Excellent but underrated film

Absolutely Fantastic

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

'New Indian cinema' contains a broad spectrum of various genres, directors and other classifications of films. It is in essence the collection of all those who oppose the dominant film code of Bollywood in alternating ways (Verma, 2011). One of the most interesting films is Ritesh Batra's The Lunchbox (2013), as it feels more like a European art house film set in Mumbai than a traditional Indian film.To accurately denote how The Lunchbox differs from the dominant Bollywood code a clear definition of the latter is needed. Ganti has postulated that the English-speaking world created the term 'Bollywood' in the '70s, when the biggest Indian productions generated international interest for the first time. The coagulation of 'Bombay' and 'Hollywood' was a reference to the influence of Bombay film productions on the Indian cinema culture as they are shown nationally and internationally. A more recent interpretation of the term refers to the Bombay cinema as the only non-Hollywood film industry that is globally dominant and present. However, the actual use of the term indicates a specific film style instead of a particular film industry; there are 'Bollywood' films that are not made in Bombay (2004). The primary aspect of the archetypical 'Bollywood' production is the melodrama, both in content -the masala mix of many genres, and aesthetically -in the staging, colour use and acting (Mishra, 2002; Mooij, 2006). An important point in the comparison to North-American film history is the continued dominance of the 'Bollywood aesthetic'. Whereas Hollywood experienced a crisis in the '60s, which led to a change in film style due to the rise of new Hollywood and the end of the production code, major 'Bollywood' productions have largely remained unchanged in their aesthetic since the advent of widescreen in the '50s. Lutgendorf has noted that this cinematic aesthetic was already present in the foundation of 'Bollywood', namely the pre-modern Indian storytellers that "were already fond of flashbacks, lyrical interludes, surreal landscapes, and vast and crowded Cinemascopic tableaux; their language was visually intense, almost hallucinatory: screenplays awaiting the screen." (2006, p. 250)The most important aspect of the 'Bollywood aesthetic' for this essay is the rejection of the realistic portrayal that is dominant in Western film culture. This preference for the constructed, the supernatural was, as mentioned above, present in oral tradition long before the advent of cinema. To break with this aesthetic is thusly moving away from not only the dominant film style but also Indian storytelling in general. This is why The Lunchbox appears to the spectator as a non-Indian film, because it conveys a story in a way that mirrors the Western narrative film tradition through its realism. Firstly, Batra utilises no non-diegetic music or song and no voice-over. His film contains two songs in a repeated scene, he shows the lunchbox carriers singing on the train both times. This results in an accurate representation of Mumbai with diegetic music. The Lunchbox only hints at the 'Bollywood' dance scene when two characters are discussing an old hit song that originated from a 'Bollywood' film. In summary, the film acknowledges the dominant film style, but rejects the constructed nature of independent or integrated dance scenes in its goal for realism.Furthermore, Batra employs a -in contrast to the vibrant style of 'Bollywood', dull colour pallet, giving Mumbai/Bombay a gritty and bleak outlook, akin to the character of a modernised urban environment. The Lunchbox has many dark scenes, in contrast to many 'Bollywood' productions that are always well lit. This darker aesthetic is also translated into the content, as the film deals with topics such as loneliness, infidelity, addiction and estrangement. Batra wants to portray the whole picture of Indian society, not just the good and beautiful parts as is done in most of the 'Bollywood' productions. Above all he wants to explore the social conditions through individual characters, in other words not a general realistic aesthetic but a specific form created by Michelangelo Antonioni, i.e. introspective realism. The adaptation of this style is further exemplified in the many shots where the protagonist is the only object in focus, symbolising their estrangement, a schemata Antonioni perfected in Il Deserto Rosso (1964) (Cook, 2004). In addition, The Lunchbox displays many scenes in the style of the slow cinema where the film time and the real time are equal. The most striking examples are the scenes that present the protagonist consuming the daily lunchboxes, all in long takes. Cook notes in his book from 2004 that this stylistic technique also originated from the work of Michelangelo Antonioni, who introduced it in L'Avventura (1960).Conversely, the only filmic aspect Batra retains from the 'Bollywood' aesthetic is the cinematic aspect ratio of 2.35:1 (the standardised CinemaScope format). This indicates that he still envisioned The Lunchbox to be shown in theatres and cinemas rather than on television. Batra does not eschew the economical aspect of the Indian film tradition; he does not aim for the same audiences as 'Bollywood', but still strives to reach niche crowds in smaller venues and multiplexes. Overall, Batra has rejected the dominant 'Bollywood' tradition not out of a reactionary action. He wanted to realistically portray the social problems that arise in a modernised urban environment. The 'Bollywood' aesthetic, with its melodramatic staging, masala story structure, colourful pallet and energetic dance sequences, is not suited to convey stories about estrangement and isolation. The Lunchbox adapts from Michelangelo Antonioni, a filmmaker that also dealt with the topic of modernisation and how it impacted those who experienced it. Subsequently, given the motivation behind Batra's appropriation of Western film tradition, it is unfair to devalue his film as a languid way to appease international audiences, as was the case in Sarina Masukor's review of the film (2015). The Lunchbox handles its external film language for the purpose of reflecting on and criticising the Indian society and culture that has undergone modernisation, a fact that major 'Bollywood' productions often neglect in their narrative structure.Cook, D. A. (2004). A history of narrative film (4th ed.). New York: W.W. Norton.Ganti, T. (2004). Introduction Bollywood: a guidebook to popular Hindi cinema (pp. 1-52). London: Routledge.Lutgendorf, P. (2006). Is There an Indian Way of Filmmaking? International Journal of Hindu Studies, 10(3), 227-256.Masukor, S. (2015). Old Recipe, New Flavour: Ritesh Batra's The Lunchbox. Metro(183), 70-73.Mishra, V. (2002). Bollywood cinema: Temples of desire: Psychology Press.Mooij, T. (2006). The new Bollywood: No heroines, no villains. Cineaste, 31(3), 30-35.Verma, R. (2011). Beyond Bollywood: Indian cinema's new cutting edge. The Guardian, 23.

