Lughole.net – Webmaster Resources, Technology and Current Affairs blog

Jodha Akbar is more than your money’s worth

Posted on 05. Apr, 2008 by Saarthak in Movies

Jodha Akbar hit the Indian screens on 15^th February after running into delays, once due to post-production work and another time after the director was advised 21 days of bed rest because of a severe back problem.

It turned out to be one of those movies for me, which I was desperate to watch, but could not go to the cinema due to lack of time. Luckily, Ashutosh Gowariker’s magnum opus emerged a super-hit despite being bashed by critics (we’ll talk about these idiots later), and hence stayed longer at the multiplexes, which in turn allowed me to catch it on Thursday.

Description

Hirthik Roshan was a good choice for the role of Akbar, considering his features. He surprises with a fairly nuanced performance, aided with dollops of Urdu. Aishwarya Rai, who has always made a mark in traditional roles – be it hum Dil De Chuke Sanam or Devdas, strikes a chord as the playful Jodha. No one in the rest of the casting appears a misfit.

Almost a 4-hour film, Jodha Akbar is the longest movie I ever saw after Lagaan, which incidentally, is also a work of Mr Gowariker. However, I was so mesmerized by the cinematography, sets, costumes, dialogues, diction, music and acting, that time ceased to flow.

Transported to an era where the finest Mughal emperor lived, I gasped as the camera dug right inside the canon during a battle scene, even as a canon ball boomed out of it to hit the enemy camp. I felt humble and enchanted as I heard the Sufis sing “Khwaja mere Khwaja,” and I sang along with the subjects of Akbar’s vast empire as they sung “Azeemo Sha Shenshah” in his praise. As usual, I stayed to watch all the credits once the movie ended, marveling at this great piece of filmmaking.

Critics – when will they ever learn

There have been people, who have criticized this film to be utterly fictitious, and who have questioned the existence of Jodha Bai. Well, as far as I remember, I did read in my history book in 7^th standard that Akbar married a Rajput princess called Jodha Bai, which helped strengthen his alliance with the Rajputs. Even if that is wrong and historians now claim that she was some other Bai, what does it matter? The most essential facts about Akbar’s patronage and respect of the Rajputs is nicely depicted. The film language allows its speaker creative freedom, and he can express it whatever way he likes. Ashutosh Gowariker never claimed that he was making a documentary. And yet, JA is a thoroughly well-researched and well-made commercial film. In fact, K Asif’s Mughal-e-Azam is many times more fiction ridden than JA.

As far as film critics go, I have completely stopped believing them. They appear to be either biased, bribed or are downright idiots. How else can you justify Khalid Mohammed belting out 4 stars to “Om Shanti Om” and 2 and a half stars to Jodha Akbar? Its ironic, its funny, it’s the height idiosyncrasy! I wonder why a respected newspaper like Hindustan Times had to employ KM of all the people for writing movie reviews.

Jodha Akbar Vs Mughal-E-Azam

I thought it would be nice to compare Mughal-E-Azam and Jodha Akbar, even though they were made generations apart, and the former focused more on Akbar’s son Salim than the great Mughal emperor himself

1. Sets, Costumes and Jewellery: The sets in Mughal-e-Azam were grand and pristine even by today’s standards. However, most of the shoot was indoors. In contrast, Jodha Akbar tried to capture a more appropriate setting, with the Agra fort set for Akbar’s palace and the Rajput havelis in Rajasthan; too good. The costumes and jewellery used in both the movies are equally awe-inspiring, and of course highly expensive. From what I heard, the rakhi tied by Aishwarya Rai on Sonu Sood’s hand cost Rs 8 lakhs!

2. Music: There is absolutely no doubt that both the movies have fabulous music. Nuashad was a legend, and so is AR Rahman. Mughal-e-Azam has more songs, but I believe the ones in Jodha Akbar are more aptly put in and move the story forward.

3. Photography: The framing, camera movements and composition in Jodha Akbar are far superior. I have hardly seen such impressive cinemtatography in Bollywood movies (mostly seen in Mani Ratnam movies). K Asif’s film was probably lost out because of the technology factor!

4. Script: The scripts of both the films are definitely exhaustive in their detail. However, I am sure the one written by Gowariker took far more hard work, considering the intricacies and complications that were created in the Mughal-Rajput and Rajput-Rajput dealings. MeA was a more melo-dramatic story, JA is dramatic and well crafted.

5. Acting: This one goes to Mughal-E-Azam. With actors like Prithvi Raj Kapoor and Dilip Kumar, who knew Urdu at the back of their hands, the diction and performances were quite flawless. Hirthik Roshan, though competent, did not appear as comfortable with Urdu. I have always found Madhubala extremely beautiful, and in my opinion she’d have been a great Jodha as well. Yet, Aish has always done well under a good director, and this was Gowariker at his best!

Conclusion

The art and creative direction is what truly gives this film its grandeur. The colors surround you and make the film worth watching in a theater rather than on a television screen. The orange and red hues with the dusky backdrop of the desert, the cackling fire set amidst colorful tents, the majestic pink forts and the glorious white robes light up the screen.

Apart from a few notable performances such as Ila Arun as Maham Anga, this film was a director’s feat and not really carried by any of the actors’ performances.

Share

Related Posts:

• No Related Posts

Tags: aishwarya rai, ashutosh gowariker, hrithik roshan, jodha akbar