52
Starring: Priyanka Chopra, Harman Baweja, Darshan Jariwala, Anjan Srivastava
Directed by: Ashutosh Gowariker
Stars: **1/2
The most disappointing aspect of watching a movie is seeing a pointless endeavour and What’s Your Raashee? is mostly just that. So if Jodhaa Akbar was a four hour long film about a royal couple unable to decide whether to consummate or not, this one goes on endlessly about a guy’s search for a bride. Jodhaa Akbar, for all its splendour and great music, was hardly as significant as a Lagaan or a Swades. One already saw a certain lack of ambition in the story, in spite of its mammoth scale.
Now, with What’s Your Raashee?, Ashutosh Gowariker has gone ahead and tried to recycle a concept that became popular with the televised series, Mr Yogi in the DD days. The idea of an NRI looking for one girl from every sun sign is expected to be an episodic one and clearly suited for television. When it’s made as a film, it turns out excruciatingly long drawn and boring.
The strength of the subject is the curiosity it evokes in the audience about their individual sun signs, so for a while, it seems interesting when NRI Yogesh Patel (Harman Baweja) meets a couple of girls. The first one(Aries) is the best of the lot and Priyanka’s really in form here. Also, for a subject that would normally be right up Yash Raj’s alley, Gowariker ensures there is a certain authenticity to the setting. The homes appear lived in, the characters (many new faces) are all people who one might have encountered at some point. So thankfully, there’s nothing synthetic about the story.
Yogesh’s meeting with the girls is fairly good until interval point. Harman’s earnestness and Priyanka’s finesse as a performer ensure that the proceedings stay interesting for quite some time. Another aspect about the film is that Gowariker never overstates the traits in any sun sign and keeps it subtle. So the Aquarian should be recogonised by her dreamy eyes, the Geminine by her proclivity to fall in love with the idea of love, the Arian for her honesty and so on. On one level, you can appreciate the director’s acumen to slip in characteristics in an unobtrusive way, but then again, some signs are so unrecogonisable that they become mere characters.
The essential repetitiveness of the plot takes its toll in the second half and the episodes from this point are simply not engaging enough. The Piscean girl’s ‘punar janam’ episode is especially tedious. Gowariker inserts two sub-plots to break the monotony but all they do is stretch the film even longer. There’s one involving a jotish-turned-jasoos and another one with Yogesh and his brother being chased by a ‘Bhai’ character who wants his money back. These are as boring as the hazaar songs that have been needlessly thrust into the narrative. The film’s climax is probably as unconvincing as the premise itself. It’s never clear from the very beginning why Yogesh’s grandpa won’t hand him over his inheritance if he won’t marry. This is a major flaw in the script, something which could have been easily taken care of.
Many of Ashutosh’s strengths as a director, including his ability to treat his story and characters intelligently are visible here. But many of weaknesses are more pronounced than ever. The filmmaker has always made long films, but here it seems especially unjustified. At least five of the songs could have been done away with. The only two songs that are reasonable good are Su Che and the title track. His languorous, unhurried style of filmmaking that probably was okay for a film like Swades makes it quite problematic when it comes to a light-hearted, fun film like this one.
Still, if there’s anything to recommend, it is the performances. Priyanka Chopra, while never a very charismatic actress, has always been a competent and intelligent performer. And nothing proves it better than her ability to play each character in a unique way. The screenplay lets her down at various points but there is very little to fault the actress. Priyanka has put in an enormous effort, in the sense that she’s skillfully changed her body language and speech pattern for all the characters. She’s especially terrific playing the 15 year old girl.
Harman Baweja has been well cast. The film probably needed an actor without the baggage of an image and could look convincing in the role of a well-meaning, malleable young boy. He’s decent, and has almost as much screen time as Priyanka.
The other actor who really shines here is Darshan Jariwala, as Harman’s affable uncle.
But as one said, the film ceases to be interesting after a point and the concept simply runs out of steam. By the time, the climax approaches, you couldn’t care less who Harman marries.
-Sandhya Iyer
There Are 52 Responses So Far. »
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Agree with the above estimations (considering the movie works).
But Kudos to those Reliance guys who talked about expected 175-200 crores ...
Easy Recovery Plan,
India = 125 cr, 65 cr Share.(as its a Class and Mass movie and Hrithik works well everywhere)
Overseas ...
here are earlier reports
Reliance Big Pictures acquires distribution rights of biggest blockbusters
BIG Pictures to distribute Hrithik Roshan starrer Kites 
Those who understood meaning of "tumhe pyaar kab tak na karein bhala" will get the meaning of my last comment ...
Also I am the biggest fan of Nadeem-Shravan's music and I like his music more than some of ARR's songs! 
Plagiarism aside - as every famous music director has copied some song at some time
Rajesh Roshan has given some great ...
From music to cricket- I remember telling Rikky that on consistency Pathan junior is a much better batsmen ...
manoj16_391 26 September 2009
03:02:42 am
“if Jodhaa Akbar was a four hour long film about a royal couple unable to decide whether to consummate or not”
Thats the worst possible way of looking at one of the finest movies made in recent times.If someone thinks JA was all about consummation,then most definitely his understanding of movies is worse than a layman.
