5 ms·

It’s highly enjoyable though it is also very nationalist propaganda in parts, which foreigners won’t pick up on. For the most part it never becomes an issue bec

by dagmx 4y ago

It’s highly enjoyable though it is also very nationalist propaganda in parts, which foreigners won’t pick up on. For the most part it never becomes an issue because the brunt of the movie is fighting colonialism and therefore quite appropriate and incredibly good. The end credit scene is the only part that I’d consider problematic from a messaging standpoint as it takes a hard line on who they celebrate and isn’t subtle about the directors political allegiances. Anyway would really recommend watching it. It’s a wild ride, and incredibly well done. If you’re not from India, you can largely ignore the issues with internal politics Edit: Since people are asking for links about the politics… https://www.vox.com/23220275/rrr-netflix-tollywood-hindutva-caste-system https://www.vox.com/23220275/rrr-netflix-tollywood-hindutva-... https://slate.com/culture/2022/06/rrr-review-indian-blockbuster-netflix-hindu-nationalism.html https://slate.com/culture/2022/06/rrr-review-indian-blockbus... Essentially it’s holding up some of the more radical freedom fighters and downplaying the more pacifist and equitable ones which reflects the directors political stance

hermitcrab 4y ago
I did wonder about the Indian politics in the film. I did pick up a few bits here and there, but probably missed a lot. Care to say a bit more about that? If not, I understand.
- dagmx 4y ago
  I updated my post above with links of why many consider it nationalist, but I can elaborate more if you want. Just let me know. It’s subtle but it’s in the same vein of how many military and cop films push messaging
unmole 4y ago
> The end credit scene is the only part that I’d consider problematic from a messaging standpoint as it takes a hard line on who they celebrate and isn’t subtle about the directors political allegiances. I don't actually remember the end credit scene and I didn't pick up on any contemporary political references. Could you elaborate?
- dagmx 4y ago
  I updated my post with links for reading but it’s essentially subtle but insidious. There’s a movement among the right to downplay the more equitable and peace friendly freedom fighters in favour of more radical ones, including ones with ties to the Axis powers. Again, it barely takes away from the film since it’s just the final credits but it’s quite a clear signal of the directors outspoken political views
  - cuteboy19 4y ago
    From their perspective the Axis powers were not that much worse than the British
    - samarthr1 4y ago
      If memory serves, the axis powers (Japan and Germany) did even aid to some small extent.
    - zR4B 4y ago
bergenty 4y ago
What are you talking about? The part where they refer to Indian freedom fighters? Because I thought they did a really good job of highlighting a lot of them, not just well known ones and across vast political spectrums. I mean they had Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose as well as Shivaji and Mirabai.
- dagmx 4y ago
  That scene was good till you consider a few factors: - Bose was allied with the Nazi’s. I know it’s debatable whether the ends justify the means but he also held some fairly hostile views that are being used again - there were notable omissions of freedom fighters who preached peace , but more importantly, those who were against the division of Pakistan and India. I shared a couple links above in an edit, but there’s definitely an messaging to align with the directors more hardline views of modern Indian politics
  - unmole 4y ago
    > Bose was allied with the Nazi’s A marriage of convenience like when Gandhi allied with the Ali Brothers. > there were notable omissions of freedom fighters who preached peace Three of them where Gandhians but OK. > but more importantly, those who were against the division of Pakistan and India. Nobody in the Congress wanted partion to begin with. But there was no leader against it when it became clear that it was apparent. Who exactly do you have in mind?
    - dagmx 4y ago
      Your entire comment is a “so what?” You don’t think it’s suspect that major figures were excluded from the list? And they just happen to be the same major figures the right wing governments try and move away from. You don’t think being allied with the Nazis and never denouncing their views was an issue either? the movie had a clear political agenda to it.
      - unmole 4y ago
        > Your entire comment is a “so what?” Yes. Because it's a fantasy movie. Reading complex political messaging into it is rather silly. > Your entire comment is a “so what?” I don't think excluding Gandhi and Nehru from a cheesy dance number is the end of the world. > never denouncing their views Again, read what the man had to say about the Nazis after he left Germany. Also read about what Gandhi had to say about Bose and what Bose had to say about Gandhi. We've had an international airport named after him for decades. Bose is not even remotely controversial in India. > the movie had a clear political agenda to it. But somehow that wasn't clear to overwhelming majority of the audience who actually saw it.
v512 4y ago
> highly enjoyable Doubt.
- dagmx 4y ago
  What’s there to doubt? I’m not speculating that it will be enjoyable. I am making a statement that it was enjoyable to me (and my friends, along with many many others online who’ve raved about it) if you don’t find it enjoyable, that doesn’t mean doubting the veracity of my stated opinion. You may however disagree
JohnBooty 4y ago
Thank you for posting that. I learned a lot! Like many (most?) Westerners, I obviously appreciated the anti-colonialism aspect, but had no idea about all of that other context. I am deeply appreciative.
- mikymoothrowa 4y ago
  I’m Indian and I didn’t see those either. There’s no scenario in which slate/vox would have written a ideologically uncoated positive review of this movie.
  - dagmx 4y ago
    I’m Indian and I saw it when I watched the movie. Your comments show you have a right wing attitude to these things and I doubt you’d have therefore picked up on it since it affirms a particular world view.
    - unmole 4y ago
      If you didn't realise Ramcharan taking up a bow was an homage to Alluri Sitaramaraju, maybe you don't know what you're talking about?
      - dagmx 4y ago
        Where did I say I didn’t know that? You’re putting words in my mouth.
        unmole 4y ago
        Because you posted a link to an article that claimed otherwise and commended a comment that got it wrong.
        JohnBooty 4y ago
        I feel like you two are both on the same side?
mikymoothrowa 4y ago
Those articles reaffirm more the extreme political mentality of vox and slate than any political leanings of the director. That these websites practically thrive on conjuring up issues even where none exists should surprise no one.
- pessimizer 4y ago
