Slumdog Millionaire

[TheArsenal]

And the word I was using was "aestheticized" not "anesthetized."

It was. And why I repeatedly typed "anesthetized" - instead of what I meant to - is beyond me. But there you have it. Mild embarrassment on my part aside, my essential disagreement with the characterization made by the article (an interesting read, by the way) still stands.

Moreover, I think the charge that the film wouldn't have any momentum if it was directed by an Indian filmmaker rather than a British one is spot on--has there ever been an Indian film that has had legs, critically or commercially, in the United States?

This I agree with, and is likely true. Although there is a great deal of debate out there as to whether Indian film makers have the appetite to make films of this nature. From what I'm reading, the "typical" Indian films delve so deeply into fantasy and whitewash that few are even filmed in India, but much more picturesque, and therefore, false, locales. Slumdog may contain the fantasy elements of a happy ever after story (which I enjoyed), but against a back drop that acknowledges some sort of "real" India of crushing and wide spread poverty exists, whether in Slumdog it is a "simulation" of this poverty, as the article calls it, or not.

As far as the mechanics of the film itself, I think the film does "[ladle] on brutality only to dispel it with frivolity" because, it is at its heart an uplifting feel good fairy tale. Any film where the good guy wins the money and the girl is. And the flat out Bollywood dance number for an ending makes no pains to disguise this. But I think the brutality and ugliness serve to up the stakes in the story, particularly for the Western audience unused to such conditions. The ugliness and brutality were not shown to grind us down in a realistic way for the two hours. That's a different movie entirely.

I personally don't find anything particularly wrong with Slumdog's approach, even if I can acknowledge the viewpoints on the other side.

 

[HighteeHeller]

Great movie. The day after I saw it I bought the soundtrack as well, which has been playing pretty much nonstop on my iPod.

I havent seen the movie but heard the soundtrack playing in Chapters and bought it. I've been listening to it pretty much non stop. Now i have to see the movie.

 

[Lookingglassman]

I'm usually not into foriegn films, but I plan to see it. It looks pretty good.

 

[Harvey]

And the word I was using was "aestheticized" not "anesthetized."

It was. And why I repeatedly typed "anesthetized" - instead of what I meant to - is beyond me. But there you have it. Mild embarrassment on my part aside, my essential disagreement with the characterization made by the article (an interesting read, by the way) still stands.

It's probably spellcheck. It doesn't seem to accept the former as a word.

I'm usually not into foriegn films, but I plan to see it. It looks pretty good.

The filmmakers are British, the money is British and American. Not really a "foreign film," by my definition.

 

[Deckerd]

One thing I found strange was the change from the hero's childhood behaviour to his adult behaviour. As a child he was a cocky little con artist who'd kissed the Blarney Stone. As an adult he was so reserved it was hard to reconcile the two.

 

[ALF]

I have to say... I'm in the minority.

I didn't buy it. At the end of the movie, for me, the ending did not overpower the dread, helplessness and morbidity it portrayed as life in India for the lower class.

 

[stoneroses]

I'm usually not into foriegn films, but I plan to see it. It looks pretty good.

I would not describe it as a foreign film just because it is set in another country.

I would say on balance that it is a wonderful film and I hope it wins a bucket load of Oscars.

 

[Trekker4747]

Just got back from seeing this.

A+

100%

Five Stars

Awesome, awesome, great and surprising movie.

I mean, I can't say much more than that.

Great, great movie.

Just great.

Well, I also think the older brother looked like an Indian version of David Hasselhoff.

 

[Trekker4747]

So... How was anyone surprised by/disapointed by the "happy ending" when the opening title cards clearly indicate he won?

And also:

Sometimes happy endings are nice to have. This movie is one of those cases. It's not like they THEN showed him and the girl moving to LA and living in a huge mansion or something.

 

[Bob The Skutter]

I think it may be just me, but I don't really see the whole "Most depressing feel good movie" label it seems to have picked up. I didn't find it particularly feel good, or depressing. I enjoyed it, thought it was a really good films, and paradoxically I thought they made the slums look beautiful with some fantastic shots, but I can't say the over all tone was any more depressing, or feel good than a lot of Hollywood movies anyway.
I thought it did a great job of just giving you the story without feeling like a "Message" or judgement. Also the fact it was fiction gave it room to be brutally honest at times as well as being wrapped in the world of the story, so not having to be totally real.

