A backlash from viewers and critics caused the much-anticipated, opulent Indian movie Adipurush to bomb at the box office. Meryl Sebastian of the BBC examines the problems with the movie.
Adipurush had all the makings of a big-budget hit: a star with a huge fan base, a plot based on a revered Hindu epic, a big budget, and even the support of some senior members of the ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).
It was the most recent in a string of movies that, in some instances, claimed a connection with nationalism or Hinduism. Adipurush's formula, while successful for some, backfired; the audience it was meant to entertain and please has turned against it.
The Ramayana, a Hindu epic, is cited as an inspiration by the Adipurush film's creators.
The story of the Ramayana tells of the Hindu god Ram's victory over the demon king Ravana after the latter kidnaps Ram's wife, Sita.
The Hindi and Telugu-language movie ought to have turned around a dreary quarter for Bollywood at the box office. But its financial situation quickly turned around.
The movie got mostly unfavorable reviews after it came out. Leaders of the opposition criticized the movie, and two cities in neighboring Nepal banned all Bollywood movies until a "protestable" line was changed.
Even the producers were surprised by the audience backlash that served as the final blow. While some Hindu organizations pushed for a ban on the movie, protests took place throughout India. Director Om Raut and writer Manoj Muntashir of Adipurush are now under police protection after receiving death threats.
Adipurush, according to critics, is one of a number of recent movies that try to appeal to Hindu viewers. Some of them have also been charged with escalating religious animosity. The Kashmir Files and The Kerala Story, two movies that received harsh criticism for fabricating information and inciting Islamophobia, were huge box office successes.
Others have taken issue with the way the movie portrays Ravana, a follower of the Hindu god Shiva, gifted musician, and strong king.
Sowmya Rajendran, a writer and critic, claims that "Ravana [in Adipurush] is modelled on Bollywood's now popular image of the Mughal villain] with kohl-rimmed eyes and in dark attire.".
The movie was anticipated to live up to the high standards set by blockbusters like SS Rajamouli's RRR and Baahubali and Mani Ratnam's Ponniyin Selvan, which stood out for their compelling plotlines, deftly written dialogue, stunning set pieces, and capable visual effects.
Adipurush, in contrast, is compared to a school play by critics due to its amateur acting and meme-friendly CGI.
They have made fun of its "video game" aesthetic, "clunky graphics," lack of creativity, allusions to Western fantasies like The Lord of the Rings and Game of Thrones, and two-dimensional storytelling.
Its dialogues offended viewers; many said the use of everyday language was disrespectful to the deities it represented. Additionally, they objected to the portrayal of Ram as a vengeful deity. Ram is known to believers as "Maryada Purushottam," or the ideal man.
Even industry analysts were caught off guard when the movie's box office fell after its first weekend.
The Hindi version of the movie was projected to gross at least 2 billion rupees in its first week of release, despite having a budget of about 5 billion rupees ($61 million, £47 point 8 million). Analyst Komal Nahta predicts that this will now end at about 1.3bn rupees.
According to Mr. Nahta, the film's Hindi-language box office receipts have decreased by 75–80% since Monday. "And with every day that goes by, it keeps falling quickly. The Telugu version's earnings also experienced a similar decline.
With Hindu organizations and priests who called for a ban on the movie, the unhappiness appears to be deeper.
The chief priest of the Ram temple in Ayodhya, the city where Ram is thought to have been born, claimed that the dialogues caused his "blood to boil.". In response to the movie's "wrong" costumes, illustrations, and word choice, the right-wing organization Hindu Mahasabha reported the incident to the police. The All Indian Cine Workers Association claimed that the movie offended Hindus' feelings.
Although there are numerous variations of the Ramayana throughout Southeast Asia, in India Valmiki's Sanskrit poem continues to have the most impact. Adipurush opens with a lengthy disclaimer that states that this is the version it is based on.
One of the epic's most well-known adaptations is a 1987 TV program, which journalist and author Dilip Mandal claims became the undisputed representation of Valmiki's epic.
He claimed in The Print that Adipurush was "just another chapter in the history of the re-invention of Valmiki's Ramayana," adding that the 1987 version's rigidity "limited the cultural richness that localized interpretations can bring, leaving little room for diverse perspectives and nuances and inhibiting the potential for the story to resonate with different communities.".
People in India have spent their entire lives watching plays based on the epic that were performed at festivals and schools and were adorned with local idioms like songs and proverbs. Manoj Muntashir, the writer of Adipurush, defended his artistic decisions by claiming that he based the movie on the storytelling customs prevalent in his Uttar Pradeshi village growing up.
According to Ms. Rajendran, the failure of Adipurush to conform to accepted notions of the epic is not the cause of its failure.
She labels it a "lazy film that doesn't bother to delve into the richness of the epic" or comprehend the impact it has on people, with its "terrible dialogues and shoddy world-building.".
However, the reasons for the film's rejection worry and trouble Rahul Desai as much as the movie itself.
He told the BBC that there was "no defending the movie, which looks to scale up the aggressive language of modern Hindu nationalism.". However, the majority of people in this place are offended because they find the alteration of tradition to be offensive. ".
He claims that Hindu mythology (such as the Ramayana and the Mahabharata) cannot be touched at this point. People perceive it as an assault on their truth, in contrast to historicals, where facts are frequently changed to support politically divisive narratives. ".
Because of this, he claims, the film's attempts to be innovative are mocked.
It's true that a sizeable portion of the Indian public today believes in Hindutva narratives. They do, however, also visit theaters to be entertained and to get their money's worth, according to Ms. Rajendran. They won't waste their money on a sloppy, fake movie. ".
the YouTube channel for BBC News India. Click . here. to subscribe and watch our explainers, features, and documentaries.
