MovieChat Forums > Rang De Basanti (2006) Discussion > How embarassing

How embarassing

posted 17 years ago by ss336
8 replies | jump to latest

It's a real shame that Indian cinema has plummeted to these abysmal depths in only 5 decades. So this is a must-see film for Indian youth then is it? Is that because all the 'youth' in this movie are depicted as spoiled rich kids/tourists showing off in front of a white girl who can do better, by lots of half-naked running around in fields and macho posturing. I love Indian movies from the 50s and 60s, but can someone explain how some of the greatest movie-making talent in the world fell to the level of *beep* in only 50 years? Some of the old Indian movies I've seen are amazing, but this one, admittedly the first I've seen for quite a while, has me feeling utterly sick, and grateful to my parents for having emigrated from India in the 60s. If this is such a must-see film for Indian youth, then I suppose said Indian youth shouldn't be troubled by the problems of regional separatists (Sikh, Tamil, Kashmir), female infanticide, mass illiteracy, squalor and widespread poverty. There have been films dealing with the Indian struggle for independence that were MUCH better than this pile of dog-turd. No, everything is hunky-dory and lovey-dovey fine in the parallel universe in which this *beep* is staged. Indian youth: watch the old movies and leave this rang de dog *beep* in the dust.

Sorry to put it so strongly .. but the Indian movie-making industry needs to come away from the idea of soft porn or Hollywoodish productions, and away from the excessively 'patriotic' zeal of Chinese movies a la Jet Li, and instead come back to doing what it does best.

[–] acme76 16 years ago

so ok, what "specific" movies from 60s are you referring to ?

what's your point ? Yes, the directionless, pompous youth shown in the beginning finally awakens and tries to fix the "system". That's the whole movie is about. Westerners/reviewers did not like the 'ways' it happened, so I guess they have forgotten their own histories.

Did you finish it ?

What "levels" are you referring to ? can you be little more cogent ?

I have seen more movies from all parts of the world than I can imagine and I have it in top 10 of all times. I guess you are an 18 year old and you should go back to watching Spiderman and LOTR.

[–] mystical_aura_diana 16 years ago

Your parents emigrated from India in the 60's ,no offence to that, but have you seen India ,as in the REAL INDIA?!.
You said that all the youth in this movie are depicted as spoiled rich brats.You may have gone dellusional when you saw this movie because this statement of yours proves your incompetency at grasping minute and obvious details.Dj's family runs a "Dhaba" ,dhaba as in roadside restaurants which obviously doesn't make him rich.There's no mention of Sukhi,ok.Aslam isn't exactly what you call rich,actually far from that.Laxman also doesn't look very rich , but if you call simple shirt and pant rich,then he is rich.Only Karan belongs to a rich household and in nowhere in the film is he spoiled.

Secondly it is you who has a dirty mind and inclinations in those direction.That whole scene was to show there feeling of liberty,passion,joy,awakening.You see their half-naked bodies but you do not see their expressions and their salutes directed to the pilots.And you call their antics macho posing,who do you think they were trying to show it off to?.They didn't whistle when they saw Sue because they had dirty minds like someone I'm talking to right now.

You are feeling grateful of your parents leaving India because of a movie you did not like?.THAT'S what I call incredulous.You are actually grateful that you are not living in India and experiencing all of this.This is the greatest height of hippocracy I have ever seen. Utterly sick is what I'm feeling right now after reading your insane ideas.

What was exactly wrong in this movie that gave you the idea that we must not care about Female Infanticide
,Illliteracy ,Poverty,etc.Let me tell you that we got independence from Britishers not our own evils and considering that certain people like you still exist in masses in our country we are not going to get independence from these evils.

Degrading your country like this publicly is not patriotism mister.And I want you to take offence at whatever I said except that parents part because you deserve it.Are you not an Indian by heritage? YOU HAVE SOME REALLY SERIOUS THINKING TO DO . THINK ABOUT IT .It will just take few moments from your precious life and perhaps help you later.

[–] ss336 16 years ago

Well OK take it easy.. it's only a movie. I really didn't like it, and found much of it so distasteful I was moved to write about it. Many of the old Hindi movies seem to me to be 'Art' (note the capital 'A') but I feel that such a departure has been made in the direction of instant gratification and consumerism it's about time the Indian movie industry starts looking again at quality rather than 'product'.

