Ramayana Part 1 Review: Yash’s Ravana Emerges as the Film’s Strongest Point

Nitesh Tiwari’s Ramayana takes on one of India’s most revered mythological epics with a relatively safe approach to storytelling. While the film aims to bring the familiar tale to the screen, its most interesting aspect, according to the review, lies in its understanding of Ravana, played by Yash.

Advertisement

The Ramayana has been retold across generations, with different interpretations and perspectives shaping how audiences engage with the epic. Bringing such a story to cinema in 2026 is therefore more than a straightforward filmmaking exercise. The choices made in adapting it also influence how the familiar characters and events are presented to a contemporary audience.

A familiar retelling with limited creative risks

The review describes the film as a largely straightforward adaptation that stays close to the traditional narrative. Rather than exploring bold interpretations or taking significant creative risks, the storytelling appears focused on presenting the epic in an accessible and entertaining way.

Its sincerity is acknowledged, but the approach also leaves room for questions about what a modern adaptation of such a layered story could have attempted. The review suggests that the film misses an opportunity to engage more creatively with the different interpretations and possibilities that have surrounded the Ramayana over centuries.

Yash’s Ravana offers a brighter point

The strongest element highlighted in the review is the film’s treatment of Ravana. Yash’s portrayal of the antagonist gives the adaptation a more compelling dimension, offering a reason to look beyond its otherwise conventional storytelling.

Rather than presenting the film as a bold reinvention of the epic, the review sees its appeal in a relatively restrained retelling whose most notable strength lies in how it approaches its central antagonist.

Ultimately, Ramayana appears content with a familiar narrative approach. Its sincerity may make it accessible to audiences, but its limited appetite for creative experimentation remains a missed opportunity.