Slumdog bashing!
Slumdog has certainly struck a nerve Like it or hate it, everyone has an opinion. Preliminary box-office reports say Slumdog isn't quite the millionaire he was expected to be in India. Despite all those Oscar nominations, despite the musical blandishments of local boy (and three-time Oscar nominee) A R Rahman, despite the reams of hype in the press, and despite director Danny Boyle and Co touring the TV channels in an endless cycle of promotion, the film just hasn't caught on the way it was expected to.
Yet, in a sense, the film is a bona fide phenomenon. Don't take our word for it - just ask those who've seen it. The instant reaction upon walking out of the theatre appears to be the overwhelming urge to discuss the film to pieces. Everyone has a strong opinion - about the film, about the reactions to the film, about the pieces written about the reactions to the film - and everyone is writing in a about it.
Cliche ridden
Slumdog depicts India the way a foreigner sees it and we cannot deny that. It's a good film but doesn't deserve the hype it is getting. It It is not just a personal opinion, but an assessment born of my passion for good cinema. Unlike the majority of Indian critics who can't digest the depiction of poverty and the ugly underside of Mumbai, I have no issues with the way Boyle has done it.
I felt some of the visuals were disgustingly fascinating -- like the man and the buffalo wading through muck during the chase scene. One can see the efforts made to locate such filth, guaranteed to turn the insides of anyone, leave alone the 'developed' western world audience.
My only grouse is that all this is used in a calculated manner to constitute the form of the movie while the content is so ordinary and full of cliches. Form has successfully overshadowed the pedestrian content. Nothing wrong in that as many slick, well-made formula movies have entertained people and made money. The problem is that this movie is critically acclaimed and awarded -- undeservingly so. Satyajit Ray was repeatedly criticised for his 'exploitation' of Indian poverty. But he focused on characters as human beings, rather than visuals designed to shock. That is why his characters are men and women of flesh and blood, not just cardboard caricatures, as seen in Slumdog.
Lastly, on the music award for this film. I've been a fan of Rahman right from his Dileep days and I have no doubt about his genius. Unfortunately, his score can in no way be termed the greatest or innovative. I have a sneaking suspicion Rahman may be aware of this irony. To call his work original is a travesty of justice, if not ignorance. I hasten to add that Rahman deserves global recognition, but more for his genius and contribution to music than for his score in Slumdog. If the end justifies the means, then Slumdog is a winner every which way you look at it.
One of the best movies I've ever seen. It's just about perfect. What stuck me above everything else was the pulsating, riveting soundtrack. The head pounding Indian music throws you into the perfect mood to carry you through the movie.
What am I missing? The critics love it (my favourite critic, Roger Ebert, called it a masterpiece). Walter loves it. The masses love it. So why didn't I love it? Could it be because I hate Who Wants to be a Millionaire even more than highwire walking?
With reference to the infamous "shit scene", it is significant since it shows the child's spirit. Nothing can stop him from achieving his goal (Big B in childhood, but later on the girl). Life on the streets teaches a child many things, as opposed to kids who appear on game shows after undergoing intense training. When the protagonist asks the compere of the show if he was feeling nervous, the former, having experienced various hurdles in his life, is least intimidated by the latter.
The "Slumdog Debate" shows how far we have turned away from reality. Let's accept that we are a poor nation. We have enough companies like Satyam to ensure that our poverty lasts several years. The film has rightly projected what we are. Our political bigwigs must work honestly and diligently to make us rich and prosperous. Until then, we have to tolerate such projected realities. Tantrums over the film will not alleviate our poverty.
The movie rightly portrays India's day-to-day reality. We cannot expect Boyle to put on display India's affluent who hideously ape the West. The world will obviously want to see India as it is and if we are ashamed it's time that we reformed ourselves by bridging the appalling gap between the haves and the have-nots.
However much we try to sweep poverty under the carpet, it cannot be ignored. The National Commission for Enterprises in the Unorganised sector says 836 million Indians or 77 per cent of the population earn less than Rs 20 a day. Poverty is an ugly reality in India. It has a global market and there is nothing to grouse about if someone markets our poverty to get an award.