Unfortunately when you make a movie dealing with the creation of a land that is still young (1947-2007), it does tend to carry a lot of baggage. In the 40s and 50s the Indian national consciousness was forged out of the mass popularisation of various mythologies. It was a difficult time, and there have been several wars in addition to internal problems since then. I feel strongly that this movie takes the HIGHLY INAPPROPRIATE and fundamentally dishonest position that India has surmounted these obstacles to progress, when in fact it has not. Therefore, the problems of illiteracy, female infanticide and very serious levels of poverty and deprivation are simply ignored. The movie takes place in a parallel universe where a young, educated white English woman goes to India and finds none of these problems to confront her consciousness, and in which the youthful and rich indulge in a rather sad adulation of 'martyr' figures from a NEW Indian 'mythology' (as opposed to the mass mythology of early India whether 3000BC or 1947AD i.e. Mahabharata, Ramayan, etc.). Surely you have to admit this is pretty transparent?

[–] Samwise_Lives 16 years ago

I would say that adulating Rama would be more escapist than idolizing someone like Bhagat Singh. I know Rama is the incarnation of Vishnu during Ravans villiany, but I personally find it easier to associate myself with someone who is historic, like Ghandi, or Bhagat Singh (though I am a pascifist so I would idolize Ghandi more than Singh, but that's beside the point.) than say to Sita, Lakshman, or Hanuman (my favorite characters in the Ramayana) simply because I know through historical evidence that Ghandi was real, and what he did really worked. Sita may have been a real princess living in India before the Moguls invaded, and she may have been captured and rescued by her beloved, but she most certainly was not kidnapped by a 10 headed demon who could not be destroyed by any god, her husband did not have green skin, and there was no monkey general who had the power of flight. It's the same with every historically mythological figure.

You cannot address every wrong in a nation with one movie, or one newspaper. It takes a series of them. This movie is meant to inspire a nation who is used to being told what to do and what to believe. This movie stresses the point that the only way to change a country is to change yourselves first, is to become liberated first. So that is a foundational movie. Yes, bad planes, and unfair martyrdom is the least of Indias worries, but that isn't what the movie addresses now is it?

America did not become a powerful nation because they allowed their motherland to tell them what to do or what to believe. India will not be a great nation until the people are willing to stand up against the corruption, any corruption from complacency as shown in Rang De Basanti, to female infanticide.

To obey just for obedience's sake? That's something only people like you do.

[–] Summer_M 16 years ago

Do you not think this movie is FAR superior to most other Indian films being released these days?

Sure, it doesn't have the 'classic' feel of the old movies but then it's only a couple of years old.

Yes, it lacks the Dilip Kumars and the Raj Kapoors but they're long gone; Amir Khan, whilst not as good as them (in my opinion) is still very good - one of the best Indian actors out there these days.

Every movie, whilst aiming to appeal to everyone, does tend to have a specific target audience. This one happened to focus on rich, well-to-do youth. Saying that that makes it a bad film is like calling The Breakfast Club an awful movie just because the characters are all obnoxious teenagers.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sayontan 16 years ago

Well, I wouldn't agree with your statement about "a young, educated white English woman goes to India and finds none of these problems to confront her consciousness". She came to India after chucking her job to complete her movie, so naturally her focus was on getting her movie made. Never does the movie take a position that India has surmounted the obstacles to progress (it is a different matter that India has made a lot of overall progress despite these obstacles).

A lot of the problems that you list are aggravated by the issue the movie talks about - corruption. People get elected on the claims that they will address illiteracy and poverty and then work to ensure that progress is slow on these fronts, just to make sure that the same vote-banks remain available for tapping. A defeatist situation, indeed. Additionally, the "adulation of 'martyr' figures" was a means of providing the characters of the movie a tool to fight. This seemed like the theme of the movies of 2006 - Lage Raho Munna Bhai reverted to Gandhi being the tool to fight.

I didn't think the movie was that great, but not for the reasons you stated. A group of students killing corrupt politicians is not an uncommon theme amongst movies of the 80's (watch "Arjun" featuring Sunny Deol). All the same the movie's treatment of rousing nationalist sentiments in the youth of India was praiseworthy. The turn from "Is desh ka kuchh nahin ho sakta" ("Nothing can be done about this country") to actually doing something drastic is what worked for most people (not so much for me, though)

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]