"Yada Yada Hi Dharmasya
Glanirva Bhavathi Bharatha,
Abhyuthanam Adharmaysya
Tadatmanam Srijami Aham"
Bhagavad Gita (Chapter IV-7)
To the current generation this might sound Greek but for others it would bring about a feeling of nostalgia. It would evoke memories of their childhood, about the time they spent together as a family connected by a TV show. As legend has it, whenever this epic was aired on Doordarshan time froze and the streets of India wore a brazen look. It was comparable to a India-Pakistan match in terms of it's catch and viewership. Yes, I'm talking about B.R. Chopra's Mahabharata.
They don't make shows like that anymore, do they ? The dialogues were simple, the actors brilliant and the costumes and effects(for 1988) looked magnificent. Overall, the show was pristine. Although that could have been compounded by the fact that Television had recently become a phenomenon in India and anything the public saw was new and original. The effects that that particular TV show had on them reverberated through one whole generation. Such high was the moral content and so well were the characters played that it became a runaway success. Nitish Bharadwaj playing the role of Krishna was revered as a God, and everywhere he went people touched his feet to seek his blessings. It created something which was never truly seen before and will never be seen again.
 |
| Nitish Bharadwaj as Krishna in B.R. Chopra's Mahabharat |
Fast-forward to 2008- the Television and Entertainment Industry has grown exponentially but the whole concept that goes into making a TV show has changed. Changed to follow the one created by one Ms. Ekta Kapoor. Weird camera angles, horrific story lines, trashy acting and unnecessary songs have become the new norm. But in all these years nobody has dared to recreate the Mahabharata, not even the mighty Bollywood. Suddenly in that ingenious mind of Ekta Kapoor comes an idea - she wants to re-make Mahabharata and portray the characters the way she had conceptualized them as a child. It was a plan born to fail. And it failed badly. If you try replacing Sachin Tendulkar with Sir Ravindra Jadeja, you are doomed. And that is exactly what this was. It was not just about the class difference, the older version was something which was something close to people's heart, it had a sentimental value. Whatever little chance she had she blew it up by showing the most controversial scene in the epic as the pilot episode. Not even Krishna could save her the blemishes.
So when Star Plus recently announced that it was going to launch Mahabharata again, one had reasons to be skeptical. Some people had already given up on it, foreboding that it would turn out to be Mahabharata disaster part II. There was and still is a dearth of reviews about the new show and it seemed like no-one was interested in watching it. It was touted as the first 100 crore TV show in India but still how could it possibly match up to the 88' version ? The shadow of B.R Chopra's epic would always loom large over them. However, if you analyse it closely the picture is not all that gloomy. The TRP's are good and if you watch the trailers for various characters you would be relieved knowing atleast this would not be another disaster. If you see the way a short introduction was given about the important characters, you would know that the show was well planned. The director had thought of perfectly reasonable explanations as to why a particular character acted in a particular way and what he wanted to do with each character within the limitation of it's mythological significance. While Ekta Kapoor's version focused more on the ridiculous Manish Malhotra designed Roman-costumes and models with 6 pack abs, this had more subtle touches to it.
The actors roped in to play various characters play their part to a T. Although Arav Chowdhary was a bit old to play the younger Bheeshma, he has portrayed the stoic nature of Bheeshma pretty well. Praneet Bhatt gained a lot of screen time during the beginning and was absolutely brilliant in the way he played Shakuni. A major criticism of Ekta Kapoor's version was that Anita Hassannandani was not fit to play the role of Draupadi. Her over-the-top acting in the pilot was the reason a lot of people became prejudiced about the show after just one episode. Also, the actors playing the Kauravas and Pandavas were daily-soap actors and seeing them play a mythological character was not something the viewers could believe easily. Here Star Plus has done a marvelous job in finding relatively fresh faces and the Delhi beauty Pooja Sharma is one among them. She does justice to the fabled beauty of Draupadi and looks like a promising actor. Shaheer Shaikh and Rohit Bharadwaj do a good job playing the part of Arjuna and Yudhisitra respectively. Saurabh Jain looks like he was born to play mythological characters and he has continued where he left off playing Krsihna. There is a certain air of arrogance about Arpit Ranka and that is exactly what is required to play Duryodhana. The only misfit one could think of might have been Ratan Rajput who was too loud to play Amba. Even the costumes and armor designed by Oscar winner Bhanu Athaiya are probably the closest to reality you will get. The story proceeds at a fast pace and there hasn't been any unnecessary drag until recently. This is where it has even outdone Chopra's Mahabharata as there were too many interludes which slowed down it's pace drastically. Today's 'instant make-up, instant break-up' generation would've found it boring.
