OMG 2 Review - Gutsy But Pointless & Impractical Writing

OMG 2 Review : Akshay Kumar, Pankaj Tripathi and Yami come together for OMG 2, a sequel to the 2012 superhit "OMG! Oh My God" (2012). Being a remake, things became easy for OMG 1, but with OMG 2, it's a big problem. OMG had a suitable theme as the protagonist was fighting that 'G', aka God, in the film. But in OMG 2, the protagonist is fighting the school, society, and himself. So basically, they just used the OMG brand to cover one of the gutsy and taboo stories, knowing that without a brand, it wouldn't work. You have to be smart enough to understand what you are selling on the brand, and the OMG 2 makers failed to understand this basic fact. OMG 2 is anything gutsy, a pathbreaking attempt, or whatever you call it, but it's not the brand "OMG" film at all. Sex education is mandatory and is not as taboo as the film suggests, but the problem is aligning it with the devotional angle of Lord Shiva. Like mentioned above, OMG was about fighting God, but here it's more of his personal fight. Then why do you even need God's substance in the first place? The writer is at fault; he had to be practical and sensible here, but unfortunately he is clueless.OMG 2 is about Kanti Mudgal (Pankaj Tripathi), a great Shiv bhakt in Mahakal Nagari, whose respected and sophisticated life is turned upside down by a vulgar act of his son. The son is called off from school, but moreover, he is unable to walk in society due to his 'shameful' act. Kanti decides to leave the town with his family, but then Lord Shiva sends one of the messengers (Akshay Kumar) to help him. The messenger guides Kanti in his own way, and then Kanti is set to battle out society and its taboo thinking about "sex education". He is opposed by a talented lawyer, Kamini (Yami Gautam), who is defending the school, and three more parties in the courtroom. The arguments between uneducated Kanti and educated Kamini form the crux of the rest of the story.OMG 2 has to be one of the most illogical pieces of writing if you see it at the base. The beginning, yes, the base, is weak. The boy is offended by his schoolmates/rivalries; that's fine; it happens (even I have done some naughty things in my school days). But where is the setup for the main context? So, a naughty boy teases the boy for his "size," referring to why the girl denied dancing with him. Seriously? When did she check it, buddy? And since when has "size" got to do anything with a salsa dance partner? One of the biggest faults in the writing is in the arguments, as Kanti Bhai speaks about sex education but never about the age at which it is supposed to be taught. Not a single word about the genuine age of 12+ which is so common among parents, especially females due to periods. To destroy the basic sense of practicality, the writer did not even bother to mention the boy who shot the video. Isn't it offensive enough to have a case? That was one kind of abuse here; actually, it was the major one. Throughout the film, you see Lord Shiva's messenger guiding Kanti, but never for a moment do we know what he has to do with this topic. OMG 1 used the Bible, Quran, and Bhagwad Gita to prove the main point in the court's arguments, which ultimately makes Kanti a winner. It was simply taken from Hollywood's pathbreaking 1960 film "Inherit The Wind,"  but it worked better here in India due to the logical assistance of religious faith. Do we have any such references in OMG 2? Yes, but no. We have those references from Panchtantra, Kamasutra, and even Lord Macaulay's 1935 British rule, but can someone tell me what the connection is? All the energy and talk are wasted on proving one point: Sex Education, and that's totally okay. But did we ever have a word on its various aspects? By the way, in which era was this film set? It must be the 2010s or 2020s since we have a mobile and a solid animated edited video, and you are telling me that sex education is not known in this Era? I had sex education lessons in 9th grade way back in 2005, and I didn't even ask for it. It was so common in 2005, and you are calling it taboo in 2023, and that too in a high-profile English-medium school? And a qualified lawyer is defending this? You now understand why it is POINTLESS and IMPRACTICAL!In terms of performances, OMG 2 has a fine acting unit. Pankaj Tripathi gets the maximum screen space, and he shines like he always does. The problem appears in his character graph, which doesn't move from one point to another according to the momentum of the film. Akshay Kumar's screen presence is far from what it was in OMG. Maybe it wasn't his film this time, and he didn't even get enough scenes here. One of the riskiest decisions by the makers was to cast a lady to defend the arguments about sex, masturbation, morality, and everything 'vulgar' else that comes under the zone, and Yami Gautam was a perfect fit for the role. It's just that her character doesn't make any sense, as I believe that a B. Ed. graduate would be more exposed to such things happening in schools and colleges. And also, it is a matter of its own IQ and social awareness. Pavan Malhotra makes a funny judge, and we all know that Judges and courtroom cases are never so childish, yet we have to tolerate everything that happens in the courtroom for the sake of entertainment created by an overuse of cinematic liberty. Brijendra Kala brings a couple of laughs, while Govind Namdev and Arun Govil hardly get any scenes to be noticed. The supporting cast is also unnoticeable.OMG 2 has decent music, if not hit numbers. "Har Har Mahadev" is a wannabe Shiva trance sensation, and it is the only segment in which Akshay Kumar appears for the longest period in the entire film. Amidst Barbenheimer hype, Akshay singing "Uddja Kaale Kaawa," from "Gadar," has to be one of the weirdly amazing things to be done for "Oh My Gadar 2". The technical aspects are okayish, be it cinematography, editing, or production design. Amit Rai had the huge responsibility of matching the class of Umesh Shukla's "OMG," and I think he didn't recognise it. He should have made this film as a standalone movie instead of using the OMG brand, and then, I guess, things would have been different. The film got an "A" certificate, but the language is still awkward for Adults if they are watching it with their parents or families. Maybe we are not yet ready for these bold conversations, at least not through a mainstream film. The same subject might appear differently in an artistic cinema or a documentary, but it's just not comfortable with a film that's supposed to carry the OMG saga ahead and be a social entertainer at the same time. Rai's direction misses many nuances while dealing with the surroundings, authentic docs and science, but the biggest problem with OMG 2 is its weak writing. You can't make a courtroom look like a sensational press conference by a politician; you can't have public verdicts taken into account to win a court case; and that fussy Viral stuff of social media and the press is getting so boring nowadays. Is this what you call clever writing when you are trying to break the silence on a sensitive topic? More than anything else, OMG 2 falters at the writing. I appreciate the guts of the makers (half a star extra for that), but I wish they had brains too.