Matt Shea
RubySoho
Morgan Bell
Cibbuano
David O'Connell
Mountain Fog
Slumdog Millionaire
March 25th 2009 23:09
Yes, it does strike me as a futile gesture, reviewing a movie that has already opened to a thunderous theatrical release and scooped up 8 Academy Awards - but that seems to be how it's done around here. Coming late to the party, with a bottle of warm white wine.
By now, you're likely uninterested in an actual review, since you've already heard so much about "Slumdog Millionaire" that you've already watched it in theatres, or are getting ready to buy it on DVD.
Yes, it's a good movie, and I enjoyed watching it very much. For a review of the movie, read Ripple Effect.
The reason I wanted to review "Slumdog Millionaire" so long after its release is to stand back, from a position of contemplation, and consider the criticism surrounding the film. Is it justified?
One of the major concerns about films of this nature is that sensationalism of child poverty is a cheap trick to draw audiences into the film. While this is true, of many films, such as "City of God", "Boyz in da Hood" or even "The City of Lost Children", the reason that we find it engrossing is for the reason that we should be shown this. Without cinema to give us a view, we remain wilfully ignorant.
Some might claim that journalism and documentaries should provide this look, but I contend this point - both forms of media are prone to bias, but in the guise of preaching the truth. A fictional film, on the other hand, we take to be untrue - and the elements that have some measure of reality are heightened against the backdrop of good screenwriting. A film like "Slumdog Millionaire" manages to show us the squalor of the Mumbai ghettos, but also moments of rare joy, even peace and security. Most of all, there's the element of hope; without it, the audience is reluctant to share in the journey.
The sense of hope keeps the audience riveted to the end of "Slumdog Millionaire", even as we predict the natural conclusion of the film. On this note, critics and academics have criticized the film on other grounds, all of which have sound reasoning.
From the Guardian, Salman Rushie admitted to enjoying the film, but commented that the plot was unrealistic to the point of damaging the film. True, but I suppose this is a conceit of the story that we gladly accept - after all, it's highly improbably that a ghetto boy would get exactly the right questions to answer on a game show, but, still, it's possible. Other criticism revolves around the overuse of English in the film, which, even to me, seems ridiculous that two orphans from a slum would speak to each other in English.
I think the aspect that bothers me the most about the film is praise lauded upon director Danny Boyle for his work on "Slumdog Millionaire" - his Indian co-director, Loveleen Tandan, is hardly mentioned, other than to give the film an 'Indian' footing.
No, this feels like a foreign production, a Westerner flying down out of the clouds to record how the third world lives, filmed in English so as not to tax the subtitle-resistant eyeballs of English-speaking audiences. Rushie also commented on this, saying
"...an Indian film director making a movie about New York low-life and saying that he had done so because he knew nothing about New York and had indeed never been there. He would have been torn limb from limb by critical opinion. But for a first world director to say that about the third world is considered praiseworthy, an indication of his artistic daring. The double standards of post-colonial attitudes have not yet wholly faded away"
Rushie says it well, noting that our attitudes only flow in one direction. I wonder how American audiences would react to homegrown poverty used to feed sympathetic audiences abroad?
Here, in Australia, filmmakers that look to examine the harsh reality of life for the Aboriginals face a bigger enemy: indifference. Last year, I reviewed an excellent Australian feature, "Boxing Day", which examined the life of one family, torn between their Aboriginal heritage and their position in modern Australian society. The film was met with only a smattering of applause at home, but receiving enthusiasm abroad.
"Slumdog Millionaire" is, without doubt, a film that's worth watching, one that's capable of making you hold your breath in its final scenes - though it's constructed to work to that point - but it's a compelling tale of the resilience of life.
I say: You've seen it already, probably, and, if you haven't, it comes out on DVD this month.
See it for: In Boyle-style, the film is visually stunning, though Boyle often relies on the German angle to add a sense of unbalance to the scene.
*this image is from Ripple Effect
| 104 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Anonymous
Comment by Janet Collins
Acceptable Etiquette
The Social Critic
Janet Collins Blog
The beauty of Slumdog Millionaire was that it did make it all seem believable. You could sit back and say this would never happen and that would never happen but it would be hard not to say it was a damn good movie.
Comment by ShaunK
Screen Adventure
Thank you for those quotes by the controversial man himself Sir Ahmed Salman Rushdie - (with a 'd' in his sir name) - interesting stuff
I of course had alot of problems with this film, but none of them seemed to be shared problems mentioned in your review.
What I find interesting about seeing this film was at the time I actually did like it, while I watched it with an audience - however afterwards, more I thought about the film, afterwards, the more I disliked it, I wonder why it worked that way?
Comment by Matt Shea
20/20 Filmsight
In terms of believability, I think Janet hits the nail on the head when it comes to film - making the unreal seem believable and allowing the audience to make that leap with you.
Comments here about the coincidences: Jamal and Salim don't meet up by coincidence - Jamal searches for Salim using his phone company's directory, finding him that way, and I don't really see the problem with the train station. There are certainly a couple of plot holes in this film but, really, you are so invested in the characters by that stage that you make that leap.
With regards to Boyle, I think he might be a victim of his own success with this film. As I understand it, Boyle came on this project late in the piece, pretty much as a director-for-hire (much like most directors). Now, of course, the film community's obsession with the concept of the 'auteur' means that most of the success of the film is attributed to him, which is unfair on both him and the rest of the team behind it. Now we have comments like Rushdie's above that accuse Boyle of post-colonial double standards, which again I think is unfair. He's a director... he 'directs' films... he doesn't 'make' films as such - a massive team writers, producers, editors, directors, actors, various techs 'make' films.
Comment by Cibbuano
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Janet, there's definitely the appeal of fantasy, and the end of the film shows that element - everyone in the Mumbai slum roots for Jamal, as he's one of their own...
Shaun, ah, thanks for the correction...
it's interesting, your point... I suppose the magic of the cinema is that you can get caught up on the communal delight that fills the space, then, taking a step back, your critical brain kicks in. I'm definitely much more forgiving of movies that I see in the cinema...
Matt, a great point about assigning blame to 'auteurs'... though, I definitely felt Boyle's touches in the footage. The overuse of the tilt angles, for example...
Comment by Postmodern Critic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
I read a review that called the film full of 'poverty porn' and actually racist, which is too big of a stretch for me. I enjoyed the film greatly and while I may not buy it on DVD I may hire it from the DVD store...
Comment by sam sall
Health and Fitness
Speech Starter
Health Matters
Comment by Cibbuano
Hunt Famous
Orble Post of the Day
Fat Cult
Techbreak
Sam, well, thanks for reading... really? not entertaining at all?
Comment by Postmodern Critic
Postmodern Critic
Relativity Watch
Padsoc
Comment by Matt Shea
20/20 Filmsight