The title of this blog is also the title of a lovely Marathi movie I saw today. The title is loosely transalated as 'Island of stars'. The movie is a sinple story of a family in Dapoli - a village about a boat ride away from Mumbai. The story has Sachin Khedekar in a lead role. The stoy is simple - While on a visit to Mumbai, Sachins son (Onkar) comes upon a 5 star hotel. He insists on going inside - but is stopped from doing so by his father, who knows that they will not be allowed to set foot inside that palace for the rich. The boy insists and Sachin strikes a deal - they can stay at the hotel provided Onkar comes first in his school in the exams. Onkar takes this to his heart - puts in some serious efforts and actually tops his class. That is when the movie gets interesting.
The movie is very well made. It is extremely realistic and has fab performances by the entire cast - including the ones with 2 bit roles. I generally find most Marathi movies to be loud and full of slapstick humor but this one was refreshingly different. I think movies like Valu, Natarang, Achanak and Taryanche Bet are sure signs that something wonderful is afoot in the world of Marathi cinema - let us hope that we continue to see more such movies being made.
But I digress - Let us come back to the movie. The movie beautifully captures the struggle of the father to keep his side of the bargain. He knows he will never be able to afford the 22000/- required to put his family of four through one night at the hotel. The frustration at being unable to make his kids dream come true makes him compromise his principles. His moral code is strong enough to withstand his own and his wife's earthly desires but crumbles when faced with those of his children. But the movie has a positive message. He does revert back to the path of the straight and the correct - with the support of Onkar.
At no point did the movie feel false or the screenplay seem hackneyed. It was a thinking man's movie that raises important questions- How much money is enough? What can and cannot be compromised? How many things which we take for granted in our lives would really be extra-ordinary expiriences for those below us on the income ladder? And why do those things within our grasp give us so little pleasure?
I think the upwardly mobile (myself included) are beginning to develop rapacious tendencies for all things all the time. There is something very rotten with the way we run our society. All resources are to be diverted to those who can afford them. Money is the ultimate means and also the justification for consumption. This is a very serious problem in a society like ours - one with serious income inequalities. I dont want to rant on about this as enough has been written about it - but I would like to give an illustration of the problem we have. Suppose there is a village in which everyone has almost the same income and wealth. The main commodity of consumption in the village is Oranges which can be consumed in any quanity by each person in one day - and is consumed purely for pleasure. Now since everyone has the same income , everyone will have the same capacity to buy these oranges - say 1 a day. Now suppose, some people develop a slightly higher income. These people will then be able to buy 2 oranges every day. They are therefore pulling in more oranges towards themselves and depriving the others (whose incomes have not grown) of Oranges. Now if the income of these already slightly high income folk increases further, they will consume more and more till they alone can finish of all the oranges and there is nothing left fot the others. So what happened is that although the utility of the orange did not increase but because they could - the rich bought more and the poor were deprived of these oranges. THis is happening in the real world for everything from apartments to Alphonso mangoes. The rich are to take while the poor to sell. It is ok to take as long as you can afford it. Wonder how long this system will last till the poor say 'Damn with the money - let us use the number power instead!'
The movie is very well made. It is extremely realistic and has fab performances by the entire cast - including the ones with 2 bit roles. I generally find most Marathi movies to be loud and full of slapstick humor but this one was refreshingly different. I think movies like Valu, Natarang, Achanak and Taryanche Bet are sure signs that something wonderful is afoot in the world of Marathi cinema - let us hope that we continue to see more such movies being made.
But I digress - Let us come back to the movie. The movie beautifully captures the struggle of the father to keep his side of the bargain. He knows he will never be able to afford the 22000/- required to put his family of four through one night at the hotel. The frustration at being unable to make his kids dream come true makes him compromise his principles. His moral code is strong enough to withstand his own and his wife's earthly desires but crumbles when faced with those of his children. But the movie has a positive message. He does revert back to the path of the straight and the correct - with the support of Onkar.
At no point did the movie feel false or the screenplay seem hackneyed. It was a thinking man's movie that raises important questions- How much money is enough? What can and cannot be compromised? How many things which we take for granted in our lives would really be extra-ordinary expiriences for those below us on the income ladder? And why do those things within our grasp give us so little pleasure?
I think the upwardly mobile (myself included) are beginning to develop rapacious tendencies for all things all the time. There is something very rotten with the way we run our society. All resources are to be diverted to those who can afford them. Money is the ultimate means and also the justification for consumption. This is a very serious problem in a society like ours - one with serious income inequalities. I dont want to rant on about this as enough has been written about it - but I would like to give an illustration of the problem we have. Suppose there is a village in which everyone has almost the same income and wealth. The main commodity of consumption in the village is Oranges which can be consumed in any quanity by each person in one day - and is consumed purely for pleasure. Now since everyone has the same income , everyone will have the same capacity to buy these oranges - say 1 a day. Now suppose, some people develop a slightly higher income. These people will then be able to buy 2 oranges every day. They are therefore pulling in more oranges towards themselves and depriving the others (whose incomes have not grown) of Oranges. Now if the income of these already slightly high income folk increases further, they will consume more and more till they alone can finish of all the oranges and there is nothing left fot the others. So what happened is that although the utility of the orange did not increase but because they could - the rich bought more and the poor were deprived of these oranges. THis is happening in the real world for everything from apartments to Alphonso mangoes. The rich are to take while the poor to sell. It is ok to take as long as you can afford it. Wonder how long this system will last till the poor say 'Damn with the money - let us use the number power instead!'
No comments:
Post a Comment