Why “Slumdog Millionaire” didn’t deserve its awards

Like others before it, this was a voyeuristic look at the Third World’s poor and vulnerable. There was no sense of history, no glimpse of peoples’ struggles and really no dignity.
The big screen shuffled its images in a vacuum.
I’ve seen quite a bit of slums, poverty and destitution in my life.
I’ve even seen how an open-air, wood-platform, makeshift toilet seat actually works. I have a feeling none of the moviemakers experienced the thick of it, though it plays a comic part in the film.
But the comedy doesn’t work because it’s grotesque, as is much of the film: filled with violence, horror, lies and distortions.
For instance, the handsome movie superstar would never get off his helicopter and sign an autograph for a feces-smeared poor kid who somehow rubbed past the throngs of the adoring crowd. No way — it’s a lie. And that’s why it’s really horrible.
Yes, it’s OK to show poverty, show disparity. That’s fine, even more than fine. But show it in a real way. Don’t leave its causes unexplored. Don’t raise false hope.
And yes, it’s fine to show a communal riot scene. Of course, Hindu fascists in Mumbai slaughtered Muslim slum dwellers after riots broke out when Hindu nationalists destroyed the Babri mosque in 1992.
But few Western viewers, and few of the Hollywood elite who get to vote for the Oscars, had any clue about the barbarity they were witnessing. Out of nowhere, the protagonist’s mom and neighbors are rounded up and butchered. Riots in India don’t quite happen that way.
The incomprehensibility of the film reaches its apex in the “ Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” game itself. Take one example: An American tourist couple visits the Taj Mahal and to display their generosity, they give the protagonist a $100 bill for a tip, and this helps him to learn which American figure is printed on the money — an answer he needs to keep going in the contest. Talk about preposterous!
I feel sorry for the young performers who poured their hearts out on and off camera, and were not properly compensated for their work.
I feel even sorrier for the young-generation Bollywood patriots who crave to see India honored on the Oscar stage — at any cost.
“Slumdog Millionaire” failed them all.
Partha Banerjee is a New York-based media and immigrant rights activist. He teaches at Empire State College. He can be reached at pmproj [at] progressive [dot] org.
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
This form needs Javascript to display, which your browser doesn't support. Sign up here instead
|
CURRENT ISSUE: JUNE 2012
Cecile Richards
Ruth Conniff | "Millions of women are counting on us for care. And if we're gone, there's no one else there," says the head of Planned Parenthood.
What's at Stake in Wisconsin
Ruth Conniff and Matthew Rothschild | Much more than Scott Walker's future hangs in the balance.
The Mother of Midwifery
Eleanor J. Bader | Ina May Gaskin has delivered more than 1,200 babies and revolutionized the field.
Scott Walker, the Monster.
See more at http://www.zinasaunders.com -- On June 5th, the voters of Wisconsin will decide whether to recall Scott Walker, the monster created by an unholy alliance between the radical right and big business, who has made attacking unions the hallmark of his administration. Cover for The Progressive magazine June 2012: http://www.progressive.org
Come to Progressive Talks and Events
June 4, Madison, WI
Terry Tempest Williams on "The Power of Voice"
Ruth Conniff and Matthew Rothschild on
"What's at Stake in the Recall."
5:30-7:30 pm at the Lakeside St. Coffee House, 402 W. Lakeside St, Madison.
It's a fundraiser for The Progressive. Contributions are tax-deductible.
If you can't make it but would like to contribute anyway, please send your check to The Progressive, 409 E. Main St., Madison, WI 53703.










Comments
Umzukehren Totes Meer sozial liechtensteinisch geld verdienen im internet fortlegen gescannt, ungleich Kontaktsprache mitkommen herunterzunehmen.