Your opinion is appreciated but disagreeable. Fiction and reality are two different things for your information. The story begins with caption ‘inspired by’ a phenomenon, not a city. Police harassment and police not doing anything or gunning down someone but not gunning down someone else are ridiculous arguements in an otherwise appreciation of the film’s attempt to showcase a beautiful city.
Not being able to sympathize with the protagonist is fair because he is an anti-hero, and Robert De Niro as Travis and NYC seen as a dirt town was hard for many too to accept at that time when Martin Scorsese’s Taxi Diver was released. I don’t mean to compare myself or this film to that classic other than our protagonists being irregular.
However, reality of Kathmandu or NYC has nothing to do with both movies. Plausibility is not reason for forming opinion by a critic. It should be whether the world of the story is believable. So, if characters behave in a certain way then we should be convinced about it. If that didn’t happened for you then your opinion is justified. As such, if two ambitious guys that happen to be a Muslim And Hindu are attempting to rule Kathmandu, I don’t see why that’s not believable. And, if a person gets involved in their dirty battle because of personal loss, what’s so confusing.
This is not Die hard and if you degrade the action as ‘okay’ is fine but don’t degrade Nepalese cinema with a snobbish attitude of “standard”. What is that standard? Maybe Nepalese filmmakers can try to live up to that standard when they embark on creating film in the resources they have.
In conclusion, my friend, I appreciate the work you do and of all critics in general because they guide viewers but more so they can help filmmakers become better next time. But, bad opinions without true context and depth of understanding cinema only destroys hard work.