Movie Review: Jodhaa Akbar - Disappointing
Raza Rumi
The challenge of translating a historical era into a cinematic endeavour is daunting, especially when it concerns historically contested subjects such as the fabled love between 16th century Mughal Emperor Akbar and Jodha Bai, the legendary princess from Rajputana who later ruled India as Empress and symbolised the Hindu-Muslim accord of the times. However, it is not historical accuracy, or lack thereof, which defines the rather exasperating cinematic narrative of an otherwise glorious period of the subcontinent's history. It is the facile treatment of history, its interpretative variants and its actors that makes the Bollywood film Jodhaa-Akbar a disappointment.
Akbar's reign symbolised the zenith of the Mughal Empire and also some of its unique attributes. Whether it was the secular, tolerant governance based on the Sulah-i-Kul (peace with all) policy, opening up the frontiers of theological discussion, effective administrative systems or promotion of Indo-Mughal art forms, Akbar was a pioneer in most respects.
Jodhaa-Akbar attempts to capture the essence of that particular moment: the Indianisaton of the Mughal court and most importantly, the royal household. Whether it is to do with the grafting of a temple within the Agra fort or the introduction of vegetarian meals, these were significant markers for centuries to come, enabling a tiny Muslim minority to rule the non-Muslim majority. But the film fails to handle this momentous phase of history appropriately and instead churns out a masala mix that, despite the massive budget, results in mediocre film-making.
This is not to say that the film is without merit. It is visually stunning in places and A R Rehman's music is outstanding. The two stars – Ashwariya Rai and Hrithik Roshan – provide glamour and unreal beauty. The settings are competently improvised and yes, the feel of the whole cinematic experience does convey the clichéd Mughal aura of splendour, excess and a hybrid aesthetic. Rai and Roshan exude that enigmatic chemistry which makes them an attractive pair on screen.
The most unforgivable moment in the film is the near destruction of an otherwise lilting melody, Khawaja Meray Khawaja , meant to be an incantation for the great Hazrat Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti buried in Ajmer. The filming of this song is almost farcical. The Qawwals aiming at Sema end up mimicking the whirling dervishes of Konya. To add insult to injury, they also wear Rumi caps and sport fake beards. At the end, our secular Emperor joins in the whirling of the dervishes. Understandably, this was a purely commercial gimmick. However, the mystic haal (trance) of the South Asian variety is distinctive for its myriad forms and general lack of structure. Even if this sequence had to be used, there could have been better ways of employing the global 'hit' whirling stunt.Another minor anecdote overlooked by Gowariker and his co-writer Haidar Ali is that Akbar sought blessings from Khawaja Moinuddin Chishti by walking barefoot to his shrine rather than tying his nuptial knot at the shrine (image above shows Akbar at the shrine). Talking of facts, it is also unclear who Jodha Bai was. Yes there are Jodha's quarters in each of the Mughal palaces, but the Rajput princess whom Akbar married, according to some versions, was Harka Bai, daughter of the ruler of Amber, Raja Bharmal. To be fair, there are several disclaimers in the titles so one can overlook this license with history taken by the director.
What is sad is that the script props cardboard characters and insists that they are larger than life. Not much is known of the relationship between Akbar's powerful foster mother Dai Anga and Jodha Bai. But the characterisation in the film turns into a mocking recreation of Kyunki Saas bhi Kabhi Bahu thi ethos with domestic struggles taking place on who controls the kitchen and what food is to be cooked for the Emperor. The handling of this conflict in the film reeks of those infamous STAR Plus serials hugely popular in India. If at all, this conflict was about power as the Rajput Empress (like the later Queen Nur Jehan) inducted her kith and kin in senior positions within the Empire. That Dai Anga was a female power centre at the Mughal court is glossed over. And, what can one say about the poor Nau Ratans — the famous nine advisers of Akbar – they appear such caricatures and lifeless beings on screen. Admittedly, the film was not about Akbar's court; however, this does not mean that the larger setting of this love story should have been treated with such an amateur brush.
One fails to understand why the honour-obsessed Rajputs in India are protesting. If anyone needs to protest it should be the Muslims of the subcontinent. Except for Akbar and his Persian mother, Hameeda Banu Begum, the film unwittingly promotes the Muslim stereotyping agenda. From Bairam Khan to Akbar's brother-in-law, almost every Muslim is barbaric, intolerant and, more often than not, scheming. The Mughal characters were complex people, neither barbaric Mongols nor Kabir chanting Bhakats. Ancient and medieval Indian history is replete with tales of violent Hindu rulers, so what differentiates them from the Mughals? From a subaltern point of view the local populace underwent a discontinued experience of exploitation. Akbar's humanism and tolerance was unprecedented in that age. The film harps on these themes for a particular message but ends up validating all that the Hindutva brigade loves to say, and is never afraid to say, about Muslims and Muslim rulers in particular.
The performances are perfunctory except for the leading protagonists. Both Roshan and Rai come across as fairly fluid actors and for once do not massacre common Urdu words. The cinematography is first rate and the costumes (including the jewelry) are aesthetically noteworthy. Alas the script and its structure, is what undermines the entire effort. Bollywood may have surpassed world cinema in technique and viewership but it lacks that elusive attribute known as "quality-screenplay" not to mention its total disregard for time in true South Asian fashion. For instance, Jodhaa-Akbar at times appears to be a real time drama. The total length of the film is three and a half hours. Was there an editor on the team?
