Slumdog Millionaire
This blog is a discussion forum for students in Mr Peck's and Mr. Frankenfield's World Literature classes. The questions are credited to others, including this awesome site: http://famvin.org/en/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/slumdogmillionaire.pdf
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
Reaction in India
Do you agree or disagree with the author of this article?
The movie creates awareness of the situation of the slums and their socioeconomic situation is to the point of crisis where they have no pride in where they live. The movie seeems to creat an accurate vision of the slumdogs in their slums but then again i have not been there.
I agree with the author because there is always two sides of a story. However, the film creates public awareness. Also with the fact that the Slums are growing the film might have been a positive to put donations and money to avoid more poverty. They say that the western society only focuses on the negative in the middle east and India, yet many great things have been said about the art, cities, and other accomplishments. In every country there are negatives I feel the film just put the issue on the table.
I believe this movie shows the true background of the economy of India, and how they fight for every situation in life. Their economic policy and social status creates a awareness in their living and effects what they do on a day to day bases, and this movie is a perfect showing of what they go through to survive and what we take for granted in life.
Rubina, the younger Latrika, was paid £500 for a year's work
Azharuddin received £1,700
As for Ayush Mahesh Khedekar, the younger Jamal, recieved the same money as a servant makes in India.
These are some of the kids that were in the movie and will most likely never get out of the slums becoming true life "slumdogmillionaires." In India, it is true that their is large amount of people living in the "urban-slum" area. These kids have no choice usually in life because they grow up a slum which means their family nor they cannot afford a proper education for themselves meaning they cannot and will not rise out of 'slum-status'
However, this movie only shows the 'slums' of India and does not represent the economic situation of India as an entire nation. India, in 2005 according to worldbank.com was the 12th wealthiest nation. India, as we are all well aware, was blessed with many natural resources as like Opium, many spices, silk, cotton and since then, the wealth of the country has not decreased and will not considering their plentiful resources that they have and will continue to have. India, as a nation, will last longer than Arabia, The United Arab Emirates, and many other nations that depend on oil for an economic boost. India, unlike these nations, flourishes without the boost of only one limited product and has been thriving since the 1400th century.
Yes, the economic situation of India is bad, but could be a lot worse. Their are other countries and nations in this world that suffer of way more severity than India.
In this article I believe some parts are true in that the movie in India was released and it brought a negative feel towards Indian People. It only really looks at the poverty and ganglife of india and what the thug life is all about. The people of India dont want to see the negatives of where they live and they just think of this film like anyother person that comes out of poverty to become famous. But to us this is a very powerful film and it provides a message to our country and what we can do to change these things.
In the article are think that some parts of it are true, but really the movie only shows one point of view, and that is from a Slumdog. It doesn't show what it is like for a middle class or working class person point of view. To other people who watch the movie, we get the feeling that it is like this everywhere in India, but it is only in certain parts of India.
the article states that the movie only focuses on the negative side of what is going on in india. however, if hollywood and others continue to cover the negative and hide what is going on in the slums, then nothing will ever change. everything needs to be put out into the public to create awareness on order to change what can be improved
Yes, i do agree with the author that the movie shows the poverty of the slums, but that's what the movie was about. It did also show some of the city and what they were doing to help it. This also puts the slums out there, so they may be able to get help and make it a better place to live in. There are always highs and lows, but i think this low will help the slums out more than hurt them.
Yes I agree with the author. This movie helps represent the reality of the slums in India. It makes us who are living the high life realize what they have to go through day by day. Perhaps this will help people to support the slums and give them the supplies they need to live and survive. The people who live in the slums are offended by the term "slumdog", but I believe in the long run it gave all of the people in a higher place a reality check. When we think about it, the problems we go through are nothing compared to what they go through. Not everything was included in this article and movie. The people in the slums said that it only pointed out the negative parts of living in the slums, not the positive like the massive amounts of energy. Hopefully this movie will help touch the hearts of others so they will lend a hand to those in need.
If the slums are accurately portrayed, then it becomes just a part of the landscape, a key part of the setting, something that is unchanged and comes with everything else. The international attention gained by this film has the potential to help the people of Mumbai by exposing these problems to the world. It is true that India has a lot of things for its people to be proud of that the director could have chosen to be in the film, but having some of the largest slums in the world shouldn’t bring anyone pride.
I agree with this author, because if it is accurately portraying the slums of India then the residents should not be displeased. All that the movie is doing is making the Slums of India known to the world. It is taking a real life setting and showing people around the world.
Mr Peck you said in class today that only 50 people out of the millions that live there protested. Also on the youtube video we watched it stated how if slumdog millionaire won some oscars then it would help their families in way. I agree with the author because in the movie they are just showing facts and about their cultuer and if they are unhappy with that being portrayed in the film then they whould figure out why they are embarrassed of their culture and who they are. No matter where you're from or who you are you should always want to stand up for your home and who you are.
