Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray's pronouncement not to let Shah Rukh Khan's starrer My Name Is Khan be screened in Mumbai created much sensation around the world and publicity for the film -- the publicity that it could not have bought at any cost. Actually, Bal Thackeray's action had nothing to do with the film itself - it was all about Shah Rukh's saying that Pakistan is "great neighbor" whatever Shah Rukh's definiotn of a "great neighbor" is. But anyway, film's name My Name is Khan and its oft publicized credo "My name is Khan and I am not a terrorist" in itself is quite provocative.
The film though made in India is set in the USA and deals in the aftermath of September 11, 2001 attacks on the twin towers and the pentagon. What was the purpose of making the film and declaring basically that even though I am a Muslim but I am not terrorist? As soon as the attacks happened American administration went out of its way to insist and make a point that Islam has nothing to do with the acts of terrorism and Muslims are patriotic citizens of the country. So what was the point to go and tell the President of the United States seven years after the act even though I am a Muslim, I am not a terrorist - the President has been telling the world that from day one. He need not be told what he has been proclaiming from day one. If anyone that needed to be told the massage were the perpetrators of the crime who carried out the act in the name of Islam.
Now then what was the film all about?
It seems the sole purpose the film was made was a propaganda for Islam. But anything that is carried too far loses its appeal and that is exactly what the film succeeded in achieving. Every film, every story has to have some exaggeration to make a point - that is normal. But when carried to beyond imagination and all limits, it turns people off. The film may find appreciative audience in the Muslim Middleast and other Islamic countries - and blind admirers of Shah Rukh which are aplenty -- but it will turn off a neutral person. It is difficult to imagine how Shah Rukh would have handled the character of an autistic person had Dustin Hoffman not done the role in The Rain Man - if the face of Shah Rukh is covered one would not know whether it is him or Dustin. The story is weak.
Shah Rukh by doing the role has done a big disfavor to his image of being a representative of the secular film industry of India. He is now just an Islamic propagandist.
| 
(0 vote)