Despite the Indian film industry being the second largest in the world, it’s not often that an Indian movie gets a big global push, as Ramayana is on the 2026 movie schedule. I’ve long been curious about Indian movies, but I’ve never really dived headlong into it. Like RRR a couple of years ago, which blew me away with its scope, Ramayana has me intrigued, but I’ve not seen it yet. The reviews for the epic have me even more confused, and frankly, curious. They are a little all over the place, and the conflicting reviews come down to those familiar with the source material and those who are less so, I think.
Ramayana is based on an ancient epic Hindu poem that is one of the foundations of Hindu mythology. It seems from the reviews that it comes down to how the film looks versus how it tells this ancient story. For example, Peter Bradshaw at The Guardian writes in his 4-star review:
With its giant canvas and some truly beautiful sunset skyscapes, this very enjoyable film has a little of Peter Jackson’s Lord of the Rings and even Disney’s The Lion King.
Brandon Zachary at ScreenRant shares some of that sentiment in his review, where he rated Ramayana a 7/10, writing:
There's romance, action, music, and even an operative tale of order and chaos that quietly plays with expectations. While the underlying storytelling is lacking in some key ways, and it stumbles as a result, the compelling craft and engrossing highlights make it a must-see on the big screen.
Describing the movie as “monumental” and “majestic” and comparing it favorably to another epic poem that became a book-to-screen adaptation earlier this year, The Odyssey, Christian Zilko says in his review for IndieWire:
Every facet of India’s topography, from lush grasslands filled with antelopes to gnarled forests with tigers and evil spirits lurking around every corner, is on full display. There are enough wars, musical numbers, “Gladiator”-style arena contests, talking eagles, lavish Indian weddings, Shakespearean feuds, da Vinci-esque flying machines, and shape-shifting to satisfy even the most attention-span-challenged viewers.
However, it seems that reviewers who are more familiar with the source material have found the movie less exciting. Often, these reviews are critical of how the story is told. For example, Siddhant Adlakha wrote for IGN:
It has neither the emotional hook nor the soul to compensate for its lack of visual momentum, and its reliance on a half-baked tech to appeal to a wider audience impedes what little drama exists at its core.
Prabhjot Bains is even more blunt in his review for But Why Tho?. Rating the film just 3/10, Bains decries the “sloppy” CGI, the “copious amounts of tepid slow motion,” and the “swamped in on-the-nose, expository writing.” Also comparing it to Christopher Nolan’s hit, Bains says:
Yet, despite its massive scale, outsized 195-minute runtime, and calculated positioning as India’s deeply reverent answer to The Odyssey, Nitesh Tiwari’s Ramayana: Rise of a Legend lands with all the force of an ornate thud.
So, here I am. I’m still really interested in the movie (and Indian cinema), but now I’m not sure how I should feel about it. I admit I’m not familiar with the source material, and it seems like I shouldn’t trust this movie to teach me about it. However, the grandness of it all–and I love a good spectacle–still has me excited to see it. I’ll just have to see how it goes.
