RRR (2022)
March 31, 2022 8:59 AM - Subscribe
A fictional history of two legendary revolutionaries' journey away from home before they began fighting for their country in the 1920s.
I cannot wait to see this.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:27 PM on March 31, 2022
posted by DirtyOldTown at 2:27 PM on March 31, 2022
I didn't know this, so this is v cool to learn:
Tribal Army: Among all the things that #RRRMovie has done,the best is to introduce two unknown Freedom fighters to mainstream India
1. Alluri Seetarama Raju, the leader of the Rampa tribal Rebellion against the British
2. Komaram Bheem, the leader of a struggle against the Hyderabad Nizam. https://t.co/mPw9w2CkBA
So these are the real life inspirations, but I completely didn't have the cultural fluency to realise Ram's character is meant to be a tribal one too.
posted by cendawanita at 10:44 PM on March 31, 2022 [2 favorites]
Tribal Army: Among all the things that #RRRMovie has done,the best is to introduce two unknown Freedom fighters to mainstream India
1. Alluri Seetarama Raju, the leader of the Rampa tribal Rebellion against the British
2. Komaram Bheem, the leader of a struggle against the Hyderabad Nizam. https://t.co/mPw9w2CkBA
So these are the real life inspirations, but I completely didn't have the cultural fluency to realise Ram's character is meant to be a tribal one too.
posted by cendawanita at 10:44 PM on March 31, 2022 [2 favorites]
This was the greatest cinematic experience of my life. Holy shit, I don’t even have words for how much I loved it. Every fifteen minutes it gave me the most insane action sequence I’d ever seen.
posted by EarBucket at 1:52 PM on April 3, 2022 [3 favorites]
posted by EarBucket at 1:52 PM on April 3, 2022 [3 favorites]
Btw, it's only available in Hindi, but at least it's on Netflix now! (FWIW the leads did the dubs in all the Indian languages it was released in)
posted by cendawanita at 11:05 PM on May 22, 2022
posted by cendawanita at 11:05 PM on May 22, 2022
I cannot wait to see this.
ME TOO. Baahubali 1 & 2 rocked my world a few months ago, will be watching this later this week.
posted by LooseFilter at 8:14 AM on May 23, 2022
ME TOO. Baahubali 1 & 2 rocked my world a few months ago, will be watching this later this week.
posted by LooseFilter at 8:14 AM on May 23, 2022
It had some fun parts. Had some boring parts too! The bros angle is the most sincere and heartfelt part of the movie. It reminded me a little bit of the Jojo that I've seen... Vastly over the top ridiculous drama that is fun but very comic book-y.
The piggy-back prison escape is a glorious high point of the movie. (Kind of amusingly there's an old French prison escape film whose name I can't remember right now that also has a stand-on-the-shoulders scene that was much loved chez fleacircus -- piggyback prison escapes! Cinematic gold!)
I don't know the whole political and cultural context, but the fashy undertones to this movie are not subtle lmao. Even if it's not aimed at Muslims, and even if there is one tiny scrap of "this Muslim family is helping us", even if I enjoy seeing the British Empire get a stick in its eye -- like, singing how every street has a man of iron, with big fashy statues and cannons while striking propaganda poses in a huge cry of nationalism is a lot; one of the R's literally wrapping himself in a 'glory to the motherland' flag while the current context of that phrase is lynch mobs and political dominance.. feels like a lot. I'm too ignorant to judge! But it feels foolish of me, on top of ignorant, to just put that squicked out feeling aside.
posted by fleacircus at 8:24 AM on May 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
The piggy-back prison escape is a glorious high point of the movie. (Kind of amusingly there's an old French prison escape film whose name I can't remember right now that also has a stand-on-the-shoulders scene that was much loved chez fleacircus -- piggyback prison escapes! Cinematic gold!)
I don't know the whole political and cultural context, but the fashy undertones to this movie are not subtle lmao. Even if it's not aimed at Muslims, and even if there is one tiny scrap of "this Muslim family is helping us", even if I enjoy seeing the British Empire get a stick in its eye -- like, singing how every street has a man of iron, with big fashy statues and cannons while striking propaganda poses in a huge cry of nationalism is a lot; one of the R's literally wrapping himself in a 'glory to the motherland' flag while the current context of that phrase is lynch mobs and political dominance.. feels like a lot. I'm too ignorant to judge! But it feels foolish of me, on top of ignorant, to just put that squicked out feeling aside.
posted by fleacircus at 8:24 AM on May 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
This is on Netflix in the US now! Just have to find a spare 187 minutes to watch...
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:14 AM on May 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 9:14 AM on May 23, 2022 [1 favorite]
Just watched this tonight. Holy wow.
posted by Mchelly at 8:25 PM on June 20, 2022 [2 favorites]
posted by Mchelly at 8:25 PM on June 20, 2022 [2 favorites]
So I’ve slept and had more time to find words , and I’m still gobsmacked, but some actual thoughts:
I loved all the action scenes, but especially how surprising every one of them managed to be. I was introduced to the movie by being told “don’t google it, don’t watch the trailer, just watch it - it’s The Fast and the Furious but in late colonial India” and I think that’s the best advice / encapsulation I can imagine, though I wish I had been warned about the level of gore. When the truck burst into the compound and exploded with animals in all directions - I still can’t describe the rush.
I can’t remember the last time I saw a movie with so little for female characters to do, but I still didn’t feel cheated at the end. I could have done without how evil for the sake of evil the governor’s wife was, but if everything else was over the top, I guess the villain needs to twist the mustache that much tighter.
