Charlotte Morgan

Deewar Film Review

Screening India

March 1, 2010

The film “Deewar,” directed by Yash Chopra, was a very interesting transition from “Guide” into the role of the hyper masculine male hero. In the beginning of the story, we see the father figure of a family get shunned from his village, allegedly for being a thief, who then banishes himself from his family and his home. We are left with his two sons, Vijay and Ravi, and their mother, who are harassed so badly by the rest of the village that they have to run away with nothing. The two boys and their mother end up living under a bridge in complete destitution and poverty in the slums of India.

The idea of the state is present through their poverty, especially in the scene where Ravi is watching the schoolyard, dreaming of an education, while the national anthem is playing in the background. This demonstrates how the slums were being kept out of national development. As the story progresses, Vijay chooses a life of crime, while Ravi becomes a police officer. From this point on, Ravi’s character is the embodiment of the state, displayed through his education, “ideals and principles,” and loyalty to his nations law through his work.

A very interesting aspect of “Deewar” is the female social critique that we have from the mother of the boy who Ravi shoots on the train tracks. The woman yells and displays Ravi’s misguided justice in shooting her boy, but then is immediately shushed and pushed away by her husband, who disregards her as “uneducated.” The wife brings up the important issue of the police working with a corrupt system, which punishes the poor and the disadvantaged, and serves to make the only link in the movie between what smuggling does to society. The woman is pushed away, and we see the father figure then represented as wise and intelligent because he says that he is a teacher.

Throughout the film “Deewar,” we see the idea of religion present in the everyday routine of Vijay, Ravi, and their mother. Vijay refuses to go into the temple after his father has left them, yet his devotion to his mother remains in the fact that he still goes with her every day and waits outside. Vijay goes on to lead his life of crime, and in the end his faith is what ultimately saves his mother, and saves him from himself. He finally goes into the temple to pray for his mother’s health, which proves successful, and ends up dying in his mother’s arms on the steps of the temple. When he is dying, he returns to his innocence by shedding his sins and his badge, a symbol of his strength. Anita, the other character in the film possessing the “universal bad,” has a similar enlightenment at her death, where she says she doesn’t feel like she is dying but instead is being reborn. Both of these characters’ demise eventually leads to a spiritual end, both being rescued from their previous lives.

The idea of dating and relationships in the movie “Deewar” were very different to what we have been seeing previously, especially in the way that premarital sex between Anita and Vijay was so blatantly exhibited. This premarital sex resulted in Anita becoming pregnant, and I believe foreshadowed their deaths. The dating between Anita and Vijay, and Ravi and his girlfriend was more modern and physical, and was unknown to their mother, which was seen in the scene at the train station between Ravi and his mother.

Most importantly, I think “Deewar” illustrated the idea that the slums were being outcast from the progressive movements at the time. Vijay, to me, represented the slums and the reality of the situation, where Ravi represented the law and the government, which was naive to what was actually going on. I think this can be seen in the scene where Vijay and Ravi meet under the bridge, which ironically opens with the national anthem, where Ravi vaguely goes on and on about his “principles and ideals,” and defending his nation. Vijay responds by reminding him where he came from, and that ideals and principles cannot provide you with food. On a larger scale, this is saying that the elite can easily spout things like ideals and values because they cannot begin to understand that the people in the slums have to fight for everything that they have. The bridge in this scene is a crucial symbol in the movie, because it is the only thing holding the two brothers together. It is their home and their origin, and the only thing that they still share.

The western clothing and language, as well as Anita being the embodiment of a westernized woman, contributed largely to the film. I interpreted this as being a factor of a changing society in India, becoming more modern in ways such as dress, language, and interaction between couples.

There were only about 3 songs in “Deewar,” which was a surprising change from the extensive love songs in Guide especially. The film was more focused on the masculinity of Vijay, and his role as the bad hero, which made the song sequences more about him and his action, and less romantic. Vijay’s relationship with Anita wasn’t particularly romantic either, which would explain the lack of love songs between them. On the other hand, the song sequence between Ravi and his girlfriend was much more romantic and sing-songy like “Guide,” except I found it to be much more physical.

