Open letter to the Academy
|
Dear Members of the Academy, Many congratulations for putting up a brilliant show this past Sunday night. Isn’t Hugh Jackman superb? Wish you had at least nominated him for Australia, but never mind—his Oscar night performance is sure to fetch him some musicals, if not film roles. I know how hard it is to be a judge, when one has to select from a range of such breathtakingly good fare. Unlike other critics, however, I think the Academy often redeems its wrong choices. No Oscar for Andy Dufresne from The Shawshank Redemption? Well, give one to Dave Boyle for Mystic River. Did we overlook Ennis del Mar, that stratospheric point in a young man’s career? Applause for the Joker please. It is with high hopes, therefore, that I put forth my case. In spite of what Danny Boyle and the film’s PR machine would have you believe, I don’t think Slumdog is an authentic representation of India. For one, the plot twists are way unimaginable, and the editing uneven. My problem with Slumdog also has to do with the fact that a film made by a white man is being lauded as an accurate depiction of urban poverty in India. I don’t know of any Indian director who has been able to show the US in a light that removes his/her gaze from the immigrant experience. Mira Nair made a widely panned representation of Vanity Fair, and now restricts herself to Indian themes. Why then should a Boyle come here and tell us and the world what India is all about? Isn’t this the worst manifestation of Orientalism? To be sure, India does have some of the problems shown in Slumdog—poverty is rampant—but you do not take the worst elements of a society and make a film that, unfortunately, wins such great recognition. There are many great stories in India waiting to be told, and they do not have to include young children throwing themselves into piles of shit. Why not, for instance, make a movie on the problems faced by young Indian women as they juggle the demands of modernity and tradition? There is a new movie out this week here, called Delhi 6, made by an Indian who spent his childhood in Chandni Chowk, an Old Delhi area where much of the movie is based. See the movie and you feel his love for the place drip in every scene. I did not feel such a high watching Slumdog. That movie just made me sad to be included with the vast humanity that was being represented. Anyway, the one good outcome of Sunday night is the Oscar for Rehman. He is a truly deserving recipient. (Incidentally, he has also supplied the score for Delhi 6.) So dear Members, since the Academy believes in correcting past wrongs with lavish encomiums, can it, conversely, be assumed that an undeserving Oscar will be followed by a long drought? Can I rest assured that Danny Boyle, no matter how great his next project, will not be reading the victor’s speech from a crumpled note? In anticipation, Vikram Johri |
(8 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ...Disclaimer
All the content posted in the 'Business Standard Blogs' section, unless specified otherwise, are made by Business Standard employees. The content posted in 'Business Standard Blogs' does not follow routine internal Business Standard reviews and editorial processes and should be considered only as the views and opinions of the employees and not of Business Standard.
April 17th, 2009 at 3:27 pm
AND WHY DO WE THINK THAT THE OSCARS ARE JUST THE BE ALL AND END ALL OF EVERYTHING……. JUST LIKE CHINA-INDIA HAVE FARED MUCH BETTER IN THIS FINANCIAL CRISIS THAN THE WESTERN WORLD, SO ARE WE BETTER THAN THE WEST IN EVERY WAY….. (THINK OF ALL THE OPPORTUNIST NRIs WHO ARE NOW COMING BACK TO INDIA AFTER THE DOWNTURN !!)
AND WHO SAID THE OSCARS WERE FAIR……. KIM BASSINGER GOT THE BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS FOR L A CONFIDENTIAL INSTEAD OF GLORIA STEWART FOR TITATNIC JUST BECAUSE SHE HAD T*** & A****
April 17th, 2009 at 3:20 pm
JUST SLAM THE SLUMDOG…… DOESNT DESERVE SO MUCH ATTENTION…… END OF THE DAY DANNY BOYLE IS NOT AN INDIAN……. WE INDIANS SHOUNDNT BE REJOICING BECAUSE A GORA B******** SHOWED OUR COUNTRY IN SUCH POOR LIGHT
March 1st, 2009 at 12:11 am
Well, every movie has a critic and and every critic gets his say, but honestly, i do agree with vikram as director only had covered only the one shade of ‘color’ of india.
