Hello everyone,
This blog follows the worksheet of Dilip Barad Sir, which provides clear analytical direction and helps in understanding the film from multiple perspectives such as narrative structure, thematic depth, performance, cinematic language, ethics, and critical discourse. The worksheet brings clarity to each task and strengthens the critical engagement with the film. For a more detailed and guided understanding of Homebound, readers are strongly encouraged to visit the worksheet link given below, as it offers valuable insight and academic clarity.
.jpeg)
PART I - PRE-SCREENING CONTEXT & ADAPTATION:
1.Question : Source Material Analysis
Answer: In Basharat Peer’s original essay, Amrit Kumar and Mohammad Saiyub are portrayed as textile workers who become victims of the sudden COVID-19 lockdown. The essay functions as journalistic reportage, emphasizing factual detail, immediacy, and the sheer scale of migrant suffering. The men are presented primarily as ordinary labourers, representative of millions rendered invisible by state failure.
In Homebound, Neeraj Ghaywan fictionalizes these real figures into Chandan and Shoaib, giving them interior lives, emotional arcs, and long-term aspirations. This shift transforms the protagonists from statistical victims into narrative subjects whose hopes and disappointments are central to the film’s emotional structure.
Fictionalization allows the film to move beyond documentation and explore structural injustice, focusing on how caste, religion, and class shape everyday life. The characters are no longer just casualties of a crisis; they are individuals whose dreams collapse under systemic pressure. Thus, the film converts journalistic observation into social realism with psychological depth.
Discussion Point: Narrative Shift in Employment
Answer: In the original essay, Amrit and Saiyub’s work as textile labourers situates them firmly within the informal economy, where survival, not ambition, is the central concern. Their suffering reflects the state’s neglect of migrant labour but does not directly challenge the idea of institutional inclusion.
By contrast, Homebound reimagines the protagonists as aspiring police constables, a significant symbolic shift. The police uniform represents authority, respect, stability, and recognition by the state. For Chandan and Shoaib, securing a government job promises escape from caste humiliation, religious marginalization, and economic insecurity.
This change reframes the narrative from one of economic abandonment to one of betrayed aspiration. The film argues that institutional dignity in India is not equally accessible. Even when marginalized individuals strive to enter state institutions, they encounter invisible barriers. Ambition, therefore, becomes a source of pain rather than progress.
Thus, the film critiques the illusion of meritocracy, suggesting that institutions offer hope rhetorically while denying dignity in practice.:
2. Question: PRODUCTION CONTEXT:
Answer: Martin Scorsese’s association with Homebound is reflected in the film’s commitment to realist aesthetics. The film avoids melodrama, using long takes, natural lighting, minimal background music, and unobtrusive editing. Emotional moments are underplayed rather than dramatized, allowing silence and physical fatigue to communicate suffering.
This approach aligns with global arthouse realism, a cinematic tradition often appreciated in Western film festivals. At Cannes and TIFF, the film was praised for its restraint, moral seriousness, and humanist perspective. Western audiences interpreted the film as a universal story of displacement and dignity.
However, domestic Indian audiences—more familiar with emotionally expressive narratives—found the film challenging. The lack of dramatic resolution and overt sentiment limited its popular appeal. The same realism that earned international acclaim created distance at home.
Thus, Scorsese’s influence helped position Homebound as festival cinema, enhancing its global recognition while contributing to its limited domestic reach.
Conclusion :
Through adaptation and production choices, Homebound transforms a journalistic account into a deeply political cinematic narrative. The film interrogates ambition, dignity, and institutional failure while adopting a realist style that bridges global cinema traditions and local social realities.
PART II: NARRATIVE STRUCTURE & THEMATIC STUDY
3: The Politics of the “Uniform”
Question
Answer : In Homebound, the police uniform is not merely a job symbol; it represents institutional legitimacy, respect, and protection. For Chandan and Shoaib, both belonging to socially marginalized communities, the uniform promises escape from everyday humiliation caused by caste and religious identity. Wearing the uniform would mean being recognized as a lawful, respectable citizen rather than a suspect or subordinate.
