Maits.txt - Tumblr Posts

badhaai do: how some of us from the queer community missed its point

I've been back after 9213049 years to announce that y'all MUST watch Badhaai Do, it's literally the most beautiful form of queer representation I've seen. another thing, ignore those who say there are zero queer people involved.

a few spoilers ahead, so please watch the movie before reading this :))

1. the script consultant is queer.

2. the people in the pride parade (which had the unfortunate straight flag in the trailer) were queer. I saw plenty of instagram stories by those in there, posting about it, and checked out their profiles. if they didn't spot it, that means not all queer people keep up with news that makes them sad lol.

3. the girl who hands the mask to Shardul was his sister-in-law, also queer.

4. we also don't know for sure whether there aren't any other queer people involved in the making, so let's not just assume that only the hets were a part of this.

and check out the interviews by the crew - they have mentioned more than once that they showed this film to a LOT of queer people, showed the script to a lot of queer people too. the script consultant recently mentioned just how far the writers and directors went to keep it as sincere as possible. that doesn't sound like "rainbow capitalism to me". that doesn't sound like capitalizing off queer suffering.

i, for one, can see some sincere and genuine effort put in by people who are not even gay. we got a pride anthem, some solid gay-lesbian solidarity (#sumiandshardulbesties5ever), realistic queer romance, and several milestones in Indian cinema too, I think (I do not recall a blood test being portrayed as sensual in bollywood before OH MY GOD). i remember tearing up at sumi's father destroying her (and me) with the singular line: "mere ghar me hi kyu?" (why does it have to be at my home AKA why does it have to be my daughter?). i remember the joy of seeing a pride parade and my date bawling like a child watching sumi and rhimjhim run underneath the rainbow. i had to watch it more than once to fully understand the little details and the subtleties of the characters. some of my favourites are:

1. rhimjhim blowing kisses at shardul during the pride (hints at the start of the second half, when shardul blows her kisses)

2. guru giving such a fruity kick to shardul it melts my heart dkjsfji

3. not all members of the family are present in the last scene. taiji and sumi's mother are absent, another unnamed aunt, shardul's nieces, etc. but we see her brother, who was the one who called her a "pervert". character growth there and we dont need to get into how it happened. this is not about them, after all.

5. sumi wearing the red glasses to not let shardul's coworkers find out that she's a part of the parade.

6. the walkie-talkie during the scene with shardul's superior and his wife visiting them for tea is blaring about loud, barking dogs and the dialogues SEND ME.

7. kabir's text messages. you really need to pause to read them but they're so sus (i think he might be cheating? idk)

basically, it ages like an evergreen forest.

i didn't expect to walk into the theatre to watch an arthouse, indie film. at its core, what badhaai do has achieved is something phenomenal - it has retained what defines a bollywood movie while simultaneously portraying queer relationships as something not extraordinary or reserved for the "woke" segments of society. the characters aren't just their sexualities and sumi says it herself: "hissa hain, puri zindagi kaha hain." (trans: it's just a part of us, not our entire life.) shardul slaps his lover, kabir is an asshole, sumi decimates her partner's career, rhimjhim makes assumptions on shardul's sexuality, etc. it is bad enough that i have to sit through homophobes calling this as a disgusting film filled with obscene scenes, giving their low-iq opinions on why it's wrong. now i have to sit through seasoned, jaded queer individuals like me, give some of the worst reasons to cancel a film and call it problematic?

The characters are not pinnacles of perfection and I'm here for it. I don't want a cardboard vincian protagonist. some

of the reviewers clearly don't understand what nuance is and I'm okay with that. some of us who have grateful access to resources and inner pride meetings forget that there are those still in closet, those who still don't know that gender is a social construct. that we still live in a country which has some of the most homophobic outlooks. sure, homophobia was a concept popularized by the British, but are we really going to forget that there are scriptures dated BC that have specific laws for punishing lesbians? homophobia has been as rooted in our culture as the urge to search for a suitable groom for a girl the minute she comes of age (the number may change with each passing century, but does it really matter?).

those that go as far as the city's outskirts for a chance to live a life free from the heteronormative eye. there are also those who want a child as their own. what's so heteronormative about that? what's so heteronormative about wanting to be a mother? are we seriously going to nitpick on the littlest things? and let us not forget that guru isn't at all interested in the child. he states this himself and is hesitant to join Shardul until he is told that it is just to be by his side. the ending is not meant to be perfect. heck, I would go as far as to say that the true ending was when it was just Sumi and Shardul with the child. perhaps the filmmakers wanted to offer us a happy ending, or at least, a bittersweet one. and i will quote the director from his interview with PeepingMoon: "they never really come out of the closet. instead, the closet just gets bigger."

this is coming from someone still in the closet, living in a somewhat conservative society and still grasping with their own gender identity. my closet keeps getting bigger, with the recent addition of my mother to it. watching this movie encouraged me to come out to her and my mother to give some of most supportive words a queer child can hear. and for that, i cannot thank Badhaai Do and its makers enough for it.

