Blogs

Monday, February 23, 2009 16:28 IST

So congratulations then to all those who were associated with Slumdog Millionaire. From the producers, director and script-writer to the youngest child actor, it is everyone's success and whatever one might say -- it is not an Indian film, it shows the seamy side of Mumbai -- etc, you got to admit Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy brought a perspective no Hindi filmmaker would ever have. Even dirt and filth in Bollywood films, when it is shown, is so glamourised and artificial that it loses any meaning. The much talked about shit scene (an echo of a similar scene in Trainspotting, also by Boyle) has attracted the ire of all those who feel this is poverty-porn, and it is certainly cringe inducing, but who can deny it is marvellously inventive.

But as a Mumbaiwalla, I have some other grouses. I think the author and script-writer have a very outdated view of even Mumbai's underbelly. The infamous "blinding of the beggar child" scene, for example--when was the last time you saw a blind beggar in Mumbai? No seriously, blind beggars are passe though the legend lives on. The Dickensian conditions, complete with a Fagin may still be around (though I cannot confirm that), but the Mumbai beggar today looks very different from what he/she used to. Ditto the police torture scene. Good sources tell me that even the electrode sequence harks back to another era.

Most of all I think that while life in the slums is tough and miserable, to suggest, as the film does, that the only way out is to take to crime is ingenous. The slums of Mumbai also are home to people who have proper jobs and who are perfectly "respectable"; they just cannot afford proper apartments. A nod in that direction would have made a big difference.

Yet, it is the creator's prerogative to show his vision of things and no one can quarrel with Boyle and co about that. Let us also not forget that two Indians have won Oscars and the film has focussed attention -- largely positive -- on Mumbai so soon after the 26/11 attacks.

4 comments

I saw Slumdog Millionaire. I also saw Dharavi. But SM was much better and more realistic. Why ignore the fact that it also gives a message of believing in your dream?
I don't understand why some "intellectuals" have a problem with a non-Indian director making a film on a plot which is very Indian. Be happy that even the non-Indian directors and producers are showing interest and making their way to bring Indian on a global front. And why should someone think that not accepting the Oscars would have been an ideal gesture? C'mon, grow up, buddy. It was their hard work that got recognised.

The comments of Mr Krishnamoorthy and them being backed by Mr Desai smack of pseudo-intellectualism, a quality inherent in jingoistic cretins. The two gentlemen should grow up — intellectually, that is. Maybe they should take a crash course in humanities from MIT's OCW, instead of feeding their feeble minds with carefully wrought bilge.

The portrayal of India's poverty by a non-Indian gets international acclaim and wins Oscars for Indians and we bask in that glory. Deplorable.

Who cares if Boyle had an outdated view about Mumbai's slums? Slums still exist and there are worse scenes that don't need to be shot in a movie that happen everyday.

The ideal gesture by the Indians who received the Oscars would have been to just gracefully not accept the award. Wonder what's the purpose of this movie, to bring some developmental focus to the slums or win Oscars for a few?

Well said.