a mixed bag

recently in the dvd player: “the alamo”, “zakhm”, “hum dil de chuke sanam” and “swades”. two pieces of crap, and two decent but overly worthy efforts. crap first:

“the alamo”: uninvolving, pointless, trivial. even something jingoistic would have been preferable to this lifeless mess. the sad thing is that it seems to think it is a clever movie which has interesting things to say about mythmaking and nationmaking. it does not. the only plus i can think of: i finally know what a bowie knife looks like. other than that this is an exercise in costume design. the guy playing santa anna chews some scenery but only half-heartedly.

“hum dil de chuke sanam”: i’m ambivalent about reviewing bad bollywood films here since most of you are unlikely to watch them unless i recommend them very highly (and of the ones i have recommended mike’s seen “company” and that’s about it i think). so i’m not going to spend too much time on this except to say that no one exoticizes india like indians themselves and that this film may have been written by a particularly stupid 12 year old. the liberalization of the indian economy in the 90s saw the rise of both a big spending leisure class and the expression of a complicated hindu chauvinism. this film, like many other 90s blockbusters, speaks to both–on the one hand providing aspirational fantasies and on the other, in the guise of critiquing it, repackaging patriarchal tradition.

“zakhm”–directed by mahesh bhatt who made some excellent films in the 80s. if you can get your hands on them you should try to watch his early films–in particular, “arth” and “saaransh”. then in the late 80s bhatt went from making powerful melodramas and social-realism to light bollywood comedy. many of these were quite entertaining as well (and all “inspired” by some american film or the other–the delightful “dil ha ki maanta nahin” was an update of the earlier bombay movie “chori chori”, itself “inspired” by “it happened one night”). but in the mid-90s his films got worse and worse. “zakhm”, which he has said is his last film as director, is his avowed attempt to atone for his cinematic sins by going against the tide of anti-muslim sentiment (which he saw playing out in bombay movies as well). bhatt returns to his melodramatic roots to dramatize the question of cultural and religious identity. the film oscillates between events right after the destruction of the babri masjid in 1992 and the ensuing bloody riots in bombay (also covered in mani ratnam’s “bombay” and rushdie’s “the moor’s last sigh”) and flashbacks to the protagonist’s childhood which build to a secret about his parents that explodes in the film’s present. there are some problems with the film’s allegorization of these issues but it is a very good example of how the bollywood form is amenable not just to spectacular masala movies but also social critique. i don’t know how accessible it will be without some knowledge of recent indian history but it is worth watching (only two hours long too). there used to be far more “small” movies like this made within the bombay industry in the 80s and early 90s, and in an encouraging sign it looks like the genre may be making a comeback.

“swades”: and this is an example of how the bollywood blockbuster structure can also accomodate social commitment and a message of rural development. “swades” is directed by ashutosh gowariker (who also made “lagaan”) and is a very well put-together film. it is about a n.r.i (non-resident indian) nasa engineer who makes a guilt-ridden trip to india to seek out his old nanny/maid and over the course of the film realizes that the country of his birth needs him more than the country he has immigrated to. there are some substantive problems with the film: it isn’t clear, for example, why the charge of being disconnected from the problems of rural india should be laid just at the doors of non-resident indians as opposed to those of their counterparts in indian cities; nor is it clear who the intended audiences for the film’s various messages of reform are–it seems to address both non-resident indians and villagers at the same time. narratively, the film also suffers from not really having any sort of antagonistic presence–personal and social issues get worked out quite easily, all it seems to take is a powerful speech or two. so, why did i like it anyway?

perhaps because i saw it right after “hum dil de chuke sanam”, whose excesses it is a nice antidote to. unlike that genre of film’s simultaneous celebration of indian “tradition” and its arrival as a global player, “swades” acknowledges the huge imbalances in indian society that are the other face of its entry into globalism (gleaming tech centers in bangalore and villages without electricity) and ties this underdevelopment to problems with “tradition”. things may get worked out too easily and unrealistically (as they did in “lagaan” as well) but i think this film works in the register of fantasy anyway–it is very old fashioned, “inspirational” filmmaking, and if in its attempt to show its audiences a picture of “what we need to do” it leaves out the difficulties in getting there at least it tries. and in the current bombay landscape that’s a significant thing. unfortunately, it didn’t do so well at the box-office. but if you have three hours to spend i would recommend it. much better than watching “vanity fair”.