Like many of his fans, I am completely puzzled. Of course, he has given interviews explaining the reasons
Illustration/Uday Mohite
Why did Rajkumar Hirani switch from Gandhigiri to Sanjugiri? Like many of his fans, I am completely puzzled. Of course, he has given interviews explaining the reasons. And his protagonist Sanjay Dutt's life is a dream masala script — he has been a drug addict, womaniser, and sentenced to jail for five years for possession of a Dawood Ibrahim gang-supplied AK56 rifle, and his connection to the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts case. But yes, yes, yes, as the film repeatedly reminds us, he was exonerated from charges of being a terrorist. And yes, Ranbir Kapoor is brilliant.
ADVERTISEMENT
As a Bollywood filmmaker, Hirani is at the top of his game. All his films have turned to gold — Munnabhai MBBS, Lage Raho Munna Bhai, 3 Idiots and PK — in which he promoted Gandhigiri, and daringly took on the medical and education systems, corruption and religious frauds, and became the darling of the masses. He has had a long and rewarding partnership with screenwriter Abhijat Joshi and producer Vidhu Vinod Chopra. So, why did Hirani — a good guy by every account — who lionised Gandhi in one film — lionise a living actor-criminal, in his next? He must have had a pile of good script ideas. Besides, an "approved script" is bound to be dangerously PR-ey. Sanjay Dutt even dances in the film on himself. Kaiku, kaiku? I don't have any answers. As this film has made pots of money, it also shows where the public sympathy lies.
I shouldn't have been surprised: papering over dark truths is a Bollywood tradition, as well as a Dutt family tradition. In 1980, the late Nargis Dutt, top Bollywood star, MP and mother of Sanjay Dutt, accused Satyajit Ray — whose staggering body of films, including Pather Panchali, Apur Sansar and Aparajito, are acclaimed worldwide — of "exporting poverty to the West." Apparently, it is okay to have dire poverty in reality, but to address poverty in cinema? Chee chee! All a bit rich, considering Nargis' top films included Raj Kapoor's Awara and Shree 420, and Mehboob Khan's Mother India, all tackling poverty. Could it be, that what was really sought here, was a Bollywood monopoly on exporting poverty, snubbing Bengali artists addressing the subject? After all, her Mother India was nominated for an Oscar, and her films were popular in the Soviet bloc; whereas Ray's films were feted worldwide, including at the Cannes, Berlin and Venice film festivals. But I'll let this go. You get my drift. Bollywood prefers to paper over crime and sing All izz well. We are waiting for a movie on Salman the Saviour.
Nor does Bollywood have a monopoly on lionising a criminal. What about our Mallu Harvey Weinstein? The Malayalam film industry has been desperately defending actor Dileep, who was jailed for his involvement in having an actress abducted and raped, and is out on bail. The Association of Malayalam Movie Artists (AMMA) briefly kicked him out, before smugly reinstating him again. Other than the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC), few have been outspoken in denouncing Dileep, in the Malayalam or Indian film industries. They're all 'bretthers,' chettas and bhais of the rape-accused. Weinstein is their role model. Bravo, India! *Slow clap*
Meenakshi Shedde is South Asia Consultant to the Berlin Film Festival, award-winning critic, curator to festivals worldwide and journalist. Reach her at meenakshishedde@gmail.com.
Catch up on all the latest Crime, National, International and Hatke news here. Also, download the new mid-day Android and iOS apps to get latest updates
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
