'Adipurush' - An Epic Disaster

Jalegi tere baap ki바카라�바카라� never in one바카라�s wildest thoughts or dreams can one imagine Lord Hanuman, a towering figure in the Hindu pantheon, speaking these words. But in a film that liberally uses so-called tapori (바카라�street바카라�) language, anything is possible. Pre-release, Adipurush was touted to be an epic cinematic reproduction of the widely-revered Hindu epic, the Ramayana. However, post-release, the film has triggered waves of anger and disgust, not just among the right-wing Hindu audience, but also among liberal followers of the religion who worship the figures of Ram and Hanuman바카라�the stand-out characters of the epic바카라�as infallible deities.

Adipurush is a movie which has gone wrong on multiple levels, be it in its intent or its very essence. Torn apart by critics and audiences alike for the shoddiness of the script and the film바카라�s 바카라�B-grade바카라� look, the movie, as one critic described it, is 바카라�part Planet of the Apes, part King Kong바카라�.

Directed by Om Raut with dialogues written by Manoj 바카라�Muntashir바카라� Shukla, the makers of the movie have floundered at every possible step post-release바카라�from justifying the 바카라�cringey바카라� dialogue and then altering parts of it post outrage, to asserting that their film was 바카라�not at all based on the Ramayana but was just inspired by the epic,바카라� thereby backtracking on how they had initially advertised the film as a retelling of the epic.

Protests erupted on the streets of Maharashtra, Uttar Pradesh, Delhi and other states against the dialogues attributed to the character of Lord Hanuman, as well as Lord Ram바카라�s character바카라�s 바카라�angry young man바카라� persona, a depiction that is quite at odds with his widely accepted demeanour of being calm and collected. Even the portrayal of the demon king Ravana was a laughable deviation from how the antagonist is usually depicted.  His 10 floating heads바카라�a double decker situation with 5 heads on top of 5 heads바카라�was something no one in the audience would have ever imagined.

Crossing a Line

One can argue that there ought to be a limit to the creative liberties taken when adapting religious epics that have sentimental value to millions of people. Filmmakers who cross that thin line separating a grand retelling of the epic from mockery in the name of making a modern version, run the risk of having their work criticised at best, and banned at worst.

The makers of Adipurush seem to have breached that thin line, inviting criticism from all quarters. So much so that, in the aftermath of the movie바카라�s release, Deepika Chikhalia Topiwala, who is remembered for her portrayal of Sita바카라�s character in Ramanand Sagar바카라�s televised version of the Ramayana, believes that the 바카라�time is right to stop making movies and shows based on the epic.바카라�

Arun Govil, who immortalised the figure of Lord Ram in Sagar바카라�s Ramayan, expressed suspicion that the makers had likely realised well in advance that the movie was going to backfire, which is why they started to meet ruling party ministers and came up with bizarre promotion strategies, like exhorting future audiences to 바카라�reserve one seat per cinema hall for Lord Hanuman.바카라�

바카라�Why do they want to fool around? Why do they want to bring new things? To try new things? Leave us alone. Why do you want to touch God in this fashion? Please don바카라�t do that. And what was the need for it?바카라� Govil was quoted as saying.

Interestingly, in the run up to the release, the filmmakers had even managed to get the 바카라�blessings바카라� of many prominent BJP leaders. The names of Adityanath, Shivraj Singh Chouhan, Manohar Lal Khattar, Himanta Biswa Sarma, Pushkar Singh Dhami and Eknath Shinde바카라�the chief ministers of Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, Haryana, Assam, Uttarakhand and Maharashtra, respectively바카라�even find mention in the movie바카라�s credits, as per reports.

One Controversy After Another

Once criticism started pouring in, the film바카라�s dialogue writer Manoj 바카라�Muntashir바카라� Shukla, as a way of damage control, attempted to float the conspiracy angle, suggesting that efforts were being made to defame the film. Shukla went on to claim that Adipurush was certainly not an adaptation of the Ramayana, but was merely inspired by it. However, he landed himself in even more hot water when, as a response to the criticism of the dissonant dialogues that the character of Lord Hanuman was made to mouth, he suggested that Bajrang Bali (as Lord Hanuman is also known as) doesn바카라�t speak like Lord Ram because 바카라�he was not a god in the first place.바카라� Needless to say, this did not help  matters in the slightest.

A rap on the knuckles came with the Union Ministry for Information and Broadcasting stating that 바카라�nobody has the right to hurt the sentiments of people,바카라� adding that the filmmakers had agreed to make the necessary changes that were asked for. The All India Cine Workers바카라� Association, too, came out with a statement asking the prime minister for the screening of the movie to be stopped countrywide and for FIRs to be filed against the filmmakers. Many opposition political parties demanded a ban on the movie as well.

Adipurush even threatened to trigger a cross-border row, with the mayor of Nepal바카라�s capital Kathmandu, threatening to ban all Hindi movies indefinitely. Furious that Adipurush had referred to  Sita as 바카라�India바카라�s daughter,바카라� the mayor, Balendra Shah, argued that 바카라�Janaki바카라�, as Sita is also known as, is considered 바카라�a daughter of Nepal.바카라� While the mayor did ban Adipurush in his region, it was overturned by a Nepali court a few days later.

That the film was going to be subpar had become clear as early as October 2022 when the first teaser was released. The film바카라�s release was eventually pushed to June 2023 from January to 바카라�enhance the look.바카라� However, despite using extensive computer-generated imagery and expansive landscapes and fanciful creatures (such as dragon-sized bats that are nowhere to be found in the source text), the film바카라�s visual effects failed to enthral even those from the audience who were ready to suppress their intelligence to be able to enjoy the movie. It isn바카라�t that the makers of the film were short of funds; they reportedly spent a whopping Rs 600 crores on the film. However, the end product turned out to be one that could please none바카라�neither VFX lovers nor devout followers of the religion.

The fact that the film has nosedived at the box office, with collections dropping to 1.5 cr on its second Monday ought to serve as a stern reminder to filmmakers to not take their audiences for granted in the name of doing something different or modern. Epics such as the Ramayana count for more than just entertainment in India; Hindu families ensure that their children learn about Lord Ram and Hanuman바카라�his most ardent bhakt (devotee)바카라�from a very young age via stories told to them by parents and grandparents. Ram is entrenched in Hindu collective memory and is an intrinsic part of their lives and culture so much so that he is believed 바카라�to come home every Diwali.바카라�

The makers of Adipurush, with hundreds of crores in their wallets and blessings from various heads of state could neither appease lovers of religion nor fans of good mythological cinema.  It appears that the pressure to recreate the magic of the Ramayana differently every two or three years on television and in cinema using VFX and contemporary dialogues is doing more harm than good to the much-loved epic.

(Edited by Ramya Maddali)