I AM SCREAMING LMAO THERE ARE HEAD CANONS ALREADY FOR BADHAAI DO LEADS I LOVE THIS NAVY WEBSITE SM

im so glad you see my point and it's so gratifying to know that there are still a lot of queer people who genuinely get its point like tysm akshat ghildial, suman adhikary and harshavardhan kulkarni for writing this masterpiece, and thank YOU bhumi, rajkumar, gulshan and chum for translating it so beautifully on screen.

badhaai do: how some of us from the queer community missed its point

I've been back after 9213049 years to announce that y'all MUST watch Badhaai Do, it's literally the most beautiful form of queer representation I've seen. another thing, ignore those who say there are zero queer people involved. a few spoilers ahead, so please watch the movie before reading this :))

1. the script consultant is queer. 2. the people in the pride parade (which had the unfortunate straight flag in the trailer) were queer. I saw plenty of instagram stories by those in there, posting about it, and checked out their profiles. if they didn't spot it, that means not all queer people keep up with news that makes them sad lol. 3. the girl who hands the mask to Shardul was his sister-in-law, also queer. 4. we also don't know for sure whether there aren't any other queer people involved in the making, so let's not just assume that only the hets were a part of this. and check out the interviews by the crew - they have mentioned more than once that they showed this film to a LOT of queer people, showed the script to a lot of queer people too. the script consultant recently mentioned just how far the writers and directors went to keep it as sincere as possible. that doesn't sound like "rainbow capitalism to me". that doesn't sound like capitalizing off queer suffering. i, for one, can see some sincere and genuine effort put in by people who are not even gay. we got a pride anthem, some solid gay-lesbian solidarity (#sumiandshardulbesties5ever), realistic queer romance, and several milestones in Indian cinema too, I think (I do not recall a blood test being portrayed as sensual in bollywood before OH MY GOD). i remember tearing up at sumi's father destroying her (and me) with the singular line: "mere ghar me hi kyu?" (why does it have to be at my home AKA why does it have to be my daughter?). i remember the joy of seeing a pride parade and my date bawling like a child watching sumi and rhimjhim run underneath the rainbow. i had to watch it more than once to fully understand the little details and the subtleties of the characters. some of my favourites are: 1. rhimjhim blowing kisses at shardul during the pride (hints at the start of the second half, when shardul blows her kisses) 2. guru giving such a fruity kick to shardul it melts my heart dkjsfji 3. not all members of the family are present in the last scene. taiji and sumi's mother are absent, another unnamed aunt, shardul's nieces, etc. but we see her brother, who was the one who called her a "pervert". character growth there and we dont need to get into how it happened. this is not about them, after all. 5. sumi wearing the red glasses to not let shardul's coworkers find out that she's a part of the parade. 6. the walkie-talkie during the scene with shardul's superior and his wife visiting them for tea is blaring about loud, barking dogs and the dialogues SEND ME. 7. kabir's text messages. you really need to pause to read them but they're so sus (i think he might be cheating? idk) basically, it ages like an evergreen forest. i didn't expect to walk into the theatre to watch an arthouse, indie film. at its core, what badhaai do has achieved is something phenomenal - it has retained what defines a bollywood movie while simultaneously portraying queer relationships as something not extraordinary or reserved for the "woke" segments of society. the characters aren't just their sexualities and sumi says it herself: "hissa hain, puri zindagi kaha hain." (trans: it's just a part of us, not our entire life.) shardul slaps his lover, kabir is an asshole, sumi decimates her partner's career, rhimjhim makes assumptions on shardul's sexuality, etc. it is bad enough that i have to sit through homophobes calling this as a disgusting film filled with obscene scenes, giving their low-iq opinions on why it's wrong. now i have to sit through seasoned, jaded queer individuals like me, give some of the worst reasons to cancel a film and call it problematic? The characters are not pinnacles of perfection and I'm here for it. I don't want a cardboard vincian protagonist. some

of the reviewers clearly don't understand what nuance is and I'm okay with that. some of us who have grateful access to resources and inner pride meetings forget that there are those still in closet, those who still don't know that gender is a social construct. that we still live in a country which has some of the most homophobic outlooks. sure, homophobia was a concept popularized by the British, but are we really going to forget that there are scriptures dated BC that have specific laws for punishing lesbians? homophobia has been as rooted in our culture as the urge to search for a suitable groom for a girl the minute she comes of age (the number may change with each passing century, but does it really matter?). those that go as far as the city's outskirts for a chance to live a life free from the heteronormative eye. there are also those who want a child as their own. what's so heteronormative about that? what's so heteronormative about wanting to be a mother? are we seriously going to nitpick on the littlest things? and let us not forget that guru isn't at all interested in the child. he states this himself and is hesitant to join Shardul until he is told that it is just to be by his side. the ending is not meant to be perfect. heck, I would go as far as to say that the true ending was when it was just Sumi and Shardul with the child. perhaps the filmmakers wanted to offer us a happy ending, or at least, a bittersweet one. and i will quote the director from his interview with PeepingMoon: "they never really come out of the closet. instead, the closet just gets bigger." this is coming from someone still in the closet, living in a somewhat conservative society and still grasping with their own gender identity. my closet keeps getting bigger, with the recent addition of my mother to it. watching this movie encouraged me to come out to her and my mother to give some of most supportive words a queer child can hear. and for that, i cannot thank Badhaai Do and its makers enough for it.

IKR !! the tags under this post are literally on fire 🔥 i love these people lmao. like i expected sumi's mother to shun her but not shardul's aunt. glad to see those who made the worst possible comments (like sumi's brother or shardul's sisters and his brother-in-law) come around. a lot happened in that one year, but tbh, im glad they didnt show that. it's not about how the hets came around and accepted them, after all. and those who call this a happy ending seriously need to watch the film again

badhaai do: how some of us from the queer community missed its point

I've been back after 9213049 years to announce that y'all MUST watch Badhaai Do, it's literally the most beautiful form of queer representation I've seen. another thing, ignore those who say there are zero queer people involved. a few spoilers ahead, so please watch the movie before reading this :))

