Daktar Kaku attempts to use the world of medicine to tell a larger story about family, ideology, gratitude, ambition and the changing meaning of service. Rather than restricting itself to hospital life, the film uses the relationship between doctors and the people around them to explore different ideas about responsibility and success.

The subject is relevant, and the film contains several emotionally effective moments. However, its ambition is frequently held back by uneven writing, excessive exposition and a screenplay that sometimes explains its ideas rather than allowing the characters and situations to communicate them naturally.

Story: A Relevant Conflict Between Service and Ambition

At the centre of the film is Dr Dilip Saha, played by Prosenjit Chatterjee, a committed doctor whose understanding of medicine is closely connected to his social and ideological beliefs.

After losing his wife, Dr Saha raises his son Puskin while also taking responsibility for Pocha and Mampi. Puskin, played by Riddhi Sen, and Pocha, played by Pavel, grow up together and eventually become doctors themselves.

Their understanding of what it means to be a doctor, however, gradually moves in different directions.

Pocha remains deeply grateful to Dr Saha and continues to regard him as a mentor and guru. Puskin, meanwhile, begins questioning the values he has inherited and moves towards a more business-minded understanding of medicine.

The film is at its most interesting when this conflict between service and ambition develops naturally through the characters.

Screenplay: Too Many Ideas, Too Much Explanation

The screenplay has a meaningful subject but often struggles to maintain focus.

Daktar Kaku touches upon healthcare inequality, medical costs, rural healthcare, social responsibility and the commercialisation of medicine. Each of these themes has the potential to support a strong drama.

The problem is that the film tries to address too many of them simultaneously. Characters frequently explain their positions through long conversations and monologues, while certain ideological points are repeated.

The father-son conflict between Dr Saha and Puskin could also have been more nuanced. The film is more effective when it allows the audience to understand the characters through their actions rather than through extended explanations.

Direction: Thoughtful Ideas, Uneven Execution

Pavel’s direction shows a clear interest in using the medical world to explore larger social and personal questions.

There are moments where the film communicates its ideas visually rather than relying entirely on dialogue. These portions feel more confident and cinematic.

However, the direction is sometimes affected by the screenplay’s tendency towards exposition. Several scenes feel as though they are designed to explain the film’s message rather than allowing the audience to discover it organically.

Prosenjit Chatterjee: The Film’s Strongest Anchor

Prosenjit Chatterjee delivers one of the film’s most controlled performances.

As Dr Dilip Saha, he brings restraint and credibility to the character without resorting to unnecessary overacting. His mannerisms, interactions with patients and empathy towards those around him help establish the character as a doctor driven by responsibility.

The limitation is that the screenplay does not always provide enough backstory or dramatic action to fully establish the ideology that the film repeatedly discusses.

Still, Prosenjit provides the film with a strong emotional centre.

Riddhi Sen: An Emotional Conflict That Needed More Depth

Riddhi Sen plays Puskin with sincerity and emotional conviction.

His character’s resentment towards his father is partly connected to the loss of his mother and the belief that Dr Saha chose his professional duty at a crucial moment.

This emotional wound could have become the film’s strongest dramatic engine. Instead, the screenplay sometimes moves too quickly between confrontation, ideological disagreement and emotional resolution.

Riddhi handles the emotional scenes effectively, but the character’s overall arc could have benefited from greater development.

Pavel: Effective, Though Uneven

Pavel’s portrayal of Pocha is an important emotional component of the film.

His gratitude towards Dr Saha gives the story a warmer dimension, and several of his emotional scenes work effectively.

However, some of the longer monologues and dialogue-heavy sequences feel slightly rehearsed rather than completely natural. The issue becomes more noticeable when the screenplay asks the character to explain ideas that could have been communicated more effectively through behaviour.

Supporting Cast

Rajatava Dutta is effective in his role, although the character does not receive enough consistent development.

The elevator sequence involving Puskin and Mr Damani is one of the film’s more interesting visual moments. The confined space and movement between different levels complement Puskin’s internal movement between opposing ideas.

Ena Saha brings an approachable presence to her character, although the role itself is not written with the same depth as the central characters. Her Bengali delivery can occasionally feel somewhat exaggerated, making a few moments less natural.

Music & Romantic Portions

The film’s songs and romantic portions occasionally interrupt the central narrative rather than strengthening it.

While they provide variety and commercial appeal, the film would have benefited from a more selective approach, particularly because its strongest material lies in the family and ideological conflict.

Comedy & College Portions

The college and ragging-related comedy in the first half feels less essential to the central story.

Some lighter moments provide relief, but several of these sequences could have been shortened or removed without affecting the main narrative.

A tighter approach would have allowed the film’s central emotional conflict to receive more attention.

Visual Language: When the Film Lets the Images Speak

One of the film’s strengths is its occasional use of visual storytelling.

The elevator sequence involving Puskin and Mr Damani is a good example. Instead of relying entirely on dialogue, the physical space becomes part of the scene’s meaning.

These moments suggest that the film could have been even more effective had it relied more frequently on visual storytelling and less on direct exposition.

Editing & Pacing: A Tighter Film Could Have Been Stronger

One of Daktar Kaku‘s structural weaknesses is its pacing.

The central story has enough material to sustain a focused social drama, but songs, romantic portions and some of the college-related comedy occasionally interrupt the narrative momentum.

A tighter runtime and more disciplined editing could have allowed the father-son conflict and the film’s central ideological debate to carry greater emotional weight.

What’s Good & What’s Not