As a reviewer of cinema it is my duty to those who read my criticisms to present my own honest opinion of a film’s worthiness set to criteria of my choosing. That criteria includes but is by no means limited to the quality of performances of those involved, the technical achievements illustrated, and the ability of a film to establish some sort of emotional bond with its audience. Another duty of a reviewer, and one that is not necessarily a common practice, is to admit to a mistake; to admit that for one reason or another an error in judgment was made. Maybe it was the time of day; maybe it was mood; or maybe it was just life throwing a hardball, but there was something there at that moment that affected the quality of the viewing for better or worse.A little over six months ago, I wrote a rather scathing review of Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire in deeming it “an overly stylized melodramatic piece of cinematic mediocrity with a manipulative happy ending that tries to evoke an emotional response out of its audience that in all honesty it really doesn't deserve”. However, a recent viewing of the film has lent to the conclusion that a mistake has been made on my part. So, it is at this very moment that I swallow my pride and admit that Slumdog Millionaire is actually a much more superior film than I initially gave it credit for. Did it deserve the Oscar win over Benjamin Button? No, but I can see where its popularity stemmed from now and the bewilderment that once lingered in me after Academy’s Best Picture winner was announced is surprising no longer present.
Christopher Misch, Managing Editor
*SPOILER WARNING*
ReplyDeleteAfter my second viewing, I still wasn't much impressed. I think that the Best Picture, Director and Screenplay wins were undeserved, but I'm aware that this is a tremendously popular film, and that I'm in the minority, so I'm willing to accept that voters simply picked the film they liked the most. The technical wins, however, are outrageous.
Technical aspects aside, my main beef with the story is that it is flat and uninteresting. Not so much the plot structure, ie. the quiz questions followed by flashbacks (which I actually think is a very good idea for a movie), but the fact that the protagonist never seems to go through anything psychologically, or to develop, let alone evolve. His mother gets beaten to death by a mob, and the guy doesn't even cry or seem particularly disturbed afterwards. What needs to happen to get a bit of a reaction out of this kid?
He just gets thrown into one event after the other and doesn't seem to have any inner struggles, doubts or regrets. Maybe that's the story they wanted to tell, but I don't find it particularly interesting. I tend to prefer protagonists who screw up every once in a while, and either learn from their mistakes or not.
And I think your initial comment was right on the money: "a manipulative happy ending that tries to evoke an emotional response out of its audience that in all honesty it really doesn't deserve". I completely agree, the reason being that, in order for the ending to happen, his brother had to give his life. Bafflingly, this goes entirely unacknowledged by either him or the girl - they're just happy to be together, without a care in the world, despite the fact that his brother just let himself be killed in order for that to happen. I understand that it's still more of a positive than a negative conclusion, but I find it hard to accept as simply a happy ending. The movie seems to think it is, though.