SPOILER ALERT!
Perhaps one of the most underrated psychological thriller movies of all time. With movies like "se7en", "Fight Club" and "Shutter Island" successfully bending the minds of the audiences, Raman Raghav 2.0 is the only psychological thriller that has the potential to compete with the acclaimed movies mentioned above. But today, I would like to shed light upon one of the most psychologically disturbed and socially isolated characters after "Hanibal Lector" (Silence of the lambs) - Ramanna.
There is not much known about his past but one thing is evident that he has a normal family. he has a normal sister but the way she treats him with immediate hostility proves that his "family" has lost all hopes in him. Apart from being a serial killer, he spends time adoring ACP Raghavan. The admiration is not based on looks or sexuality but the attitude and similarity.
Ramanna's decisions like all of us are based on "moral conduct" or in simpler words, one's attitude based on his own moral values (either self-taught or by the society). But, his moral conduct is quite different from ours and that is where the psychological analysis begins. Ramanna believes in doing the devil's work by removing the evils and wrongdoers of society. He believes that he is doing good work. this good work is killing someone who has put dirt on society. Now he believes that doing this "good work" is the job of the law enforcement authorities but the way they do it is different. The difference is their "license to kill". The video down below would put things in a more clear perspective:
He bifurcates the world and people into black & white (duality of his mind). The beautiful metaphor of the "chessboard" makes it clear that he always has to walk on the black path of the chessboard because he does not have the "license to kill". ACP Raghavan on the other side does have this so-called "license". Ramanna is so fixated on proving that ACP Raghavan and himself are very similar but unlike him, ACP Raghavan walks on the white path making him "morally good".
This concept is pretty confusing and seems outlandish but if you think about it, it is very much true. When the drug Fueled ACP Raghavan "accidentally" kills Simmy, the similarity between those two characters of the movie is much clear. It is also a critique of the concept of morality. The moral principle is a very flawed concept to judge what is right and what is wrong because moral values vary from person to person. This whole movie is about two morally flawed people. Even though they start by looking opposite (good and evil), by the end of the movie, the duality of their mindsets is no more. Even ACP Raghavan (the white or good character) kills someone who is not a threat to society and possibly gets away with it. Thus, making it clear morality or moral values cannot justify an act as good or evil. Only the consequences of one's actions justify an act as good or evil. (the idea of "Ying-Yang" feels more digestible)
I hope the readers of this article would understand what I have written and be open to a friendly discussion. Nonetheless, I have to say that Nawazuddin Siddique's performance was staggering. Only a few actors across the world can maintain such commitment to one's character (this was proven when he got a standing ovation at the Cannes film festival after the screening of this movie). On a lighter note, I would like to wish everyone a happy new year. I hope you all to be blessed with happiness and love and also a great year ahead.