 

[Harvey]

So... How was anyone surprised by/disapointed by the "happy ending" when the opening title cards clearly indicate he won?

Who was surprised by the ending?

Although there is a great deal of debate out there as to whether Indian film makers have the appetite to make films of this nature. From what I'm reading, the "typical" Indian films delve so deeply into fantasy and whitewash that few are even filmed in India, but much more picturesque, and therefore, false, locales.

Again, I'm no expert on the cinema of India or Bollywood, but I don't think I subscribe to this charge. Many of the films filmed outside of India are set outside of India (I just saw Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna, and it was set entirely in New York City). Plenty of serious movies about India have been made by Indian filmmakers, of which Deepa Mehta is a notable example. Try finding a copy of her film "Earth." It's phenomenal, and without the fantasy elements that are pervasive even in "Slumdog Millionaire."

More to the point, though, I do think the charge that "typical" Indian films are unwilling to tackle complex subjects is true. But the same charge could be leveled at Hollywood, and most other film industries. To be honest, the "typical" films don't interest me that much.

 

[tomalak301]

Figured it won best picture, might as well bring it back up to the first page.

I've been thinking about this movie some, and my experience seeing it. I loved this movie, but the major thing I loved was the music behind it. That was an awesome score, and the song that won for best song was definitely the best of the three. I'm considering getting this soundtrack at some point.

 

[indranee]

And the word I was using was "aestheticized" not "anesthetized."

It was. And why I repeatedly typed "anesthetized" - instead of what I meant to - is beyond me. But there you have it. Mild embarrassment on my part aside, my essential disagreement with the characterization made by the article (an interesting read, by the way) still stands.

Moreover, I think the charge that the film wouldn't have any momentum if it was directed by an Indian filmmaker rather than a British one is spot on--has there ever been an Indian film that has had legs, critically or commercially, in the United States?

This I agree with, and is likely true. Although there is a great deal of debate out there as to whether Indian film makers have the appetite to make films of this nature. From what I'm reading, the "typical" Indian films delve so deeply into fantasy and whitewash that few are even filmed in India, but much more picturesque, and therefore, false, locales. Slumdog may contain the fantasy elements of a happy ever after story (which I enjoyed), but against a back drop that acknowledges some sort of "real" India of crushing and wide spread poverty exists, whether in Slumdog it is a "simulation" of this poverty, as the article calls it, or not.

As far as the mechanics of the film itself, I think the film does "[ladle] on brutality only to dispel it with frivolity" because, it is at its heart an uplifting feel good fairy tale. Any film where the good guy wins the money and the girl is. And the flat out Bollywood dance number for an ending makes no pains to disguise this. But I think the brutality and ugliness serve to up the stakes in the story, particularly for the Western audience unused to such conditions. The ugliness and brutality were not shown to grind us down in a realistic way for the two hours. That's a different movie entirely.

I personally don't find anything particularly wrong with Slumdog's approach, even if I can acknowledge the viewpoints on the other side.

just in case you two are still reading this thread, here are a plethora of Indian film directors who make SERIOUS, non-bollywoody, realistic films. in India, they are called Art House films, and the grandaddy of them all is Satyajit Ray (a man of multipronged talents who is India's renaissance man, a man who won a lifetime achievement Oscar over a decade ago). his movies set the tone for modern Indian films that aspired to realism and neo-realism AND were critically successful here in America and in Europe. have you not heard of his Apu Trilogy? if not, get thee to a Blockbusters. (yes, they should have Ray films).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyajit_Ray

India is a vast country and Bollywood is not the ONLY movie industry in it. if you want to learn more, check these links out. they're a good doorway to Indian films that are fantastic in their breadth and creativity. films that can stand up to any Latin American, European or well-made American film.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:India_art_films
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_India#Art_cinema_in_India
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cinema_of_India

oh, and if you need a recommendation, let me know

PS. I haven't seen Slumdog. Yet. and, yes, I was born and brought up in India.