We should understand the before globalization occurred to ‘us’ the western civilization had a feeling of india full of snakes, tigers, and buuzo magicians.
And now ‘we” are “SLUM DOGS’ and i guess not every one in this country a millionaire.
Hats off to Sir. Rehman he is blessed and a hardworking man and i do wish and pray success for him.
The movie had itz own moments the scene of the indian society is not so damned, the movie portray hope, love, passion and first time the cops came clean after the interrogation.
In the end the movie was gud but hyped…..
February 28th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
A film full of realism and fantasy! How COULD they? Don’t they know what cinema is about?
February 28th, 2009 at 3:37 am
Vikram,
I don’t see any relevant points in your criticism of the movie. Do you agree that this movie was better executed in terms of performance and technicalities than all the numerous hindi movies made. I agree there are some exceptional hindi movies made but most of them dont even get close. Movie columnists defines movies as commercial movies and art movies; Slumdog millionaire was combination of both. In the movie Raaz, they couldnt even make real looking oxes attacking the hero. Mainstream movie makers have a long way to go.
You can suggest to make a movie on the women’s challenges in juggling the demands of modernity and tradition but who decides that? It is the audience and audience here liked to share their heart with this boy from slum who makes it despite all the challenges. Movie topics on women’s challenges is up for grabs. If it is again a British or French director who picks on this subject, you will write another article on why foreign directors find it interesting to choose suffering of Indian women as movie subjects.
One thing I would say is at least the Academy has a judicious process of selecting good movies, unlike India’s Filmfare awards.
February 27th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
Look at the silver lining, Vikram. Some times bad publicity is better than no publicity at all. Neither Satyajit Ray nor Mani Ratnam nor Adoor Gopalakrishnan nor Girish Karnad ever won or ever will win an Oscar for best direction (though Ray received a Lifetime achievement Oscar on his death bed). So we have to accept the reality and grab whatever comes our way. May be we will attract hordes of ‘gora’ tourists to Dharavi and they will weep copious tears and leave rolls of greenbacks in this down turn!
Making movies about modern Indian women will not attract a paying audience of more than three - forget about Oscars. Now if you really wanted to fix the Danny Boyles of this world, you should produce a movie about the homeless people in London, New York and Silicon Valley. Almost all of them are fat, stinking and give the lie to the championing of capitalism. As a coup-de-grace, you can hire Danny Boyle to direct the film.
February 27th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
Though I couldn’t agree with you more on Shawshank, I beg to differ on Slumdog. Academy does make mistakes, but Shawshank lost purely to brilliance of Forrest Gump and Tom Hanks in particular…. It was sheer bad-luck for team Shawshank that th release yr coincided.
Why Pulp Fiction didn’t get best movie and how Lord of Rings got one, is however a different debate
Ha Ha.
First of all, Danny’s India representation is manifestation of what Mr Swarup - an Indian, has written. He has just brought those images to life with some top-up effets & fabulous cinematography. The script is a fiction with real surroundings, real people and real poverty - at least it doesn’t make an old man younger defying principles of science. Poverty, beggars, crime is still a reality in our society, it is something you & me witness everyday driving back from our swanky offices in AC cars. This story is more about ‘Hope’..winning in the most hostile conditions.
Second, Danny released this outside India in US making it eligible for mainstream category (unlike Lagaan, Taare Zameen etc) so all points to him. Technical reason for this win
Third, it’s true that there are so many amazing topics to make movies on in India. …But who’s listening ? Apart from a few brave attempts here n there. (Tare Zameen Par as an e.g.)..tell me an Indian movie that comes close to PHILADELPHIA on a sensitive topic like AIDS/Gay relationship & that too in 90s ? We are a society of hypocrites who want to talk, write, debate but afraid to ‘DO’ that (thats including me too !! ) So if a brit is showing a fictitious reality, lets accept it as an honest attempt to make something entertaining and real. The ‘Pile of Shit’ scene is the most loved sequence of this movie if you ask any person on the street.
Lastly - going by your logic, why should Oscars consider Shekhar Kapoor’s representation of Queen Elizabeth or Mr Attenbourgh’s Gandhi authentic ?