How wonderful to see heroine-oriented emancipation sagas becoming big hits… provided the emancipation is achieved in glamorous foreign lands.
Kangana Ranaut’s film Queen deserves to be celebrated for many reasons. For one, it is “a Kangana Ranaut film.” She is in every frame, a heroine with no need for a hero opposite her. Two, the film has turned into one of the unlikeliest of hits, grossing more in its second week than its first. (In these multiplex times, collections typically fall steeply in the second week.) Three, the film’s success is validation that audiences are open to a range of women-centric films, from the heavy-duty Vidya Balan dramas like Kahaani to these small, breezy dramedies. These were the lessons we took away from the success of English Vinglish a few years ago, though that film came with a stronger USP, the return to the big screen of one of Hindi cinema’s biggest heroines.
Queen and English Vinglish are both well-crafted films, and really hard to dislike – but they rely on a rather troubling trope to illuminate their heroines’ emancipation. In English Vinglish, Shashi, a housewife who doesn’t speak fluent English (and who is, therefore, frequently mocked), goes to the US and enrols in an English class to learn the language. In Queen, Rani, a woman who is dumped by her fiancé on the eve of the wedding, takes off to Paris and Amsterdam and discovers that she doesn’t need a man to lead a life. Both Shashi and Rani are unsophisticated, in the sense that they wouldn’t fit into a Farhan Akhtar movie – and this makes their transformations all the more remarkable. And in a culture where cinema is essentially an offering at the altar of the hero, who can deny these heroines their moments in the sun?
But did Shashi have to go to the US? Did Rani have to go to Paris and Amsterdam? Doesn’t India offer its women enough experiences and opportunities for emancipation? And wouldn’t audiences flock to those movies?
Two things here. It is the filmmaker’s prerogative to tell the kind of story he or she wants to tell, and in telling this story – in the case of these films, the small-town-girl-goes-abroad-and-finds-herself story – the more extreme the culture shock, the more the flailing one has to do, the more well-earned the epiphany. (In films as in life, the greater the adversity, the more feel-good the triumph.) So it isn’t surprising that Queen and English Vinglish packed their heroines off to distant corners of the earth. When Shashi cannot manage a conversation in English with her daughter’s teacher in Mumbai, how will she manage in New York? When Rani has led such a sheltered life in her overprotective and middle-class Delhi environs, however will she fend for herself in Europe? These are rock-solid dramatic constructions. The fear of drowning is far greater in the deep end of the pool.
My question is simply this: Don’t these deep ends exist in India? Do new experiences happen only in new countries? Take Highway, where a New Delhi princess finds herself when she’s kidnapped by a thug and given the two-cent tour of the non-air-conditioned India. Or take One By Two, the Abhay Deol flop released earlier this year. The heroine, the Mumbai-based Samara, leads a life every bit as Bohemian as Rani’s Parisian friend. Samara isn’t shy when it comes to sex. (Her friend-with-benefits wants her to move to… Amsterdam! Is the country’s tourism department actively wooing Bollywood?) She deals with an alcoholic mother and a distant father. In other words, had Rani made it to Samara’s tony Mumbai suburb and moved around with people like Samara, she’s as likely to have had those life-changing epiphanies. She’d still have seen people she’d never seen earlier. She’d still have done things she’d never done earlier.
The point isn’t to fault Queen, which achieves its modest aims with a good deal of grace. The point, rather, is to understand why films like Queen and English Vinglish succeed the way they do, when other emancipative you-go-girl sagas like Highway fall behind. Forget the qualitative factors – acting, filmmaking, and so forth. The list of films that scored on these aspects and yet failed at the box office extends to the moon. It’s the feel-good fantasy, essentially, that people are buying into. You walk away from Queen and English Vinglish on a high. You walk away from Highway wanting to slit your wrists. Besides, Homely Indian Woman Conquers the World has a better ring (and ka-ching) to it than Rich Little Delhi Princess Slums It Out in Small-town India.
That’s why the character of Shashi resonated so much with moviegoers. Shashi is a great cook, and she runs a small catering business that keeps its clients coming back for more – and yet, it’s her mastering of English, in glamorous New York (as opposed to one of the numerous learn-English institutions inside India), that’s shown to be the real achievement. Her big speech in the end is delivered in English. This is ludicrous in a film that says your family should accept you as you are. But had that speech been delivered in chaste and fluent Hindi, which your maid servant can manage, the fairy-tale spell would have been broken. Isn’t it nicer when the First World falls at your feet?
