Slumdog 1,Bollywood 0

The film won eight Oscars and got Kingsley and Rohini Hattangadi,who played Kasturba Gandhi,a BAFTA each. After Gandhi,both actors went as far as they were allowed to by their respective film industries. Kingsley became Sir Ben and acted in films such as Turtle Diary,Bugsy,Schindlers List,Artificial Intelligence and House of Sand and Fog; Hattangadi is best remembered for her flimsy,tufted-hair,lipstick-on-cheeks portrayal of an evil aunt in Chaalbaaz.   

Now,27 years after Attenboroughs magnum opus which plays on our TV sets every national holiday another British filmmaker,armed with another local narrative,a tale of poverty,oppression,aspiration and love,has brought India into the spotlight.  

Slumdog Millionaire,quickly appropriated as our movie,is up for nine academy awards having already won four Golden Globes and India is finding it hard to keep its excitement under check. But is it right for Bollywood and the local media to celebrate it as a coming of age of our 300-titles-a-year cinema? On the contrary,isnt it proof of the inadequacy or our film industry rather than a monument to it?  

Danny Boyle is one of the brightest new directors today. But he doesnt command an aura like Steven Spielberg or Martin Scorsese. A film by him doesnt guarantee critical acclaim and box-office riches. Hes created a much smaller appeal for himself by tackling strangely diverse subjects. From the flesh-eating zombies of 28 Days Later to the star-savers of Sunshine,from drug addiction in Trainspotting to the saintly innocence of Millions,Boyles films make the 52-year-old director seem 20 years younger because his stories are a reflection of modern life. Boyles world is our world,its different facets shown from within,always fresh,never repetitive. For him,the simplicity of our daily grind is both exciting and complicated no need for James Ivorys period dramas,Ron Howards big-budget biopics,or Quentin Tarantinos uber-cool preaching.  

The genius of Boyle is that Slumdog is not a story about India but a genuinely Indian story. Even more so than Mira Nairs Monsoon Wedding or Deepa Mehtas Water both relevant,both provocative,but both somehow telling Indian tales to foreign audiences. The only allowance hes made is using 10 million instead of one crore. With an age-old Indian formula,keeping away from his trademark use of stylized hues,Boyle has left the film true to its Bollywood form.  

Just as Fernando Meirelless City of God wouldve been very regular for Brazilians or Guillermo del Toros Pans Labyrinth for Mexicans because of their long association with mystical realism for us the story of Slumdog is clichéd. And Gandhi was,too,by being the most-told Indian story of our times. But all four films touched a chord with larger,world audiences,and the stark difference is that while Meirelles is Brazilian and del Toro Mexican,the two mainstream films from India to make an impact in the last 30 years have both been made by foreign directors.  

It is fine for our leading ladies to prance at Cannes,for our producers to party at Sundance,for our actors to present awards in Beverly Hills,but what,really,is their contribution to their art form at a time when Indians are hailed each week for scaling new heights across sectors and regions? Must our cinema only be a medium of entertainment,or should it also be a reflection of our times,thoughts and ideas? After making movies for 75 years,should it really take a Slumdog to teach us how to tell our story,using our clichés,our music,with railway-platform dances perfected by us?  

So,in a nutshell,is the success of Slumdog really our victory as a vibrant film-watching,prolific film-making,country? Or is it our defeat? 

kunal.pradhanexpressindia.com