One of the most engaging but dishonest film is Jana Gana Mana, from Commiewood.
Infact the movie clearly states its political ideology and bigotry very clearly, including its emotional manipulation technique. But alas, we were hooked to cinema and missed it all.
A thread.
Spoilers Ahead. The film was good only no? Why are you calling it called dishonest, you ask? Good question. The film states one thing and does exactly its opposite – isn’t this dishonest?
Take this scene for example – it hates discriminating people by color. A school textbook that calls people fair and ugly is criticized.
Valid point. But what does the film do?
It casts a fair skinned Prithviraj as the virtuous hero who fights for the “oppressed” despite huge personal losses. He fights against a evil dark skinned Tamil speaking politician, GM Sundar as the villain.
Okay this is just a casting choice, ignored. Mild example to start off the proceedings.
More to come.
The movie hates “identity” politics and hating someone based on their names. But but, the main villain’s name is Nageswara Rao. The mini villain – an experienced advocate who represents the State is named Raghuram Iyer.
A chairperson of NCW, a character with negative shade is Shwetha Gupta. Comrades and EVR fans will want to remove surnames from everywhere else but keep it in their film villain names.
Coincidence?
Wait – there is more.
A student from a downtrodden background had a good PhD guide – Hamid sir. He had almost approved her research thesis, but after he passed away, he was replaced by one casteist evil Professor named Vydarshan.
He is the second main villain of the film, who kills Prof Saba Mariam in a hit and run case.
The thesis of the girl is about “(Perpetuation) of caste system in 21st century India – A subaltern perspective” Antonio Gramsci (a hero for comrades) coined the term subaltern to explain the socio-economic status of “the native” in an imperial colony.
The girl eventually commits suicide in the film.
Which university is enabling such toxic professors?
“The Central” university of course. Who is its democracy loving director who takes no action on such professors and continues to ignore enquiry committee reports? Somebody who looks like Modi.
Ofcourse, any resemblance to reality is coincidental disclaimer applies.
Is the film’s political inclination stated that clearly?
The villain Nageswara Rao can always been sporting H religious symbols, he is the head of RJSP party, sporting saffron and cadre carry RSS-ish flags. He is the prime accused in “Ramanagara Riots”.
He can do anything to get to power.
He can ban “notes” (demonetization) and if needed, he can ban votes too (fearmongering) Why does the film instill so much divisiveness and fear of one party in its audience subconsciously?
That is explained in the film itself.
The film says: ” The biggest tool of a politician is emotions.
Once people become madly occupied with an emotion, their thinking capability would stop. They will become bhakts, so it is important to make people emotional for you to win power” That is exactly what the film did – it emotionally and subconsciously manipulates you.
Almost every good character in the film is a M or non-practicing H, and almost every bad character in the film has a religious symbol displayed.
The revolutionary comrades are angry with wasting public money on statues and in rewriting history with blatant lies. Oh, the irony.
The beauty of the film is – you think somebody is a hero in the 1st half, and the 2nd half convinces you that he is a villain.
Similarly, the entire Jana Gana film should be considered a hero in our first half. Reality is the second half, where we understand their true motives.
(This article has been compiled from the tweet thread posted by @labstamil on April 06, 2024, with minor edits to improve readability and conform to HinduPost style guide)