I didn’t love this movie with anything like the passion I felt for Everything Everywhere All At Once, but it feels like a great companion piece for blow-your-mind visual sequences. Even the non-action sumptuousness of the architecture and the landscapes were worth the playing time. In general I feel like 2022 has been a great movie year.
I’m so glad that people are talking about this, because I don’t think it would have appeared on my radar otherwise (I rarely watch either Bollywood - yes I know this is technically Tollywood - or action movies), and it was so much fun. It’s only 10 am here and I already recommended it to at least a half dozen different people.
But I have to admit I also sort of feel compelled to watch the new Downton Abbey movie as a chaser. Not sure if that’s a not-all-colonialists response or just wanting to see some pretty buildings and outfits without anyone getting a fist through their eyeballs.
posted by Mchelly at 6:51 AM on June 21, 2022
I loved all the action scenes, but especially how surprising every one of them managed to be. I was introduced to the movie by being told “don’t google it, don’t watch the trailer, just watch it - it’s The Fast and the Furious but in late colonial India” and I think that’s the best advice / encapsulation I can imagine, though I wish I had been warned about the level of gore. When the truck burst into the compound and exploded with animals in all directions - I still can’t describe the rush.
I can’t remember the last time I saw a movie with so little for female characters to do, but I still didn’t feel cheated at the end. I could have done without how evil for the sake of evil the governor’s wife was, but if everything else was over the top, I guess the villain needs to twist the mustache that much tighter.
I didn’t love this movie with anything like the passion I felt for Everything Everywhere All At Once, but it feels like a great companion piece for blow-your-mind visual sequences. Even the non-action sumptuousness of the architecture and the landscapes were worth the playing time. In general I feel like 2022 has been a great movie year.
I’m so glad that people are talking about this, because I don’t think it would have appeared on my radar otherwise (I rarely watch either Bollywood - yes I know this is technically Tollywood - or action movies), and it was so much fun. It’s only 10 am here and I already recommended it to at least a half dozen different people.
But I have to admit I also sort of feel compelled to watch the new Downton Abbey movie as a chaser. Not sure if that’s a not-all-colonialists response or just wanting to see some pretty buildings and outfits without anyone getting a fist through their eyeballs.
posted by Mchelly at 6:51 AM on June 21, 2022
Also I loved the end dancing sequence, and it really makes me want to learn more about the different groups / regions / leaders it highlighted as “embers” and the roles they played in the uprising that led to independence. It was fantastic that (from my ignorant Western perspective) it seemed that they managed to go full-on political in an irresistibly captivating way.
posted by Mchelly at 6:57 AM on June 21, 2022
posted by Mchelly at 6:57 AM on June 21, 2022
This is amazing. I'm not even done yet so I'll check in more later but I want to report that the older white woman, Catherine Buxton, is Alison Doody, aka the love interest/secret Nazi from Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:04 PM on July 16, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 7:04 PM on July 16, 2022 [1 favorite]
Vox: RRR is an incredible action movie with seriously troubling politics
RRR manages to depict Adivasis as compatriots instead of enemies, and seems to think that’s generous enough. But the movie still presents Adivasis as, at best, simpletons who aid the journeys of the central, all-important upper-caste heroes. [...] Every choice made in the film is deeply steeped in and informed by a privileged upper-caste lens and framework that brutally reinforces the invisible Brahmanical hierarchy.
posted by 1970s Antihero at 7:01 AM on July 20, 2022 [8 favorites]
RRR manages to depict Adivasis as compatriots instead of enemies, and seems to think that’s generous enough. But the movie still presents Adivasis as, at best, simpletons who aid the journeys of the central, all-important upper-caste heroes. [...] Every choice made in the film is deeply steeped in and informed by a privileged upper-caste lens and framework that brutally reinforces the invisible Brahmanical hierarchy.
posted by 1970s Antihero at 7:01 AM on July 20, 2022 [8 favorites]
Vox: RRR is an incredible action movie with seriously troubling politics
That's really interesting. I wondered why Gandhi and Nehru weren't referenced at the end, but caste-politics was something I never would have considered. Thanks for posting it.
posted by Mchelly at 8:15 AM on July 20, 2022 [2 favorites]
That's really interesting. I wondered why Gandhi and Nehru weren't referenced at the end, but caste-politics was something I never would have considered. Thanks for posting it.
posted by Mchelly at 8:15 AM on July 20, 2022 [2 favorites]
I definitely did notice the part in Bheem's speech near the end where he says, "I am just a simple tribesman and I did not understand what you were doing!" and that felt like an OOF.
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:17 AM on July 20, 2022
posted by DirtyOldTown at 8:17 AM on July 20, 2022
If we're sharing commentaries, i haven't gone thru this but i was recced this one: unpacking RRR, Indian politics and cinema .
posted by cendawanita at 8:40 AM on July 20, 2022 [4 favorites]
posted by cendawanita at 8:40 AM on July 20, 2022 [4 favorites]
But by the way, Gandhi has a reputation that's mostly positive for sure, but that Vox article for some reason skips mentioning the connection he had with Hitler (well, admiring penpalship?? And his South African activism was also a reaction against his offense that Europeans classed the coloureds together with the black people), for all that section that elaborated on Hindutva fascism.
