Last Man in Tower Review: Manoj Bajpayee, Divya Dutta Shine in Mumbai Redevelopment Drama

Last Man in Tower turns a Mumbai redevelopment dispute into an intense examination of ambition, greed, pressure, loneliness and human behaviour. Based on Aravind Adiga’s novel, the film follows one resident who refuses to sell his home even after a builder offers a substantial amount of money, putting him at odds with neighbours who are ready to move on.

Manoj Bajpayee plays Yogesh Mishra, a retired schoolteacher living in a home filled with memories of his late wife. While the other residents accept the builder’s lucrative redevelopment offer, Yogesh refuses to leave. He insists that residents have a legal right to reject the deal and should not be pressured into surrendering their homes.

The film’s strength lies in avoiding a simple division between a righteous protagonist and greedy neighbours. Each resident has personal reasons for wanting to sell. One mother hopes to provide a better life for her special-needs child, a single mother wants to fund her daughter’s education abroad, while another resident needs the money to clear his debts.

As the dispute intensifies, the issue moves beyond property and personal choice. Pressure begins to take increasingly disturbing forms. An elderly couple eventually agrees to the deal after masked men attack them, while Yogesh’s lawyer advises him to accept the money and move on. Even workers concerned about safety reconsider their position when financial incentives enter the picture. The film suggests that money can influence not only property decisions but also silence, loyalty and moral choices.

The housing society gradually becomes central to the story. Its meetings, gossip, alliances and judgments reflect the complex social dynamics of Mumbai apartment life. The residents even scrutinise the private life of a single woman, turning her visitors and personal choices into subjects of gossip. Yogesh challenges this behaviour by arguing that privacy is a basic right and that residents have no authority to intrude into another person’s life.

The film also uses these interactions to explore Mumbai’s changing social landscape. Yogesh recalls that the society was once exclusively Christian and that Hindus were not allowed to live there. He questions whether a city that has changed enough to bring different communities together should not also learn to accept people living outside conventional family structures.

Divya Dutta delivers a particularly compelling performance as Sangeeta Puri, whose special-needs son shares a close relationship with Yogesh. Her efforts to persuade him to accept the redevelopment deal become increasingly emotional. She reminds him that the residents supported him when his wife was battling cancer and argues that he should now support their aspirations. Sangeeta's behaviour can be seen as emotional manipulation, but Dutta ensures that the character never becomes a straightforward villain. Her pain, frustration, envy, maternal concerns and disappointment remain visible throughout.

Manoj Bajpayee anchors the film with a nuanced portrayal of Yogesh. Rather than relying on obvious mannerisms to portray an elderly man, he builds the character through subtle changes in movement, speech and body language. Yogesh’s stubbornness, unsolicited advice and determination to remain relevant feel recognisable, particularly in his strained relationship with his son. His son's criticism of his constant advice becomes a painful reminder that being convinced you are right does not necessarily make relationships easier.

Boman Irani plays the builder with controlled menace. Instead of presenting him as an aggressive or exaggerated antagonist, the performance makes him calm, persuasive and curious about why Yogesh cannot be bought. The builder's inability to understand what Yogesh truly wants adds another layer to the conflict, especially because even Yogesh may not have a clear answer.

The pressure against Yogesh eventually becomes extreme. His access to basic necessities disappears, support from the society dries up and even his home is subjected to humiliating acts. As he is pushed towards emotional and physical isolation, the film refuses to tell the audience that his position is automatically heroic. It instead raises a difficult question about whether defending one's principles is always courage or whether it can eventually become another form of selfishness.

Director Ben Rekhi presents a Mumbai far removed from the city's glamorous skyline. Ageing buildings, compact homes, neighbourhood conversations and residents constantly observing one another create a grounded picture of a community being transformed by redevelopment. The conflict remains personal even as its consequences grow increasingly serious.

The building itself works as a metaphor for the characters. Some residents see the old structure as something worth preserving, while others view demolition and redevelopment as the path to a better future. The film maintains this ambiguity rather than forcing viewers to choose a single side.

Running for around 97 minutes, Last Man in Tower keeps its narrative focused and avoids unnecessary expansion. The adaptation remains connected to Adiga’s novel while developing its own cinematic identity. Its conclusion is emotionally difficult and leaves viewers with two uncomfortable questions: when does the pursuit of a better life turn into greed, and when does holding firmly to one's principles become selfishness?