What the hell was Danny Boyle thinking?
Even before the movie released, everyone was going gaga over it. Slumdog Millionaire was everywhere and thanks to it being nominated for the Golden Globe and bagging quite a few, it instantly became the flavour of the season.
I wanted to watch the film, for the simple reason that it was being written about in great detail. Mostly on a positive note. But, every once in a while, we came across a review (ironically only strictly Indian ones) which were not exactly falling over themselves in praising the film. Though, they did not trash the film entirely – after all the film did get Rahman his first ever Golden Globe and earned him 3 Oscar nominations – they nonetheless were not very happy at what they termed – ‘exposing the underbelly of Mumbai’. Oh yeah, right!
I caught the film on the first day of its release at a plex. Multiplexes are known to be the hub of a somewhat upper-middle class viewers, you do come across college kids and a not so upwardly mobile family – but I was quite amused to see that Slumdog drew ‘only’ the elite and uppler class crowd. Not to mention, the firangs. The crowd itself made it very clear, what section of the audience was Danny Boyle targetting with his rags to riches story of a 18-year-old.
The film at its best can be described as a typical Bollywood fare in English. Nothing more. By the way, would someone please tell Danny Boyle that no star – and definitely not Big B – lands in the slums in his chopper, meets people and signs autograph for a crap-bathed kid!
The film is a typically 70ish Bollywood fare dished out for Western audience who love to see the so-called ‘real India’ – read dirty, poor, hungry India. I have little doubt that had the film been made by an Indian director, it would have been mercilessly trashed left, right and centre, and the said director would probably never have made anotehr film in his lifetime. This film makes news for the simple reason that it is made by a white man with a white mindset for a white audience, but with a brown star cast.
Of the cast Dev Patel is competent – though nothing too great to write home about. The young Jamal who lives in the slums with his mother is endearing. Madhur Mittal as Jamal’s elder brother, Salim, is quite a good discovery. Frieda Pinto is not worth a mention. Mahesh Manjrekar is doing what he does best – playing the typical Mumbai bhai. Saurabh Shukla shines in the cameo. Irrfan Khan is as usual good. His eyes speak volumes. He does not need dialogues. But, the man who steals the show, is undoubtedly Anil Kapoor. He is the perfect showman – loud and in-your-face.
Anil’s utter contempt for the chaiwallah who has made it to the hot-seat. The way he plays with him like a cat playing with a mouse before killing it. He is brilliant in every scene. Especially when he misleads Jamal with the wrong answer, but Jamal refuses to bite the bait – watch out for Anil’s split-second expression – too damn good. You cannot ignore his arrogance and conceit. The film minus Anil would have been an utter waste of time.
Rahman is of course good. His background score rises far above the film. But, why was he nominated for the song Jai Ho!? That, I felt, was the weakest of the tracks. And, the choreography was ghastly!
The film scores on the technical aspect. Brilliant cinematography. And slick editing. But, not all the positives put together can save this highly mediocre film. The negatives are just too much. Mr. Boyle, thank your lucky stars you aren’t an Indian filmmaker!
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
stop being ignorant u don’t like the movie that’s fine
BUT don’t bring the whole “white man exploited poverty” issue which has been beatn to death quite frankly and it is frusturating
bollywood can only DREAM of making movie like SM some bollywood makes are not even worthy of polishing danny boayle’s shoes because they lack creative genious like him
and we should be proud that atleast indians are getting recognizedon global platform
@Movie fan,
“bollywood can only DREAM of making movie like SM some bollywood makes are not even worthy of polishing danny boayle’s shoes” – Whoa, whoa, whoa! Easy! There is a lot more in the world of Cinema than Danny Boyle and Slumdog Millionaire – honestly!
@Movie fan,
Hey, in case you didn’t notice, I did praise the cast and Rahman. They are Indians, I suppose? But, by “Indians” do you mean ‘dirty, poor, hungry India’ – that got recognition on a global platform?? Just asking.
Just for a moment, forget India vs West bit. Just judge it as a movie based on reality that we Indians especially Mumbaikers experience everyday.
1. Do you think it is possible for a host of the Karodpathi show to get a kid from the slums who has made it all the way until the last question to get him arrested? Did you notice the fan following for the climax that they showed with traffic getting blocked people watching out of tv’s in shops etc.? However stupid the host is, can you imagine what happens to his ratings in the public if the guy answers that one question and gets away? Just the base does not work.
2. Why is the guy on the show again? So that she will watch it? Then what? There is no other purpose except that she might catch his face on TV?
3. The chai wala begins to search on the computer like a whiz kid?
It is like City of God meeting Salaam Bombay meeting the karodpathi show. Well shot, well editied, decently acted but no great deal. Too many creative licenses for it to be a great film.
dude .. loads of issues wid ur post ..
ok first thngs first … the movie is NOT n i repeat NOT a documentary on the social and economic conditions of india.. Danny Boyle duznt say it anywhere that thats wat he is making .. duz he ? So stop saying that its not the right picture of india…
We ourselves make so many movies that show the slums and the poverty and corruption and unemployment.. so goin by ur standards a movie like swades is also not good coz it just talks abt villiage problems and thats not wat india is .. the day india makes good movies (cinematographicaly )and understands the ways of international marketing they wud be appreciated .. that is if international acceptance is a criteria ..
its not being praised coz its been made by a white man(a foreigner) … if thats the condition then they wud not nominate rahman for oscars and giv him a golden globe .. they wud just giv all the awards to the foreigners.
cast review.. dev patel was ok .. the kids were brilliant coz they depict a freshness that only non actors have .. freida pinto is not good .. madhur mittal is truly a find .. anil kapoor on the other hand is at his crappiest best ..his character is a showman .. but the way he plays it .. the character is not even good at that.. but we can let that pass ..
So i dont find a lot of reason here but then again .. u have a right to express opinion .. but i DONT agree wid it.
thanks ..
Medha is at it again.
I think I understand her game now. She writes against a film that is in flavour or makes negative remarks about someone respectable and in a very ugly way. This creates controversies and get her the attention with hits and popularity.
@Medha
I haven’t even seen the film but I can see the same pattern of arguments emerging. I caught you didn’t I? Don’t worry, nobody will see or remember my remarks.
Chill… it is just a movie and well u r right abt the target audience…..i dont know if ur right about the western audience loving to see the ‘real’ dirty india. I would not agree with it. I guess the reason the movie went on to become a sleeper hit is because of the love story which amazed the western audience. The story of how a boy struggles to get his lady love back and how he succeeds is what made the audience go ‘Wow’. I dont buy the argument of portraying india in a bad sense. There have been a lot of indian movies which have had their backdrop in the slums too and there was no hue or cry about those movies…….
and abt Jai ho being a hit – well it was a perfect song for the happy ending… and the western audience felt the joy ….. Well it may not be ARR’s best composition but it fits the bill and registers in the mind…. probably that being a bollywood dance number helped… the other songs in the movie were in the background and gelled well with movie but none were dance numbers..
First let me make it clear that I haven’t exactly fallen head over heels in love with this film. I think it is a brilliantly crafted film, yet not quite the masterpiece it’s being touted as. Undoubtedly the film is overhyped.
Now to this article here, which unfortunately and tragically is filled with bias, skepticism, and total lack of any convincing argument or point.
“The crowd itself made it very clear, what section of the audience was Danny Boyle targetting with his rags to riches story of a 18-year-old.”
Do the masses really want to watch the horrors and dark side of India? Hasn’t massy cinema always been escapist? Is it the filmmakers’ fault that only urban audiences are watching it? Haven’t they also released a hindi version, hence reinforcing the fact that they do, in fact want it to get a wide audience in India?
“The film at its best can be described as a typical Bollywood fare in English. Nothing more. By the way, would someone please tell Danny Boyle that no star – and definitely not Big B – lands in the slums in his chopper, meets people and signs autograph for a crap-bathed kid!”
What is wrong with that? Yes, stuff like this don’t happen in real life, and that is one of the reasons why we go to thew movies in the first place. First you have a problem with the portrayal of the ‘underbelly’ which in fact is very much present and real. And then you also go on to complain about the escapist elements and the unabashed tribute to Bollywood which pulsates with joy and hope to say the least.
