Jodhaa Akbar: notes and an unreliable synopsis
[Statutory warning: I can’t promise that everything described here is an accurate reflection of what happens in Jodhaa Akbar. Parts of this review are as authentic a representation of the film as the film itself is of the Mughal era.]
It turns out that the controversy about historical authenticity in Jodha Akbar has been such a waste of everyone’s time. This film is really at its most authentic when it abandons all pretence that it was made for any reason other than to bring together Bollywood’s two most beautiful people (and a lot of shiny jewellery). Take the magnificently show-offish moment where a shirtless Akbar (Hrithik Roshan) displays his swordsmanship while Jodha (Aishwarya Rai) watches in womanly awe. The scene exists completely independent of context – it’s about Hrithik as the ultimate alpha-male preening like a peacock (an inordinately muscular peacock) for Aishwarya; it’s about sending vicarious thrills through star-struck moviegoers of both sexes. With just a minor alteration in setting and costume, it could easily have come out of Dhoom 2, a film that was a fine showcase for this same couple.
As it happens, this is one of the most assured scenes in Jodhaa Akbar. Unfortunately, most of the rest of the film makes a half-hearted stab at telling us about various things that may or may not have occurred in the mid-16th century. Yawn. Completely beside the point. Anyway, this is roughly what happens, or what I could make out as I drifted in and out of sleep:
(An unreliable summary)
The first few minutes give us the background on the many political intrigues of the time, in the stentorian but much-too-familiar voice of Amitabh Bachchan. (Like a stern father-in-law keeping a watchful eye on Aishwarya after that kiss in Dhoom 2, Bachchan’s presence looms large here: not only does he do these ponderous voiceovers but Sonu Sood, the actor who plays Jodha’s protective brother Sujamal, strongly resembles the young Amitabh – the moustached Amitabh of Reshma aur Shera, for example, or even Ganga ki Saugandh - from many angles.) Most of the historical information is tedious and complicated, though there’s a certain fun to be had in seeing the kings of Hindustan depicted as petulant little boys, sulking, whimpering and clinging to their thrones when faced with the prospect of being made vassals. (As the maharajah of Amer, Kulbhushan Kharbanda looks and sounds like he has serious breathing problems, and little wonder given the number of heavy necklaces weighing him down at all times.)
Meanwhile, on the Mughal side of things, there is Bairam Khan, a good old-fashioned medieval psychopath who uses his official status as guardian for the boy-prince Akbar to nurture a very personal fetish for lopping off enemy heads. Unfortunately for Bairam, the boy-prince soon grows up and dispenses with his services. To prove that he is worthy of ruling the country, Akbar then takes on a wild elephant in a scene that is reminiscent of Hrithik’s superhero-racing-the-horse in Krrish. But what really puts his courage to the test is when he agrees to wed the Hindu princess Jodha to complete a political alliance: her long list of demands includes the right to sing bhajans loudly in the next room while he is discussing matters of state with his viziers.
Sadly the marriage remains unconsummated because by the time J and A have finished removing all those layers of jewellery they are no longer horny and only wish to sleep. This puts the future of the Empire in jeopardy. Also, there are culture shocks that must be dealt with. The newlywed Jodha, wholly unaccustomed to the brutal ways of the Mughals, watches aghast as her husband has a traitor thrown to his death from the roof (cue bone-crunching sound) and then has him thrown off again when the job isn’t finished. (Aishwarya’s eyes widen: she never got to see such gory things in the Bachchan household except when Amar Singh and Shah Rukh came visiting at the same time.)
