I’ve always been an ardent admirer of Karan Johar. I was only 2 years old when “Kuch Kuch Hota Hai” appeared on the big screen. That alluring smile of Shah Rukh, Rani Mukherjee’s ultra-modern portrayal of Tina, and oh! Kajol as the vivacious girl-next-door Anjali in faded jeans and funky t-shirts—all of these seemed to be a fairy tale to me. The peppy numbers of his movies would thrill me, carry me to a universe of colors, dancing fairies, and abiding joy. I’ve always adored him for the sake of nostalgia, But when I grew up and began to understand the complexities of life, society and its patriarchal rules, only then was I able to see the unabated misogyny that lurked behind the beguiling and seemingly “happy ending” of his film.
I was equally astonished at how aesthetically Johar exploited NRI emotions in “Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Gham”, endorsed the “char din ladki in” attitude in our all-time favorite “Kal Ho Na Ho”, and glorified extra marital affairs in “Kabhi Alvida Na Kehna” with the impregnable aid of hypersensitive emotions. Should I even talk about “Student of The Year?” The story revolves around a school where students come in Gucci jackets and most amazingly (duh!) their intelligence is measured through their dancing skill at prom night. Wow! Mr. Johar, you have such an unquestionable insight of the Indian Education System.
All these years, he has hurled so many unrealistic, stereotypical, misogynistic movies at us. Yet we ran to the theatres to steal the essence of the life we could never have. He made money out of our misery. He is rich because we are miserable and hopeless dreamers. But what gives him the right to ruin a regional classic like “Sairat” and turn it into a nonsensical idiotic Bollywood remake? Money perhaps?
“Sairat” (Director: Nagraj Manjule) is a Marathi film set in a rural backdrop. The film explores the emotional journey of two young college students, Archana and Prashant. The story has nothing new to offer. It’s a conventional story of financial and racial inequality between two lovers. But the way it has been presented is something that the big Bollywood directors should learn from regional movie makers. Here the characters do not elope on bullet bike or wear designer ghagra choli while playing holi. The lucidity of the film and the handling of numerous emotions compel the audience to swing between the fear and the love they feel for Archana (Archie) and Prashant (Parshya) when they wage a war against the powers-that-be. The story reflects zeal as much as it reflects poignancy and romance but in a more pragmatic way. Sadly these independent works are deprived of the limelight, because of the monetary void in their industries which results in a lack of promotion and weak marketing.
Karan Johar is welcome to direct/produce ludicrous movies like “Shandaar”. But ruining a brilliant original like “Sairat” with a pair of star kids and their plastic acting (very evident from the trailer itself) is injustice to cinema. Adding glamour to a simple story has been the easiest formula of producing a super-hit in Bollywood. But designer lehengas, posh locations, and unnatural acting (read: overacting are inevitably going to suffocate the simplicity and innocence of such a beautiful, beautiful movie.
Being a cinema lover, I am heartbroken. Shattered.
The post Dear Karan Johar, Did You Really Have To Ruin A Film Like ‘Sairat’? appeared first and originally on Youth Ki Awaaz and is a copyright of the same. Please do not republish.
If you think the Hindi film industry started deteriorating only a few years ago, it’s not true. Though we are fortunate to watch some good movies ahead of their respective times like “Black Friday”, “Gupt”, “Kaante”, “Khaki” and a few others but they are like the lotus in the mud. The entire industry has only one script. It’s the same revenge story, where parents are killed, sisters are raped, or some there’s some twist like brothers separated due to an antagonist conspiracy. The revenge drama continues in many films, sometimes with horrible dance steps until the entry of Hrithik Roshan!
In the last 15 years, Rajkumar Hirani has directed five films which include Munna Bhai M.B.B.S. (2003), Lage Raho Munnabhai (2006), 3 Idiots (2009), PK (2014) and now, the explosive biopic on the life on Sanjay Dutt (“Sanju”) which has become an instant hit.
The antagonist Ganesh Gaitonde has been portrayed by Nawazuddin Siddiqui, who has not only done an extraordinary job, but also owned the series in the way he says –”Kabhi kabhi lagta hai apun hi bhagwan hai!’ (Sometimes it feels like I’m God).’
One of the most powerful characters of this season is Anjali Mathur (Radhika Apte) -a RAW agent who is shown continuously fighting the demons of patriarchy in the line of work and the tragic closure of her missing father’s case. Looking at the strong female characters Radhika has portrayed earlier, we might develop some expectations from Anjali, her being a female RAW agent. She is shown to have been complaining that female agents, despite their abilities, are forced to do desk work rather than go on the field. At the same time, she is portrayed to be inadequate at her job, not vigilant enough. Whether it is the requirement of the character or not is another matter, but RAW certainly trains their agents well, so I did not find that part convincing enough.
His journey from the cop who is unenthusiastic about the missing Muslim boy to the cop who tells his wife, ”आज खूप दिवसांनी खऱ्या पोलिसासारखं वागलो (Today, I acted as a true policeman after a long time),” with satisfaction, is overwhelming.
It is quite challenging to construct a fictional character taking part in actual history without moulding it, especially while constantly switching from flashbacks to present, but the directors and writers have been successful in making it look natural.
Though Kabir’s poetry is in the curriculum of most Indian boards, I doubt if there is an effort to make the students understand the depth of his writings. Usually, the teacher dictates the literal meaning of the couplets included in the syllabus and the students reproduce the same in the exam hall. Thus, they lose a chance to learn a lesson that has the potential of changing their vision of life and give them a new-found sense of purpose. Perhaps it is because of the deceptive simplicity of his writings that we miss his message. He aimed at bestowing people with the most fundamental truth of life, knowledge that had hitherto been the preserve of only the upper-caste Brahmins and available only to those with access to the classical Vedas and Upanishads written in Sanskrit. He writes in one of his couplets-