Why didn't Dhadak have a Dalit love story?

CONTEST : IPL 2026 Prediction Game

Page

Next Last

astha36

@astha36

Rocker

+ 3

Posted: 7 years ago

I don't know if there has already been a topic about this, feel free to point out or report. I haven't watched either Dhadak or Sairat, but the latter is in my wishlist. Recently, I found out that while both movies had an intercaste romance angle, Sairat had one of the two as a Dalit while Dhadak only has upper castes. Is there a reason for this? Is Karan Johar the reason for this? Too scared to show a Dalit love story? Or is it just prejudice? Because if it is a remake of Sairat, why would they change this particular detail?

Quote

Frequent Posters

astha36

@astha36

Rocker

+ 3

Posted: 7 years ago

Originally posted by: ilovecrepes
Late to the party

Oh 😃 I didn't see this topic anywhere. My bad.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

1138873

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

Waise bhi dono dalit hee to lag rahe hain movie main 😛

PS: No offense to dalits ...my gf in canada was a dalit too

Edited by ashleellaunda - 7 years ago

Quote

Male-Chauvinist-Pig

@Ur-Miserable

Stunner

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

Possibly because Kjo didn't wanted any negative promotions this time around.

Quote

astha36

@astha36

Rocker

+ 3

Posted: 7 years ago

Originally posted by: SrideviFan4ever
Like I discussed with someone here, if there's anyone who needs to be blamed for any change in the source material, for it it has to be the makers of Sairat themselves. They very well knew what they were getting into by selling the rights of the film to someone like Dharma who do not have the experience of making caste based films. Representation is necessary in Bollywood and makers should have a responsibility regarding it but for me, the makers of the original should be equally responsible about selling the rights to the right people who can do justice to the original instead of looking at monetary gains.
Though both the leads in Dhadak do not belong to upper castes, I think Kjo and the filmmaker are right in their framework to adapt the movie whichever way they want with all the rights officially in place.
People need to channelize their disappointment to the right person. Blaming Bollywood for diluting regional content will stop the day the makers of such regional content stop selling the rights to big production houses and act more responsibly.
Apart from many factors, Bollywood does not have the maturity to tackle such issues with sensitivity in mainstream cinema. And I'd rather watch a remake by a director who knows what he is doing than a remake by a director who is trying to remake a film while having no idea of the politics in the original thereby giving a botched up representation of caste.
It has to come organically instead of being forced. That's the reason why Sairat worked so well in the Maharahstra belt. The gaze of a Dalit director- relatable caste politics in Maharashtra. Zee could've easily made the film in Hindi with a Dalit director but they chose to sell it to someone else. The problem starts there. The blame starts there.

I don't agree at all with this. How can the makers of the original be blamed for selling the rights to someone? Just because Karan and others in BW do not have the right perspective or enough knowledge on the subject, that doesn't mean it becomes someone else's responsibility to not give them rights? That's like putting the blame on others for a criminal's actions saying that it's not his fault, the others should have been more careful. It's like saying it is the wife's fault for having married a philanderer when she gets cheated on. Even if that guy is a known philanderer, it is still not the wife's fault. In this case, yes, nobody in their right mind would say that Karan Johar would make a film with correct social sensitivity in place, but that doesn't mean Sairat makers, who have done an amazing job in their own movie, can be blamed for Karan's incompetence. Why is it okay for people like Karan to do anything for money and not okay for Sairat makers to make money on this?

And also, if we become content with whatever sub standard stuff we have, and don't hold people to standards, it isn't going to be better for the industry. No one is forcing them or trying to hinder their creativity. The decision to change this particular detail from the original seems political to me, and definitely not creative. So, we can question it and if they can't handle the kind of insight that's needed into the Indian society, then it is their fault for choosing to remake that movie. Better choose something fluffy and excel at it. But if they have chosen to remake a movie, they are answerable and will be compared with the original in every aspect.

Quote

576281

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

May be the director of Dhadak didn't want to make another Sairat? And I think he should be allowed at least that much freedom, no?

Quote

Zennia

@Zennia

Trailblazer

+ 7

Posted: 7 years ago

If KJo was specific about any caste or community, then those people would have taken it as insult and some or the other controversy would result.

Quote

Shaitaan Haiwan

@Shaitan-Haiwan

Stunner

+ 8

Posted: 7 years ago

Originally posted by: BubbleBath
If KJo was specific about any caste or community, then those people would have taken it as insult and some or the other controversy would result.

I read somewhere that after Padamavat and all the death threats they had to dilute the movie - Padamavat is based on the same region right ?

Quote

milton_friedman

@milton_friedman

Navigator

Posted: 7 years ago

no parshya was a koli(shudra) by caste ...it was a maratha -shudra lovestory

Quote

hedwig_fawkes

@hedwig_fawkes

Voyager

Posted: 7 years ago

#10

Originally posted by: cricketfan1
May be the director of Dhadak didn't want to make another Sairat? And I think he should be allowed at least that much freedom, no?

but that's like saying someone should have the freedom to remake Titanic without the shipo, or Les Mis without the French Revolution. I am sure Jack and Rose's love story can be told without the shipwreck, but the obvious next question becomes, why remake the Titanic at all?

Sairat was a subversion of the BW rich girl/poor boy saga. It had all the trappings of a grand BW love story ... but also that pesky cast issue that kept bring it back to reality. The whole of the second half was in a different tone altogether, to show the difference between fantasy and the truth. When you take away the caste angle, then Sairat basically becomes another rich girl/poor boy story. So then, why Sairat?

The last thing that bothers me about this is, the original director basically only made Sairat to tell this caste-based story that is obviously very personal to him. If you watch his interview with Anupama Chopra, he talks about how he had made his first film on the subject of caste, but no one had gone to see it (though it won a national award.) Which is why he set out to make a glossy film on the surface that would STILL talk about caste. In a way, forcing people to acknowledge that reality. then BW comes along and says. :we love your film and want to remake it, but we will only keep the pretty bits and not the central theme of the film which is the main reason you made Sairat in the first place", don't you think this is disrespectful to the director whose vision you are essentially taking credit for?

I get what SrideviFan4ever is saying to an extent, I think the Sairat makers should have put in a clause saying "caste angle needs to be addressed in Hindi remake" in their contract, but that doesn't absolve Shashank of responsibility. I think the FC discussion around this was good. I don't think it was any particular malice, it was just that shashank is just not a deep person. He is a superficial person with superficial problems and he views the world through a superficial lens. He probably did not even recognize the importance of caste to a film like Sairat.