Anyway, after watching Akbar’s topless swashbuckling, Jodha decides that the way to a man’s eight-pack abs is through his stomach. So she takes over the royal kitchen and sets about preparing a large vegetarian meal for him with her own hands. However, things nearly go perilously wrong when she misinterprets an order for a “24-carrot salad” and slips some of her rubies and emeralds into the dish, causing the emperor’s courtiers to suffer from indigestion for days afterward. In a delicate and affecting scene, the crafty Ila Arun (playing Akbar’s wet-nurse) enters the kitchen grounds where countless heaps of vegetables are scattered about, and bursts into a rendition of “Mooli ke peeche kya hai”. This highly dramatic sequence ends with Jodha falling out of favour; however, after a timely reconciliation, our leads start making out on the floor of the chamber (as chronicled in a lost volume of the Akbarnama) before realising that they should move to the bed in the interests of royal decorum.
Meanwhile the political intrigues continue apace, but thankfully they are punctuated by some nice quiet moments between Akbar and Jodha – like the one where she bends down to touch his feet and he catches her mid-dive, in the manner of every traditional Indian husband in a Bollywood film (in other words: make sure the woman genuflects, but also make a token gesture that will show how modern-thinking you are). There are an equal number of scenes where the characters simply wander about languorously, admiring the gardens, reclining on bolsters, playing with rabbits and pigeons and looking a little bored, like they wish television had been invented.
Despite all the gloss, this is a static film, full of scenes that carry on long past their sell-by date. Ashutosh Gowrikar said in an interview that his movies are as long as the story requires them to be, but even someone who knows very little about the technical aspects of filmmaking will see that Jodhaa Akbar could easily have been shorter and more compact. (The number of reaction shots alone made me think that some bits could have been produced almost as competently by the Ekta Kapoor factory.) The battle scenes are indifferently put together and it's hard to work up much interest in which general's elephant is crushing which foot-soldier's head; I was immensely disappointed even by the final one-on-one combat, which I’d hoped would at least give the film a rousing ending. And when computer effects are pressed into service (as in the aerial shot of discharging cannons, with one of them shooting its flaming iron ball straight into the camera), the effect is still flat and uninspired.
Diamonds last forever; so does this film
I was forewarned that the only reason to watch Jodhaa Akbar was to feast one’s eyes on the extravagant jewellery adorning the persons of nearly every member of the cast. After seeing it, I have to agree that the experience was rather like four hours spent in a gold souk that has two large and handsome posters of Hrithik and Aishwarya on the walls, and some soulful A R Rahman music playing somewhere in the background. If you love jewellery that much, good for you – if not, you may feel that this film goes on for nearly as long as the Mughal Empire did.
It turns out that the controversy about historical authenticity in Jodha Akbar has been such a waste of everyone’s time. This film is really at its most authentic when it abandons all pretence that it was made for any reason other than to bring together Bollywood’s two most beautiful people (and a lot of shiny jewellery). Take the magnificently show-offish moment where a shirtless Akbar (Hrithik Roshan) displays his swordsmanship while Jodha (Aishwarya Rai) watches in womanly awe. The scene exists completely independent of context – it’s about Hrithik as the ultimate alpha-male preening like a peacock (an inordinately muscular peacock) for Aishwarya; it’s about sending vicarious thrills through star-struck moviegoers of both sexes. With just a minor alteration in setting and costume, it could easily have come out of Dhoom 2, a film that was a fine showcase for this same couple.As it happens, this is one of the most assured scenes in Jodhaa Akbar. Unfortunately, most of the rest of the film makes a half-hearted stab at telling us about various things that may or may not have occurred in the mid-16th century. Yawn. Completely beside the point. Anyway, this is roughly what happens, or what I could make out as I drifted in and out of sleep:
(An unreliable summary)
The first few minutes give us the background on the many political intrigues of the time, in the stentorian but much-too-familiar voice of Amitabh Bachchan. (Like a stern father-in-law keeping a watchful eye on Aishwarya after that kiss in Dhoom 2, Bachchan’s presence looms large here: not only does he do these ponderous voiceovers but Sonu Sood, the actor who plays Jodha’s protective brother Sujamal, strongly resembles the young Amitabh – the moustached Amitabh of Reshma aur Shera, for example, or even Ganga ki Saugandh - from many angles.) Most of the historical information is tedious and complicated, though there’s a certain fun to be had in seeing the kings of Hindustan depicted as petulant little boys, sulking, whimpering and clinging to their thrones when faced with the prospect of being made vassals. (As the maharajah of Amer, Kulbhushan Kharbanda looks and sounds like he has serious breathing problems, and little wonder given the number of heavy necklaces weighing him down at all times.)
