Bollywood actors as well as directors are confused whether they should shower words of praise on Danny Boyle's brilliant portrayal of Mumbai's underbelly in SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE, or tear it apart for exposing India's struggle with its daily contradictions; good, bad and ugly. The controversy has begun to unravel following super star Amitabh Bachchan's criticism of the film for portraying India as a “Third World dirty underbelly developing nation”. Those who love Boyle’s film say “It also makes one wonder why some of our entirely over-rated, desi directors have failed so spectacularly in spelling out the ugly truth about Mumbai's dark world as transparently and convincingly?" Pervaiz Alam looks at the controversy.
Accolades for Slumdog
SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE has been nominated for 11 BAFTAS. The film won four Golden Globe awards for Best Picture in the Drama category, Best Director for Danny Boyle, Best Screenplay for Simon Beaufoy and Best Original Score in a Motion Picture for Composer A. R. Rahman.
Indian television channels went overboard in celebrating the success as if it was a Karan Johar presentation. Johar in India is known for showcasing the most jazzy and glossy side of the middle classes. They are like fairy tales, soothing the nerves of the middle classes.
Slumdog Millionaire makes Bollywood jealousBefore Golden Globes, SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE had also won five awards at the LA Critics’ Choice Awards on Friday, including Best Picture, Best Director, Best Writer, Best Composer and Best Young Actor for Dev Patel.
Is it politically incorrect to appreciate Slumdog
Shobha De, leading columnist and novelist, wrote in her column 'Politically Incorrect' for the Times of India: It (SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE ) cut terrifyingly close to the bone as it took us straight into the innards of this brutal world, where wide-eyed kids lose their innocence (and their eyes) at the hands of ruthless gangsters who mutilate, maim, kidnap and kill at will. And the first thought that came to mind is that it has taken an 'outsider' (Danny Boyle), to go fearlessly into 'No Man's Land' and hold up a mirror to our sordid society — the same one that looks the other way... and flinches when confronted.
"It also makes one wonder why some of our entirely over-rated, desi directors (homegrown products, at that), have failed so spectacularly in spelling out the ugly truth about Mumbai's dark world as transparently and convincingly? Whether or not Boyle's film wins an Oscar or two is immaterial. It should be made compulsory viewing for anybody who wants to understand the shocking, ghastly subtext that deals with the 'other' Mumbai — the one that feeds on abject poverty and paradoxically enough, also on the soaring hope that this same poverty breeds success," writes De.
Bachchan unhappy with the success of Slumdog
Now, look at what Bollywood super star Amitabh had to say in his blog: "It's just that the SM (Slumdog Millionaire) idea authored by an Indian and conceived and cinematically put together by a Westerner, gets creative Globe recognition. The other would perhaps not," Bachchan wrote on his blog.
If the movie projects “India as a third world dirty underbelly developing nation and causes pain and disgust among nationalists and patriots, let it be known that a murky underbelly exists and thrives even in the most developed nations.”
"Conditions world over are so similar. Perceptions differ, but the reality of life and existence, unchanged. Comments for the film Slumdog Millionaire and the anger by some on its contents, prompt me to say the above," Bachchan wrote.
Bachchan backtracks
Amitabh Bachchan, later, backtracked and said he didn't mean it actually. "Someone mentioned the film on my blog. Some expressed opinion for it, some against... I merely put both of them up and invited debate.''
Oh, really?
Double standards of the West?
Much revered Mr.Bachchan should know that hundreds of films with huge budgets and top stars have been made in Hollywood and Britain on what Mr.Bachchan calls 'murky underbelly' that 'exists and thrives in the most developed nations.'
In fact, Hollywood has made some brilliant films on America's murky politics as well, ranging from the corruption of the White House to Capitol Hill. Themes such as racism, double standards of Washington in dealing with Africa and the third world, corporate greed and bribing power etc. have dominated the Western films during the last five years.
Hollywood legend Martin Scorsese (Taxi Driver, Goodfellas, After Hours, The Departed, Casino, Gangs of New York) built his reputation on exposing America's underbelly to the rest of the world. So it’s really difficult to comprehend what Bachchan is complaining about.
Accolades for Satyajit Ray but Bollywood despised
Bachchan in his blog writes that the "commercial escapist world of Indian cinema" has vociferously battled for years, on the attention paid and adulation given to legendary Satyajit Ray at all prestigious film festivals of the West and not a word of appreciation for the entertaining mass-oriented box office blockbusters that were being churned out from Mumbai.
"The argument: Ray portrayed reality. The other escapism, fantasy and incredulous posturing. Unimpressive for Cannes, Berlin and Venice. But look at how rapidly all that is changing," he says.
So whose fault is this, if 'entertaining mass-oriented box office blockbusters' do not amuse international juries? Certainly, Ray had nothing to do with it. Or, perhaps, he could have played a dirty hand. Because, he raised the bar so high! Would it not be fair to say that India's commercial cinema, barring a few exceptions, has failed to address the surreal aspect of our living.