An edited version of this piece can be found here. Copyright ©2014 The Hindu. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Baradwaj Rangan 
brangan
March 27, 2014
A reader sent this to me on FB, a nice story that takes the argument here a step further and interviews “real-life Ranis”.
http://www.livemint.com/Leisure/ryZrydbHWRgp9dFD2BhA1J/The-Capitals-real-queens.html
ramitbajaj: Sorry, don’t know what happened there. Fixed it, thanks.
LikeLike
desidaaru12
March 27, 2014
“In other words, had Rani made it to Samara’s tony Mumbai suburb and moved around with people like Samara, she’s as likely to have had those life-changing epiphanies. She’d still have seen people she’d never seen earlier. She’d still have done things she’d never done earlier.”
Yeah, no.
What would have happened is that they would have thought her too small town to hang out with. And made fun of her English. She would have run into a succession of male and female ‘Vijays’. Setting the movie abroad was a neat way to side-step all the class bias that would inevitably seep into Rani’s interactions with fellow Indians who live like Westerners.
When the characters of Shashi and Rani leave India, what they are really escaping is the condescension/ infantilising / expectations that they are constantly subjected to. I think the audience response has been to this mostly. In the theatre I watched it at, the movie seemed to be a catharsis for some.
Same reason a Highway (with the Rich Girl trope) needed to be in rural India.
Objective is to plonk the characters in a setting where they don’t ‘belong’ and hence escape social expectations that they would otherwise be heaped upon them. Veera cannot get distance from her family in Europe, na?
From a script perspective, it would be hard to sell the idea that *any* family would ‘allow’ their daughter to travel in India absolutely alone. I don’t have to spell out why.
Veera didn’t have that problem, since she got kidnapped. She had a ‘guardian’ of sorts, plus a truck at her disposal.
LikeLike
soniakrishna
March 27, 2014
I think a crucial point you missed out mentioning is that while in Highway a woman still needed a ´man´ to liberate her and show her what real love feels like, the wife in English Vinglish and the jilted bride-to-be in Queen didn´t need one. In spite of the absence of any crucial male character, which I think most men in India would miss as identifiers to themselves, these movies did amazingly well.
Sure enough, English Vinglish and Queen could have been narrated differently but I believe it may not have been this refreshingly simple and focused (on the idea of self-realization and liberation of a woman) had the context been India. Considering India as a complex society, the central story of Rani or Shashi might have gotten lost in the myriad of issues that actually confront an individual, whether a man or a woman, in our country. For example, I know a friend whose parents thought it´s much safer for their daughter to study in the UK than in Delhi!
Your statement, ¨Besides, Homely Indian Woman Conquers the World has a better ring (and ka-ching) to it than Rich Little Delhi Princess Slums It Out in Small-town India,¨ is misplaced. Highway and Queen, although similar in one respect — the heroine emerges a free-spirited, independent woman, are entirely different films. Veera´s main woe was that she was the victim of a detached, cold household — neglected and never understood by her own parents and abused by her own uncle, who she was forced to entertain at her house even after having told her mother about ´the abuse´. The life she was made to lead was a facade to protect the idea of ´family´ and the reputation of all concerned. Veera eventually found her voice to fight this facade and family-enforced oppression through, among other things, the love, a sense of belonging and trust she received from one man Mahabir. Another important theme in this film was the class/caste difference.
Rani in Queen, on the other hand, had a very supportive and understanding family. But this obedient young girl, like most young girls brought up in a normal middle-class household (or like most of our mothers and loving elder sisters), was unaware of her own worth and abilities. Queen sells an idea that given a different situation and exposure, those who are taunted as ´behenjis´ or conservative/naive in outlook can be as independent, forward-thinking, attractive as any modern liberated girl today (in her own way).
LikeLike
Katyayani
March 27, 2014
BR, your article has generated a profound question. The right answer to it can only be a philosophical one. Paris, New York: Can any place in India be matched with them for the grandeur and glamor they have got to offer? Even great sages like Vishwamitra could not resist the beauty of mohini’s (Take the literal meaning of this word ‘mohini’). This also includes the hitech-mohini’s in the form of places such as Silicon Valley.
If you think you can resist that, then you are nothing less than a “brahma rishi”.
LikeLike
Rahini David
March 27, 2014
I had the very same questions reading your Queen Review. In fact I obssessed over it but didn’t want to post the thought in that review’s comment’s section as the comments were going quite well. So thank you for writing this.
I had a funny feeling that these movie would not have worked that well inside an Indian setting at all. If Shashi had gone to Allapi and enrolled in a English Course there and a Malayali cook had tried to romance her, then the story would have had a very different tone there. The same would have been so if Rani honeymooned herself in Kodaikanal. If she had kissed a random guy in Kodaikanal, people would not be saying how empowering the story is.