I liked the film “Deewar” very much, and so far it was my favorite. Although I love the beautiful dance and song sequences and traditional clothing, it was a nice change to see a plot with more action and less romance. One thing that bothered me was that Vijay and Ravi’s father ran away like a coward, when he could have left with them and helped his family build a new life. I also was disappointed in the way that Ravi came out as the hero in the end, because I see him as ungrateful and naive to what reality is. I believe that was the point of the ending though, because even though the character that followed the law and was the “embodiment of the state” ended up on top, the audience as well as their mother favored Vijay and what he stood for.

Deewar, Chris Norrod

Christopher Norrod

Deewaar Film Review

Screening India

2/28/10

Yash Chopra’s Deewaar is a story of brothers walled apart by the paths they take in life. To escape the poverty they were left in, the older brother, Vijay (Amitabh Bachchan) turns to crime.  The younger brother, Ravi (Sashi Kapoor), turns to an education, and ultimately becomes a police officer.  Produced during a particular tumultuous time in Indian history, six months before the Indian Emergency, the film’s emotions reflect those of working class and poor Indians across the nation.  Anger and uncertainty is directed at those who have wealth and those who have power; Amitabh Bachchan embodies these emotions with his angry young man performance.  He has been put down by the world around him, and he is filled with a quiet rage that follows him throughout the movie, and at several points it explodes out in a furious manner.  Deewaar has two major themes: the nature of justice and injustice, and the conflict of duty between family and society.  Leisure suits and leather versus uniforms, the movie comes down in favor of the law, but the angry young man becomes the Bollywood star.     

One notion underlying Deewar is that justice is often harsher towards the poor.  The poor have no rights, but when they advocate for those rights the resulting disorder also causes human suffering.  The Verma family struggles begin when the father attempts to advocate for the rights of coal miners.  The father is threatened into submission by corrupt businessmen into betraying his fellow sympathizers.  The older, innocent son, Vijay, is kidnapped in retaliation, and given a tattoo on his arm saying “My father is a thief”.  That moment is the first most personal taste for Vijay of injustice.  The Verma family spirals down as they flee their home, the father runs away, and the mother is forced to labor in extreme poverty.  She loses her job when she falls down and breaks bricks.  Vijay polishes shoes, sacrificing his own education to support his younger brother.  Another important moment in the film for Vijay is his response to the injustice of turning over a percentage of pay as tribute to organized crime.  Instead of turning to the law, he turns to his fists.  He beats up the mobsters and ultimately turns to crime.  As Vijay becomes more wealthy and powerful, he comes to the attention of the law, and Ravi.

Ravi, too, is no stranger to injustice.  Ravi too grows up on the streets of Bombay, and dealt with the hunger and poverty of street life.  He is refused a job because he lacks connections.  However, he ultimately lands a job in law enforcement.  His job as a policeman leads him to shoot an unarmed young boy for stealing a loaf of bread to feed his hungry family.   One important scene in the movie is when Ravi visits the family of the boy he wounded.  The mother cries for him to get out.  She argues that Ravi should be prosecuting the rich and powerful and not her son. However, the father accepts the shooting saying it makes no difference if you steal a little money or a lot.  The father, a humble ex teacher states that millions of Indians die of starvation, and not all turn to theft.  This is a scene that portrays this underlying notion of justice and its meaning.  Ravi bows down to this wisdom he “could only have learned in the home of some teacher.”  The film seems to wrestle with whether the law is a tool for the rich and powerful, and whether or not it can effectively serve justice without bias.

There is also a constant struggle between the men’s duty to their family, especially their mother, and to society.  Vijay’s lifestyle leads to great riches for his family, though at the cost of his mother, a proper Indian woman in a sari, when she discovers the source of her son’s income.  As any frequent Indian cinemagoer would know, the mother is a powerful symbol for the Indian state.  His mother leaves Vijay’s house, and lives with her other son.  Ravi is not as successful as Vijay nor is he as loved by his mother, yet she chooses to stay with him because he leads a more righteous, a more dharmic, lifestyle.  This struggle between duty and family leads to the climatic scenes when Ravi and his mother decide to apprehend Vijay.  Ravi is told by his mother to not let his hand tremble when he shoots, effectively giving him permission to commit fratricide.  Society ultimately prevails as Vijay is gunned down in the streets of Bombay, and Ravi and his mother are awarded for their efforts.

