Why they dont want you to see Buddha in a Traffic Jam

S_H_Y thumbnail
Screen Detective Participant Thumbnail 13th Anniversary Thumbnail + 9

Z-Gen Zest

Posted: 9 years ago
#1
Picture this: An indie movie, on an off-beat topic. There is no typical Bollywood masala kitschy running around trees by over-aged botoxed heroes. Instead there are poems by the legendary poet Faiz Ahmed Faiz. The story is not the banal rich guy meets poor girl, or how one man does insanely ridiculous stuff to change the system. The story is about real world problems, and how lives revolve around it. It's not a 4.5 star rated movie which involves an ageing star, playing out some hyper-realistic sequences, with patchy "special" effects, an unconvincing plot, all wrapped up in a self-idolising movie. It's instead the story about ordinary students, who uncover something extra-ordinary. The climax is not a clash of brawn and might, it is a clash of ideas and ideologies.

On the face of it, such a movie would be the darling of our "enlightened", "intellectual" movie critics. So many times have we heard them cry for out something more from Bollywood or the Indian film industry at large.

Buddha in a Traffic Jam, is one such movie, which, if not delivers completely on the promise, at least dares to trod the path less ventured on, and succeeds to a large extent.

The movie's first sequence shows us how poor and down-trodden India's tribals in the Naxal infested areas are. Not only is their financial situation pitiable, they are forever caught up in a situation of being caught between proving and choosing loyalties, to the local Naxal overlord, who terrorizes them, and the Government, whom they cannot entirely trust. The Government and its representatives here are no heroes, making the predicament of the villagers even more complex.

The next sequence shows a bunch of free-thinking, party-going students, taking on the self-appointed moral police chieftains of our society. The movie makes no bones about making it clear that these goons in fact belong to the Hindu far-right, heck even the picture of a real-life goon from such fringes is shown. And these students stick it to these guys. This along with the theme of sympathy for the downtrodden and angst against extremist forces are what constitute wet-dreams of Indian leftists. But that's just the sucker punch, the fattening of the proverbial lamb.

As the movie progresses, we see what no leftist would ever want us to see. How socialist ideas are irrelevant and failing. How some ideologies can be misused for exploitation of the poor. How leftists have penetrated institutions across the board. How capitalism is running the world around us, and how it can solve many core issues. Without revealing much, one can say it does ask a lot of questions.

Even thought I am not qualified to comment on this aspect, from a pure movie-making angle, the film is not perfect. Some of the acting could have been better. Certain portions seem unwarranted, and a tighter edit could have made proceedings more riveting. Some crucial plot points seem to be under-developed, leaving the viewer to figure out a bit on his own. But this is not what the movie reviewers talk about. They focus, on entirely other things, to make sure the viewer doesn't go to see it. Most negative reviews of the movie follow a template, which can be explained thus:

1. Before the review of the movie, comes the review of the director and his fans. "Oh Right-wingers", "Oh he directed these movies before this one" are desperate attempts to downplay the credentials of the director. A classic tactic of ad-hominem attacks being used here, and of course no one will tell you that the movie has been screened in multiple film festivals, even bagging a few awards. Yes, we are to believe these are independent unbiased reviewers.

2. There is a reference to the 2 or 3 sequences, which otherwise do not aid the story per se, which are tributes to path-breaking movies from Hollywood. While fair, unbiased reviews have indeed called them "tributes", the leftist critics have been unanimous in calling them "rip-offs", almost as if all of them were given the instruction to say this.

3. There is a reference to a few small scenes which according to the reviewers make no sense. One reviewer even said this:

Bizarrely, he seems to be rather aroused by information, at one point inexplicably shown to be touching himself, one hand down the front of his boxers, while reading left-wing material written by his professor. Seriously, I can't make this stuff up.

Sorry sir, you did make it up. The character was in fact not looking at left-wing material and as confirmed by the director himself, was not even touching himself. Quite a flight of imagination by the reviewer. So apart from focussing on trivialities, reviewers are even "making stuff up".