Meanwhile, on the Mughal side of things, there is Bairam Khan, a good old-fashioned medieval psychopath who uses his official status as guardian for the boy-prince Akbar to nurture a very personal fetish for lopping off enemy heads. Unfortunately for Bairam, the boy-prince soon grows up and dispenses with his services. To prove that he is worthy of ruling the country, Akbar then takes on a wild elephant in a scene that is reminiscent of Hrithik’s superhero-racing-the-horse in Krrish. But what really puts his courage to the test is when he agrees to wed the Hindu princess Jodha to complete a political alliance: her long list of demands includes the right to sing bhajans loudly in the next room while he is discussing matters of state with his viziers.Sadly the marriage remains unconsummated because by the time J and A have finished removing all those layers of jewellery they are no longer horny and only wish to sleep. This puts the future of the Empire in jeopardy. Also, there are culture shocks that must be dealt with. The newlywed Jodha, wholly unaccustomed to the brutal ways of the Mughals, watches aghast as her husband has a traitor thrown to his death from the roof (cue bone-crunching sound) and then has him thrown off again when the job isn’t finished. (Aishwarya’s eyes widen: she never got to see such gory things in the Bachchan household except when Amar Singh and Shah Rukh came visiting at the same time.)
Anyway, after watching Akbar’s topless swashbuckling, Jodha decides that the way to a man’s eight-pack abs is through his stomach. So she takes over the royal kitchen and sets about preparing a large vegetarian meal for him with her own hands. However, things nearly go perilously wrong when she misinterprets an order for a “24-carrot salad” and slips some of her rubies and emeralds into the dish, causing the emperor’s courtiers to suffer from indigestion for days afterward. In a delicate and affecting scene, the crafty Ila Arun (playing Akbar’s wet-nurse) enters the kitchen grounds where countless heaps of vegetables are scattered about, and bursts into a rendition of “Mooli ke peeche kya hai”. This highly dramatic sequence ends with Jodha falling out of favour; however, after a timely reconciliation, our leads start making out on the floor of the chamber (as chronicled in a lost volume of the Akbarnama) before realising that they should move to the bed in the interests of royal decorum.Meanwhile the political intrigues continue apace, but thankfully they are punctuated by some nice quiet moments between Akbar and Jodha – like the one where she bends down to touch his feet and he catches her mid-dive, in the manner of every traditional Indian husband in a Bollywood film (in other words: make sure the woman genuflects, but also make a token gesture that will show how modern-thinking you are). There are an equal number of scenes where the characters simply wander about languorously, admiring the gardens, reclining on bolsters, playing with rabbits and pigeons and looking a little bored, like they wish television had been invented.
Despite all the gloss, this is a static film, full of scenes that carry on long past their sell-by date. Ashutosh Gowrikar said in an interview that his movies are as long as the story requires them to be, but even someone who knows very little about the technical aspects of filmmaking will see that Jodhaa Akbar could easily have been shorter and more compact. (The number of reaction shots alone made me think that some bits could have been produced almost as competently by the Ekta Kapoor factory.) The battle scenes are indifferently put together and it's hard to work up much interest in which general's elephant is crushing which foot-soldier's head; I was immensely disappointed even by the final one-on-one combat, which I’d hoped would at least give the film a rousing ending. And when computer effects are pressed into service (as in the aerial shot of discharging cannons, with one of them shooting its flaming iron ball straight into the camera), the effect is still flat and uninspired.
