Wonderful movie. Very fun…but, is it too close to Forrest Gump?

I understand that the audience is supposed to suspend their disbelief in order to enjoy what amounts to a folktale. And with that understanding, I can say that I really enjoyed Danny Boyle’s Slumdog Millionaire, but, I also understand everyone’s gripes with the movie.
The audience is presented with a sequence of over-the-top events that amounts to the main character’s victory. And, although a case can be made that all of the events in the life of Jamal-the main character played by Dev Patel-are based on actual horrors experienced by some residents of the slums of India, the fact that Jamal has experienced so many of the extremes and that all of those horrific experiences eventually lead to his “happy ending,” is mildly irritating.
Like I said, I like a good folktale; they’re fun and usually very creative. But, when you display so many atrocities in one film and then deux ex machina, abracadabra, viola, happy ending, it pisses me off.
The ending is happy, because it was written to be happy. That’s okay. I can accept that and enjoy the movie. The story has you believe that it’s fate that allows Slumdog’s hero to overcome, that fate wrote the ending, but it was screenwriters, directors, and studio producers that ultimately have a say in how the movie should end. And face it; most people don’t want to pay the money to see a movie without a happy ending.
Still, that’s fine. But, I say this is like Forrest Gump for several reasons, but the most irritating one is this:
The main character doesn’t grow. He was born innocent and unselfish and he’s consistently placed in unfair situations that he continues to fight against because he doesn’t know any other way to be, and in the end he’s earned his happy ending by virtue of having been tortured in the pursuit of making someone else happy.
And it’s a disservice to the people who have actually lived through violent discrimination, the Vietnam War, poverty, and prostitution.
Of course, Jenny dies in Forrest Gump, and Latika is “disfigured” (she’s still gorgeous, so the quotations were meant as a mark of bitter sarcasm) so, I guess not everyone gets their happy ending, but there always needs to be a gruesome sacrifice by a side character-the horse’s head, a mother’s blood, a sister’s body part, etc. But that main character has to remain intact in order for the audience to leave the theater contented.

Possibly-related Articles:                                        
(auto-generated)