1. the script consultant is queer. 2. the people in the pride parade (which had the unfortunate straight flag in the trailer) were queer. I saw plenty of instagram stories by those in there, posting about it, and checked out their profiles. if they didn't spot it, that means not all queer people keep up with news that makes them sad lol. 3. the girl who hands the mask to Shardul was his sister-in-law, also queer. 4. we also don't know for sure whether there aren't any other queer people involved in the making, so let's not just assume that only the hets were a part of this. and check out the interviews by the crew - they have mentioned more than once that they showed this film to a LOT of queer people, showed the script to a lot of queer people too. the script consultant recently mentioned just how far the writers and directors went to keep it as sincere as possible. that doesn't sound like "rainbow capitalism to me". that doesn't sound like capitalizing off queer suffering. i, for one, can see some sincere and genuine effort put in by people who are not even gay. we got a pride anthem, some solid gay-lesbian solidarity (#sumiandshardulbesties5ever), realistic queer romance, and several milestones in Indian cinema too, I think (I do not recall a blood test being portrayed as sensual in bollywood before OH MY GOD). i remember tearing up at sumi's father destroying her (and me) with the singular line: "mere ghar me hi kyu?" (why does it have to be at my home AKA why does it have to be my daughter?). i remember the joy of seeing a pride parade and my date bawling like a child watching sumi and rhimjhim run underneath the rainbow. i had to watch it more than once to fully understand the little details and the subtleties of the characters. some of my favourites are: 1. rhimjhim blowing kisses at shardul during the pride (hints at the start of the second half, when shardul blows her kisses) 2. guru giving such a fruity kick to shardul it melts my heart dkjsfji 3. not all members of the family are present in the last scene. taiji and sumi's mother are absent, another unnamed aunt, shardul's nieces, etc. but we see her brother, who was the one who called her a "pervert". character growth there and we dont need to get into how it happened. this is not about them, after all. 5. sumi wearing the red glasses to not let shardul's coworkers find out that she's a part of the parade. 6. the walkie-talkie during the scene with shardul's superior and his wife visiting them for tea is blaring about loud, barking dogs and the dialogues SEND ME. 7. kabir's text messages. you really need to pause to read them but they're so sus (i think he might be cheating? idk) basically, it ages like an evergreen forest. i didn't expect to walk into the theatre to watch an arthouse, indie film. at its core, what badhaai do has achieved is something phenomenal - it has retained what defines a bollywood movie while simultaneously portraying queer relationships as something not extraordinary or reserved for the "woke" segments of society. the characters aren't just their sexualities and sumi says it herself: "hissa hain, puri zindagi kaha hain." (trans: it's just a part of us, not our entire life.) shardul slaps his lover, kabir is an asshole, sumi decimates her partner's career, rhimjhim makes assumptions on shardul's sexuality, etc. it is bad enough that i have to sit through homophobes calling this as a disgusting film filled with obscene scenes, giving their low-iq opinions on why it's wrong. now i have to sit through seasoned, jaded queer individuals like me, give some of the worst reasons to cancel a film and call it problematic? The characters are not pinnacles of perfection and I'm here for it. I don't want a cardboard vincian protagonist. some

of the reviewers clearly don't understand what nuance is and I'm okay with that. some of us who have grateful access to resources and inner pride meetings forget that there are those still in closet, those who still don't know that gender is a social construct. that we still live in a country which has some of the most homophobic outlooks. sure, homophobia was a concept popularized by the British, but are we really going to forget that there are scriptures dated BC that have specific laws for punishing lesbians? homophobia has been as rooted in our culture as the urge to search for a suitable groom for a girl the minute she comes of age (the number may change with each passing century, but does it really matter?). those that go as far as the city's outskirts for a chance to live a life free from the heteronormative eye. there are also those who want a child as their own. what's so heteronormative about that? what's so heteronormative about wanting to be a mother? are we seriously going to nitpick on the littlest things? and let us not forget that guru isn't at all interested in the child. he states this himself and is hesitant to join Shardul until he is told that it is just to be by his side. the ending is not meant to be perfect. heck, I would go as far as to say that the true ending was when it was just Sumi and Shardul with the child. perhaps the filmmakers wanted to offer us a happy ending, or at least, a bittersweet one. and i will quote the director from his interview with PeepingMoon: "they never really come out of the closet. instead, the closet just gets bigger." this is coming from someone still in the closet, living in a somewhat conservative society and still grasping with their own gender identity. my closet keeps getting bigger, with the recent addition of my mother to it. watching this movie encouraged me to come out to her and my mother to give some of most supportive words a queer child can hear. and for that, i cannot thank Badhaai Do and its makers enough for it.

lmao im not going to name names, but there was this instagram page which kept giving the opinion "good queer films by queer people like onir are the ones getting flagged while crap like badhaai do gets greenlit". like dude, you did not just make a valid point while bringing down another film lmao. also they posted this at the time the movie hadn't released. anyways this article came on my timeline and it's poetic justice at its finest and possibly the biggest defense i can give badhaai do:

here's the article.

badhaai do & filmfare and how it affects the queer movement

badhaai do won 6 filmfare awards!! and apart from that, 14 nominations. this is such a welcome surprise to me considering how much the filmfare panders to popular films and celebrities. while i'm convinced that best actor in a supporting role was robbed from gulshan devaiah (who played guru) as well as best dialogues + best director, let's not dwell on that negativity. the war to get same-sex marriage is still on. and i'd like to thank the team for dedicating their awards to the queer community. for those who have been complaining yet again that this was a profitable venture for the people involved, think again about how much it tanked in the box office. and yes, bhumi pednekar has addressed the on-going legal battle for same sex marriage here. i would ask for jaded queer individuals like me to step back and think that there are different ways of coming together to support a social cause. making an entire film is one of them. green lighting such a film is one of them. acting in such a film is one of them. considering what the extremely homophobic government is capable of, we must take all such things into account. and when queer icons like onir also come out in support of badhaai do (btw his red carpet look on filmfare >>>), we should take a page from their book to see where they are coming from. also i went and checked out the team behind badhaai do (not just the actors). apparently the director (harshavardhan kulkarni) and the editor (kirti nakhwa) are already in hot soup with the government since they returned a NATIONAL AWARD a few years back. their reason? the growing intolerance of the government. kinda iconic. and a reminder that this is the same government that routinely sends journalists, activists, historians to jail while dabbling in the same fields and falsifying facts and history. (lmao calling our trauma an "urban elite" problem is so ironic considering they are the urban elites). badhaai do getting the second highest number of filmfare awards is one of the many victories that we have secured. please remind yourself to not alienate any sort of support whatsoever just because it doesn't fit the stereotypical narrative of activism. and after all, activism in art is the most powerful of its kind, is it not?

considering making a good old fashioned review about qala since i have many, many thoughts about this film and none of them are positive lol (fair warning, i don't like this film). i will touch on finer aspects like acting and performing classical music (since i am someone who's trained in hindustani music for 14 years). would you be interested in reading it?

you literally said EVERYTHING. left no crumbs behind either.

