Sholay
was the underdog of Bollywood films that was apparently expected to
be a complete flop, only to be India's highest grossing film of all
time and many factors play into the success of the film but the
largest draw is without a doubt due to the antihero dynamic duo of
Veeru (Dharmendra)
and Jai (Amitabh Bachchan). Sholay was a vessel
that carried part of a growing character archetype further cementing
the anti-hero as a lovable and usable character. This style of
character was quickly gaining popularity in Western film as well with
characters like Max
Rockatansky from Mad
Max or
Harry Callahan from Dirty
Harry
and it was no exception that India would also see and want to share
similar narratives for films.
The
reason for the success of anti-hero characters is simple in that it
makes for interesting story telling as characters suddenly become
more accessible to viewers because anti-hero characters face
challenges and react to them outside of the traditional good versus
evil paradigm. It takes on a realistic approach to conflict in
storytelling as characters are met with situations that are not
entirely black and white but instead facilitate a large grey area
much like real life consequences. Veeru and Jai are two criminals
because that is how they survive. When these two are introduced,
handcuffed and speaking to Thakur on the train, the audience sees
these two men sporting Western fashion and arrested -- two things
that are typically associated with villainy, especially in Bollywood
where Western fashion usually connotes negative qualities of
corruption or oppression. Despite this, the characters are
exceedingly engaging, cool, and amiable. From saving the cop that has
detained the two from, ironically, other bandits, to saving an entire
village from genuine oppression and villainy from that of Gabbar
Singh, the anti-hero character proves itself as capable of good when
necessary and shows emotional investments unlike the typical
antagonist roles in most films.
As
mentioned in the blog postings by professor Ghosh, Amitabh Bachchan's
character Jai, the moody, quiet, yet loyal character is a
representation of the "growing angst and disillusionment of the
Indian youth who felt let down by the government's inefficacy in
combating corruption, poverty, and unemployment." This is a
large component to the success of many anti-hero characters as
characters like Jai are likely products of the very same concerns by
the Indian youth's of the time. As a result, the character acts in
ways that may seem unjust traditionally but in reality they act as
one would out of genuine struggle and are not reprimanded for their
actions in the film and demonized by being portrayed as characters
that are evil. We see this in Sholay
often as Veeru and Jai decide to be hired as mercenaries and
attempt to steal from their employer but stop out of a sense of honor
to the woman that catches them in the act and Thakur, saying that it
will never happen again. Similarly, when Veeru and Jai hear Thakur's
reason behind wanting to capture Gabbar Singh, the two willingly
choose not to accept money for capturing this villain because they
have sense of justice that they would still wish to defend despite
being criminals themselves. They're criminals, but they're not "bad
guys."
The
wonder of the anti-hero is in the complexity that the characters are
allowed to have. They
are allowed to be imperfect and only part-time selfless people as Jai
and Veeru never once apologize for their way of life and what they
believe to be just and unjust. Other than the capacity to relate to
the characters as being more realistic, the anti-hero is able to do
what the viewers are thinking. When we see the gnarly-toothed
criminal Gabbar and see what he has done and continues to do to the
villagers, we are relieved to see Veeru and Jai gunning down Gabbar's
lackeys so that we might finally get to see Gabbar get what he
deserves. True evil, which is what Gabbar seems to represent in the
film, should be punished and the fact that Gabbar was able to get out
of prison, murder Singh's entire family fuels the fire of those that
doubt the efficacy of governmental institutions and their capacity
for public safety, making characters like Jai and Veeru all the more
necessary because stopping Gabbar with traditional means of justice
do not always work and these characters are able to vent the
frustrations of those that see the shortcomings of the institutes
that are supposed to aim to protect and maintain justice
The
film's setting also reflects the nature of the anti-hero as we see
areas of bright flora to represent good amidst a very dry and barren
landscape to represent the bad. Veeru and Jai are typically in a
rocky, barren, or generally plant-life vacant location when they are
fighting: on a train surrounded by an arid landscape and fighting off
bandits or surrounded by a mountainous, rocky scene and defeating
Gabbar's men and later Gabbar himself. Conversely, in times of peace
and relationship building, both characters are seen relaxing under
the shade of a tree at different occasions throughout the film or at
Thakur's estate which is surrounded by crops and in many areas,
grass. Thakur, the general proponent for justice is often surrounded
by flora and fauna whereas the most evil character, Gabbar, is
literally living in the rocky, barren hillside of a mountain. The
two characters that are constantly navigating between these two
distinct areas would be Veeru and Jai, the anti-heroes. The anti-hero
harnesses both problematic traits of good and bad, which is what
makes them so human, interesting and relatable.
Sholay
is without a doubt, a massive success that more than likely
influenced many changes in film for both Bollywood and the world at
large as it pushes a budding new character archetype that is now a
staple in modern Western media. The
creation of the anti-heroes in Sholay
is
only one of many successful challenges to tradition that are seen
throughout the film and the result was a record-breaking highest
grossing Indian film. But the film owes much of its success still, to
the unique anti-hero dynamic that shows off the exciting, intriguing
and accessible characterization as well as a strong and intricate
narrative.
Nathan,
ReplyDeleteYou and I seem to have the same ideas with our posts! I also thought that the anti-hero dynamic added a more realistic and relatable component to the film, but I like how you pointed out that their status as anti-heroes lets them give some relief to the audience. If they had been more traditional heroes, they would not be allowed to commit such brutal acts of violence, even against such an evil villain as Gabbar. As anti-heroes, however, they are allowed to give the audience the catharsis of seeing the villains in the film done away with permanently and violently. I for one would have been incredibly upset if Gabbar had been allowed to live after everything he had done, or even if he had had a painless death at the hands of the government. We can forgive Jai and Veeru for their past crimes because their ultimate act of violence allows them to rid the world of Gabbar.
I like your interpretation of the anti-hero trope. It is true that an anti-hero can be more relatable to the audience than the superhero with the unachievable moral high ground. An anti-hero has the ability to communicate problems we all face with moral decisions such as whether to do whats best for us and whats best for others.
ReplyDeleteI also like your interpretation of how surroundings reflect characters role in the movie, that was something I hadn't noticed but strikes me as a conscious decision made by the directors.
I like your interpretation of the anti-hero trope. It is true that an anti-hero can be more relatable to the audience than the superhero with the unachievable moral high ground. An anti-hero has the ability to communicate problems we all face with moral decisions such as whether to do whats best for us and whats best for others.
ReplyDeleteI also like your interpretation of how surroundings reflect characters role in the movie, that was something I hadn't noticed but strikes me as a conscious decision made by the directors.
Connected to your discussion of the anti-hero, wherein you say that anti-heroes like Jai and Veeru are necessary to combat the unmitigated evil of villains like Gabbar, is the idea of vigilante justice. The original ending of the film had the Thakur killing Gabbar, but the Indian censor board refused to pass the film. So, the ending was reshot with the arrival of the police just in time so as to affirm that institutional law was still effective. Would you say that despite this framing that the film raises doubts about the efficacy of the usual means of maintaining law and order, that it presents viewers with the possibility of justice existing outside the system?
ReplyDelete