Guide film review, Pasang Sherpa

.

Pasang Sherpa

Guide

Directed by : Vijay Anand

Produced  by : Dev Anand

Written by : Vijay Anand ( From R.K. Narayan’s Novel)

Starring : Dev Anand (Raju)

                Waheeda Rehman(Rosie)

                Kishore Sahu (Marco)

Music by : S.D. Burman

Cinematography : Fali Mistry

Release Date : 02/06/1965

Running Time : 183 min.

        

       “Guide”, a Hindi movie released in 1965 is a collaboration of two brothers Dev Anand and Vijay Anand in the Bollywood industry. It is one unforgettable movie where we see the new kind of taste in Bollywood movies. The movie is based on a novel by R.K. Narayan.  The major theme throughout the movie was Raju giving guidance to the people and becoming the part of everybody who he guides. We also find a strange love story in the movie, the romance of Raju with Rosie, a married woman. Raju seems never to have achieved anything for himself in life; he is always trying to help or guide people trying to make their lives better. The story overall is tragic. The movie does not really focus on patriotism towards the country, but it is more concerned with building community.

            The movie starts with Raju getting out of jail. He is going back home, but he does not find a reason to go back, and story begins with a flashback. Raju is a famous guide in the town whom everybody knows. One day Rosie the daughter of a courtesan and her husband, Marco, comes to the town. Marco is a wealthy archeologist. He is more interested in his work than his wife. While Marco is busy with his work, Raju takes Rosie on a tour and discovers her talent and the reason why she was married to Marco. Rosie explains to Raju how dancing is not acceptable to Marco, and that is why she had to quit. Raju convinces her that she should not quit what she enjoys. When Rosie goes to visit Marco in the cave, she sees that he is having an affair with a different girl. Then Rosie leaves Marco and decides to continue doing what she like but she has nowhere to go. Raju takes her in and they fall in, love with each other.

          When Rosie moves in with Raju, everybody thinks that she is a prostitute as she dances in his house. Raju gets in lots of trouble trying to defend her from people gossiping about her. It gets so bad that Raju’s mother leaves him. Since Raju is not letting Rosie go, he loses everything his friends and business. Then Rosie changes her name to Nalina, and Raju guide Nalina to her successful career. But Raju starts gambling and drinking. One day Marco shows up from nowhere and tries to get Rosie back. Then he has his agent ask Rosie to release some jewelry, which is in a safe deposit box. Out of jealousy Raju forges Rosie’s name to release the jewelry, which will eventually tear them apart. And Raju is sent to jail. When he gets out of Jail, he goes to this village and he suffers from hunger and poverty in rags. One morning a farmer finds him under an orange shawl and thinks that he is a holy man. Bhola the Farmer tells him that his sister refuses to marry and it is his worst serious problem. Raju impress the girl and gets her ready to marry, so then people thinks he is a swami. People bring food for him and listen to his words. He makes lots of things possible in that village, and tells them a story about the holy man who fasted for twelve days, which resulted in rain to end the drought.

            Then drought actually hits the village, and due to a miscommunication a village fool interprets that Raju is going to fast for twelve days to end the drought that they are facing. He then gets in the trap and opposes the idea, but decides to fast for the sake of the village. With his popularity thousands of people come to see him and get his blessing. Then there he finds her mother as she came to get his blessing, Rosie comes to visit him and his friend. But the very random scene when this American journalist gets really surprised when Raju speaks in English. Then she asks him, “ Have you ever fallen in love?” Then it actually rains, and people are happy but the time has come for Raju to leave. 

           The movie overall is good, the dance scenes were different than in the movies shown earlier. They were dancing in the forest, in the mountain, etc. While Nalini was dancing, the stage was covered with statues of gods and goddesses. The movie brings the new flavor to the Bollywood industry. The movie is worth seeing again.