It at all one has to sum up the essence of Jodhaa-Akbar ,it has to be Respect.Respect for one’s feelings,respect for one’s religion and respect for one’s traditions and beliefs.In a country like India which is so diverse in its religion and culture and wherein instances of communal disharmony is a normalcy(unfortunately),a movie like JA is a welcome change.Its a welcome change from some ridiculous jingoistic movies whose only agenda is to play with the emotions of the people to sell their movies.JA,at its core, has the most heartening and the most cardinal message for every Indian.JA is easily Gowariker’s most honest work and reflects his broad outlook towards life.
Swades had its heart at the right place and had its own moments though it has many flaws in its execution.
Lagaan,if not for cricket and Gowariker’s unique style of direction,would have been worse than MP.On paper,Lagaan had one of the most ludicrous plots that one can imagine.I remember Anil Thakraney,a noted columnist,summarizing Lagaan as:
Lagaan – cricket = Mangal Pandey!
Speaking about WYR,the film might not have got favourable reviews from most,but AG has atleast managed to get some good words for poor Harman and Priyanka in the reviews.
Qalandar 26 September 2009
07:43:55 am
Re: “In a country like India which is so diverse in its religion and culture and wherein instances of communal disharmony is a normalcy(unfortunately),a movie like JA is a welcome change.”
very well said.
pardesi 26 September 2009
06:28:54 pm
Thanks for your detailed review of the film. You liked Harman and Priyanka, but not the film. Ashutosh can be blamed for the pace and flow of the film, but he was always a ponderous sort of film-maker, taking his own sweet time to develop the narrative. His films always drip with sincerity, and I think a film like WYR may have required more froth.
About communal disharmony, one cannot force communal harmony by trying to rewrite history.
Doga 26 September 2009
07:13:34 pm
Good review, but this movie is doing down down down.
Priyanka Chopra is in top form it seems(from whatever i have seen in the promo’s), lot of effort must have gone in showing 12 different characters and mannerisms. Kudos to her.
Harman the less said the better.
Ashu, get back to working with superstars.
Akshay 26 September 2009
10:50:47 pm
I saw WYR yesterday and realised that the problem was primarily with genre identification and then serving the content for target audience. The movie is being promoted as a Romantic Comedy but there are a lot of moments in the movie where one fails to find Romance or even Comedy.
It is not a bad film by any stretch and there are some very good moments but the songs have killed the overall continuity of the movie. One could hear huge uproar in theater when any song started.
The plot of the movie is very interesting, concept refreshingly new, all of Priyanka’s characters written very well. Shorten the movie by an hour and people would be glued to their seats while watching this.
Sack the Editor
Akshay 26 September 2009
10:55:49 pm
Manoj – “Lagaan,if not for cricket and Gowariker’s unique style of direction,would have been worse than MP.”
I am not sure what do we achieve by saying statements like this. The movie worked and definitely the way cricket was interwoven with the script was the USP. You want to remove the USP of the movie and then say, it would have been otherwise a dud.
pardesi 26 September 2009
11:04:28 pm
So you liked it but thought it was too long?
Akshay 26 September 2009
11:07:35 pm
I liked a lot of parts of the movie but as I said the continuity of watching the movie got killed because of songs
Pranav 27 September 2009
03:07:41 am
I watched it yesterday and thoroughly enjoyed it. It helped that I had listened to the soundtrack before and was familiar with the songs. In fact I liked 5-6 songs from among the 12. Gowarikar has developed majority of the characters well (except a couple) and has handled the details very well. Like Akshay said this movie could have been a 2.5 hour movie and would have kept people glued to their seats but for me even the current length worked. Harman has put in a sincere effort and is not bad whereas Priyanka is simply fantastic. There is also some humor involved with the supporting cast. All in all worth seeing once.
Doga 27 September 2009
08:08:51 am
Female Centric movies like DBH/Laaga Chunri/Aaja Nachley/Whats your rashee doing average to poor business doesnt bode well going forward to give makers enough confidence in continuing in this direction.
Fashion was once exception. I guess we need some Bhandarkar power.
Madhuri Dixit was one Star who used to invoke comments like” Beta(1992)should be called Beti and Raja(1995) should be called Rani”, now we need someone like that.
sandhya 27 September 2009
08:21:43 am
The film has its moments. That title song has been gorgeously picturised. Also, what an amazing dancer Harman is. Gowariker has given him a chance to showcase his dancing abilities in one song and he rocks.
The first half is pretty tolerable, but the second half is a total drag and the climax is sooooooooo lame. This could really have been an neat film, with some changes. The biggest problem is the length. Gowariker should have trimmed this film short by 30 mins at least. I believe UTV is editing the film now, but this should have struck them earlier. Even a lay person can edit this film, it’s that obvious.
