Queen is from India, Offside is from Iran, these two countries have some similarity. Firstly, religion plays a very important role in their culture and country. Secondly, they have long history, namely, they have very strong cultural foundation. Based on these two similarity features, we can roughly conclude a point that their culture won’t be changed and updated very easily and sharp.
Queen shows us a traditional Indian woman, how she changes herself to become a new Indian woman in her European travel. The main character she travels in many European countries such as French and Holland, meets and makes some friends who are very unusual for Rani, at the same time, her opinion and sense of worth is changing. I know that Rani, she is a very kind and gentle girl, but I personally think her personality, to some extent, is cowardly. If I see my fiancé in Holland, and say something like I come here for you so you have to come back with me. How arrogant is he! I promise I will be angry and slap him very strongly. I personally think Queen is a good and representative Bollywood cinema, but I won’t say I like this film. Compared to Offside, I like Offside more than Queen.
Before I saw this film, I know sorts of knowledge about Iran, and its culture and history. I know that the social stage of Iran female is far lower than male, there are many strict rules and unfair sense of value on women. This film shows me a real Iran society, as Panahi says this is a social film, but social films always connect to politics. As I see, don’t separate society and politics, because they are accrete. In this film, those girls they all love football but they are forbidden to entry stadium, when they are only allowed to see at home on Television, they against. I think they are very brave, they already known that if they get caught they will be took away to police station, and worse more they possible will suffer unknown punishments. Pahani transfers this information to audiences at the beginning of film. There is a screen that a girl ask the soldier why women can’t enter stadium to see football games? Soldier answers that because the stadium is full of men, and they all yell some very dirty words, Iran women can’t hear that. Then the girl ask further that why foreign women like Japanese women they can entry? The soldier answers because they aren’t Iran women. The girl reply so the reason is actually we are Iran women? And the soldier get confused by the girl. What I got from this conversation is, most common people are foolish and bemused on common cultures and opinions from given. They don’t understand but they accept, nobody jumps out to question and challenge why Iran women is forbidden to enter stadium.
Also Pahani shows his opinion and wish on Offside, ‘I hope in ten or 20 years’ time when people watch Offside they can look at it as a documentary of a moment in Iran when we didn’t have the rights and freedoms they now enjoy. You have to be very precious to think one film can bring about social or political change, but if people question the laws, the limitations and the restrictions, then the film will have done its job.’ Then I more confirm that this is a documentary film, and in this film, Pahani didn’t put many his personal emotion and opinions. What we get from film, is what we see from it. Gender this social issue is merely a theme.
To sum up, I think that offside is better than Queen because Offside questions a social issue from inside, namely like the eggs hatched, while the Queen is with the help from outside.
References:
Jafar Panahi interviewed by Jumana Farouky, “Blowing the Whistle,” Time (21 May 2006): HYPERLINK “http://www.time.com/time/ magazine/article/0,9171,901060529-1196395,00.html” http://www. time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,901060529-1196395,00.html
Panahi quoted in Ali Jaafar, “Fear of the Penalty.” Sight and Sound vol. 16, no. 5 (May 2006): 35.
Comments I did:
https://brittanyliblog.wordpress.com/
https://azizhussaini.wordpress.com/
Hi Fan,
First I wanted to say that I definitely laughed at and agreed with your comment that you want to slap Vijay strongly! 😀 However, I don’t particularly agree with your opinion that Rani is to some extent cowardly. Sure, she didn’t immediately reject Vijay when he tracked her down in Amsterdam, but throughout the film Rani definitely goes on an admirable and brave journey transforming from a naive, innocent rural girl that is reminiscent of the classic submissive Bollywood female character into a strong, independent and worldly woman. Her ultimate choice of returning her engagement ring and walking free is a revolutionary choice for the gender values of Bollywood cinema.
Do you agree that Rani’s personal journey throughout the film is more courageous than cowardly considering all the traditional gender expectations she defies?
Thank you for your comment above all, Xiao.
I know what you want to explain to persuade me that Rani isn’t coward, slap on the guy does not suit to Rani her character’s personality. It suits to me! I will tell you more details that why I think Rani is a little bit coward. Rani isn’t a bravery girl, honestly, Rani seems like very bravery because we compare her to other traditional gender.
To answer your question, before I answer your question I need to say that I actually don’t understand your question very well. Considering all the traditional gender expectations she defies, do you mean that a traditional Rani before she became the fiancee, the one who follow opinions and orders from people around her, the one who is a good girl recognized by other people? If it is, then I will say yes, it is very courageous. Compare to other traditional Indian women, she is unusual, and her travel is really cowardly.
Hi Yolanda,
It is very an interesting point that you said if you were Rani, you must get angry and slap your fiancé, we are same in real life. But in the movie, Rani is a girl who are innocent, smart before her honeymoon cancelled, she is well-educate but willing to give up her job for marriage. When she back in Delhi, Rani hands Vijay her engagement ring and, after saying “thank you”, walks away with a smile on her face. At that moment, she has already become a real “Queen”. She refreshes her character with more independent and strong. Slap looks a little aggressive, that is not suit to her original character.
Otherwise, both two movies raise gender problem, but in different way, how do you think each of them depicting the key theme (gender) but with different elements?
Thanks
Brittany ❤️
Thank you for you comment, Brittany.
Before I answer the question you ask at the end, I have to discuss with you about the slap or not this question. Yeah, as you said, finally Rani she return the ring to the guy (just call him guy or I will call him bullshit), and leaves with confident smile and optimistic emotion. Well I agree that this is a kind of mute and beautiful counterattack, and very successful. BUT! But the point is this can’t let me clam down at that moment. Queen won’t be perfect forever.
Then turn to the question you ask. Same heart, different method. I will say that Queen is more like a business movie, or perhaps it is. Then Offside is a social movie, or perhaps documentary. Their movie genre is totally different, which to some extent decides their different methods to depict gender. I didn’t do any survey but I personally think that audiences who prefer Queen will more than Offside. Travel, and obvious jokes caused by cultural difference and her ignorance are appealing elements to audiences, and these won’t give audiences strong stress. While Offside is on the opposite side.