Destiny. Slumdog Millionaire, the 2009 winner of the Oscar for “Best Motion
Picture of the Year” dexterously employs this concept in the telling of a
rags-to-riches romance story. The film centers around eighteen-year-old Jamal
Malik, a destitute orphan from the slums of Mumbai, who finds himself as a
contestant on India’s rendition of “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire.” As Jamal
approaches an unlikely victory, a mere one question away from twenty million
rupees, police arrest him under suspicion of his uncanny ability to answer all
of the questions correctly. By happenstance, however, each question implicates
Jamal’s multitude of life experiences from a violent religious dispute in his
childhood slum, to his brother’s, Salim’s, involvement with urban gangs, and
most importantly, of his one true love, Latika. Thus, director Danny Boyle uses
the questions on the game show to trace the relationship between Jamal and
Latika throughout their childhood, adolescence, and present state of adulthood.
This romance is central to the narrative of this film, as Jamal attributes his
participation on the game show to finding her. In order to reclaim Latika, the
two face a monumental obstacle in her marriage to a brute and powerful
gangster. This film, then, uses this relationship as a foundation for a
multifaceted love story that focuses on defying the odds to be with one’s true
love; a love story of destiny. (Colson & Boyle, 2008)
Boyle employs an interesting narrative construction in tracing the romantic relationship between Jamal and Latika from their early childhood and adolescent years. Thus, these periods are not typified by an innocent and childlike affinity for one another. Jamal and his brother Salim lose their childhood friend Latika, leaving adolescent Jamal longing to find and save his love. In a scene set in the heartland of Mumbai, riddled with destitution, Jamal inquires about Latika; as the scene shifts to different locations and different interactions between locals, Jamal seems relentless in his quest. Then the scene shifts to a dialogue between Jamal and Salim in their apparent workplace of a restaurant kitchen. Here, a dialogue between Jamal and his brother ensues, which demonstrates two diametrically opposite perceptions of engagement in monogamous relationships; on end of the spectrum is Jamal, who cannot deny his brother’s mocking claims that he is “ghost searching for his lost love,” (Colson & Boyle, 2008 49:38) and on the other end is Salim who claims there is, “Plenty of pussy in Bombay for Salim” (Colson & Boyle, 2008).
Boyle employs an interesting narrative construction in tracing the romantic relationship between Jamal and Latika from their early childhood and adolescent years. Thus, these periods are not typified by an innocent and childlike affinity for one another. Jamal and his brother Salim lose their childhood friend Latika, leaving adolescent Jamal longing to find and save his love. In a scene set in the heartland of Mumbai, riddled with destitution, Jamal inquires about Latika; as the scene shifts to different locations and different interactions between locals, Jamal seems relentless in his quest. Then the scene shifts to a dialogue between Jamal and Salim in their apparent workplace of a restaurant kitchen. Here, a dialogue between Jamal and his brother ensues, which demonstrates two diametrically opposite perceptions of engagement in monogamous relationships; on end of the spectrum is Jamal, who cannot deny his brother’s mocking claims that he is “ghost searching for his lost love,” (Colson & Boyle, 2008 49:38) and on the other end is Salim who claims there is, “Plenty of pussy in Bombay for Salim” (Colson & Boyle, 2008).
(Screenshot from movie, 48:47)
(Screenshot from movie, 49:55)
The juxtaposition of Salim and Jamal is
interesting in thinking about the expectations for males in terms of
relationships. While Jamal’s adolescent longing for Latika is cute, Salim’s
crude statement receives support, via laughs, from the other employees. When
analyzing this dichotomy, then, we are led to believe that the predominantly
supported belief weighs in favor of Salim; Salim’s dismissal of monogamy is, in
fact, endorsed. This idea adheres to the Heterosexual Script’s notion of Masculine
Commitment, which “states that men actively avoid commitment, marriage,
monogamy, or taking their romantic relationships ‘to the next level’” (Kim,
Sorsoli, Collins, Zylbergold, Schooler, & Tolman, 2007, p. 148). Keeping this in mind, then, we have a
character, Jamal, who opposes this concept, while simultaneously having a
character, Salim, who embodies the concept and receives support in holding this
belief. Thus, in sum we are led to believe that the more accepted notion of male
commitment is exampled by Salim, and therefore exampled by the Heterosexual
Script’s notion of Masculine Commitment.
This scene, in being predominated by the
male voice, lacks a discussion of the female positionality in relationships.
Arguably, however, the lack of a female presence embodies the notion of
“symbolic annihilation” of women, which centers on the idea that a “lack of
visibility has resulted in narrow and stereotyped depictions” (Holz
Ivory, Gibson, Ivory, 2009, p. 174).
This is not to say that Latika herself ought to have been present in this
scene; after all the storyline of this part of the movie revolves around the
separation of the star crossed lovers. However, the lack of a female voice in
the kitchen environment avoids the introduction of the female perspective.
Thus, this scene silences the female voice, focusing exclusively on the male
conception of romantic relationships.