Having said that, it is a fairly watchable film as it tries to re-invoke the medieval process of Hindu-Muslim co-existence; and brings a lost era back to life. Jodhaa-Akbar also, rather boldly, depicts the unusual cinematic tale of a Hindu woman falling for a Muslim man, albeit grounded in political opportunism. Rajput "honour protests" against the film in India need to be understood in this light. For once Bollywood has undone the cliché of Muslim woman and Hindu man.
Those interested in the Mughals should see this film preferably on a big screen. Jodhaa-Akbar could have been a great film. Its main theme held that intrinsic potential but it was splintered by an overdose of pop history, a flaky script and the relentless commercialism that defines our age.














Anuradha Goyal
URL
April 1, 2008
02:11 PM
I was fairly dis-appointed by Hritik's dialog delivery, his Urdu pronunciation was pathetic, as you mention even the commonly used words, and I think even his expressions were very crisp and modern lacking the royalty that Akbar's character should have displayed. Aishwarya actually carried herself very well, though age has started showing on her. I seriously missed the nav-ratnas, specially Birbal and Tansen.
I rate the movie as visual delight, otherwise Ok.
bd
URL
April 1, 2008
03:07 PM
one of my colleagues said she has gone to see this film 11 times in the theater!!!, the idea of spending 3.5 hours (plus 2 hours top and tail) multiplied by 11 times (60 hours, 2.5 days) is so amazing to me that I was simply left gaping. I am sure it must be good.
Mind you, one of my classmates saw quamat se quamat tak 24 times....
Bhavdeep
April 3, 2008
12:58 AM
How can you say that Navratnaas were mere caricatures in ythe movie when there werent shown.
Navratnaas were established in Akbar's court only after Salim was born to the two (Akbar was 29 then). And this movie ends way before that time comes.
Secondly, a protocal is required to be shown to establish the essence of a period in history and all these long shots (which barely lasted 10 seconds or less) are done for these purpose only.
The characters had to be Panchatra-inspired because these cliches are what every single individual relates to.
Just to bring a film down, dont create illogical refrences (mostly false).
A
April 3, 2008
01:15 AM
Well. How can you decide if it was worth watching or not? I actually extremely disagree with your crapy viewpoint. Why dont you make a better movie than Jodha Akbar and show it? I will criticize you then. :P
Raza Rumi
URL
April 3, 2008
01:52 AM
Dear readers
thanks for the comments. Responding to cinematic production is a personal,subjective process and my review indicates that.
A: thanks for the advice but I am not a film-maker. I respect your right of "extremely" disagreeing with my point of view - though it might have been more interactive if you had indicated what you disagree with.
I am grateful to Bhavdeep for pointing out a historical "fact" that I must revisit.
cheers, RR
karen
April 4, 2008
03:32 PM
The movie is a master piece for me. watched it manytimes. the movie grows on you . just like rehman's music. first time it may just look good or OK.. but a second time watch will mesmerise you. you see a lot of beautiful details in the expressions, acting ..sets etc etc which you have missed for the first time when your mind is busy analyzing the history..... a classic for sure.
santosh
April 4, 2008
03:38 PM
My verdict. super hit . very well made. any one with an openess and likes experimental movies would love JA.
well its your Loss if you didn't like it.
as for me and the those who enjoyed,
the JA is a treat. I am surprised that the actors actually "performed" in this movie. well thanks to the diretor . this movie sure gets a lot of people liking bollywood for a change.
Celine
URL
April 6, 2008
06:49 PM
As you started out, it might have been a daunting challenge for Gowariker, and you have a few valid points here, nevertheless, I still enjoyed the movie on the big screen as it was a visual splendour, with such exquisite costumes and sets.
Here's my view on Akbar:
http://indicaspecies.blogspot.com/2008/02/akbar-and-cultural-synthesis.html
temporal
URL
April 6, 2008
09:00 PM
Celeine:
become a desi critic
(and submit an article on tansen)
Celine
URL
April 7, 2008
09:19 AM
Thanks.
And how do I go about it? I am not really tech-savvy.
Celine
URL
April 7, 2008
09:19 AM
Thanks.
And how do I go about it? I am not really tech-savvy.
temporal
URL
April 7, 2008
11:09 AM
click HERE
after you receive a password you can submit an article...just follow the instructions
for the first time contributor there is an exemption...they can post a previously published article
after that the article has to "first published" or "exclusive" since we a google news source
good luck
Gill
April 7, 2008
04:09 PM
>>>One fails to understand why the honour-obsessed Rajputs in India are protesting. If anyone needs to protest it should be the Muslims <<<<
Hahaha you must be kidding!!! Why should Muslims be protesting? Like you said "honor-obsessed" Rajputs .... ofcourse they are pissed because they have been portrayed as "Pimps" who would sell their daughters and sisters for "materialistic" and selfish gains. It is that simple!
And where is the logic for a Muslim to be angry. After all Salim the son of Jodha Akbar had no respect for Hindu religion and its followers it is evident from the fact that he ordered the torture and execution of Guru Arjan Dev and after winning Kangra fort he ordered killing of hundereds of cows and with their blood wash the floors of famous Kangra temple inside the fort. List can on and on....
So my friend what exactly changed from this alliance of marraige? Nothing!
Add your comment
(Or ping: http://desicritics.org/tb/7512)