Personally, i completely agree with the author of the book. Because the movie was not made to rip on Indian society.Its not like they tried to make the worst part of India look even worse. They filmed the movie on set of a real slum. They didn't make their own set of what they thought it would look like. There is now way that these people can be upset on how the film makes their country look. They straight up showed it how it is and they should not be ashamed of what they have. If they are ashamed of showing the outside world their true colors then they should do something to fix it.
im kind of on the fence with this author because there are deffinetly some good points made but also you have to remember its a movie and thats just what sells. the author talks about how it portrays mumbai in a negative light and isnt a true indian movie. but then you have to remember that you make a movie to make money and people love bad news its just the way we are.
I believe this movie is just another example of British exploitation in India. It's merely the same thing the British have been doing for hundreds of years in India. This time the grand prize was 8 Oscars for the British filmmakers. I agree that people in India shouldn't be frowned upon for not liking the movie just because Americans do. They live in a different culture, and enjoy different kinds of movies.
This movie opens eyes to other countries on the situation in India. The movie shows that India is not all fashion and beauty, but some of their people have hard times. It creates an awareness to the slums and how it affects the children growing up. Some people didn't approve of this movie because they don't want to accept that something like that exists in the world. It shows the downside to the world and that the world isn't a happy fairytale.
I agree because the movie was shot in the real slum's of India and its basically just showing the rest of the world what's going on. If people aren't happy with what the movie is showing then they shouldn't just sit around and complain they should do something about it.
I agree that the movie focuses only on the slums of India and not all that it has to offer. To some I can see that it would give off a negative view and it is understandable that people are angered by the movie. However the director did not make the movie to make peole think of India in a demeaning way. He just wanted to make it good and make money off of it even though this made some people mad.
i disagree with the author because this movie shows how difficult life is in the slums of india. because of this movie help from other countries has reached the slums and is helping clean up india.
I agree with the author. The movie should not be viewed as somthing that is putting down India for its slums. Infact... those who are from the slums that are complaining should reconcider their thoughts. At the end of the movie with Jamal winning the money, shows how an average person or someone who is in an economically different position can "beat the odds" with determination and persevierance. It shows that just because you are a "slumdog" doesn't mean that you are less than anyone else who seems to be in a better predicament than you. I think that even though the movie was created by a non Indian should not have a major effect on how people view it. I understand that someones view is differnt when its "looking in" (non Indian) rather than "looking out" (Indian), but again it shows that there is hope and that things are changing for the better just like India as a country wants to portay..... those are just my thoughts....
I disagree with the author of this article. Movie is not only showing poverty of the India but it also showed how developed the Mumbai was when the brothers met again. Every country has poverty and ethical flaws. Also, it is not like every one in India is slumdog. There would be alot of hobos on the street in New York City. American would not be upset if the hobos are filmed in the movie because americans know hobos does not represent America as whole. I would say the author is victimizing the India as he brings down the fame that movie has earned.
YooRim you are exactly right "not like everyone in India is a Slumdog". That is true, it is also true that this is a movie, if this was a documentary I think the people of India would have more to worry about. What about the movies that highlight the ghettos and slums of the U.S. Now of course they are not on the same level, but why aren't people upset about those. Maybe people will start to recognize these terrible conditions and be more likely to give and to help. I agree with the author and don't think people should be so upset about it, after all there are more important things like maybe instead of arguing about the controversial, they should worry about fixing there problems.
This article can be interpreted differently, some people may say that they are offended with the making of the movie and what the movie depicts. The people that think the movie is a disgrace think that they are putting india down for its slums. Others see this as an oppurtunity to show the world what India is like. I personally think that the makers of this movie do not mean to make fun of India, but try and portray what is really going on in India.
The situation being shown in the movie was true, and I don't think the director was focusing on the negative part of India deliberately. What he didn't do was that the other side of India society. However, due to the topic of the movie, negative scenes was not possible to be avoided.
The article only focuses on the negative side of India and that is the Slums. It doesn't show the point of view of the middle class or working class people. Like the author said it is just putting down the slums in India.
I think that it is just a movie and that people shouldn't take it so seriously. I can see how people would be offended by it though as it makes people look terrible.
I agree with the author. Yes there are always two sides to a story, however, as far as I know this is an accurate portrayal of some of India's inhabitants. I also know that this movie has given me an awareness of what people who are of a lower social class than most of the people I know go through day to day. I find it interesting that people are so upset about this movie, we already know about the good things that come from India, so if this is an accurate protrait, why be upset? I don't understand these people's logic..
1. Do not type anything here that you would not say in my presence. Please keep this information highway clean. 2. Respect others' answers. If you have something to add, add it in a respectful manner. 3. You do not have permission to change the links, the color, the fonts, the language or any format of this blog. 4. You may use Internet English, but again, it must be respectful. 5. More than one of you may answer a question, but you may not repeat the thoughts of others. 6. Be polite.
