Well, more a matter of sour grapes.

British-Indian author Salman Rushdie has attacked the plot of multiple Oscar-winning film "Slumdog Millionaire" as a "patently ridiculous conceit".

Rushdie wrote in Britain's Guardian newspaper that the central feature of the film -- that a boy from the Mumbai slums manages to succeed on the Indian TV version of "Who Wants to Be a Millionaire" -- "beggars belief."

"This is a patently ridiculous conceit, the kind of fantasy writing that gives fantasy writing a bad name," the author of "The Satanic Verses" said in the article published Saturday.

The point that Rushdie misses, of course, is that the fantasy of it all is precisely what appeals to people about the plot of both the original book (Vikas Swarup’s "Q&A") and movie is that it is an outrageous fantasy. Who does not root for the underdog (or, in this case, the underSlumdog)? We want to see the little guy win against all odds. And that is why more people will love the book and film versions of “Slumdog Millionaire” than will even like Rushdie’s novels, including the fatwa-worthy “Satanic Verses”. Reading and movies are often the way that we seek a release from our own lives and an escape from our problems, not a time of deep thought and contemplation upon the larger issues of life, the universe, and everything. That is not to say that Salman Rusdie is not an Important Author – merely that there is an appropriate place for both the serious works of Rusdie and the lighter fare of Swarup.

Posted by: Greg at 12:54 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 264 words, total size 2 kb.