New York is Bollywood's first mainstream film on the 9/11 issue. Fortunately, it is not a rehashed Hollywood 9/11 film, but it treats of issues specific to South Asians post 9/11. However, by the end of the film you wonder whether New York has been sponsored by the American tourism department as a PR campaign to keep Indians coming to America. A reassurance perhaps, that: "It's OK for you to come to America, if you are not a terrorist, we will love you and treat you as our equals, or maybe even better."
Before I go onto discus relatively minor issues of the technical aspects of the film-making of the film, I want to discuss the more major issues that a film on 9/11 requires deliberation on: political ideologies. As many have remarked in earlier reviews New York seem to have a confused political ideology. In the first half, you are exposed to the horrors of the Patriot act, detention centres and torture to which many South Asians, particularly those of Muslim descent were being subjected to, and how this lead to huge alienation and radical sentiments amongst the Muslim population. So you think this is a film made on the plight of these innocent people and will be critical of such policies.
In the second half,these policies are justified by blaming Muslims themselves for alienating themselves from America. Prior to this, America was a benign, secular, free and embracing democracy in which Indian students were actually not just amongst the most popular in American college campuses, but the most popular. Everyone was happy, free loving and enjoying their life. It was the fault of Muslims that all this changed.
By the end of the film, because the Muslims have rectified their ways, America loves Muslims again. So much so that the child of an actual terrorist is the most popular kid in his school. It's all free and loving again. There is even a message in the end-credits on how Obama has closed down the detention centres - now we can all live happily ever after.
Of course, many know that none of that is reality. No, America was not a completely benign, secular and free embracing democracy in which Indians enjoyed equal or even better status prior to 9/11. Nor, was it the fault of Muslims that America enacted policies like Patriot act, illegal detention and torture, and instigated wars. These policies were already in the pipelines long before 9/11. One simply has to read the policies of the Bush administration prior to 9/11 to find virtually all the post 9/11 policies contained therein.
And finally no, none of these policies have changed. If one looks at the statistics the alienation of Muslims has not decreased, but increased. The detention centres are still open and fully operational. The wars are still going on and more are being planned. Americans are still losing their civil rights by the day. And as for Obama, let alone closing Guantanamo, he has called for prolonged detention of anybody who COULD be a terrorist in the future without warrant, without trial, without evidence.
It is a given that the Bollywood formula is mostly a fantasy genre of film-making. It is not suppose to be reality, but a hyper-real reality, more vibrant and more idealistic than the real world. However, it is insulting to ones intelligence, when it transposes this formula onto serious issues like 9/11 and human rights issue. Such issues demand realism, deliberate critical and intelligent political commentary and pain streaking research. But, in "New York" we get a New York that is a montage of nothing more than perfect and idyllic shots of modernism; presenting nothing more than escapism for a developing India. We see fun, frolics and perfect relationships which seem be juxtaposed from an episode of friends. It is small wonder why Indians have such rose-tinted expectations of places like America and are in a hurry to leave India for these paradises.
The common man on the streets of New York could not relate to the fantasy New York in this film. Nor could the cultured and educated intellectual. In short to sum up the political critique of this film: the film is an outright sham.
Moving on to the more minor points of film-making. The director, Khan, has a very promising and vivid visual style, and this observation was not lost on me in his debut film, "Kabul express" The production values of this film are superlative, and this is evident from the opening credit sequence itself. It maintains its slickness throughout. However, the slickness is very self-aware and one soon tires of the endless slow motion shots and the really set-up and choreographed lighting.
The screenplay is overlong, meandering and repetitive. After a while one begins to become frustrated with too much of the same.
The first song is incredibly long, that you actually wait for it to end. This is a shame, because this is probably the best song in the film. The others are a bit lacklustre and often unnecessary.
The acting is for the most part embarrassing. While most actors are passable, the acting of Nitin Mukesh is unforgivable. One wonders if he's there just because he is white. As somebody said earlier he fumbles even the simplest scenes. His attempt at acting brings a lot of unintentional comedy in this film, which completely ruins the more sombre mood it tries to establish at times.