Of the cast, i am most surprised that you don’t even mention the actors who made the film the most special, and the only ones who REALLY touched my heart and stood out the incredible three musketeers- Azharuddin Mohammed Ismail, Ayush Mahesh Khedekar, and Rubiana Ali who play Salim, Jamal and Latika in the earliest parts of the film.
“I have little doubt that had the film been made by an Indian director, it would have been mercilessly trashed left, right and centre, and the said director would probably never have made anotehr film in his lifetime.”
What makes you so sure that a good film made by an Indian director would have been trashed? Woulkd an Indian director, and more importantly an Indian producer even made this film? Would he have been able to give it this grand canvas.
Stop grudging Boyle for having done well what we haven’t done. Criticism is fine as long as you’ve atleast read the film well and appreciated the spirit in which it is communicated. Rise from the cesspools of cynicism and appreciate Boyle’s effort.
This just seems a case of two kinds of people looking out of the same window- one seeing the stars, and the other shit. The writer, with all respect to her, unfortunately has falls in to the latter.
@John,
It looks like you remeber all my posts – well that’s quite an acievement, I guess. I mean, you tell me in no uncertain terms how you absolutely hate my opinions – but at the same time, they remain with you. Great!
@Parthenon,
Never once did I say it’s a documentary. All I tried to say was – it’s a highly mediocre film – and definitely doesn’t deserve all the hue and cry.
@Jahan,
This film could be made only because, as you so rightly put it, it’s Danny Boyle with a foreign production company backing him. All the same, it does not mean that this film is the next BIG thing. And, definitely not a Salaam Bombay. And, yes, I still stick by my point – any Indian filmmaker – and the critics would have torn him to pieces.
To all of you who say “this movie is only a big deal becoz it shows India’s poor and was directed by a white man”, a simple question. If you knew this, and assuming most people in Bollywood knew this, why didn’t you go ahead and make this movie yourself?
I’ll tell you why. Because you and most of the Bollywood Directors have no understanding of the appetite of an international audience, specially an American one. Many have tried the crossover movie that registers in US and all have failed to generate the kind of acceptance Slumdog received (except Monsoon Wedding and Salaam Bombay). Was Monsoon wedding also well received because it had poor Indians?
Of course it is not the greatest film of the year but it also doesn’t deserve this much criticism. I liked the way film unfolds. Things were handled nicely by Danny boyle. As far as poor India is concerned…come on guys beat it! Haven’t we shown it in our movies too? In fact showing such a smart and intelligent slum dweller shows Indians in a much better light than many of us have shown till date! ;-)
I haven’t read all your posts. I only read the one on Welcome to Sajjanpur. Your title gave your review away and I figured what you were upto. Didn’t read it. Just read the reactions and caught on to your game. I like understanding games.
You’re right… the last one remained with me. But for what? Since you say ‘Great’ and ‘Achievement’ to that kind of rememberance, it just proves what I said
Didn’t it strike you that I might remember a lot of awful things?
See you on another of your posts.
@John,
By the way, I quite like your take on ‘understanding games’.
Of course you remeber only the awful things – and I find that quite funny. If I read something really bad or watch something pathetic, I would much rather forget it – than let it remain with me
@Prerna,
Maybe it doesn’t – but to each his own. I really did not like the film, sorry to say.
so medha .. since u know that it is not a documentary y do u think it shud be factual .. wat i mean to say is that all movies are not supposed to cover all aspects of an issue .. thats the job of a news channel
the movie FICTIONAL .. never claiming that it is a complete representation of India .. it is but a film based in India .. so they can show flying elephants and 3 legged monsters havin tea wid clowns dressed in louis vuitton garments .. wats the problem ..
and the best story for me is one which combines fiction and non fiction .. its based in a real scenario and develops on it ..
another thing .. i know u wud urself agree to the fact that India has a poverty problem .. we all know it .. we all see it .. so wats the problem if a director makes a movie about that .. are we so full of ourselves that we wont allow an outsider to see that .. or is it a matter of him being of another nationality ? if thats the case then its nonsense coz creativity duznt have boundaries.. go to britain and make a movie abt the problems there .. and make it half as well as danny boyle did and no one can call it bad cinema ..
plus the movie is abt hope and destiny too .. y do ppl jus take that part away and bicker abt it ?
another thing .. jus for ur reference .. ur phrase “highly mediocre” is a contradiction in terms so I din’t understand wat u mean.
its a movie abt hope and destiny that has been made very differently then normal hollywood movies .. so ppl like it .. the hue n cry by the way is not from the beginning .. in fact the movie had no one to market it internationally and almost fell apart .. thats where the production houses come in and they did a good job at it ..
The perfect review. The film does’nt live up to my my expectations, i guess it just got hyped.
Did I say I don’t remember the good things?
The funny thing about life is that, when you decide to forget it, you’ve actually decided to make it more important than it is. There’s no need to forget or push anything under the carpet.
Anyway! Isn’t an email forum better for this kind of conversation? Mine is driftatindiatimesdotcom
@Parthenon,
I don’t understand cinema like many on this forum do, neither do I claim to. I am your average movie-goer – who likes to watch movies, and sometimes goes out of her way to do so – but is disappointed when the movie somehow doesn’t justify the pains. I was looking forward to watching Slumdog as much as anyone else with probably as much excitemnt and anticipation. Getting written about and discussed like, it sure looked like something really-really good. But, yes, I was disapoointed. And majorly. And, that is what I have written about. I liked the performances. But, I did not like the film. I appreciated the technicalities, but not the story. I failed to connect with the film.
If this movie was by an Indian director, nobody would have had a problem with it at all, the fact of the matter is that, its made by a white dude and has got global recognition & everybody is watching the slums in India and ‘might’ have a negative thought about India. If an Indian guy had directed it, we’d all praise it like hell, because we know it’d reach only a minimal % of the viewers globally, who’d thus know about India’s slums. Ah! we’re saved.
Tell me none of the things in the movie existed and still does, child beggers are everywhere in India, from traffic signals to railway platfoms. Danny has shows stuff that’s true, if you got problem with that, please help out the slum kids and rehabilitate them rather than bashing a very well made movie.
And the stroy is NOT EVEN ABOUT THE SLUMS, they serve as the background, the main thing about the movie is the love story btwn Jamal & Latika, and how they seperate and then get togther.
The setting of the movie could been anywhere, India – pakistan – Brazil – even America. Every country has a section of population that is poor.
It’s funny how you chose to ignore all of these and just write some really kick-ass bad review of the movie.
________________________________________
And ‘JAI HO’, is an awesome number to end the movie, the choregraphy was for a different song first when it was shot and then later the song got changed, PLEASE GET YOUR FACTS RIGHT.
And if you’re wondering why won Rahman 3 nomination, shouldn’t you check out the other nominated songs/albums as well. Who knows the other ones might be terrible. Chk out youtube! people are going crazy over that song (mostly the goras).Please put in a bit of sense before you get down to write something.
*Hands folded*
The book ‘Q&A’ is much better than SM. The movie didn’t live up to my expectations. Not a single scene stayed with me once the movie was over.
[Quote]By the way, would someone please tell Danny Boyle that no star – and definitely not Big B – lands in the slums in his chopper, meets people and signs autograph for a crap-bathed kid!
[Unquote]
____________________________________
If People can kill themselves coz MGR died, if people can built a temple for Amitabh/Dhoni/Khusbhoo, if people can pray day in & out perform special poojas for Amitabh so that he recovers from an deadly accident, if people can travel all the way from UP to wish him on his B’day and just to get a sight of him, if people can spend their entire life going to stadiums just to watch Sachin bat and get his name tatooed on their body, if people can do crazy things for Rajinikanth.
that one from the movie is nothing in front of all these, let’s get it right, people in India are superstar crazy, obv you or me might not do something like that, but ‘people’ do it.
@Sriram,
First let me make it very clear – I’m ecstatic about Rahman bagging the Golden Globe and being nominated for 3 Oscars. But, all the same Jai Ho! is definitely not one of his best compositions. Also, I don’t really care if the choreography was for some other song first and then it got changed – it was still bad. And, the fact that the ‘goras’ – as you say – are going crazy over the song and teh choregraphy does not mean that it needs to be celebrated by everyone, does it?
