MovieChat Forums > Dor (2006) Discussion > But why..

But why..

posted 17 years ago by 031bukhari-m
7 replies | jump to latest

But why did she have to travel all the way to rajasthan for a signature when she could've just signed it her self in the mountains and save her hubby! all the hassle but for what? it wasnt like the director said or mentioned that meera had to give along a passport copy, or and ID copy or be present infront of law agencies to confirm;) zeenat signed the copy in the mountains, amir was saved from the arabian gallows, and we would have no DOR:) (why could superman fly, then again) dor was beautifully shot, well directed with honest acting by the cast and behroopiya was a delight. and again there should've been some more mention of him in the end than just waving the green flag.

good movie overall though the directors' should get into details without boring the audience, details give any good movie, that fine edge.

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 17 years ago

1) From the script point of view: If you really understood the character of Zeenat, you know that she is a strong yet very honest and grounded person. She would never sign the papers herself because of her honesty.

2) From the storytelling point of view: You say that the director should've gone more into details. I see it this way: the director chooses to focus on the relationship between the women as the centre of the film. You notice at the beginning that there is not much explanation either on the not-so-good relationship between Aamir and his parents, there isn't much said about what Zeenat had to go through in life to become the independent woman she was, and they don't even give details about what exactly happened in Dubai between the two husbands. I think it was a wise choice to focus on one thing and just to focus on these two characters and seeing the film through these two woman is, I think, what makes it special. For instance: because the women don't have absolute clarity on what happened in Dubai, we neither do. To tell a story, one has to make a selection of details which are going to be part of the storytelling, which leads to the film as a whole, and I think Nagesh Kukunoor did a great job at that.

[–] trigger_jam 17 years ago

i agree with Anwar's explanation.

to the original poster, if you want to indulge in specifics then why not a bit further in your own scenario. suppose they send that signed piece of paper and the Saudis halt the execution on the pretext of providing proof that the widow had indeed signed off for forgiveness. what trickery could zeenat apply then?

but once again, it was asserted from the very first scene that zeenat was a character driven by principles more than anything else.

[–] 031bukhari-m 17 years ago

ayushdave,

what and where was the need of the trickery left to be applied then?! wouldn't that be an ending solution;)

[–] adityabindal 17 years ago

I think the poster has a very valid point here. I completely disagree with the principles argument.

She spoke of women empowerment and played with the morality of a foreign society and religion to achieve a personal purpose, i.e. getting that letter signed. One would dare call this ethical or moral? She was not driven by principles, but was a pragmatist. Her need of the hour was the signature, and she was willing to go to any length for such a thing.

While there could be other details outlining why she couldn't forge a signature, a dont agree with the argument of her principals or honesty.

As for the focus of the movie, i think thats what was missing in the movie. Someone mentioned that the director did not want to get into those small silly details. Well, the problem with being all artsy and creative is that when you come up with such a unique plot, you have to adhere to it and respect it. These small details become crucial.

For those of you who have read The Kite Runner, you'll know what I'm talking about. Any piece of fiction is permitted to have several themes, however there has to be that one central theme which is closely CONNECTED with the main PLOT, and therefore the focus was flawed.

[–] Anwar_Puttarjee 17 years ago

Could you explain what you mean by saying: "she played with the morality of a foreign society and religion"? I didn't notice anything like that at all.

As for the focus of the movie, i think thats what was missing in the movie. Someone mentioned that the director did not want to get into those small silly details. Well, the problem with being all artsy and creative is that when you come up with such a unique plot, you have to adhere to it and respect it. These small details become crucial.

I don't know exactly what you mean by saying "artsy" because I see it like any other movie, and would not call this an arthouse movie at all (if that's what you mean). Anyway, I don't agree with that a director has to pay attention to all the small details, because I think that really depends on the focus. And if you watched the film closely, you would notice that we really just follow Zeenat and Meera the whole film. They are the focus and the story is told from their perspective. You are thus saying that Zeenat and Meera should have known exactly what happened in Saudi Arabia? I don't agree. I think it's a wise choice of the director to choose these characters as the perspective of the storytelling, so that we can be more involved with them. Otherwise, it's one of those films in which you see a story "from the outside" (if you know what I mean), not that that is a bad thing. Besides, why should it be that a movie with a "unique" plot should pay attention to all the small details? I think style of storytelling also plays a role. Otherwise all movies would be like documentaries. :)

[–] Chrysanthepop 17 years ago

i agree anwarji. i got the dvd from eros. tried to get the dvd of film star but can't find it anywhere :(

[–] itsmejyo 15 years ago

Yep, Anwar's got it right. I too kept expecting the Saudi scenes to be explained, as to who killed whom. But with Zeenat's arrival at Meera's Haveli, and their meeting, the resolution murder seemed trivial. (not the murder, just it's reswolution in this context.)