The conspiracy raging against 'Slumdog Millionaire'

Final ballots for the 81st Academy Awards should land in Oscar voters mailboxes beginning today, so it's only natural that the final shots should be fired as well.

Most of the damning allegations are being hurled against Fox Searchlight's "Slumdog Millionaire," rather obvious since the film is the unquestioned front-runner and an easy target for rivals.

As noted earlier in this column, forces were at work in India trying to disparage Danny Boyle's surprise hit and awards magnet leading to a front page L.A. Times story last Saturday pointing out some of the negative criticism essentially saying the film is a "white man's" vision of a slum-ridden India.

Today, a story kicking around since early in the season about the treatment of some of the local Indian child actors reared its ugly head again with allegations that the film's producers and distributors paid them dirt cheap wages and have not been concerned with their welfare.

Director Boyle, producer Christian Colson and Fox quickly prepared and issued a statement not only refuting those charges but pointing out exactly what measures have been taken to protect and insure each child's welfare and future.

It wasn't so much the story (it almost never is) but the suspicious circumstances around its reemergence on the very day Oscar ballots were being mailed. Impressively taking a cue from the Obama campaign, Fox Searchlight strategists immediately got control of the story putting a statement out that carefully answered each allegation. Rather than ignoring it and hoping it would go away (a favorite, but usually failed public relations strategy by wuss publicists), they took an aggressive stance to crush the story in its tracks before it could do serious damage or be misinterpreted by Academy voters.

This kind of thing has been going on in modern Oscar campaigns now for years, particularly since the Denzel Washington boxing picture "The Hurricane" got pummeled for accuracy and was swept out of the race before it began. The most famous example was the case against Ron Howard's "A Beautiful Mind." The case turned into a front page New York Times story. Having been burned with "Hurricane," Universal wasted no time in taking on the mud slinging against "Beautiful Mind" and eventually wound up winning four Oscars including best picture.

I spoke to a senior Fox executive who said he found these tactics appearing against "Slumdog" to be "reprehensible." He added that "it's a sad state of affairs for the industry that the race for Oscar has to come down to this level".

The exec does not believe this story was just a coincidence of timing and theorized that there were probably "other factors" that had something to do with fanning the flames against "Slumdog" at a critical time in the Academy process. He offered no concrete proof, however, of his conspiracy theories  because  there does not seem to be an iota of evidence to that end but did name names anyway (ones we won't repeat here).

The Searchlight contingent isn't letting the pressure get to them and were even thrown a celebratory party by Fox Co-Chairman Jim Gianopulos Wednesday evening.

Meanwhile, others are busy offering new theories as to how front-runner "Slumdog" can't possibly win in the end. At least two different consultants this week have tried to downplay the effect of the various guild awards this year ("Slumdog" has already won Producers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild awards with Directors Guild of America lurking in the wings on Saturday) saying the memberships of the guilds no longer dovetail with the Academy and therefore can't be relied on to accurately foretell the ultimate Oscar victor (unless of course YOUR movie is the one that is WINNING!!!).

"Watch 'Button' overtake 'Slumdog' for the big prize. Because it's the kind of film career movie people would prefer seeing as best pic during their watch," one publicist with a definite dog in the hunt predicted. I've heard similar things from "The Reader" and "Frost Nixon" camps as well, so take it with a grain of salt and a glass of "Milk." The publicist DID add a reminder of his vote-telling prowess as he waxed nostalgic for his prediction earlier this month that "The Dark Knight" wouldn't make the mix.

He was right on that but can "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" make a real case now as a potential upset winner over "Slumdog"? The case of "Crash" doing the impossible and overtaking "Brokeback Mountain" is the great hope other film camps point to the most but it's frustrating in the least to see one movie repeatedly win. The Boyle flick has so far prevailed at the National Board Of Review, Critics Choice, Golden Globes, SAG and PGA awards. Just DGA, Writers Guild of America and the British Academy of Film and Television Arts awards still offer head-to-head contests to come. Could a momentum changer be in store offering a final twist to a topsy turvy season?

Indeed "Slumdog" is now in the enviable position of having the wind at its back. And just WHO wants to be a "Millionaire"? The other four contenders of course, all looking for any way to ward off what increasingly seems to be a done deal.

Let the voting begin now. Ballots are due back on Feb. 17.