  Imagine thinking that about those boring-ass centrist websites.
  - mikymoothrowa 4y ago
    imagine thinking these websites are centrist because you have more ridiculous extremist websites on the left and the right.
    - xmonkee 4y ago
      Vox is literally the definition of neolib trash. I don't understand how you can call it far left. People on the left don't actually mind the label, but don't call shitlib stuff far left. The left is explicitly opposed to neoliberalism. If you wanna read something actually on the left: https://jacobin.com/ https://jacobin.com/
      - unmole 4y ago
        Vox is just cookoo. Jacobin on the other hand is full on deranged.
        xnyan 4y ago
        What organizations do you consider to be sane, rational center/center-left (vox) and leftist (jacobin) media? Is it possible you consider every leftest media outlet between cookoo and deranged?
        4y ago
unmole 4y ago
Honestly, a lot of the criticism reads like a tin-foil fan theory. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And some of it makes me question the author's familiarity with the actual background. > he’s seen assuming a wardrobe that invokes his namesake Rama No, he assumes a wardrobe that invokes Alluri Sitaramaraju, the historical figure his character is based on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Sitarama_Raju https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Sitarama_Raju And this popular representation and the fictional fiancee named Sita come from a classic 1974 movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Seetarama_Raju_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Seetarama_Raju_(film) Rajamouli is not exactly big on subtlety. If the troubling implications need so much ink to explain, maybe the implications aren't actually there? > Essentially it’s holding up some of the more radical freedom fighters and downplaying the more pacifist and equitable ones Sardar Patel, Chidambaram Pillai and Tanguturi Prakasam were not radicals, they were lifelong members of the INC and were committed to Gandhian non-violence. Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose were capital S Socialists, it doesn't get more equitable than that. This argument would have held weight if someone like Savarkar was included. As it stands, it makes no sense.
- dagmx 4y ago
  Bose was a socialist in the sense that nazis were nationalist socialists so I’m not sure what your point is there.
  - unmole 4y ago
    Maybe read about man's views on the matter?
    - dagmx 4y ago
      I have in the countless times this has been brought up. My high school had a Bose statue and taught us a lot of his history as well to try and reaffirm his greatness. In the end , I haven’t ever seen anyone show me anything that didn’t also require ignoring Bose’s significant ties to the Nazis to have a charitable take on the man and his followers.
random314 4y ago
+1 on that. I only watched the action sequences in the movie as RRR is not the kind if movie I enjoy. But the end of the movie, makes it quite clear that it is a nod to right wing Hindu nationalism. The most pointed example is the exclusion, in the end credits, of the 2 biggest icons of Indian liberation - Mahatma Gandhi and the first prime minister Nehru( the British locked him up for over a decade) who were secular liberals. Nehru happens to be the great grandfather of the main opposition leader Rahul Gandhi. As the right wing Hindu pre independence movement largely connived with the colonialists, the right wing government today is focused on appropriating a select few independence fighters and projecting them as right wing icons even though they were liberals or socialists. 3 prominent figures. 1. Bhagat Singh - a socialist who is now projected as a right wing icon and stripped of his Sikh beard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh 2. Sardar Patel - Nehru and Gandhis colleague who had some right wing sympathies, but actually banned RSS (Modi's organization) following the assassination of Gandhi by RSS workers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Unity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Unity 3. Subhash Bose - A foolhardy military strategist who tried to partner with the Nazis to fight the British. Eventually, assisting the Japanese in Burma and helping them invade India. Gandhi was extremely wary of Bose's plans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose Towards the end, it projects the independence fight as a largely Hindu fight against British and anoints upper caste Rama as a leader of lower caste Bheem. At this point, it seems that the exclusion of muslims, sikhs and some Christians etc. From the script as freedom fighters seems deliberate. Bheem is a nod to lower caste icon bhimrao Ambedkar, who converted from Hinduism to buddhism to escape caste hierarchies. This could have been a positive inclusion in the story, but it is flipped on its head when Bheem is shown swearing fealty to upper caste Rama in the end. The Ramayana itself, has a negative attitude towards lower castes, which makes this highly improper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambuka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambuka [1] Moreover the choice of Rama is sensitive in the current political situation in India as Rama is being used as a tool to bully poor Muslims on the streets. https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+jai+shree+ram https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+jai+shree+ram [1] You will notice that Shambuka is noted as an "interpolated" character in Ramayana. This almost certainly true, but the Godliness of Rama as an avatar of Vishnu is part of the same interpolation. The original smaller Ramayana is simply the story of an "ideal king". This was converted into a story of divinity by the interpolation of Godliness, sexism and casteism(uttara and bala kanda) . Wikipedia has been edited to clarify that Shambuka is a later interpolation, while the article on Rama and Ramayana simply forget to headline that the divinity of Rama is a later interpolation. The interpolation makes complete sense as the brahmins successfully solidified the caste system and inserted casteist and sexist texts into several ancient sanskrit texts to anoint the caste system with divine status. There is a small ongoing movement to refer to the current version of Hinduism as Brahminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Brahminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Brahminism
asenna 4y ago
I agree with this. I saw this in the theater in India and the overtly Hindutva stuff definitely got me laughing. It's not even subtle, hard to miss when you know the context.
chinabot 4y ago
Great Movie. Nice to see us British from the anti-colonial standpoint, we always get cast as the nice guys but we have a shit ton of historical baggage, I think we deserve the odd movie payback to even things out.
zR4B 4y ago
>downplaying the more pacifist Where is the downplaying part in the movie?

