Slumdog, A Tough Competitor
I’m going to note this only because the Oscar season should be about the movies but really, it’s all about the drama. Laments come from all sides because, supposedly, it isn’t the nature of the beast but the many parasites that live off the beast that are the problem (when in doubt, blame it on the Oscar blogs). It is human nature to compete. The Bagger talks Slumdog today. He championed both Little Miss Sunshine and Juno and it isn’t because he’s friendly with Fox Searchlight so much as he’s a sap underneath it all. My own theory. Here, he writes about Slumdog and one has no choice but to agree with him. He’s right about the movie and he’s right about the season:
One-by-one, the other contenders have come and gone, impressing to be sure, but none knocking filmgoers back in their seats. And that’s what a best picture does. “The Departed” may have wobbled in parts, but once the viewer was strapped in, the film took off. “No Country For Old Men” the same way. Even “Crash” created a wind inside the movie house, regardless of its shortcomings. You’d have to go back to 2004 and “Million Dollar Baby” to find a winner that unfolded in its own sweet time.
Though “Slumdog Millionaire” has a hoary plot device, the kind of narrative armature that could have come out of the vaults of Warner Brothers five decades, the ability of Mr. Boyle to find both the movie and the humanity in that story make it a tough Oscar competitor.
That means, I think, Slumdog wins by default. If it is the only movie that makes voters sing, and they don’t want to award The Dark Knight, which, other than the comic book thing, would have Oscar written all over it (with a red crayon) — it’s the charmer for the gold. You know, for a long time, there has been a desire to merge Bollywood and Hollywood and before now, it’s been resisted by both sides. Slumdog should meet somewhere in the middle – western enough for our tastes (Dickensian themes, poverty, true love, poor vs. rich) and authentic enough for Bollywood tastes (poverty, true love, poor vs. rich, with a song and dance or two — here there is only one. One more and its Oscar chances would have been zip).
Funnily enough, there have been many movies that took the wind out of me — Benjamin Button for one. Revolutionary Road for another. But I suppose I would have to agree that, all in all, it isn’t last year with films like No Country and There Will Be Blood or the year before, with The Departed and The Queen. So perhaps, given that, it could be Slumdog’s to lose. The trouble is, the more people weigh it down by saying it’s going to win, the harder it will be for its wings to lift.
OmarS says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 9:23am
It seems a frontrunner has finally emerged. Slumdog Millionaire has so far been the movie the beat. While other movies, such as Milk, have been getting rave reviews, Slumdog seems to ahve become the one to beat. It’s placing on many Top 10 lists and on top of that it’s already winning critic cirlce awards quiet effortlessly. No other movie is really sticking out in the pack aside from our Slumdog. But it’s true, putting preassure on it, sets it up to fail.
On a side note Sasha, while Slumdog is, atleast for the near future, the closest thing to a Bolly/Holly mix that will be produced for the mainstream public, it is hardly meeting in the middle. Save for the brilliant score by Rahman, a song penned by the brilliant Gulzar and the presence of Anil Kapoor and Irfan Khan, the movie is really a Western movie set in India with little to no real Bollywood influence. I say this just to clarify. SOme people are going to assume that because there’s a song/dance at the end and becasue its’ set in India, that that qualifies it as a Bollywood movie. It doesn’t. Bollywood is a whole other style of filmmaking that Western filmmakers cannot mimic, and most Western audiences can’t handle. To put it bluntly, it’s beyond the breadth of Western Audiences.
It was a nice touch by Danny Boyle to give an ode to the biggest film industry in the world, but that’s all he’s done. It’s a cameo in an otherwise Western movie. For real Bollywood you need to check out some real classic Bollywood fare. And I’m sure the closest many of the people here have gotten is Lagaan. But there is a whole world of cinema out there that many of you know not about. And I just want to say that there’s a reason that these movies are some of the most popular in the world, selling more tickets than American movies. Until a REAL crossover movie comes, however, I thank Danny boyel for giving the Western world AR Rahman.
Ryan Adams says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:01am
“One-by-one, the other contenders have come and gone, impressing to be sure, but none knocking filmgoers back in their seats.”
I love the Bagger, but I’ll decide for myself what knocks me back in my seat.
Paul Outlaw says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:14am
I’m not entirely buying it either. Because if I were, my current nominees list would not be Milk, Slumdog, TDK, Benjamin Button, Revolutionary Road but rather Milk, Slumdog, Iron Man, The Wrestler, Gran Torino.
Ryan Adams says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:31am
You make some excellent and well-expressed points, OmarS. I’ve seen a couple dozen Bollywood movies, and they don’t look or feel like Slumdog Millionaire. They feel more like South Pacific or West Side Story. They’re closer to 1950′s Broadway than they are to UK-filtered Hollywood.