4. Most importantly, everyone makes sure to point out that the story is ridiculously unbelievable. Yes, in this cuckoo world, a reviewer gives 4.5 stars to a movie which shows a character who is a top-billed Bollywood actor, running at night on the streets and on rooftops, to catch a nemesis who looks exactly like him. But, the same reviewer calls Buddha in a Traffic Jam's plot: "preposterous". Other adjectives used by some other reviewers include: "propaganda", "unconvincing", "ridiculous plot", "laughable". Sure, it is a simplistic approach to a very complex issue. After all, it is a movie and not a documentary. But is it really "preposterous" when there have been numerous cases of the exact crucial plot point unfolding in real life? (Spoiler alert:1, 2, 3, 4)

5. And most reviews are peppered with inaccurate observations. Examples:

a. Some reviewers question the accent of Arunoday Singh. Maybe they did not hear Arunoday's character himself saying that he had spent 4 years in USA. What could have been a cinematic accuracy is being questioned by so-called critics now! (and of course another banal point)

b. One review claims that a character pictures his professor while making love to some girl, "orgasming to his master's voice", when truly, the movie shows all the different events, which continue to haunt the character even when he should be mentally involved in something else. And for the record, his mind is shown picturing numerous sequences besides his professor too.

c. Another review claims that the Indian School of Business was interchangeably called the Indian Institute of Business at certain points. Hello Mr Reviewer, the movie clearly calls the college the "Indian Institute of Business", even though it is shot at the real-life ISB. In fact, there is even a statement at the start which says that one shouldn't conflate the fictional IIB with the real ISB, since the ISB holds different values and beliefs.


They list the above problems, but very clearly the elephant in the room which no "critic" will speak about is this: The movie cuts a bit too close to the bone on occasions. Further, it has the potential to be used as a tool, and in the exact manner as they use their tools. Remember how some "trolls" are branded Sanghi RSS-supporting Hindutva Bigots as soon as one speaks anything pro-Modi or pro-BJP or pro-Hindus or pro-Government and even just anti-Left? This movie shows how some on the Left might be aiding Naxals, and there in lies the fear in the minds of the "critics": What if we all are labelled Naxalists by the people who watch this movie?

In the end, Buddha in a Traffic Jam doesn't pretend to offer any solutions to a very complex issue. It simply poses certain questions, which have clearly become uncomfortable to a few: How do we address the very real issue of tribal upliftment? How do we tackle the serious threat of violent Naxalism in parts of India? How do we take care of a small section of the bleeding heart leftist "intellectuals", who either knowingly or unknowingly are helping Naxalism? Can plain and simple capitalism be a panacea for many ills? How do we get out of this traffic jam?

Watch the movie for its attempt at touching on a topic no-one has dared to talk about. Watch it for some eye-opening possibilities it presents, which have been mirrored in real life. And watch it for being amazingly prophetic, by filming in 2012 (when the movie was actually made), a scene which has played out in real life in 2016, and which has been a focal point of debates for some time. Not really "preposterous" now is it dear reviewers? It is no masterpiece, but it isn't one to swept under the rug either.

Created

Last reply

Replies

26

Views

1.6k

Users

11

Likes

24

Frequent Posters

kvgmatri thumbnail
16th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#2
Well put!
I was quite shocked when I read Raja Sen's review. They are not even trying to hide their biases anymore!
And they would call themselves liberals 😆
807116 thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#3

Vivek Agnihotri recounts his Jadavpur University ordeal: No room for the Right


http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/vivek-agnihotri-buddha-in-a-traffic-jam-jadavpur-university-abvp-left-2779844.html