by dagmx 4y ago

hermitcrab 4y ago

I did wonder about the Indian politics in the film. I did pick up a few bits here and there, but probably missed a lot. Care to say a bit more about that? If not, I understand.

dagmx 4y ago
I updated my post above with links of why many consider it nationalist, but I can elaborate more if you want. Just let me know. It’s subtle but it’s in the same vein of how many military and cop films push messaging

unmole 4y ago

> The end credit scene is the only part that I’d consider problematic from a messaging standpoint as it takes a hard line on who they celebrate and isn’t subtle about the directors political allegiances. I don't actually remember the end credit scene and I didn't pick up on any contemporary political references. Could you elaborate?

dagmx 4y ago
I updated my post with links for reading but it’s essentially subtle but insidious. There’s a movement among the right to downplay the more equitable and peace friendly freedom fighters in favour of more radical ones, including ones with ties to the Axis powers. Again, it barely takes away from the film since it’s just the final credits but it’s quite a clear signal of the directors outspoken political views
- cuteboy19 4y ago
  From their perspective the Axis powers were not that much worse than the British
  - samarthr1 4y ago
    If memory serves, the axis powers (Japan and Germany) did even aid to some small extent.
  - zR4B 4y ago

bergenty 4y ago

What are you talking about? The part where they refer to Indian freedom fighters? Because I thought they did a really good job of highlighting a lot of them, not just well known ones and across vast political spectrums. I mean they had Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose as well as Shivaji and Mirabai.

