Saturday, July 31, 2010

Raavanan Vs Raamaayanam

This post is dedicated to all those who prompted me to retaliate – contrary to popular criticisms, this was actually a good movie.
Every minute of the movie was aesthetically pleasing but more than that, it was a movie that you couldn’t leave in the theatre and go back home without a thought on your mind. The parallels to the Raamaayanam were absolutely clear and to me, there was no sacrilege. Come on people, she did NOT fall in love with him; there’re emotions like empathy and pity at play here!
The movie only attempted to paint the characters differently… not even different colours, just different lighting perhaps. The questions raised were only an extension of the debates that have been going on for centuries – the world is grey, not black and white.
About the arguments that religious sentiments were hurt and that if it had been some other religion, the Govt. would’ve intervened – Hinduism has weathered much more real threats than a movie that hardly a few lakh people watched. Personally, I am staunchly religious and yet, I find that I’d rather be tolerant like my faith than raise a hue and cry about someone’s interpretation of the characters in an epic. I agree that it is sacred to millions of people but just like our country, our culture too belongs to each one of us – everyone is entitled to their own opinions, let them be !
In every scene, it was made amply clear that the female protagonist was in love with and loyal to her husband. And as with any modern adaptation, the writer and director have only modified the story to fit the age. So I suggest that you watch it as a movie by its own right – if it makes you feel any better, think of it as a very looooose adaptation rather than a re-telling of the story. But if you only want the Raamaayanam, watch Ramanand Sagar, not Mani Ratnam.


Manoj Rao said...

Well said.

cc: Ganesh Ramachandran!

Ganesh R said...

Very clear ! Another positive interpretation of the movie !

Here are a few points that I feel have been misunderstood.

Such a movie ain't a threat to Hinduism, but another example that the Govt. is highly biased when it comes to Hindus and their religion - In such a grey world, being tolerant can't help you survive. This was the point I was trying to highlight there.

I agree the cinematography was nothing short of awesome! But my question - "Is it so necessary to use a mythological story as its backbone?" I have a doubt - Why does everyone get to a Hindu epic when it comes to depicting a social problem prevalent in the country? Gr8 tolerant Hindus huh?

Let tolerant Hindus be tolerant. I'm no more one. If the writers and directors are entitled to have interpretations and adaptations, well I equally have the right for the same, by which my interpretation is that it is an insult to the epic.

There's one thing I've clearly understood - Hindus seem to be the only people who can watch themselves being insulted on silver screen and raise an applause. WOW !!

May be it suited the Thretha yuga and Dvaapara Yuga. Not this age where tolerance, I feel, is complete madness. You need not take it to the streets and burn effigies. But raising a hue and cry is what we can do to say "WE ARE GOD DAMN HURT. STOP THE NONSENSE."

No offense meant. You are entitled to have your opinion too. Good to know the money spent on the movie was worth for a few like you.

sandhya... said...

Hey Ganesh, the point I am trying to make is that Hinduism has survived for so long mainly because it is tolerant. It's like a basic tenet, the religion implies freedom and to put it your way, we are kind of going against that if we raise a hue and cry... But I will not push this point further cuz, well, freedom to you too ;)