Bhoot (2003)

The thing with this movie is that the first half is superb. There are genuinely terrifying moments, which make the prospect of going out of your room to get snacks seem like the most hideous idea possible. Urmila Matondkar delivers an extremely convincing performance, as a woman who gets sucked into that terrifying unknown commonly referred to as "being possessed". It's pitch perfect- you get to see her consciousness fraying at the edges, her moments of self-doubt, and finally, the void where she is only a sliver of an identity. It's a horrifying journey, and Urmi deserves all the awards and praise she got for this performance.

However, the film itself starts fraying at the edges in the second half. The jump-scares are still there, but what's missing is the ghastly psychological reality of horror. The movie moves into a boring conventional territory, which would have been good on its own, but pales significantly when compared to the first half. In the effort of explaining everything too neatly, I think the movie loses some of that crazy touch that's required to make a "I am so not sleeping tonight" level horror movie. Which is a shame, honestly, considering that it totally could have reached that height. 

Ajay Devgan is quite good, as the hapless husband who runs from pillar to post to find something that might actually cure his wife. Rekha is criminally under- and mis-utilised here, so points off for that too, Ramu. Nana Patekar was a bit off as well, while I really enjoyed Victor Banerjee's psychiatrist role. Also, the actress who plays the creepy maid (I am so pissed we never get to know the maid's back story) deserves an award specially made for her. 

In conclusion, now I see why people have said that the only good movie Ramu has made in this century is Rakta Charitra (2010). But this also makes me excited to see his other movies from the 90s, since I literally can't stop talking about the one that I have seen: Kshana Kshanam (1991). Also, middle-aged actresses >>>