dagmx 4y ago
That scene was good till you consider a few factors: - Bose was allied with the Nazi’s. I know it’s debatable whether the ends justify the means but he also held some fairly hostile views that are being used again - there were notable omissions of freedom fighters who preached peace , but more importantly, those who were against the division of Pakistan and India. I shared a couple links above in an edit, but there’s definitely an messaging to align with the directors more hardline views of modern Indian politics
- unmole 4y ago
  > Bose was allied with the Nazi’s A marriage of convenience like when Gandhi allied with the Ali Brothers. > there were notable omissions of freedom fighters who preached peace Three of them where Gandhians but OK. > but more importantly, those who were against the division of Pakistan and India. Nobody in the Congress wanted partion to begin with. But there was no leader against it when it became clear that it was apparent. Who exactly do you have in mind?
  - dagmx 4y ago
    Your entire comment is a “so what?” You don’t think it’s suspect that major figures were excluded from the list? And they just happen to be the same major figures the right wing governments try and move away from. You don’t think being allied with the Nazis and never denouncing their views was an issue either? the movie had a clear political agenda to it.
    - unmole 4y ago
      > Your entire comment is a “so what?” Yes. Because it's a fantasy movie. Reading complex political messaging into it is rather silly. > Your entire comment is a “so what?” I don't think excluding Gandhi and Nehru from a cheesy dance number is the end of the world. > never denouncing their views Again, read what the man had to say about the Nazis after he left Germany. Also read about what Gandhi had to say about Bose and what Bose had to say about Gandhi. We've had an international airport named after him for decades. Bose is not even remotely controversial in India. > the movie had a clear political agenda to it. But somehow that wasn't clear to overwhelming majority of the audience who actually saw it.

v512 4y ago

> highly enjoyable Doubt.

dagmx 4y ago
What’s there to doubt? I’m not speculating that it will be enjoyable. I am making a statement that it was enjoyable to me (and my friends, along with many many others online who’ve raved about it) if you don’t find it enjoyable, that doesn’t mean doubting the veracity of my stated opinion. You may however disagree

JohnBooty 4y ago

Thank you for posting that. I learned a lot! Like many (most?) Westerners, I obviously appreciated the anti-colonialism aspect, but had no idea about all of that other context. I am deeply appreciative.

mikymoothrowa 4y ago
I’m Indian and I didn’t see those either. There’s no scenario in which slate/vox would have written a ideologically uncoated positive review of this movie.
- dagmx 4y ago
  I’m Indian and I saw it when I watched the movie. Your comments show you have a right wing attitude to these things and I doubt you’d have therefore picked up on it since it affirms a particular world view.
  - unmole 4y ago
    If you didn't realise Ramcharan taking up a bow was an homage to Alluri Sitaramaraju, maybe you don't know what you're talking about?
    - dagmx 4y ago
      Where did I say I didn’t know that? You’re putting words in my mouth.
      - unmole 4y ago
        Because you posted a link to an article that claimed otherwise and commended a comment that got it wrong.
        JohnBooty 4y ago
        I feel like you two are both on the same side?

mikymoothrowa 4y ago

Those articles reaffirm more the extreme political mentality of vox and slate than any political leanings of the director. That these websites practically thrive on conjuring up issues even where none exists should surprise no one.

pessimizer 4y ago
Imagine thinking that about those boring-ass centrist websites.
- mikymoothrowa 4y ago
  imagine thinking these websites are centrist because you have more ridiculous extremist websites on the left and the right.
  - xmonkee 4y ago
    Vox is literally the definition of neolib trash. I don't understand how you can call it far left. People on the left don't actually mind the label, but don't call shitlib stuff far left. The left is explicitly opposed to neoliberalism. If you wanna read something actually on the left: https://jacobin.com/ https://jacobin.com/
    - unmole 4y ago
      Vox is just cookoo. Jacobin on the other hand is full on deranged.
      - xnyan 4y ago
        What organizations do you consider to be sane, rational center/center-left (vox) and leftist (jacobin) media? Is it possible you consider every leftest media outlet between cookoo and deranged?
        4y ago

unmole 4y ago

Honestly, a lot of the criticism reads like a tin-foil fan theory. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And some of it makes me question the author's familiarity with the actual background. > he’s seen assuming a wardrobe that invokes his namesake Rama No, he assumes a wardrobe that invokes Alluri Sitaramaraju, the historical figure his character is based on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Sitarama_Raju https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Sitarama_Raju And this popular representation and the fictional fiancee named Sita come from a classic 1974 movie: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Seetarama_Raju_(film) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alluri_Seetarama_Raju_(film) Rajamouli is not exactly big on subtlety. If the troubling implications need so much ink to explain, maybe the implications aren't actually there? > Essentially it’s holding up some of the more radical freedom fighters and downplaying the more pacifist and equitable ones Sardar Patel, Chidambaram Pillai and Tanguturi Prakasam were not radicals, they were lifelong members of the INC and were committed to Gandhian non-violence. Bhagat Singh and Subhash Chandra Bose were capital S Socialists, it doesn't get more equitable than that. This argument would have held weight if someone like Savarkar was included. As it stands, it makes no sense.