The film carefully shows how the protagonists internalize the belief that hard work and discipline will lead to success. Their exam preparation scenes are filled with hope, routine, and sacrifice, reinforcing the idea that merit will be rewarded.
However, this belief is systematically dismantled when the statistics are revealed—2.5 million candidates for only 3,500 posts. The sheer scale exposes the illusion of fairness. No amount of individual effort can overcome such structural imbalance. The competition becomes less about merit and more about survival within a rigged system.
Through this contrast, the film critiques Indian meritocracy as performative rather than genuine. It offers aspiration but withholds access. The uniform thus becomes a symbol of false promise, highlighting how the state manufactures hope while denying dignity.
4. Intersectionality – Caste and Religion
Identify scenes in Homebound that depict micro-aggressions rather than overt violence. Analyze the following two cases:
Question:
Answer :
Case A: Chandan and the ‘General’ Category
Chandan’s decision to apply under the ‘General’ category reveals deep internalized caste shame. Although reservation exists to correct historical injustice, it is socially stigmatized. Chandan fears being judged as undeserving or inferior.
This moment shows how caste oppression functions invisibly. The violence is not external but psychological. Chandan attempts to erase his caste identity to achieve social acceptance. The film suggests that caste discrimination persists not only through denial of opportunities but through the forced suppression of identity.
Case B: Shoaib and the Refused Water Bottle
The workplace scene where an employee refuses water from Shoaib is a powerful example of quiet cruelty. There is no abuse, no confrontation, and no visible aggression. The politeness of the refusal makes it socially acceptable yet deeply hurtful.
This act reflects religious othering, where Shoaib’s Muslim identity marks him as untouchable in subtle ways. The scene demonstrates how exclusion operates through everyday gestures, making discrimination appear normal and deniable. The cruelty lies in its silence.
5. The Pandemic as a Narrative Device Critics have noted a distinct tonal shift in the second half of Homebound.
Question : Does the introduction of the COVID-19 lockdown feel like a convenient narrative twist, or does it expose pre-existing slow violence? How does the pandemic transform the film from a drama of ambition into a survival thriller?
Answer: The COVID-19 lockdown in Homebound does not function as a convenient plot twist. Instead, it acts as an inevitable exposure of slow violence—a form of long-term structural neglect that marginalized communities already endure.
Before the pandemic, Chandan and Shoaib are struggling but hopeful. Their lives are governed by aspiration and belief in institutional fairness. The lockdown abruptly removes these illusions. Employment disappears, transport collapses, and survival becomes the only concern.
This shift transforms the film’s genre. The first half operates as a social drama centered on dreams and preparation. The second half becomes a survival thriller, focused on hunger, exhaustion, bodily pain, and death. The camera follows the deterioration of the human body rather than the pursuit of success.
The pandemic does not create injustice; it reveals it. The film suggests that the state’s failure during COVID is not accidental but consistent with its long-standing apathy toward the marginalized.
Conclusion of Part II
➡ Through its narrative structure, Homebound exposes the fragility of ambition, the cruelty of everyday discrimination, and the illusion of fairness in Indian society. The film uses realism and restraint to show how dignity is slowly denied long before crisis strikes.
PART III: CHARACTER & PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
6. Somatic (Body Language)
Observation:
Answer :
Vishal Jethwa’s performance as Chandan is deeply somatic, meaning that trauma is communicated primarily through physical movement and posture rather than speech. Throughout the film, Chandan’s body language visibly changes in the presence of authority figures such as exam officials, employers, and police officers.
When interacting with authority, Chandan’s shoulders slump, his spine curves inward, and his gaze drops to the ground. His speech becomes hesitant, and his hands remain close to his body. This physical “shrinking” reflects internalized caste oppression, where the Dalit body learns to make itself smaller to avoid attention, suspicion, or humiliation.
