This topic is not about the Oscars; it is a discussion about the film and since it is neither Kollywood nor Bollywood, I am starting it here under Other Topics.
I think before proceeding, people should read this link:https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/kollywood-masala/1132343/every-indian-is-proud-a-r-rahman-pg-5
Now, I came across this entry in a blog that I visit once in a while - I was attracted to it because it is called Apu's World - Apu being the protagonist in Satyajit Ray's classic works and I thought how refreshing. The blogger is a Tamilian - intelligent and articulate and I enjoy his/her posts. This particular one really attracted me. So I wanted to share it with people here.
**************************************************************************************************************
"I went in to watch Slumdog Millionaire fully expecting to see a movie "about life in the slums". What I didn't expect was that though the slums and the poverty were very much there, the movie wasn't really about them. Rather, it was a good story about a boy from the slums who makes it big and really, most people watch movies because they are good stories, not so much because they teach us anything or tell us about specific places.
Which is why, I'm quite surprised about those in India who would slam Danny Boyle and the movie for showing a side of India which they'd rather keep hidden. For one thing, the movie isn't half-way realistic. How many slum kids do you know who get to be on Kaun Banega Crorepati? The story of Arvind, the boy who is blinded and forced to beg in a subway is probably more "real" than that of Jamal, who not only manages to get on to the show but also wins a 2 crore thanks to a lot of luck, some coincidences and a bit of thinking. So, no, Slumdog Millionaire isn't about India's reality, even if one were to assume that there is any One Reality to portray.
After watching the movie, I am still unable to decide which of these is really annoying people.
A. All Western film-makers want to see in India is its poverty, so that the entire first world can laugh at us = chip on shoulder about how the white man sees us, constant pathetic need to prove that we are on par with "them"
B. This reality isn't the only one; what about executive India, what about the fancy cars, the multi-storeyed buildings, the middle class schools, the MBAs = Reality is only what life is for us. I wonder if the millions in India who live in slums or even on the roadside should object to Karan Johar movies because it doesn't showcase "their" reality?
C. The film is only getting noticed because it is being made by a Western film-maker = Well, Indian film-makers, for the most part are not interested in these subjects, but still, shouldn't they generally give us an Oscar anyway? Also, huge failure to understand that the Oscars aren't really about world cinema, inspite of the foreign film category.
D. All of the above?
The truth is that Slumdog Millionaire is neither a terribly insightful look into India's poverty nor is it a white-man-slum-touristy look at India. Poverty is the backdrop for Jamal's story, but that is not all there is to it. Infact, to me, one of the most heartbreaking scenes in the story was when little Jamal gets taken up in the orphanage van by Maman who is clearly A Very Bad Man, but to Jamal and his friends riding in the van, it is as though they have been promised a slice of life in paradise. The naked optimism in their eyes is killing, because you know so well that they are going to be let down cruelly. (This reminded me so much of Kutty- K).
Slumdog Millionaire works because of moments like this where we get caught up in one individual's story and root for him to succeed, and it works inspite of a downright unreal last 15 minutes which are a disgrace to the rest of the movie. Slumdog Millionaire works inspite of its occasional deviations from reality simply because it is one of the oldest stories in the world told well; the underdog story that most of us can never resist.
*******************************************************************************************************This is the .precise reason why SD became a hit - in times of recession and depression, this feel-good film warmed the hearts of many cinemagoers. In fact, it was supposed to go to the DVD straightaway, but someone saw the potential in it and decided to release it as a film. When it was initially shown in a cinema in Canada, the response from the audience was so fantastic that the distributors then decided to proceed publicising it on a massive scale. I am glad they did!
I remember another foreign film winning an Oscar - same premise - a feel-good film that had dark undercurrents - Roberto Benigni's La Vita e Bella - Life is Beautiful. That was another great film. The Italians were understandably proud of it. But there were people who disliked it because they could not see how a humourous film could be set in the Holocaust. (Just like SD "emphasising" poverty and slums). I saw it and I loved it. Like SD, LIB went beyond the Holocaust.
Oh, by the way, SD is based on the book, Q&A. It does not strictly follow the book. The book itself?? Oh my God. I just loved it. It was brilliant.
