Imtiaz Ali and the manic pixie dream girl - Page 6

Most rom com, Bollywood movies are like that nothing specific to imitiaz.

Originally posted by: S_H_Y

Most rom com, Bollywood movies are like that nothing specific to imitiaz.

Yeah but the manic pixie fan girl has become a trademark in his films. Showcasing how he believes everything should revolve around men, including women, and their main purpose in life. Perhaps he is worse than Vangha at taking criticism. Perhaps he just hides it better. Although I have never seen him get defensive or aggressive in interviews, he has been getting the criticism of the manic pixie dream girl for a long time now by prominent critics. He has never changed writing his stories completely from a male gaze. Even two days ago there was a Pinkvilla article stating he will continue making movies from his heart and not dispute or discuss with those who have minor criticism of him. I am not going to change the way I do anything. No one says his previous films were not good at achieving what he was trying to say. But there was a major issue that can be fixed. Again might be another symptom of the male ego that he does a good job of hiding.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

I disagree a tiny bit. Please forgive me for going on a tangent here lol. Yes, patriarchy is something from which we all suffer, but it is not the only oppressive superstructure. Caste, class, race, sexuality, gender, religion, disabilty— all decide our position within a system, say, patriarchy.

In India, Dalit feminism has differed from Sávarna feminism on so many issues and theories.

In the west, race and class are other important markers. Taylor Swift clearly has more privilege and power in society than a Black man due to his race. And that Black man might have more power and privilege over a Black woman in his community. It is then double marginalisation for the Black women due to both racism and misognoir.

There is no universal female experience and/or sisterhood. I mean, there have always been Názi women who also wanted marginalised folks dead in every iteration of that ideology despite being treated as nothing more than a child-producing machine by that system themselves.

So yeah, I feel a bit iffy about universal womanhood wale notions tbh. That said, I DO AGREE, Ved's story on anyone other than a rich, cishet guy would have been so CATHARTIC, good lord.

Deepika would have ate that role, too, with her own struggles with depression in mind.

I never said patriarchy is the only oppressive superstucture. I have been screaming off the top of my lungs for America and Israel to stop the oppression of the Palestinian people. It goes along with the oppression the west has been doing in the middle east for sometime now. All the issues you mentioned I can write in blood I have spoken about at sometime or another.

I have been speaking for ages about income inequality in America for a while now. Despite the fact that my family is far more privileged then most people in America. I have spoken for ages about how prisons in America have exploded with people of color due to racism. And more colored men have probably been the victim of that then women. Do you want me to cut and paste my post from social media platform to prove it too you? I have even worked in organization that help break the school to prison pipleine that has lead to America having more people in jail than China. I have worked for organziations to help the homeless population.

But this specific post catered patriarchy so I have been laser focused on that. In that perspective women face a lot more challenges then men. I am not sure how people got the idea that I would think patriarchy is the only opressive superstructure in the world. Very confused.

Originally posted by: Grumpydwarf24

I never said patriarchy is the only oppressive superstucture. I have been screaming off the top of my lungs for America and Israel to stop the oppression of the Palestinian people. It goes along with the oppression the west has been doing in the middle east for sometime now. All the issues you mentioned I can write in blood I have spoken about at sometime or another.

I have been speaking for ages about income inequality in America for a while now. Despite the fact that my family is far more privileged then most people in America. I have spoken for ages about how prisons in America have exploded with people of color due to racism. And more colored men have probably been the victim of that then women. Do you want me to cut and paste my post from social media platform to prove it too you? I have even worked in organization that help break the school to prison pipleine that has lead to America having more people in jail than China. I have worked for organziations to help the homeless population.

But this specific post catered patriarchy so I have been laser focused on that. In that perspective women face a lot more challenges then men. I am not sure how people got the idea that I would think patriarchy is the only opressive superstructure in the world. Very confused.

Oh I am not contesting you at all. I very much agree with you on all those topics. I just meant that not all "female" representations are universal I think. I don't think that Nita Ambani necessarily has it "harder" than, say, a Dalit man in India. Neither would a biopic on her necessarily mean anything in terms of representing me, my struggles, or my mariginalisation as a woman who is not privileged in so many ways. I was asking for more interesectional representation of women than the binary of "male-centric"/"female-centric."

I wasn't being confrontational at all. Just adding caveats or rather my inputs to your points.

