Jan 30, 2006 03:47 PM
2166 Views
(Updated Jan 31, 2006 11:54 PM)
I have issues with RANG DE BASANTI and its writers and Director! And serious ones at that! And I would like to tell them at some point what they are but will first tell you...
1) If you are using respected freedom fighters of India as the BASE of your story, should you not then explain to the audience of any nationality, culture or religion as to who they are and what they stood for? In fact, why go so far, take 10 ordinary Mumbaikars and ask them if they know who even Durga bhabhi was and why she cold bloodedly said: “maar dalo”. It was not just for effect I’m sure!
2) Sue (Alice Patten), the British girl whose character no doubt was of paramount importance to RANG DE BASANTI, was not shown at any time to be employing the help of a camera crew or production company in order to make her so called “documentary” (I have a big issue with the word documentary, that I’ll get to in my next point), but instead we see her using a camcorder which in my opinion must be a magical camcorder given to her by Harry Potter as a gift as she got great results out of it. Sue’s imaginary vision of the 3 freedom fighters in the beginning of the film was a good and novel start to the story as well as when she sees DJ (Aamir Khan) on the bike as Azaad. But then what? It was a blur and a mess! Whenever the tone of the film went into sepia (black & white), was it Sue’s imagination or was it what she had recorded on her magical camcorder? Please explain this to me Mr. Mehra either now in writing or put subtitles or a voice over in the film, as it is very confusing!
3) Please define “documentary” to me. Or let me do it.
Using film, photographs, and sound recordings of real events to provide a factual report (Oxford dictionary).
Presenting or recording factual information without fictionalizing but in an artistic fashion (world book dictionary)
Presenting facts objectively without editorializing or inserting fictional matter, as in a book or film (dictionary.com)
A work, such as a film or television program, presenting political, social, or historical subject matter in a factual and informative manner and often consisting of actual news films or interviews accompanied by narration (dictionary.com)
If we go by the above definitions, then Sue is NOT making a documentary but a fictional film as she is acquiring amateurs to act the roles of the freedom fighters. But since documentary is what it is called, then I will indulge in it, and overlook this error, as there are more serious issues to discuss.
4) Why would a hard core Hindu like Laxman Pande (played by a veteran like Atul Kulkarni) who believes in the sanctity of history, culture and religion want to act in a documentary? That also with a bunch of no gooders and a Muslim at that! His first scene makes us, the audience; believe that he could be a BJP/Shivsena follower who wants to preserve Hinduism (we all know how emotional they are about their cause!). Were his beliefs so shallow that after having a fight with DJ (someone he despises), and Sue (someone he has no “leena ya deena” with) bursting into tears, he decided still to be a part of the documentary where he is no doubt going to have to have dialogues with a Muslim. Wow! Please get more Sue’s to come to India so we can have religious unity.
5) I think it is great that our Defense Minister can take a walk with one bodyguard at 8am on a footpath. How down to earth that is. And how sad that it was so easily possible to assassinate him. Silly man, didn’t he know that a person like Narayan Rane is completely surrounded by his bodyguards before he exits his house? In comparison to Rane, a Defense Minister should be having at least double his security?? I would also like to add that based on what we saw in RANG DE BASANTI, it seems that we are unduly placing a lot of blame on terrorists. DJ and his friends got away scott free after assassinating the Defense Minister and the blame was put on terrorists. Seems like India’s police and intelligence, have no intelligence! Great way of showing the youth how to get away with murder!
6) Talking about the police, how realistic is it that a Mother whose son has died in a MiG crash, and who’s sitting at the India gate with a candle in his memory would be subjected to “lathi” charge? Is that what happens in India? Please give me one example. If you can’t then why is an Indian showing India in a bad light and that also internationally? Doesn't he think enough damage has been done already by other filmmakers who have done the same? Why doesn’t he show factual issues in India that require solutions and give a solution instead? Has he watched Swades? If not, then he should do. And learn! Even a film like Shikhar has a better message to give than RANG DE BASANTI!
Conclusion…
Throughout the movie I am waiting for something significant to happen which will make the young generation awaken as the tag line suggests… will the group of friends “wake up” and realize there are more things to life than boozing and partying your life away once they are rehearsing for the ‘documentary’ that Sue is making and they come into contact with the greats like Chandrashekhar Azaad and Bhagat Singh, or will they “wake up” when they see the final copy of the documentary or… what? Since Mr Mehra has referred to the freedom fighters who (some of us know) at their time went through ordeals unimaginable to today’s youth, my curiosity was even greater… so when he has started with something so significant, and he use sthe death of a pilot in a MiG crash as his idea of awakening the youth then I have to say that he has greatly insulted the freedom fighters of India!! Yes, it is really sad with regards to the MiG crashes but does he find that reason enough to promote the killing of a Defense minister? That is his solution? That is his message to the youth? Is he out of his mind? The freedom fighters had no other choice but to do what they did during their time, as the whole system was run by the Brits and no justice could be done, but today the country is run by Indians and it IS a democracy, your voice can be heard via the media, and the courts or even by starting a movement. Today we don’t have to resort to unnecessary killings. As for the film’s climax… what would suffice to say is that Mr. Mehra has shown India as a regressive country where black cat commanders kill unarmed people who are not even holding any hostages and that India is a dictatorship.
Lastly, as for my favourite Mr. Aamir Khan, I forgive him for being part of a film like RANG DE BASANTI, where his character was depicted as a sleazy lust driven Punjabi who wants to lay the foreign Mem at any opportunity that may arise and where his talent as an actor is not shown in any frame from the crying to the funny remarks made in Punjabi. Anyone can do that! And putting him in the second lead has also contributed to the downside of the film in my opinion. It’s only big of Mr. Khan or Mr. Mehra to do that, if your main lead can hold his own… which he couldn’t. Mr. Khan is above that and has been wasted. He should stick to films that give him his due credit.
The only good thing about the movie was they way it was shot.
PS. I now know what RANG DE BASANTI means. But not by watching the film.