But Sasha’s right about the special sparks that fly when the world’s two major movie industries rub up against each other. I don’t think we want them to merge — and that suggestion might alarm AMPAS voters — but two movie styles don’t have to merge to produce beautiful offspring.
long time listener says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:31am
I was disappointed to read this in the Bagger, as if he’s hedging his bets. Slumdog wins a couple of second-tier critics awards and now it’s time to start the backlash? And David Carr needs to be first on the pile?
It’s not Bollywood, but it is, at least, a nod in the direction of another culture. It seems to me that the other frontrunners are all very much about the political/sociological idea of America (Rev. Road, Frost/Nixon, Milk, even TDK or Wall-E, it could be argued). There’s something refreshing about Slumdog. I don’t think the DC critics are reason enough to knock it down a few pegs. Another serious contender will emerge soon enough.
Sasha Stone says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:43am
Long Time Listener, quite the contrary, I don’t think Bagger’s post is in any way negative towards Slumdog, just negative towards the inevitable backlash of this nasty season.
Bill M. says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:46am
I’m not championing for The Dark Knight to win the Oscar but Oscar pundits are saying the comic book stigma hurts The Dark Knight’s chances but doesn’t Slumdog’s foreign language stigma for Best Picture winners even though the majority of the film is in English. It’s pretty much an Indian film directed by an English director about an Orphan from the Mumbai ghetto. Slumdog is the closest thing to the feel-good Oscar movie but how often does that kind of movie win Best Picture (Shakespeare in ’97, Gump in ’94?). I think Slumdog has more going against in terms of traditional Oscar voting.
Slumdog is the front-runner right now. By the end of the year I think it’s going to be Curious Case when it comes out for Christmas.
My five: Curious Case winning, Slumdog, Revolutionary Road, Milk, The Dark Knight.
RichardA says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:54am
I like Denby’s review of Slumdog.
Basically, he said: fun movie, but so what.
Can I plug my love for AUSTRALIA…love it.
qwiggles says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 11:06am
As usual, people’s defense mechanisms kick in around this time of year when their favourite starts looking vulnerable to general and, for the most part, rational criticism, and they preemptively strike by labeling those who don’t like their baby mere backlashers and naysayers and finger-pointers. Maybe that’s so in part, but whatever happened to just plain not liking a movie, and explaining yourself?
I haven’t liked Slumdog since I saw it in September. Forget the fact that I didn’t find it believable: I didn’t care. I didn’t care about the token girl, her 8 lines split between 3 actresses, the third chosen because she is pretty and doe eyed and because how could we resist wanting to gobble her up?
I didn’t care about our protagonist. Seriously, can anyone explain to me his reason for going on Millionaire (never mind whether his life story getting him through is poignant or just contrived) without wincing? I’ll summarize: adult Jamal accidentally runs into Latika shacking with a mob boss (this always happens to my childhood loves) and, because she is watching Millionaire on the tiny kitchen TV as she prepares said boss a sandwich, on the one time he visits, and because she likes the show well enough, she guesses, something about escape, he decides RIGHT THEN that making it on the show will make her love him for-evas. Please. Please! All of this is sloppy on a very basic narrative level, and on the level of character motivation. THIS is why things are happening so quickly.
I didn’t care about the supposedly innovative cultural hybrid I was seeing, though I admit to enjoying it greatly as City of God-lite for the first hour, before the Free Willy-inflected Latika narrative reared its head. No, I actually found the token gesture to Bollywood offensive and ham-fisted. What we have here, I thought to myself, is low-rent Aladdin set in India: maybe if they dance, no one will care? And true enough: I didn’t care.
As I’ve said before, there is plenty to legitimately criticize this movie for, even if, as I believe, it WILL win best picture. There is plenty not to like; one does not reveal oneself as an ogre or nasty campaigner for saying “nay.” It doesn’t need a concentrated backlash.
I suppose what I’m getting at is, look at any year’s best picture crop, and name me some films that deserve to be immune from criticism, lest the critic prove herself to be REALLY MEAN AND SPITEFUL! Slumdog should get its lumps like every other movie has.
Paul Outlaw says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 11:10am
Thank God Diablo Cody didn’t write the Slumdog screenplay…
long time listener says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 11:15am
Yeah, I get that Carr tends to critique the awards craziness, rather than offer straight opinions. I realize that he’s essentially paraphrasing the chatter he expects to hear, but isn’t that really just hastening the supposed backlash? I mean, David Carr isn’t the type to pull a “TOLDJA!” but still. It just seems like the whole process is upside-down, when winning precursors is a bad thing. Maybe that’s what he’s getting at.
jwright40 says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 2:08pm
I love the Bagger but it’s too early to talk about prevailing winds. Bagger does it here because he’s locked in. This is generally a good thing – he’s parsing the tea leaves so we don’t have to – but it can mean he’s too closely attuned to any movement or any wisp of trend. Bloggers, in this climate, distinguish themselves solely by calling things first. They must do this in order to survive as bloggers; Bagger is human, he’s no different. (That, not incidentally, is why I like this blog so much – it doesn’t need to be first to call anything, and tends not to try.)