But the politics of this movie is undeniable, and i acknowledged to myself the aesthetic and my own distance (while we had our own blockbuster nationalist hit that erased other races in our anticolonial history that I'm staying away from) are the only reasons tht i can watch it.
posted by cendawanita at 8:47 AM on July 20, 2022 [1 favorite]
But the politics of this movie is undeniable, and i acknowledged to myself the aesthetic and my own distance (while we had our own blockbuster nationalist hit that erased other races in our anticolonial history that I'm staying away from) are the only reasons tht i can watch it.
posted by cendawanita at 8:47 AM on July 20, 2022 [1 favorite]
(which is why I was taking heart that Bheem was in disguise as a Muslim - taking every little bit that I can - because I was bracing myself considering the premise, and also for all that I enjoyed Baahubali, my deepest darkest chuckle unrelated to part 1's foreign army was the entire exchange with the Muslim merchant where the upshot is of course Indian steel is stronger than the Damascus sword the Muslim was handling.)
posted by cendawanita at 8:56 AM on July 20, 2022
posted by cendawanita at 8:56 AM on July 20, 2022
Thanks for this background--watching both RRR and Baahubali, I had the consistent sense that I was missing some problematic social/political overtones, but wasn't sure exactly what.
posted by LooseFilter at 11:55 AM on July 20, 2022 [1 favorite]
posted by LooseFilter at 11:55 AM on July 20, 2022 [1 favorite]
Thanks for the links! I have very little familiarity with internal Indian politics, so for the most part the main part of the movie's politics that I recognized was "British Empire Bad" (which is self-evidently true) and maybe a little eyebrow-raising at the "I am just a simple man who did not recognize your brilliant plan" bit. I am fully willing to take a more nuanced view of the movie as "extremely striking action movie that has pretty 👀 politics," along with, say, Dick Tracy.
posted by DoctorFedora at 7:03 PM on July 20, 2022
posted by DoctorFedora at 7:03 PM on July 20, 2022
I didn’t love this movie with anything like the passion I felt for Everything Everywhere All At Once....
I was discussing this with my roommate last night, who had the exact opposite reaction: "I'd thought that Everything Everywhere was my favorite movie of the year no question, but then I saw this." He is urging me to absolutely see it, and to see it on the big screen if at all possible. He is also ROYALLY pissed that it didn't get any real Oscar acknowledgement other than Best Song.
I'm not quite as sold - I don't tend to care about spectacle if the script has any warts in it (I hated Avatar for precisely that reason), and McHelly's comment above that "it’s The Fast and the Furious but in late colonial India" has me a bit skeptical. But I grant that that's a Me problem and it's still on the list.
But my roommate would probably encourage everyone to go see it, in a theater, immediately.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:31 AM on January 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
I was discussing this with my roommate last night, who had the exact opposite reaction: "I'd thought that Everything Everywhere was my favorite movie of the year no question, but then I saw this." He is urging me to absolutely see it, and to see it on the big screen if at all possible. He is also ROYALLY pissed that it didn't get any real Oscar acknowledgement other than Best Song.
I'm not quite as sold - I don't tend to care about spectacle if the script has any warts in it (I hated Avatar for precisely that reason), and McHelly's comment above that "it’s The Fast and the Furious but in late colonial India" has me a bit skeptical. But I grant that that's a Me problem and it's still on the list.
But my roommate would probably encourage everyone to go see it, in a theater, immediately.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:31 AM on January 26, 2023 [1 favorite]
Not gonna lie, I was upset it didn’t get nominated for special effects and pretty sure it deserved a Best Picture nomination more than Avatar.
posted by Mchelly at 7:46 AM on January 26, 2023
posted by Mchelly at 7:46 AM on January 26, 2023
Dude, I think that from a script standpoint, even the video project I made in high school deserved a Best Picture nomination more than Avatar.
that's more about me hating Avatar, though
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:27 AM on January 26, 2023
that's more about me hating Avatar, though
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:27 AM on January 26, 2023
I'm not quite as sold - I don't tend to care about spectacle if the script has any warts in it (I hated Avatar for precisely that reason)
The hesitance is understandable as you've never seen his other films (which he also scripted) but -- however my issue is as someone majoritarian from a similar post-col country rather than a minority of the west, by comparison to Avatar this movie is basically Network. The script work is tight. Not even the best F&F can say that.
But comparison to EEAAO is apples and oranges imho - such different cultural viewpoints in ways that their respective nuances function that would make attempts to make any comments about them that's generalizable to be absolutely foolhardy. (To start with, this is going to lean extra hard on the noble cause of defending one's nation and the traditions associated with it, and EEAAO is basically iconoclastic and is responding to the generational mental anguish that comes from trying to fulfill those cultural expectations).
It would be interesting to see how you respond to it. I have a sense non-Indian audiences responded to it as something very satisfyingly wish fulfilling without being interrupted in thinking about it's contribution to flattening the national narrative, much like how non-Americans enjoy the second Top Gun movie (this movie is still better though).
posted by cendawanita at 1:18 PM on January 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
The hesitance is understandable as you've never seen his other films (which he also scripted) but -- however my issue is as someone majoritarian from a similar post-col country rather than a minority of the west, by comparison to Avatar this movie is basically Network. The script work is tight. Not even the best F&F can say that.
But comparison to EEAAO is apples and oranges imho - such different cultural viewpoints in ways that their respective nuances function that would make attempts to make any comments about them that's generalizable to be absolutely foolhardy. (To start with, this is going to lean extra hard on the noble cause of defending one's nation and the traditions associated with it, and EEAAO is basically iconoclastic and is responding to the generational mental anguish that comes from trying to fulfill those cultural expectations).