As the film progresses into
adulthood, Jamal manages to finally discover the whereabouts of Latika. By
following his brother, now an employee of the gangster of the two’s childhood
slum, to the gangster’s house, Jamal uncovers Latika’s marriage to the gangster
himself. He enters the house, posing as a dishwasher, and the two embrace,
knowing exactly who each other are despite years of separation. Latika, however,
seems obviously hesitant, knowing full well her abusive husband is in close
proximity. The husband enters, and during his fits of rage at the happenings of
a cricket game, Jamal quietly whispers his love for Latika and implores her to
leave her husband, proclaiming, “I will wait. The VT station. 5’oclock, every
day until you come” (Colson & Boyle, 2008). Latika shakes her head at Jamal
and dismisses his statements of adoration as being “too late” (Colson &
Boyle, 2008 1:19:43).
This scene exclusively focuses on
the relationship between Jamal and Latika, and introduces a relatively uncommon
take on male-female dynamics in relationships. Considering this scene in
isolation, audiences are led to believe that men will go to any lengths to
unite with their one true love. Jamal employs sly tactics to learn of Latika’s
whereabouts, and despite her dismissal, he refuses to give up, evidenced by his
proclamation that he will wait at the train station until she arrives.
Considering the Heterosexual Script, while Jamal tends to follow notion of
Masculine Courting Strategies in being the “protector and provider,” he does
not use “wealth, power, or physical strength” to win back Latika; instead, he counteracts
this concept by using endearing and genuine language and action (Kim,
Sorsoli, Collins, Zylbergold, Schooler, & Tolman, 2007, p. 148).
Coupled with Jamal’s departure from
the Heterosexual Script, is Latika’s unconventional apathy towards the future
of their relationship. Despite Jamal’s overt advances and imploration for her
to leave her husband and flee with her true love, Latika upholds a stance of
practicality and pragmatism realizing the futility and implausibility of her
leaving. This runs incredibly counteractive to the Heterosexual Script’s notion
of Feminine Commitment. According to this conception, “women prioritize their
romantic relationships, making sacrifices for the sake of their partners” (Kim,
Sorsoli, Collins, Zylbergold, Schooler, & Tolman, 2007, p. 148). In this scene, despite the blatancy of
the couple’s mutual infatuation, Latika shirks this path, temporarily opting
for her financially secure but abusive preexisting relationship.
That scene fashioned another
obstacle for the fated lovers; but in being a love story with a happy ending,
their separation was impermanent. After Salim hands Latika his cell phone and
car keys, Latika finally escapes her tyrannical husband, and this happens to
coincide with Jamal’s return to “Who Wants to Be a Millionaire” for the final,
decisive question. With his face seemingly flooding the televisions throughout
the streets of Mumbai, Latika abandons her car to be able to watch. Jamal faces
a question he does not know the answer to, opting to use his final lifeline,
“Phone a Friend.” He calls his brother’s phone, but unknowing of Salim’s
bequest of his phone and car to Latika, Latika answers at the very last second.
She cannot provide any insight into the answer to the question, but at the
sound of Latika’s voice, Jamal seems at peace. He answers the question with a
blind guess, and happens to guess correctly thus winning “Who Wants to Be a
Millionaire.” Latika begins joyfully running for the train station, where Jamal
happens to be sitting after his monumental victory. The two seem to be the only
people in the train station, as they finally embrace wholeheartedly, and Jamal
proclaims, “This is our destiny” (Colson & Boyle, 2008).
(Batun, 2012)
Despite the previous scene’s
departure from the Heterosexual Script idea of Feminine Commitment, this scene
seems to endorse this idea of Feminine Commitment. Evidently in this scene,
Latika gives up her other life for a life with Jamal; she leaves a life of financial
security and status for Jamal. The abusive relationship she was in certainly
does not offer the conventional sense of security, but movie does not take
issue with the after effects of her leaving her gangster husband. Thus, we are
prone to envision a response of retaliation after this fairytale period with
Jamal. In other words, in line with the idea of Feminine Commitment, as women
“making sacrifices for their partners,” it seems that Latika makes the ultimate
sacrifice in leaving her husband for Jamal; she opts for a more precarious
relationship threatened by the prospect of her husband’s retaliation (Kim,
Sorsoli, Collins, Zylbergold, Schooler, & Tolman, 2007, p. 148).
For Jamal as well, this scene seems
to rescind his divergence from the Heterosexual Script idea of Masculine
Courting Strategies. Based on this scene, we can see the inexorable influence
of wealth in ultimately winning one’s lover. This scene does not necessarily
contend that Latika chose Jamal because of his money; after all she left her
husband before Jamal wins the game show. However, it would be naïve to ignore
the coincidence of Jamal’s winning of an incredible sum of money and his
reunion with Latika. To revisit the dimension of Masculine Courting Strategies,
this idea centers around men’s use of wealth, power, or physical strength to
fulfill their protector and provider role in a relationship (Kim,
Sorsoli, Collins, Zylbergold, Schooler, & Tolman, 2007, p. 148). While previously Jamal embodied the
protector and provider facet of this code, he lacked the substantiating wealth,
power, and strength. In this scene, however, Jamal’s winning leads him to his
ultimate reunification with Latika; thus, this scene seemingly demonstrates
that adherence to the Masculine Courting Strategies are a man’s path to
successfully courting a female.