@Sriram,
Yes, you are right. People do crazy stuff. I’m not arguing with that fact – if you’s notice – what I had said was that – “By the way, would someone please tell Danny Boyle that no star – and definitely not Big B – lands in the slums in his chopper, meets people and signs autograph for a crap-bathed kid!” – I am talking about the star not the star chaser!
This is what I think:
When an Indian makes a film, the (majority of) Indian audience do not raise logical questions, because the audience have become accustomed to Indian films being illogical.
But when (majority of) Indian audience see a “Western” film or a film by a “Westerner”, they start looking for logics, because they believe their films have all to do with logic.
Yeha Chalta Hain Magar Waha Nahi Chalta. Or something like that.
Anyway, the film is utter crap. I don’t know why everyone is getting their chaddis twisted.
The movie was a good watch. It had all the elements that go into making a sympathetic and suspenseful film but it is not a great film. I can’t understand the fuss, honestly.
The only gripe I have is that I found the “falling into the sewer and poo-covered” scene gratuitous. There was no need for it. In fact that scene was repulsive, not funny at all. I don’t think any one would do that just for the Great Mr. B’s autograph!
@ Medha
..
JAI HO, is ‘probably’ not his best score, but what make is bad?! It’s very good, if not as great as ‘Chaiya Chaiya’, and as far as the west is concerned, they look at best musical score on two terms, 1) does it enhance the visuals in the film?! and 2) does it stand-out as a good song minus the visuals. As for JAI HO, I think it does well on both, infact the entire album, every song co-relates with the scene, esp the ‘O..saya’, mausam & escape, played at many scenes.
I can’t bliv you guys call the album not a good one, I mean if it gells well with the movie, that’s the primary goal, then it gotta be good. And upar se , none of us have even heard the other nominated song or albums, WHAT IF THEY ARE BAD?!
Over the years after the Internet and networking sites, we guys have been more ‘unnecessarily’ analytical.
Exactly my feelings!! It is just hyped because it was made the first time by a white guy… we have had these kinds of films for a long time now.. and people are rooting for this in place of the dark knight..huh!!
what the hell were you thinking when writing this rveiew or whatevr itt is
shudnt you put a spoiler warning before blurting out the story . why reveal what anil kapoor did in teh film.
will someone tell teh author of this post how to watch films…who told you teh superstar landed in a chopper to sign autographs . haha …i dont care to read your post beyoond that point. you should first learn to watch films.
@ Medha.
…
I think as per the movie, Amitabh had come there for a movie shoot, and him signing the autograph for the kid who was full bathed in shit, so what?! May be Amitabh wouldn’t do it, but that’s just a creative license. And if you’d think beyond that, it’s a damn good movie.
PS – If this movie was set in say, brazil, made by Danny and would have gone on to win the Oscar best picture, we’d all say, ‘Kya movie hain yaar’! Just coz he based it in India, we’re like ‘how dare you’.
The germans have no problem with so many movies on Hitler, do they screw the asses of the filmmakers? that’s just one ’story’ about Germany.
@Sriram,
I think it’s ironical that one of your arguments in justifying Jai Ho! is that others could be worse!
What the fuck is the poverty exploiting debate? It’s such a lame debate.
I was really pissed off when reading the same thing about Satyajit Ray… Amitabh Bachan ain’t got no brains
@Sriram,
No I have no issues with a film showing the underbelly. Salaam Bombay was a brilliant film, I think. But, I will not be cowered into accepting that Slumdog is up amongst the best. And yeah, AB did land for a shoot – but how many superstars you know have actually signed an autograph for a slumkid bathed in shit – and sorry – that cannot be called creative license!
@ Medha
..
Nah you didn’t get me!
Now you said JAI HO wasn’t Rahman’s best, to which I agree partially. A very good song, but yeah AR has done better, but def good.
Now, if he goes on to win an Oscar for this, you’d still harp on the point that the song was average as per Rahman, which is sorta fine, but if you hvn’t heard the other nominated song, how could have say this song doesn’t deserve it?! The other song ‘COULD’ be not as good as this. Obv ‘not all’ Award winner win for their BEST of works
I think I can’t make it simpler than this…
@ HG: “Anyway, the film is utter crap. I don’t know why everyone is getting their chaddis twisted.” ROFL… havent heard this before…
So, just coz that scene was bad, acc to you, the whole movie turns out bad?!
What sorta logic is that?!
i am eagerly waiting for Medha’s film……i’m sure she can make a completely realistic film with no creative licenses that can sustain the attention of the viewer and entertain him/her while simultaneously singing the virtues of Mother India…oh wait….
Slumdog has a tomatometer rating of 95% on rottentomatoes.com, ahead of The Dark Knight (95%), Milk (93%), The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (72%), Frost/Nixon (91%) and The Reader (60%) ; the last four being its fellow Best Picture Nominees. But the best critics of the world don’t know anything do they, they are busy hatching plans on ways to put down Indian film-makers, aren’t they Medha?
I saw the movie yesterday and I have some knowledge of films – academically and as a viewer. I agree with Medha completely – it’s direction and editing of the worst kind!
I did not like the script too much but if everything remained the same and just the director and editor were some more competent people, it would have been a great movie!
The one question one flashback format was excruciating after a while.
Highly lacking in creativity I thought!
Thanks for speaking up Medha!!
I share the same pain.
But hey we are getting nominations right?
I guess we should not talk then. Take the oscars and GGs and celebrate the super mediocrity. It is a pity that over the guys our directors have exposed our shortcomings in our movies – They have not got the unanimous praise that this piece of crap is getting.
There have been enough Ardh satyas, Dharavis, Ek Doctor Ki Mauths and you would see loads of reviews in the web saying ‘my problems with the movie ____’ on them.
When it comes to SDM – it is a brilliantly crafted movie – you ask one question – the answer is ‘arre bhai! it is supposed to be a fairy tale’ and I am the idiot who can’t spot a fairy tale from Danny Boil!! join the list medha. Lets filter the globe for more idiots…!!
@Jaiganesh,
I think you are being very harsh on the movie. There were quite a few holes but still this was a great movie and thoroughly entertaining.
Well, I see Medha getting a lot of flak because she said exactly what no body wants to listen. But that doesn’t make the truth false.
We live in a world of stereotypes. Like firangs are bad and they don’t have familial bonds and they are promiscous and they take grass and drugs and stuff.
That’s our firang prototype.
Look at Republic Day parades and what you’ll find in 48 hours time is depictions of how Indian freedom fighters are kiling firangs and there’d be a lot of foreigners sitting in the dignitaries.
And they’d see it not like we see the firang stereotype. They’d see it as a jaundiced vision.
We prototype everything. Like a girl has to be near anorexic and as fair as lacking proper RBC to look beautiful. I hear from my friends Halle Berry is an ugly bitch and Beyonce Knowles – “Oh I never look at her face”.
Stereotypes.
Like wise, the stereotype that the Westerners have about India and Indians is that it’s the land of filth. Of poverty, of corruption, of Taj Mahal and snake charmers. Poverty is so beautiful You know. A man going to work in an MNC on a sedan is not a piece of art. But a kid dying of hunger is to be photographed, cinematographed and .. To hell with stereotypes.
Slumdog Millionaire is a movie made by a white man, For the white man, Showing the brown men are still Dogs and the white men are still ratially superior.
This movie succeeded so unprecedentedly because it reinforces the ratial superiority faith that the west possesses. It reaffirms at a time when East is developing and US economy is at its lowest that India and the likes are still third world and as backward as the west always pictured.
There’s this dialogue when the kid says “This is the real India” and the lady gives him the huge sum and says “This is the real America or the like” – This is the biggest shameless racial statement I’ve ever seen made in Celluloid.
Yes Slumdog has good cinematography, it has refreshing faces, it has a break neck speed, it’s hardhitting and it’s a beautiful piece in parts, but its soul, it’s integrity is all compromised.
It’s a movie that yearns recognition and international awards by sucking up to the people who matter.
This could have been a great movie and I’m really disappointed that utter racial cynicism, jaundiced vision and racial overtone turned it into a current day apartheid propaganda.
Yes Mr. Boyle you’ve achieved it, You’ve just defaced a nation internationally and we’re honored because a few of our men have got oscar nominations.
