PDA

View Full Version : Deepa Mehta: Water (2005)



Chris Knipp
06-22-2006, 11:06 PM
Deepa Mehta: Water

Social criticism, history, romance, tragedy -- lite

Review by Chris Knipp

Mehta’s Water, currently being well received by American audiences, is another in her series of historical films (Fire 1996, Earth 1998, now this, but with love comedies in between including Bollywood/Hollywood) which paint with broad strokes and surging music key moments or aspects of modern Indian history. This one concentrates on the custom of following ancient Hindu law requiring widows to, as is helpfully explained to us by a religious man and student of the scriptures in the film, either die in suttee, on the funeral pyre of their dead husband; go into an ashram -- here, into a temple near the Ganges in the holy city of Varanasi -- and live there till death; or marry their husband’s younger brother. Our film focuses on the second alternative, confinement to an ashram. Despite the fact that even in 1938 there was a law (news to the ladies of Varanasi) encouraging widows to remarry, Mehta tells us in end titles that many widows are still confined today. Mehta struggled against losing odds to make this film in India and the shoot was completed in Sri Lanka. There are criticisms of the authenticity, but this necessity must be kept in mind.

Mehta’s broad strokes are pretty strokes. She begins with an appealing child widow, a girl of seven called Chuya (Sarala) who doesn’t even know she was married but is shaven and shut into an ashram with older women when her old husband dies. The shaven widows are a mixture of crones and suffering sisters who’re given clear-cut distinguishing traits. They’re not Dickensian grotesques but are lightly comic – though they can turn nasty just as they can suffer. The other main character is a beautiful woman named Kalyani played by Lisa Ray, an actress born in Canada; Indian viewers have said her Hindi is stilted-sounding, and indeed most of the dialogue is. Kalyani has been working as a prostitute to help support the ashram, the lone member of the widow ashram allowed to wear her hair long -- a decline in tradition having apparently led to less charitable support of such a place. Kalyani's a dead ringer for Jennifer Connelly and, despite her recent background as a call girl delivered by rowboat, has eyes as pure and bright and innocent and starry as a child's. Along comes a young well-educated man of rich family, Narayan (John Abraham), the actor 6’1’, broad-shouldered, and wearing wire rimmed glasses that make him look even more like Gregory Peck than he does already. But he doesn't get to do much acting: he's Gregory Peck as Indian supermodel (which Abraham in fact formerly was); and though he's seen shaving, he's fashionably grizzled. He goes about in dhoti and long exquisite pale blue shirt, the kind of impeccable loose garments that show off a physique by slightly hiding it. The saddest thing is how emotionally stunted the women are. A toothless old crone known as "Auntie" (Vidula Javalgekar) dreams of nothing but the buttery, sugary sweets she ate at her wedding when she was a young girl which now she is forbidden to have. But the film isn’t stingy about offering us its own bonbons.

As in a Bollywood musical, Narayan and Kalyani set eyes on each other, music plays, and it’s instant love. We know Narayan is going to rescue Kalyani, but it turns out not to be so easy. There are various times when you expect the actors in Water to burst into song, and perhaps dance – odd in a film about very grim conditions. In the background news periodically comes in of the emergence of a national savior named “Gandhiji,” who’s imprisoned by the English and then released. Mahta excels at grand climaxes and this one has a tumultuous, cathartic finale that includes Gandhi and a railway station. Viewers of Mahta’s 1998 Earth won’t be likely to have forgotten the train massacre during the India-Pakistan war of the late Forties and it’s hard not to be swept away by some moments in Water, but you might want to try. Its approach to events is simplistic and saccharine and is more on the level of a novel for young adults than mature historical fiction. Music is a little too helpful. Flute-playing and poetry-quoting are too-glib romantic devices. One has the sense that the filmmakers are playing to a western audience, even though they’re close to Bollywood traditions. This is more sophisticated than popular Indian musical films, but if you compare it to Sajayit Ray it’s sadly facile stuff. Perhaps people would like the History Channel to be like this, but if it were, it would betray its historical function.

oscar jubis
06-24-2006, 11:16 AM
I enjoyed the beautiful and engaging Water and I have much respect for the filmmaker having had to overcome great obstacles to get it in the can. Yet I am not entirely satisfied with it and wish to raise three issues:

If widows are still being confined in ashrams nowadays, why not make a contemporary film about them? Mehta was inspired to make the film after meeting a confined widow only a decade ago, and the reaction from conservative religious groups during attempts to shoot it in India indicate this is a current issue. No matter how interesting the late 1930s were from a historical perspective, making a period film feels like a cop-out, avoiding a confrontation with the current political, social and religious forces involved.

Why cast an actress (Lisa Ray) who's a "dead ringer for Jennifer Connelly" (Knipp) and whose "Hindi is stilted-sounding" in a lead role? Ray certainly could pass as caucasian even if she's reportedly of mixed Indian and Polish heritage. There are so many strikingly beautiful Indian actresses who look and sound like someone who might be confined to an ashram.