-- Pete Hammond

(Photo courtesy Fox Searchlight)

Comments

[filmboymichael]

I'm sure Harvey Weinstein was one of those names....gluttonous thing that he is.

[child]

I THINK ITS ABOUT DAMN TIME THAT ACADEMY MAKE A FUCKING CHOICE(right that is)!!!
SLUMDOG Is THE BEST PIC
OF 21 CENTURY PERIOD

[alex]

But even with all of its connect-the-dot contrivances, Slumdog didn’t play out like much Oscar fare; it never eyed the little gold man from the outset, it had no big-money backing, no Hollywood talent. And in that way, the film itself has managed to espouse the very underdog spirit of its script. But still. Some of you continue to think that Slumdog isn’t serious enough (boring enough?) to earn its nominations. Go watch Frost/Nixon then—I hear that one’s quite swell.

[alex]

But even with all of its connect-the-dot contrivances, Slumdog didn’t play out like much Oscar fare; it never eyed the little gold man from the outset, it had no big-money backing, no Hollywood talent. And in that way, the film itself has managed to espouse the very underdog spirit of its script. But still. Some of you continue to think that Slumdog isn’t serious enough (boring enough?) to earn its nominations. Go watch Frost/Nixon then—I hear that one’s quite swell.

[lou lumenick]

The correct term for what's happening here is smear campaign.

[Jemima]

I hope Slumdog whips every other film at the cart's tail. The film-makers created this film with the best intentions and it deserves every plaudit it's earned. It's about time a true underdog won the golden statuette!

[Adiran Kimberly]

So why is everyone so carefully avoiding mentioning the OBVIOUS "Best Movie" choice that is "MILK"?

[Tom]

This is all SO predictable. If 'The Reader' wins best picture then I will have lost ALL faith (what faith I have left after some of the recent poor Academy choices) in the system. I have seen all 5 Best Pic films and Slumdog and Milk are the only two worthy of the award. Frost/Nixon is solid but boring, Ben Button is interesting but too long, The Reader is obviously Oscar bait with a menacing marketing machine behind it - although Kate Winslet is excellent and due for recognition finally. All fingers crossed for Slumdog Millionaire!

[antonwilliams]

Wonder if anyone from Slumdog will receive residuals once the movie is released on DVD? Also one does have to remember that Slumdog once was headed straight to DVD. Does one think that those executives who dumped the movie or were recommending the movie to go straight to DVD will vote for Slumdog to be best picture? I highly doubt that and I think on that reasoning, Slumdog probably will not receive "Best Picture".

[David Fitzgerald]

Whadda mean backlash? Like the backlash over "Brokeback Mountain," a film that won all of the pre-Oscar awards. Where Academy members openly stated they refused to vote for the gay cowboy movie? Compare the tapes of the "Oprah" show right during voting where she pushed to have "Crash" win. It is her right to pick whatever movie she wants. Just like she gushed over SDM on her Oscar show this year. Look back when Roger Ebert also wrote webblogs and articles on why "Crash" should win over "Brokeback Mountain." Whadda you mean backlash this year? Is it backlash for industry insiders to comment that a formalistic movie that has a big cheesy dance number over the credits at the end doesn't hold up? [At least Mamma Mia had the dance numbers there for a reason] No one could have predicted that our Indian hero was going to recover from a night of police beating to win the game show or get the girl, right? I'm hoping for a well timed streaker to keep this year's show interesting.

[Bombay Talkies]

Yeah, what's with the LA Times anyway? So MUCH negative Slumdog coverage in the LAT. Stop it already. Slumdog is a Great Film, a sweet-hearted film, and an important film.

I live in india and work in Bollywood and my take is the Indian reaction is not negative, it is mixed, but mostly highly positive.

Some dissent is to be expected when an outsider directs a movie about your country, expecially in India, a country with some 20 official languages and thousands of dialects, four major religions, and 1.06 BILLION people, especially at this point in its rapid development.

This, in fact, is one of the reasons Slumdog is a great movie, and should win the Oscars. It is the story of India itself, using the Indian film conventions, lightly translated to reach a broad international audience.

The plot is not implausible as many critics have claimed. On a macro level it is the story of India. On a micro level, there are many such stories in India, including that of a poor rickshaw driver who won a million rupees on another knowledge-based game show. Slumdog gets this is exactly right: Indian slums teem with unschooled geniuses, often speaking three or four languages.

