10 Oscar nominations and 2008 Audience Award in Austin Film Festival, amongst several others. Probably that’s one of the several ways of ‘looking’ at Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire. Though the movie was released as early as August 2008, in the U.S., it got released in India on 23rd Jan, 2009; a time by which, the Indian market was flooded by ‘DVD quality’ pirated DVDs and VCDs of the same.
Slumdog Millionaire has been everywhere for a while, Google, Newspapers, Billboards, SMSes and conversations, often rekindled with some interesting and some clichéd type of controversies; the earliest one raked by Amitabh Bacchan in his blog criticizing the labeling of commercial Bollywood movies as being escapist, while hailing Satyajit Ray as the portrayer of reality. Amitabh Bacchan went a step ahead, stating how even the most developed part of the world will still have an underbelly, much like the one portrayed in India.
Slumdog Millionaire being a Hollywood production and being directed by an Englishman, the celebration of Indians is perhaps a little exaggerated and a little introspection might leave you with just the ‘underbelly’ as truly Indian, as is projected in the movie. Of course not to forget the Golden Globe for ‘Jai Ho’ by A.R. Rahman.
While not negating the dent that the movie might have caused to the National Pride of many Indians, I am tempted to carve out a middle path, a way of viewing it in a very different light.
Understanding the fact that, its been adapted from Vikas Swaroop’s Q and A is as crucial as it is to constantly remind oneself that it’s a Hollywood production (as opposed to a Bollywood production).
Talking about its adaptation from a novel, it deals with the acknowledged problems of the transformation from one medium to another. While a novel can get away describing events running to several pages, the film often has to constrict itself into a ‘time frame’ and as such only a handful of directors manage to present reality of books in the widescreen without looking fantastic or stupid or bullshit. On that account, Danny Boyle certainly scores well and is something that rightfully belongs to him and the awards as well.
Coming to the second aspect, of the director’s nationality (underscoring that he is not an Indian, rather than pointing at his British nationality), Indians are a proud race, and there is perhaps no Bollywood production till date that doesn’t reflect this pride through the several possible channels. A case for instance, can be built around Madhur Bhandarkar’s, Traffic Signal. On a broad plane, both Slumdog M and Traffic Signal can be placed into what can be termed as, ‘slice-of-life’ kind of movies. However, the subtle distinction between the two can be found in their treatment of the subjects and the ‘sights’. While Bhandarkar would whitewash the street signals of India, making it more agreeable to the Indian viewers, Boyle makes his character scuba dive on a shit hole, earning points for its realistic nature and irking the Indian pride.
Whatever Slumdog M portrays about Indian life, is Boyle’s creative right to showcase. And one cannot deny that such slums do exist in India and to quote Amitabh Bacchan, anywhere else in the world. Or to disagree that Indian police do violate human rights would be ridiculous. Or to say that several of the slum kids do not follow the portrayed trajectory to the street signals or the gangs, would be utterly false. To throw a one liner, in an attempt to condense my viewpoint, I’d say, that Slumdog M hasn’t been sanitized for Indian viewer ship.
I personally feel Slumdog M, with the amount of criticism & controversies that it kicked up in India and the unending trail of awards and critical acclamations, it received worldwide, it should be taken as a wake up call for Indian viewers to mature and to accept that there can be truth(s)…
NOTE 1: While going through an excerpt from Danny Boyle’s interview with some channel, I came across this interesting trivia, which I could not manage to insert in the article above and which I was too excited about to have not shared. I quote the excerpt with due references.
“Cinematical: Talk about working with the Who Wants to Be a Millionaire people. I heard they're pretty tough on intellectual property; was it difficult getting them involved for a concept that implies the show was rigged?
Slumdog Millionaire has been everywhere for a while, Google, Newspapers, Billboards, SMSes and conversations, often rekindled with some interesting and some clichéd type of controversies; the earliest one raked by Amitabh Bacchan in his blog criticizing the labeling of commercial Bollywood movies as being escapist, while hailing Satyajit Ray as the portrayer of reality. Amitabh Bacchan went a step ahead, stating how even the most developed part of the world will still have an underbelly, much like the one portrayed in India.