LikeLike
Gradwolf
March 27, 2014
“I think a crucial point you missed out mentioning is that while in Highway a woman still needed a ´man´ to liberate her and show her what real love feels like, the wife in English Vinglish and the jilted bride-to-be in Queen didn´t need one. In spite of the absence of any crucial male character, which I think most men in India would miss as identifiers to themselves, these movies did amazingly well.”
Oh dear. Usually I stay away from this criticism colored by ideologies but got to make exceptions once in a while. I think, at least, from my reading of the film this was hardly the case. Mahabir’s character doesn’t come across as any savior material. He is a stranger. Veera doesn’t open up to a man. She opens up to a stranger. And as the story developed, I’d say Mahabir is the one liberated compared to Veera. While there is an argument to be made that Highway and Queen are indeed different films and BR’s oversimplified pigeonholing maybe wrong, the above definitely is not it.
LikeLike
abvblogger
March 27, 2014
@desidaaru12 Super like that comment. Yes, there are ‘western’ conclaves in India which are not exemplars of open-minded free living, where every individual is free to craft his or her own destiny, but rather the same old Indian obedience & conformity harnessed to the yoke of Western norms of cool & rich. It’s kind of like high school, except it’s more weird because 20-somethings are behaving just as cliquishly as teenagers. There are exceptions to this generalization, of course, but your Rani would have be lucky enough to bump into the sort of group that would accept her, not exclude her and still constitute the deep end that BR refers to.
LikeLike
Aran
March 27, 2014
Wow. A lot to say about this.
1. That was the best and most subtle Farhan Akhtar slam-down I’ve seen ever. Elicited a chuckle. Honestly, well done. 😀
2. Highway and Queen are indeed different films because their protagonists are so far apart. Rani calls for a sense of identification from the Indian everywoman whereas Alia in Highway is probably a girl most Indian women would never even meet. Her issues, while legitimate, are sadly what might be called first world problems in my opinion. This is not to disparage the issues of child abuse or alienation in one’s household, but really, a lot of women from all classes face these issues, but deal with them in much more subtle, non life-changing ways than Alia does in Highway. As well made as Highway was, there was something quirky about it in a ‘Farhan Akhtar’ kind of way in that it was about the problems of someone who wasn’t “like me.” Take an upper class protagonist and plonk her into rural India and dress her in adorably non-fitting clothes and she finds herself is a bit of a stretch.
3. Finally – the main idea of your piece, about women needing to go abroad in order to be emancipated. A couple of people have pointed out earlier that it is needed – desidaaru’s idea about the class issues + expectations and soniakrishna’s opinions about complex societal issues being valid points, imo. Coming from an semi-traditional Indian girl living in a foreign country for higher studies, I really feel that these epiphanies could not have been achieved in India. In some small way, perhaps, sure. But the kind of freedom that a girl would have in a different country, the kind of eye-opening expansion of worldviews… I don’t think that can happen in India, especially not in the social setting where Sridevi and Kangana are. Desidaaru’s pointing out of infantalising and expectations is a real issue. Whatever you do outside of a house, we live in the kind of societal structure where you cannot have a real sense of independence or independent achievement inside the house.
LikeLike
chhotesaab
March 27, 2014
I haven’t seen ‘Highway’ or ‘Queen’, and saw ‘English Vinglish’ on TV, so my opinion is from what I have read or seen about the movies in reviews, through media ….
I feel, that ‘feel good’ movies (like Queen and EV), in general do better than movies which are heavy and not that ‘feel good’ (which is what Highway seemed like). If you just compare Imtiaz Ali’s movies, Socha Na Tha, Jab We Met and Love Aaj Kal did better than Rockstar and Highway.
LikeLike
whatsthat
March 27, 2014
In fact, going to an extreme experience typically tends to heighten preferences for the status quo – so all this US/Europe tripping would make these “homely” women even more so. This is why I couldn’t really enjoy either – although Queen was far better than the botox queen’s comeback.
I thought Udaan explored this notion the best – the demons and heroes are all in our lives, and simply altering environmental conditions is unlikely to “convert” anyone.
LikeLike
Rahul
March 27, 2014
Gradwold, SoniaKrishna, you might like this
trishagupta.blogspot.ca/2014/02/why-you-may-not-want-to-join-imtiaz-ali.html
LikeLike
Rahul
March 27, 2014
I think the choice of foreign locales for EV and Q may have to do with the imagining of these movies as fairytales , as in, she flew away to a distant land and found herself. Something of that sort. There is an element of whimsy involved. Hard to pull that off in an Indian setting. I don’t mean fantasy as identical to feel good, just a space where “anything can happen”.
LikeLike
Madan
March 27, 2014
In other words, had Rani made it to Samara’s tony Mumbai suburb and moved around with people like Samara, she’s as likely to have had those life-changing epiphanies.
