The Sabarmati Report: 7 reasons why you should watch the movie, 7 reasons to ignore it, and the 3 controversial scenes

On 27th February 2002, 59 people were burnt alive to death and this incident was much more horrifying than 9/11. It is not because of the number of fatalities but the identity of the perpetrators.

On April 28, 2006, a film was released that stands out for its significance. While movies are released every week, this date is notable because it marked the debut of the Hollywood film United 93, 1,721 days after the real-life event that inspired it. Remarkably, the incident was adapted for the screen in under five years. Although other films have been made on the same subject, United 93 holds a unique position due to its deeply intertwined narrative with the actual event. This authenticity brought the story to life, earning the film exceptional ratings on platforms like Rotten Tomatoes and IMDb.

It was such a major development that even Bollywood started making movies on the same. It was based on the terrorist attack which transpired on 11th September 2001 and targeted the World Trade Centre in the United States of America. The filmmakers, however, saw a masala venture like “My Name Is Khan” in the incident. Were the filmmakers aware of a more serious incident in our nation? Was it possible for the storytellers within them to show the event on the silver screen and reveal the truth to the public? Has our country actually experienced a tragedy worse than 9/11? The answer is “yes” and the reasoning behind it terrifies the film industry.

On 27th February 2002, 59 people were burnt alive to death and this incident was much more horrifying than 9/11. It is not because of the number of fatalities but the identity of the perpetrators. The people who carried out 9/11 were trained and had a religious mindset but those who burnt the Sabarmati Express train could be anyone from a vegetable seller to a tailor or a painter to a Maulvi-Maulana (Muslim cleric) or even a neighbor walking in the crowd, all of whom we trust.

How can a person burn someone alive to death? How is it possible to burn 59 people alive at once? The answer to such inquiries is that hatred must first reach the soul rather than the mind or heart before one can even consider committing such an act. According to the text, Islamist beliefs already include hateful notions including the killing of “kafir” (infidel), hellfire and others. However, how is this animosity possible in a Ganga-Jamuni culture? The result is that “The Sabarmati Report” has been released after 8297 days. That’s more than 22 years of wait.

I apologise for not being able to write about the movie or its screenplay, music, acting, cinematography or any other thing even after so many paragraphs but I have not strayed. I didn’t want to write the review. There was no requirement for it. A lot has already been expressed from mainstream to social media. Hence, I am writing about the need for this film in our society. I’m curious as to why it took 22 years for someone to produce a movie about such a dreadful and heartbreaking event that will always be remembered in Indian history.

Why one should watch “The Sabarmati Report”

• It was Sabarmati Express transporting the karsevaks from Ayodhya that was burned in Godhra.
• Watch this movie to learn the names of some of the 59 passengers who perished in the Sabarmati Express fire in Godhra.
• Watch this movie to learn about the event that split Indian history into two sections: India before and after Godhra.
• The train fire was intentionally kindled by extremist Muslims rather than a spontaneous occurence of a technical issue. Watch this movie if you want to witness this reality on the big screen.
• If you believe that the media portrays all facts accurately, then you should watch this movie.
• The community of Ganga-Jamuni filmmakers eventually woke up even if it was after 22 years and wrote as well as filmed the truth of Godhra. Watch this movie if you wish to witness this transformation.
• Only 41 of the 59 individuals who were burned alive as a result of radical Islamic ideology have had their names released to the public thus far. Who were the other eighteen unidentified people? When will the investigative journalists and filmmakers from Bollywood execute research on this and produce a documentary or movie? Do you want those 18 people to not be forgotten by just going unnoticed, or do you want the issue to become more than just a question and instead become the story of the nation? If you want this then watch this movie.