Don’t even dare to compare it with Swades. Anybody who does it deserves to see and appreciate Slumdog Millionaire.
Sorry Medha for such a long and boring comment, but the feedback you’re getting here is disgusting. And yours is one of the only close to true reviews that I read.
After reading this I feel like there is someone who thinks as me. Waaa!!!!!! 10 Oscar nominations
Great. Do you feel this is the only best movie made in India. The answer is a big no. There are really masterpiece made by mastero’s. Is this the best music composed by AR, Surely not. I mean there are much much better music composed by AR.
so,………..its only because white man made it.
technically one of the best film I’ve ever seen. Cinematography,editing and direction is mindblowing. But the script is quite a letdown. May be it will appeal to international viewers but just too many plot loopholes and cinematic licence taken IMO. Anyway, at least Danny gave us a nice opportunity to masturbate out the juice of patriotism at the cost of his film.
oh boy here we go again , PFC’s lets trash whatever is popular brigade is out again , first of probably many of “reviews” slumdog millionaire.
notwithstanding naysayers, slumdog juggernuat will continue to roll and sweep the oscars these years..stand aside benjamin button and mr. nixon ! :D
@ Ramesh
If people don’t come to India after watching this movie, am happy ‘those’ guys arnt coming. Screw them.
This is a great movie and it will be. If it was made by Danny in say, Brazil/US/UK/China, it’d still be great. As I said earlier its not about poverty but about the love story and how this guy wins after everything that has happened in his life.
And for why ‘every indian movie that gets oscar nomination is about POOR people’
India selects one film for the foreign film category, why do we send the poverty ridden films then?! Send a say TZP kinds to the oscars every year in that case. A movie made well, its sent for nominations not coz ‘we don’t wanna show poor people in India’ funda.
@Medha- The Best review I’ve read over this movie, and the most appropriate. Great Job
@morph – Stop the PFC bashing. It’s not about PFC, It’s about us and it’s about our country. No Indian who has grown up in India, knows the country and its spirit inside out, has imbibed the culture and its frailties would ever accept SM.
It’s an intellectual insult and a racist slap on the face of the nation. I sincerely hope it gets seen by minimum number of westerners. Not because there’s anything about India to hide but because it’s a blatant one eyed and condescending portrayal.
What’s the explanation for Anil Kapur’s character being so mean? Why he tries to harm the kid?
You know what, no body knows that or so would it seem. Well, not really, the reason is, he’s an Indian. Do you really have pipe water sold as mineral water in every hotel?
How many times have you heard in Agra, a Mercedes being robbed in day light and left supported on bricks? Is that the real India?
Well, likewise You could also say, the real USA is the USA stereotype that we have about them in India. But it’d be wrong on our part to arrive at such a conclusion. SM very conveniently arrives at such racial conclusions.
Every shameless news channel is hopelessly selling the movie. A colleague of mine who’s an Indian but who’s spent all her child hood in Australia, New Zealand and Singapore saw the movie 4 times. And rates it as the best “Indian” movie.
Need I tell any more? Where Swades was different and why Swades died was because it was true and it was honest. India is as much about poverty, illiteracy and caste and creed as much it’s about the intellectual capital of past and present.
Find out the Indian representation in NASA. The IITians contribution and its recognition in US and Canada. There are always these two facets. One wouldn’t be complete without the other. Swades merged these two faces. Swades showed reality with dignity, but hell what we need is porn, Poverty porn. That’s why Slumdog worked bigtime.
I know Boyle hasn’t made a docu. I know he’s made a commercial cinema. But you know what? It’s a disgraceful, stinking, racial and western gratifying piece of cinema. There’s no reason to hail it.
Slumdog was Rehman’s weakest composition over a decade. And it’d only be befitting if he gets Oscar for it. Because he deserves a double digit of them and didn’t get. Beyond his, Russle’s and Gulzar’s nomination, Slumdog is the same story of foreigners raping India and its culture and attaining glory.
When Akbar was the king of India, Agra’s GDP was 3 times that of London. And when I was visiting Fatepur sikri recently, I found a brit photographing a sick Indian public toilet.
You see what I’m saying? That photograph is Slumdog for you and it’s anybody’s guess who that photographer is.
http://tinyurl.com/bzv3h8
This is the working link.
@ Subhasish
..
Dude I live in Mumbai man! and whatever is shown in the movie is what has/is happening. I got to college, find small kids with broken legs, arms asking for alms, I reach the R.station again the same scene, worse this time.
Can you not deny what is shown in the movie?! And as for Swades, its a totally different movie with different settings man.
The stuff that’s show in SlmD M is real and we are not ready to accept it, just coz its made by a UK dude and now the world would look down upon us. If it was made by Indian guys, we’d be fine coz we know not many firangs are gonna watch it anyways.
Time for us to get a reality check.
HAHAHAHAHAH sorry are we still stuck in “bharath chodo” “firangies are evil people” attitude
sorry welcome to 21st centuary
take a chill people
FACT- there is POVERTY in INDIA
FACT- there are more poor people in India than rich people
so why ignore these facts let’s faceit India is still 3rdworld country
as Irfaan khan righfully said in his interview
“if u don’t like what u see in SM then do something to improve India’s condition”
it is very easy to point fingers at “outsiders” instead of taking responablity of these conditions
who is responsible for these slums???
When I read this post yesterday, there were not comments added to it yet. I wanted to add “1st” as my reply, because apart from difference of opinion I felt a juvenile post deserved perhaps a juvenile response.
I think its a cultural thing, and only we as Indian’s respond in most juvenile ways possible to any universal recognition(i.e white man’s degrading view, why is Ash not # 1 in top 100, how SRK is more popular than Tom Cruise).
SD is a underdog love story, with poverty as a backdrop and a popular game show to keep it engaging. AND that’s all it is. Blame Vikas Swarup for writing such a story in bad light of India. If we get past the chip on our shoulder, we would see it as a simple uplifting love story.
As for films with poverty ridden being selected for Oscars ? It’s and American Award, with one award for foreign films, which is voted by all American critics who pick films they have understanding of. And poverty is universal, and even then of the list, I cannot speak of non-hindi language films, but apart from Bandit Queen no other film is easy to relate to for the voting critics. Yes some no name eastern European countries, or Iran’s films get selected, but those countries are constantly on the news in US, the critic who vote know of those things, or those countries go out of their way to promote their films . And only recently we see collaboration and joint ventures between Bollywood and Hollywood, and with more exposure, more awareness and appreciation should follow.
you know, what makes me laugh is, the film wasn’t about poverty and yet, all people talk about is poverty in india & some even trying to find a message. totally hilarious.
the film was about jaamal – but he was so invisible in the film… that people are looking at povetry and india. so conclusion the film failed.
i thought i come up with some weird statements, but you guys are on a complete different level.
People are like why do the west always select the movies from India that’s depicts itself as poor?!
Why do Indian filmmakers make movies about poverty then in the first place?! make a horror, a thriller a sci-fi and then send it as an official nomination for the Oscars.
There were also many who say TZP should have been chosen for the Oscars! I mean WTF, have you even checked out the other contendors this year?! who knows they could better than TZP. Ditto for the song JAI HO, not rahman’s best, but best among the nominated lot.
..
Are we going towards Paris hiltonazation period now in India?!
Medha ,
every person who watches a movie is an average movie goer who is putting her/his money and time into it and its but natural that u might be unsatisfied with the product.
The problem here is that you have based your expectations on a set of reviews and the so called “BUZZ” thats generated. That is exactly where the promotional media houses come into play.
Even though there was a huge BUZZ abt movies like “Om shanti om ” or “Ghajini”, I dint expect anything from those movies and I am average movie goer too .. without a creative bone in my body ..
So all I can say is that next time u wanna go see a movie then have ur own criteria.
I for instance wanted to see the movie because I loved the cinematography shown in the trailers and especially the shots on the train wid the kids really appealed to me. The story was no secret.. a slum dwelling boy goes to become a millionaire .. that is exactly wat happens so I was not expecting a lot .. maybe thats y I was satisfied.
There is this huge BUZZ abt Dev D .. but for some reason I am expecting more from Gulaal .. but then again thats my point of view and in this case its based on the script.
