Why Some People Hate Slumdog Millionaire: A Critical Review

Slumdog Millionaire was released in 2008 and went on to earn numerous accolades, including eight Academy Awards. However, its reception wasn't entirely positive, especially in India where the film faced criticism. This article delves into the reasons why some individuals, including renowned Indian filmmakers, did not appreciate the movie.

Introduction to Slumdog Millionaire

Slumdog Millionaire follows the tumultuous journey of Jamal Malik, a young man from the slums of Mumbai, as he competes on a televised version of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. The film explores themes of poverty, resilience, and the human spirit, providing an evocative portrayal of life in the Indian slums. While the movie garnered critical acclaim and box office success, it also sparked controversy in certain quarters, particularly in India.

Adoor Gopalakrishnan's Critique

Adoor Gopalakrishnan, a renowned Indian film director, expressed his displeasure with the film in an interview with NDTV. According to Gopalakrishnan, a five-time winner of the Indian National Film Awards, the movie did not warrant intense scrutiny:

To know more about the movie's plot, characters, cast, etc., click on the further link.

Gopalakrishnan's Perspective

Gopalakrishnan states that while he did not hate the movie, he did not find it particularly extraordinary. He noted:

As an Indian, I didn't find anything special about the movie. If I say I hate this movie, no never, but if you say it's extraordinary, no, it's not. Its name and story are about the "Slumdog Millionaire," so I have no problem if it portrays India wrongly because the life of poor people is like hell, whether it's India or America.

He further elaborates on specific aspects of the film:

He gives the plot 9/10, suggesting that while the narrative is strong, the portrayal of Mumbai during the 1970s and 1980s is misleading. Gopalakrishnan criticizes the depiction, claiming that the city was portrayed as a place where one could "kidnap or kill anyone and live free."

He discusses the portrayal of the Millionaire game show judge. Gopalakrishnan feels that the movie could have portrayed him more accurately, possibly giving him a chance to explain the correct answer in the washroom, where he could have told the truth to Jamal.

Gopalakrishnan also mentions that the movie could have given a slightly different twist to the story by portraying people's inherent tendency to help the underprivileged as a positive factor.

Despite these criticisms, Gopalakrishnan concludes that the movie is average, primarily because there are many better Indian movies available. He points out that Indian cinema offers a vast array of films with compelling narratives, rich characters, and emotional depth:

Many people outside India love Slumdog Millionaire. They think they have a jackpot and will enjoy thousands of movies. But why not before them? This question makes me feel that really why not, which arises a little anger toward this movie.

Comparative Analysis with Hollywood

Gopalakrishnan also compares the film's popularity with Hollywood productions and expresses his skepticism about the hype around Slumdog Millionaire. He discusses several popular Hollywood movies such as Inception, Interstellar, The Girl on the Train, The Pianist, and The Machinist. He mentions that these films often have IMDb ratings of 6 to 7, yet Slumdog Millionaire achieved an IMDb rating of 8. He feels that there is a significant gap between the hype and the actual quality of the movie:

If you assume that I just watch Indian movies and opening my big mouth comparing Hollywood to Bollywood, no, I am not. I have a fondness for many Hollywood movies. When I hear names like Inception, Interstellar, The Girl on the Train, The Pianist, The Machinist, and many more arise, and when I see this, I feel that there is much more hype for this [Slumdog Millionaire] than there should be. Because we have these types of movies in Bollywood, usually with an IMDb 6 to 7.

Gopalakrishnan's final conclusion is that he prefers another movie, The Life of Pi, which he believes should receive more recognition. He mentions that he would give it more stars than Slumdog Millionaire, but also notes that the movie is available on IMDb, which can be used for a more detailed comparison.

Concluding Thoughts

The reception of Slumdog Millionaire is complex, with its overseas success and critical acclaim coexisting with domestic criticisms. Adoor Gopalakrishnan's evaluation highlights the diverse perspectives on the film, reflecting on the challenges of adapting stories from one cultural context to another. His critique serves as a reminder that cinematic storytelling is not just about entertainment but can also raise questions about cultural representation and the balance between authenticity and artistic license.