What I didn't like about Dear Zindagi

It started with Queen, the story of a new age girl who goes on a journey of self-discovery and eventually realizes that there is more to life than what she had always thought of. Then it was followed by a number of other films concentrated on central female character and her abilities as an individual. Probably for the first time Indian Cinema is being brave enough to pick up the subject of Women Liberalization and Individuality. It is a good sign. But in an attempt to cash in on this popular thought wave, the latest addition to the series of films doesn’t seem to be striking that deep a chord. Yes, I am mentioning about Dear Zindagi. The movie has been praised and appreciated by one and all. Its motivational dialogues are doing meme rounds all over the social media and people are feeling a happy and positive sentiment about the film. All of this is fine, I don’t have any problem what so ever with the kind of attention the film is getting. My concern is a bit different and a bit counter intuitively sensitive.

It happens quite often that explicit glorification of an aspect results in implicit marginalization of another aspect. This new found and overtly celebrated women singularity is somehow coming across as discriminatory against men. I know it’s a difficult proposition. Even in today’s world, it is called and observed as a men’s world and only a minority population of women enjoy the real freedom. Those ways men shouldn’t be at the complaining end. Well, I am not complaining. I am just iterating the observation I have made which I believe is not healthy and should be taken care of more seriously.    

The film revolves around a confused young girl whose past haunts her in such a way that she fears commitment and therefore becomes indecisive about her choice in love. It is understandable. We all go through that kind of phase in our lives, although not necessary all our pasts are scarred. People could be confused and aimless despite there being no past incident influencing their sub conscious. But I guess it becomes essential in films to relate any eccentric behaviour of the protagonist with their past to make the story telling a bit less complex and less time consuming, Alia’s character in Highway, Ranbeer’s character in Tamasha are a few evidences of what I am trying to say here. 

So, sliding through the haunting past cliché, the story moves on to another cliché i.e. the introduction of a messiah figure, a psychiatrist played by Shahrukh. Again, the logic behind this cliché could be that story telling becomes simpler and in case of this film, it made the way for a superstar to pitch in, opening up marketing and revenue generation avenues for the otherwise low key film. Queen had scored big on this front as Kangna’s character managed to overcome her pseudo limitations by herself without the intervention of any guiding force.

Now let’s take a look at the so called life altering philosophies rendered as simple dialogues by Shahrukh’s character in the film.

“Albert Einstein Ne kaha tha: Pagal wo hota hai jo roz roz same kaam karta hai aur chahta hai ki nateeja alag ho”

Can’t be credited to the film if it was indeed said by Albert Einstein.

“Rona, Gussa, Nafrat
Kuch bhi khulkar express nahi karne diya
Ab pyaar kaise express karein?”

Sounded good and convincing when delivered by Shahrukh, however I could see glimpses of inspiration picked from movies like Taare Zameen Par.

“Don’t let the past blackmail your present to ruin a beautiful future”

Heard number of times before, however the idea portrayed is quite apt and relevant, but isn’t this something everyone already knows?

“Hum hamesha mushkil rasta kyu chunte hain zaruri kaam ke liye, kya pata asan raste se bhi kaam ho jaye?”

You see films like Lakshya and this philosophy is represented as just the opposite i.e. ‘Kab tak asan rasta chunte rahoge, kabhi to mushkilo ka samna karo’.

Moreover, the choice always doesn’t boils down to us, more often it’s the circumstances which puts us in making the choice. Barring people with affluent backgrounds, the majority of middle class makes choices out of compulsion. I personally believe in the philosophy of having the smart and simple way out, but the philosophy itself is quite debatable. It certainly is not a blanket solution for everyone.

“We are all our teachers in the school of life”

Yes, true, and so is our society, our surroundings and a number of other factors. Again, this is something everyone knows already and not worthy of being preached.

“Agar hum apni zindagi ka steering wheel apne haath me nahi lenge na, to koi dusra driver seat par baith jayega”

I couldn’t be sure of what does this even mean. Does this mean that we must take control of our lives as to make our own decisions, carve our own careers, and live our own lives? If that is the case then Shahrukh’s character should have refused to take control of Alia’s character’s life when she was in desperate need of help. Someone might argue that Shahrukh’s character did what he did only to help Alia’s character come to the realization of his grand philosophies and he was not actually sitting in driver’s seat, but during that duration of her treatment, Alia’s character actually behaved as Shahrukh’s character asked her to and the process might have left a lifelong impact on Alia’s character as to change her behavior forever. If this doesn’t accounts for letting someone else drive your life then what does?

“Safe feel karne ke liye pehle saare darr mitana zaruri hai”

It is quite contextual. To get rid of fear might not be the best idea always. It is the inherent fear which drives survival in most of the animal species and having evolved from our primitive selves, even humans cannot be devoid of fear because it is necessary for our survival.

“Jab hum apne aap ko achhi tarah samajh lete hain, to dusre kya samajhte hain, it doesn’t matter, not at all”

It might be true for enlightened souls like Gautam Buddha, but a practical and social human being cannot live in isolation. It actually matters what others think about us. People take efforts to enhance their image in front of others, especially those who matter, like our bosses who might appraise us based on what they think about us, like the father of the girl/ boy we love who might decide whether to allow the relation based on what they think about us and like a number of other people.

“Zindagi me jab koi pattern banta ya koi aadat banti dikhai de na, to uske baare me achhi tarah se sochna chahiye, genius is about knowing when to stop”

Even if the habit under consideration is for good? At one hand the person is preaching ‘Take the easy route’ and at other hand contradicting it by preaching that don’t get addicted to patterns. For Alia’s character it was easy route to always remain in touch with Shahrukh’s character and seek guidance whenever required, but it was told to her that this pattern needs to be broken down now, implying that whether you like it or not, now you have to take the difficult route of dealing with your situations on your own. This looked fancy and inspirational in the aura of the theatre, but actually this doesn’t make any sense. 

And now we finally come to the phrase which I found most disturbing and uncalled for:

“Jab kursi khareedne me itna choice hai to fir Jeevan saathi me kyun nahi”…..or something of this sort where an analogy was drawn between chairs and potential partners. Now in a film which claims to be the thoughtful and sensible cinema and has been perceived likely by most of the audience, an analogy of this sort doesn’t fits. More than being disgusting, it is inappropriate. You see, chairs are objects, and comparing those with guys is a way of objectifying the guys. Now if a similar analogy had been drawn comparing women to some object, it would have been thrashed and put down by almost everyone, but a derogatory objectification of men doesn’t rings any alarm, doesn’t raises any eyebrows. A person can buy and use as many chairs as she wants simultaneously without violating any moral obligations, but having multiple partners simultaneously is counted as infidelity. Now infidelity might not be a crime per se, but is it something we should inculcate in our uber cool life styles?

Moreover a chair could be bought for a friend, relative, neighbor and anyone else, but same could not be the case with guys. Yeah, I know, I am taking the analogy way too seriously and literally. The context in which it was used was probably not the same, but my point is that if there is a movie which is based on life altering philosophies and is worthy of people’s attention and appreciation then shouldn’t the creators be wary enough to handle each and every aspect, including the subtle analogies, in a more sensitive manner?

The idea was simple and noble, but somehow I could not relate to the execution. I can appreciate the intent behind the movie but not the sloppy dialogues which are spreading across as some commandments on the social media. I am a person of simple needs, for me, films like Anand and Bawarchi still outweighs Dear Zindagi.