The scene in which Chandan is asked his full name is particularly significant. The request is ordinary, yet his body reacts with tension and fear before he responds. His pause, stiff posture, and lowered eyes suggest the anxiety of caste exposure. In Indian society, a full name often reveals caste identity, and Chandan’s body remembers this threat instinctively.
Through this performance, Jethwa shows that caste trauma is not only social but embodied. The body carries generational memory of exclusion. Chandan’s physical hesitation becomes a silent testimony to the psychological violence inflicted by caste hierarchy.
7. The “Othered” Citizen
Observation:
Answer :
Ishaan Khatter portrays Shoaib with controlled intensity, marked by suppressed frustration rather than open anger. His performance avoids emotional outbursts, instead relying on quiet expressions, tense silences, and restrained dialogue. This creates a sense of simmering angst—anger that cannot be safely expressed.
Shoaib’s decision to reject a job opportunity in Dubai is crucial. Dubai represents economic security but also permanent outsider status. By choosing to stay in India and pursue a government job, Shoaib expresses a desire for belonging in his homeland. He believes that serving the Indian state will grant him legitimacy and acceptance.
However, the film gradually reveals that Shoaib’s faith in institutional inclusion is misplaced. Despite his loyalty and ambition, he continues to face subtle religious discrimination. His Muslim identity makes him perpetually suspect, even within the nation he calls home.
Shoaib’s arc reflects the minority experience of conditional citizenship—belonging that must be constantly earned and is easily withdrawn. His quiet anger captures the pain of realizing that home can also be a site of rejection.
8.Gendered Perspectives
Critique:
Evaluate the role of Sudha Bharti (played by Janhvi Kapoor). Some critics argue that she functions mainly as a “narrative device” rather than a fully developed character. Do you agree, or does she serve as a necessary counterpoint representing educational empowerment and privilege?
Answer:
Sudha Bharti’s character occupies a limited narrative space, which has led some critics to label her a narrative device rather than a fully lived individual. While this criticism has merit, her role is nevertheless structurally significant within the film’s thematic framework.
Sudha represents educational empowerment, urban privilege, and social security. Unlike Chandan and Shoaib, her identity is not marked by caste or religious vulnerability. Her access to education and stable social networks allows her to move through institutions without fear or humiliation.
Rather than existing as an equal protagonist, Sudha functions as a contrastive figure. Her presence highlights the uneven distribution of opportunity. She embodies what the system can offer to those already positioned advantageously.
From this perspective, Sudha is less a narrative weakness and more a thematic counterpoint. She exposes the gendered and class-based asymmetries of empowerment. However, the film stops short of fully exploring her interior life, limiting her emotional depth.
Thus, Sudha is both a narrative device and a necessary symbol—important for what she reveals about privilege, even if not fully realized as a character.
Conclusion :
➡ Through restrained performances and embodied acting, Homebound transforms individual characters into social metaphors. The film uses physicality, silence, and emotional restraint to explore caste trauma, minority anxiety, and structural privilege with quiet but powerful realism.
PART IV: CINEMATIC LANGUAGE
9. Visual Aesthetics
Task : Cinematographer Pratik Shah uses a “warm, grey, and dusty” colour palette in Homebound.
Answer
Pratik Shah’s cinematography in Homebound deliberately avoids visual spectacle and instead focuses on physical reality. The warm, grey, and dusty palette mirrors the harsh environmental conditions of the highway—heat, dryness, and lifelessness. These colours drain the frame of vibrancy, reflecting the emotional and physical depletion of the characters.
During the migration sequences, the camera frequently avoids wide, panoramic shots that might aestheticize the journey. Instead, it relies heavily on close-ups and fragmented framing—feet dragging across asphalt, dust clinging to skin, sweat soaking clothes. By isolating body parts rather than faces, the film reduces the characters to tired, suffering bodies, emphasizing endurance over identity.