Charlotte Morgan

Brueck: Screening India

February 21, 2010

Guide Film Review

Guide, written and directed by Vijay Anand, is a film consisting of a series of unraveled flashbacks, beginning and ending both in the present. The start of the film is outside of a jail, where our hero, Raju, is finally released from his sentencing for forgery. The allegation that this man Raju is the story’s hero will only make sense once the entirety of the plot is laid out, as well as the lives of the rest of the characters. When Raju’s mother and his former “almost wife” Rosie arrive at the jail to take Raju home upon release, they learn that he has been let go early and has failed to come home. Both women are shocked and heartbroken, and Rosie takes Raju’s mother home and begins to tell her the story of her love for Raju. Rosie’s tale begins the flashback that encompasses most of the movie.

Class is one theme that serves as a primary element to the movie Guide, especially in regards to Rosie. Rosie’s mother is a courtesan, and does everything in her power to remove Rosie from this atmosphere, and give her a more respectable life than her own, even at the cost of loosing her daughter. Rosie’s mother arranges for her to marry an older, wealthier, upper-class man named Marco, who stifles her expression by forbidding her to dance, expecting her to be a submissive wife. Marco expresses that she is not low-class anymore, and that because she bears his name she will no longer dance and act like a whore. Rosie begins to “find herself” through Raju, their guide, while on the trip, and realizes that she would rather give up her class in order to dance, her passion. Raju encourages Rosie to continue to dance once they had eloped to his mother’s house, despite being frowned upon by his village and disowned by his friends. I think that Rosie and Raju both realized in this moment of the film that other people’s connotations of class and ideas in regards to her dancing were unimportant, and what mattered was that they were together and happy.

Rosie and Raju’s relationship in the movie Guide has no place in respectable society at the time, and their live-in situation is obviously not accepted throughout the movie. Raju’s mother becomes so infuriated with the situation that she leaves her home. Rosie’s marriage to Marco was diminishing her identity as her own woman, leaving her with a barren life. Her love for Raju saves her, and brings her liberation. This idea of their marriage being the demise, and an unofficial love affair acting as the savior to Rosie’s humanity, is not the accepted ideal in Indian society. This affair denotes traditional values of a mans parents approaching the woman’s parents in arrangement of marriage, as well as presents the ideas of infidelity and a non-married life as “liberating.”

We are constantly reminded throughout the movie of the fact that Rosie has no home to look back to. Marco removing her from her mother and class erases her origins, and Raju who rescues her from her marriage then removes her from her only home with Marco. This “unattachedness” contributes to the unfavorable way that Raju’s mother and others see Rosie. Once Rosie embraces her dancing, the seemingly disgraceful pieces of her past help her to become successful and famous. Raju’s character is deeply planted in his origins, which can be seen in the way that he brings Rosie back to his house despite the connotations that she brings, as well as the fact that he returns home once him and Rosie have a “falling out” near the end of the movie. In my opinion, the fact that Raju would not return home after he was let out of prison reflects an even stronger respect for his origins, his home, because he did not want to tarnish his family and their reputation with what he had done.

The gender roles presented in the movie Guide were very interesting to me in contrast with our previous films. In Guide, we moved away from strong female roles and instead focused on the highly eroticized role of the male hero, Raju. Throughout the film, the character of Rosie and her role as a newly successful dancer and reinvented woman is eventually pushed into the background. Although Rosie has worked her way from nothing to making a name for herself, Miss Nalini, we end the movie focusing on Raju. After Raju begins to ignore his wife, commits forgery, and ends up in prison, he reappears heroically after his sentence in a remote village pretending to be a saint. Neither going to prison or pretending to be a saint to a famished village are noble or heroic situations, yet when Raju is cornered by the villagers into fasting for twelve days to spiritually relieve the drought, he then is enlightened and becomes a martyr.