– But that’s easier said than done. I have not watched One by Two but I am assuming Samara is fairly yuppie class (else meeting her is hardly going to offer Rani an alternative experience). Class distinctions would come into the picture here and make it harder for Rani to gain acceptance from those sections of Mumbai’s citizens who are outwardly more urbane (while not necessarily always liberal, a difference which the film captures through Vijay). Whereas the three roommates from Amsterdam or the waitress in Paris are not so far removed from her in terms of class but liberal in outlook. This is a very basic difference between Europe and India which we need to acknowledge. It is possible for a person living in Europe to cherish liberal values while not being a part of the elite which is much harder in India. Not that there aren’t, but it would then make the film a much more individual-to-individual affair and remove the dramatic contours that make it an entertaining affair.
LikeLike
abvblogger
March 27, 2014
A minor quibble – doesn’t homely mean ugly, especially when used as an adjective for women? Or has Indian english legitimized its usage as simple / homebound?
LikeLike
desidaaru12
March 27, 2014
@Madan, this is what I was trying to say. She lives in Delhi, after all,home to the Paharganj of Dev-D and the South-Ex of Aisha. Only difference is,someone like her wouldn’t be welcome there.The foreign location becomes a device to surround her with the ‘right’ kind of people and experiences.
Also, I really appreciated the fact that much of the movie is shot at night. There is something exhilarating about feeling like the town is yours for the taking.( Udaan, Rang De Basanti, any movie with enough ‘bros’). These drunken-roadside-revelry scenes with women wouldn’t have seemed credible in a Indian city. It would border on the gimmicky.
LikeLike
Rahini David
March 27, 2014
Rahul: that fairy tale setting is a good point. The west seems comfortable with fairy lands whereas in India we are not always comfortable with it. So Amsterdam or Manhattan or Paris fill the part fairy lands should.
Abvblogger: The has been legitimized by frequent usage in Matrimonials where homely is the most exhalted adjective for an Indian bride. Even in the west it probably started as a euphemism for ugly and then became a synonym as euphemisms often do.
LikeLike
soniakrishna
March 27, 2014
@Gradwolf
“I think a crucial point you missed out mentioning is that while in Highway a woman still needed a ´man´ to liberate her and show her what real love feels like, the wife in English Vinglish and the jilted bride-to-be in Queen didn´t need one. In spite of the absence of any crucial male character, which I think most men in India would miss as identifiers to themselves, these movies did amazingly well.
— Oh dear. Usually I stay away from this criticism colored by ideologies but got to make exceptions once in a while. I think, at least, from my reading of the film this was hardly the case. Mahabir’s character doesn’t come across as any savior material. He is a stranger. Veera doesn’t open up to a man. She opens up to a stranger. And as the story developed, I’d say Mahabir is the one liberated compared to Veera. While there is an argument to be made that Highway and Queen are indeed different films and BR’s oversimplified pigeonholing maybe wrong, the above definitely is not it.¨
Ah, there is so much that can be said, but here is an immediate reply.
When I said ´liberate´ her, I meant to help her find herself, which in this case was never the motive of Mahabir or his gang. Of course, ´Mahabir’s character doesn’t come across as any savior material´, but he definitely opened up new horizons and set free this young girl who couldn´t find an outlet to escape her suffocating, oppressive upper class family life. This, beginning with a situational kidnapping. Also, Mahabir gained Veera´s trust when he slammed his own gang member for feeling her up, by simply listening to her, by not pushing her away when she hugged him afterwards; all of which she didn´t get from her mother or father when her uncle abused her. So, who is then a stranger? In this understanding, I don´t agree with you that Mahabir was a ´stranger´ Veera opened up to.
Highway is definitely not a story about Veera alone, it is also a story about Mahabir. This is exactly my point. English Vinglish and Queen, on the other, had only female leads — Shashi and Rani. And no man, except in the negative, played a part in Rani and Shashi finding themselves. I personally feel this point in itself is extremely noteworthy, considering these are extremely successful Bollywood films.
LikeLike
soniakrishna
March 28, 2014
@Rahul – Your link was helpful. This particular para below from the link (http://trishagupta.blogspot.ca/2014/02/why-you-may-not-want-to-join-imtiaz-ali.html) further explains my point that Gradwolf highlighted earlier.
Later, Mahabir plays protector again, by driving away his creepy gangmate Goru (Saharsh Kumar Shukla, absolutely stellar as the caressing harasser). Eventually, Ali puts the words in his heroine’s mouth. She wants to stay on with Mahabir, Veera says, because with him she feels as she has never felt before – that she can do anything at all, and he will take care of things (“tum sambhaal loge”). The feeling is a powerful one; it tugs at the heartstrings. But it cannot enthuse me that the deepest emotion Ali attributes to his otherwise brave heroine is a desire for protection (and it feels even more manipulative that her buried hatred for the world she grew up in involves a buried memory of child sexual abuse). Yet if it is true that Ali’s heroines almost always need a man to find their freedom, it is equally true that his heroes only come into their own by falling in love – with a woman.
