SubscribeJha’s Rajneeti- a Mahabharat without the Good Guys
When I read The New York Times and The LA Times review of Rajneeti, I was a little worried that my high hopes for the film may be crushed, as they frequently are, when it comes to Bollywood. After watching the film, even Katrina Kaif’s unappealing performance couldn’t deter me from the film. In my books, it’s one of the best of 2010.
Rachel Saltz of The New York Times wrote that the film jumped from scene to scene, easily resting the blame on the the screenplay for the faulty narrative. But, for me, this very feature of the movie let it redeem itself from all the other less intriguing segments. The fast pace of the film and parallels to the Indian epic Mahabharat are the reasons I write in support of the movie.
The Mahabharat was a story of the Kuru family who ruled Hastinapur. It was about the power struggle and the fight of good and evil between two branches of the family, the Pandavs and Kauravs. Both the Pandavs and Kauravs had flaws, but the Pandavs were clearly the good guys. They stood with the truth, and had God on their side (literally). The Kauravs, on the other hand, personified evil. Samar and Prithvi (Ranbir Kapoor and Arjun Rampal) represented the Pandavs, while Veerendra and Sooraj (Manoj Bajpai and Ajay Devgan) symbolized the Kauravs. Devgan’s character in particular was an accurate reflection of Karan from the Mahabharat, who was also the illegitmate child of Kunti, the mother of the Pandavs.
Unlike the Mahabharat, it is hard to argue that one side– either the Pandavs or Kauravs, are inherently “good.” Arjun Rampal’s character was obviously flawed– his relationship with Shruti Seth’s character, his violent streak, his refusal to let a Dalit run for election and his thirst for power were all qualities that don’t match up with the famously moral Pandavs. It was unclear as to why Katrina Kaif’s character believed he had a “good” heart. His love for his brother and his failed attempt to save his brother’s girl friend did not make him a good person, but definitely a compelling character.
Samar, Ranbir Kapoor’s character, also had too many shades of darkness to be accurately matched up with the most famous Pandav, Arjun. Bajpai and Devgan together did have darker shades than their counterparts, but the stunning difference of a lack of truly moral figures from the Mahabharat is notable, and one of my favorite themes in the film. It was a deliberate and brilliant move by Jha. Frank Lovece of Film Journal International stated that the film “becomes so ridiculous and over-the-top violent that there is nobody, nobody, to root for.” For me, this was one of the saving graces of the film. Jha’s message that politics doesn’t have room for heroes was accurately conveyed, even more so, with the use of the Mahabharat.
The characters in Rajneeti played politicians, yet none showed any compassion or responsibility toward their constituents– they were all selfish, all greedy, and all power hungry. At the end, Kapoor’s character stated that politics can only bring the darkness from inside of you, and he has a point. It was a pessimistic message about Indian politics, one that differed from Mani Ratnam’s Yuva.
In Jha’s film, he conveyed that in the modern era of politics, it’s all a power struggle– there is no virtuous Yuddhishtir, no politicians who stand who work for the greater good. There are some who are more evil than others, but circumstances did play a hand (as seen through Devgan’s story). According to Jha’s film– in politics today, there are only Kauravs.
The film’s storyline and performance by Arjun Rampal were delightful. Katrina Kaif’s performance and storyline were weak and almost destroyed the film. Oh, and I must note that her character bares no significant resemblance to Sonia Gandhi.
Overall, Rajneeti was a compelling story, and due to a lackluster Bollywood year, I’m glad that a film that relied on a good script and strong performances outdid some other less deserving films that pulled strong box office numbers (cough, My Name is Khan, Housefull, cough). This movie also deserves merit because major Bollywood stars took a risk by making a dialogue-heavy film that wasn’t too commercial. It was nice to see Ranbir Kapoor, Arjun Rampal and even Katrina Kaif act in a film that was very different from anything they had done before. Kapoor’s career in particular is becoming more intriguing by the day.
Because Bollywood seems mythological obsessed these days (Raavan releases on June 19), stay tuned for a post about Kalyug, Shyam Benegal’s 1981 film starring Shashi Kapoor– also an adaption of Mahabharat.
Waiting for Mani’s Magic
Mani Ratnam is one director who was able to make films that not only gained box office success, had musical blockbusters, but were also applauded by critics.
His second Bollywood film Roja (he was primarily making Tamil films before) made it to the 10 best soundtracks of all time list by Time Magazine, and his Tamil film Nayagan made it to the All-Time 100 Best Movies.
Here’s a song from the film Roja:
Ratnam’s film Dil Se, which released in 1998, dove into the terror-stricken region of Northeast India. The female lead in the film (SPOILER) was raped by soldiers as a child and witnessed the death of her family. She was also a terrorist– hard to find in Bollywood. The movie also produced one of India’s most famous songs: Chaiya Chaiya. (All of Ratnam’s Bollywood films have music composed by A.R. Rahman.)
Ratnam was able to eloquently address and convey major issues in India that were mostly ignored by the rest of the film industry, But, unlike the more independent film makers, he used Bollywood’s techniques to convey the message, which made his otherwise independent films mainstream. His films had dances, songs, famous actors, and love stories. But, the songs were interwoven in the plot, the scripts made sense and lacked major holes, and the acting was usually impressive.
He didn’t shy away from controversial issues, but embraced them. His stories represented a greater complex situation that were often extremely relevant and real in India. His film Bombay portrayed communal riots in the city through the eyes of a Muslim-Hindu couple. Yuva showed the different facets of India’s youth- some were itching to leave India for the promise of America, and some were ready to change the system by entering politics. The lessons Bollywood must remember from Ratnam’s films are:
1. An original story is a good thing.
2. Producers should learn that serious issues don’t repel audiences.
3. A director’s job is only to think of the artistic merit of the film, not box office potential.
4. Music made for a film is even better when it blends beautifully with the script.
Ratnam’s last Bollywood film, Guru, was a biopic of Dhirubhai Ambani, who was amongst the most powerful and richest men in the world. Although his story is appealing and touching, the film lacked the darkness that his other films usually had. It wasn’t a complete disappointment, but compared to his prior work, was less than stellar. Ratnam wasn’t quite able to find the voice that touched on the chord that connected to the greater issue in India. It was more a rags-to-riches fable and played up Ambani’s story.
His next film, Raavan, is all set to release. But going forward, Ratnam should remember that:
1. Famous actors aren’t necessary for a film’s success.
2. Not every movie needs six songs
3. Be careful not to fall in love with The Bachchans. We know it’s hard, but try and resist. A little.
4. Maybe the films can be a little shorter. Yes, we understand that your films already break many Bollywood norms, but a movie with a length less than two hours would be our favorite new Ratnam standard.
Ratnam’s latest film is an interpretation of the The Ramayana, an ancient epic originally written in Sanskrit. In a major part of the story, the demon, Raavan, kidnaps Lord Ram’s wife, Sita. But in this version, Raavan isn’t so bad, and Sita isn’t so savitry (pure). Here’s the promo:
To be honest: the promo worries me a little. But just a little. I have faith that Ratnam will return to his former glory and teach Bollywood that mainstream films are allowed to have some intellect and originality.
And even if he fails, don’t worry: the music will probably be worth waiting for.
-
Follow me @bollyobserver