No international recognition for Bollywood while Nairs and Mehtas thrive
Ignorance is bliss, wise people say. During the last five years, Bollywood films have failed to qualify for some of the most important film festivals such as Cannes, Berlin and Venice in the competitive categories.
Mira Nair's 'Monsoon Wedding' won the Golden Lion award at the 58th annual Venice Film Festival in 2001. Since then India has not won a major award at any of the three biggies- Cannes, Berlin and Venice. The truth is even bitter; should we really consider films by Nair, Deepa Mehta and Gurinder Chaddha as Indian films?
'Monsoon Wedding,' a comedy about an extended family reuniting from around the globe for an arranged marriage in India's capital, was not an 'underbelly' film or was it? Mr. Bachchan could say Nair depicted incest in an Indian family. Incest happens in the west too, he could add.
At Venice in 2001, it was the first time a woman (Mira Nair) had won the top prize and the first time an Indian film had won since 1957's win for Satyajit Ray's 'Aparajito'. Bollywood, led by Mr. Bachchan, is yet to open its account.
Bollywood trapped between London Bridge and Interlaken
‘Adulation given to legendary Satyajit Ray at all prestigious film festivals of the West and not a word of appreciation for’ Bollywood, legendary Bachchan says on his blog. If we read between the lines, films based in India, with six songs and dances entirely shot near London Bridge and Swiss Interlaken, should also be awarded at all major film festivals for their 'originality' of themes such as Bollywood flick 'God Tussi Great Ho' where Mr. B plays God. Of course, his character had nothing to do with Morgan Freeman in 'Bruce Almighty (2003)'! No one is even suggesting that God Tussi was a crude remake. Perhaps, God Tusi...could have won an Oscar for its sheer originality.
Blaming Satyajit Ray has been a favourite pass time of Bollywood as if poverty in India was Ray's figment of imagination. 'Look at how rapidly all that is changing,' is, of course, a reference to the fastest growing industry of entertainment in India, at a 20% plus rate, with more than 1000 films under its belt every year. Film stars are charging more money and Hollywood studios have started making Hindi films. Thanks to 1 billion + population. Yes, every year, a few small-budget films are made for the discerning audiences. But shouldn't we expect more from such a giant industry?
It's time that Bollywood must also behave as part of a mature nation that India has been. We all love Bollywood massala films but for God's sake make some of them real and original as well, people of India have been crying for some time. Escapism is enjoyable in difficult situations but a constant doze of opium is bad for health, we all know.
Filmmakers not amused by Bachchan's remarks
"A film is made by a filmmaker's vision and sensibility, not nationality. Any film that tells a compelling human story and moves an audience will be appreciated by all. Human emotions are universal, be it an Indian or Western audience," Bhavna Talwar, who directed critically acclaimed 'Dharm,' said.
"Let's get it right, Slumdog... is an Indian film. It is easily the most successful Indian film ever. So what if the funds came from outside India. The funds for Bandit Queen came from the same source and it is considered an Indian film. The funds for Chandni Chowk to China came from Warner Brothers, but it is considered an Indian film," Kapur wrote in his blog.
"Except for the director, screenwriter and one of the producers, everyone else of the 100-odd people that make a complete film unit were Indian. The film is also based on a book by an Indian author," he added.
"Audiences do not judge a film on the basis of its maker, but how the film is made. Since Slumdog... is such a good film, it would have got such a reaction even it were made by any director whether Indian or Westner," said Kunal Kohli who made 'Fanaa'.
Irrfan Khan and Anupam Kher defend Slumdog
Actor Irrfan Khan, who plays a police inspector in Slumdog Millionaire, has rejected criticism about the film and believes the reality of Indian poverty can’t be ignored.
"If anyone has any objection to the depiction of poverty in the film they should first come forward and take initiative to remove it. Only talking won't help," Khan told India's leading news agency PTI.
"We can not shut our eyes from the fact that a large section of our country continues to live abject poverty which can not be removed by not being shown in a film. We need to work on grass-root level to remove this problem," he said earlier.
One of India's best known actors Anupam Kher told AFP in London that the success of "Slumdog Millionaire" had given increased credibility to the country's film industry. Kher noted that the success of "Slumdog" had "brought a certain stature and dignity to Indian cinema" but acknowledged that "having said that, after all, it is a (British director) Danny Boyle film."
"It happens to have Indian actors, which is an achievement, but it will be interesting to have an Indian director making an Indian film and then getting international acclaim and being a big box office hit," Kher told AFP.
When Firangis came to Mumbai they won the world…
So we guess the issue is not the portrayal of poverty, but who did it. Bollywood, it seems, is perturbed over the fact that a 'firangi' crew came to their 'karma bhumi' and exploited Mumbai so imaginatively as well as realistically that the city looked different from the Mumbai of Bollywood films. Why didn't Boyle show some of the best five star hotels of Mumbai, sprawling shopping malls and affluent middle classes testing wines at Indigos and Ivys? Any guesses?
By Pervaiz Alam
Email: pervaiz@iefilmi.com