Padmaavat the movie review
So much is written about the movie even before its release
that I felt no reason to write anything else. Then I read this wonderful
review.
I agree with almost all the points in the review by @Lavanya
Nukavarapu but I liked the movie nevertheless. I am adding my view point in
continuation of her review:
1. Ranveer Singh was hamming and over acted. Way over the
top…. He was a caricature of Allauddin. Ranveer reminded of Shahrukh from
Devdas. I liked both of them. Shahid was inadequate and Deepika was optimum,
big watery (or was it glycerin) eyes notwithstanding. Rest of the cast was just
ok, especially GORA and BADAL. They are mythical characters and Sanjay Bhansali
casted unknown actors. Malik Kafur was given too much importance and the Gay
angle was unnecessary to the plot.
2. Bahubali has set the bar so high that other filmmakers
will take at least a decade to reach there. CGI and war scenes were so poor in
Padmavat when compared to Bahubali. Even casting is poor comparatively.
Bahubali is the BAAP of all period/ fantasy movies. Padmavat fell woefully
short.
3. This movie is at the cross hairs of left and right both.
I read this article from Swara
Bhaskarhttps://thewire.in/218456/end-magnum-opus-i-felt-reduced-vagina/. I
think this misses the point totally. Padamavati is the feminist of 13th century
AD. It is true she was the second wife but that was acceptable at that time.
She married Ratan Sen on her own volition. Her decision of Jauhar is not about
Vagina. This is about consent. She said no to Khilji but Khilji would have
raped her and would have stripped her off from her dignity. At point of time
there was no court, police, women commission to protect her from evil
attackers. The king was the Almighty. Khilji killed her husband and was only
one step away from raping her. She had no other way except Jauhar and it was
her choice. That is the act of supreme defiance. Padmavati is like Bhagat
Singh, Rajguru, Sukhdev and Chandrasekhar Azad. It was not suicide. It was true
example of “NO MEANS NO”. Her act of asking permission from Ratan was out of
love. Otherwise she has shown her own independent thinking throughout the
movie. Be it showing her reflection to Khilji or traveling to Delhi to free
him.
4. The protests by Karni Sena were unnecessary. The movie
was best possible extolment and glorification of Rajputs. If somebody should
protest, they should be admirer of Alauddin (if there are any), because his
portrayal was one way dimensional.
5. I liked “Binte Dil” the best. Arijit keeps amazing me.
Other one was “Naino wale ne” by Neeti Man.
6. By now everyone knows Padmavati was the figment of
imagination of Malik Muhammad Jayasi, a Sufi poet. Padmavat (or Padmawat) is an
epic poem written in 1540 by Sufi poet Malik Muhammad Jayasi, who wrote it in
the Hindustani language of Awadhi, and originally in the Persian Nastaʿlīq script.
The philosopy is called “Tasawuff”. The whole poem Padmavat is symbolic.
Padmavati is God and Ratan Sen is Sadhak. Raghav Chetan is Satan and Allauddin
is illusion (Maya). If we get a Guru we will attain Padmavati i.e. Nirgun
(Formless, omnipresent and omniscient God) after defeating Maya.
"तन चितउर, मन राजा कीन्हा
हिय सिंघल बुधु पद्मिनि चीन्हा ।
गुरु सुवा जे पन्थ दिखावा
बिनु गुरु जगत को निर्गुन पावा ।
नागमती यह दुनिया धन्धा
बांचा सोइ न एहि चित बन्धा ।
राघव इत सोई शैतानू
माया अलाउदीन सुल्तानू ।"
So much for the hullaballoo about honor and pride. The whole
poem was symbolic which by the way even Sanjay Leela Bhansali failed to show.
He is a good director never the less.
Comments
Post a Comment