LikeLike
soniakrishna
March 28, 2014
This might throw some light on why Highway, in spite of being a good movie, couldn´t do as well as Queen. I don´t endorse BR´s view of the glamorous foreign location as the winning point for Queen over Highway.
Why a few of those who I spoke to and who watched Queen didn´t watch Highway:
1. ¨Doesn´t the movie have a sad ending?¨
2. ¨We heard that the movie (Highway) doesn´t have all its songs in it.¨ (This might sound ridiculous, but it was a reason given by a few people.)
3. Scepticism about a film with a pure, platonic love affair
4. Highway is ´Bollywoodish´, Queen is subtle and genuine
Not to overlook the reviews and IMDB ratings for Queen (9.1) and Highway (7.9). More importantly, Bollywood biggies such as Aamir Khan, Deepika Padukone, helped publicize Queen.
Personally, I think it´s great that Queen is getting the attention it is. Sadly, Highway is not.
LikeLike
Madan Chopra (@mpmainka)
March 28, 2014
Just a small correction. “When Shashi cannot manage a conversation in English with her daughter’s teacher in Mumbai”… Shashi Godbole lives in ‘Pune’.. and not Mumbai.
LikeLike
Madan
March 28, 2014
Also, I really appreciated the fact that much of the movie is shot at night. There is something exhilarating about feeling like the town is yours for the taking. – Well said and I agree. Finding yourself in the dark of the night has a kind of Jekyll-and-Hyde flavour (in a non perverse sense).
LikeLike
Gradwolf
March 28, 2014
@soniakrishna
Fair enough. My disagreement was only about reading of Highway. I understand Queen/EV and Highway are completely different films and we getting such female centric (and women only) films must be celebrated rather than nitpicking about minute details. Had a discussion on these lines on twitter yest after this article came up.
I don’t think BR was nitpicking though. This is more of a thinking aloud piece on how well can one accomplish the same effect by setting these stories in India as opposed to crossing the seven seas, than a criticism piece. I think it is definitely possible to come up with a story and it will be more challenging (as a writer/director) to sidestep the points raised by desidaaru12. After all, even in a foreign land, you’d need a bit of luck to bump into the kind of good hearted characters Rani bumps into. The same liberty can be taken with a film set in India.
All said and done, yesterday I was schooled by a friend on the nexus of tourism department of various countries, their PR, travel based media and producers. So there is that. Oh well.
LikeLike
Gradwolf
March 28, 2014
@soniakrishna
Wow! No.4 is plain wrong!
LikeLike
brangan
March 28, 2014
All: Some other reactions, from an FB re-post of this piece (I asked their permission to copy-paste these thoughts here):
— I know many many women who wanted to be handcuffed and fully kidnapped by Ranadeep Hooda…just saying…
— loved the film….travel maketh a man this time it is a woman…Both in English Vinglish and in Queen the cinderella at the ball syndrome is high till you return to the hearth and the cinders. Also couched in the so called liberation of middle class behenji women is the frigidity displayed. they are so a sexual . So many good looking , attractive men but the quintessential Indian gharelu bharatiya nari doesn’t look at phirangi men or men per se. The success of these films lie in the return journey……return to neglectful self gratifying husband, return to congested city life. There is no anger , no passion…..only bacchus liberates the Indian woman….
— While I am a B Rangan fan , I’m not sure I buy into the sentiments expressed in this particular article. Rani needed to go far away from her comfort zone…and anyplace in India would have been only extending that zone, not stepping out of it. Also, she’d have been running the dangers a woman alone runs in our country. Can you imagine how that dancing in tipsy fashion in front of the cab driver scene would have played out?
desidaaru12: What would have happened is that they would have thought her too small town to hang out with. And made fun of her English.
I don’t think this is a given. There could be kind souls in South Mumbai. There could be creeps in Amsterdam. I don’t think everyone in South Mumbai would display the “class bias” you talk about.
When the characters of Shashi and Rani leave India, what they are really escaping is the condescension/ infantilising / expectations that they are constantly subjected to.
And you’re saying that when abroad, stereotyping and racism aren’t possibilities? Just as those have been avoided in these films, the “bad traits” of South Mumbai vaasi-s could have been avoided too, by having Rani or Shashi hang out with the right kind of people.
soniakrishna: In retrospect, I wish I hadn’t mentioned “Highway,” because that reference seems to have hijacked the piece. I brought in to contrast the feel-bad versus the feel-good mainly.