Raju inhibits many characteristics of the “universal good” in the story, despite his apparent faults. He has respect for his mother; especially when he doesn’t believe Rosie tried to persuade her to stay in her home, and he creates strong emotional bonds with the men of the village, which encourage them further to think he is their saint. Raju displays intense religious tolerance during his fast and after his enlightenment, and his devotion to the village and the end of the famine shows the love he has for his country, and especially the people of his village and surrounding areas.

On the other hand, Rosie, who never committed any crime besides fleeing her miserable marriage, inhabits many of the characteristics of the “universal bad.” The fact that her name is Rosie immediately shines an unfavorable light on her because it is western, and many of the “villain” or undesirable roles have western characteristics. The fact that Rosie is estranged, or unattached from her family is also a characteristic of the “universal bad” in a role. Also, I interpreted Rosie’s dancing in the film to be portrayed as uncontrolled sexuality, because she was inclined to do so despite what everyone thought of her. Rosie’s suicide attempts in the beginning of the movie also seemed to reflect her ignoring fate and religion. She also seemed to reject her culture by leaving Marco, and not marrying Raju. In the film, only once Rosie sees Raju as a martyr during his fast, does she appear in an all white sari, removing her jewels and material items. This appearance of “purity” in Rosie only comes after the hero of the film is made clear, where she can then be pushed into the background unnoticed.

This self-centered male role of Raju in Guide creates a new homoerotic image of the male figure in the films so far. We end the movie with an unattached male hero, becoming a martyr in solitude for the lives of the people in the village. Raju is seen as enlightened, powerful in his struggle, and completely devoted to bringing his people rain.

Religion plays a major role in Guide, because it is the most important element left in Raju’s life right before he dies. Raju has gone through his life, which eventually ended in sin by abandoning his wife and mother, committing a crime, and lying to the village. During his fast, he is enlightened and realizes that he must devote himself to the people who believe in him by truly fasting. He confesses his sins and dies a reconciled man. Raju’s new found devotion to the people of the village construct the idea that a man can always redeem himself through religion, and find identity and devotion to the people or place that needs them most. Although Raju’s martyrdom wasn’t on a national level, his actions showed that he cared for his people enough to die for them, which is an ideal parallel with national identity.

The musical style and songs in Guide were all different, yet interesting with many shared characteristics. The songs with the picturesque mountain scenes in the background with Raju and Rosie singing to each other as lovers, was magical and romantic, even though somewhat more “cheesy” than previous songs. Once Rosie began to discover who she truly was, and wanted to be, the song sequences became increasingly more romantic and entertaining, beginning with the song on the back of the truck in the hay. Once Rosie became Miss Nalini, her dance and song sequences became more and more elaborate, including other women dancers as well as womanly figured statues and bright color. Although this would seem to heighten her femininity and character as a woman, it contrasts with the fact that she is eventually pushed into the background by Raju’s character. In the end of the movie, most of the songs focus on Raju and his devotion, heightening his character to the upmost hero.

I enjoyed the film Guide immensely, it held my attention throughout the entire three hours, and kept me interested. I loved the character of Rosie, and her song and dance sequences were thrilling and beautiful. I initially liked the character of Raju as the guide; he was amusing and full of character, yet my fondness of him diminished as Rosie became famous. I was disappointed in the way that Rosie was pushed into the background because in my opinion, she wasn’t necessarily the hero of the story but she succeeded against all odds. Despite Raju’s “enlightenment,” I had a hard time finding him to be genuine in the end, and his disregard for his mother and Rosie after he was let out of prison really bothered me. Overall, the film Guide entertained me, as well as taught me more about the progression of Hindi cinema throughout the years!

Rachel Newsham

Screening India

Professor Brueck

13 Feb, 2010

Mother India Film Review

Mother India, a film by Mehboob Khan, follows the life of a traditional Indian woman who is faced with many trials and difficult decisions. Her ability to persevere through these trials and hold firmly to her morals distinguishes Radha as an extreme example of a traditional Indian woman and mother who is willing to renounce all for the sake of upholding dharma, the law of ethical conduct. The most important theme played out in Radha’s character is the religious based concept of preserving a woman’s honor or lãj, specifically in terms of chastity.

