Zarminae Ansari gave the more positive review, believing that Deepa Mehta's Earth "effectively conveys the reality of the partition and will go a long way in explaining to the rest of the world the cause of the wounds that run deep even today between India and Pakistan." I'm not sure I concur with this sentiment; Mehta shows only one "reality" of the partition - the violent one. She does not tell us how India emerged from the partition or how it affected the country 40 or 50 years later. I do agree, however, that Earth exposed the "wounds" inflicted by the partition. I have a much better understanding of why India and Pakistan don't like each other.
C.J.S. Wallia, on the other hand, found Earth to be "simplistic," "poorly developed," and a "vicious" distortion of the facts behind the partition. This may be true. The film certainly casts a dark eye on the Sikhs, and several of the characters are weak and lack development. I agree with Wallia especially on Mehta's choice of eight-year-old Lenny-baby as the narrator. Wallia notes that using Lenny's viewpoint is "too limiting" and "fails to create dramatic situations that could bring out Lenny Baby's anguished bewilderment of the tragic events of the partition." That, I believe, was the film's biggest weakness.
I do not dislike the film as strongly as Wallia does, but I do not think it provides as balanced or thorough presentation of the partition as Ansari does. Another review I read, by Stephen Holden at The New York Times, summed up the film best: "a ruddy twilit sensuality along with a sense of nocturnal foreboding."
I wish I could write like that.
No comments:
Post a Comment