Overall, I have a feeling the female audiences may be kinder. The men were groaning. Again, if you’re a male who likes family dramas/female-centric plots, it won’t be such a waste I guess.
julie 28 September 2009
09:48:34 am
” Jodhaa Akbar, for all its splendour and great music, was hardly as significant as a Lagaan or a Swades.”
umm sandy I have to disagree here. While one can argue that Lagaan was culturally significant, but so was Jodhaa Akbar especially since it shows the steps taken by the Emperor Akbar to promote Hindu Muslim unity, and his respect of other religions led to the universal accaptability of the Moghal king. It cemented the bond between Hindus and Mulims, and there were numerous cultural exchanges namely in the field of poetry, literature and music.
One can see the respect for the Hindu culture amidst the then Muslim community till the times of Jehangir. Akbar had the respect for Hindu gods and that was perfectly protrayed through the movie JA. Jodhaa Akbar appropriately documents the Hindu Muslim cultural ethos of those times very much like MEA did when the magnum opus was released 50 years back.
Lagaan is significant in terms of cultural depiction of the Indian society but I fail to see the same depth of understanding in Swades which to me seems to me a fragmented portrayals of an NRI culture and the typical rural Indian lifestyle. Swades comes across to me as a confused film and that is probably the reason that the audience rejected it in an outright manner. It is a mistake to take the names of Swades and Lagaan in the same breath.
julie 28 September 2009
09:52:42 am
but thanks anyway for the review of WYR.
ACHILLES 28 September 2009
04:44:23 pm
“So if Jodhaa Akbar was a four hour long film about a royal couple unable to decide whether to consummate or not, this one goes on endlessly about a guy’s search for a bride.”
HAHA missed this gem … how about this extension:
“So if Lagaan was a 4 hour long film about how the british lost a test match to a bunch of villagers who cudnt hold a cricket bat properly …. if Swades was a 4 hr film about a NASA scientist deciding to quit his job n come back to India to marry his lovergirl … and if Jodhaa Akbar was a four hour long film about a royal couple unable to decide whether to consummate or not …”
Lena Hai to pura le lo bhai … chupa-chupi khelne ka umar na raha.
anyways, all of gowarikar’s movies are based on ridiculous storylines and drags for long hours.
Doga 28 September 2009
04:52:58 pm
PC saved grace for WYR.
And Ashu ki itni kyun le rahe ho bhai log, He has probably given 3 better movies this decade(Lagaan,Swades,JA).
Doga 28 September 2009
04:53:59 pm
Yeah Ashu makes movies which travel their own pace, Sometimes public goes along(Lagaan,JA) , sometimes not(Swades).
sandhya 28 September 2009
10:36:18 pm
Ah Julie, I can sense you were itching to take me on there lekin zyaada kuch bola nahin
You know I have a certain fondness for Jodhaa Akbar, not so much for the script but for Hrithik’s fabulous performance and the gorgeous songs.
For the kind of grand scale it has, the enormous super human effort invested into it, I just felt the story is not ambitious to that level. Gowariker is happy to peddle a royal love story (flat, but made engaging by the lead pair and some individual scenes). The communal harmony element is an aspect of the love story – almost a token-like extension. Apart from that, my personal view is that the film could have been far more masterful than it eventually turned out to be. Still, a film that is greatly watchable.
Your other point on Swades is a valid one. In my book, no film comes close to Lagaan – neither Ashu’s nor anyone else’s in this decade. When I was comparing his three films, I was judging it mostly in terms of the thematic aspects they encompassed. In that respect, I thought JA fell short, considering the scale on which it was mounted.
pardesi 28 September 2009
11:27:01 pm
For me Swades is Ashu’s finest!
Fragmented portrayal of NRI culture and typical rural Indian lifestyle? When an NRI goes to a village that is what happens. At least the rural Indian lifestyle was real, and not made up story of communal harmony that had no historical backing. In reality “Jodhaa” was converted to Islam upon marrying Akbar.
Qalandar 28 September 2009
11:47:24 pm
I think Swades was well-intentioned, but cinematically quite uncompelling to me; more didactic than kinetic. Ideologically, it was one of the more obvious examples of a long line of films that patronize “the rural”, where the outsider/city dweller/whatever has to come to the village and teach “the local” what to do, how to live, etc. i.e. the outsider isn’t just the means of a certain kind of material progress, but he is also a completely “neutral” voice who is the means for a kind of political/mental/cultural liberation (e.g. he can show the village folks that casteism is bad, etc. etc.) Such neutrality speaks volumes about the self-image and self-congratulatory stance of the “us” who are expected to constitute the film’s audience; good intentions that transcend politics for us; while mere anthropology for the rural other. [It is a trope that is often in evidence in Western films too, where "the Westerner" journeys to "the East" or some suitably exotic location that exists to further the Western protagonist's self-realization, and for which the (Western) hero represents the Last Best Hope. To an extent "The Last Samurai" also conformed to this problematic pattern.]
pardesi 28 September 2009
11:55:41 pm
“Ideologically, it was one of the more obvious examples of a long line of films that patronize “the rural””
That would be true if the outsider did not in turn get “ruralized”. This was excellently shown by Ashutosh via the “water” theme that ran throughout the film. It is not just a city dweller teaching the local what to do, but the outsider being a catalyst, something very common in fiction and cinema. The intention here was in a fictionalized setting, and thus made more palatable than a blatant rewriting of history.