The most important lesson the film teaches us is queer solidarity, in my opinion and i think now's the best time to put that lesson to use.

badhaai do & filmfare and how it affects the queer movement

badhaai do won 6 filmfare awards!! and apart from that, 14 nominations. this is such a welcome surprise to me considering how much the filmfare panders to popular films and celebrities. while i'm convinced that best actor in a supporting role was robbed from gulshan devaiah (who played guru) as well as best dialogues + best director, let's not dwell on that negativity. the war to get same-sex marriage is still on. and i'd like to thank the team for dedicating their awards to the queer community. for those who have been complaining yet again that this was a profitable venture for the people involved, think again about how much it tanked in the box office. and yes, bhumi pednekar has addressed the on-going legal battle for same sex marriage here. i would ask for jaded queer individuals like me to step back and think that there are different ways of coming together to support a social cause. making an entire film is one of them. green lighting such a film is one of them. acting in such a film is one of them. considering what the extremely homophobic government is capable of, we must take all such things into account. and when queer icons like onir also come out in support of badhaai do (btw his red carpet look on filmfare >>>), we should take a page from their book to see where they are coming from. also i went and checked out the team behind badhaai do (not just the actors). apparently the director (harshavardhan kulkarni) and the editor (kirti nakhwa) are already in hot soup with the government since they returned a NATIONAL AWARD a few years back. their reason? the growing intolerance of the government. kinda iconic. and a reminder that this is the same government that routinely sends journalists, activists, historians to jail while dabbling in the same fields and falsifying facts and history. (lmao calling our trauma an "urban elite" problem is so ironic considering they are the urban elites). badhaai do getting the second highest number of filmfare awards is one of the many victories that we have secured. please remind yourself to not alienate any sort of support whatsoever just because it doesn't fit the stereotypical narrative of activism. and after all, activism in art is the most powerful of its kind, is it not?

qala and the style over substance argument

so, i watched qala (dir. by anvita dutt) immediately when it came out - a story that exposed the music industry and the position of women in it, especially focusing on the toxic nature of indian classical music? it was like they made the film for me (someone who's spent a good chunk of their life trained in hindustani classical music). however, i was sorely disappointed.

in essence, qala, along with other films that did commercially well that came out in bollywood last year, solidified my understanding that the audience of today's generation of movie-watchers genuinely puts style over substance and in fact, uses it as a way to defend their favourite movies from criticism. the recent resurgence of praise for om shanti om of all films, only strengthened this opinion.

my criticisms for qala are in plenty, yet i will choose to expand on the ones that strike out the most to me, all of which range from the lightest to the harshest criticism:

the choice of music

the acting

the direction + writing

the handling of the serious issues that are the main theme of the film

before you read ahead, please know that there are spoilers.

in indian classical music, there are two distinct forms: hindustani (or, north indian) and carnatic (or south indian) music. each have their differences and similarities and even someone who hasn't trained can tell them apart upon listening. within hindustani music - which is the genre of music that qala learns from her mother - you have many different styles of singing, ranging from shastriya sangeet (classical form of singing) to laghu sangeet (semi-classical and sometimes, light music). of course, this categorization also has its roots in religion and caste. shastriya sangeet has forms of singing like dhrupad (the oldest form and a strictly devotional medium), khyal (the most common one, telling tales or speaking of human emotions), bhajan (also a devotional medium), etc.

laghu sangeet has forms of classical music like the thumri, a form of singing popularized and invented by courtesans. the lyrics were sensual, romantic and more explicit. of course, owing to these, they were looked down upon. even the british had a huge role in diminishing the status of indian women performers. the "other woman" concept was specifically one that they propagated and the rise of the "perfect housewife" phenomena began since the seventeenth century. the extreme effect of that? the courtesans lost out on their patrons and were forced into prostitution.

hence, that was the primary history behind qala's mother, urmila, shaming her into never being a performer, i.e, in a more derogatory term, a "singing girl". a courtesan, essentially. which is accurate, considering the film is set in the 1940s. if a girl was too "out there in the world", i.e, her achievements being publicised in newspapers or her getting recognition for her academics, her future marital prospects were ruined. and the "shame" that befell the family if she was learning music or dance was worse. a significant number of the prominent female musicians that emerged from this era of pre-independence to post-independence were unmarried. or they had many patrons and salacious rumours regarding their love life were in plenty. the film pakeezah (1972) explores such themes quite well. and the many renditions and retellings of devdas also serve as a good example of the stature of performing women.

however, it's the music itself where it goes wrong for me. the choice of songs as well as qala's singing (of course, all of qala's songs are sung by the amazing sireesha bhagavatula), is in a style all too similar to laghu singing. the years of egregious training, no matter how much her mother dismissed her, would've developed a voice which would've sounded a lot more like what a lot of classical singers would sound like, unless they were singing a lighter form of singing. and it isn't a matter of pitch or using falsetto. qala's mom is referred to as a master of qawallis, which is a sufi form of devotional singing (and comes well under hindustani music too). even the lyrics of qala's songs, while full of very obvious foreshadowing, do not match the overall orthodox classical upbringing that the film portrays.