The first part of the film is used to create the idea that the land represents the nation. This film was created ten years after the independence and partition of India. One of the film’s themes is to address the Muslims who have left India after the partition and call them home. In the scene with the villagers dancing within the sheaves of wheat they have formed an outline of the country of India. With careful notice, we see that East and West Pakistan have not been removed from the outline. This theme is also portrayed in the preceding scene where Radha is calling out to the other villagers not to leave. In her moving song, she begs them not to abandon their home claiming that: “the earth is still your heart,” referring to the idea that India is still the Muslim’s motherland and they should not abandon her.

The setting of this film is in rural India where villagers must depend on the grace of nature and Sukhilala, the local moneylender. The film opens with the marriage of Radha and Shamu. When she enters her husband’s home, Radha discovers that her mother-in-law has pawned off most of their land in order to pay for the wedding. Radha, as an “ideal” traditional Indian woman and bride, is shown as diligent, hardworking, modest, and loving towards her husband. Reminiscent of a renouncer, she offers to sell her gold bangles in order to buy back their land. Her husband refuses, and they decide to work on an unruly plot of land that is filled with boulders. In their endeavors to clear the land, Shamu looses both of his arms. He is humiliated by Sukhilala and leaves his family believing that he is only an extra burden. Radha, much like the goddess in The Song of Krishna, loves Shamu and unwaveringly hopes for his return throughout the film.

The plot spirals downward from here with her mother-in-law’s death leaving Radha alone to take care of her ever-growing family. Sukhilala comes to offer her help in return for her services as a mistress, but she refuses. She has her young sons work alongside her to clear the field and plant a very hopeful crop. Right before harvest, a storm comes and sweeps away the crop along with two of Radha’s children. Unable to provide food for her remaining two sons, Radha turns to Sukhilala. As she is about to relinquish her lãj, she looks to the shrine of a goddess and is reminded of her duty to uphold dharma, which, in this case, symbolizes her chastity.

She returns to her sons and they work diligently to get back on their feet. The film skips a few years and we return to a village that has become very prosperous. Although Radha has not succeeded in paying back the moneylender, her sons have grown up into healthy young men with hearts full of love for both their mother and girls of the village. The oldest son, Ramu, marries the girl of his dreams while Birju, the rebellious younger son, is refused marriage by his prospective father-in-law. Seeing that he has no hope of gaining Chanda’s hand in marriage, Birju focuses his efforts on avenging the past grievances of his mother.

The last section of the movie is about Birju’s revenge. Unable to learn the knowledge within Sukhilala’s record books, Birju turns to thievery in order to regain his mother’s bangles, land, and honor. During Sukhilala’s daughter’s wedding ceremony, Birju makes a grand entrance with a group of rebels on horseback. After finding his mother’s gold bangles, he kills Sukhilala and captures his daughter Rupa, marking the climax of the movie.

The end of the climax comes when Radha shoots Birju. Faced with a moral dilemma, Radha views Birju’s intended violation of Rupa’s honor as a violation of the entire village. In an extreme example of renouncement, she places the honor of another woman before her love and commitment to her son by killing him, thus upholding dharma and canonizing her character as the example of the ultimate woman.

The similarities between Birju and Sukhilala are important in understanding an ironic twist in the film. By the end of the film, Birju’s character has assimilated into a character much like that of Sukhilala’s. As a moneylender, Sukhilala was regarded as a thief. Similarly, after finding his work to be in vain, Birju gave up on an honest living by taking up a life of thievery. Birju also takes on Sukhilala’s character in his conquest of Rupa. Even though he left Radha with a choice, Sukhilala had tried to take away her honor by making her a mistress. Birju, in his desire to avenge his mother, similarly tried to take away Rupa’s honor. In his desire to defeat his enemy, Birju left behind the rules of dharma and conformed to the very character he was determined to destroy.

