Last Man in Tower Review: Manoj Bajpayee and Divya Dutta Turn a Mumbai Housing Battle Into a Chilling Study of Greed

Last Man in Tower, directed by Ben Rekhi, takes what initially looks like a straightforward property dispute and gradually turns it into something far more uncomfortable. Adapted from Aravind Adiga’s 2011 novel, the film follows retired schoolteacher Yogesh Mishra, known as Masterji, played by Manoj Bajpayee, as he becomes the only resident of an aging Mumbai housing society unwilling to accept a lucrative redevelopment deal. The film was released in theatres on September 11, 2026.

The premise is simple: a developer wants the residents to vacate their homes so the old building can be redeveloped. Most residents see the offer as an opportunity to improve their lives. Masterji sees something else at stake: memories, belonging, and the right to decide what happens to his home.

What makes Last Man in Tower interesting is that the film does not make either position completely comfortable.

Manoj Bajpayee Makes Masterji Difficult and Human

Manoj Bajpayee carries much of the film through a deliberately restrained performance.

Masterji is not written as a conventional heroic protagonist. He is stubborn, argumentative, and convinced that his principles are worth defending even when everyone around him disagrees. Bajpayee understands those contradictions and plays the character without turning his resistance into a grand cinematic performance.

The actor's physicality is particularly effective. His slower movements, controlled expressions, and changes in body language communicate that this is an older man increasingly finding himself isolated from the community he once belonged to. India Today's review similarly highlighted Bajpayee's detailed portrayal of an elderly man whose stubbornness, loneliness, and need for relevance exist alongside his principles.

That complexity is important because Masterji's position is never presented as automatically righteous.

At several points, the viewer can understand why his neighbors are frustrated with him.

Divya Dutta Is the Film's Emotional Counterweight

If Bajpayee represents resistance, Divya Dutta provides the film with one of its strongest arguments for change.

Dutta plays Sangeeta Puri, a resident whose personal circumstances give her compelling reasons to support the redevelopment. Her character is not simply motivated by greed. Her aspirations are tied to her family and the possibility of providing a different future for her son.

That makes her confrontation with Masterji more painful.

Rather than playing Sangeeta as a straightforward antagonist, Dutta allows resentment, desperation, affection, and frustration to exist together. The Times of India called her performance a standout and described Sangeeta as an important parallel lead whose motivations remain recognizably human.

Cinema Express also singled out Bajpayee and Dutta as the film's anchors, noting how the drama uses their opposing positions to explore middle-class morality and Mumbai's housing crisis.

Their scenes together work because neither actor needs to announce who is right.

Boman Irani Avoids the Easy Villain Route

Boman Irani, as developer Dharmen Shah, could easily have become the stereotypical wealthy builder who exists only to represent greed.

The film wisely gives him more texture.

Shah is persuasive rather than constantly aggressive. His confidence comes from understanding what people want and knowing how easily financial opportunity can change a person's position.

This makes the central conflict less about one evil individual and more about a system in which everyone has something to gain and something to lose.

The Indian Express and Filmfare reviews both noted that Irani's performance avoids making the developer a simplistic villain, allowing the conflict to retain its moral ambiguity.

The Real Protagonist May Be Mumbai

The film's most important character, in a broader sense, is Mumbai itself.

Last Man in Tower moves away from the glamorous version of the city that dominates much mainstream Hindi cinema. Instead, Ben Rekhi focuses on an aging housing society, cramped homes, neighborhood conversations, and the uncomfortable intimacy of people who know far too much about each other's lives.

The redevelopment plot becomes a way of examining what happens when an old community encounters the economics of a rapidly changing city.

The building represents different things to different residents. For one person, it is an inconvenient old property. For another, it is financial security. For someone else, it represents decades of memories.

The Indian Express describes the film as a study of the tension between urban development and individual integrity, while Scroll.in notes how the adaptation turns Mumbai redevelopment into a critique of changing social and economic relationships.

Greed Is Not the Only Problem

The film's strongest idea is that greed rarely arrives alone.

Money changes conversations first. Then relationships. Then loyalties.