while bhagavatula has an amazing voice well versed in classical music (especially since she sings bhajans so often), considering the time that qala was set in, you would've expected a sound similar to something along the lines of noor jehan or even roshan ara begum. instead, it sounds a lot like a mix of semi-classical instrumental with a more pop-based voice. which is easier for our generation to digest and consume, however, it comes at the cost of a sound which is very typical of the 50s-70s era of bollywood.

one that qala does right are the costumes. they do their job well. not the sets as much, which i will get into later. at some points, they are well in line with the rest of the era of the film, other times it just sticks out like a sore thumb. here's where the "symbolism" comes in.

one of the most jarring examples is the song qala sings at the first performance, a very light classical song just by the sound of the vocals. even the song jagan sings is very contemporary at its core. despite the characters having an allegedly strict, traditional schooling of music (jagan's voice is devoid of the typical heavy accent or dialects that those who are from underprivileged backgrounds tends to have), the songs at hand present a very modern take on qawallis, despite bollywood being a flourishing ground for many iconic qawallis. therefore, the compositions sometimes falter at some points specifically because of the vocal choices. choosing to do away with alaaps, especially in qala's part, less aakar and more bariki, are all signficant details that feel jarring to someone who's lived in the world of classical music as long as qala. otherwise, there are some signature sounds retained from the era that the film is set in.

and while still on the topic of singing, a very important issue that i find least addressed is the acting of it. despite there being little vocal variations in the compositions, the actors don't show that they are singing. and in the film specifically revolving around music, that's an extremely important detail that i find amiss. hardly opening the mouth, the movement of the lips, the posture as well as the hand gestures (yes, a very important detail!), are all obvious flaws. a recent film that does that does those details well is the disciple (2020). the first scene of urmila teaching qala singing displays urmila wearing an elaborate piece of nose jewellery that covers half of her mouth, and that's when they're doing rehyaas (practice), not a performance. it's huge details like these that don't sell the film to me.

the acting is quite underwhelming and here is where disagreements with my opinions might enter. i find trupti dimri's rendition of qala extremely, for lack of politer words, exasperating. she tends to show the same expressions for all of her problems, i.e., there is no great difference between her feeling anger or feeling despair or feeling depressed or feeling cheated or just plain exhaustion. qala's character is a complex one and difficult to act, which is a concession i will give, however, the hype around her is a little unnerving when the audience is given such an unremarkable delivery of dialogues and emotion. it comes off as school-play acting at times. swastika mukherjee, who plays urmila, is quite two-note with her acting, which sometimes suits her character and sometimes just feels very low-effort. babil khan has his moments, yet there is such less versatility. you'd think the babil of qala's hallucinations and the one who existed in real life would have some distinct characteristics (which they do), but they never come off as that. it feels so half-hearted at times.

the whole point of symbolism is that it's subtle at heart and not on the face. qala has on-the-face symbolism, which is an irony in itself. the black swan scene, the frosty room in the beginning, the ghostly jagan, etc. almost made me bump my nose into a wall. it comes off as pretentious at best, as if the viewer is stupid. it is also very off-putting in some scenes. for example, the black swan scene - there is very little buildup and it feels very predictable in the sense that "it all goes downhill from here". however, there is one scene which i like, which is the gargoyle one (a very traumatic scene, for those who recall, it is the one right before ghodey pe sawaar gets recorded for the final time). i think that is the most effective filmmaking in the entire film. the best thing about symbolism is always the subtlety. it makes the viewer keep coming back to pick up on something they might have missed in the first watch, it helps them pick up the pieces along the way instead of being able to tell the twists thirty minutes before they are revealed.

and one of the most egregious crimes of the entire film is the direction. here is where we get a little more technical (but just briefly, do not worry). the way it cuts from one scene to the next is like watching a poorly edited reel put out by the team of an out-of-touch marketing firm. the editing could have been better at many places. the writing falls flat specifically when it comes to the characters. i'm pretty sure on paper, the script must've been a delight to read. the story has so much potential - considering that it's based on two books, where there might've been even more depth given to the characters - it isn't new in any way but it offers a different, feminist perspective of the indian music industry. yet, the characters are paper thin on screen - in their ambitions, psychology and sociology. hence, urmila suddenly turning a new leaf in the last ten minutes of the film is something that feels wrong, because all along, she has been portrayed as a heartless mother. qala's actions make sense because her character has nearly always been rooted in self pity and rage. jagan is nothing without music. there is very little dimension to them apart from me summarizing their characters in one sentence with less than thirty words each.

that is why, the film feels even more half-hearted when it speaks of the issues that it centers around. all of these elements add up and make for a tiring watch. i gave qala a second chance, to be fair and omitted some of my pettier criticisms, yet the more serious ones remain. to a certain extent, it does aestheticize depression, which i have a huge issue with. however, baby steps as always with bollywood. it's no dear zindagi considering it is set in a different period with a different ending. however, the writing of the characters could've been so much better. a little more exploration of urmila's intentions would've given her so much depth. a few more interactions between qala and jagan might've given qala the chance to befriend him and not just see him a rival, thus intensifying the decision she took. the characters do not feel human, they are strictly white or black and qala being the anti-hero feels very off since it requires better writing and a stronger plot. and of course, much better acting.

however, qala re-opened up discussion of a nearly-always forgotten discourse - that of the position of women in music. and for achieving that bare minimum, i give it full credit. however, when there have been films with much better writing, characterization and cinematography in bollywood itself, with a similar theme, qala needs to be seen for what it contains than what it displays. just because it glitters, doesn't mean it's gold.

