Slumdog Millionaire

Slumdog Millionaire

Am I the only one who was shocked at the brutality and torture at the beginning of this movie?

I read a number of reviews before I went to the movie and more since I have seen it. None of them mention the physical shock of seeing a quiet gentle man brutalized in the first few scenes.

People where I live are singing the praises of the movie. They delight in the use of the two languages, “It makes it more authentic,” they say. “And the scenes in the slums are so realistic you can almost smell them,” these are aspect that score points.

The acting is to be admired and the beautiful expressive eyes, especially on the children are heart melting. No one mentions the scene where horror takes over and one set of beautiful eyes is blinded so the child can better earn money as a beggar.

Are these two events: the torture of a person from the slums and the blinding of a child from a low socioeconomic group so common in India that they don’t require mention?

I would like to think that both episodes were part of the film because the director Danny Boyle wanted the world to be know that that is how life is lived ( and suffered) by the majority of Indians.

I believe that his 1995 movie, ‘Trainspotting’, helped introduce many of us to the horrors of the world of drug dependency. In Slumdog Millionaire the Slumdog (Jamal Malik) appears to accept that he should have to put up with torture from the authorities – perhaps put up with any cruelty that comes his way. As he has success after success on the Indian version of ‘Who wants to be a Millionaire’ he becomes a national hero but this makes no difference to the police and the brutal tactics they use to try to get him to admit he is cheating.

I really wonder why people don’t comment on this aspect of the award winning movie? Perhaps we don’t want to focus on such a negative aspect and it certainly is a great film?

If Danny Boyle gets an Oscar I will be the first to cheer.

Vicky Cristina Barcelona

‘Vicky Cristina Barcelona’ Woody Allen’s new film is (in brief) about two American girls spending their summer in Barcelona.

They go for different reasons. Vicky is taking a break from her impending, conventional marriage and is a student of Catalan culture. Cristina is a free spirit searching for love, a purpose to her life and experience.

They stay with Vicky’s cousin, an establish American family, living in the city, who take them to an art opening where Cristina spies and eyes up the gorgeous local painter Juan Antonio played stunningly by Javier Bardem. Juan notices them too. How could it be otherwise?

He oozes a sort of bohemian sex appeal. Watching him chat up both the girls (he is equally taken by both of them) it is impossible to imagine him as the sociopathic killer, Anton Chigurh, in ‘No Country for Old Men’. Both sociopath and seducer are wonderful performances and equally believable.

The story moves along with Vicky being faithful to her fiancée back in the states but she accompanies Cristina on a weekend away with Juan.

There is no way either girl could resist his charms? The three become romantically and sexually entangled and then they are joined by Maria Elena (Penelope Cruz) Juan’s mentally-unstable -ex-wife who is reported to have tried to knife him afact that intrigues Cristina. For me this is probably the best part of the film – the interaction between Juan and Maria Elena is funny, slick and taught with tension.

The film is funny, beautiful and sensuous. The skies are blue; the sun is golden and the weather balmy. It’s thought provoking about love, duty and our own happiness and fulfillment.

I fell in love with Barcelona, the sensuous laidback painter, Juan Antonio and the beautiful Maria Elena- Penelope Cruz - who was superb in her part.

Go to the movie – it’s a good experience and the ending gives us all a moment when we look at ourselves and reflect and wonder what decision we would have made.

This dramatic photo is of Maria Elena posing for Cristina who is finding her creativity in photography.