These close-ups force the audience to experience exhaustion viscerally. Repetition of walking feet and laboured movement slows down the rhythm of the film, making time feel heavy and unending. This visual strategy creates an aesthetic of exhaustion, where suffering is not dramatized but accumulated gradually.
Thus, the framing choices transform migration into an experience of attrition rather than adventure, aligning the viewer’s bodily perception with that of the characters.
10. Soundscape
Answer
Homebound uses sound with extreme restraint. Silence dominates key moments of suffering, while the background score is sparse and understated. When music is present, it does not guide emotion but quietly underscores mood.
This minimalist approach contrasts sharply with traditional Bollywood melodrama, where tragedy is often amplified through loud background music, songs, and emotional cues designed to provoke immediate sympathy or tears. In such films, sound tells the audience how to feel.
In Homebound, silence performs the opposite function. It creates discomfort, forcing viewers to sit with pain without emotional mediation. The absence of music during moments of hunger, death, or exhaustion makes these scenes feel unresolved and real.
The score by Chandavarkar and Taylor is used sparingly, often blending into ambient noise rather than standing apart. This avoids sensationalizing suffering and aligns the film with realist cinema traditions, where tragedy is depicted as quiet, ongoing, and ordinary.
By refusing melodrama, the film respects the gravity of its subject matter and allows suffering to remain uncontained and ethically unsettling.
Conclusion :
➡ Through restrained visuals and minimal sound design, Homebound constructs a cinematic language rooted in realism. The film’s aesthetic choices emphasize bodily exhaustion and emotional silence, challenging conventional cinematic representations of tragedy and inviting viewers into an intimate, uncomfortable engagement with social suffering.
PART V: Critical Discourse & Ethics (Post-Screening Seminar)
11. THE CENSORSHIP DEBATE (CBFC CUTS)
Discussion : The CBFC ordered 11 cuts in Homebound, including muting the word “Gyan” and removing a dialogue referring to “aloo gobhi.” How do these specific cuts reflect the state’s anxiety about films that expose social fissures? Discuss Ishaan Khatter’s statement on the “double standards” applied to social films.
Answer :
The CBFC’s cuts reveal a deep state anxiety about social realism. The word “Gyan” and the phrase “aloo gobhi” appear harmless on the surface, but within the film’s context they point toward class identity, caste-coded language, and everyday marginalization. By muting and removing such details, the censor board attempts to sanitize lived reality.
These cuts suggest fear not of obscenity, but of recognition—that audiences might see their own society reflected too clearly. Films like Homebound disturb the illusion of social harmony by foregrounding inequality, migration, and systemic neglect. The censorship therefore works as a tool to control narrative discomfort, not morality.
Ishaan Khatter’s comment on “double standards” is crucial here. He points out that commercial films are allowed excess—violence, misogyny, spectacle—without interference, while social films face strict scrutiny. This exposes a bias where entertainment that distracts is tolerated, but cinema that questions power is curtailed. Thus, censorship becomes ideological rather than ethical.
12. THE ETHICS OF “TRUE STORY” ADAPTATIONS
Debate : Author Puja Changoiwala has filed a plagiarism case, while the family of the real Amrit Kumar claims they were unaware of the film’s release. What are the ethical responsibilities of filmmakers when adapting stories of marginalized people? Does “raising awareness” justify the exclusion of original subjects or creators?
Answer :
When filmmakers adapt stories rooted in real suffering and marginal lives, their responsibility extends beyond legal permissions to moral accountability. Marginalized individuals often lack institutional power, making them vulnerable to being represented without consent, credit, or compensation.
The plagiarism allegation and the family’s unawareness raise serious ethical concerns. Even if the film aims to “raise awareness,” awareness cannot come at the cost of erasing the voices of those who lived the story. Awareness that excludes original subjects risks turning trauma into aesthetic material for privileged consumption.