Although this film can be hard to sit through, I enjoyed watching the characters of Radha and Birju develop. Both of them had to decide between the selfish tendency of taking the easy way out or the path of upholding dharma, which included many sacrifices. While Radha chose the path of a renouncer, Birju chose the path of the rebel. Birju’s journey led to his death, but by sacrificing her son, Radha gained the reputation of being the mother of the entire village. This film seems to point out the idea that although performing one’s duty often entails a great amount of suffering, the end reward is both far-reaching and well worth the effort.

Devdas vs. Dev D.- Old vs. New

Sydney Blach
Movie Review; DEVDAS
Bollywood; TR 3:30-4:45
February 8, 2010

Devdas vs. Dev D.

Devdas is a timeless tale focusing on a “woe-is-me” central character, Devdas, and the story of his tragic love affair with his child-hood lover Paro. The classic story based on a popular novel by Saratchandra Chattopadhyay has been manipulated multiple times throughout the years. Its beginnings take root in 1917 with the success of the novel, soon after in 1935, New Theaters produced the screenplay version of Devdas directed by P.C. Barua. The story was once again re-worked and once again in the version Produced and Directed by Bimal Roy released in 1955. This version will be the basis of this review. The story was also re-told in 2002 directed by Sanjay Leela Bhansali, and finally in 2009 in a film called Dev D. written and directed by Anurag Kashyap; of which this review will compare to the 1955 version by Roy. Each film follows the same plot line, yet seeing as there is a tremendous difference in their generation the main problems, trials, and actions are dealt with in a fairly shockingly different manner.
Overall each version is an epic story of young-love following two childhood sweet-hearts forbidden to marry due to fluctuating circumstances. In the 1955 version what stands between the young couple is the controversial caste system that rules the country. Devdas’ family are rich landlords placing them high-up in caste, whereas Paro is of a low caste servant family. On the contrary in Dev D. what separates the couple is not the disproval by family, in fact Dev’s dad even exclaims at one point in the movie how perfect he esteems Paro to be for his son. Instead, it is Dev’s own revelry and a silly misunderstanding on Dev’s part that keeps the couple from committing to one another. This notion is also observable in the 1955 version, for example when Devdas himself explains to his companion “She chose the path of matrimony and I chose the path of destruction.” This difference between the two central characters is explicitly presented in the earlier version as Paro goes on to get married as a result of the rejection by Devdas. Rather than settling down, in both films Devdas/Dev have a sexual based relationship with a woman named Chaudramukhi/Chanda who in the 1955 version is portrayed as a “prostitute-like” woman trained in classical singing and dancing, and in the 2009 version is a full on prostitute.
Another notion that is portrayed similarly yet different in each of the versions is the theme of Paro being a non-traditional/modern central female character. By modern I mean that in each instance Paro behaves in a manner when it comes to her relations with Dev/Devdas that in traditional Indian standards of female code of conduct, would be frowned upon. In the 1955 version Paro is rendered as an innocent, young, naïve girl who is hopelessly in love with a forbidden lover. At one point she exclaims that she would ask Devdas to marry her, and then proceeds to enter his bedroom in the middle of the night. This notion is almost reminiscent of Shurpanakha in the Ramayana when the audience sees Shurpanakha lusting after Rama and confessesing her love to him. The purpose of this portion of the epic story is to set up a contrast between an ideal Indian woman- Sita and a repulsive woman- Shurpanakha in order to teach the audience the proper behavior expected from a woman. The traditional woman is the one that waits for a man to approach her, which is not what Paro does either. Once again this concept is more overt in Dev D. For rather than simply not having the patience to wait for her lover to approach her, Paro is shown engaging in explicit sexual encounters with Dev in all sorts of different exclusive locations around the small town.
The central theme of the film and of both versions of the film seems to revolve around the concept of forbidden love and what the denying of that love does to the emotional psyche of Dev/Devdas. In the 1955 version Devdas’ father sends him away to Calcutta to end all relations with Paro causing the rest of the film to follow his downhill slope to an alcoholic and meaningless life of a relentless lust for Paro. The same notion is dealt with in Dev D. but rather than just covering his emotions with alcohol he resorts to hard drugs, vodka, and a partying lifestyle. Paro seems to in a sense move on in both cases while Dev/Devdas is left battling an internal struggle and self destruction.