Piyush Mishra Accuses Anurag Kashyap of Ruining the Second Halves of His Films

Veteran actor, lyricist, and writer Piyush Mishra has stirred controversy with his blunt remarks on filmmaker Anurag Kashyap. While acknowledging Kashyap’s legacy in shaping modern Indian cinema, Mishra accused him of a recurring flaw: delivering powerful first halves in his films but consistently spoiling the second halves. He specifically took aim at Gulaal, Dev D, and the cult hit Gangs of Wasseypur, saying all three fell apart midway despite strong beginnings.

“Half a Good Movie, Then It’s Ruined”

In his candid remarks, Mishra did not mince words. He claimed Gulaal started brilliantly but lost its intensity in the second half. According to him, Kashyap has a habit of starting strong, only to derail the story once he feels the film is on track. He also pointed to Dev D, which initially looked like a bold and raw take on alcoholism, before it turned into something “strange” and disconnected in the latter half. Even Gangs of Wasseypur, hailed by many as Kashyap’s masterpiece, wasn’t spared. Mishra argued that while the film gripped audiences in its build-up, its sprawling narrative fizzled out later.

Why Mishra’s Criticism Matters

It’s not unusual for critics or audiences to call out Kashyap’s style, but Mishra’s comments carry extra weight because he has worked closely with the director. Having acted in Gulaal, he witnessed Kashyap’s process up close. Publicly criticizing a filmmaker you’ve collaborated with is rare in Bollywood, where diplomacy and silence are often the safer routes. Mishra’s honesty has ignited debate: is Kashyap a genius risk-taker or a filmmaker who repeatedly sabotages his own stories?

Fans Divided Over Kashyap’s Style

Fans of Kashyap argue that his unpredictability and rawness are exactly what make him stand apart. They say his films reflect life itself—messy, unresolved, and morally ambiguous. For them, what Mishra sees as “ruined” second halves are actually deliberate choices that defy Bollywood’s formulaic endings.

On the other hand, many viewers agree with Mishra. They point out that Kashyap’s films often lose steam after a gripping start, leaving audiences frustrated. Dev D in particular has been cited by fans as a film that promised a hard-hitting narrative but drowned in experimental detours.

Legacy vs. Imperfection

Mishra clarified that his comments weren’t meant to erase Kashyap’s contributions. He admitted Kashyap will be remembered in cinematic history for daring to break Bollywood’s formula. But he insisted that criticism is necessary, even for icons. In his view, Kashyap repeatedly undermines his own brilliance by refusing to tighten his second halves.

Is Kashyap Listening?

The big question now is whether Kashyap will take Mishra’s critique seriously or dismiss it as just another opinion. Will he refine his storytelling, or will he continue embracing the chaos that divides critics and fans alike?

Either way, Mishra has cracked open a debate the industry usually avoids: that even celebrated auteurs may have patterns of failure. By calling Kashyap out so directly, he has forced Bollywood to confront whether artistic unpredictability is genius—or simply sloppy filmmaking.