Chris Knipp mentioned Satyajit Ray. Indeed I'd prefer Water aimed closer to the poetic realism of Ray and Ghatak than surrender to commercial pressures. I bet Ebert is not the sole critic who wishes there was no Kalyani or wishes this character relegated to a minor role. Perhaps Kalyani's tragedy is needed to concoct the intended happy ending... I'm not convinced though. Let's be fair, there's simply no doubt audiences love Water and have made it a hit. It's been playing here for 6 weeks, which is a long run for a foreign-language film. Among those, it's by far the most successful of 2006 (approaching $3 million; compared, for instance, to barely over $1 million for the French crowd-pleaser Joyeux Noel). 53% of IMdb voters rate it a 9 or 10. I've had more people come up to me to ask my opinion of it than any other foreign-language release this year. In my book, it's always good when casual American moviegoers show interest for a subtitled film.

Chris Knipp
06-24-2006, 12:34 PM
I agree with your criticisms. I also find it annoying when a movie made to please that's superficial and innacurate in plotting setting and casting pretends to be socially responsible. The two aspects don't go together. There's not much use in "what if's" though: this is the kind of "subtitled" stuff that sells tickets. (Some) Regal cineplexes are showing Pierre Morel's District B13/Banlieue 13 (which I've reviewed here) in French with subtitles, an accomplishment of sorts. It also impressed me that UA cineplexes showed Christophe Gans' The Brotherhood of the Wolf/Le pacte des loups in 2002 in French with subtitles. These are both juicy pieces of filmmaking with no immediate claims of moral virtue, though Banieue is pro-banlieue, of course.

Howard Schumann
06-26-2006, 11:03 AM
WATER

Directed by Deepa Mehta (2005)

According to the ancient Hindu Laws of Manu: a wife has only three options upon the death of her husband: She must burn with his remains, remarry his younger brother, or live the remainder of her life in self-denial. The third film in a trilogy that explores religious hypocrisy, Canadian filmmaker Deepak Mehta's Water is an eloquent protest against the maltreatment of Indian widows, some as young as seven years old, who are condemned to live a life of penitence and deprivation. The shooting of Water in India was interrupted in 2000 by Hindu fundamentalists who staged protests, destroyed sets, and forced the production to shut down and move to Sri Lanka.

Set in India in 1938 along the River Ganges, Water chronicles the lives of several widows against the backdrop of the rise to prominence of Mahatma Gandhi and his non-violent campaign for liberation. Recently widowed 8-year old Chuyia, played by the outstanding Sri Lankan actress Sarala, is sent by her family to a house for widows where her head is shaved and she must wear a white sari to let others know of her status. Chuyia meets the overbearing Madhumati (Manorma), the "mother" figure who raises money for the ashram by sending young girls across the River Ganges to be prostitutes. She is gently opposed by Shakuntala (Seema Biswas) who tries to protect the girls without openly denying the traditions.

Kalyani (Lisa Ray) is one of the girls used by Madhumati but she still manages to maintain a youthful innocence and beauty. Chuyia and Kalyani become friends and while walking in the village, accidentally meet Narayana, a young law student (John Abraham) who is active in the movement for Indian liberation. He fiercely opposes the hypocrisy involved in isolating widows and condemning them as untouchables. He tells Kalyani that the issue is one not of religion but of money: "One less mouth to feed", he says, "four less saris, and a free corner in the house. Disguised as religion, it's just about money," Narayana and Kalyani fall in love and he asks her to marry him in spite of the opposition of his family and society, a situation that leads to unfortunate consequences.

In Water, Mehta employs the humanist tradition of Satyajit Ray with expressive Indian music enhancing the emotions of the characters, but also bodily lifts the character of Auntie from Pather Panchali and the movie struggles for an original style. While Water is beautiful to look at and embodies an important message, it is ultimately defeated by a very conventional style, a clichéd and manipulative plot, and some larger than life characters who never come alive as real human beings.

GRADE: B-

Chris Knipp
06-26-2006, 11:13 AM
The "just about money" statement is an important point I wish I'd brought in. We generally agree, though I don't see much resemblance to a Ray tradition; this is more like TV stuff.

Howard Schumann
06-29-2006, 04:02 PM
Originally posted by Chris Knipp
The "just about money" statement is an important point I wish I'd brought in. We generally agree, though I don't see much resemblance to a Ray tradition; this is more like TV stuff. The Ray tradition I was referring to is his use of music to enhance the emotional impact of a character's expression or action. That is the only resemblance I can find and it felt plagiaristic (if there is such a word).

Chris Knipp
06-29-2006, 09:53 PM
Plagiaristic is certainly a word, and a tendency.