qala and the style over substance argument: a singer and writer's take

so, i watched qala (dir. by anvita dutt) immediately when it came out - a story that exposed the music industry and the position of women in it, especially focusing on the toxic nature of indian classical music? it was like they made the film for me (someone who's spent a good chunk of their life trained in hindustani classical music). however, i was sorely disappointed. in essence, qala, along with other films that did commercially well that came out in bollywood last year, solidified my understanding that the audience of today's generation of movie-watchers genuinely puts style over substance and in fact, uses it as a way to defend their favourite movies from criticism. the recent resurgence of praise for om shanti om of all films, only strengthened this opinion.

my criticisms for qala are in plenty, yet i will choose to expand on the ones that strike out the most to me, all of which range from the lightest to the harshest criticism:

the choice of music

the acting

the direction + writing

the handling of the serious issues that are the main theme of the film

before you read ahead, please know that there are spoilers.

in indian classical music, there are two distinct forms: hindustani (or, north indian) and carnatic (or south indian) music. each have their differences and similarities and even someone who hasn't trained can tell them apart upon listening. within hindustani music - which is the genre of music that qala learns from her mother - you have many different styles of singing, ranging from shastriya sangeet (classical form of singing) to laghu sangeet (semi-classical and sometimes, light music). of course, this categorization also has its roots in religion and caste. shastriya sangeet has forms of singing like dhrupad (the oldest form and a strictly devotional medium), khyal (the most common one, telling tales or speaking of human emotions), bhajan (also a devotional medium), etc.

laghu sangeet has forms of classical music like the thumri, a form of singing popularized and invented by courtesans. the lyrics were sensual, romantic and more explicit. of course, owing to these, they were looked down upon. even the british had a huge role in diminishing the status of indian women performers. the "other woman" concept was specifically one that they propagated and the rise of the "perfect housewife" phenomena began since the seventeenth century. the extreme effect of that? the courtesans lost out on their patrons and were forced into prostitution.

hence, that was the primary history behind qala's mother, urmila, shaming her into never being a performer, i.e, in a more derogatory term, a "singing girl". a courtesan, essentially. which is accurate, considering the film is set in the 1940s. if a girl was too "out there in the world", i.e, her achievements being publicised in newspapers or her getting recognition for her academics, her future marital prospects were ruined. and the "shame" that befell the family if she was learning music or dance was worse. a significant number of the prominent female musicians that emerged from this era of pre-independence to post-independence were unmarried. or they had many patrons and salacious rumours regarding their love life were in plenty. the film pakeezah (1972) explores such themes quite well. and the many renditions and retellings of devdas also serve as a good example of the stature of performing women.

however, it's the music itself where it goes wrong for me. the choice of songs as well as qala's singing (of course, all of qala's songs are sung by the amazing sireesha bhagavatula), is in a style all too similar to laghu singing. the years of egregious training, no matter how much her mother dismissed her, would've developed a voice which would've sounded a lot more like what a lot of classical singers would sound like, unless they were singing a lighter form of singing. and it isn't a matter of pitch or using falsetto. qala's mom is referred to as a master of qawallis, which is a sufi form of devotional singing (and comes well under hindustani music too). even the lyrics of qala's songs, while full of very obvious foreshadowing, do not match the overall orthodox classical upbringing that the film portrays. while bhagavatula has an amazing voice well versed in classical music (especially since she sings bhajans so often), considering the time that qala was set in, you would've expected a sound similar to something along the lines of noor jehan or even roshan ara begum. instead, it sounds a lot like a mix of semi-classical instrumental with a more pop-based voice. which is easier for our generation to digest and consume, however, it comes at the cost of a sound which is very typical of the 50s-70s era of bollywood.

one of the most jarring examples is the song qala sings at the first performance, a very light classical song just by the sound of the vocals. even the song jagan sings is very contemporary at its core. despite the characters having an allegedly strict, traditional schooling of music (jagan's voice is devoid of the typical heavy accent or dialects that those who are from underprivileged backgrounds tends to have), the songs at hand present a very modern take on qawallis, despite bollywood being a flourishing ground for many iconic qawallis. therefore, the compositions sometimes falter at some points specifically because of the vocal choices. choosing to do away with alaaps, especially in qala's part, less aakar and more bariki, are all signficant details that feel jarring to someone who's lived in the world of classical music as long as qala. otherwise, there are some signature sounds retained from the era that the film is set in. and while still on the topic of singing, a very important issue that i find least addressed is the acting of it. despite there being little vocal variations in the compositions, the actors don't show that they are singing. and in the film specifically revolving around music, that's an extremely important detail that i find amiss. hardly opening the mouth, the movement of the lips, the posture as well as the hand gestures (yes, a very important detail!), are all obvious flaws. a recent film that does that does those details well is the disciple (2020). the first scene of urmila teaching qala singing displays urmila wearing an elaborate piece of nose jewellery that covers half of her mouth, and that's when they're doing rehyaas (practice), not a performance. it's huge details like these that don't sell the film to me. the acting is quite underwhelming and here is where disagreements with my opinions might enter. i find trupti dimri's rendition of qala extremely, for lack of politer words, exasperating. she tends to show the same expressions for all of her problems, i.e., there is no great difference between her feeling anger or feeling despair or feeling depressed or feeling cheated or just plain exhaustion. qala's character is a complex one and difficult to act, which is a concession i will give, however, the hype around her is a little unnerving when the audience is given such an unremarkable delivery of dialogues and emotion. it comes off as school-play acting at times. swastika mukherjee, who plays urmila, is quite two-note with her acting, which sometimes suits her character and sometimes just feels very low-effort. babil khan has his moments, yet there is such less versatility. you'd think the babil of qala's hallucinations and the one who existed in real life would have some distinct characteristics (which they do), but they never come off as that. it feels so half-hearted at times.

one that qala does right are the costumes. they do their job well. not the sets as much, which i will get into later. at some points, they are well in line with the rest of the era of the film, other times it just sticks out like a sore thumb. here's where the "symbolism" comes in.