@Sriram – I’ve wasted enough time trying to say what I don’t need to. But to cut a long story short, I’ve mentioned that it has elements of a great movie but the soul is corrupt and conceited.
I’m not saying it doesn’t show truth. What I’m saying is, it sees only what it wants to and shows only that. In isolation some fact can mean something else. facts don’t mean anything in isolation. You’ve to show in totality if you want perspective. and the film has no perspective at all.
Showing reality is fine. But showing pseudo reality trying to sell by denigrating is not right.
I’ve just one question to ask you dude. It’s about that dialogue -
“This is the real India” and that lady giving the 500 dollar or whatever and saying roughly “This is real america or blah blah…” What was that dude?
Wasn’t it racial gratification? And the movie, as much as it’s replete with some reality, it’s replete with racial overtone also.
And as for the meritorious content? You take Ayn Rand’s fountainhead in essence, You adapt it to poverty and you have a great story? Somebody said it’s underdog love story. Well it’s the mother of all stories. But the actual story was written more than 75 years back. The essence of each leading character and their shades are taken from Fountain head and adapted to poverty, society and contemporary events.
This is my last comment on this post. To every one who thinks it’s a great cinema, Yes I agree it’s a juvenile post, so are my comments and enjoy the reality cinema.
The difference between porn and SM lies not in realism, both have it in comparable amounts. The difference lies in the raciality of treatment and endeavour.
@ subashish
..
What do you mean by “soul is corrupt and conceited” ? The movie DOESN’T say this is ‘THE ONLY THING ABOUT INDIA’, that’s just one portion of India. What do you mean by it doesn’t show the truth?! What is the Truth man?! Truth is that we don’t accept the movie coz its made by a Britisher and he’s insulting us. If it was by an Indian we’d happily watch it.
..
And about the answer, ‘We’ll show you the real america, yes that was uncalled for. BUT in the 2nd half, Salim tells Jamal that ‘India is the centre of the world now, and that’s he’s at the centre of it all’,
Why do you not talk about this?!
And the MAIN THING, which I have repeated like a ‘million’ times, that the movie is NOT about poverty, its about how Jamal loses Latika and later finds her. That’s it man.
Please watch it as a movie. Imagine its not Mumbai, it could be any other state in the WORLD.
Saw the movie today..average movie for me..like the technical work of camera, some scenes and the first chase…Irrfan was OK, Anil was an ill defined character, rest just about passed muster..
the Oscar guys are OK, they gave it ARR who, in their opinion did a great job. Of course, they would’nt know that he has done far greater jobs in movies like Taal, RDB, Roja, Thiruda Thiruda, etc. But, well we will gleefully take that. Resul has also done a very nice job.
Simon Beaufoy could have done better with the screenplay but I guess the running time and western senses came in the way.
Danny has done what I think a very safe game. He is successful commercially, I would compare it to an Ocean’s eleven or Hannibal Raising, movies that are tuned to be liked by audiences, very formulaic. But cool, that is the way he makes his flms. Cannot expect him to be Fincher or Soderbergh.
So, we chill and applaud another average entertainer. But better than some crap we produce in India by the truckload.
stop referring to the slums as ‘underbelly’ as if it’s a dirty thing that we all need to cover up. honestly, that’s very degrading. India is a poor country and so the background was set in the slums. the story is not about slums, it’s not about the kid from salaam bombay, and it’s not about what is realistic. Sriram has been saying this for a while and if you guys haven’t gotten it then you are just uncomfortable with your own identity. it’s as if someone showed your face on camera without makeup and everyone is pissed off that the audience can see their pimples.
Secondly, 15 minutes into the movie i figured out that this was an escapist story with a rags-to-riches theme. and it did that pretty well. i don’t claim that SM was the best movie of the year, and yes the choreography for Jai Ho was terrible, but my criticisms of it are purely cinematic. the bachchan scene was a homage to his stardom and the utter reverence of bollywood. of course it’s not realistic but man was it fun. i don’t have any moral objections to it. what’s way more degrading that Boyle’s (or Vikas Swarup’s) vision is the fact that most bollywood movies choose to hide the poverty and gloss over it, as if it’s not there. the pimples aren’t there. thats right, put your heads in the sand people.
Finally, if an Indian director had made this movie and it was produced and marketed properly for the film festival audiences, it would have gotten the same reception. but we don’t have that kind of a film culture here. also, i can think of only a handful of Indian filmmakers who are in the same league as Boyle.
so to those pissed off that SM wasn’t that great of a film because you had issues with it’s depiction of India — the film was not about the depiction of India or the slums or whatever. it was about jamal. too bad you couldn’t overlook that and enjoy how Boyle incorporated grit and escapism in the same frames. maybe you have some inferiority complex about a white man doing what you should have done. dare i say it borderlines racism?
^^^very well said
@ Sriram: Although Subashish isn’t articulating his objections too well he is in fact correct. I’ve lived in “the west” for 11 years now and I can assure you there is not even a slight attempt to not demonise India, it is considered axiomatic and self evident to do so.
Firstly the movie is technically and thematically weak, it’s just not a well made movie. it’s not my main thrust to argue that so I won’t get into it. you make the point that what is depicted in the movie is real – well no it isn’t and I’ll explain what I mean by that. I grew up in a barely middle class family in Delhi and so interacted with and lived within the lives of the strata depicted in SM, their lives can be described as being demanding certainly but to classify, underscore and amplify their lives as being hellishly traumatic is bias if only because it is not the teor of their lives….but wait there is more !
let’s take the example of sexism, for years it would bother me that a joke about women would be considered sexist while that same specific joke more or less, when made about men would not. I used to put it down as a chip on the feminist shoulder. over the years though it has dawned on me why the objections to such humour were correct. Every reference or depiction that is particularly one sided needs to be seen in the overall context of the body of public statements made about and around it. These jokes were sexist because the cultural artifacts of patriachy mean that there are positive depictions of men aplenty so any slight condescending remark really doesn’t affect the narrative about masculinity while the reverse does translate into a slur. it’s all about context and where exactly the reference sits in the “free” market of ideas.
Every cultural stream of humans has a grand narrative about itself within which it also situates it’s ideas of the rest of the world. This is not merely self aggrandisement, it is also the currency which enables or disables the growth of that cultural stream towards progressive outcomes. It situates – assymetrically or otherwise, that particular cultural stream within the competitive interaction of cultures politically, economically and in terms of historical narrative flowing on to future outcomes.
The west has a grand narrative about itself that demonises and exoticises other cultures. This is what enables the west to act unilaterally in consuming disproportionately and then making trivial condescending “charitable” contributions towards the inequities it has created. it’s what enables the west to dehumanise other cultural streams with so that at the appropriate time those cultures can be gainfully exploited or carpet bombed as the situation may demand. in the case of India, China and Russia this assymetric dialog is now growing shriller by the second because quite simply the culture wars have begun.
Read the websites and the print media of any anglo saxon centric think tank in the world right now and there is a palpable sense of fear and hand wringing that their three centuries of dominance will become a foot note in history given that the “old poweres” which were the cultural streams of consequence for millenia are rising again. One of the clearest things you will notice in these documents is the clear demarcation between the attitude towards India and China. While China is delivered grudging respect because of it’s own creation of soft power and cultural agenda in the public domain, there is an almost gleeful celebration of the number of Indian writers that can be obtained who are prepared to act as the “native informant” writing biases into the public domain that can safely be steered away from acccusations of racism because the writers are indian. In fact the celebration of rather mediocre indian writers in english who say the “right” things has become the norm(have you read the booker winning Arvind Adiga? it’s shockingly bad writing which only facilitates the post colonial narrative that cannot be safely advanced by a white author anymore). Rohinton Mistry who hasn’t lived in India for more than 3 decades is celebrated as a native informant, Arundhati Roy who makes facetious and easily falsifiable arguments (if someone could only be bothered exposing the outright distortions of truth in her opinion pieces) is upheld as an iconic voice of reason, Mira Nair who neither lives in india nor by her own admission has observed the dysfunctions she portrays in her own life (her failed marriage was with a white male) is simillarly felicitated and celebrated and so on and so forth…all these individuals have thriving careers and are recepients of numerous financial incentives, grants and awards for their efforts incidentally.