It would be interesting to see how you respond to it. I have a sense non-Indian audiences responded to it as something very satisfyingly wish fulfilling without being interrupted in thinking about it's contribution to flattening the national narrative, much like how non-Americans enjoy the second Top Gun movie (this movie is still better though).
posted by cendawanita at 1:18 PM on January 26, 2023 [2 favorites]
But comparison to EEAAO is apples and oranges imho
Hey, tell my roommate that, he's the one that said it.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:16 PM on January 26, 2023
Hey, tell my roommate that, he's the one that said it.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:16 PM on January 26, 2023
....I finally saw it.
In a weird way I'd put it in the same category as Con Air - unsubtle and ridiculous as all hell, but only ways that make it awesome. Yes, the politics and societal stuff in it can be a little oogy, but you don't go to see this for a history lesson for the same reason you don't go to see Con Air for a discourse on the penal system. You go to see movies like this to see guys land planes on the Vegas Strip or to see guys throw live jaguars at each other.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:22 PM on March 4, 2023 [2 favorites]
In a weird way I'd put it in the same category as Con Air - unsubtle and ridiculous as all hell, but only ways that make it awesome. Yes, the politics and societal stuff in it can be a little oogy, but you don't go to see this for a history lesson for the same reason you don't go to see Con Air for a discourse on the penal system. You go to see movies like this to see guys land planes on the Vegas Strip or to see guys throw live jaguars at each other.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:22 PM on March 4, 2023 [2 favorites]
Western awards season campaign continues: SS Rajamouli does the VF Notes from A Scene with the Nattu Nattu song. I am extremely entertained (for rl politics reasons) that the whole sequence was filmed in Kyiv, Ukraine.
posted by cendawanita at 5:57 AM on March 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by cendawanita at 5:57 AM on March 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
but you don't go to see this for a history lesson for the same reason you don't go to see Con Air for a discourse on the penal system
This is very true, but just for your consideration: Imagine if the best if not only known fictionalization of a couple American indigenous freedom fighters reframed their background to heavily emphasize their supposed Christianity and America as a Christian nation.
posted by cendawanita at 6:00 AM on March 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
This is very true, but just for your consideration: Imagine if the best if not only known fictionalization of a couple American indigenous freedom fighters reframed their background to heavily emphasize their supposed Christianity and America as a Christian nation.
posted by cendawanita at 6:00 AM on March 7, 2023 [2 favorites]
This is very true, but just for your consideration: Imagine if the best if not only known fictionalization of a couple American indigenous freedom fighters reframed their background to heavily emphasize their supposed Christianity and America as a Christian nation.
Counterargument to continue your analogy - if you are showing this movie to an audience where the vast majority of people are from a Muslim or Shinto background, and know nothing about the Christian faith, are you certain they would even pick up on that signaling? Or, if you're showing this movie to an audience that knows nothing about American history, would they even GET that the people depicted were real people?
I know what you're getting at - but I also had to have someone else point that out to me, and explain why it was a thing. I otherwise wouldn't have been aware of it, because I was raised in the United States and grew up Catholic, and literally the only thing I'd known about religion in India prior to this was some stuff about Ganesha and Krishna (and the only reason I even knew about Krishna was because someone else once told me how The Legend of Bagger Vance was a riff on the Bhagavad Gita). Similarly, the only Indian freedom fighter I was aware of was Gandhi. The average person in the West who sees this won't know any of that and will only be getting off on "holy fuck that dude just picked up a motorcycle and used it like a club".
Disclaimer that I am only talking about the reception in the West. I'm assuming that the reception is very different and more nuanced in India and Pakistan itself; just like the reception here in the West to movies like They Died With Their Boots On or Gone With The Wind or The Patriot or J. Edgar or Pocahontas, or scores of others.
Ultimately what I'm getting at is: I don't think that the popularity of RRR in the West is going to lead to a huge shift in American awareness of Indian history, right or wrong. Instead, it seems more likely to lead to a shift in American awereness about Indian cinema. The Honest Trailers video about RRR made a good point that pretty much our only awareness of Indian cinema consists of a handful of GIFs, and "hey, aren't the closing credits to Slumdog Millionaire supposed to be like what Bollywood movies are all like?" I was also mistakenly calling this a "Bollywood" film for several weeks until I saw this other video, which explained that Bollywood is just one of several studio systems in India. I literally had no idea about that, and I'm a movie blogger.
In short - propaganda doesn't necessarily work when you're dealing with an audience of complete and utter ignoramuses like us.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:11 AM on March 7, 2023
Counterargument to continue your analogy - if you are showing this movie to an audience where the vast majority of people are from a Muslim or Shinto background, and know nothing about the Christian faith, are you certain they would even pick up on that signaling? Or, if you're showing this movie to an audience that knows nothing about American history, would they even GET that the people depicted were real people?
I know what you're getting at - but I also had to have someone else point that out to me, and explain why it was a thing. I otherwise wouldn't have been aware of it, because I was raised in the United States and grew up Catholic, and literally the only thing I'd known about religion in India prior to this was some stuff about Ganesha and Krishna (and the only reason I even knew about Krishna was because someone else once told me how The Legend of Bagger Vance was a riff on the Bhagavad Gita). Similarly, the only Indian freedom fighter I was aware of was Gandhi. The average person in the West who sees this won't know any of that and will only be getting off on "holy fuck that dude just picked up a motorcycle and used it like a club".
Disclaimer that I am only talking about the reception in the West. I'm assuming that the reception is very different and more nuanced in India and Pakistan itself; just like the reception here in the West to movies like They Died With Their Boots On or Gone With The Wind or The Patriot or J. Edgar or Pocahontas, or scores of others.