Diamonds last forever; so does this film
I was forewarned that the only reason to watch Jodhaa Akbar was to feast one’s eyes on the extravagant jewellery adorning the persons of nearly every member of the cast. After seeing it, I have to agree that the experience was rather like four hours spent in a gold souk that has two large and handsome posters of Hrithik and Aishwarya on the walls, and some soulful A R Rahman music playing somewhere in the background. If you love jewellery that much, good for you – if not, you may feel that this film goes on for nearly as long as the Mughal Empire did.
on Sunday, February 17th, 2008, 7:27 pm in Film › 
Email this
› 
Facebook this
› 
Reddit this
› Link
› Reader links
Enjoy your review of Dhoom 3 muchly.
This isn’t a hint :)
I can hunt and drive fancy cars if given the chance!
Sigh… Not a fan of either of them, but Hrithik and Aish were so meant to be. Like Salma Hayek and Antonio Banderas. Perfect together. Too bad reality gets in the way. :P
haha
No way. They’d clash on bathroom time and fight over the blowdryer.
Haha. Speaking of vanity, mughal decorum and what-not, I believe it was emperor Shah Jahan who installed mirrors on the walls and ceilings of his bedroom so he could watch himself perform.
Rushdie’s new short story tips its hat to the movie. He really is obsessed with celebrity.
thanks once again Manish for Rushdies new short story tips..looks interesting.. cant get enough of Rushdie..so thanks for all ur Rushdie’s blog entry keeping us getting enough of Rushdie until his new book comes out..I cannot wait to read that florence novel..
Jabberwock..I dont agree with u..
I saw the movie..yes agreed it is terribly long and I suffered with headache for 24 hrs after watching the movie..but still I thought movie was well made and worth seeing..I found the love story between the two superslow but kind of so real and cute..If that was all true about Akbar, I thought modern men should learn lessons from Akbar…respecting his woman, giving her freedom and waiting until she feels the love in her heart, giving her religious freedom and freedom to do what she wants to do…very impressive broadmindedness in 1550’s..Looking at todays generation of guys rushing through marriages looking at photographs and chemistry more than emotional or mental connection, I find this kind of love very real..taking time to know the real person and giving each other enough space and respect to feel true love for each other..kind of lasting love capable of immense sacrifice..
I dont see anything wrong in aiswarya cooking for her hubby..all our moms did that..we all do that right.. agreed movie was superslow, sound and noise was too much…but otherwise it was ok..
I loved sufi music tinge in the movie..u are right..costumes jewellary colors cinematography some choreogrphy was spectacular..but movie is not all that bad..except for too much war scenes, dragging for too long without proper editing..And one place Hrithik uses a match stick to light a candle..in that generation they were no matchsticks so director should have taken care of that but otherwise I thought movie was worth watching..
Prakruti: no issue with your liking the film (even though it gave you a headache for 24 hours!), but w.r.t the “very impressive broadmindedness in 1550’s…” etc, I worry that you’ve taken the historical bits at face value. As Ashutosh Gowrikar has admitted in interviews, the details of the Jodha-Akbar story presented here are mostly fiction. It’s possible of course that some of this might have happened - Akbar’s tolerance and broadmindedness in matters of faith are well-known - but I wouldn’t go overboard romanticising the way people lived back then vis-a-vis modern lives. Remember, this was also the period where burying people (including minor transgressors) head-deep in the sand and getting elephants to trample over them - as spectators watched in glee - was a popular hobby even for the most benevolent and broadminded emperors! At any rate, from the historical authenticity point of view, there’s a heck of a lot more wrong with this film than its use of matchsticks.
And when did I say there was “anything wrong in Aishwarya cooking for her hubby?”
Prakruti: just saw your write-up on the film. Did you really think Hrithik needed more muscle to play Akbar? Good heavens - the real-life, five feet-two-inch Jalaluddin must be quivering in his grave at the very thought!
Did you ghost-direct this flick :-D
Hmmm Are there porno versions of hindi movies if so this one has the perfect title to make a porno version.
The title is …..