Considering India as a complex society
Oh come on. And the First World is a simple society? 🙂
Queen sells an idea that given a different situation and exposure, those who are taunted as ´behenjis´ or conservative/naive in outlook can be as independent, forward-thinking, attractive as any modern liberated girl today (in her own way)
And all I’m wondering out aloud is, Can’t this have happened in India? I think it could have happened in India, the way it did in “Udaan.” Of course, the films would have been less of a fairy tale, then.
From my review: Like Udaan, Queen is a coming-of-age story, a breaking-of-shackles story, though one with far less grit. If Udaan was disturbingly realistic, with an ogre of a father to vanquish, Queen is a sun-dappled fairy tale, with a line of fairy godmothers cherishing and protecting Rani through her little journeys of self-discovery.
Rahini David: If Shashi had gone to Allapi and enrolled in a English Course there and a Malayali cook had tried to romance her, then the story would have had a very different tone there.
Of course the story would have been different. Every story is a result of the choices made by the writer — but even if the story would have turned out different, the net takeaway would have been the same (I hope).
Aran: Coming from an semi-traditional Indian girl living in a foreign country for higher studies, I really feel that these epiphanies could not have been achieved in India. In some small way, perhaps, sure.
Well, again I differ. I think there’s enough variety in India that you can find yourself having epiphanies every twenty miles you cross.
Madan Chopra (@mpmainka): Oh is that right? Sorry about that.
Gradwolf: But then, these are all “thinking aloud” pieces, no? 🙂
LikeLike
Aran
March 28, 2014
BR, In response to your “I think there’s enough variety in India that you can find yourself having epiphanies every twenty miles you cross”
– I’d say, for a Veera maybe, but not so much for a Rani or even a Shashi. I don’t really think you’re getting the condescension / infantilising / expectations issue. Everybody a girl meets in India would have a set response to her based on how a typical Indian girl should be. Imagine how difficult it would be for Rani to wear a plunging neckline somewhere in India without people gawking, leering at or censuring her.
LikeLike
desidaaru12
March 28, 2014
@BR
I don’t disagree with you that the film could have been set in India 🙂
Queen does require a suspension of disbelief anyway (the recurrence of the Alice in Wonderland reference, first seen in Aiyya), but IMHO setting the story in India would have required it in a greater degree.
I suppose it’s a bit of a chicken/egg situation.What came first- script or subsidy ? 🙂
Also, I’m a bit miffed that Queen and English Vinglish are being boxed together. Obvious similarities, Queen is very much (to me) a coming-of-age/ friendship-travel movie where Rani at the end pretty much the same person who now relates to the world in a more self-assured way.
English Vinglish on the other hand never really transcended the ’empowerment’ theme.
LikeLike
Nathan
March 28, 2014
Where, may I ask, did you have your epiphany to be a full time film reviewer?
LikeLike
matriarkheia
March 28, 2014
Reblogged this on matriarkheia and commented:
Another queen I would like to see!
LikeLike
Shvetha
March 28, 2014
What desidaaru12 said. I haven’t watched either movie, but am already sold on the epiphany-delivering foreign locations-premise. To your doubts, I will say (with tongue firmly in cheek) you’ve got to be an Indain woman to understand this.
😀
LikeLike
MANK
March 28, 2014
Brangan,
Perhaps OT,but Speaking of girls escaping to foreign fantasy lands, have you seen the Tarsem singh film ‘The Fall’.Here a foreign girl and man is shown escaping from LA into fantasy land represented by India.I saw it after a friend recommended to me after watching Highway and seeing how much i liked that film.This was a tale set in LA about a wounded stuntman taking a wounded little girl on a journey through a fantasy tale in which both of them participate and the film is mostly set in India. I was really bowled over by the amazing visuals which were all shot in India. But most importantly by the little kid played by a non actor Catinca Untaru.Dont know why . but she reminded me a lot of Alia Bhatt in Highway. Man she really pulled at my heartstrings. her broken english Narration and her endearing performance brought a lump to my throat(however cheesy that might sound) .So i googled more about her and was amazed by the fact that it was her only film Dont know whether you reviewed the film or not? , i think it came out in 2008. Some of my friends found it a big bore , but i was really moved by it. Would love to hear your views about it?