Ultimately what I'm getting at is: I don't think that the popularity of RRR in the West is going to lead to a huge shift in American awareness of Indian history, right or wrong. Instead, it seems more likely to lead to a shift in American awereness about Indian cinema. The Honest Trailers video about RRR made a good point that pretty much our only awareness of Indian cinema consists of a handful of GIFs, and "hey, aren't the closing credits to Slumdog Millionaire supposed to be like what Bollywood movies are all like?" I was also mistakenly calling this a "Bollywood" film for several weeks until I saw this other video, which explained that Bollywood is just one of several studio systems in India. I literally had no idea about that, and I'm a movie blogger.
In short - propaganda doesn't necessarily work when you're dealing with an audience of complete and utter ignoramuses like us.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 7:11 AM on March 7, 2023
Sure. But do Americans really think non-Americans were born with an exceptional sense of nuance and understanding of Americana or did we also go through that acculturation process via the act of consuming american pop culture?
Which is why for this hypothetical movie I introduced, as you continued: if you are showing this movie to an audience where the vast majority of people are from a Muslim or Shinto background, and know nothing about the Christian faith, are you certain they would even pick up on that signaling? this isn't really a counterpoint. The lack of fluency as your own anecdote with Bollywood showed (and one where south asian/diasporic mefites have gone over in other threads) isn't a static state. The familiarity brings awareness, even a messed up or incomplete one - ask anyone not particularly into British history what's their baseline knowledge of the British royalty and it's based on pop culture as much as anything. I certainly learned nothing useful about the American penal system from Con Air, but I also picked up the imagery of prisoner transport, which is certainly something I have little local analogy to. I am merely responding to the urge of using western ignorance as defence. Enjoy the movie, I certainly do. There's no reason to not also pick up things that the movie inevitably brings to your worldview.
posted by cendawanita at 8:03 AM on March 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
Which is why for this hypothetical movie I introduced, as you continued: if you are showing this movie to an audience where the vast majority of people are from a Muslim or Shinto background, and know nothing about the Christian faith, are you certain they would even pick up on that signaling? this isn't really a counterpoint. The lack of fluency as your own anecdote with Bollywood showed (and one where south asian/diasporic mefites have gone over in other threads) isn't a static state. The familiarity brings awareness, even a messed up or incomplete one - ask anyone not particularly into British history what's their baseline knowledge of the British royalty and it's based on pop culture as much as anything. I certainly learned nothing useful about the American penal system from Con Air, but I also picked up the imagery of prisoner transport, which is certainly something I have little local analogy to. I am merely responding to the urge of using western ignorance as defence. Enjoy the movie, I certainly do. There's no reason to not also pick up things that the movie inevitably brings to your worldview.
posted by cendawanita at 8:03 AM on March 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
But do Americans really think non-Americans were born with an exceptional sense of nuance and understanding of Americana or did we also go through that acculturation process via the act of consuming american pop culture?
Ah, but you don't necessarily get that acculturation from one single instance of American pop culture alone, and that was my ultimate point. Sometimes the thing you're watching makes it clear that "those guys from Hamilton [or whatever] are all based on real people", but sometimes they don't, and if they don't then you're just watching Chris Jackson and Leslie Odom Jr. being awesome dudes that "I guess they're made-up guys for the story or something". And it's that lack of familiarity that I'm referring to. (Again, I am talking about a single film here as opposed to an overall juggernaut; I'll be getting to that in a moment.)
I am merely responding to the urge of using western ignorance as defence. Enjoy the movie, I certainly do. There's no reason to not also pick up things that the movie inevitably brings to your worldview.
Right, but my point is that the movie itself didn't tell me about how Ram's costume towards the end of the movie is supposed to be a reference to the Ramayana, which in turn supports a Hindu-as-nationalism world view. For an American to pick that up from the film alone, they would first have to know
* Who Rama is,
* How Rama often dresses,
* That Alluri Sitarama Raju and Komaram Bheem were actually real people,
for starters. And this specific film doesn't really do all that great a job at giving that level of exposition to Western audiences. But it also wasn't trying to anyway, because it was filmed for a market that would know all of that anyway.
The comparison you were making suggests that you're hoping (or fearing, I'm not sure) that Americans will come away with an altered perspective of India's national history, but I'm saying that this film alone doesn't even give enough information for the average American moviegoer to know that this is connected to Indian history in the first place, save for what utter shits the British colonial forces were (and they were shits to us as well so we were already down with that perspective).
I agree that this film will bring things to Americans' worldview, but I'm simply saying that the things it brings would be "oh hang on, India has awesome action films, it's not all just movie-musical dancing and singing stuff." This is the very very beginning of American familiarity with Indian cinema, and the perspectives you're suggesting we would be picking up on wouldn't come until a couple years into people's deep dives into "Man, RRR was awesome and I had no idea Indian movies were like that, what else have I missed out on?" You're not wrong that we could pick up things, but that only happens when we're seeing the things to pick them up from, and that seeing-of-things has just barely started. And that start alone could be a good thing, because the West is also kind of insular about its entertainment and tends to avoid films from unfamiliar languages, let alone cultures (consider: the first time that the Academy gave the Best Picture Oscar to a film not made in the English language was in 2019).