dagmx 4y ago
Bose was a socialist in the sense that nazis were nationalist socialists so I’m not sure what your point is there.
- unmole 4y ago
  Maybe read about man's views on the matter?
  - dagmx 4y ago
    I have in the countless times this has been brought up. My high school had a Bose statue and taught us a lot of his history as well to try and reaffirm his greatness. In the end , I haven’t ever seen anyone show me anything that didn’t also require ignoring Bose’s significant ties to the Nazis to have a charitable take on the man and his followers.

random314 4y ago

+1 on that. I only watched the action sequences in the movie as RRR is not the kind if movie I enjoy. But the end of the movie, makes it quite clear that it is a nod to right wing Hindu nationalism. The most pointed example is the exclusion, in the end credits, of the 2 biggest icons of Indian liberation - Mahatma Gandhi and the first prime minister Nehru( the British locked him up for over a decade) who were secular liberals. Nehru happens to be the great grandfather of the main opposition leader Rahul Gandhi. As the right wing Hindu pre independence movement largely connived with the colonialists, the right wing government today is focused on appropriating a select few independence fighters and projecting them as right wing icons even though they were liberals or socialists. 3 prominent figures. 1. Bhagat Singh - a socialist who is now projected as a right wing icon and stripped of his Sikh beard https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhagat_Singh 2. Sardar Patel - Nehru and Gandhis colleague who had some right wing sympathies, but actually banned RSS (Modi's organization) following the assassination of Gandhi by RSS workers. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Unity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statue_of_Unity 3. Subhash Bose - A foolhardy military strategist who tried to partner with the Nazis to fight the British. Eventually, assisting the Japanese in Burma and helping them invade India. Gandhi was extremely wary of Bose's plans. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subhas_Chandra_Bose Towards the end, it projects the independence fight as a largely Hindu fight against British and anoints upper caste Rama as a leader of lower caste Bheem. At this point, it seems that the exclusion of muslims, sikhs and some Christians etc. From the script as freedom fighters seems deliberate. Bheem is a nod to lower caste icon bhimrao Ambedkar, who converted from Hinduism to buddhism to escape caste hierarchies. This could have been a positive inclusion in the story, but it is flipped on its head when Bheem is shown swearing fealty to upper caste Rama in the end. The Ramayana itself, has a negative attitude towards lower castes, which makes this highly improper. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B._R._Ambedkar https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambuka https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambuka [1] Moreover the choice of Rama is sensitive in the current political situation in India as Rama is being used as a tool to bully poor Muslims on the streets. https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+jai+shree+ram https://www.google.com/search?q=muslim+jai+shree+ram [1] You will notice that Shambuka is noted as an "interpolated" character in Ramayana. This almost certainly true, but the Godliness of Rama as an avatar of Vishnu is part of the same interpolation. The original smaller Ramayana is simply the story of an "ideal king". This was converted into a story of divinity by the interpolation of Godliness, sexism and casteism(uttara and bala kanda) . Wikipedia has been edited to clarify that Shambuka is a later interpolation, while the article on Rama and Ramayana simply forget to headline that the divinity of Rama is a later interpolation. The interpolation makes complete sense as the brahmins successfully solidified the caste system and inserted casteist and sexist texts into several ancient sanskrit texts to anoint the caste system with divine status. There is a small ongoing movement to refer to the current version of Hinduism as Brahminism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Brahminism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Brahminism

asenna 4y ago

I agree with this. I saw this in the theater in India and the overtly Hindutva stuff definitely got me laughing. It's not even subtle, hard to miss when you know the context.

chinabot 4y ago

Great Movie. Nice to see us British from the anti-colonial standpoint, we always get cast as the nice guys but we have a shit ton of historical baggage, I think we deserve the odd movie payback to even things out.

zR4B 4y ago

>downplaying the more pacifist Where is the downplaying part in the movie?