Slumdog - Literary versus Celluloid

I read Vikas Swaroop's 'Q&A' couple of years ago. I must thank my dear friend Alok Jha - (who is also from the same corps as the now-far-more-famous-author of the story that Danny Boyle has twisted enough to take Indian celluloid to the Oscars) - for introducing me to the book. A book which I may have never picked up at all while rummaging through the shelves at Timbuktoo - the only English Bookshop here, frequented so often by our anglo-phone friends especially Alok on his then frequent visits from Senegal).

I recently saw 'Slumdog Millionaire'. We've heard so much about the film and I was all set to be disappointed... a disappointment that naturally occurs over over-hyped offerings. What would this offering by Danny Boyle do?

I had enjoyed the book. The book was one, among others, that gave me inspiration - that it was possible for 'anyone to write' (Gousteau from 'Ratatouille' - made similar statements about people who could weave similar magic with culinary skills too. "Anyone Can Cook" - was the theme of that Celluloid drama). Can Anyone Write? Ofcourse, anyone can write, but getting people to read what they write is the challenge.

Vikas, Shah (The Caliphs House - A year in Casablanca) and Chetan Bhagat have done that to me and to a million other readers. Thus, here I too am, attempting to make people read what I write.

Vikas' book versus Boyles celluloid version - There is a mismatch. Authors have the luxury to be able to explain thoughts and imagination. Their celluloid-medium counterparts, however have to get the character to act and express imagination. Thus books seem to always be better than their films. I was surprised to find articles ridiculing Swaroop and his novel while at the same time Boyle was receiving accolades at making a superhit of a movie from a non-descript novel. THis is where I beg to differ.

I was disappointed by Slumdog. After having rewatched 'SlumDog' with an analytical mind - I am more or less convinced that Vikas' storyline makes sense. To a critical Indian, Boyles story has loopholes. I refer not to his genuine depiction of Dharavi life that has tickled the patriotism of many Indians ashamed of this indecent exposure of a real situation. I refer to loopholes that I list below in this 'budget' film that has made 'Crore-pathis' of most of the team within teh 'Slumdog Millionaire'. (I am also convinced that his budget film was budget because he probably didnt have to re-create sets and just let his 'child' artistes play around while he filmed them.)

Vikas cleverly used a plagiarised version of Kaun Banega C.. thus a cheap studio copy of a very successful show - explaining thus the cheap character exhibited by Anil Kapoor. The Studio running at a loss and unable to pay the winnings, explains the show hosts desperation to stump the candidate. Boyles KBC does not define it as a cheap version - only that the host is cheap. Unimaginable to an Indian audience in my opinion - especially after having had AB and SRK do the original shows.

Ram Mohammed Thomas wins the game show and then is questioned and tortured before he is rescued by the reporter following a story. Jamal is tortured before the end of the show and then is taken back for the final question. Tough to swallow that he would keep quiet.

Boyle has yet woven the tale with exceptional performances from the kids - almost as though they weren't acting - but the Inspector Irfan couldve been droning his Hutch pre-paid adverts and Constable Sreenivas isnt anywhere near a Dharavi Sreenivas. Anil Kapoor couldve been playing Mr India and is the Weakest Link. The technical aspects of the film are I guess what make the presentation beautifully brilliant. Rahmans' Music is superb - exhibiting the immense talent in this genius. I must admit that he deserves nominations for many more scores of his - but those didnt have the backing of Danny Boyle. ( Funnily, at the mention of Danny, I can hear Jim Reeves singing Oh Danny Boy in my memory - 'I love you so' he croons)

It's a pity that books dont have music.