VERDICT VIA VIEWS

The great English poet Alexander Pope says to observations which ourselves we make, we grow more partial for the observer's sake.  Now that Oscars are out in the last week and euphoria floating all around India, let me take a stance on the movie slumdog with the aforementioned quote as a backdrop. To begin with, I experimented with this movie. I saw half of the movie when the BAFTAs were announced, and the other half after the Oscars; this was just to test the influence of the movie on my views, and how it was portrayed in the media. Although by no means I am a movie buff, I felt this movie had different dimensions to it, not to say Oscars was always on Boyle’s mind. Now coming back to the movie itself, let me try to postulate the reasons why it grabbed many awards:

MARKET VIEW-POINT:

Make no mistake, India to western world is not just a cultural hub or land of diversity, but a magnanimous market where the billion consumers are viewed as a potential buyer of everything made in west, so why not movies ? Even if a single product made by the western world is consumed by, say 1/4th of Indian population, then the product will indeed produce rich dividends to the seller. Apart from this, India also acts as a good launch-pad to many products in south asia, unlike China which relies mainly on its own production. A movie like Slumdog would have been never possible if Boyle had decided to shoot it in China. Hollywood feels that its market is undermined in India because of the bollywood domination, so the best way to enter the arena was not to fight the enemy in its own den, but to befriend the enemy by identifying the talent in India and portraying it to the world; so Rahman was the obvious choice, along with Russell Pookutty, and of course Gulzar. 

SOCIO-ECONOMICS VIEW-POINT:

 It is a staggering fact revealed by World Bank that a third of the global poor now reside in India, and what better way to portray this than a movie. Boyle’s idea to magnify the poverty is effective, and to some extent humbling too. It is sad if all the things shown in the movie are indeed real, but if it is real, then it is high time for us - the billion Indians to gather steam. But why did Boyle choose India, and not Africa or other parts of Asia ? Part of the reason may be due to openness of India, as our political leverage and media welcomes criticism, and this movie is indeed a critical portrayal of our socio-economical divide, and where else is this division evident as much as in Mumbai? Boyle’s experiment would have neither worked in Israel nor in Nigeria or for that matter Zimbabwe. India after all is a secular republic, so unveiling her grief is simple yet special ! 

 ENTERTAINMENT VIEW-POINT:

CHILDREN are fulcrum to this movie. This is indeed a smart move by Boyle to grab attention. If all the characters in the movie were shown as adults, I doubt the message would have been as effective as it is now. The best way to show emotion, especially the sober ones is through innocence, and children do this effectively than the grown up. Also, children, irrespective of race, colour and language are welcome across the world, than their adult counterparts. Frankly speaking, great Indian filmmakers like Shyam Benegal, Girish Kasaravalli and many more have show poverty and suffering of India in greater depth and width than Boyle has done in Slumdog. It is just that foreigner’s camera opens the eyes of globe. It is high time that we first identify our good directors and film makers in India and project them to the world in a better way than it has been done. Then Oscars will not be a once in a century kind of experience.

                After all this, it was heartening to see the ever humble Rahman receiving Oscars, even though he may have not got the award for his best work. In my view, Oscar deserved Rahman more than the other way around, because everyone knows how good he is. In future, if Rahman and Sachin Tendulkar get Baratha Ratna, I will not be surprised. 

JAI HO….to only those who deserve it…