Paheli - did the movie make people uncomfortable? - Page 6

Originally posted by: FingerFetish

Nice try fleeing. 10/10 for effort.

Fleeing did not work out for me. I shall pursue my other strengths now.

Conceptually and visually Paheli was breathtaking.

The fact that the wife chose a ghost and was happy about instead of her husband was quite interesting.

There were quite a few layers, the husband abandoning the wife and everyone expecting the wife to be okay with it.

The problem with Paheli was the execution, when you make movies dealing with offbeat subjects you would need to make it entertaining, large parts of Paheli was too slow. Also though the actors were very good you never feel for these characters.

Adding some romance, comedy, magic and emotions would have developed the characters and it could have been a shorter film.

I think showing it like a folktale fairytale and leaving the audience to interpret it would have succeeded.

Originally posted by: cts22

Conceptually and visually Paheli was breathtaking.

The fact that the wife chose a ghost and was happy about instead of her husband was quite interesting.

There were quite a few layers, the husband abandoning the wife and everyone expecting the wife to be okay with it.

The problem with Paheli was the execution, when you make movies dealing with offbeat subjects you would need to make it entertaining, large parts of Paheli was too slow. Also though the actors were very good you never feel for these characters.

Adding some romance, comedy, magic and emotions would have developed the characters and it could have been a shorter film.

I think showing it like a folktale fairytale and leaving the audience to interpret it would have succeeded.

@bold, I actually loved the pace and flow of the movie.

It made it more fable like for me..

Originally posted by: Clochette

I bet, Paheli made a lot of people feel uncomfortable - in different ways.

In my eyes, it was a very fruitful collaboration of especially 3 persons: the director Amol Palekar, the producer & leading actor SRK and the gorgeous Rani skilfully making a movie about women empowerment.

Tales of gods and ghosts following their own (mostly egoistic) agenda by taking the role of a husband are known (and told/read) in cultures as diverse as Asian, African, European, so THIS idea is nothing new. But the part of the story that was REALLY special, was the fact, that the imposter genuinley cared for the woman and thus being honest to her and giving her the means to make an own choice - it was kind of juxtaposing forced (and disrespected) against giving a choice (and respected). It's something still not well received in the beginning of the 21st century in a world where the too many males still could not deal with respecting women as genuine partners.(I felt that the Oscar-responsibles did not grab the special position, Paheli had as an Indian/Hindi film).

As for the ending, I was happy that the physical husband and the ghost's soul&love&respect merged. The husband had already shown a slight inclination to be a man on his own (and not the weakling of the beginning).

His body merged but wasn't the husband's soul trapped elsewhere? I enjoyed the film and the woman's choice angle but I did feel a bit bad for the husband. He was weak but he wasn't a bad man. He didn't deserve her but also didn't deserve to lose his entire life.

Originally posted by: Talis

His body merged but wasn't the husband's soul trapped elsewhere? I enjoyed the film and the woman's choice angle but I did feel a bit bad for the husband. He was weak but he wasn't a bad man. He didn't deserve her but also didn't deserve to lose his entire life.

I too, felt really bad for him.

For humans - bodies get possessed by spirits but souls are still part of the body I think.

The symbolism is probably that her husband transformed to the man of her dreams..

I am with the others that as a youngster I did not understand this movie and was unfamiliar with the folktale. I found it slow and boring but at times intriguing. The film had potential but was bogged down by its languid pace. I feel the execution could have been better and that would have been accomplished by establishing a quicker pace.

As mentioned earlier, I have read about the tales/ myths from various cultures of Greek gods, ghosts, and entities coming in the guise of man especially a woman's husband then taking her. In all those, the women were violated while here the ghost had given her the option to choose for herself. The folktale was truly ahead of its time.

I am not sure how I feel about that ending. Kishan was a dutiful son, and like Lachchi, he was tied to a stranger as was the norm for that period. He likely felt that he had no choice either. His family's expectations were the only expectations, that was what he was raised to believe. He followed it without exception. He had the potential to become a better partner to Lachchi but by then it was too late. It's unfortunate and almost unfair that he had to pay for it with his soul, his body was no longer his.

Lachchi fortunately got to experience a blissful life, one that all women dream of yet few get to realize. In the ghost she found a being who belonged to her and she to him. At the same time, he was just as dutiful to the family. Best of both worlds; a well balanced man who could juggle all aspects of his life equally. The "affair" was digestible to an extent because the ghost was the embodiment of the Kishen that was Lachchi's ideal. That could have been her husband. It induced these contradictory feelings in the viewer, on one side it was somewhat acceptable because we were rooting of Lachchi to get her happiness but on the other side there were some disturbing aspects too.

Originally posted by: hotchoco

ok, honestly, I think the ghost is just a stand-in for another man. This movie was based on a very old folktale. In those days, you couldn't possibly create or perform a story about a married woman hating her husband and leaving him for another man. Instead, these types of themes were spread using a plot device like a ghost and the magical realism is supposed to be amusing and entertaining enough that people don't get offended.

It's how you spread heavy messages by disguising them in fairy tales that could even be told to children.

The original folklore does not give any agency to the bride. She never knew that she was living with a ghost and not her real husband. Even in the end, her feelings upon the revelation do not come to the fore.

Originally posted by: sub_rosa

The original folklore does not give any agency to the bride. She never knew that she was living with a ghost and not her real husband. Even in the end, her feelings upon the revelation do not come to the fore.

Interisting information (thanks)! So again there is a SRK movie where the woman gets her own agency and loving a woman means also respecting her wishes and personality even though it means to change the original folklore.

Well, I also felt compassion with the husband and I think that even the ghost sensed that it was time to give agency to him yet not an exclusive one - he still wanted to play a part in the couple's life. I guess, by deliberately entering the waterskin, he lost only his physical appearance but not his kind of love which he transfered to the husband before getting trapped in the waterskin.

I’ve never seen paheli but the way you wrote makes it seem very interesting. I’m gonna watch it now.

Movie bored me and what really made me uncomfortable was rani's ridiculous hair extensions