This is not just a film review, but a commentary on the politics of this film. I was reluctant on sharing my views on this film, as it has been accepted by so many. But now I feel that I should, because I feel strongly against this film and I should broadcast my own views on why I feel so strongly about it. I expect a ton of brickbats(not recommended) so with great courage do I tell:
Once in a while film comes, that is not accomplished in any way and lackluster in execution, but simply based on it's political messages can hitch a ride to success and fame. We Indians, are quite a cynical people and seem to enjoy those films that show us in a bad light, more so our government; Anniyan and Hindustani spring to mind.
We associate the more darker films, that concentrate on issues of poverty, crime and corruption to be more intellectual cinema, when they may not be well-made films at all.
I accept that there is a lot of corruption in India and a lot of issues that need to be resolved. But, that shouldn't turn us into cynics, it should only install within us the determination to improve on these issues. Before, we can do that, we need to start taking responsibility and cease blaming others for our deficiencies
The easiest thing to do is blame the government; almost all of us do it and indeed Rakyesh Mehra, with nationalistic zeal, has done the same in Rang De Basanti. But the reality is not so simplified; we contribute as much to the problems in India; we are as complicit and accountable as the government officials.
Rakyesh Mehra, however, tries to displace all of the blame onto the government. He portrays the government as some brutally oppressive and rotten regime and draws parallels between government officials and the British Indian government. Perhaps he forgets, he is in India where he has the freedom to make a film like Rang De Basanti and get it shown. If he was anywhere else, it wouldn't have been so easy.
Do you think the US would have given the same freedom to Hollywood filmmakers to openly demonize their government? The political freedom Indians enjoy in expressing their opinions and views is unparalleled by the world and the fact that we get to see films like RDB is testimony of that.
The kind of events depicted in Rang De Bansanti, have already taken place in the US with much more severity. The Los Angeles riots of 1991, The WACO incident, the 1999 Seattle riots, the 2001 Miami riots where people have been brutally attacked by the state(government) Yet, nobody has turned it into a film and the only coverage it has got in the media are from independent documentary filmmakers who are clumped into the category of anarchists, right-wingers and conspiracy nuts that any self-respecting American does not pay heed too.
I never recall anything of the sort happening in India to that severity, yet Rakyesh Mehra seems to imagine it has. The situation of politics in India can be bad, but it's not so bad that the government would become like the Taliban. Nor is to so bad, that Indians feel oppressed in their own country.
How could RDB be reflecting India, if it is not really about India?
Rakyesh Mehra has essentially made a propoganda film, that depicts the situation in the country in black and white terms and very lopsidedly; The Indian government are bad and oppressive and the apathetic youth are in deep slumber, victims of the oppression, disenchanted and demoralized and he tries to correlate their situation to the situation of pre-independence India and the struggle of Bhagat Singh and his copatriots.
He then goes onto justify how it is a necessary evil for the GOOD youth to assassinate the BAD Indian defence minister(While he's at it he also has a son murder his father for corruption) because that is what Bhagat Singh and his group did.
We all know this is not British India today, that Indians can freely travel around the country and not encounter signs such as ''Indians and Dogs not allowed'' and we can relate to the kind of desperation and hopelessness of Bhagat Singh and other youth at the time were feeling.
But this fallacious attempt to relate this situation to Modern India, where Indians enjoy many civil, intellectual and political freedoms doesn't fly. You cannot justify terrorism as freedom fighting when you already have freedom.
He illuminates many legitimate problems in the first half of the movie, which would have necessitated complex and indepth solutions, but he takes the easy way out in the second half, probably due to his inabilities to write and advocates violence as a means to getting people to listen, something that is characteristic of terrorism.
He does not even begin to explore other non-violent avenues such as public awareness through media, humans rights and civil rights campaigns or going international. He jumps straight to the gun.
And in the end it leads to nothing but a vicious cycle of violence and seeds the thought of revolution. Are we going to have a sequel where many youth groups have sprung up against the government and are assassinating officials, leading to a bloody revolution?
Or is there going to be a flood of youth in this country going to join the police forces, the army or politics as if that will make the country better, right? The filmmaker Shankar who also makes these fantasy films about challenging corruption, at least has it worked out that the only way India is going to improve is when India citizens better themselves.
Rang De Basanti is being shown all over the world and it's already a big success, but it's disconcerting to me that so many people are going to watch this film and think it is representative of India. Rang De Bansanti may have done more to spoil India's image in the world, than all other Bollywood films have done to improve it. India looks no different to Iran and the Taliban in this film, and we know that isn't true.
Rakyesh Mehra seems to live in a make-believe India, that is ruled by evil tyrants and where the people are in deep slumber and in need of emancipation through freedom fighting. The person who truly needs to wake up is Rakyesh Mehra himself.
This film is not about patriotism but misplaced patriotism. A grande delusion of Rakyesh Mehra that really needs to go back in time and live in British India to understand how many freedoms he enjoys today.
A few very brief comments about the film itself:
The film is an incoherent amalgamation of DCH and RKS's Legend Of Bhagat Singh and freely borrows from them, particularly the latter from where it even copies frames.
It is very disjointly put together, the sore points being the sepia-tones Bhagat Singh reenactments and the songs, all of which are the groups spending time with each other and pissing around, slackening the pace. The film loses the plot occasionally with all the time-wasting and becomes repetitive.
The characters start out interesting, but soon flatten out and become typecasted. Atul Kulkarni and Kunal Kapoor and their Hindu and Muslim enmity is a predictable cliche; Sharman Joshi is turned into the group clown; Sue is the white woman who speaks Hindi and is making a documentary; Siddarth is the disenchanted Indian who wants nothing more than to the leave for greener pastures; Aamir Khan is the 40 year old college student that looks old enough to be their uncle.
The characters are unconvincing and cliches, the screenplay overlong and repetitive, the songs pointless and the director misguided by his delusions. That said, there are a lot of good moments in this film, but they do not come together to make a good film. As a film it is average, but the politics of this film turn this average film into a bad propoganda film.