The movie creates awareness of the situation of the slums and their socioeconomic situation is to the point of crisis where they have no pride in where they live. The movie seeems to creat an accurate vision of the slumdogs in their slums but then again i have not been there.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author because there is always two sides of a story. However, the film creates public awareness. Also with the fact that the Slums are growing the film might have been a positive to put donations and money to avoid more poverty. They say that the western society only focuses on the negative in the middle east and India, yet many great things have been said about the art, cities, and other accomplishments. In every country there are negatives I feel the film just put the issue on the table.
ReplyDeleteI believe this movie shows the true background of the economy of India, and how they fight for every situation in life. Their economic policy and social status creates a awareness in their living and effects what they do on a day to day bases, and this movie is a perfect showing of what they go through to survive and what we take for granted in life.
ReplyDeleteRubina, the younger Latrika, was paid £500 for a year's work
ReplyDeleteAzharuddin received £1,700
As for Ayush Mahesh Khedekar, the younger Jamal, recieved the same money as a servant makes in India.
These are some of the kids that were in the movie and will most likely never get out of the slums becoming true life "slumdogmillionaires." In India, it is true that their is large amount of people living in the "urban-slum" area. These kids have no choice usually in life because they grow up a slum which means their family nor they cannot afford a proper education for themselves meaning they cannot and will not rise out of 'slum-status'
However, this movie only shows the 'slums' of India and does not represent the economic situation of India as an entire nation. India, in 2005 according to worldbank.com was the 12th wealthiest nation. India, as we are all well aware, was blessed with many natural resources as like Opium, many spices, silk, cotton and since then, the wealth of the country has not decreased and will not considering their plentiful resources that they have and will continue to have. India, as a nation, will last longer than Arabia, The United Arab Emirates, and many other nations that depend on oil for an economic boost. India, unlike these nations, flourishes without the boost of only one limited product and has been thriving since the 1400th century.
Yes, the economic situation of India is bad, but could be a lot worse. Their are other countries and nations in this world that suffer of way more severity than India.
In this article I believe some parts are true in that the movie in India was released and it brought a negative feel towards Indian People. It only really looks at the poverty and ganglife of india and what the thug life is all about. The people of India dont want to see the negatives of where they live and they just think of this film like anyother person that comes out of poverty to become famous. But to us this is a very powerful film and it provides a message to our country and what we can do to change these things.
ReplyDeleteIn the article are think that some parts of it are true, but really the movie only shows one point of view, and that is from a Slumdog. It doesn't show what it is like for a middle class or working class person point of view. To other people who watch the movie, we get the feeling that it is like this everywhere in India, but it is only in certain parts of India.
ReplyDeletethe article states that the movie only focuses on the negative side of what is going on in india. however, if hollywood and others continue to cover the negative and hide what is going on in the slums, then nothing will ever change. everything needs to be put out into the public to create awareness on order to change what can be improved
ReplyDeleteYes, i do agree with the author that the movie shows the poverty of the slums, but that's what the movie was about. It did also show some of the city and what they were doing to help it. This also puts the slums out there, so they may be able to get help and make it a better place to live in. There are always highs and lows, but i think this low will help the slums out more than hurt them.
ReplyDeleteYes I agree with the author. This movie helps represent the reality of the slums in India. It makes us who are living the high life realize what they have to go through day by day. Perhaps this will help people to support the slums and give them the supplies they need to live and survive. The people who live in the slums are offended by the term "slumdog", but I believe in the long run it gave all of the people in a higher place a reality check. When we think about it, the problems we go through are nothing compared to what they go through. Not everything was included in this article and movie. The people in the slums said that it only pointed out the negative parts of living in the slums, not the positive like the massive amounts of energy. Hopefully this movie will help touch the hearts of others so they will lend a hand to those in need.
ReplyDeleteIf the slums are accurately portrayed, then it becomes just a part of the landscape, a key part of the setting, something that is unchanged and comes with everything else. The international attention gained by this film has the potential to help the people of Mumbai by exposing these problems to the world. It is true that India has a lot of things for its people to be proud of that the director could have chosen to be in the film, but having some of the largest slums in the world shouldn’t bring anyone pride.
ReplyDeleteI agree with this author, because if it is accurately portraying the slums of India then the residents should not be displeased. All that the movie is doing is making the Slums of India known to the world. It is taking a real life setting and showing people around the world.
ReplyDeleteMr Peck you said in class today that only 50 people out of the millions that live there protested. Also on the youtube video we watched it stated how if slumdog millionaire won some oscars then it would help their families in way. I agree with the author because in the movie they are just showing facts and about their cultuer and if they are unhappy with that being portrayed in the film then they whould figure out why they are embarrassed of their culture and who they are. No matter where you're from or who you are you should always want to stand up for your home and who you are.