 |
| Pandvas in the New Mahabharata |
The show has also had it's fair share of criticism. The set and animations hardly make you feel it is a 100 crore show. This is where we need to learn from Hollywood and use technology to make a film/TV show which is much more than just actors, costumes and scripts. One look at Spartacus will tell you how important a role technology has played into making it successful. There were also cases of it drifting away from the original script on a lot of occasions. To show Bheeshma attacking someone from behind is criminal. It destroys his image. He was a self righteous man and no-one during those ages would have attacked anyone from behind. There were certain rules of war which were never broken. Another experiment gone wrong was Duryodahana defeating 4 out of the 5 Pandavas in a gauntlet match only to be defeated by Arjuna in the end. Such an incident had never occurred and Duryodhana had only faced Bhima. It changes the perception of the people depending solely on this version for their knowledge and views about the Mahabharata. Those people might sympathize with Duryodhana believing he was better suited to lead than Yudhistira and was unfairly treated. They might even support his actions which led to the war.
There have been cases where a change has worked for the good too. Like in the case they opted out of showing the real reason behind Madri's death. It is believed that she performed Sati after learning that her husband Pandu was killed because of her. Such a thing could obviously not be shown on Indian Television, as viewers have different sensibilities and it might have been wrongly interpreted. The 'Moses-esque' entry of Krishna was also pretty cool to be honest. It added extra magic to his already complex character.
One thing on which the jury is still out is presenting the Mahabharata in a way the Iliad was written. Just as Achilles is the main hero in the Iliad, and it's a story about his journeys and victories, they are trying to present Arjuna as the main hero of the story and make it look as if every important decision was taken by him alone. The role of Yudhistira has been marginalized. I'm not sure if it's the right thing to do, but it works in terms of engaging the viewers where they have a clear hero Arjuna, a villain in Duryodhana, the anti-hero Karna and the mastermind of all schemes Krishna. We must remember that the Mahabharata is not just an epic like the Iliad where one just need to present the story in an attractive way, the social message it sends out is also very important. The Bhagvad Gita is the sacred text of the Hindus and it is an integral part of the epic. As the creators of the Mahabharata said they wanted to re-create it for the younger audiences it becomes even more imperative that they think about the message that they are sending, each scene-each episode. If we truly want our traditions to flourish among the younger one's we need to do the Mahabharata right. This is a big reason why people didn't like Ekta's version. It was not a Mahabharata the young India could see and learn from.
Although the current version does fine, there is so much more they could have done. The friendship between Karna and Duyrodhana has been minimalized an it's an important part of Karna's character. There seemed to be hatred between Pandu and Dhritarashtra, but in reality they loved each other even though they were competing for the same crown. These are the values we should learn from the epic. It shouldn't be like a '300' where the movie became famous because of the war sequences and fight scenes. The moral content of this show should be very high. This is what differentiates Chopra's version from the rest. All's not lost though. Still the most important portions of the show have to be telecast and it will depend upon those scenes how this show will be perceived in the future. The Draupadi Vastraharan scene and the Bheeshma Vadh are two of the most important scenes in the story, both of which are still remaining. It is the handling of those two scenes which will decide whether this will be remembered as another classic like Chopra's or just another mediocre show. I honestly can't see it going down as bad as Ekta's Mahabharata.
Verdict- All in all, a good show with the potential to be a great.
PS- The old Mahabharata is available on YouTube. The new one telecasts on Star Plus Monday-Friday at 8:30 pm.