the whole point of symbolism is that it's subtle at heart and not on the face. qala has on-the-face symbolism, which is an irony in itself. the black swan scene, the frosty room in the beginning, the ghostly jagan, etc. almost made me bump my nose into a wall. it comes off as pretentious at best, as if the viewer is stupid. it is also very off-putting in some scenes. for example, the black swan scene - there is very little buildup and it feels very predictable in the sense that "it all goes downhill from here". however, there is one scene which i like, which is the gargoyle one (a very traumatic scene, for those who recall, it is the one right before ghodey pe sawaar gets recorded for the final time). i think that is the most effective filmmaking in the entire film. the best thing about symbolism is always the subtlety. it makes the viewer keep coming back to pick up on something they might have missed in the first watch, it helps them pick up the pieces along the way instead of being able to tell the twists thirty minutes before they are revealed.

and one of the most egregious crimes of the entire film is the direction. here is where we get a little more technical (but just briefly, do not worry). the way it cuts from one scene to the next is like watching a poorly edited reel put out by the team of an out-of-touch marketing firm. the editing could have been better at many places. the writing falls flat specifically when it comes to the characters. i'm pretty sure on paper, the script must've been a delight to read. the story has so much potential - considering that it's based on two books, where there might've been even more depth given to the characters - it isn't new in any way but it offers a different, feminist perspective of the indian music industry. yet, the characters are paper thin on screen - in their ambitions, psychology and sociology. hence, urmila suddenly turning a new leaf in the last ten minutes of the film is something that feels wrong, because all along, she has been portrayed as a heartless mother. qala's actions make sense because her character has nearly always been rooted in self pity and rage. jagan is nothing without music. there is very little dimension to them apart from me summarizing their characters in one sentence with less than thirty words each.

that is why, the film feels even more half-hearted when it speaks of the issues that it centers around. all of these elements add up and make for a tiring watch. i gave qala a second chance, to be fair and omitted some of my pettier criticisms, yet the more serious ones remain. to a certain extent, it does aestheticize depression, which i have a huge issue with. however, baby steps as always with bollywood. it's no dear zindagi considering it is set in a different period with a different ending. however, the writing of the characters could've been so much better. a little more exploration of urmila's intentions would've given her so much depth. a few more interactions between qala and jagan might've given qala the chance to befriend him and not just see him a rival, thus intensifying the decision she took. the characters do not feel human, they are strictly white or black and qala being the anti-hero feels very off since it requires better writing and a stronger plot. and of course, much better acting.

however, qala re-opened up discussion of a nearly-always forgotten discourse - that of the position of women in music. and for achieving that bare minimum, i give it full credit. however, when there have been films with much better writing, characterization and cinematography in bollywood itself, with a similar theme, qala needs to be seen for what it contains than what it displays. just because it glitters, doesn't mean it's gold.

fellas, this is the same exact problem with heeramandi also

qala and the style over substance argument: a singer and writer's take

so, i watched qala (dir. by anvita dutt) immediately when it came out - a story that exposed the music industry and the position of women in it, especially focusing on the toxic nature of indian classical music? it was like they made the film for me (someone who's spent a good chunk of their life trained in hindustani classical music). however, i was sorely disappointed. in essence, qala, along with other films that did commercially well that came out in bollywood last year, solidified my understanding that the audience of today's generation of movie-watchers genuinely puts style over substance and in fact, uses it as a way to defend their favourite movies from criticism. the recent resurgence of praise for om shanti om of all films, only strengthened this opinion.

my criticisms for qala are in plenty, yet i will choose to expand on the ones that strike out the most to me, all of which range from the lightest to the harshest criticism:

the choice of music

the acting

the direction + writing

the handling of the serious issues that are the main theme of the film

before you read ahead, please know that there are spoilers.

in indian classical music, there are two distinct forms: hindustani (or, north indian) and carnatic (or south indian) music. each have their differences and similarities and even someone who hasn't trained can tell them apart upon listening. within hindustani music - which is the genre of music that qala learns from her mother - you have many different styles of singing, ranging from shastriya sangeet (classical form of singing) to laghu sangeet (semi-classical and sometimes, light music). of course, this categorization also has its roots in religion and caste. shastriya sangeet has forms of singing like dhrupad (the oldest form and a strictly devotional medium), khyal (the most common one, telling tales or speaking of human emotions), bhajan (also a devotional medium), etc.

laghu sangeet has forms of classical music like the thumri, a form of singing popularized and invented by courtesans. the lyrics were sensual, romantic and more explicit. of course, owing to these, they were looked down upon. even the british had a huge role in diminishing the status of indian women performers. the "other woman" concept was specifically one that they propagated and the rise of the "perfect housewife" phenomena began since the seventeenth century. the extreme effect of that? the courtesans lost out on their patrons and were forced into prostitution.

hence, that was the primary history behind qala's mother, urmila, shaming her into never being a performer, i.e, in a more derogatory term, a "singing girl". a courtesan, essentially. which is accurate, considering the film is set in the 1940s. if a girl was too "out there in the world", i.e, her achievements being publicised in newspapers or her getting recognition for her academics, her future marital prospects were ruined. and the "shame" that befell the family if she was learning music or dance was worse. a significant number of the prominent female musicians that emerged from this era of pre-independence to post-independence were unmarried. or they had many patrons and salacious rumours regarding their love life were in plenty. the film pakeezah (1972) explores such themes quite well. and the many renditions and retellings of devdas also serve as a good example of the stature of performing women.

