The audiences forget the film as soon as they exit the theatre. If such is the case, then why do these NRI audiences patronise Westernised Indian films that portray meaningless themes through scantily-clad actresses? This member is quick to retort, “Such films are purely for entertainment value. It is detrimental for our younger generations because it gives them a wrong insight into the events that occurred in that historical era.” Contradictory stances A member of an NRI group involved in the protests (on the condition of anonymity) said, “Films such as ‘Jodhaa Akbar’ put our Indian culture in bad light by conveniently depicting inaccurate historical facts. But the NRI audiences are known to be more evolved due to their years of assimilation into more supposedly broad-minded cultures. The ban on “Jodhaa Akbar” in certain States of India could be politically motivated.
These NRI groups have gone a step further and created a website, to garner support for this “noble mission” of theirs. But in spite of this disclaimer, the film has invited the wrath of protestors all over the country and even NRI audiences all over the world. In all his interviews, he always maintained that it is a fiction based on historical events. In fact, he never claimed the film to be a biopic. Gowarikar, and his team, allegedly spent years preparing for the film, researching the period, and taking pains to ensure that its cultural depictions were correct (in having Jodhaa speak Hindi and Akbar Urdu, for example). A film is a director’s medium and if the director is not permitted to freely express his/ her interpretation of a certain event through the cinematic medium, what further motivation would highly acclaimed directors have in delivering further quality products to the audience?
This new trend of power in the hands of the people denies the filmmaker his/ her right to freedom of expression. The Rajput groups of India are arguing that the name Jodhaa was the name of Jehangir’s wife.Ĭonsidering that Indian films are X-rayed by the stringent Indian Censor Board, is it appropriate for films to be subjected to further censorship demands and bans based on public intolerance? After all, should not the Censors be the ultimate authority in deciding what content is suitable for public viewing? Against freedom of expression Noted historians have claimed that the basis of the movie, the relationship between Jodhaa and Akbar, is completely faulty and incorrect.
/vidio-web-prod-media/uploads/1990929/images/ets2_premier_ETS20c6b7a8e370b7ae9_672x378-00223.jpg "watch jodha akbar")
However, despite Gowarikar’s effective efforts in maintaining that balance, there was seen a streak of intolerance towards what some claim to be an inaccurate, rehashed version of historical facts.Įven before its release, the film invited the ire of certain groups and was subsequently banned in several States. Without taking sides, the maverick filmmaker wisely portrays Akbar as a secular force who wants to see “Hindustan’s” great religions coexist side by side.
#Watch jodha akbar full
In his latest offering “Jodhaa Akbar” (released February 15, 2008), director Ashutosh Gowarikar made a savvy decision in focusing on the religious tensions between Akbar’s court, full of traditional Islamists, and the Hindu Rajput c ulture of Jodhaa. No space for a rational, public discourse: Emotional reactions against the film "Jodhaa Akbar". By RISHI VOHRA The recent violence in some States over “Jodhaa Akbar” raises the question: Should public intolerance be allowed to hijack a medium that is exclusively the director’s space?
0 kommentar(er)