Meanwhile those interested please check out these links
http://catincauntaru.wordpress.com/:
http://www.rediff.com/movies/2008/may/26singh.htm
LikeLike
MANK
March 28, 2014
CHECK OUT AN ENDEARING MOMENT OF HERS FROM THE FILM
also some behind the scenes
LikeLike
MANK
March 28, 2014
What is really tragic is that we have such extraordinary locations in our country, but our filmmakers insist on sending our heroes and heroines on foreign trips. We just don’t have directors with that eye for locations and framing and staging to exploit these locations to the fullest.I have always found that indian locations in Hollywood films look nothing like the way they look in indian films (save a few like the recent Highway). They look so beautiful and spectacular, whether its Passage to india,Darjeeling Ltd,Gandhi or even a turkey like Octopussy.Subsidy or not?, i think we need more filmmakers exploiting the beauty of our country.
LikeLike
Madan
March 29, 2014
Another question that I would like to ask to those who feel skeptical about the need to send Rani to Europe: where exactly in France or Netherlands do the families of the girls have to cough up dowry to get her married? Where exactly in either country do families indulge in female foeticide? Do you really think that the acceptance of a girl child as just as precious as a boy has no bearing on the outlook of the people of such countries or, on the other hand, the lack of such acceptance on the outlook of Indians? And no, these things don’t happen only in tribal parts of India or the like; the family of my Chettiar classmate coughed up lakhs worth in cash plus gold as dowry only last year and a year before, an illegal sex determination clinic run within the hospital of a renowned and respected chain was sealed by the municipality. It would therefore be a mistake to look at Queen as purely the story of Rani finding herself; it addresses very important questions about the way we treat women in India and Vijay’s family is a good exhibit because most of us have met such people and would consider them respectable in every other regard. I really don’t see how that contrast could be brought out without actually flying Rani over to Europe.
LikeLike
Madan
March 29, 2014
That is also why I too don’t agree with clubbing English Vinglish and Queen. I am willing to go along to some extent with the argument that in EV, Shashi was transported to NY so that a Mind Your Language-like scenario could be played out. I am not yet convinced that Queen was set in Paris and Amsterdam for only such superficial considerations.
LikeLike
ushasrinath
March 29, 2014
desidaaru12: What would have happened is that they would have thought her too small town to hang out with. And made fun of her English.
I don’t think this is a given. There could be kind souls in South Mumbai. There could be creeps in Amsterdam. I don’t think everyone in South Mumbai would display the “class bias” you talk about
With considerable experience of living in India and working with a university in Europe, agree with desidaaru 12 here. There is much less class ism and of course, no casteism in North Europe at least among the kind of people she would meet in a hostel. And much safer too, i would think. And with foreigners, there is no slotting of the kind that would happen in India. Therefore, I think desidaaru12 has a very valid point.
LikeLike
soniakrishna
March 29, 2014
@BR
Maybe we aren´t as aware of the complexities of other countries as we are of our own, which might have suited the director to focus on one aspect.
Frankly, I still can´t imagine Queen being made in any other way. And I don´t see why we should be complaining at all, because it is such a well made movie and a rare one at that too. India or abroad the story is very much that of an Indian girl, breaking a few barriers, probably not in any obviously intense, mind blowing way (like in Udaan). If it is a light, fun movie, why not see the point it is making and adore/accept it?
@Madan: I second your thoughts.
LikeLike
soumya
March 29, 2014
Doesn’t India offer its women enough experiences and opportunities for emancipation?
Ayesia takia in Dor and Sonam Kapoor in Raanjhanaa come to mind.. the answer to your question I feel is rather technical.. its easier to show transformation of a character using the cultural/ social differences that exist as a leverage point.. or else the writer/ director has to resort to much more complex narrrative devices and focus much more on the internalization of the struggle the character is going through which is lot tougher..
I am still looking forward to a film where the girl consuming alcohol and opening up, or girl wearing slightly more revealing clothes to show the transformation cliches are not used in emancipation sagas.. instead it dwells more on the psychological journey of its protagonist.. but will such film have any takers?? thats the question to ask..
LikeLike
Ramit
March 29, 2014
Is it a possibility that producers were trying to woo the foreigners or rather Indian diaspora in foreign as Bollywood movies are popular outside India as well, much like Hollywood movie makers trying to cover as many countries as possible [(Ghost Protocol- Moscow, Mumbai, Dubai, Croatia), (Skyfall- Istanbul, Shanghai, Macau), (2012- India, China, S.Africa), …]?
LikeLike
Deepti Sharma
March 29, 2014
Thanks Mr Rangan for the very interesting conversation. I had so many thoughts in response to what you’ve said here, it went on to become a complete blogpost. I hope posting the link here doesn’t count as spam:
http://deepti-five-feet-under.blogspot.in/2014/03/rani-aur-rachel.html
LikeLike
indianmalefeminist
March 30, 2014
“Ayesia takia in Dor and Sonam Kapoor in Raanjhanaa come to mind”
Err I don’t know what either of this characters has to do with female empowerment. Especially Raanjhanaa – seriously? And Dor, you do know that all women centric films aren’t de facto “empowering” right?
