Vipin Das has an undeniably whacky concept for a protagonist and a great title going for his film. There’s conviction in the slow treatment of this investigative thriller. After a terrific introduction and a dark prologue, the film dives into an almost absurd zone – We have a cop whose methods include playing the game of Antakshari with the accused in his station. Now this makes for an engaging character to get behind, an endearing, fallible hero with a likeable quirk. This quirk is never really given a backstory through the course of the film. I see that as a bold choice, for keeping the faith on the audience to buy into the absurdity of it all.

At the same time, we have an arguably unnecessary backstory for the antagonist, who is a serial killer on the prowl. His method is using a stethoscope to strangle his victims, who are second-hand owners of one particular bike. This by itself, is an intriguing thought, as much as the quirk handed to the protagonist. But the film chooses to “explain” the motives of this serial killer. We get a backstory, with a brutal, on-your-face depiction on the caste violence that him and his mother have faced. I strongly believe the film would’ve worked even without this segment. Using the stories of the downtrodden in such an inorganic manner – to the point where an injustice like caste appears objectified – doesn’t quite sit well for me. It’s the gaze and extent of the brutality being depicted that’s making me wonder if there’s a problem here. Why can’t psychopaths just be chaotic and unhinged? Why do they always need a sob story to rationalise their actions? This has also been a recurring problem with (successful) serial killer stories being made down south. It has gotten to a point where the killer’s backstory, no matter how grave and pitiful, has ended up looking like a part of a formula. (On the issue of caste, to the makers’ credit, they do touch upon it once again with the cops discussing it unabashedly among their ranks.)

Coming back to the killer here, a lot of questions arise from his story too, like when we haven’t yet seen him, we have this image of a clinical sociopath who can literally mirror the personalities of his victims, play into their thought patterns to lure them into his. But the very moment that his mask is off, it feels as if his emotions have gotten broad too. He goes through a moment of catharsis that seems off-character for the impenetrable personality we’ve been building up to. This could be a case of personality disorder, which isn’t something I have much knowledge on, so I’d rather give the benefit of doubt to the makers. The supposed cliffhanger of an ending doesn’t work either, playing into a trope abused by horror films.

This is an engaging watch, it meanders – but only in retrospect, because never did I feel this while watching the film. While holding back on the reveal for so long, the makers also make way for intriguing subplots, but sadly don’t quite resolve their conflicts. There’s a mute girl, a mother and two kids suffering under the toxic man-of-the-house. There’s a great moment where the mute girl stands her ground against an abusive old cop. We come to expect the same for the mother’s story too, but that plot is very glaringly abandoned. I say glaringly because the film has a rather stretched out climax – a really long single take, and a physical fight that appears dragged out owing to unexciting beats within the stunt choreography – and I wish all that time had been spent on the abandoned characters. Antakshari is a game of energy as much as lyrical knowledge, and I felt this during this climax fight. It’s just two men swinging out at each other to the point of exhausting their energies.

The makers do get a lot right. Saiju Kurup’s presence lends charm to the simpleton cop character, in a film with utterly despicable cops played by Kottayam Ramesh and Binu Pappu. The visual atmospherics and tension in smaller setpieces work big time. This is why the film is consistently engaging. I only wish the writing had lent as much support to the craft on display, by being consistent. It flirts with the absurd for a bits, and is grotesquely realistic in another. These varying ends of eccentricity don’t quite come together, making for unsatisfying watch.