Ethically, filmmakers must ensure:
Transparent credit to original creators
Informed consent of real-life subjects
Respectful representation without appropriation
“Raising awareness” does not justify silencing the very people whose lives are being depicted. True ethical cinema must share authorship, not appropriate experience. Otherwise, the film reproduces the same power imbalance it claims to critique.
13. COMMERCIAL VIABILITY VS. ART
Discussion : Producer Karan Johar stated that he may not make “unprofitable” films like Homebound again, despite its Cannes ovation and Oscar shortlisting. Analyze the tension between the film’s critical success and its domestic box office failure. What does this reveal about the consumption of “serious cinema” in post-pandemic India?
Answer :
The case of Homebound highlights a sharp conflict between artistic prestige and market survival. International recognition—Cannes applause and Oscar shortlisting—confirms the film’s aesthetic and thematic excellence, yet its poor domestic box office exposes systemic limitations in India’s film distribution and viewing culture.
Several factors explain this tension:
Limited screen availability for non-commercial films
Inadequate marketing compared to star-driven cinema
Post-pandemic audience preference for escapism over realism
Karan Johar’s statement reflects an industry reality: producers operate within financial risk, even when films earn global respect. Serious cinema struggles not because of quality, but because the market prioritizes spectacle, familiarity, and comfort.
This situation reveals that post-pandemic Indian audiences consume “serious cinema” more as festival prestige than as mainstream experience. Until distribution systems and audience habits evolve, socially critical films will remain celebrated abroad but marginalized at home.
Conclusion :
The contradictions surrounding Homebound: a film praised for its moral seriousness yet constrained by censorship, ethical disputes, and market failure. Together, these debates reveal how power operates beyond the screen—through regulation, authorship, and consumption—shaping what kinds of stories can be told, credited, and sustained.
PART VI : FINAL SYNTHESIS
Essay Promt (1000) : How does Homebound portray dignity not as a reward but as a basic right denied by systemic apathy, and how does the film use the idea of the “Journey Home” as both a physical migration during the COVID-19 lockdown and a metaphor for the protagonists’ failed search for acceptance within Indian society?
Answer :
Neeraj Ghaywan’s Homebound powerfully supports the statement that dignity is not a reward to be earned but a fundamental human right that is repeatedly denied by systemic apathy. The film presents the “Journey Home” not merely as a physical movement during the COVID-19 lockdown, but as a layered metaphor for the protagonists’ lifelong struggle to find social acceptance, security, and recognition within the Indian social order. Through its depiction of migrant lives, institutional indifference, and silent suffering, Homebound exposes how dignity is systematically withheld from the marginalized—not because of personal failure, but because of deeply rooted structural inequalities.
1. The Journey Home as a Physical Reality
On the surface, Homebound narrates the journey of migrant workers forced to return to their villages during the sudden COVID-19 lockdown. With transport suspended and cities shut down overnight, the protagonists are compelled to walk hundreds of kilometres along highways. This physical journey becomes the most visible symbol of state failure.
The film shows that the migrants are not asking for privilege, comfort, or opportunity—only for safe passage, food, and shelter. Yet even these basic necessities are unavailable. This reveals the core idea of the film: dignity is denied at the most fundamental level when individuals are forced to beg for survival.
Ghaywan deliberately avoids sensationalism. Instead of dramatic confrontations, the camera lingers on tired bodies, slow footsteps, and silent endurance. This visual language emphasizes that suffering is routine, not exceptional, for marginalized communities. The physical journey thus becomes evidence of systemic apathy, where the state remains invisible and absent at a moment of humanitarian crisis.
2. Dignity as a Denied Right, Not a Reward
A key argument of Homebound is that dignity should not depend on one’s productivity, resilience, or ability to endure suffering. However, the film shows a society where dignity is treated as something that must be “earned” through usefulness.
The protagonists contribute labour to the city, yet they are abandoned the moment they become inconvenient. This reveals a cruel logic: workers are valued, but workers’ lives are not. When the system collapses, they are discarded without protection.
