No complain on acting but storyline of movie is disappointing. It doesn't feel connected. Climax is average.

Emotion, comedy, actions are not great. In some placed movie tried to put emotions, but it doesn't stick. It just passes through without any realization. After some time, it feels bore. You will not feel sad if someone dies.

Deepika Padukone role has no major contribution, it doesn't have the vibes. Same old type script for her.

Hrithik has major role and total focus was on him. Still, dialogue, story let him down.

Acting of villain is just sufficient.

Songs are ok. Just fill the movie.

Movie is just one time watch without much expectations.

There are movies with entirely imaginative stories, where directors aim to elevate the narrative through the grandeur of the big screen.

Then there are real-life stories that directors attempt to adapt for the screen, striving to do justice to the original events.

And then there's Siddharth Anand, who first twists a real event into his own fantasy and then proceeds to ruin it with subpar plotting, a weak storyline, and dreadful visual effects.

In attempting to emulate Top Gun, Hindi cinema not only misses the mark but completely loses the essence of the film. While Top Gun begins with a tower flyover, Hindi cinema takes it to absurd heights, with planes flying upside down over runways, thankfully without scraping the asphalt or featuring the hero lighting a cigar or busting a dance move mid-flight.

The beginning of the movie is not just a poor imitation but perhaps a D-grade copy of top gun.

Hrithik Roshan seems to have misjudged his role, as if starring in War wasn't enough to make him realize it's not his forte, especially when the same director and team have already produced a similar action movie. It's not just about acting in a copied Hollywood movie but also in your own.

Deepika Padukone barely gets any meaningful role in the movie, apart from forced scenes, unnecessary songs, and trying to grab some screen time with Hrithik Roshan, who not only acts selfishly in the movie but seemingly in real life too.

The rest of the movie is filled with the same tired tropes of portraying Pakistan forces in a negative light, along with the usual Bollywood imaginings of Pakistan, its people, and language.

It's a bad movie from the very start until the end, where the Hindi cinema maverick decides to transform into Rambo.

P. S.

Anil Kapoor, someone forgot to tell him that it was Hritikh copying Tom Cruise and it was not his role to play.

Fighter helmed by Sidharth Anand and featuring a stellar cast including Hrithik Roshan, Deepika Padukone, and Anil Kapoor, unfortunately, falls into a myriad of pitfalls that collectively diminish the film's overall impact. The most glaring issue is the excessive use of slow-motion shots, which not only overwhelms the viewer but also detracts from the storytelling. The repetitive nature of these sequences becomes a veritable headache, diluting the potential impact of pivotal moments.

While the star power of the cast is undeniable, the film's visual effects leave much to be desired. The CGI elements lack the finesse expected in contemporary cinema, diminishing the overall cinematic experience. Furthermore, the inclusion of songs seems more like a gratuitous platform for Deepika Padukone's dance performances rather than serving a purpose within the narrative, contributing to a disjointed viewing experience.

The inclusion of songs in the movie felt forced and unnecessary. While music can undoubtedly elevate a film, in "Fighter," it appeared more like a platform for Deepika Padukone to showcase her dance skills than an integral part of the storytelling. This diversion from the plot not only disrupted the flow but also left me questioning the purpose of these musical interludes.

A notable drawback is the film's length, and this issue could have been mitigated by a judicious removal of the superfluous slow-motion shots. Trimming the runtime would not only enhance the pacing but also potentially salvage the film's narrative cohesion.

The dog-fight scenes, crucial in a film of this genre, disappoint with their lackluster execution. The fighter plane's appearance verges on the cartoonish, compromising the realism necessary for such intense sequences. This, unfortunately, positions "Fighter" as a pale imitation rather than a worthy contender in the action-thriller genre.

**Military Maneuvers by Hollywood, Not the IAF:** The movie throws around military ranks and procedures like confetti at a party. Group leaders can't just transfer squadron leaders, and "borrowing" a fighter jet is pure fantasy. Come on, guys, some basic research goes a long way.

**Action Sequences That Defied Physics:** The action scenes were more like action *comedy*. Pilots teleporting after ejection and mid-air fistfights? I get it, Hollywood loves explosions, but some semblance of realism would have been nice. This wasn't "Top Gun," it was "Top goof."

**Radio Silence...Except It Wasn't?:** They tried to create tension with a jamming scene, but any real pilot knows fighter jets have ways to counter that. It felt like the writers forgot about basic military tech in their quest for drama.

**War Crimes for Entertainment? No Thanks:** Adding insult to injury, the movie depicts a war crime that was just plain insensitive. Using such a serious topic as a plot point was a massive low blow.

**Showcasing Indian Power...Except They Didn't? ** India has some impressive military tech, like the BrahMos missile. This movie could have been a chance to showcase that, but instead, it was a complete no-show. Talk about a missed opportunity!

**Overall, "Fighter" felt like a flashy brochure for fighter jets written by someone who wouldn't know a wingman from a wing nut.** It wasn't entertaining, and it wasn't even a good kind of unrealistic. If you're looking for a movie that respects the Indian Air Force and delivers thrilling aerial combat, this one's a total dud. Stick to documentaries, people.

Comparisons with Ajay Devgn's "Runway 34" further amplify the film's shortcomings. Despite a potentially smaller budget, "Runway 34" managed to deliver a more engaging and commendable cinematic experience. The discrepancy raises questions about the directorial choices made in "Fighter," leaving audiences longing for a more polished and well-thought-out production.

In conclusion, "Fighter" struggles to soar to the heights anticipated from a film of this caliber. Sidharth Anand's vision, marred by a lack of restraint in certain aspects, results in a movie that feels like a missed opportunity rather than the cinematic triumph it could have been.