Padmavati has been in the news ever since it started its shooting, however, as the release date draws closer, the aggravation towards it just keeps rising steadily with each passing day.
The groups and communities have gone from just doing protest and burning posters of the film and fake models depicting the actors and director, to giving out threats of beheading and cutting off noses on live television.
Recently, news also came out that allegedly the Rajput community in UK is also planning to boycott the film and have nothing to do with it.
And a few days back, the film director Rahul Rawail commented on the whole Padmavati row and wondered whether something like Mughal-e-Azam that showed a fictitious relationship between Jahangir and Anarkali, could be made today.
As quoted by Hindustan Times, Rawail said that “Anarkali is a completely fictitious character. Anarkali does not exist in history. If today Mughal-e-Azam is released, will they ban it? They will not”.
Can’t We Separate Between Fiction And Reality?
While I would be the first to admit that Padmavati has its fair share of problems the least not being insufficient research, the story itself doesn’t really merit such a large scale negative reaction as it has been getting.
This is not the first time that a film is being made on historical figures, and as such with all such films, a little bit of creative freedom is taken and as a filmmaker Bhansali has given his own view to the entire Padmavati story and that is not as wrong as some people are thinking.
Read More: ‘Ghoomar’ By Rani Padmavati Is Totally Wrong, This And Other Flaws From The Movie
If one wants to take distorted history, one could look at Mughal-e-Azam too and consider that even that movie showed a very well known prince of the Mughal emperor outright romancing a courtesan for all that we know.
The character of Anarkali has no proof or evidence of existing and there is definitely no proof that a relationship between Jahangir and Anarkali even existed.
When there was no problem in showing a Prince of such a well-known and historically important empire, practically romancing and loving a ‘courtesan’ then what is the problem with Padmavati?
In Mughal-e-Azam explicit (well as explicit as Indian films can get) scenes of Salim and Anarkali were filmed and yet seeing that is a movie we have never objected to it downgrading or insulting to such an important figure in our history books.
And if Bhansali had shown even a little bit of romanticizing the obsession of Khilji then I would have also been protesting the release of this film.
However, Bhansali, the actors, the crew, even the CBFC chief Prasoon Joshi and various other people have come out and said that there is no positive angle given to the trauma that Padmavati went through.
Khilji is a villain in the movie and is shown in such a way, and Bhansali has even gone ahead to the extent of revealing that Ranveer Singh and Deepika Padukone have not even a single scene together.
Instead of focusing on how it is showing romance between a brute and a Queen (which it is not btw) why not focus on how it shows a powerful and strong Queen?
A woman who was a true Rajput and put her honour above her life and committed johar and gave the ultimate self-sacrifice. Padmavati was a queen who behaved and acted like one till her last breath, why not focus on that?
It would be better if such protestors actually focused on saving the real women, who could with such large scale protests when heinous crimes like rapes, molestation and acid attacks happen.
Image Credits: Google Images
Other Recommendations:
http://edtimes.in/2017/10/shahid-gets-badly-beaten-by-ranveers-eccentric-portrayal-of-khilji-in-padmavati-trailer-reaction/
http://edtimes.in/2017/02/why-bollywood-is-succumbing-to-the-political-bullies-of-india/