So my statement that the average American wouldn't pick up on that from the film wasn't "defense", it was more of an acknowledgement that you're assuming a level of experience with non-Western cinema that simply isn't there. The flow of movies between the various parts of the world has been very largely one-sided for a long time - many people outside of the US have a bit of a working knowledge about American culture simply because we've been shoving multiple Hollywood movies and network TV down the rest of the world's throats since the 1930s, but the rest of the world's films get shoved to the sidelines here, and are perceived either as "art films" that only egghead geeks watch, or as films only for immigrant audiences in various cities. Once in a while something gets wider notice - RRR, or Parasite, or Life Is Beautiful or Kung Fu Hustle or Amelie - but those are single films from widely different parts of the world people are watching and then going back to watching the same Marvel/Lucasfilm/Hollywood stuff the rest of the world sees.
But each time someone sees a film from another country, in another language, it's a crack in that notion that "foreign language stuff is just art film stuff" or whatever, and it's a nudge towards "there's other stuff going on from other parts of the world and I could check that out". Bong Joon Ho famously chided Americans in his Best International Film acceptance speech: "Once you overcome the 1-inch-tall barrier of subtitles, you will be introduced to so many more amazing films." Americans would only be able to start acculturing themselves through cinema if they start seeing that cinema, and they have just barely begun to do that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:26 AM on March 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
Ah, but you don't necessarily get that acculturation from one single instance of American pop culture alone, and that was my ultimate point. Sometimes the thing you're watching makes it clear that "those guys from Hamilton [or whatever] are all based on real people", but sometimes they don't, and if they don't then you're just watching Chris Jackson and Leslie Odom Jr. being awesome dudes that "I guess they're made-up guys for the story or something". And it's that lack of familiarity that I'm referring to. (Again, I am talking about a single film here as opposed to an overall juggernaut; I'll be getting to that in a moment.)
I am merely responding to the urge of using western ignorance as defence. Enjoy the movie, I certainly do. There's no reason to not also pick up things that the movie inevitably brings to your worldview.
Right, but my point is that the movie itself didn't tell me about how Ram's costume towards the end of the movie is supposed to be a reference to the Ramayana, which in turn supports a Hindu-as-nationalism world view. For an American to pick that up from the film alone, they would first have to know
* Who Rama is,
* How Rama often dresses,
* That Alluri Sitarama Raju and Komaram Bheem were actually real people,
for starters. And this specific film doesn't really do all that great a job at giving that level of exposition to Western audiences. But it also wasn't trying to anyway, because it was filmed for a market that would know all of that anyway.
The comparison you were making suggests that you're hoping (or fearing, I'm not sure) that Americans will come away with an altered perspective of India's national history, but I'm saying that this film alone doesn't even give enough information for the average American moviegoer to know that this is connected to Indian history in the first place, save for what utter shits the British colonial forces were (and they were shits to us as well so we were already down with that perspective).
I agree that this film will bring things to Americans' worldview, but I'm simply saying that the things it brings would be "oh hang on, India has awesome action films, it's not all just movie-musical dancing and singing stuff." This is the very very beginning of American familiarity with Indian cinema, and the perspectives you're suggesting we would be picking up on wouldn't come until a couple years into people's deep dives into "Man, RRR was awesome and I had no idea Indian movies were like that, what else have I missed out on?" You're not wrong that we could pick up things, but that only happens when we're seeing the things to pick them up from, and that seeing-of-things has just barely started. And that start alone could be a good thing, because the West is also kind of insular about its entertainment and tends to avoid films from unfamiliar languages, let alone cultures (consider: the first time that the Academy gave the Best Picture Oscar to a film not made in the English language was in 2019).
So my statement that the average American wouldn't pick up on that from the film wasn't "defense", it was more of an acknowledgement that you're assuming a level of experience with non-Western cinema that simply isn't there. The flow of movies between the various parts of the world has been very largely one-sided for a long time - many people outside of the US have a bit of a working knowledge about American culture simply because we've been shoving multiple Hollywood movies and network TV down the rest of the world's throats since the 1930s, but the rest of the world's films get shoved to the sidelines here, and are perceived either as "art films" that only egghead geeks watch, or as films only for immigrant audiences in various cities. Once in a while something gets wider notice - RRR, or Parasite, or Life Is Beautiful or Kung Fu Hustle or Amelie - but those are single films from widely different parts of the world people are watching and then going back to watching the same Marvel/Lucasfilm/Hollywood stuff the rest of the world sees.
But each time someone sees a film from another country, in another language, it's a crack in that notion that "foreign language stuff is just art film stuff" or whatever, and it's a nudge towards "there's other stuff going on from other parts of the world and I could check that out". Bong Joon Ho famously chided Americans in his Best International Film acceptance speech: "Once you overcome the 1-inch-tall barrier of subtitles, you will be introduced to so many more amazing films." Americans would only be able to start acculturing themselves through cinema if they start seeing that cinema, and they have just barely begun to do that.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 9:26 AM on March 7, 2023 [1 favorite]
Yes, I can agree with that.
And specifically: The comparison you were making suggests that you're hoping (or fearing, I'm not sure) that Americans will come away with an altered perspective of India's national history
Oh I definitely never expected one movie to do all that.
Ultimately this exchange for me began as just one person's attempt to at least share some bits of info that I do know? It started in trying to respond to first your initial skepticism, where you dismissed it as mere spectacle, which was understandable because the earlier comparison to Fast & Furious, and then not to you, but to your friend's comparison to EEAAO. And then finally I am responding to the notion that you don't need to know anything to enjoy the movie - and you certainly don't have to, but here I'd like to offer some more context. I'm not certain why my responses are being taken as some kind of accusation that requires a defence - I am well aware of Americans' general baseline ignorance of non-American cultural references.
posted by cendawanita at 9:56 AM on March 7, 2023
And specifically: The comparison you were making suggests that you're hoping (or fearing, I'm not sure) that Americans will come away with an altered perspective of India's national history
Oh I definitely never expected one movie to do all that.