however, it's the music itself where it goes wrong for me. the choice of songs as well as qala's singing (of course, all of qala's songs are sung by the amazing sireesha bhagavatula), is in a style all too similar to laghu singing. the years of egregious training, no matter how much her mother dismissed her, would've developed a voice which would've sounded a lot more like what a lot of classical singers would sound like, unless they were singing a lighter form of singing. and it isn't a matter of pitch or using falsetto. qala's mom is referred to as a master of qawallis, which is a sufi form of devotional singing (and comes well under hindustani music too). even the lyrics of qala's songs, while full of very obvious foreshadowing, do not match the overall orthodox classical upbringing that the film portrays. while bhagavatula has an amazing voice well versed in classical music (especially since she sings bhajans so often), considering the time that qala was set in, you would've expected a sound similar to something along the lines of noor jehan or even roshan ara begum. instead, it sounds a lot like a mix of semi-classical instrumental with a more pop-based voice. which is easier for our generation to digest and consume, however, it comes at the cost of a sound which is very typical of the 50s-70s era of bollywood.

one of the most jarring examples is the song qala sings at the first performance, a very light classical song just by the sound of the vocals. even the song jagan sings is very contemporary at its core. despite the characters having an allegedly strict, traditional schooling of music (jagan's voice is devoid of the typical heavy accent or dialects that those who are from underprivileged backgrounds tends to have), the songs at hand present a very modern take on qawallis, despite bollywood being a flourishing ground for many iconic qawallis. therefore, the compositions sometimes falter at some points specifically because of the vocal choices. choosing to do away with alaaps, especially in qala's part, less aakar and more bariki, are all signficant details that feel jarring to someone who's lived in the world of classical music as long as qala. otherwise, there are some signature sounds retained from the era that the film is set in. and while still on the topic of singing, a very important issue that i find least addressed is the acting of it. despite there being little vocal variations in the compositions, the actors don't show that they are singing. and in the film specifically revolving around music, that's an extremely important detail that i find amiss. hardly opening the mouth, the movement of the lips, the posture as well as the hand gestures (yes, a very important detail!), are all obvious flaws. a recent film that does that does those details well is the disciple (2020). the first scene of urmila teaching qala singing displays urmila wearing an elaborate piece of nose jewellery that covers half of her mouth, and that's when they're doing rehyaas (practice), not a performance. it's huge details like these that don't sell the film to me. the acting is quite underwhelming and here is where disagreements with my opinions might enter. i find trupti dimri's rendition of qala extremely, for lack of politer words, exasperating. she tends to show the same expressions for all of her problems, i.e., there is no great difference between her feeling anger or feeling despair or feeling depressed or feeling cheated or just plain exhaustion. qala's character is a complex one and difficult to act, which is a concession i will give, however, the hype around her is a little unnerving when the audience is given such an unremarkable delivery of dialogues and emotion. it comes off as school-play acting at times. swastika mukherjee, who plays urmila, is quite two-note with her acting, which sometimes suits her character and sometimes just feels very low-effort. babil khan has his moments, yet there is such less versatility. you'd think the babil of qala's hallucinations and the one who existed in real life would have some distinct characteristics (which they do), but they never come off as that. it feels so half-hearted at times.

one that qala does right are the costumes. they do their job well. not the sets as much, which i will get into later. at some points, they are well in line with the rest of the era of the film, other times it just sticks out like a sore thumb. here's where the "symbolism" comes in.

the whole point of symbolism is that it's subtle at heart and not on the face. qala has on-the-face symbolism, which is an irony in itself. the black swan scene, the frosty room in the beginning, the ghostly jagan, etc. almost made me bump my nose into a wall. it comes off as pretentious at best, as if the viewer is stupid. it is also very off-putting in some scenes. for example, the black swan scene - there is very little buildup and it feels very predictable in the sense that "it all goes downhill from here". however, there is one scene which i like, which is the gargoyle one (a very traumatic scene, for those who recall, it is the one right before ghodey pe sawaar gets recorded for the final time). i think that is the most effective filmmaking in the entire film. the best thing about symbolism is always the subtlety. it makes the viewer keep coming back to pick up on something they might have missed in the first watch, it helps them pick up the pieces along the way instead of being able to tell the twists thirty minutes before they are revealed.

and one of the most egregious crimes of the entire film is the direction. here is where we get a little more technical (but just briefly, do not worry). the way it cuts from one scene to the next is like watching a poorly edited reel put out by the team of an out-of-touch marketing firm. the editing could have been better at many places. the writing falls flat specifically when it comes to the characters. i'm pretty sure on paper, the script must've been a delight to read. the story has so much potential - considering that it's based on two books, where there might've been even more depth given to the characters - it isn't new in any way but it offers a different, feminist perspective of the indian music industry. yet, the characters are paper thin on screen - in their ambitions, psychology and sociology. hence, urmila suddenly turning a new leaf in the last ten minutes of the film is something that feels wrong, because all along, she has been portrayed as a heartless mother. qala's actions make sense because her character has nearly always been rooted in self pity and rage. jagan is nothing without music. there is very little dimension to them apart from me summarizing their characters in one sentence with less than thirty words each.

that is why, the film feels even more half-hearted when it speaks of the issues that it centers around. all of these elements add up and make for a tiring watch. i gave qala a second chance, to be fair and omitted some of my pettier criticisms, yet the more serious ones remain. to a certain extent, it does aestheticize depression, which i have a huge issue with. however, baby steps as always with bollywood. it's no dear zindagi considering it is set in a different period with a different ending. however, the writing of the characters could've been so much better. a little more exploration of urmila's intentions would've given her so much depth. a few more interactions between qala and jagan might've given qala the chance to befriend him and not just see him a rival, thus intensifying the decision she took. the characters do not feel human, they are strictly white or black and qala being the anti-hero feels very off since it requires better writing and a stronger plot. and of course, much better acting.

however, qala re-opened up discussion of a nearly-always forgotten discourse - that of the position of women in music. and for achieving that bare minimum, i give it full credit. however, when there have been films with much better writing, characterization and cinematography in bollywood itself, with a similar theme, qala needs to be seen for what it contains than what it displays. just because it glitters, doesn't mean it's gold.