What exactly is the purpose then of this assymetric narrative ? why is captain kirk still the big man, the leader of 24th century humans in cultural projections into the future ? why is the blatant western over consumption that is reducing the planet to a cinder little by little something that is overlooked even though at every environmental summit the west has so far refused to pick up it’s moral burden ? why are China and India being framed as the major polluters of the world – when most of their consumption is still in the service of the west rather than their own populations ? Why are political, economic and military agendas that stand outside those of the west routinely identified as the problem while the military industrial complex of the west continues about it’s trillion dollar business under the world’s collective noses ? Frankly it’s because the much maligned (by the left) and recently dead Samuel P Huntinton only articulated the clash of civillisations that has long underscored western ideas about itself and the rest of the world. Western dogma for the last three centuries emerged from and continues to proceed forward from a zero sum game which pits the west as the pinnacle and therefore deserving of it’s hegemony.
where does this put slumdog millionaire exactly ? it squarely situates the narrative of India as the emerging alternative to the west as a power in the dysfunctional and exploitative category. And make no mistake even though most indians would find the idea of India as a truly emerging alternative rather silly given the realities of their lives the fact remains that the macro economic figures (this incidentally is what i now do for a living, for the time being anyway) of the country are sheer gold. Especially with the global downturn and rapacious decisions made in the west for 3 decades coming home to roost, IF the right decisons are made by indian leadership we are at the cusp of growth that will completely dwarf anything that has come before it.
The fact of the matter is that these very same injustices exist in the west…exactly the same ones though in culturally specific ways which are not demonised to the same extent in collective consciousness and public space…the fact that slumdog was made at all stems from the fact that it is based on a book written by a native informant and thus can credibly be defended against racial bias. In fact the recent articles defending the movie against such accusations have also been written by other native informants, such as the article in the guardian, and are replete with ad hominem attacks on individuals who have raised the objections. Which is handy because ad hominem attacks are a wonderful bombastic exercise in considering everything else but the actual merits or demerits of arguments.
Frankly Slumdog is a bigoted and assymetric paen to the “superior” and “humane” west which is by deduction then the only worthy stream leading into a progressive and mythologised future of humanity. What is objectionable about the movie is not that it depicts poverty but that it depicts India as a collective of inhuman brutes who are not deserving of stepping into the future on their own terms and under the leadership of their own agendas and concerns.
Movie was good, but definitely did not deserve all this hype surrounding it…
All actors except Farieda did a good job… background score and cinematography was good… screenplay was weak.
Some things I just could not relate to –
Whats with the Brit accent, huh. Come on its a Danny Boyle film after all. Why couldn’t they work on Dev Patel’s accent to suit the character he was playing?
And the scenes at Taj… “But of course maam” and all? I mean, which slum kid speaks such language, and with all that accent…
Jai Ho definitely is not one of AR’s better compositions… The choreography was irritating…
@Abhay,
Just because I don’t agree with your exalted opinions about a film, does that I mean I gotta make one and prove my point to you?? Naah … don’t think so.
@Abhay,
“But the best critics of the world don’t know anything do they, they are busy hatching plans on ways to put down Indian film-makers, aren’t they Medha?” – Now, when did I say that? All I said was had the film been made by an Indian director, critics in India would have torn him to pieces, let alone rave about the film.
@Jaiganesh,
Rightly put – take the Oscars and Golden Globes and celebrate mediocrity
@Subhasish Chakroborty,
You are right. It could have been a great film. But, the myopic vision of India killed it. Sadly.
I honestly just wanna say a BIG F*** YOU to everyone out there trying to voice their so called POV on the creative team behind the making of Slumdog and screw what is, after all an individual experience. You’ll either love the movie or not. That’s it. Don’t go about being all judgemental.
I for one, LOVED SLUMDOG. It kinda brought back a lot of memories of what I felt which watching Satya (which I feel is technically far superior to Slumdog) ten years ago at Eros.
@Crimzin,
“You’ll either love the movie or not.” – And I did not. And said so.
OMG, Medha! I couldnt have disagreed more! Was Slumdog promised as an intelligent documentary on Mumbai or India?? What is with us getting on to the defend-India mode? Of course it is masala, of course it is fiction! So you WILL have cinematic liberties. Stars WILL land in slums and the hero WILL get a divine intervention to help him win that jackpot! If you were expecting a Coen brothers film, well then, it is an expectations problem from your end. No offence meant, but I really think so. Like the same way people didnt like Ghajini because they thought it would be some intelligent film that has studied short term memory loss scientifically. I didnt like Ghajini too, not at all, but not for these reasons. I was expecting a masala film but didnt like that masala which unfolded on screen.
When Danny Boyle made Trainspotting, no one questioned by is the UK being portrayed in bad light. When City of God got made, no one said it is about poor Brazil made for pleasing the west! These are backdrops of his films, not to be mistaken for the story itself. Its like saying Pather Panchali is about poor India. I am sorry but I guess you have missed the soul of the film entirely.
Medha, i totally respect your PoV. And I accept that you didnt like the film. To each his own. But just another PoV for you to think about. That’s what makes this blog so much fun!
You are in the minority as far as SDM is concerned. So I am sure you will get a lot of charged up comments! All of us should express our opinions and then take it easy
medha,
i just c’d not stop laughing reading the article and the comments.
the film is a joke for a movie nominated for 10 oscars. im fine with what they show in the movie as its just a masala film quite well shot, but with a lot of potholes in the script.
the scene in front of taj was just plain stupid.
but again now i have reservations on the pfc forum. i see ppl commenting abt the greatness of Tzp or Swades which are nothing more than average movies. Even an Omkara comes nowhere close to a Kaliyattam made almost 8 years before its release.
(both were adaptations of othello, kaliyattam was directed by jayaraj)
the first thing ppl here need to realize is that bollywood is india’s worst film industry. the people here who’ve been spoon fed on this crap are no likely to comment better and its not just because the general cinematic taste is bad, but that none of the so called ethical media in our country is taking steps to promote the good cinema.
how many of the guys commenting here knows abt directors like a murali nair or girish karasaravalli whose movies are much better than the best celebrated hollywood movies.
Murali is a director whose celebrated at cannes.
but unfortunately we ppl notice a cannes only when ash makes a catwalk there along with her hubby shabby guy. and the media bothers to ignore such awesome talents.
Another point i wanted to make was that since i know most of u are aamir khan fans here is that he’s a very ordinary actor who cant even really emote. he understands his limitions very well and his movies might appeal to many ppl but sorry it fails to light me up as all his movies seem to be pretentious except dil chahta hai and 1947 earth.
so what im summing up is that when i can sit and read most comments praising Aamir Khan and his sense for different movies and feel sad abt the state of indian movies coz much awesome movies in other languages get no limelight from the indian media, it balances the scale when a silly movie like slumdog millionare gets 10 nominations for oscars and real bollywood fans feel sick abt it.
Even guys like Anurag Kashyap, Madhur Bandarkar, Vishal Baradwaj are nothin more than very ordinary filmmakers, so shd i dare comment abt Om prakash mehra or an ashutosh gowarikar? no i dont say that abt abt a govind nihalani or a shyam benegal.
so blame it on you for promoting crap, else how c’d an SRK or AK or Salman Khan become a super star lol again. Srk was pathectic on stage at the golden globes.
so happy circusing for promoting and enjoying mediocrity
For me the main problem about the movie was that i could not get connect with the characters one they started speaking in English. It kinda looked outta place and as if they were just reading out the lines rather than acting…the movie would have been a decent one if its in complete hindi. It should have something like apocalypto with full subtitles..It would have made much more sense.
Arati you’re mistaken in assuming that people who don’t agree with your nonchalant acceptance of the movie as having priorities other than india bashing have a chip on their shoulders…so it didn’t rankle you fair enough but maybe that’s because of how far in line you’ve had to fall in with the prevailing paradigm of the world – which is decidely skewed by the megaphones of the west. Now I’d safely assume that you may not take kindly to being accused of being indoctrinated into a submissive mindset, in the same fashion those of us who don’t think the “soul iof the movie” (as you so facetiously put it) was elsewhere are equally people who have their reasons for finding the movie objectionable.