Interesting review from Qwiggles – this is the first nonprofessional instance of dislike for the film I’ve seen. I didn’t care for it either, and was content to be the only one. I didn’t resent the film, and I enjoyed its inherent vitality. But by many Western conventions, the film was a joke – the barest shell of frame, with a story structure fit for a college composition class, and some real nonperformances shambling around, clearly having a nice time but doing nothing for me.
I’ll be interested to see how far the film gets. A backlash will certainly happen a la Miss Sunshine/Juno, but Bagger is only contributing to a run on the bank, as it were, by being one of the first to call this backlash. Give it a few more critic’s awards first. And even when the lash comes, perhaps it will survive.
Laura says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 3:05pm
I think the Slumdog backlash has already begun in full force. Just looking at some of the comments on this site, and on the Entertainment Weekly message boards, it’s clear that the detractors are coming out more and more to bash this popular film.
Look, not everyone is going to like every movie. There are plenty of beloved classic movies that also have groups of people who hate them. Which is fine, everyone has their own taste. What bothers me the most about the long Oscar season is when the detractors insult everyone else for liking this “horrible” “inept” “contrived”, or whatever, popular movie that they hate. And then of course the rival studios join into that kind of talk. And it’s all because these popular movies have strong Oscar buzz. Because you never hear this kind of hate talk for popular movies like Iron Man, that have no Oscar buzz.
So I say, can’t we all just express our opinions of what films did and did not move us without insulting all others who don’t agree? Just a humble plea…..
curiousBen says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 4:44pm
I second that Laura ….
Same ol same ol same ol ….
I would say 85% of BP winners are / have been / will always be tailored to win the award!!
The Natural says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 4:56pm
Anyone else think “Milk” has a really great chance at winning? I’ve just seen it this past week and it’s exactly the kind of picture to win the big prize: immensely moving, beautifully directed, filled with sensational performances and topped off by its potent social, political relevance during this historic election year.
Can it happen?
Paul Outlaw says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 5:02pm
Yes, we can.
I mean, yes, it can.
But so can the Button.
Mitchell says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 8:43pm
CONTAINS SPOILERS
A Case for Slumdog Millionaire:
The criticizers of ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ usually comment on the story of the film, that it is unbelievable. I believe that the story that Slumdog is being criticized for actually helps the thematic elements evident in the film. The film covers topics such as religion, love and romanticism but its main theme is that escapism is a necessary part of life even though it often slips into an unrealistic romantic area.
The film opens with Jamal being tortured by the police trying to force him to confess that he has cheated on the game show Who Wants to be a Millionaire? However, the first time we are introduced to the thematic elements in the film is when we meet a younger Jamal and his brother Salim running a toilet service. We see Salim lock Jamal in the toilet when his favorite Bollywood star is coming to town. What happens next shows us how important this Bollywood star, something Jamal associates with escapism, is to him. He jumps below the toilet into all of the remains just so he can get the man’s autograph. This shows how far people will go just to escape from everyday reality, relating back to the theme of the necessity of escapism.
Next in the film, we see how hard Jamal and Salim’s life truly is. They go through their mother dying and, in a sense, being kidnapped and forced to beg for money. They then steal for money from many tourists and such just to get by as they grow up. This is the most realistic part of the movie as a whole. The films star Freida Pinto, a Mumbai native, has said in many interviews that this movie portrays the city better than any other film she has ever seen. Danny Boyle, the director, shows us the hellish life that the boys went through just to get by to show us the desperate need that these boys have to dream and escape from their life.
We then enter the third act and see Jamal find his brother and Latika after they leave him at a hotel. This is the most important part of the film because it truly ties up the main theme perfectly. When Jamal finally sees his brother after many years, he imagines himself running after him and jumping out the window with him. This is a vital part of the movie because it shows the ability that Jamal has to imagine. It shows that he does fantasize about what he wants to happen. We then see Jamal meet Latika for the first time in many years. Latika refuses Jamal’s pleas to take him and leave her husband. Jamal sees Who Wants to be a Millionaire? on in the kitchen and Latika tells him that the show is (forgive me for paraphrasing because I do not have the exact words) important because the people of India get to step into new shoes and experience another life. It is all about escaping. This furthers the theme of the necessity of escapism.