Ultimately this exchange for me began as just one person's attempt to at least share some bits of info that I do know? It started in trying to respond to first your initial skepticism, where you dismissed it as mere spectacle, which was understandable because the earlier comparison to Fast & Furious, and then not to you, but to your friend's comparison to EEAAO. And then finally I am responding to the notion that you don't need to know anything to enjoy the movie - and you certainly don't have to, but here I'd like to offer some more context. I'm not certain why my responses are being taken as some kind of accusation that requires a defence - I am well aware of Americans' general baseline ignorance of non-American cultural references.
posted by cendawanita at 9:56 AM on March 7, 2023
I think I was picking up what sounded like defensiveness because - while yes, you're right that there's more to the film, you only pick up on that if you're already versed in a particular background. And...you yourself agree that we're not familiar with that, so I'm not understanding why you're surprised we're not getting those references.
In fact - let's skip movies altogether and use the music of U2 as an example. (I promise this will make sense, just bear with me.) Three of the members of U2 are rather fervent Christians, and actually considered making U2 a "Christian Music" band for a while - but that wasn't the music they wanted to make. So, instead, they make the music they wanna make, but....on occasion they drop little Christian things in, either references in the lyrics or in the album cover art or whatever.
Now - sometimes they are obvious references (the line from "Beautiful Day" that goes "See the bird with the leaf in her mouth, after the flood all the colors came out" is something many people would spot as being a reference to the dove and the rainbow in the story about Noah's Ark). But other times they are less obvious: if you look at the album cover of "All That You Can't Leave Behind", you'll see the band standing around in an airport. And 90% of the people will simply see it as nothing more than that. But if you look at the sign behind them over on the far left, you will notice it says "J33-3". Now, those 90% of the people who see this as "the band standing around in an airport" will interpret that as "oh, that's probably a sign saying where to find a certain gate or whatever". But for those who are as steeped in Christianity as the band is, they will recognize it as a reference to a specific verse from the Bible - the Book of Jeremiah, Chapter 33, Verse 3: "Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know."
The story of Noah's Ark is way more familiar to a lot of people, but only the hardcore Christians would be able to see that "J33-3" alone and understand "oh, that's talking about the Book of Jeremiah". Now: can you enjoy the album without understanding that reference? Sure, it's a great album. Can you understand the album cover art without understanding that reference? Yes - you understand it maybe SLIGHTLY differently than someone who gets that reference, but it's not rendered incomprehensible if you don't. And finally: would you be able to figure out that reference from the photo alone? No - nothing else in the album cover gives you any clue that there's anything deeper about that sign, if you don't already know that reference. You would expressly have to be told that that was a reference the band was making, from an outside source, if you didn't already know.
So I think our disconnect may be coming from: you are seeing the references in RRR to be more like "See the bird with the leaf in her mouth" when it comes to how blatant they are, and I'm seeing them to be more like "J33-3". And that is why I think there are people comparing RRR to The Fast and The Furious or Everything Everywhere All At Once - because we're so unfamiliar with non-Western references (as you yourself agree), that the symbolism is coming across more like that "J33-3" and so it's flying straight over our heads, and all we have left is the spectacle.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:27 AM on March 7, 2023
In fact - let's skip movies altogether and use the music of U2 as an example. (I promise this will make sense, just bear with me.) Three of the members of U2 are rather fervent Christians, and actually considered making U2 a "Christian Music" band for a while - but that wasn't the music they wanted to make. So, instead, they make the music they wanna make, but....on occasion they drop little Christian things in, either references in the lyrics or in the album cover art or whatever.
Now - sometimes they are obvious references (the line from "Beautiful Day" that goes "See the bird with the leaf in her mouth, after the flood all the colors came out" is something many people would spot as being a reference to the dove and the rainbow in the story about Noah's Ark). But other times they are less obvious: if you look at the album cover of "All That You Can't Leave Behind", you'll see the band standing around in an airport. And 90% of the people will simply see it as nothing more than that. But if you look at the sign behind them over on the far left, you will notice it says "J33-3". Now, those 90% of the people who see this as "the band standing around in an airport" will interpret that as "oh, that's probably a sign saying where to find a certain gate or whatever". But for those who are as steeped in Christianity as the band is, they will recognize it as a reference to a specific verse from the Bible - the Book of Jeremiah, Chapter 33, Verse 3: "Call to me and I will answer you and tell you great and unsearchable things you do not know."
The story of Noah's Ark is way more familiar to a lot of people, but only the hardcore Christians would be able to see that "J33-3" alone and understand "oh, that's talking about the Book of Jeremiah". Now: can you enjoy the album without understanding that reference? Sure, it's a great album. Can you understand the album cover art without understanding that reference? Yes - you understand it maybe SLIGHTLY differently than someone who gets that reference, but it's not rendered incomprehensible if you don't. And finally: would you be able to figure out that reference from the photo alone? No - nothing else in the album cover gives you any clue that there's anything deeper about that sign, if you don't already know that reference. You would expressly have to be told that that was a reference the band was making, from an outside source, if you didn't already know.