Slumdog Millionaire being a Hollywood production and being directed by an Englishman, the celebration of Indians is perhaps a little exaggerated and a little introspection might leave you with just the ‘underbelly’ as truly Indian, as is projected in the movie. Of course not to forget the Golden Globe for ‘Jai Ho’ by A.R. Rahman.
While not negating the dent that the movie might have caused to the National Pride of many Indians, I am tempted to carve out a middle path, a way of viewing it in a very different light.
Understanding the fact that, its been adapted from Vikas Swaroop’s Q and A is as crucial as it is to constantly remind oneself that it’s a Hollywood production (as opposed to a Bollywood production).
Talking about its adaptation from a novel, it deals with the acknowledged problems of the transformation from one medium to another. While a novel can get away describing events running to several pages, the film often has to constrict itself into a ‘time frame’ and as such only a handful of directors manage to present reality of books in the widescreen without looking fantastic or stupid or bullshit. On that account, Danny Boyle certainly scores well and is something that rightfully belongs to him and the awards as well.
Coming to the second aspect, of the director’s nationality (underscoring that he is not an Indian, rather than pointing at his British nationality), Indians are a proud race, and there is perhaps no Bollywood production till date that doesn’t reflect this pride through the several possible channels. A case for instance, can be built around Madhur Bhandarkar’s, Traffic Signal. On a broad plane, both Slumdog M and Traffic Signal can be placed into what can be termed as, ‘slice-of-life’ kind of movies. However, the subtle distinction between the two can be found in their treatment of the subjects and the ‘sights’. While Bhandarkar would whitewash the street signals of India, making it more agreeable to the Indian viewers, Boyle makes his character scuba dive on a shit hole, earning points for its realistic nature and irking the Indian pride.
Whatever Slumdog M portrays about Indian life, is Boyle’s creative right to showcase. And one cannot deny that such slums do exist in India and to quote Amitabh Bacchan, anywhere else in the world. Or to disagree that Indian police do violate human rights would be ridiculous. Or to say that several of the slum kids do not follow the portrayed trajectory to the street signals or the gangs, would be utterly false. To throw a one liner, in an attempt to condense my viewpoint, I’d say, that Slumdog M hasn’t been sanitized for Indian viewer ship.
I personally feel Slumdog M, with the amount of criticism & controversies that it kicked up in India and the unending trail of awards and critical acclamations, it received worldwide, it should be taken as a wake up call for Indian viewers to mature and to accept that there can be truth(s)…
NOTE 1: While going through an excerpt from Danny Boyle’s interview with some channel, I came across this interesting trivia, which I could not manage to insert in the article above and which I was too excited about to have not shared. I quote the excerpt with due references.
“Cinematical: Talk about working with the Who Wants to Be a Millionaire people. I heard they're pretty tough on intellectual property; was it difficult getting them involved for a concept that implies the show was rigged?
Danny Boyle: Well it was really interesting, because what happened was the guys who invented the show years ago in Britain, they were a company called Celador. What they did was a couple of years ago they sold the show for a staggering amount of money, and what they did with the money was they set up a film company called Celador, who were the producers of this film. What happened was a lawyer -- presumably a very smart lawyer -- in that deal in which they sold it, put a clause in saying that if there was ever a feature film featuring the show, that Celador would have the right to use the music, the right to use the stage design, the right to use the copyright of the show, blah blah. So we were okay. And we didn't even have to pay for it! It was amazing to be able to use it, and they were a little concerned with how we would portray the show ... but I guess we were just very, very lucky with how we were able to get around it, I suppose.”
NOTE 2: I couldn't come to terms with the fact that A.R. Rahman was awarded the Golden Globe for his track 'Jai Ho'. There are several better (much better) compositions by the legendary Rahman. I know you would agree.
NOTE 3: (its the final note!) The controversy simply refuses to dispell (atleast in India). The front page of today's Delhi edition of The Hindustan Times, came up with the following news:
Posts
