Plot Intro
Jamal Malik (Dev Patel) is an Indian Muslim who originates from the slums. By chance, he becomes a contestant on the Indian edition of Who Wants to be a Millionaire hosted by Prem Kumar (Anil Kapoor), but shocks audiences by managing to get every answer correct. The police believe that an undereducated “slumdog” such as he must have cheated, but under interrogation, Jamal reveals that he does, indeed, know all the answers due to various horrendous events in his childhood. Through flashback, we then see his tumultuous relationship with his older brother Salim (Madhur Mittal), his love affair with childhood sweetheart, Latika (Frieda Pinto), and his endless struggles with gangsters, criminals and religious conflicts.
Here is one our most lively and ethnically diverse Best Picture winners, and one that I remember fondly from my first viewing of it in 2008. Slumdog, like Crash and The Departed, is another curveball winner. Made modestly, but proving to be a massive hit in the Western markets and at the Oscars, it nabbed the much-coveted Best Direction and Best Screenplay, and beat Frost/Nixon, Milk, The Reader and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button to the final prize.
All in all, I think this is an immensely deserving winner, and one of the highlights of the new millennium. The framing device in which Jamal reveals his life-story through the answers he gives, and the unusual and unexpected ways in which he has these answers in his head, is totally inspired. It gives the film a relentless and intense pace, and director Danny Boyle skilfully uses the Who Wants to be a Millionaire music score to evoke the sort of stomach-clenching feelings we get when real contestants put their fortunes on the line or use a lifeline.
The creative editing also got an Oscar, and this is no surprise. Admittedly, the slanted camera angles and disjointed movements feel a little bit outdated (it sometimes feels like we’re watching a rap music video from the late '90s), but Boyle’s relentless innovation ensures that I was never bored. The film’s two hours flew by.
It also boasts some excellent acting and huge emotional investment. Dev Patel, who at the time was only really famous for Skins, deservedly made a name for himself. It’s a shame he didn’t get a Best Actor nod. I also thoroughly enjoyed Anil Kapoor as the snide host of the quiz show. He jumps between entertaining funny man and nefarious enemy of Jamal’s success with spine-tingling skill. A minor quibble is that the script doesn’t make it entirely clear what, exactly, he has against Jamal. I can only assume he is classist and possibly racist too (remember, Jamal is a Muslim in a predominantly Hindu country). A shout-out should also go to the child actors, who are the best I’ve seen so far on this project.
This makes the scenes in which society chomps down on Jamal and his loved ones quite devastating. The sudden and vicious death of his mother; the manipulation of children by a sadistic Fagin-like pimp; his brother’s descent into corruption; Latika’s horrendous relationship with a misogynistic crime boss, all of these have us cheering for these characters’ successes.
This is a really wonderful film. It tells a Dickensian bildungsroman in a much shorter time than Dickens ever managed (indeed, the story is basically Great Expectations, David Copperfield and Oliver Twist all rolled into one). It may have been slightly controversial in India itself (I think Doug is going to go into more detail on this), but it’s one of the most vibrant, most innovative and most exciting of all the Best Picture winners.
Highlight
The climax of the film has Jamal attempt to call his brother because he doesn’t know the answer to the last question. I won’t go into much more detail than that, but it’s thrillingly edited and written, with some surprising outcomes.
Lowlight
The reaction from some Indian critics and audiences suggests that the film may not be the most accurate or fair depiction of India. But then, the film is only two hours, and India is a 3.2km squared country with 1.3 billion people sooooo……
Mark
9/10
I remember watching Slumdog Millionaire a while back and absolutely loving it for its (as Paul says) Dickensian plot, wild array of characters and ultimate good triumphing. It’s a film with a great heart and a cracking pace, and after long dreary pieces like Crash, it’s good to see a more entertainment-minded film winning.
I think this is an issue I’m encountering more and more with these later decades. Film, to me, has a duty to entertain in some respect. That doesn’t mean comedy, it means to captivate and enthral, and maybe even distract. A lot of these later films are depressingly dull and try to hammer home some ‘important message’, alienating me completely in the process. Films like Titanic and Slumdog Millionaire are great because while they may have messages they want to convey in the story, the story comes first.
And for me, the story in Slumdog is flawless. The pitting of a young scrawny hero against an oppressive, seemingly-unbeatable state is an oldie but a goodie. Throw in the colourful characters of the Fagin-esque pimp, the brother who is haunted by his cruel earlier decisions, an evil Mafiosa-type boss and a host more background characters who bring the story to life. The framing device is, as Paul says, a stroke of genius. It reminds me of Desert Island Discs, using the songs (or in this case questions) as markers by which to examine a life. It’s a gripping and reliable structure, and I’m here for it.
So it’s totally without fault? Not quite.
The film received criticism in India for essentially spinning poverty-porn and painting India as a place of misery and cruelty. I’m not going to deny this totally, but the criticism rings true for me. When I visited India a couple of years back, I encountered a very different world to ours, and one that may not translate particularly well to our Western lives - and storytelling.
On my travels, I visited a couple of villages that have the type of poverty we see here. Except in the villages, they did not view themselves as poor. They were proud of their homes, their industries, and we left confused by our own definition of poverty, because by labelling them as poor and destitute, we were applying a Western filter to a world that doesn’t necessarily fit it.
Further to this, the simple Western love story doesn’t feel quite so accurate here either. In Indian culture, the concept of love is irrevocably tied with family, duty, honour and more, so that the business of falling in love and the way people interact with each other is very different to our world. So at times, this film feels like a Western impression of India. It wouldn’t matter so much if Slumdog was just set against India as a backdrop, but Danny Boyle seems to be tying India in irrevocably, and there are moments when it feels a little bit like a tourist’s story.
When we’ve watched Bollywood films, this difference is even clearer. Boyle throws in a Bollywood dance number at the end, and while I enjoyed it at first viewing, now it seems a little off. This is a Western look at India, using Western tropes, and so the Bollywood dance number - while no doubt a tribute - feels a bit like Western patronisation.
It’s not to say we can’t tell great Indian stories, but I think Western film-makers will always need a Western way in - for instance the impeccable The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel which uses expats as a way to explore the environment and which for me summoned up much more of a feeling of India successfully.
Highlight
I love the symbolism moments, for instance Samir in the bath filled with money. Danny Boyle is a great film-maker, and he knows his medium.
Lowlight
As I say, it feels like a look at India from the outside, which left me feeling oddly disassociated at times.
Mark
8/10
8/10
No comments:
Post a Comment