Residents who once shared everyday life begin looking at one another through the value of their individual apartments. The redevelopment proposal exposes resentments and ambitions that were already present beneath the surface.

This is where Last Man in Tower becomes more disturbing than a conventional social drama.

The film asks whether people become immoral because they are inherently greedy, or because circumstances give their greed permission to surface.

That question comes directly from the novel's larger examination of capitalism, redevelopment, and human behavior. Adiga's original story similarly refuses to divide the residents neatly into heroes and villains.

The Film's Greatest Strength: Moral Ambiguity

One of the smartest decisions in Last Man in Tower is its refusal to make Masterji completely right.

His principles are admirable. But his refusal also affects people who have genuine financial and personal reasons for wanting to move.

That creates an uncomfortable viewing experience.

You may sympathize with Masterji in one scene and understand the residents' anger in another.

The Times of India praised the film for allowing contradictory viewpoints to coexist instead of declaring one side entirely correct.

That ambiguity also prevents the movie from becoming a simple anti-development statement.

The film is asking a more complicated question: when a city changes, who gets to decide what progress looks like?

Ben Rekhi Keeps the Drama Controlled

Ben Rekhi directs the film without relying excessively on melodrama.

The escalation comes through everyday interactions rather than constant dramatic declarations. Meetings, conversations, disagreements, and shifting relationships gradually transform the housing society into an increasingly hostile environment.

At the same time, the film's compact runtime keeps the central conflict moving. Contemporary reviews have placed its duration at roughly 94-97 minutes, depending on the listing or review source.

The economy works in the film's favor, although it also means some supporting characters receive less development than they do in Adiga's considerably broader novel. Scroll.in specifically noted that the movie is crisp and efficient but does not fully reproduce the book's depth and satirical texture.

What Works and What Doesn't

What works

• Manoj Bajpayee's layered performance

• Divya Dutta's emotionally complex portrayal

• Boman Irani's restrained approach to the developer

• The Mumbai redevelopment setting

• Strong moral ambiguity

• A compact, focused narrative

• A story that connects personal greed with wider social change

What doesn't work as well

The adaptation can occasionally feel too compressed. Adiga's novel has considerable room for its large ensemble of residents and its darker humor, whereas the film has to move through the same basic conflict in a much shorter period.

Some of the novel's satire and social detail therefore feel reduced, leaving the film more direct and serious in tone. This is also reflected in the mixed critical response: while some critics praised the performances and relevance, others felt the adaptation was somewhat restrained compared with the source material.

The Celebrity Hour Take

Last Man in Tower works best when it refuses to tell the audience exactly whom to support.

Manoj Bajpayee gives the film its moral center, but Divya Dutta makes sure that center is constantly challenged. Boman Irani, meanwhile, represents a world where ambition is not necessarily presented as evil; only its consequences become increasingly troubling.

That is what makes the film more than a story about one man refusing to sell his home.

It is about the price attached to every definition of progress.

For Masterji, selling means giving up something that cannot be measured in money. For his neighbors, refusing to sell means potentially giving up opportunities they may never receive again.

Neither side gets an easy answer.

And that is precisely why the film stays with you after the credits.

Final Verdict

Last Man in Tower is a thoughtful urban drama powered by three strong performances and a premise that feels increasingly relevant to contemporary Mumbai.

Manoj Bajpayee gives Masterji dignity without making him saintly. Divya Dutta provides the emotional volatility that keeps the conflict alive, while Boman Irani brings controlled menace to the developer at the center of the dispute.

The film may not capture every layer of Aravind Adiga's novel, but it successfully preserves its central moral dilemma: what happens to human relationships when a price is placed on everything?

For viewers looking for a Hindi drama driven by character, social context, and uncomfortable moral questions rather than conventional spectacle, Last Man in Tower is worth watching.

The Celebrity Hour Rating: 3.5/5

Sources & Verification

This review was prepared by independently cross-checking the film's release information, cast, director, adaptation credits, and premise against the official trailer material and multiple contemporary reviews. The film's central themes and critical assessment were compared across India Today, The Indian Express, Scroll.in, The Times of India, Cinema Express, and Rotten Tomatoes' aggregation of published reviews.