and the careful choice of filming locations allows for the inclusion of a beautiful set of landscapes. On this subject, it is worth watching the beginning of this film with attention. The soundtrack and the visual and sound effects complete all this with subtle touches, of great quality.