Even if that were true, Dev D (although not exactly a “female centric” film) and Kahaani might have been better examples. But I would personally still agree the posters before that the scope is limited, unfortunately and a lot of elements would seem pretty much out of place and forced in our setting.
LikeLike
Srini
March 31, 2014
@Deepti Sharma
That was very nice post.
LikeLike
brangan
March 31, 2014
Ramit: Is it a possibility that producers were trying to woo the foreigners or rather Indian diaspora in foreign as Bollywood movies are popular outside India as well…
Excellent point — one that I hadn’t considered. Thanks.
Deepti Sharma: Not at all. Any extension of these discussions is all good.
LikeLike
MANK
March 31, 2014
Brangan,Sir you have no response to my query about the movie ‘The Fall’, I was eagerly waiting for your views on this one like no other.
LikeLike
soumya
March 31, 2014
@indianmalefeminist, well it all depends on what each one’s perception of ’empowerment’ is.. in my point of view character of Zoya in Raanjhanaa, especially in scenes of her initial days in JNU showed a quiet and confident transformation from a small town girl self admittedly being trained to be a good homemaker to an independent free willed woman finding her own feet and standing tall in front of a man who she is clearly smitten by.. and to think of it the most consequential and significant decisions of her life or in the film were all made by her whereas male characters just let her take the lead ..( eventhough her character had shades of grey..) and Dor had one of the most empowering climax scenes where a shy and withdrawn widow from a very consevative family chose a more liberated life even if it was with a woman whose husband was allegedly responsible for taking every joy out of her life…the point here is that these could be women whom we know in real life or whom we could meet on a day to day basis…
Kahaani on the other hand had a very powerful woman character as its protagonist but I could not relate to the character at a personal level at all.. haven’t seen Dev.D so cant comment.. what I am trying to say here is that I personally would prefer seeing on screen ordinary women in ordinary situations showing remarkable strength and courage to lead their lives exactly the way they want as opposed to remarkable women who achieve the impossible often, but have no resonance in real life.. that defines “empowerment ” to me..
LikeLike
auroravampiris
April 1, 2014
Let’s hypothesize for a moment, in a facetious manner. Let’s say I’m a man. My one fear is the fear of… say… uh, traveling. Let’s say I’ve lived in India my whole life and I’m terrified of traveling abroad. Terrified of meeting all those multi-hued people (of hues other than a dark brown to fair brown). And let’s say my company suddenly told me I had to go to France on an important assignment.
I’m terrified. I have to speak and learn and interact with people who stereotypically, hate interacting in the only foreign language I know – English. I have to learn an entirely new language. I feel emasculated (men feel that, right? Don’t they?). But I muster some courage, go to France, and I’m completely lost. But eventually, through much adversity (and not “adversity” of a terrible nature, but adversity of a more mediocre nature), I manage to learn a new language, learn a new way of life and eventually give a speech in French at a dinner with friends.
Sure, I could’ve given a speech in Malayalam, or Hindi, or English, or whatever, but it’s “French” that was the obstacle – it’s the French that made me feel inferior, the idea of the “abroad” as horrifying (exemplified by a strange language) that made me quiver in my boots. And at the end, when I manage to learn it, I realize that it wasn’t a big deal after all.
The point of that example was to say this – this isn’t about “learning English is empowering.” This is about how I empowered myself by conquering what I thought was an obstacle, only to realize it wasn’t much of an obstacle at all. That last paragraph is absolutely ludicrous (and I’m probably making you mad, but I think that’s kind of the point). And to a woman like Rani, the entire point was overcoming the barriers that had been imposed ON her by everyone around her. Going everywhere with Chintoo and so on and so forth.
At the end of the day, films are artifice. And it’s easier to write broad metaphors. What better way to illustrate the breaking of all borders than to physically cross entire borders and enter a foreign land?
Which is not to say your annoyance at the empowerment abroad theme is misplaced – sure, a script could be written where broad metaphors become more nuanced, and much like Udaan, scripts could be written where empowerment is homegrown. But that last paragraph is pretty damn annoying to me – you seem to be insinuating something entirely removed from the chief message of the film itself (which is not to say the movie is a “message movie” or something).
LikeLike
brangan
April 1, 2014
auroravampiris: I like your hypothesis, and no, you’re not making me mad. (If the whole point of the comments section is to exchange POVs, then getting mad at an opposing POV is pretty much pointless, no? 🙂 )
There are two things here. Shashi’s decision to speak in English. And the film’s insistence on making her do so. Within the film, yes, Shashi fits your hypothesis. I’m drawing back and considering a larger point, which is from the filmmaker’s POV and his/her decision to create Shashi this way.
LikeLike