All up: A film which is worth missing, if you're not politically and socially illiterate.
Before I go onto discus relatively minor issues of the technical aspects of the film-making of the film, I want to discuss the more major issues that a film on 9/11 requires deliberation on: political ideologies. As many have remarked in earlier reviews New York seem to have a confused political ideology. In the first half, you are exposed to the horrors of the Patriot act, detention centres and torture to which many South Asians, particularly those of Muslim descent were being subjected to, and how this lead to huge alienation and radical sentiments amongst the Muslim population. So you think this is a film made on the plight of these innocent people and will be critical of such policies.
In the second half,these policies are justified by blaming Muslims themselves for alienating themselves from America. Prior to this, America was a benign, secular, free and embracing democracy in which Indian students were actually not just amongst the most popular in American college campuses, but the most popular. Everyone was happy, free loving and enjoying their life. It was the fault of Muslims that all this changed.
By the end of the film, because the Muslims have rectified their ways, America loves Muslims again. So much so that the child of an actual terrorist is the most popular kid in his school. It's all free and loving again. There is even a message in the end-credits on how Obama has closed down the detention centres - now we can all live happily ever after.
Of course, many know that none of that is reality. No, America was not a completely benign, secular and free embracing democracy in which Indians enjoyed equal or even better status prior to 9/11. Nor, was it the fault of Muslims that America enacted policies like Patriot act, illegal detention and torture, and instigated wars. These policies were already in the pipelines long before 9/11. One simply has to read the policies of the Bush administration prior to 9/11 to find virtually all the post 9/11 policies contained therein.
And finally no, none of these policies have changed. If one looks at the statistics the alienation of Muslims has not decreased, but increased. The detention centres are still open and fully operational. The wars are still going on and more are being planned. Americans are still losing their civil rights by the day. And as for Obama, let alone closing Guantanamo, he has called for prolonged detention of anybody who COULD be a terrorist in the future without warrant, without trial, without evidence.
It is a given that the Bollywood formula is mostly a fantasy genre of film-making. It is not suppose to be reality, but a hyper-real reality, more vibrant and more idealistic than the real world. However, it is insulting to ones intelligence, when it transposes this formula onto serious issues like 9/11 and human rights issue. Such issues demand realism, deliberate critical and intelligent political commentary and pain streaking research. But, in "New York" we get a New York that is a montage of nothing more than perfect and idyllic shots of modernism; presenting nothing more than escapism for a developing India. We see fun, frolics and perfect relationships which seem be juxtaposed from an episode of friends. It is small wonder why Indians have such rose-tinted expectations of places like America and are in a hurry to leave India for these paradises.
The common man on the streets of New York could not relate to the fantasy New York in this film. Nor could the cultured and educated intellectual. In short to sum up the political critique of this film: the film is an outright sham.
Moving on to the more minor points of film-making. The director, Khan, has a very promising and vivid visual style, and this observation was not lost on me in his debut film, "Kabul express" The production values of this film are superlative, and this is evident from the opening credit sequence itself. It maintains its slickness throughout. However, the slickness is very self-aware and one soon tires of the endless slow motion shots and the really set-up and choreographed lighting.
The screenplay is overlong, meandering and repetitive. After a while one begins to become frustrated with too much of the same.
The first song is incredibly long, that you actually wait for it to end. This is a shame, because this is probably the best song in the film. The others are a bit lacklustre and often unnecessary.
The acting is for the most part embarrassing. While most actors are passable, the acting of Nitin Mukesh is unforgivable. One wonders if he's there just because he is white. As somebody said earlier he fumbles even the simplest scenes. His attempt at acting brings a lot of unintentional comedy in this film, which completely ruins the more sombre mood it tries to establish at times.
All up: A film which is worth missing, if you're not politically and socially illiterate.