 

[TheArsenal]

India is a vast country and Bollywood is not the ONLY movie industry in it. if you want to learn more, check these links out. they're a good doorway to Indian films that are fantastic in their breadth and creativity. films that can stand up to any Latin American, European or well-made American film.

Good. Thanks. I'm always searching out films off the beaten path. Knowing little about Indian film, I would be curious to see how serious subject matter is treated.

I would also be curious to know what numbers of people watch these more serious films as opposed to Bollywood fare. It would be interesting to hear how accurate characterization in the Western media is or is not.

 

[Ryan]

And the fact that his evil brother finds redemption, and Jamal manages to secure the money and the girl, is too soft, light, and pat for my tastes.

That's just the sugar coating on the nasty little pill. The movie's filled with murder, rape, poverty, child abuse, prostitution, slavery, and torture. The moral of the story seems to be Fate will completely fuck up your life and kill your entire family so you can get a million rupees and a hot girlfriend.

 

[indranee]

India is a vast country and Bollywood is not the ONLY movie industry in it. if you want to learn more, check these links out. they're a good doorway to Indian films that are fantastic in their breadth and creativity. films that can stand up to any Latin American, European or well-made American film.

Good. Thanks. I'm always searching out films off the beaten path. Knowing little about Indian film, I would be curious to see how serious subject matter is treated.

I would also be curious to know what numbers of people watch these more serious films as opposed to Bollywood fare. It would be interesting to hear how accurate characterization in the Western media is or is not.

cool! this is part of a PM I sent to Hirogen Alpha on this topic. I'm copying it below for you and for any interested lurkers. let me know if you see any of the films I mentioned and what you thought of them. also, if you need more recoms, gimme a holler:

--
okay, do you do subtitles? if so, have I got a treat for you!

okay, before anything: check this out first.

http://www.filmreference.com/encyclopedia/Independent-Film-Road-Movies/India-ART-CINEMA.html

hmm... how about if I throw out a few names of the directors and you can maybe netflix them (if you do that stuff. I've never netflixed, I'm sorely unhip in that way. I just go to the Indian stores and rent the stuff).

here are some director-names in order of my faves (just mine, other people have different interps).

Satyajit Ray (the absolute master of the Indian Humanist film): if you can, try to get the famed NYT film critic Pauline Kael's take on his films... she was a huge fan with a jaundiced eye when needed. here's a link, there may be more around on the 'net:
http://www.enotes.com/contemporary-literary-criticism/ray-satyajit/pauline-kael

Also, if you can find Andrew Robinson's biography on him -- fantastic stuff:

http://books.google.com/books?id=u9...a=X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPR5,M1

okay, I'll try to go by a short sort-of genre list:

realistic/violent/almost nihilistic: Govind Nihalani (his "Aakrosh" is hands-down one of my favorite films EVER... Ray notwithstanding. see it if you can:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080322/

also, in this category, directors like Shyam Benegal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shyam_Benegal
(I would highly recommend "Manthan" and "Bhumika" out of his ouvre).

realist/less violent/noiristic:

Goutam Ghose:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goutam_Ghose
(his "Paar" is stark and terrifyingly real).

also, Ketan Mehta:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ketan_Mehta
I recommend "Holi" and "Mirch Masala".

oh, and also, if you can, watch New Delhi Times (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089678/), and Albert Pinto ka Gussa kyon aata hain (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080343/). the first is a harrowing foray into a time when modern India was staging a pretty public dialogue between the constitutionally promised freedom of the press and corruption in government and society; the latter film is almost a bridge to the newer art films that came after the '90s.

as for Satyajit Ray: I recomment the Apu Trilogy heartily, and perhaps "Days and Nights in the Forest" and perhaps his Calcutta Trilogy to start with.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satyajit_Ray
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calcutta_trilogy

okay, those are some of the best older directors. how about if you watch those and like those, I'll give you more of the newer crop seriously, it's more because it's sort of a logical transition from those to the newer films which deal with the more modern themes of the current India.

take care,
indrani.