So I think our disconnect may be coming from: you are seeing the references in RRR to be more like "See the bird with the leaf in her mouth" when it comes to how blatant they are, and I'm seeing them to be more like "J33-3". And that is why I think there are people comparing RRR to The Fast and The Furious or Everything Everywhere All At Once - because we're so unfamiliar with non-Western references (as you yourself agree), that the symbolism is coming across more like that "J33-3" and so it's flying straight over our heads, and all we have left is the spectacle.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 10:27 AM on March 7, 2023
Came to my attention by way of an Indian-American journalist who finally saw the movie post-oscars and was having Thoughts about it: A Wild Indian Blockbuster Is Ravishing Movie Fans, but They’re Missing Its Troubling Subtext
Obviously, one film cannot encompass everything, and as the filmmakers have themselves noted, RRR is sheer fantasy. I cannot fault viewers for enjoying RRR so much, whether they ironically lap up the superhuman stunts or get swept up in the thrilling anti-imperial action. I’m concerned more about the timing of it all, the global presence, the recipe for viral success that other filmmakers will be eyeing. It’s an ingenious form of soft-power propaganda, one that can be interpreted as positively asserting an otherwise-marginalized ideology. Other notable Indian films—the aforementioned Purab Aur Pachhim, LOC: Kargil, Gadar: Ek Prem Katha, and many, many more—have raised fiery nationalism to nowhere near the same viewership. RRR seems to have figured out an apt formula.
Already, it’s far from the only recent historical-fiction Indian blockbuster to soft-peddle nationalist ideology. This year alone, The Kashmir Files, praised by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, garnered controversy for giving Hindu nationalists more Islamophobic ammo through the use of alternative history. The Marathi period film Pawankhind whips up furor against the historic Muslim-led Mughal Empire, a sore spot for Hindutva acolytes. Even Rajamouli’s previous hits, like Baahubali, have been uplifted as “the answer to all anti-Hindu Bollywood crooks.” You don’t have to take my word for it. You can read the words of Hindu nationalists themselves, in provocative headlines like this one: “If The Kashmir Files Gave Liberals the Wounds, RRR Is the One Rubbing the Salt.”
In another context, I’d be excited about an adventurous Telugu-language film finally getting a wide-scale audience and bringing South Indian cinema to more of the world. But with RRR, I feel uneasy. I can’t say you shouldn’t experience this dazzling roller coaster of a movie, but I will say that you should keep your eyes open while doing so.
posted by cendawanita at 3:34 AM on March 14, 2023 [3 favorites]
Obviously, one film cannot encompass everything, and as the filmmakers have themselves noted, RRR is sheer fantasy. I cannot fault viewers for enjoying RRR so much, whether they ironically lap up the superhuman stunts or get swept up in the thrilling anti-imperial action. I’m concerned more about the timing of it all, the global presence, the recipe for viral success that other filmmakers will be eyeing. It’s an ingenious form of soft-power propaganda, one that can be interpreted as positively asserting an otherwise-marginalized ideology. Other notable Indian films—the aforementioned Purab Aur Pachhim, LOC: Kargil, Gadar: Ek Prem Katha, and many, many more—have raised fiery nationalism to nowhere near the same viewership. RRR seems to have figured out an apt formula.
Already, it’s far from the only recent historical-fiction Indian blockbuster to soft-peddle nationalist ideology. This year alone, The Kashmir Files, praised by Prime Minister Narendra Modi, garnered controversy for giving Hindu nationalists more Islamophobic ammo through the use of alternative history. The Marathi period film Pawankhind whips up furor against the historic Muslim-led Mughal Empire, a sore spot for Hindutva acolytes. Even Rajamouli’s previous hits, like Baahubali, have been uplifted as “the answer to all anti-Hindu Bollywood crooks.” You don’t have to take my word for it. You can read the words of Hindu nationalists themselves, in provocative headlines like this one: “If The Kashmir Files Gave Liberals the Wounds, RRR Is the One Rubbing the Salt.”
In another context, I’d be excited about an adventurous Telugu-language film finally getting a wide-scale audience and bringing South Indian cinema to more of the world. But with RRR, I feel uneasy. I can’t say you shouldn’t experience this dazzling roller coaster of a movie, but I will say that you should keep your eyes open while doing so.
posted by cendawanita at 3:34 AM on March 14, 2023 [3 favorites]
(cendawanita, can I just say, I really enjoy getting your cultural perspective...it's always interesting (I don't have any friends from Malaysia) and funny!)
posted by praemunire at 7:46 AM on March 14, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by praemunire at 7:46 AM on March 14, 2023 [1 favorite]
You are not logged in, either login or create an account to post comments
It's not so much that Rajamouli outdid himself, but it's like he's getting ever closer to that perfect balance of outlandish setpieces that's within a semblance of reality. Like, he doesn't need Hollywood, but Hollywood sure as hell need him. Like, Uncharted and the last Fast movie broke physics and managed to also be uninteresting, while this one, like the best of the industry can deliver action and character and narrative beats in the same sequence.
Hell, he managed to outdo Spielberg's WSS imo in having a dance number that's actually a fight sequence.
But talking about movies that came out at the same-ish time, considering this is a historical fantasy about living/grappling with the British, it's practically a freebie if anyone wants to make a video essay juxtaposing it with Bridgerton season 2. Not just themes but the genre tropes as well.
And because it leaned so much on known sociopolitical historical references, even though it's purely fiction it's absolutely worth noting that the uncomplicated good guy of the duo is a tribal minority who's being sheltered by a Muslim family. (The other guy is Batman. No, i will not take any questions.) And it's absolutely on-the-nose that his request to his friend at the end is to teach him literacy, but yet not cringe.
Stay for the ending song credits! The director himself makes a dance appearance.
posted by cendawanita at 9:10 AM on March 31, 2022 [1 favorite]