For all those out there who thinks bollywood always copies, you should see this one. Who would have thought that a 9-5 job person who was lost in the world is brought back by a tiffin box and the story goes much more deeper about the hidden love of a housewife who too was lost in her own world. Slow but it still binds you to your seat "Simple events of life happy or sad,/ Some sad strings from the train of forgetfulness,/ Not fraught with heavy descriptions,/ Not crowded with events,/ No advice, no philosophy/ Only the feeling that the story is not yet over/ Although there is no more to read..." Lastly, the best part of the movie is 'The Ending'. "Only the feeling that the story is not yet over, although there is no more to read". There is something unspoken in this movie. It depends viewers to viewers, where they actually like to go with "Sajan & Ila".

I just love this Film the actors the story and way it's directed, a must see film, i have been in India and i was amazed by the lunch box delivery and how it works, and how theses people used to manage to get it on time, traveling every where in mumbai, but the person who got the idea to make a beautiful story out of it is just a genius, Nimrat Kaur the next door girl yet a real Indian beauty and a great actress, no one could be better in then Irfan Khan again an other great performance of this great actor, Irfaan Khan proves every time he plays that his one of the best bollywood actors, an other surprise in this film Nawazudine siddiqi, this man is just unbelievable he is a hell of an actor waaaw i guess that he still going to play some breath taking characters in the futur.

Can confusion ever lead to love? Most of us would not believe it, but the movie lunch box advocates exactly the same. When Lonely Housewife Ira who in the hope of winning over her ignorant husband prepares the finest of tiffins for him, destiny has other ideas as the lunchbox keeps getting delivered to the widower Saajan(Irfan Khan). The movie is an absolute entertainer. Saajan falls in love with a woman he has not even met, just by communicating with her by passing letter in the lunchbox which itself plays a key role in uniting these two. The movie is a sublime combination of supreme acting, excellent direction and phenomenal background score. Actor Nawazzudin Siddiqui also plays an integral part in the film and entertains the audience with his gimmicks. The depiction of the dabbawallahs of Bombay is also very accurate and vivid. Overall, the movie teaches the message that love need not depend on looks, language, ethnicity, all that is needed for love is love itself.