Vedika211 thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#4
I am one of those "intellectuals" that everyone nowadays seems to think that they can dispense with. I have not seen Buddha in a Traffic Jam so will not comment on it. I have seen Vivek Agnihotri's video though, where he claimed that he did 45 days of research in Indian universities, and presents a true picture. He then claims that "Lefties" get their instructions from China. At this point, I say, "Bullshit".
Do you know who the main Marxist or Leftist based thinkers of today are? Noam Chomsky (US-based), Slavoj Zizek (Europe-based), Ernesto Laclau (UK-based), and Badou (Europe-based). We live in a Euro-centric world and except Chinese intellectuals or people working on Chinese history no one reads any Chinese scholar. Look at who these people are citing in their work and referencing in their speeches - there are no Chinese scholars there. It is a popular myth that Leftist scholars get instructions from China. Perhaps a few Leftist politicians may have references China in their political speeches, but even that is rare. And no Leftist scholar in India cites or uses any Chinese scholar or politician in their work. I know this because I read them. If after 45 days of research Vivek Agnihotri claims that these people get their orders from China, then I know that he has neither actually talked to the 'intellectuals' nor read them. He is only spreading myths and misperceptions. I can also spread misinformation about RSS, about Modi supporters, about ABVP, but I prefer to read people and figure out why they are saying what they are saying rather than just blindly follow the media - of any side.
Vedika211 thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#5
Incidentally, the Vivek Agnihotri video I am talking about is the speech he made at Jadavpur university. So he did make a talk there, uninterrupted, the video of which I have seen.
Padfoot_Prongs thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 9 years ago
#6

Originally posted by: Vedika211

I am one of those "intellectuals" that everyone nowadays seems to think that they can dispense with. I have not seen Buddha in a Traffic Jam so will not comment on it. I have seen Vivek Agnihotri's video though, where he claimed that he did 45 days of research in Indian universities, and presents a true picture. He then claims that "Lefties" get their instructions from China. At this point, I say, "Bullshit".

Do you know who the main Marxist or Leftist based thinkers of today are? Noam Chomsky (US-based), Slavoj Zizek (Europe-based), Ernesto Laclau (UK-based), and Badou (Europe-based). We live in a Euro-centric world and except Chinese intellectuals or people working on Chinese history no one reads any Chinese scholar. Look at who these people are citing in their work and referencing in their speeches - there are no Chinese scholars there. It is a popular myth that Leftist scholars get instructions from China. Perhaps a few Leftist politicians may have references China in their political speeches, but even that is rare. And no Leftist scholar in India cites or uses any Chinese scholar or politician in their work. I know this because I read them. If after 45 days of research Vivek Agnihotri claims that these people get their orders from China, then I know that he has neither actually talked to the 'intellectuals' nor read them. He is only spreading myths and misperceptions. I can also spread misinformation about RSS, about Modi supporters, about ABVP, but I prefer to read people and figure out why they are saying what they are saying rather than just blindly follow the media - of any side.

Maoists in India specially the violent ones do get help from China. There have been so many reports and incidents- some even mentioned in History books written by Vipin Chandra- that Indian Maoists have connections with China and it is not surprising. The political front is independent though.

I haven't seen the movie or the video but Leftist are always being influenced by the foreign countries and their activities since before independence. They even appealed to farmers and workers to quit 'Quit India Movement' to help britishers becoz Russia joined WW-II from British's side.


Even, after 1971 war, there were reports that China tried to use Left Parties to destabilize India. So may be he is talking from that point of view.


Vedika211 thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#7

Originally posted by: Padfoot_Prongs


Maoists in India specially the violent ones do get help from China. There have been so many reports and incidents- some even mentioned in History books written by Vipin Chandra- that Indian Maoists have connections with China and it is not surprising. The political front is independent though.

I haven't seen the movie or the video but Leftist are always being influenced by the foreign countries and their activities since before independence. They even appealed to farmers and workers to quit 'Quit India Movement' to help britishers becoz Russia joined WW-II from British's side.


Even, after 1971 war, there were reports that China tried to use Left Parties to destabilize India. So may be he is talking from that point of view.