Originally posted by: Blueeeee

Oh I am not contesting you at all. I very much agree with you on all those topics. I just meant that not all "female" representations are universal I think. I don't think that Nita Ambani necessarily has it "harder" than, say, a Dalit man in India. Neither would a biopic on her necessarily mean anything in terms of representing me, my struggles, or my mariginalisation as a woman who is not privileged in so many ways. I was asking for more interesectional representation of women than the binary of "male-centric"/"female-centric."

I wasn't being confrontational at all. Just adding caveats or rather my inputs to your points.

Again I just feel as a whole Imtiaz is not interested in understanding women and enjoys telling stories through the male lense. He gets so lost in the male character that the female character also revolves around him. His male leads are also privileged in many ways. For example, Aditya def was. A rich business men like Aditya is far more privileged than dalit man like Chamkila. But I am sure Imtiaz would be able to understand both characters a lot more than a woman's.

As for women who come from affluent families. Then Neetu Kapoor also married into a legendary and rich family. That does not mean she was never the victim of patriarchy. It was a known fact that Rishi Kapoor was an alcoholic and would abuse her physically. It was also a known fact that he had multiple affairs with actresses while he was married to her. Then again many affluent women have been victims of sexual assault. I do feel women to some extent in every situation experience an element of patriarchy. IMO!

The manic pixie dream girl is a result of male gaze. Many critics have pointed out that they mostly come up in male-written stories as they mostly exist in male fantasies of believing that everything, including women, should revolve around them. That is misogyny without taking any other forum of oppression or wrong into account. It is what I feel needs to change.

The whole post feels like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Geet is a traditional 'manic pixie dream girl' that Imtiaz flips in the second half by forcing her to deal with the realities around her.

Tamasha is basically a flip on the JWM concept, with Ved initially presented as the manic pixie dream guy in the first half, and then in the second half, Imtiaz again inverts the character type. In what world does Tara even remotely fit the archetype. Ved is the one who opens her world up in Corsica, and then she is trying to find him in Delhi, because she is chasing the high. Only to meet a Ved who is just a boring normal bloke, and not quite the guy she met in Corsica.

Neither hero or the heroine is particulalry manic pixie dream girl in JHMS or Rockstar. And JHMS if anything is an equal footing play.

His female characters are one note sattelites, sure, but so are his male characters. The male characters are largely the focus, because they are self-inserts for Imtiaz. That's true for any artist that largely gets inspiration from their personal life.

Originally posted by: MostlyHarmIess

The whole post feels like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. Geet is a traditional 'manic pixie dream girl' that Imtiaz flips in the second half by forcing her to deal with the realities around her.

Tamasha is basically a flip on the JWM concept, with Ved initially presented as the manic pixie dream guy in the first half, and then in the second half, Imtiaz again inverts the character type. In what world does Tara even remotely fit the archetype. Ved is the one who opens her world up in Corsica, and then she is trying to find him in Delhi, because she is chasing the high. Only to meet a Ved who is just a boring normal bloke,

Bubbliness is not required to be a manic pixie dream girl the article just states that is how most people in Bollywood portray them. Thus it has become a hallmark of a manic pixie dream girl in bollywood.

The main purpose of a manic pixie dream girl is to come into the story and help the man grow in some way. I left out JWM precisely for the reason that the situation reversed in the second half.

Tara came into Ved's life solely to help him be his creative self and not what society expects of him to be in a corporate 9-5? Do we get any incite into who Tara is beside her desire to fix Ved?

Nargis in Rockstar came into Ranbir's life so he could experience heartbreak and become more passionate about his music career.

Similarly, Sejal helped Harry find his emotional core and stop being a womanizer.

Even in Chamkila, Amarjot is mostly there because Chamkila can not proceed with his passion of music without her.

There are no way his men are one note. The entire story mostly revolved around them. Rockstar is about Jordan's evolution as a musician. Tamasha is about Ved's journey to rediscover his creative side.

I think you are trying to take my view and fit a square peg in a round hole. Many feel this way about Imtiaz Ali films. It is not just me.

You just need to google it and you find out how many female critics have made this criticism about him for years now. Were they all trying to fit a square peg in a round hole?

https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2021/10/the-manic-pixie-dream-girl-of-bollywood/

Exactly. Imtiaz Ali just tweaks and technicalize Yashraj and Karan Johar's fantasy filmy love stories. The only Imtiaz Ali film that holds some significance and uniqueness from typical Bollywood stories is Highway. Have u seen it?