[5][6] Set against the backdrop of the 1880s Bengal presidency, the film revolves around a child bride and her journey from innocence to strength.

The village doctor, Sudip, regularly visits to check Bulbbul's feet due to an incident she refuses to discuss.

The driver of the carriage (the village boy's father Bulbbul had been seeking) is killed by the chudail, making Satya realise that Sudip is innocent.

[citation needed] She wrote the first two pages of the story after waking from her sleep one night and outlined the chudail, the myth, and the idea behind her in this first draft.

She completed the rest of the story after returning from a trip from Kolkata, after seeing a bulbul make a nest outside her house and after some encouragement from her colleagues.

With inputs from Dutt, the artwork of Raja Ravi Varma and Caravaggio were used as inspiration, in addition to influences from Expressionism and Surrealism.

Some examples of symbolism used include the grass, kaash phool, the bird and flower motifs, all significant to the goddess Durga.

[12] Set in the late 19th century in Bengal, the film delves into the idea of aristocratic Bengali women embracing ideologies of freedom.

Satya is similar to Jonathan Harker, the protagonist of Dracula, in that they have the same "cold, unemotional logic" that leads them to investigate the case (much like Sherlock Holmes) and eventually decide to kill the monster themselves.

The supernatural element (chudail in this case) embodying repressed emotions or desires is a trope of the Gothic genre.

[18] Shubhra Gupta of The Indian Express stated: "Bulbbul is very much its own film, the mix of classic pre-Renaissance Bengal and desi horror gothic making for gripping viewing...

"[20] Stutee Ghosh of The Quint gave it 3 stars and mentioned that "One of the questions that the film throws up and doesn't answer is if the binary between being a devi or a chudail is the only recourse that feminine power has to navigate in this patriarchal setup.

He wrote that the characters are thinly written, the surprises are carelessly telegraphed, and a weak script lets down the film in spite of visually striking imagery.

[22] Baradwaj Rangan of Film Companion South wrote "What we’re left with is a fever-dreamscape quasi-giallo movie, which transforms the pulp premise of a female vigilante...into something very human and emotional and deeply mysterious...the film’s imagery may be teasingly ambiguous, but the "hell hath no fury" messaging couldn't be clearer".

[23] Director Anurag Kashyap tweeted and called the film one of the best he had seen in this millennium and also praised the performance by the lead actors and Anvita Dutt.