Slumdog taps into Western curiosity about a country whose weight is increasingly felt in ordinary lives, writes Sadanand Dhume in Yale Global Online
The unexpected international success of “Slumdog Millionaire” has pleased some Indians while provoking unusually strong protests from others. The critical and commercial success of the film, contrasted with sharp criticism and a lackluster run in Indian theaters, captures the inherent contradictions of an increasingly globalized country. India basks in the glow of international recognition, but resents the critical scrutiny that global exposure brings.
Not since Sir Richard Attenborough’s “Gandhi” has a film about India captured the world’s imagination as strongly as “Slumdog Millionaire,” director Danny Boyle’s gritty yet uplifting drama about a boy from the slums of Mumbai who makes good as a game-show contestant on the Indian version of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.” The low-budget production – which cost $15 million to make, a pittance in Hollywood terms – has garnered both commercial and critical success, grossing $96 million worldwide as of February 1st, and picking up four Golden Globe awards and 10 Oscar nominations. In one among a raft of glowing reviews, Wall Street Journal’s Joe Morgenstern hailed “Slumdog” as “the world’s first globalized masterpiece.”
Similar Posts:
- Bombay dreaming
- The ‘Slumdog’ effect: Afflict the comfortable
- Slumdog Millionaire becomes the biggest ‘Indian’ blockbuster
- It shouldn’t have won
- One movie composer who knows the score
0 Responses to “The Slumdog paradox”
Leave a Reply