It is naive to believe movies like Slumdog can tarnish India's image. It does not require a movie to showcase India and its achievements. Indians have created a niche for themselves in space and nuclear technology, and at the same time more than 60 per cent of Indians live below the poverty line. I don't think one movie will change the world's perception of India.
Every Indian is happy that A R Rahman has bagged the Golden Globe and has been nominated for the Oscars. But the Mumbai Slum Dwellers' Joint Action Committee has filed a defamation case against Rahman and Anil Kapoor. In our country, there is freedom of speech, but no freedom after speech. Is it not sad?
Boyle has made a film that portrays every possible bias against India and structured it within the matrix of Western liberal perceptions. In keeping with the current American politics, it has been nominated for 10 Oscars. Our deracinated media, which constantly looks for inspirational good news stories that invariably revolve around Western appreciation of truthful portrayal of the Indian reality, has gone into a tizzy. Danny Boyle has cunningly changed the name of the film as also the main protagonist (in Vikas Swarup's Q&A) from Ram Mohammad Thomas to Jamal Malik. Looks like Boyle has rediscovered India and made appropriate changes to fit his film into the Hindu-bad-Muslim-good mould so that it has a resonance in today's America.
First, it was director Satyajit Ray who, with Pather Panchali, depicted the wrong side of our country. Now Slumdog is doing the same.
I hate Danny Boyle. Here I was listening to the film's audio track and immersing myself in ARR's music in all its pristine form. And then, I decide to watch the movie. An accompanying friend casually mentions that he was surprised to know Slumdog was from the same director who made a dark movie named Trainspotting. I wondered why such a director would make a movie about a kid getting lucky in a TV game show.
The film's music seemed divine to me -- be it the inspirational Jai Ho with its captivating crescendos, the contrasting highs Rahman and MIA reached in O Saya or the serene song titled Riots. However, somewhere between the vulgarities of diving into a cesspool, losing a parent in a senseless riot or the unknowing participation in a programme, Boyle manages to rob Rahman's music of its divinity by juxtaposing it with a series of starkly realistic images. He skilfully ties these images as distinct episodes of Jamal's life, destined to lead him to win Who Wants to Become a Millionaire. The suspense of the contest makes it an entertaining movie. Yet, to me, it was deeply disturbing. And I believe that is the best aspect of the movie -- the decadence of life is there for you to see if you choose to.
Boyle chronicles the story of Jamal without any ideological baggage; and shows Jamal's world as he sees it. By restricting himself to simply narrating the story, Boyle has created a mirror of a movie; and the audience's reaction has a lot to do with themselves rather than the movie. So whether the film exploits or depicts poverty is a question that could elicit a wide range of responses. And that is a measure of the director's success.
I have not seen Trainspotting. But I would imagine Slumdog indicates the expansion of Boyle's creative horizons. As for ARR's music, the film's realism refuses to let me escape into the heavenly sound of the music. And therein lay the key to ARR's success -- the soulfulness of his music complements reinforces the movie's realism. Slumdog may not be an epic, but it gets quite close to being one!
A grave error
I'd like to point out a serious error in the film. In the quiz, Jamal Malik is asked, "Who wrote the bhajan, Darshan do Ghanshyam?" The correct answer in the film is said to be Surdas. This answer is incorrect.
The bhajan is featured in the film, Narsi Bhagat (about the eponymous Gujarati saint poet) made by Devendra Goel in 1957. Even then, the song is attributed to Narsi Bhagat (as was the custom with classical poems and dohas) as suggested in the last few lines, Narsi ki yeh binati sun lo, bhakt vilasi re. I had experts (including the old music director of the film, Ravi) check and they confirm that G S Nepali wrote the bhajan but attributed it to Narsi Bhagat.
I wouldn't quibble about this normally but this is a film about a quiz show and how the protagonist keeps winning. He picks the blind, Surdas' name because he recalls a young singer friend who is blinded to beg. This gets him closer to the big prize. But the poem has nothing to do with Surdas.
courtesy : ExpressBuzz.