The film is so ordinary and so mediocre that the raptorous welcome it has recieved in the west in definately a result of the placation of western indoctrination about india…furthermore city of god actually humanises the favella in rio on the contrary the cardboard cut out brutality that the weak and susceptible are meted out in slumdog is a gross indictement of humanity in India – that you would even compare the two treatments is puzzling to me. in so far as trainspotting being about the underbelly of the welsh junkie scene….sure, but consider that the movie is set against a backdrop and within the climate of a massive amount of work that completes the picture about the society and people it is set in…in a few decades now the two major movies that hollywood studios have financed that are based in india are temple of doom and slumdog…well need I say more ?
The response to all those who find the movie bigoted will consistently be that they have a chip on their shoulders (politely as you have stated it or impolitely as some others have). The fact of the matter is that the world is all perception, reality if it exists at all is a very very tenous concept. Certain schools of perception have made themselves much more insidiously prevelant than others due to assymetric soft power. in my opinion, and I hope you can appreciate that i’m making this point in a civil fashion and not as a lumpen accusation, a lot of people among the educated in India have long since been indoctrinated into a perception, a narrative, a world view that is not their own. This is a very subtle indoctrination but is obvious to someone who can see both sides of the fence. As I said in an earlier post in the first decade and a half of my life I lived in a barely middle class environment – as a matter of fact it wouldn’t be called middle class anywhere but the India of that period..over a period of time because my parents were determined that I was to be educated in a “good” school and just because our circumstances improved I began to encounter and circulate within the great indian middle class..circumstances for the last decade have led to me living in the west for the last decade and doing fairly well for myself in the finance industry…why the background ? I believe that the sequential unfolding of my life and my intelligence give me a good vantage point to assess motivations involved here..whether it is the motivations behind the film or the response it has had in these boards..the pity of it is that there is probably no malice in the film making, this is truly the axiomatic assumption in the west regarding India. the inequities in their own societies are glossed over while inequities in India are specifically demonised into results of a callous and brutal society. I can assure you the amount of joi de verve and humanity you will find in india is in my experience very very unique, and still the tenor of SDM is relentlessly brutal and dehumanising…sure generalisations have to be made in works of art in order to tell stories, but when the tenor, the flavour of those generalisations is so grossly unrepresentative of the indian experience I have to wonder how you can miss that…this is not some comment i’m making about whether the film had any onus to be accurate or whether it was a documentary, what riles me is that it is specifically the very same exoticised and demonised narrative of the rest of the world that the west periodically tells itself for reasons that allow their increasingly homogenised and dumbed down indoctrinated populations to be kept in check and their grand narrative to be secured.
“the soul of the film” is pure bigotry.
@Subhasish # 51
yawn! ..if all the scottish people had taken “Trainspotting” this seriously , danny boyle would have been hounded like salman rushdie ! lol ! ..i dont ask those profound questions after seeing this movie , because its a movie (a damn good one at that every bit deserving all the kudos that its getting) not some official marketing campaign for india !
just random responses to some of the “criticism” in the review and comments sections
#Amitabh landing in helicopter in slum and signing autograph etc ,
for some reason the autograph scene kept reminding of the scene in indian jone and last crusade where indie ends up getting hitler’s autograph , in both the scenes i wasnt wondering why hitler is singing for indie or why amitabh is giving autograph for shit covered boy i was marvelling the audacity of the scene !!
#poverty porn
heres the truth , india still has 60% of population living below poverty line , so if some filmmaker randomly trains his or her camera odds are more often than not his subject is going to be poverty or slums etc , so you just have to accept the reality , to boyle’s credit , he shows both sides of india , he also stresses that india is growing and its a wooly place where filty shacks are side by side with posh apartments and swanky mercs , like the salim character says “india is at the centre of the world and iam at the centre of the centre”
Medha,
Nice view……Songs of Delli 6 is far far better than Jai ho and SM
Its a story about a guy who finds its lost love…..nothing more than that…
I don’t know know how many of you read the story Q &A ….there is no sign of poor India there….Its a great book but DB deviated from the story….. what Danny Portrayed is the poor India which made the world sympathetic otherwise it wouldn’t have been nominated for Oscar or GG…..
Also there is a filthy feeling about the slum you get when you see like movies like Aamir and Black Friday….which is completely missing here everything is so polished……good cinematography indeed….
I dont know how SM beats Gran Torino and Revolutionary Road
For those who say boyle has offended india ..sample this beauty from trainspotting …
Tommy: Doesn’t it make you proud to be Scottish?
Mark “Rent-boy” Renton: It’s SHITE being Scottish! We’re the lowest of the low. The scum of the fucking Earth! The most wretched, miserable, servile, pathetic trash that was ever shat into civilization. Some hate the English. I don’t. They’re just wankers. We, on the other hand, are COLONIZED by wankers. Can’t even find a decent culture to be colonized BY. We’re ruled by effete assholes. It’s a SHITE state of affairs to be in, Tommy, and ALL the fresh air in the world won’t make any fucking difference!
Kishalay
are you saying the slums in SM are not filthy enough LOL! i thought everyone was complaining that they were too filty to be put on screen !, have you the seen the movie ?
Ya I have seen it 3 times just to discover whats so special in it…but didn’t find any which we can remember forever …
I have no problem in showing poor India or poverty on screen……even in latin american movies everything starts from poverty specially argentina….
and I said about the feeling the smell you get when you go to these places…everybody must have went to slums once in their life so you can guess about the feeling I am talking about…..and when you can feel it…it gives you a feeling of puking just viewing it on screen it becomes a work of art….
I experienced that in Aamir but not in SM…
also young jamal dialogues could have been in hindi with subtitles instead of dubbed english that would make it more realistic
Hey Medha,
Please don’t flatter yourself by thinking my comment was directed at you specifically. I was referring to everyone in general who are bashing this movie just because it was made by Danny Boyle or as someone put it ‘a white film maker’. Regardless of who made this movie, the fact is, it’s a well made movie.
And by the way, I don’t give a damn whether YOU liked it or not. To each one his own.
@Crimzin,
True – to each his own. In that case, why would you want to – “just wanna say a BIG F*** YOU to everyone out there trying to voice their so called POV on the creative team behind the making of Slumdog”??
Medha Dutt
hello maam
i think u r a bigger film maker and u have made many bigger film than danny boyle . firset make a film the critize anyone its easy to write wnd and say its bad but have u ever relize how difficut ity is to make a goiod film
1. we love black friday but no smoking is a trash
Avdhesh – I would have preferred a bit more nuance, but I think your comments make some very important and vital points. To a very great extent I agree with you – especially about the internalized default narrative about India within the West.
By the way, Nirpal Dhaliwal (the one who wrote the Guardian article) hardly qualifies as “native informant”. He’s a Brit Indian and a joke thanks to him and his ex-wife writing a running expose on their marriage. No one takes Dhaliwal seriously.
But you know, besides the meta argument about Western worldviews, there is a more quotidian explanation.
International cinema is marketed in very consistent ways in the US and national cinema cultures are consistently stereotyped.
As I mentioned on another SM post, if you only watched the Iranian films hyped by the Western media, you’d think the leading preoccupation of Iranian society is cute kids leading cute lives.
Lots of Iranian films with complex, adult themes are consistently ignored because they don’t have the pretty picture postcard quality to them.
India basically brings up the following vignettes –
Colourful weddings with helpless female protagonists
Poor, suffering kids
Raj exotica – Merchant-Ivory and the Brits used to dish out something on these lines once in a while.
Having said all this, I’d just add the caveat that you are perhaps being a bit harsh on Booker. Whatever Arundhati’s other faults may be, “The God of Small Things” was a marvellous book that fully deserved its prize. And it didn’t have the slightest bit of poverty porn in it.
Adiga though – I really have my reservations. Arundhati wrote about her own life – Adiga writes about a milieu that he doesn’t seem to be very familiar with.
i read your review. i also read maybe the first ten comments, and then left the fight there. just in case you needed re-assurance, and i dont think you do, i think your review is fair, and unbiased. it’s a decent cast with a half-baked script and a director that doesnt really know the issues he’s dealing with. i have liked some of Danny Boyle’s earlier work, but this doesn’t quite cut it.
im glad for your review, though. at least someone was ballsy enough to say it.
This post is a fart. Is the concept of ‘fiction’ so really hard to understand? Well, some people are really dumb. What a pity.
