Slumdog Millionaire

I've just been to Slumdog Millionaire for the second time, and I am still in love with it. The cinematography, the performances from the children and adults alike, the moments of humour, the tribulations and the humanity of the ending make for a film which is steadily becoming a favourite already.

The film itself, as well as the novel's premise, obviously have flaws, and there are questions of post-colonialism that can make for uncomfortable analysis (if you wish to read a relatively good article on this issue, I would recommend perusing the Guardian's website for the article written by Salman Rushdie about adaptation which raises many a valid point) but in terms of film, it achieves a great deal.

I do find fault with it being pitched as a "feelgood" film; although the residing theme of romance and destiny are obviously feelgood, the aspects of murder, gangster culture, (assumed) rape and violent divides make for difficult viewing, even if juxtaposed against a vivid soundtrack. The plot is also extremely implausible, and the sudden change in language in the middle is not only remarkable, it is resoundly strange. This also goes for the strange assumption that Jamal would be highly literate- although a plausible solution for this problem could be argued, it would have to be assumed to have taken place outside of the viewers' eye. Perhaps this oddity is resolved in the original text. Until, or if, I read the book, I will not be able to confirm either way. Also, on a more trivial level, Dev Patel's accent throughout does tend to waver.

Conflicts of plausibility aside, I find the film is a resounding success, although I may be extremely biased in my love for Indian culture. I know that although I am utterly genuine about this love- and it goes back to a childhood interest in the stories that go along with the religions of Asia, specifically from Hinduism- it can often read as a white westerners interest in the idea of The Other. What I am interested in, however, is not a sense of cultural voyeurism, but one of collaboration. Much has been said about Danny Boyle's declaration that he took on the project because he had never been to India and he thought it would be a good project. He said this, I feel perhaps naïvely, without thinking about the ramifications of colonial history coming to bite him on his arse.

However, when you consider that he used Dev Patel of Skins fame to play Jamal, then used unknowns and Freida Patel from India itself, you can begin to see the idea of collaboration. Boyle could quite easily have used English counterparts, perhaps not so much with the kids but definitely with the adult stars. Even the soundtrack collides Western with Indian, taking a well-known composer in India and giving him a platform on English soil. (The soundtrack to Slumdog Millionaire is one of the best-selling soundtracks of this decade.)

This was a film made in collaboration between Film 4 and a various Indian companies, hardly something flowered from the food of massive, massive conglomerates. Film 4 has contributed a great deal to world and independent cinema, and the fact this film eschews either the world or the British label makes for an interesting clash of ideals.

I'm sure this could be discussed at great levels, and there are arguments for many, many sides. However, isn't it a good thing that debate and discussion and thereotical possibilities hang around this film? Rather than a curse, I believe debate in this context is rather more of a blessing. Ideas and theories of colonialism are back on the discussion table, and this can only raise awareness of the surrounding issues.

All the debate aside, Slumdog is a highly watchable, absorbing film, with great performances, even with their flaws. It is a film we should celebrate and discuss, not pilarise. But don't take it from me; this is a film that begs opinion. The best thing to do? Watch it.

Slumdog Millionaire
Directed by Danny Boyle, 120 minutes, 2008.
Starring Dev Patel, Freida Pinto, and Anil Kapoor.