Why one shouldn’t watch “The Sabarmati Report”

• You should avoid watching this movie if you want to see the visuals of the burning train because the focus of the movie is not on the train burning but on how an attempt was made to erase this inhuman incident from history. The movie centers on this media industry that propagates deceptive information.
• Don’t watch this movie if you want to witness the screams of those who were burned alive because the filmmakers must not have intended to further torment the families of the victims. Hence they and the fire are only a part of this project. However, a fanatic Muslim crowd was shown to plan and then set fire to two of the train’s bogies. The film then revolves around how the media nearly destroyed this information.
• Don’t watch this movie if you can’t tell the difference between the “two stories” that are presented in it, the lie that lies beneath the story and the reality that emerged after. This is a significant part that many moviegoers in the theater were seen to have misunderstood and even commented on. The filmmakers clearly presented two stories “Kahani-1” and “Kahani-2” and clarified that these stories were purposefully crafted to prevent the revelation of Godhra’s reality. The storyline of the Hindu boy testifying against the karsevaks in Kahani-2 and the Muslim girl being abducted by them in Kahani-1 is so compelling that, based on these two tales, the narrative that “the train caught fire on its own” was not only produced by the media of the day but it was also thought to be true in the initial probe reports. The director has demonstrated that the story itself need not be true by disclosing the fabrications of these two tales in the movie.
• Don’t watch this movie if you can’t comprehend the media report’s content or how the truth was revealed at the end. The fallacy of blindly relying on the media, the fourth pillar of the nation, has been dispelled by the story’s writer and director. For this reason, if one pays close attention to the script, it will be discovered that any sequence like “the train caught fire due to an accident” at the start of the movie is actually a media story. Nowhere is it stated that this is the actual reality. The filmmakers deserve a perfect score for shattering the idea that media equals truth.
• Don’t watch this movie if you can’t tell the difference between the cheers in the Muslim colony when the Pakistan cricket team hits a six and the scene where a small child with the skullcap celebrates India’s victory while bursting firecrackers. Some things are stated directly and some indirectly in the visual media. We must recognize this distinction as viewers. The writer is telling the hero straight out that when the Pakistan cricket team performs well, it’s usual in Muslim colonies for people to burst crackers. In contrast, the filmmaker depicts a parallel reality in which the naive youngsters of the same colony, who have not been exposed to Pakistan or extreme religious ideas, celebrate India’s success as if it were their own. We have to acknowledge the difference between portraying the mindset of a Muslim child and that of a fanatical Muslim adult or adolescent on TV.
• Don’t watch this movie if you can’t see the reasoning for the claim that both sides have good people. Although there is nothing wrong with this sequence, many viewers claim that the creators included it for balance, which is untrue. It can be considered this way, if some people from the other side are not honest, then who are the ones returning to the fold of Sanatan Dharma?
• The plot revolves around a Hindi journalist, however, if you prefer pure Hindi in written form then avoid this movie. Indeed, the Hindi spoken in the film is accurate because it is a Hindi film, but the section where it is written in Hindi is disappointing.

What does the director wants to convey in the controversial scenes

“There are honest people on both sides.” If you are hurt by this scene, then what are your views about APJ Abdul Kalam? Will you dismiss him? Kerala Governor Arif Mohammad Khan is in the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) right now. He had protested against his own Congress party and former Prime Minister late Rajiv Gandhi on the Shah Bano matter. So, will you reject him too? The story’s writer and director are merely trying to communicate that if there is a nice person in any section of society, they should be perceived as such. Should the makers not have the freedom to say and show even this much?

“Small children wearing Muslim caps celebrating India’s victory.” It is important to note that the children shown in this scene have not reached adolescence. The director wants to show that the poison of religious fanaticism has not yet filled their minds and they are innocent. Hence, they are rejoicing in the country’s win. The same filmmaker also depicted family members of those youngsters from the same Muslim colony popping crackers and clapping when Pakistan hit a six. Do you want to stop using the visual medium to compel the audience to reflect by presenting them with completely different scenarios in parallel?

“Media report and two false stories.” The director is attempting to indicate that the media has only spread incorrect information following the Sabarmati Express fire. People believe the images displayed by the media they trust to be true and that has been exposed. This movie focuses more on who planned the conspiracy and who concealed it than on who set fire to the Sabarmati Express. What is wrong with this plot point when the media is the antagonist?

Where improvement could have been made

The terrible Hindi that was written was ignored from the first disclaimer until the last sequence of gratitude. It is inexcusable given that the protagonist is proud to be a Hindi journalist and refers to himself as such throughout the movie. The producer-director should have made him do the proofreading without spending any money if he really truly knew Hindi in real life.

Read the report in Hindi here.