It has also sparked a much-needed debate in india and elsewhere on the people still left behind by the economic miracle. People are more sensitive to the poor and more determined to do something, starting with education to liberate some of those slum geniuses.

It has drawn world attention to India's economic and cultural strength as well as its poverty. India is the second most important democracy in the world. Yet a lot of people never get to hear about it in any meaningful way.

Slumdog Millionaire does all this and more, plus beautiful music by AR Rahman and MIA. It deserves the Oscars, with Milk a close second.

[Virginia]

Dear Bombay Talkies, lovely post, so glad to see a balanced comment from India. I'm an American fan of Hindi films and, now, of Danny Boyle, who "gets" Bombay and Bollywood in such an authentic and loving way. -- Virginia

[Ronny]

I've seen all 5 movies and felt happiest after watching slumdog. this seems like a crappy campaign by either the benjamin button camp or the milk camp to defame slumdog and it's director.

[Teon]

I'm happy to see that I'm not the only one who thinks that there's something fishy about this? The final ballots get mailed out today and all of a sudden this come out of nowhere. Granted, this kind of thing (tossing around bs assumptions, accusations and disparaging remarks) has been going on in modern Oscar campaigns now for years, come one. This feels like it has "Harvey Weinstein" written all over it. There are times when campaigning for Best Picture can be equal to OR worse than a Presidential campaign. The Oscars are supposed to be all about rewarding "The Best" when the fact of the matter is it has been a popularity contest for the past few years. I think this might have been something started by Harvey. Scott Rudin may be a shmuck with an inclination towards throwing objects but at least he doesn't bully people the way that Harvey does. Till this day many people agree that he purchased the Oscar for 'Shakespeare In Love' because let's face it, that film, was not better than 'Saving Private Ryan'

[brisdeservice]

Look, if an OK but truly average film like the very contrived and extremely preachy Crash, without even getting a nomination for BP at the Golden Globes, was able to come out of nowhere at the last minute and topple an exceptional masterpiece such as Ang Lee’s Brokeback Mountain which had virtually won every Best Picture award prior to the Oscars, anything can happen on Oscar night. When it comes to the Academy Awards, we now have the proof that the "campaign" can be as important, if not more, than the films themselves, one reason being that numerous voters do not even see the films they vote for. At AMPAS, insider politics rule. The Oscars are therefore pretty much irrelevant. If an alternate film eventually wins the top prize next month, should anyone be surprised anymore? In any case, it won't change the fact that Slumdog Millionaire will remain the most decorated and acclaimed film of the year just like Brokeback Mountain incontestably was three years ago. The Academy voters and the people behind Crash know this.

[B.Bear]

A smear campaign is exactly what this is.
A British funded film on a minuscule £10M budget with no stars,part subtitled is wiping the floor with the massive salaries and egos of Hollywood.
Stand proud Danny Boyle, Loveleen Tandan and crew, you've made a masterpiece and some less creative people are jealous...Stunning film !
I wish you well at the Baftas and Oscars.

[Ramesh]

The movie succeeds only because it shows India and Indians in poor light. It is a feel-good movie - but only for Americans. They feel good seeing that India is in such a pitiable state. There are lots of Indian movies much better than this one, including Namesake and Bend it like Beckham and quite a few hindi movies. But Americans want to close their eyes and see only the dirt of India. If this movie was made by and Indian or if this did not show and Indian poverty and exaggerated Indian cruelty, this movie would be in the dust bin, just as it was supposed to be

[Willa]

The original story about the kids being "exploited" appeared in The Telegraph, which is the main rival of The Times, which is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns.....oh riiiiiiiiiiiiight - Fox Studios. What a coincidence.

[Sambit from India]

Scenes of poverty and squalour may appear romantic to Westerners and to our snooty elite but for us ordinary Indians they are nothing new. They are an everyday reality. However, one wonders what sort of mind can find such images aesthetically pleasing. Party-hopping socialites (for example, Shobhaa De after all her bombast of "enough is enough" after the Mumbai attack, went and watched a pirated copy!) who are distanced from such reality may find this film an "eye-opener" but for us it IS just poverty-porn. It IS just slum-tourism. Leaving that aside, I have eight other objections to the film.

1) The director seems to RELISH showing violence. Some of it (like the police-torture) is quite needless. And why was the boy arrested in the first place? On what charge? Was it realistic?

