The first thing that strikes you as "padmawati unfold on the screen is now tepid the opulent, overwrought film is in spite of its visual flair and technical wizardy. Its beauty, as usually the case with a sanjay leela bhansali extravaganza, is skin deep. It is magnificent but overly manufactured.
female lead deepika padukone - after after whose character the film was named until censorial intervention saved off the’i’ from the title and diluted its upfront distaff emphasis, is an eye-catching epitome of elegance. she is a sight to behold. so, as some SLB fans might assert, is the film.
there is pizzazz aplenty in this overlong horses and swords yarn, but it is all so superficial if not wholly superfluous the the excess obsessed filmmaker throws into the boiling pot can rustle broth sizzling enough ideology it peddles to up hold notions of history favored by nations current political dispensation.
in one scene rani padmavati is blamed for the capture of her husband maharawal ratan singh by sultan-e- hinh alauddin killiji you allowed him go to the enemy camp alone and unarmed she is berated by king first wife. she is harangued for her beauty too. padmavati reply shouldn’t you be blaming the male nazar and neeyat instead
Overall film was good and all the star cast of the film doing fabulous job like Ranbir singh Deepika padukone Shahid kapur etc.