Vivek Agnihotri said in this talk that he had done his research in university campuses across India. He did not mention Maoists in his talk. I work in the university sector. My friends, colleagues, students, teachers are all here, and so I listened to his entire talk. He was not talking about 1971 or pre-Independence, he was talking about the here and the now.
Also, the thing is this: there are academics, there are thinkers and writers, there are grassroots activists, including local political groups and NGOs, who protest and demonstrate, and there are violent groups. These are all different, and not all of them are Marxists or Leftists. As I said, I haven't seen the movie, so I'm going by his talk, which implied that all of these are the same, and the equation is intellectual=leftist=anti-national.
I am not defending the Left parties or all their decisions. For that matter, I have also read online that the RSS did not participate in the Quit India movement, but I will believe that when I read it in a proper historical book or journal article rather than an online media source.
But the point I was making is not about defending every decision of the Left, but simpler. We live in a democracy. There is space for people who believe in different political ideologies. You do not have to be a Leftist or a Marxist yourself to say that they too have the right to exist in the country without being asked to change their views.
Edited to remove typos.

Edited by Vedika211 - 9 years ago
Padfoot_Prongs thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 9 years ago
#8

Originally posted by: Vedika211


Vivek Agnihotri said in this talk that he had done his research in university campuses across India. He did not mention Maoists in his talk. I work in the university sector. My friends, colleagues, students, teachers are all here, and so I listened to his entire talk. He was not talking about 1971 or pre-Independence, he was talking about the here and the now.
Also, the thing is this: there are academics, there are thinkers and writers, there are grassroots activists, including local political groups and NGOs, who protest and demonstrate, and there are violent groups. These are all different, and not all of them are Marxists or Leftists. As I said, I haven't seen the movie, so I'm going by his talk, which implied that all of these are the same, and the equation is intellectual=leftist=anti-national.
I am not defending the Left parties or all their decisions. For that matter, I have also read online that the RSS did not participate in the Quit India movement, but I will believe that when I read it in a proper historical book or journal article rather than an online media source.
But the point I was making is not about defending every decision of the Left, but simpler. We live in a democracy. There is space for people who believe in different political ideologies. You do not have to be a Leftist or a Marxist yourself to say that they too have the right to exist in the country without being asked to change their views.
Edited to remove typos.

exactly. But in WB it is becoming difficult to survive if u are not leftist. also in Kerla. There are so many incidence of Violence. It Left has right to exist so does the Right.
Vedika211 thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#9

Originally posted by: Padfoot_Prongs

exactly. But in WB it is becoming difficult to survive if u are not leftist. also in Kerla. There are so many incidence of Violence. It Left has right to exist so does the Right.

I do not question the Right's right to exist. Nor do I want them to change their views. I do think however that there are two kinds of Left, and two kinds of Right: the good kind and the bad kind. The good kind of left are the ones who fight for the rights of the marginalised, and the good kind of right resist the hegemony of the West, both things which are necessary. It is the goons on both sides who need to be kept in check, otherwise they are quite capable of bullying others as much as they can.
707793 thumbnail
Posted: 9 years ago
#10

Buddha in a Traffic Jam movie Poll khol of left ideologues and their vested interests... NO one is more violent than Leftist ..they are like Maano ya Maro

Related Topics

Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: naaznin · 29 days ago

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DIbOndVhV-B/?igsh=MWowOWlqcDBiMzBhcA== Neither good looking nor good actress. Does hindi audience even wants to...

Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: Amira21 · 2 months ago

Her father Chunky Pandey was not a big star and her grandparents were doctors. Chunky mostly did supporting roles and he was a super flop actor....

Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: mintyblue · 2 months ago

At first glance, she seems like she’s leaning into the “sweet girl” trajectory—you know the type. The kind who’ll do breezy rom-coms, smile...

Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: Amira21 · 2 months ago

Recently, I saw a Gujarati actor in Crime Patrol and I find him very attractive. Then, I wonder why there aren’t many Gujarati people in...

Expand ▼
Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".