As an aside – Inglourious Basterds insouciantly did that, but never as a historical piece.
Bash 29 September 2009
02:16:11 am
Yawn!
Bias No. 1: If SRK hadn’t acted in Swades, I would have liked it.
Bias No.2: If Abhishek Bachchan had acted in it, I would have loved it. 
> Blah … Blah … 
Bias No.3: Abhishek acted in Delhi 6 and I loved it. … Its a true classic. <
Angels and Belds 29 September 2009
02:23:00 am
Julie – while I wholeheartedly agree with you on your read of Jodha Akbar – i cant but disagree on Swades. To me Swades is easily Ashutosh’s best movie … by far. In no way is Swades entertaining as his other movies but no other movie has ‘touched’ me as much as Swades has in the recent past – maybe a TZP comes close. I think the problem Swades has is that its appeal is to a very small cross section of people who have actually experienced those emotions. So yes I agree with Neelu that Swades is his best.
Lagaan is easily the most entertaining movie made by Ash. So in a wierd way – if you gave me a choice to see Swades or Lagaan – i may actually choose the latter even though I feel the former is the better movie – figure that out!
As for Jodha Akbar – i think it is a great movie and very well made. I have seen it 2-3 times and i become a bigger fan each time i see it. Suffice to say that it is is the only Hindi movie where i thought that Ash(the lady) was awesome.
Angels and Belds 29 September 2009
02:30:19 am
And Q – you dont make any sense in your last comment. Swades was a case where an outsider came to a village and actually realized how far away from reality he was. His concept of bottled water changed when he saw the small boy selling water. His concept of people owing money and not repaying changed when he went to the villagers house and listened to his sob story. I would actually argue the reverse to what you are saying. Yes – he helped in giving some ideas to improve the quality of life in a village – that is the most realistic thing that could happen in today’s world. Please go to any indian village and look at the reality there. Swades was a classic case of both parties learning from each other and I did not see any patronizing involved which was unrealistic in today’s world.
Finally, Swades, to me is a great snippet of how there are life changing moments in everyone’s life where they choose between life choices. The choice of living in India vs living abroad is probably one of the biggest and toughest life decisions taken by a small but significant minority of our generation
julie 29 September 2009
05:57:44 am
“Ah Julie, I can sense you were itching to take me on there lekin zyaada kuch bola nahin”
kya karen. dost hain aap. On top of that a reputed film journalist. had to tone it down a bit
“For the kind of grand scale it has, the enormous super human effort invested into it, I just felt the story is not ambitious to that level. ”
this I can partially agree with. In terms of ratio of return to investments, you do expect something more of a magnum opus presentation, but in my view it falls short somewhere particularly in the execution of war scenes. Swades by comparison was a smaller scale investment hence the expectations could be lowered.
Lagaan on the contrary makes a perfect pitch though. For the scale of investment, the movie delivers 100% or more.
I think with Swades and JA, they work with specific segments of audience, mayber the latter a little more, but Lagaan undisputably finds a universal acceptance.
In terms of repeat value, don’t know but I have enjoyed JA more than Lagaan, but that is perhaps becasue Hrithik as a perfromer works wonders for me. And Ash looks every inch the princess that she sets out to be.
beld – for your sake I will try and watch Swades again, without any bias
and see if my opinion of the film changes.
sandhya 29 September 2009
06:25:40 am
Julie: Dosti mein toh aap ko aur argue karna chahiye without any reservations
I loved Hrithik in Jodha Akbar. He was simply fabulous. On Aishwarya I will say she obviously looks the part of the queen, but I’m not sure she played it in the most appropriate way. I personally found her too pale and placid looking thoughout the film. And there was simply no josh in her eyes or demeanour. That’s what I felt.
Wiase, aap What’s your Rashee dekhne wali hain ya nahin. I know Harman is a poor substitute for Hrithik, but he’s a fine dancer I thought.
julie 29 September 2009
06:50:22 am
sandy – will watch WYR for PC and less for the poor substutute of HR. Will watch it this weekend alongside DND. Am a huge Govinda fan.
ACHILLES 29 September 2009
08:40:35 am
Lagaan is surely Ashutosh’s best by any means … without any doubt. But it also have a few issues which renders it from being a perfect film (maybe these factors mattered when it competed at Oscars).
The movie has very slow execution in certain key scenes … say the scene where Aamir takes on the challenge … it cannot be a quick decision but the scene went on for ages! there are a couple more of these … the overall pace is good but towards the end it drags a bit … there was a totally unwanted song in between the match … and the cricket proceedings almost went to bore at certain points … for a cricket frenzy country this may not be discerned but the execution of the match cud had been more taut (CDI was better in this aspect).
Also Lagaan was no less an amar chitra katha than a Jodhaa Akbar … the entire premise of a cricket match for tax exemption was ridiculous … more so the outcome of the match.
But still its a fine film and entertains very well.
