This time I didn't wait so long since my last Bollywood viewing. It's also unusual for me to have seen two movies in a row that appear on IMDb's top 250, partly because I've seen most of them. I hadn't exactly planned that, but when something's been on my radar for a while, I start to give it priority.
Sue, a young Englishwoman, goes to India in order to make an indie film about five real historical young men who gave their lives for India's independence movement. Unable to find actors the conventional way, she hangs with her friend Sonia's rather irresponsible college buddies and decides they'd be great for the roles. Unfortunately, they have trouble relating to revolutionaries when they have almost no love for their backwater "free" country and can't see themselves dying for any cause — until a tragedy causes them to feel that they could use a new revolution.
It's a little tricky to identify a protagonist. Sue offers the most narration and is in the spotlight near the start and end, but the story kinda runs away from her. The actress receives sixth billing, tho that may have more to do with her not being well known in India (in contrast to Aamir Khan, who played 23-year-old "DJ" at 41 because he had that much star power). Sue does offer some reason for interest, being the granddaughter of a man who oversaw the jailing, torture, and hanging of those freedom fighters but expressed tremendous admiration for their indomitable spirits in his diary. When her studio employer declines to adapt the story for not being of the Gandhi persuasion, she goes it alone. (I would not recommend that a young woman travel to urban India unaccompanied, but no harm comes to her.) Everyone is impressed at her mastery of Hindi, and several guys develop crushes on her. Alas, she feels partly responsible for stirring unrest among them and doubts the wisdom of her plan.
OK, the first such unrest does not pertain to rebellion per se. Conservative Laxman is hostile to western influence on Indian culture, which makes him something of a natural pick for playing a devout patriot, but he's been no friend to the others, especially the Muslim, Aslam. (For full disclosure, the other two are Karan and Sukhi.) This conflict appears to dissolve remarkably quickly in their common goals of honoring revolutionaries and, y'know, not upsetting Sue. Nevertheless, it's enough to make their later camaraderie heartwarming.
IMDb lists comedy among the genres; Wikipedia does not. The bits of humor are almost entirely restricted to the first half, taking the form of guys goofing around. Once the time for chicanery is over, there is no chance of a fully — or even, I'd say, primarily — happy ending. It's more Dil Se.. than Dil Chahta Hai.
RDB is not rated. My best guess for a U.S. rating is R, primarily for violence in the second half. This consists of beatings and fatal shootings in both the present and sepia-toned flashbacks.
Well, perhaps I should say "saffron-toned." I understand that that color symbolizes sacrifice and is hinted at in the title, which has multiple translations, the reportedly most accurate being "Paint me the color of spring." (The subtitles just say "Bring out your colors" during the title song, but the subbing herein isn't stellar.)
The Indian Defence Ministry, to my complete lack of surprise, was reluctant to let this movie see the light of day. It vilifies a fictitious minister, based on a scandal implied by true events, and more or less glorifies the prospect of assassinating him. There is even a sense that one could justify patricide when the dad plays a knowing part in a corrupt government. (The Animal Welfare Board objected for another reason, but that scene is gone from the final cut.) I realize that it's hard to secure justice in the face of crooks who control law enforcement, but they'd have to be more definitively bad still before I could get behind that last resort.
I'm relieved to have found no reports of RDB inspiring real acts of violence from any side for any cause. It did lead to an upsurge in peaceful activism. I'm not sure whether things have gotten better in India since, but it's nice to know.
I'm a little worried that the same wouldn't happen in the U.S. if theaters had a wide release of the movie in the present. Our government is still better than the one on screen, but I don't trust everyone to make that judgment. For that reason, I hesitate to recommend a viewing.
If you trust yourself not to be swayed to drastic action, you might want to check it out. It makes for a pretty powerful, albeit uneven, 157 minutes.
No comments:
Post a Comment