The plot is flimsy and the film is silly. But I found it quite entertaining. But despite opportunities available in the script, there are no edge of the seat moments in the film. The last question could have been, but it wasn’t. Just compare it with the last ball sixer in Lagaan…which is better? :-)
kishalay
why would you see a movie you didnt like three times !! if some movies dont work for the first time they are unlikely to grow on you ! , also the movie isnt out for 3 days here , either you caught a bootlegged copy (bad bad !) or you live abroad and made 3 trips to cinema hall to see this movie in which case i really respect your opinions.
Haven’t read all the comments to the post, so pardon me if this seems like a repeat. Why are we so defensive about the underbelly? Firstly, it is not the underbelly , it is what majority of our nation is. We the educated, prosperous inhabitants of India Shining are the minority. The majority is what we see and live with everyday but have developed a thick skin towards. In our pursuit of all things shiny, we have left them behind and when someone shows it to our face,especially a foreigner, we scream poverty chic,exploitation yada yada yada… I thought the film was fine, an improbable tale in circumstances that are all too real for many.While an Indian has written the book, an Indian filmmaker would never have the guts, so lets not trash Danny Boyle
Having heard all the superlative reviews and GG and US top 10 and all that, i was really excited for this movie. i knew it shows slums, i knew its made by a british but i was all the time very positive. In between there would be negative comments on imdb, by Amitabh but i thought that they are being unreasonable. If this movie is getting so much recognition there must be something good in it. If slums exist, if poverty exists why should we have a problem if they are depicted. But after i saw the movie. i was like WTF is this. how can it receive all the appreciation it has. it just reinforces stereotypes and conveniently mutilated reality. ‘You want to see real India. This is real India.’ I mean come on in an underdog story why a dialogue like this. people who r defending it saying that this movie is unnecessarily facing racial brickbacks. it is just because the film is like that. it is racist. it is unhonest. if you show reality it has to be real. TV kept in front of Taj Mahal and people watching the game show like there life depends on it. dont tell me its reality. a slumboy being given 3rd degree because he knows answers to questions in a game show. dont tell me its reality. the only reason i can understand y this film is working in US is because they prefer to see India this way and dont care what the reality reality is. the filmmaker has just used India and the Indians dont mind being used just because they feel that atleast world is noticing them. doesn’t matter if it is for wrong and untrue reasons.
For me, SDM was a good bollywood masala film. Nothing great. But why is it getting the kind of attention that many of our well made “good” bollywood masala films didnt get? Why?
I have no issues with poverty, gora director and shit.
^^ since when SDM is good bollywood movies????????????
people are really THAT narrow minded
no wonder world is not moving ahead
Ofcourse it is. it is masala.
Dont drag the movie into unnecessary controversy. We
Just imagine, its only the name “Slumdog”. The duration of slum scenes is no more than what we have been used to in our typical hindi moves of the 80s.
Suppose the movie was called “rags to riches” Would it still create such a turmoil in our heart. I doubt it, Its a brilliantly made movie and it doesnt matter to me if it was made by a british director or someone else. Just watch the movie as a normal cinegoer and have fun
From
www.fashionhub.co.nr
Ok – let’s get something very vital out of the way here.
I and many other critics of Slumdog don’t have the slightest bit of problem with the fact that the film is about poverty stricken protagonists. A number of films that I’ve loved over the years focus on people living in deep poverty.
The fundamental problem is with the way the lives of the poor are depicted.
Danny Boyle has repeated asserted in interviews that what he’s trying to show is a slice of Indian reality.
There is no doubt in his mind that he’s making a quasi-documentary.
Defenders of the film cannot have it both ways – you cannot assert that the film is fiction and then say that this is the reality that we live with in India.
WOW what a review.
seems like the reviewer is a brash school kid.
may be not, because she talks about ‘brilliant’ cinematography & ’slick’ editing, must be well-learned, yeah.
or may be its just a state-of-mind review and she will begin to appreciate the film later in life, that if she keeps the windows open.
P.S:nothing personal
@ram, I don’t agree with you that bollywood is full of crap and other regional movies don’t get their fair share of attention. I’am from karnataka and i just can’t understand girish kasaravalli’s films. Just like the way you feel an aamir khan is over-rated i feel mr kasaravalli is also the same. Sorry my friend his films just don’t entertain, i don’t agree that he makes “DIFFERENT” stuff and his films are for “NICHE” audience because i hate those words being used by filmmakers to defend their peice of art.It’s escapist behaviour and putting the blame on the audience indicating they were not good enough thereby insulting their intelligence. Gulaabi talkies was a pathetic film, i would watch an average film like TZP or a Swades 100 times than watch gulaabi talkies. I personally felt that “aa dinagalu” was a better film in every sense of the word.
@Dewi I was not commenting about god of small things. My comments realte to the subsequent role that Ms Roy has taken on as a, in my opinion, very flawed op ed writer.
I guess the movie is wonderful but it is really an overrated movie. what ever he is showing is also correct, but why only a movie made by danny got 10 nominations and AR got 3?
@Medha:
“And, yes, I still stick by my point – any Indian filmmaker – and the critics would have torn him to pieces.”
Even if I buy that, how is that a legitimate reason to criticise Slumdog?
@morph:
“oh boy here we go again , PFC’s lets trash whatever is popular brigade is out again , first of probably many of “reviews” slumdog millionaire”
For God’s sake, stop this ‘PFC’ and ‘PFC brigade’ thing- it is the most silly and stupid thing to say. Do you think we like, sit down togethet and say- ‘oh man, this movie’s really getting popular, now let’s sit and trash it’!? Whatever an author writes is his/her personal opinion, and not ‘PFC’s official editorial opinion’ or something. If you have been following this site, you must have also seen many glowing reviews of this film too, most recent being PhoenixNU’s. We are a group of individuals and you will be surprised to know how much and how aggressively we sometimes argue and debate about films. So for once and for all, there is no ‘PFC AGENDA’ to promote or trash any film, or to be ‘rebellious’ or ‘contrarian’ for the sake of it. Period.
Medha,
If you’re still following this piece and the responses, you really need to explain this incredulously appalling that you made –
“I have little doubt that had the film been made by an Indian director, it would have been mercilessly trashed left, right and centre, and the said director would probably never have made anotehr film in his lifetime.”
That’s quite an assumption you’ve made. You’ve put to stake your credibility as a person deserving such a platform to express your opinion.
Hi,
I am in US for half a year now…. many of you would have seen America..
In last 6 months… in less than 2 mile area there were 2 murders.. and some good 20+ robberies…
I see beggers here… and worst… people who have house are also down in debts like anything… (I am saying in general… NOT ALL )
White people have superiority complex… and I see it.
Now lets talk about movie..
Every great movie has some message.. think of Forrest Gump, Hazaron, or even Hera Pheri… But this movie has nothing to say…
I am not writing bad about SM because I on PFC … and no one does so..
NiDHi MoDH
@Avdhesh (79): You have taken this as a personal vendetta, which this was not. I have better things to do than pass value judgements. Nothing NONCHALANT about it. And your comments are so silly that I dont think they even warrant a response! Stop taking yourself so seriously!
and to conclude, i have little or nothing to object to the theme of the film, nor the depiction of bombay…i’ve lived here 24 years now, the most self-defeating metropolis, and it is the rectum of the world. my objections are purely towards what a trite and technically hideous attempt at movie making slumdog is. my top contnder for the razzies.
@ Arti what else is more important to consider or take seriously but oneself ? atleast you sound like you’re content to have put me in my place with your incisive remarks and sharp wit !
@Medha: “but I was quite amused to see that Slumdog drew ‘only’ the elite and uppler class crowd. Not to mention, the firangs.”
:o
The use of the “F” word…firang…i.e.
Not good not good.
I don’t have a problem with the movie being made by a British film-maker and I don’t have ANY problem with the glorification of poverty or whatever it is. However, I do agree with the notion that the movie is HUGELY overrated and this is the ONLY reason that it’s being talked about so much.
Watch Trainspotting and you won’t believe that the same Danny Boyle had made it. Maybe it’s the story [the book] of SM itself which is not all that GREAT.
Taare Zameen Par was a better movie than this.
Danny did a great job i think
It was original work