2) How can a boy growing up in slums speak such accented English? Even if one assumes that the language he actually uses to communicate with the game-show host and the police officer is Hindi (granting the director the creative license to use a language better suited for international audiences), there are 2 instances where it is stretched too far: (a) when the boy becomes a ‘guide’ for foreign tourists at the Taj Mahal & (b) when he becomes a substitute-operator at the call-centre.

3) When the boy uses his ‘lifeline’ during the game-show, his friend discovers that she has forgotten her mobile and has to run back for it. This is plain Bollywood masala! Did the director HAVE to make it so melodramatic?

4) How did the boy know who invented the revolver just by watching his brother use it?

How does his friend know about Benjamin Franklin?

5) “Darshan Do Ghanshyam” is NOT written by Surdas. It is written by Gopal Singh Nepali for the movie Narsi Bhagat (1957). This song is also credited as traditional and originally written by 15th century poet Narsi Mehta, whose life that film is based on.

6) After winning the game-show, the boy sits on the railway platform and nobody recognizes him! Considering the popularity of the show, is that realistic?

7) Two glaring omissions: To get invited to the show one has to answer several GK questions over phone or Internet. Even after making it to the show, a contestant can reach the hot-seat, only after qualifying through “fastest finger first”. All this is conveniently forgotten in the film.

8) And of course the greatest flaw in the storyline: programmes like 'Kaun Banega Crorepati' and 'Who Wants To Be A Millionaire' are NOT telecast live. As a result the entire structure of the film becomes unrealistic. For a film that boasts of being realistic such a flaw cannot be overlooked.

Anyone else wants to say this is a g-r-e-a-t film despite all these flaws?

[Brad]

It's very simple, one word: Milk.

[kpk]

Yesterday I watched this movie. The controversies have no place as the intention of the makers of this movie or its director seems to be pure artistic and professional. When compared to movies made in India , this movie seems to be different. The percentage of people who can enjoy or see a film with a critic's eye is far far less compared to western audiance. This is the reason why good films fails in Indian Box Office. There are many Hollywood movies with big budget, but we have to judge a film on the basis of how a story is told and directed. The controversy that this film is a deliberate attempt to show poverty of a certain country seems to be absurd. We have to get attracted to a film as a form of art and appreciate the artists worked to create this wonderful movie. The talents india cannot be blaimed , they do not have the will power of creating good movies because they do not have a good audience for well directed cinema. There are wonderful cinemas directed in India with low budgets from directors like Adoor Gopalakrishnan but fails to reach limited audience. This is why films like 'Slumdog Millionnaire' is not capturing in India.

[Socalist Jew]

They DID pay them dirt cheap wages, that's what's so obscene about this story. This movie has made $75 million already. It is RIDICULOUS that two of the stars of the picture - children no less - should have to live in poverty while the producers will no doubt live in luxury. They just can't understand why these kids don't say oh gee thank you great British savior for profiting on my childhood NOW but making me and my family wait a decade to collect my (unspecified) lump sum!

[alex]

Shut up you people ........this is all a lie.......... i just a video of the kids parents they said the story is false ...go google it.........Looks like when you’re the favorite for a Best Picture Oscar, the hollywood press goes for your knees, which doesn’t really surprise me at all.

[Manny]

This movie is customized to fit in white man's perspective of anything non-white..

The lead Ram Mohammed Thomas in vikas swarup's novel was changed to Jamal for westerner's view brown skin = muslim = jamal

India = slum poverty and best they have got is call center.

In these bad economic times people leave happy with "Thank god I don't live in that screwed up country with horrible Indian men"

Enjoy your world view

[Bombay Talkies]

IIRC, Mira Nair also set up trust funds for the kids in Salaam Bombay. This is because there have been many reports of children used in movies or TV shows from the slums whose parents spend all the money while the kids get nothing. A little girl like this was on a popular TV show for a long time. Now she is grown up and broke and says she wishes the show had paid for her schooling unstead of giving the money to her alcoholic father.

The kids were paid more than prevailaing wage for their work in addition to getting a trust fund. The idea behind these trust funds is that it will encourage kids to stay in school, whereas having the money now might discourage that. Given that SM is such a big hit though, the children should get more for the present as well trust funds for their future, and it sounds like Fox Searchlight is doing just that.