ReplyDeletePersonally, i completely agree with the author of the book. Because the movie was not made to rip on Indian society.Its not like they tried to make the worst part of India look even worse. They filmed the movie on set of a real slum. They didn't make their own set of what they thought it would look like. There is now way that these people can be upset on how the film makes their country look. They straight up showed it how it is and they should not be ashamed of what they have. If they are ashamed of showing the outside world their true colors then they should do something to fix it.
ReplyDeleteim kind of on the fence with this author because there are deffinetly some good points made but also you have to remember its a movie and thats just what sells. the author talks about how it portrays mumbai in a negative light and isnt a true indian movie. but then you have to remember that you make a movie to make money and people love bad news its just the way we are.
ReplyDeleteI believe this movie is just another example of British exploitation in India. It's merely the same thing the British have been doing for hundreds of years in India. This time the grand prize was 8 Oscars for the British filmmakers. I agree that people in India shouldn't be frowned upon for not liking the movie just because Americans do. They live in a different culture, and enjoy different kinds of movies.
ReplyDeleteThis movie opens eyes to other countries on the situation in India. The movie shows that India is not all fashion and beauty, but some of their people have hard times. It creates an awareness to the slums and how it affects the children growing up. Some people didn't approve of this movie because they don't want to accept that something like that exists in the world. It shows the downside to the world and that the world isn't a happy fairytale.
ReplyDeleteI agree because the movie was shot in the real slum's of India and its basically just showing the rest of the world what's going on. If people aren't happy with what the movie is showing then they shouldn't just sit around and complain they should do something about it.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the movie focuses only on the slums of India and not all that it has to offer. To some I can see that it would give off a negative view and it is understandable that people are angered by the movie. However the director did not make the movie to make peole think of India in a demeaning way. He just wanted to make it good and make money off of it even though this made some people mad.
ReplyDeletei disagree with the author because this movie shows how difficult life is in the slums of india. because of this movie help from other countries has reached the slums and is helping clean up india.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author. The movie should not be viewed as somthing that is putting down India for its slums. Infact... those who are from the slums that are complaining should reconcider their thoughts. At the end of the movie with Jamal winning the money, shows how an average person or someone who is in an economically different position can "beat the odds" with determination and persevierance. It shows that just because you are a "slumdog" doesn't mean that you are less than anyone else who seems to be in a better predicament than you. I think that even though the movie was created by a non Indian should not have a major effect on how people view it. I understand that someones view is differnt when its "looking in" (non Indian) rather than "looking out" (Indian), but again it shows that there is hope and that things are changing for the better just like India as a country wants to portay..... those are just my thoughts....
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the author of this article. Movie is not only showing poverty of the India but it also showed how developed the Mumbai was when the brothers met again. Every country has poverty and ethical flaws. Also, it is not like every one in India is slumdog. There would be alot of hobos on the street in New York City. American would not be upset if the hobos are filmed in the movie because americans know hobos does not represent America as whole. I would say the author is victimizing the India as he brings down the fame that movie has earned.
ReplyDeleteYooRim you are exactly right "not like everyone in India is a Slumdog". That is true, it is also true that this is a movie, if this was a documentary I think the people of India would have more to worry about. What about the movies that highlight the ghettos and slums of the U.S. Now of course they are not on the same level, but why aren't people upset about those. Maybe people will start to recognize these terrible conditions and be more likely to give and to help. I agree with the author and don't think people should be so upset about it, after all there are more important things like maybe instead of arguing about the controversial, they should worry about fixing there problems.
ReplyDeleteThis article can be interpreted differently, some people may say that they are offended with the making of the movie and what the movie depicts. The people that think the movie is a disgrace think that they are putting india down for its slums. Others see this as an oppurtunity to show the world what India is like. I personally think that the makers of this movie do not mean to make fun of India, but try and portray what is really going on in India.
ReplyDeleteThe situation being shown in the movie was true, and I don't think the director was focusing on the negative part of India deliberately. What he didn't do was that the other side of India society. However, due to the topic of the movie, negative scenes was not possible to be avoided.
ReplyDeleteThe article only focuses on the negative side of India and that is the Slums. It doesn't show the point of view of the middle class or working class people. Like the author said it is just putting down the slums in India.
ReplyDeleteI think that it is just a movie and that people shouldn't take it so seriously. I can see how people would be offended by it though as it makes people look terrible.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the author. Yes there are always two sides to a story, however, as far as I know this is an accurate portrayal of some of India's inhabitants. I also know that this movie has given me an awareness of what people who are of a lower social class than most of the people I know go through day to day. I find it interesting that people are so upset about this movie, we already know about the good things that come from India, so if this is an accurate protrait, why be upset? I don't understand these people's logic..
ReplyDelete