Slumdog
Millionaire as a whole seems to purport a fantastical approach to
relationships in being such an idealistic story. The movie seems to support the
belief that men and women want a relationship that appears unattainable. Thus,
this movie extensively appeals to our sense of romanticism, or “endorsement of
romantic love ideals” (Lippman, Ward, & Seabrook, 2014,
p. 128). Romanticism can be
understood as a compilation of four unique dimensions: Love Finds a Way, One
and Only, Idealization, and Love at First Sight. When looking at Slumdog Millionaire, it seems that this
movie exemplifies three out of the four of these dimensions, with the only
exception being Idealization, “the belief that a ‘true love’ will be nearly
perfect,” which is countered by the numerous difficulties the couple faces (Lippman,
Ward, & Seabrook, 2014, p. 128).
Love Finds a Way, or “the belief that love can overcome all obstacles,” is
fully evidenced by this movie; Jamal and Latika manage to triumph over several
obstacles because of their fate (Lippman, Ward, & Seabrook, 2014,
p. 128). One and Only, or
“the belief that we have ‘soul mates’” is central to Jamal’s extensive and
relentless search and yearning for Latika. Boyle’s construction of a narrative
rooted in childhood naturally implicates this notion of Love at First Sight,
“the belief that when we meet the right person, we know it almost immediately”
(Lippman, Ward, & Seabrook, 2014, p. 129). Interestingly, then, the narrative of Slumdog Millionaire seems to revolve around the idea of
romanticism, in purporting a fanciful story with a happy-ending.
It is also fascinating to put Slumdog Millionaire in conversation with
some of Mary-Lou Galician’s 12 Major Mass Media Myths of sex, love, and
romance. Galician “found a relationship between mass media usage and
unrealistic romantic expectations for both men and women,” leading her to the
identification of these twelve myths (Bader, 2007, p. 147). This movie seems to adhere to three of Galician’s myths. The first myth states,
“Your perfect partner is cosmically pre-destined, so nothing/nobody can ultimately
separate you.” (Bader, 2007, p. 149). This myth seems strikingly similar to
romanticism’s dimension of “Love Finds a Way,” but undoubtedly permeates the Slumdog Millionaire narrative, which
ends in a declaration of “destiny.” Galician’s second myth again alludes to the
realness of the phenomenon of love at first sight; another concept shared with
romanticism and ingrained into the central narrative (Bader, 2007, p. 149).
Finally, Galician’s tenth myth states, “The right mate ‘completes you’—filling
your needs and making your dreams come true” (Bader, 2007, p. 149). This myth
parallels with romanticism’s notion of “One and Only,” and is mirrored by
Jamal’s extensive quest to reclaim his one true love.
Overall, Slumdog Millionaire conceptualizes romance in an incredibly
idealistic manner, which simultaneously validates many of the constructs of
both romanticism and Galician’s twelve media myths. Importantly, during her
research on these twelve myths, Galician “argued that popular culture offers
few portrayals of healthy relationships” (Bader, 2007, p. 147). In essence, she
argues that unrealistic romantic expectations exhibited by our populace stem from
media’s lack of “nonmythical, nonstereotypical relational strategies” (Bader,
2007, p. 147). This movie typifies these stereotyped and mythical portrayals. Slumdog Millionaire may seem to have a
happy-go-lucky ending, leaving viewers with a fairytale ending; but our
tendency to adopt unrealistic romantic expectations may have Jamal and Latika’s
destiny leaving us disillusioned.
References
Bader, A. (2007). "Love will steer the stars" and
other improbable feats: Media myths in popular love songs. In M.-L. Galician
& D. L. Merskin (Eds.), Critical thinking about sex, love, and romance in
the mass media (pp. 141-160). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Batun, M.S. (2012, March 6). Slumdog Millionaire last scene. [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWOOC7NZJTA
Colson, C. (Producer) & Boyle, D.
(Director). (2008). Slumdog Millionaire [Motion
Picture]. India: Fox Searchlight.
Holz Ivory, A., Gibson, R., & Ivory, J. D. (2009).
Gendered relationships on television: Portrayals of same-sex and heterosexual
couples. Mass Communication & Society, 12(2), 170-192. doi:
10.1080/15205430802169607
Kim, J. L., Sorsoli, C. L., Collins, K., Zylbergold, B. A.,
Schooler, D., & Tolman, D. L. (2007). From sex to sexuality: Exposing the
heterosexual script on primetime network television. Journal of Sex Research,
44(2), 145-157. doi: 10.1080/00224490701263660
Lippman, J. R., Ward, L. M., & Seabrook, R. C. (2014).
Isn’t it romantic? Differential associations between romantic screen media
genres and romantic beliefs. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(3),
128-140. doi: 10.1037/ppm0000034
No comments:
Post a Comment