The final scenes of the film are Jamal’s experience on Who Wants to be a Millionaire? and I believe, that these scenes all took place in Jamal’s imagination. The story does seem a little romantic and improbable and we already saw that Jamal has the ability to dream, and what is to say that he didn’t imagine his experience on the Millionaire show and his return to Latika? We never actually see any of the process of Jamal auditioning to get on the show or anything of the sort, he just appears on it. I believe that then Boyle creates a stereotypical Hollywood type world where everything goes as it should. He is creating escapism for the audience and for Jamal. Jamal gets the girl and there is a romantic, happy ending. Boyle challenges you to fall victim to the romantic, dramatized ending and believe that it was true and believe that it happened.
Overall, Boyle creates two worlds. The real world, Jamal’s childhood, and the romantic world, Jamal’s experience on the show and winning back Latika. I believe that Boyle was commenting on the over-romanticized nature of escapism, even though it is vital to society. This shows that the ending was not just an easy-way-out of storytelling to make everyone happy, but rather a use of traditional storytelling structures and techniques to further convey the main theme to his audience.
qwiggles says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:01pm
Mitchell,
This is an original take on the movie, and I admire your attention to detail, for the most part. But sometimes I feel you’re reaching. Ex.
“The final scenes of the film are Jamal’s experience on Who Wants to be a Millionaire? and I believe, that these scenes all took place in Jamal’s imagination. The story does seem a little romantic and improbable and we already saw that Jamal has the ability to dream, and what is to say that he didn’t imagine his experience on the Millionaire show and his return to Latika? ”
Why do you believe this? You suggest it’s because the film seems more romantic/improbable than usual, and because we’ve seen Jamal’s capacity to dream before. But I don’t see that actually supported in the film. There aren’t enough dream sequences, for one, and the one you’ve mentioned is followed by a shot that establishes that it was indeed a dream. So…if it’s a dream, I’d say it’s Boyle’s dream, not Jamal’s. And then, to get back to your points, why does it turn from reality to this dream? If the big theme is escapism, who’s doing the escaping by ending on these increasingly improbable, romantic notes? Jamal, it seems, is actually more a realist than a dreamer, that one moment aside. So who is escaping?
Noah R. says:
Monday, December 8, 2008 at 10:24pm
I’m a little funny about Slumdog’s Oscar chances because while I do think Danny Boyle is way overdue for a nomination, I don’t think it’s his best film (Trainspotting set the bar pretty high for him) and I don’t think it’s the best film of the year. Not that I didn’t thoroughly enjoy the film, but unlike No Country for Old Men (which was behind There Will Be Blood and Assassination of Jesse James), I don’t feel that a Best Picture win for Slumdog is entirely justifiable, whether it’s my favorite or third favorite or whatever. It’s a fine film but it’s just not the masterpiece everyone says it is.
Qwiggles makes good points about the flimsy story, but for me, it’s Boyle’s vision that holds it together. Just like Sunshine, the script was a mess, but the look and feel of it was breathtaking. I’d be happy with a Best Director nod, and maybe even a win, but not Best Picture. Dammit why couldn’t they have released In Bruges now instead of February!?
arushi says:
Wednesday, December 31, 2008 at 12:56am
slumdog millionaire
i want to comment on wht people hv been sayng….first….jamal knew hw to get on the show…he tells that call centre employee….dial whn prem says “if”.
getting on the show was nt that a difficult part…was it???
the good part of the movie..is hw this guy learns from all his experiences…if u noticed….the begger..blind begger…even hw knew benjamin kranklin was printed on the note….these people are not brainless…infact they use thier brains more then maybe we do…thy r observant…hv all thr senses at thr best…..
as far as jamal goes….as it says…it was written..why is it so hard fr people to belive it?…..destiny..just becausesome people dont belive in destiny doesnt mean its nt thr,,,…..its stronger in some peoples lives.
this is also shwn in the movie…prem…and the inspecters…all do not belive in the whole idea that hw can a slumdog…a person who has nt been educated so much win such a huge amount of money…..prem feels good every time jamal cant ans…or with prems stupid orthodozx ideas that since he is muslim..he wnt be able to ans the hindu religion question….he forgets…these people have a lot of knwledge which the rich …armani suited prem or even the police wont knw.
the movie opens a lot of realities….at one go…a lot of thm….the way it is portrayed..hw it still doesnt go over boared…or looses the interest…the music…and the acting..except fr latikas(the eldest/) acting…..i thing the movie is superb….
i hv seen juno outof all the above mentioned movie….i loved the movie too…bt when u compare it…plz…juno has everythng so easy..she doesnt freak out..she doesnt hv ne preganncy problms…see..even juno was a romantic thng….the whole realising that ths is the guy she loves…the guy realises once she does….
when u compare….slumdog tops the list i thnk…..the photography etc, a r rehman music…the way the subject has been treated….it was hard to belive that a non indian director got such details in the moivie….personally…bravo.