Jabberwock…me and one of my married girlfriends(who judges men by looks way better than me and who is extremely stylish) and her mom who came with us ..all three of us felt that Hrithik looked skinny..he need not be real big but a little more flesh..or wear little puffy clothes..and better colors too..Hrithik wore all pale colored clothes..I didnot like his clothes too..his costumes, his mostache(I dont even know how to spell it, never typed this word much), his figure and even his acting were all just above average…I think he is one of the finest actors in bollywood but this film was not his best..I always felt aiswarya is a pretty barbie doll who cannot act..but this movie she acted well and better than hrithik for me..may be it is hrithiks clothes that made him not that regal as he should have been.. a little more muscle may be..
aiswarya clothes were great..those yellows with greens…bright reds..young greens..
actually I went to wikepedia and read about akbar.. he married 3-4 times..was supposed to be the best of all mughal emperors..he cared about his people,was broadminded, allowed his wife to practise her religion..
only thing wikepedia says is jodhas name is different and that she converted into a muslim before marrying..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akbar
Prakruti: any Wikipedia entry should, at the very least, be supplemented by other reading if you want indepth knowledge about a subject. At any rate, Akbar didn’t marry 3-4 times, he had a harem of at least 20 princesses, like every other emperor of the time. (A lot of people would say that isn’t conduct becoming of a sensitive, modern-thinking man!) Also, I just noticed that the Wiki entry says “He never allowed his female muslim kin to be married to a Hindu prince. According to the Islamic ethos of the time, that would have been the only way to show tolerance or equality.” Anyway, that isn’t the point. The point is, it would be a serious mistake to look at this film as a history lesson of any sort, especially when the filmmakers themselves have openly said that it’s only around 30 per cent history. (It follows that my comment about Hrithik’s physique was a bit of a joke - I didn’t mean to suggest that in a big-budget, star personality-oriented film like this the role of Akbar should have been played by someone who looked exactly like the real emperor. But a commenter on my blog did wonder if Hrithik should have done the Method Acting thing and grown a paunch to play this role!)
jabberwock..really 20 wives.. too bad..kings were so bad, they all had so many wives.. I dont like the culture with multiple wives..Historically to me even Draupadi having five hubby’s is weird..
you are right, after seeing the movie I felt like reading more on mughal emperors history but u know no time to do all that..hopefully someday..
u are also right..movies are fantasies..no one makes real historical movies these days..specially in India…so why bother about history..just enjoy the moment..
I dont know if any actor could have done that role better than Hrithik..and Iam sure no one would suit that role..may be sharukh khan with a beard..since he was anyway a muslim , with beard he might add to authenticity but he is again skinny…his last om shanti om no shirt thing was scary..he looked scarily skinny.. may be kabir bedi or aravind swami kind of personality…
I dont know why but all the girls were prettily dressed in lovely indian colors in the movie but all the men were badly dressed..colors costumes..so sometimes may be if Hrithik wore some yellows or greens or bright colors he would have looked more regal and may be instead of that mostache may be a french beard…
I can sense sometimes after watching a movie that may be some other actor would have fitted role better..
like they are making atlas shrugged my fav. novel into a movie..and angelina jolie is playing dagny taggart ..to me she doesnot suit the role.. we have to wait and see..
like this year they sent omkara as oscar entry..I thought that was a bad choice..vanaja or some other movie should have been indian oscar entry..
a year before they sent rang de basanti and I thought water was a better choice ..and canada nominated water and water was in final five oscar entries..sometimes people make wrong choices specially in India…
Yikes. Despite your glowing endorsement, I think I just might have to pass.
Which, of course, explains the heaving chorus of “Cook, Cook, Cook, Cook, Cook, Cook!”
Why did they not have Rajinikanth play Akbar? Doesn’t the Akbarnama speak so eloquently of the mighty emperor defeating a posse of
villainsenemy soldiers by insouciantly flipping his cigarette through the air before proceeding to drive his car on two wheels and scything through an amassed phalanx of horses, leaving them facing the wrong way as he proceeds to jump out and somersault backwards through the air to deal with the suddenly rear-ended cavalry?