Agree that Swades catered to a small segment of the audience … but with them it connects well… but is still a fairy tale … it touches your heart but the climax is beyond any reason and never happens in real life … NRIs do come back but only when they have better career options, even which happens seldom. Also the pacing and editing problems surfaced properly with swades and the film was very boring in theaters, not so for a DVD watch … its not a surprise that it flopped.
JA also had limited appeal … the stars saved the day for Ashutosh in many ways … this movie grows on you with repeated viewings … cinematically it had problems with the war scenes (the battle of panipat was hardly needed to be shown from the context of the story) … and also the pacing was as bad as Swades.
Gowarikar is not a good commercial director … out of his 7 films only 2 are hits … and the point here is both Lagaan and JA were made on massive scales (25 cr and 40 cr budgets resp) but did not get that great ROIs (30 cr and 60 cr nett resp).
Swades was a much less ambitious in its scale (even though it was ramped up with NASA aspect).
Ashutosh will do better in future if he continues to work with top stars and Rahman.
sputnik 29 September 2009
08:56:46 am
Lagaan was Ashutosh’s best. It was excellently directed. This was a movie which was very entertaining despite its 3 and a half hour length.
Swades was a very good movie but it did feel a bit lengthy. NRIs can identify with the movie more but most Indians living in India feel that the movie is preachy and boring. It might seem preachy and unreal to most of them but Swades is based on a real NRI couple.
http://nripulse.com/profile_RaviAravinda.htm
As for Jodhaa Akbar it was an Ekta Kapoor serial on a grander scale. It was all a figment of Ashutosh’s imagination – The whole Akbar taming a elephant ala Alexander taming a horse, Akbar dressing up as a villager to find out about his subjects, Jodhaa and Akbar not consummating their marriage, Akbar-Jodha sword fight, Jodhaa and Maham Anga fighting to who gets to cook for the king. Jodhaa was being given too much importance and Akbar came out looking like an idiot. I felt bad for Akbar when his advisers advise him not to fight with Adam Khan saying he is bigger and stronger than you. Just because the director tries to make a movie on communal harmony he cannot take a historical character like Akbar and create his own cock and bull stories. The whole movie seemed so fake and deliberate.
If the movie had been named Radhaa-Jamaal or Roopa-Jalaal or something else then it would have been ok. He should have done the same thing as Lagaan hinting that the story got lost in the pages of history.
As for Hrithik, he did not suit the role of Akbar. Hrithik is a fine actor but he was trying very hard to speak in a baritone voice. He was trying so hard to enunciate that it felt he would spit anytime. I was reminded of the scene from Friends where Joey is acting opposite this actor and that actor keeps spitting on him while saying his lines. Joey then talks to him and the actor tells him enunciation is very important and Joey starts spitting too while saying his lines. Hrithik practising his sword fight reminded me of his Dhoom 2 moves. The only difference was his costume and sword. Aishwarya did look like a princess but her acting was bad as always. She was a little less annoying then usual.
ACHILLES 29 September 2009
09:15:34 am
Its difficult to be objective when personal dislikeness takes preference.
Anyways, its an open chapter of history that Akbar used to fight/tame elephants with his bare hands … it was his most fav violent sport, he even used to masquerade as a common man around his kingdom … there are other historical inaccuracies in the movie but not these.
A historical motion picture from bolly/holly or any other wood always fictionalises historical characters be it troy, gladiator,braveheart,kingdm of heaven,etcetc … and these directors dont pretend to be making a documentary for discovery unless one wants to believe that was the intention … As for actors, Gowarikar extracted the best from Hrithik and Aamir, followed by SRK and Ash.
His next hollywood project Budhha with some 100-200 cr budget frightens me.
julie 29 September 2009
10:20:54 am
“As for Jodhaa Akbar it was an Ekta Kapoor serial on a grander scale.It was all a figment of Ashutosh’s imagination – The whole Akbar taming a elephant ala Alexander taming a horse, Akbar dressing up as a villager to find out about his subjects”
Responding to the comment on taming of elephants – It is loosely adapted from an episode in the Akbarnama where Akbar tames the wild elephant Hawai.
As far as dressing like a villager is concerned, I recall reading somewhere that some noble Indian aristocrats used to do that, i.e. intermingle with aam junta to discern issues of concerns. whether or not Akbar did it or not – am not sure but maybe someone like Qalandar (the most well read person in history) can expound on.
“As for Hrithik, he did not suit the role of Akbar. Hrithik is a fine actor but he was trying very hard to speak in a baritone voice. ”
This is an unfair criticism. I think Hrithik’s pitch and Urdu diction was one of the finest I have heard in a long time. The portrayal of charcater as the young akbar was very convincing. It is arguable however whether Akbar in reality was really as good looking and tall. So yes one can detract the portrayal in terms of the physical semblance.
” Hrithik practising his sword fight reminded me of his Dhoom 2 moves. ”
You could be right here. However he had the young Jodhaa (Ash) and millions of women swooning on the exhibition of the muscles.
Qalandar 29 September 2009
12:26:52 pm
No one can know whether Akbar in fact dressed incognito and went about his city or not — he might have, although it isn’t the most plausible thing. However, this motif — of a great man or a powerful man dressed in ordinary garb and blending with “the rest of us” to find out the truth, i.e., the notion that power and privilege can veil us from the truth, is a common one in folktales and stories around the world, and has struck a chord in many cultures. No serious scholar advances these stories as literally true, the point is that they testify to a feeling among “people” that X or Y king cared about them, that he had the common touch, and so on. In Islamic cultures, in particular, this sort of story has great resonance — the earliest such tradition that I am aware of is attributed to Omar ibn al Khattab (died 644 AD), the second caliph of the (Sunni) Muslims and venerated as a near-saint by Sunni Muslims. Essentially the same sorts of stories are told about Akbar, and as late a figure as Mahboob Ali Khan, the second-last Nizam of Hyderabad (died 1911). I repeat, the important thing IMO is not whether such a story is true or not (it might even be true, as certainly no one could prevent him from doing it if he wanted to! And he might well have been influenced by such stories to follow the same “model” Incidentally the same “go see and live with the people” symbolism continues to have resonance in India, as is evident from various symbolically charged trips “to the people” by the likes of Mahatma Gandhi and Jawaharlal Nehru in the pre-Independence era. Heck, even today a Rahul Gandhi goes and sleeps in a Dalit villager’s house in order to “learn about the people’s problems”; the point isn’t whether we should take these trips as substantively meaningful in terms of policy-making — but they do tap into our culture and traditions in an important way, and resonate with the people.), but what it says about people’s perception of the ruler in question. Thus, this sort of story would not be told about just anyone — e.g. I have not heard any such story about Usman ibn Affan, the third caliph; or about Shah Jahan; or about Osman Ali Khan, the last Nizam of Hyderabad. Any of those three might also have done the same thing if they had wanted to — but the fact that “the people” don’t remember them in that way says something (Usman ibn Affan’s caliphate was dogged by charges of nepotism; Osman Ali Khan was remembered as a miser and mean-spirited, among other things, and unsympathetic to Hindus over time; and Shah Jahan was admired for the grandeur and refinement of his court and his prestige, but surely he did not have the place in his subjects’ affections that his grandfather Akbar had, or that his son Dara Shikoh would have had, had he become the emperor).
Bash: your comment is unfair, and does not merit a response, especially given that my long record on NG of dissing even abhishek films that I have issues with is well known. I thank pardesi and beld for their more thoughtful disagreement — I continue to read Swades differently than either of them, but their responses have given me food for thought; since I own Swades on DVD, I might be tempted to re-visit the film in light of their comments. Ultimately, that is really the most one can hope for in any discussion; i.e., agreement cannot be the goal of a discussion; I would much rather be shown a film or think about it in a new way, in a way that I might not have done so previously. For instance, in a recent discussion pardesi and I had on Kuch Kuch Hota Hai and misogyny, one scene that I was especially troubled by was the very one that pardesi read differently, and as being erotic. That was interesting to me, and while in the final analysis it might not be dispositive vis-a-vis my own views on the film, but the different experience of someone else watching the same scene is something that one must take into account in formulating that view.
Julie: you are far too kind, but really, I would say that I am not well read, but simply trying to be so. Any field is so vast that one is humbled…
sputnik 29 September 2009
12:50:21 pm
“Its difficult to be objective when personal dislikeness takes preference.”
I can turn it around and say that Its difficult to be objective when personal favoritism takes preference.
“Anyways, its an open chapter of history that Akbar used to fight/tame elephants with his bare hands … it was his most fav violent sport, he even used to masquerade as a common man around his kingdom … there are other historical inaccuracies in the movie but not these.”
Thanks to Julie for pointing out that “It is loosely adapted from an episode in the Akbarnama where Akbar tames the wild elephant Hawai.”
Now since Akbar really tamed an elephant according to his official biographer isn’t it weird that someone who tamed an elephant is advised by his advisers not to fight Adham Khan.
Anyways I was disappointed with the movie as I expected much more from Ashutosh after Lagaan and Swades.
Troy was partly good but then it became a Brad Pitt movie. Troy was based on Homer’s Iliad and they removed all the Gods part so that Americans don’t think it is weird. Since your user name is Achilles, you probably know that Achilles dies before he enters Troy but the director changed it. It is understandable since Brad Pitt was one of the producers.
Kingdom of Heaven had the same problem as JA when they were trying to balance between Muslims and Christians and they ended up making a mediocre movie.
BraveHeart and Gladiator rank among the Top 10 most historically inaccurate movies according to Times Online.
http://entertainment.timesonli.....038;page=2
rohitkarnbatra 29 September 2009
01:03:29 pm
Sputnik: I believe Scott’s directors cut of Kingdom of Heaven (a film I enjoyed very much) addresses some of those imbalances you mentioned. This version of the film comes in at nearly a whopping 194 minutes and is on 4 DVDs!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K.....or.27s_cut
pardesi 29 September 2009
01:15:26 pm
Historicals have to be framed within commercial cinema constraints so they take some liberties for sure. Thus bare torso Akbar taming elephants or practicing swordplay right outside the zenana (this one is more weird for me) can be cinematic license, but the matter of Jodhaa’s religion is a main point in the film and that is much harder to set aside. The communal harmony plug of JA rests on a false pillar. So one cannot say that the noble intent, and not the romance, is the key point of the film. Akbar became secular much later in his life and not because his Rajput wife decided to get him to pray to Krishna.
About NRIs coming back, many have and for “noble” intentions of giving back to the mother land. Many more have not, but I wonder if we are not all under some small burden of guilt for not going back. In fact the NRI coming back to his country is similar to a city bred taking up a rural cause, and that is happening a lot with the rise of small NGOs that are working in the village environment.
About how the rulers were perceived by the populace, the records for Akbar’s time are fragmented, but ample record s exist on how much the common man of old Delhi looked up to Bahadur Shah Zafar, an entire mutiny was placed on his aging and reluctant shoulders. About Aurangzeb one recalls the Jaziya tax and other ways in which Hindus were persecuted, but it is also hard to forget that this man translated the Koran to pay for his personal expenses, and refused to be buried in an ornate mausoleum. Aurangzeb’s small open air tomb in Aurangabad humbles me.
rohitkarnbatra 29 September 2009
01:23:20 pm
PS – I have not seen the directors cut. For the record…
Qalandar 29 September 2009
01:30:40 pm
Re: Aurangzeb: fair enough, although I would say that those virtues — frugality, etc. — are personal ones (just as certain of the young Akbar’s vices, such as coveting other men’s wives, were personal ones), whereas Aurangzeb’s vices were political ones — and hence far more destructive. A ruler can be “good” or “bad” as a human being, but those personal issues don’t matter to me as much as political virtues/vices do. Stated differently, a lot of people seem to believe that aurangzeb must have been a worse human being than akbar — but actually there is scant evidence for that. What we can conclude upon is the political vices/virtues etc.
On the subject of being humbled, your comment reminded me of another humbling moment: legend has it that aurangzeb’s final words were: “The words of the king are writ on water.”
pardesi 29 September 2009
01:38:06 pm
Frugality at the level of personal expense can be a personal virtue and may not be valued, BUT not spending the exchequer on an ornate mausoleum and leaving instructions to be in a humble tomb for ever, I think I can value that. It is a way that show humility and not an overinflated sense of one’s own worth. Goes well with his last words, thanks for sharing, I did not know. Self aggrandizement has been the cause of many a political conflict, with wide repercussions, so who knows how many were everted because he was humble?
ACHILLES 29 September 2009
01:45:57 pm
“I can turn it around and say that Its difficult to be objective when personal favoritism takes preference. ”
Maybe … but i am not the one here who is aiming to discard JA and sing Swades’s merits … i was just pointing out the plus and minuses of Gowarikar’s last 3 films. Neither i was intending to ridicule one star and uphold someone else on the lines of spitting or pouting or farting.
Anyways, as I said earlier be it Braveheart or Troy or Gladiator or KOH or JA … they are bound to be inaccurate (even in certain basic premises) and more attuned o folklores … these are primarily fictionalized accounts to entertain and not documentaries meant to give history lessons to the audience … i dont see historical accuracies being a big problem when it comes to blockbuster historicals.
Does the audience go to watch these movies after reading akbarnama or memorising iliad? at least i dont … i vaguely remember my old history textbooks which refered to Akbar as an emperor who amused himself fighting elephants, etc etc … also who knows what inspired Akbar to be secular or be interested in arts and music?
The concept of an NRI coming back to do greater good for the country is very good though impractical in most ways, but that was not what the movie swades was about … the hero goes back coz he cant marry his lovergirl otherwise! anyways, Swades was made with good intentions and even though it didnt work (even the overseas business was nothing to talk about) it still remains a good movie unless one starts over rating it.
Cult movies are usually problematic – the very reason why they gain popularity within a small minority.
pardesi 29 September 2009
02:07:16 pm
“the hero goes back coz he cant marry his lovergirl otherwise!”
ROFL! And this is more amusing that an emperor mooning over his unconsummated marriage? Talk about biases. It was NOT about the love interest, but about the call of the country and the people, for those not tuned in I would suggest a listen to the title song, goose-bump inducing. It was about mitti ki khusboo.
Cult movies go beyond their BO, that is why we are talking of an Andaz Apna Apna today, or a Jaane Bhi do Yaaron.
ACHILLES 29 September 2009
02:40:05 pm
Well let see what is more amusing?
1. One NRI goes back to a village, falls head over heels on the gal he lays his eyes on … his attempts to win her affection motivates him to try to urge children to join his lovergal’s school … when caste system intervenes he gives a lecture on its vices … then he literally lights a bulb in the village … so far so good … gal starts liking him … but will not go abroad so no marriage and (whatever thereafter … maybe platonic, who knows?) … so guy goes back to US … cant get over her … comes back … marries her … maybe he lifts another bulb in the next village or maybe a tubelight at ISRO, Gowarikar does not bother about that at all (as long as they man and woman are united and some wrestling is going on).
2. Akbar marries Jodhaa but decides not to rape her … nor to forcibly change her religion … he starts respecting her religion, develops a secular outlook, and after lots of drama they make love. Story over? Wait a hand to hand fight with a rebel is left.
In a way both are similar stories in their crux – a man’s love for a woman motivating upliftment of rural india or secularism.
If I have problems in accepting JA was not about secularism but consummation of marriage … i shud also accept Swades was about a NRI’s pining about a village gal and not about patriotism.
julie 29 September 2009
04:09:27 pm
It doesen’t matter at the end of the day, whether we all agree and comform to the same likes and dislikes. Discussions which bring some new insights, are always welcome. Like Q, even I am tempted to revisit Swades, and see if my initial impression of the movie was indeed the lasting impression. I just found it uncompelling and boring at that time, but perhaps that was also because I watched it on DVD and not on the big screen, and that too, number of years later from it’s date of release.
Q – thanks once again for enlightening us on the various folk tales of Islamic rulers dressing incognito to intermingle with common folks. Many of these stories are of course new to me.
I think amongst the Hindu rulers there have been many stories afloat about Raja Bhoj, Vikramaditya and so much so even the mythical king, Lord Rama intermingling with common people with concealed identity. There is no way to verify some of these tales except just read and enjoy the opulence of the author’s creative writing skills and imagination. While there is no way to verify this, one cannot also discard this as being completely untrue in the context of Jodhaa Akbar.
I think the JA, rather some of the other historicals too like MEA and MP have each take cinematic liberties.
julie 29 September 2009
04:13:35 pm
sandy – Congrats. your thread has received the maximum hits in the past two days. But hey little to do with the actual subject of the thread, which is WYR
Poor PC and HB, they have featured in the most insignificant of Ashutosh’s work in the entire decade, soon to be completely obliterated from memory.
Doga 29 September 2009
06:43:28 pm
Lagaan = All time Classic Hit.
Jodha Akbar = Good movie and Good Hit.
Swades = Good movie, Good acting and Flop.
Case Closed.
sputnik 29 September 2009
06:57:14 pm
“Maybe … but i am not the one here who is aiming to discard JA and sing Swades’s merits … i was just pointing out the plus and minuses of Gowarikar’s last 3 films. Neither i was intending to ridicule one star and uphold someone else on the lines of spitting or pouting or farting.”
Wow! I am not any actor’s fan and wasn’t trying to ridicule one star and uphold some one else. I did not even say anything about SRK. I thought Hrithik did try too hard to enunciate and speak in a baritone voice. The Spitting thing was a joke from Friends which says that Real Actors Enunciate. Just chill. Watch this funny video from Friends about enunciation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ISJS4gSBh0
Som 29 September 2009
07:38:18 pm
“Swades” is my personal favorite though I consider “Lagaan” to be a better film over all.
Som 29 September 2009
07:39:20 pm
Nice set of thoughts on Rashee. Thanks for sharing Sandy.
pardesi 29 September 2009
10:28:36 pm
Whatever Ashu may have tried to show about Akbar and Jodhaa’s unconsummated marriage, the fact that the REAL Jodha converted to Islam probably says story was exactly the opposite of how it was shown. About Swades – again I reiterate – watch the song Yeh to Des hai tera! If after that it still feels like some NRI love story then, imagine Hritik in it and it will change your opinion
ACHILLES 30 September 2009
06:42:30 am
There is no guarantee that there was a real Jodhaa in the first place! … that itself is dubious in the history annals … though its likely he had one rajput wife (maybe a few more considering the harem he maintained).
Also had SRK was casted in JA and won some awards for it ala Swades, then some here wud be getting goosebumps on hearing some JA song or fail to see a love story in JA! And had JA flopped, it wud had been elevated to cult status.
anyways, enuf of nok-jhok from my side … feel free to continue if you want to.
pardesi 30 September 2009
09:03:15 am
That the Rajput wives were converted to Islam says a lot about Ashu’s fairy tale story. SRK would never fit as Akbar – he lacks the required stature to carry off royal clothing
No point in recycling jokes Ach, they lose their impact second time around!!!
manoj16_391 1 October 2009
01:28:44 am
Javed Akhtar:’It is significant that Jodhaa never converted to Islam’
manoj16_391 1 October 2009
01:49:01 am
Pardesi’s history is poor
“A hindu by birth she remained Lord Krishna devotee in spite of her conversion and till now her palace is decorated with Krishna paintings and frescos”
manoj16_391 1 October 2009
01:58:33 am
“Jodhaa” converted to Islam only to marry Akbar but NEVER practised it.She had a temple built in her palace and was a Lord Krishna devotee for all her life and Akbar,given his exemplary religious tolerance,had no problems with it.
A case in point is the Bollywood star Dharmendra.He converted to Islam by the name ‘Dilawar Khan’ in order to marry Hema Malini since the Hindu law prohibits you from having 2 wives at the same time.So would you call Dharmendra a Muslim?