The denial of dignity is not shown through direct violence alone but through institutional neglect. There are no safety nets, no clear communication, and no accountability. This absence of care exposes how dignity is systematically withheld from those at the margins.
Thus, the film strongly supports the statement that dignity is a basic right denied by systemic apathy, not a prize given for obedience or endurance.
3. The Journey Home as a Social Metaphor
Beyond physical migration, the journey home functions as a metaphor for the protagonists’ broader social experience. Throughout their lives, they have been moving—between jobs, cities, and hopes—yet never fully arriving at acceptance.
“Home” in the film is not simply a village or a house. It symbolizes belonging, recognition, and security. However, the film makes it clear that even returning home does not guarantee dignity. The same structures of inequality—class, caste, and economic vulnerability—remain intact.
This metaphor reveals a painful truth: one can be physically “at home” yet socially homeless. The protagonists’ journey reflects their position in Indian society—always present, always contributing, yet never fully included.
4. Systemic Apathy and Structural Violence
Homebound critiques systemic apathy by focusing on what is missing rather than what is present. The state appears only through distant announcements and ineffective measures. There is no coordinated response to migrant suffering.
This absence creates what can be described as slow violence—harm that occurs gradually through neglect rather than force. The film suggests that systemic injustice does not always announce itself loudly; often, it operates quietly through inaction.
The pandemic does not create inequality in the film; it exposes existing fault lines. The lockdown merely accelerates the consequences of long-standing neglect. The journey home thus reveals a society unprepared—and unwilling—to protect its most vulnerable citizens.
5. Silence, Exhaustion, and Loss of Voice
One of the most striking elements of Homebound is its use of silence. The protagonists speak little, and when they do, their words often go unheard. This silence represents their social position: they exist outside dominant narratives.
The film frequently focuses on physical details—feet blistered from walking, sweat mixing with dust, bodies collapsing from exhaustion. These images reduce individuals to physical endurance, highlighting how systems treat them as labouring bodies rather than thinking, feeling citizens.
By avoiding melodramatic background music, the film forces the audience to confront suffering without emotional cushioning. This aesthetic choice reinforces the idea that dignity is denied not only materially but symbolically—through invisibility and silence.
6. Failure of the Journey and the Illusion of Return
Unlike conventional narratives, Homebound does not offer closure. The journey does not end with comfort or redemption. This lack of resolution is deliberate. It emphasizes that returning home does not undo systemic injustice.
The film challenges the romantic idea that going back to one’s roots restores dignity. Instead, it suggests that without structural change, return becomes another form of stasis. The protagonists are physically closer to home, but socially they remain excluded.
This unresolved ending strengthens the film’s central argument: dignity cannot be achieved individually when systems are fundamentally unequal.
Conclusion :
Neeraj Ghaywan’s Homebound compellingly demonstrates that dignity is not a reward for perseverance but a basic human right systematically denied by social and institutional apathy. By framing the “Journey Home” as both a physical migration during the lockdown and a metaphor for lifelong social exclusion, the film exposes the fragile foundations of belonging in contemporary India.
The protagonists’ journey reveals a society that relies on marginalized labour while refusing marginalized lives. Their movement across highways mirrors their position within the nation—visible yet unheard, present yet unprotected.
Ultimately, Homebound asks a disturbing question: what does citizenship mean if dignity is conditional? In doing so, the film becomes not just a story of migration, but a moral critique of a system that allows people to walk home while dignity remains forever out of reach.
References :
Alexander, P. (2025, October 3). 'Homebound' review: Neeraj Ghaywan's bold movie brims with hope. Onmanorama.
Barad, Dilip. (2026). Academic Worksheet on Homebound. 10.13140/RG.2.2.10952.99849.
Dharma Productions. (2025, September 17). HOMEBOUND - OFFICIAL TRAILER | Ishaan K | Vishal J | Janhvi K | Neeraj G | Sept 26 [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WojNkusud84
Thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment