Jodhaa- Akbar: The Subtleties of the Bollywood Masala Film

Last weekend I watched the much awaited Jodhaa- Akbar (2008) as it finally released in theaters. Set in the sixteenth century, the Muslim emperor Akbar marries a Hindu princess Jodhaa, to strengthen his political relationships with the Rajput Kings. In an act of defiance and retaliation against all expectations of female subordination, the princess agrees to marry him only if she is allowed to maintain her Hindu traditions and is allowed to have a temple in the palace. As the relationship between the couple evolves from an alliance to a marriage based on love, we see the evolution of Akbar into a heroic and humane leader as he is shaped by Jodhaa's teachings of religious acceptance and ruling with one's heart.

Despite the reputation of Oscar nominated Ashutosh Gowariker and the star cast of Aishwarya Rai Bachchan and Hrithik Roshan, the film had a mediocre opening weekend. Supposedly one of the most anticipated films of the year, 1500 prints were released across 26 countries, making it one of India's largest releases. However, several problems, such as the shutting down of theaters running the film due to apparent historical inaccuracies prevented a smooth release. Moreover, the inability of the distributors and multiplex exhibitors to reach a revenue sharing ratio by the release date, as well as strong opposition from animal rights activists caused further difficulty during the opening weekend.

Film critics gave Jodhaa- Akbar raving reviews, but I wanted to examine audience reaction to the film, especially given its problematic release. I therefore decided to explore the blogosphere, and on coming across very mixed reviews of the film, I chose to respond to two posts. The first, Was It Suraj Barjatya Directing the Movie? on FilmiKhabar, is a negative review of the film, discussing its adherence to the formulaic melodramatic conventions of Bollywood. The second, When Love Meets War: Jodha Akbar at Sulekha.com is more flattering, discussing its musical accomplishments, excellent performances and impressive costume design (see illustration above) while pointing out its shortcomings in terms of historical accuracy and set design, as seen in the illustration below. My responses can be seen below as well as on their respective websites.

Was It Suraj Barjatya Directing the Movie?

Comment:
I enjoyed reading your review and appreciate your balanced feedback on the film. Moreover, your comparison of Jodhaa- Akbar to an average Indian family melodrama and even an Ekta Kapoor television soap is interesting, and I do see a superficial resemblance between the two. However, I would like to illustrate the depth and larger significance of Jodhaa- Akbar's narrative in contrast to the meaningless formulaic drama of many other Bollywood films.

Unlike the typical portrayal of an arranged marriage, Gowariker uses this alliance to discuss pertinent issues of secularism and feminism that plague India today. The ground- breaking marriage of a Muslim emperor to a Hindu princess in the sixteenth century, the respect he shows for her religion by allowing her to remain a Hindu, a practice uncommon even today, and her ability to have a Hindu temple in the Islamic palace serves as a metaphor for a larger message of tolerance and acceptance that is still lacking in the country.

The developing relationship between Akbar and Jodhaa is far from predictable, and their characterizations are strong, dynamic and three dimensional. The concurrence of Jodhaa to marry Akbar for her father's political gain, but the stipulation of conditions under which she will marry represents her defiant nature without her disregard for traditions, an important statement for women in India today. Similarly, the "wife trying to impress the husband by cooking food for him" is indicative of Jodhaa's retention of Indian values despite her rejection of Indian female passivity with her confrontational, independent- minded character and her flare for sword fighting. The "husband trying to impress his wife with his body" is more than just a display of Roshan's physique in this case, since the body of Aishwarya Rai, who is known for her beauty the world over, is surprisingly never showcased in a similar light. The objectifying of the male body rather than the female body epitomizes Gowariker's message of feminism in his attempt at straying away from the exhibition of the female body and the prioritization of the male gaze.

I do, however, agree that moments in the film are overly dramatized and that critical plot points are spelled out for the audience, leaving little room for narrative subtlety. Perhaps these elements of a Bollywood masala film are Gowarikar's response to the lukewarm reception of his last film Swades (2004) that went against many norms of the mainstream Bollywood musical. However, the visual scale of the film should not be ignored in favor of narrative critique. Jodhaa- Akbar's cinematography meets international standards with its extravagant set design, opulent costumes and magnificent visual style. The depth- of- field of the shots depicting the growing romance between the central protagonists serves as an effective indication of the larger societal implications of their cross cultural relationship. Furthermore, the rich red and green costumes that are echoed in the set design are indicative of their opposing yet complimentary personalities and the socio- political impact their relationship has on their surroundings. Although the CGI leaves room for improvement, it is unlike anything Bollywood has ever seen before, let alone ventured to accomplish. Clearly, behind this Bollywood masala film is the cinematic subtlety and vision of a master, continuing to bravely conquer untrodden paths.

When Love Meets War: Jodhaa Akbar

Comment:
You make some excellent points regarding the cinematography and music score of the film. A. R. Rahman's music incorporates "Sufi and Meera Bhajans" as well as "classic and folk songs" to bring out the inherent conflict yet the melodic interplay between Hindu and Muslim cultures within India. Moreover, the use of Hindi by Jodhaa and Urdu by Akbar further depicts the religious subtexts of the developing relationship between the two. Akbar's adoption of the Hindi word "rasoigarh" (kitchen) as a sign of appreciation for Jodhaa's hand- cooked feast is one of many understated attempts on the part of Gowariker to add depth to the declining Hindu- Muslim conflicts between the couple as the film progresses. It is true that Mughal- e- azam (1960) is replete with "silken dialogs" in a completely pure and poetic form of an often incomprehensible Urdu. Gowariker however, uses the intricacies of language to depict the dynamics between religions across the country, and imbues dialog with the elegance and royalty of the Mughal era while making it completely comprehensible to the contemporary common man.

In terms of visual design, I think the film is leagues ahead of anything that has come out of Bollywood. Perhaps a comparison to Mughal- e- azam is unfair given that the film was black and white and much of the beauty of the sets relies on audience imagination. In comparing the Mughal palaces of Jodhaa- Akbar to the "Chandramukhi Mahal of Devdas (2002)" however, I completely disagree with your comments. While Bhansali was aiming at assaulting the senses of the audience with sheer opulence and color, Gowariker's sets were far more sophisticated and detailed, never overpowering the actors or their performances like the latter. Moreover, Gowariker uses more than just lavish sets and costumes to contribute to the visual style of his film. From the visceral high- speed tracking shots going backwards as the two opposing armies collide on the battle- field, to Jodhaa's delicate dropping of the beautifully embroidered translucent veil to serve as a barrier against Akbar during the initial phases of their relationship, the cinematography of film is loading with meaning and is visually breath- taking.

On the note of accuracy, I feel Gowariker effectively modernizes aspects of the characters while retaining the authenticity of the period, thereby leaving out certain aspects of Akbar's life in order to convey the themes of religious and gender equality, and to allow audiences to identify with the film. The disclaimer at the very beginning of the film explicitly stating that it is depicting only one version of history, illustrates that the film was attempting to make a much larger "socio- political critique" on society rather than a factual exploration of Emperor Akbar's life. It is a pity that the visual excellence of this film is going unnoticed in several parts of India due to protests against its alleged historical inaccuracies.

More Than Just Celluloid: Bollywood's Growing Avenues of Consumption

There has been much hype regarding increasing foreign investments, proliferation of local studios and corporatization within the Indian film industry. "The new money flowing into the business may be marking a change of culture behind the scenes", business analysts say. Disney's rise in share ownership of UTV Software Communications to 30%, the first Bollywood co- production with Hollywood major Sony Pictures and the escalating number of initial public offerings of Indian production houses on London's AIM is flooding international media. The credit for the 25% growth in revenue of the Indian film industry is given to increased capital and competition due to the sudden surge of local and foreign players in the field. I however, feel that the primary reason for the evolution of content and business models within the industry, should be attributed to the change in the ways in which audiences are able to consume film today, a factor that is largely ignored.

Corporatization has clearly grown the market, changing the structure of Bollywood production houses. The rise in the number of studios has altered the business model of family run companies with no production contracts, schedules, or bound scripts. The burgeoning number of key players in the industry, extravagant marketing campaigns and unconventional narratives that go beyond song and dance ridden family dramas have contributed to the qualitative transitions of the Bollywood film. However, the crucial and often undocumented reason for such a transition is the establishment of legitimized distribution outlets within the increasingly vertically integrated studios. In the past, production houses created films for distributors. Within the incestuous industry, films were bought on the basis of relationships shared among creative players rather than content. Producers would not display their films to potential distributors in the fear of not being able to sell them, and the latter banked on the star power and universal appeal of the formulaic Hindi film to sustain itself in theaters. Production houses have now helped set up professional distribution systems and often disseminate their own products, thereby allowing for the creation of visual texts for audiences rather than distributors. This has resulted in the generation of more experimental, low budget and independent films without a major star cast, enabling producers to market and distribute their films according to their unique positioning and target audiences. Bheja Fry (2007) for example, made with a $150,000 budget and no A-list actors, made an astonishing $2 million at the box office. Its success was predominantly due to the fact that it followed a pattern of platform distribution, releasing only seventy prints initially and increasing the number of prints as positive word of mouth caused a growth in demand. Moreover, areas and theaters were selectively chosen to distribute the film, even within the more generic target group of the elite, multiplex- viewing audiences, thereby effectively targeting their desired viewers and rapidly recovering costs.

The proliferation of multiplexes is another effect of corporatization which is largely underplayed as a factor influencing the content of Bollywood films. "Before multiplexes came into existence, the film industry was producing just three hundred films a year while now it is churning out over a thousand films", asserts Deepak Tanuja, Vice-President of Fun Cinemas. With the new five year entertainment tax waiver for upcoming multiplexes, the explosion of multi- screen cinemas has altered the face of exhibition and over the years has influenced the content of Indian motion pictures. "The multiplex concept has made it easier for small budgeted movies to make their presence felt among the audience" say critics. Without the pressure of breaking even in a 1,500 person theater, cinema halls with smaller capacities have enabled the exhibition and sustenance of independent films, as well as the growth of genres in an industry that has relied on three hour "masala" films, a concoction of many genres packaged as a predominantly melodramatic musical to appeal to the lowest common denominator. This is seen in the recent surge of horror, thriller, sci- fi and fantasy films such as Bhoot (2003), Koi... Mil Gaya (2003) and Krrish (2006) as illustrated in the image above.

With the growth of digital cinema over the last two years, distributors are able to drastically cut down on the hugely expensive cost of print. This enables viewership among audiences in B and C class towns that would otherwise be unable to access these films due to difficulty in transportation to remote areas or a high cost of print that would not be easily recovered in these regions. With a sudden surge of approximately two thousand digital theaters across the nation, cheap exhibition of small budget, experimental films that depart from the norms of mainstream Bollywood cinema, while targeting a larger audience and easily recovering costs, has been made possible. Given the lower costs, higher shelf life and broader audience base with the rise in digital cinema, Kanwaar of Apollo Group sums up its main advantages as generating "a lower break-even point", thereby increasing revenue and encouraging experimentation and narrow casting.

New avenues of audience consumption such as the growth of in- home consumption of films has also been integral in paving a path for a new wave of Bollywood films. With a huge drop in DVD costs to $3 per DVD, as well the recent practice of releasing DVDs forty five days rather than six months after theatrical release, a huge increase in DVD sales has swept the market, aiding in the potential production of direct to home and direct to television films in the near future. With increased urbanization and nuclearization of homes across the country, there are more television sets per family and with lowered interest rates over the last six years, people who were unable to afford televisions now have home theater systems purchased on installments. Moreover, although internet- based viewing is still nascent, there has been a gradual inception of a new set of small budget films created for online viewing such as Fear (2007), which was the first Indian film to have an online release without a theatrical release, as indicated by the image above. While internet releases predominantly target the Indian Diaspora since broadband connectivity within India is still restricted, corporate heads are forecasting that "the next generation of film distribution will see online and IPTV (Internet Protocol Television) contributing much larger ratios to overall film revenue".

With this burgeoning multiple revenue system, the growing methods of audience consumption as well as the infrastructure to tap into these varying streams is rapidly changing the business model of the insular Indian film industry. This, in turn, is allowing for a newfound opportunity to cater to niche audiences, which is consequently impacting cinematic content. More people are able to watch movies today than ever before due to various technological advances and audience tastes are being shaped by these changes. Not only do these various methods of consumption promote the production of independent and experimental cinema, but the accessibility with which audiences are able to consume movies is also changing their preferences in terms of the lengthy durations of Bollywood films, as more and more films are watched at home rather than viewed as theatrical experiences. The easy availability of films is also causing a demand in a greater variety of genres and narratives. The only issue that needs to be seriously considered in this rapidly growing and evolving market is that these multiple streams of viewing encourage piracy, a grave problem that must be combated against in an industry where piracy already causes a $400 million loss in revenue.