Jodhaa Akbar

Jesuits at Akbar's Court
by Nar Singh, ca. 1605

Jodhaa Akbar (2008), imagined as a spiritual and chronological prequel to Mughal-e-Azim (1960) tells the story of the Emperor Jalal-ud-din Muhammad Akbar- known as Akbar the Great- (Hrithik Roshan), and his Hindu Rajput wife from Amer, who may or may not have been named Jodhaa Baai (Aishwarya Rai). The title of this woman has come down through the mists of history as Mariam-uz-Zamani (Mariam of the Age), as she was the mother of Jahangir, heir to the Mughal throne. She was also one of many wives, but why should history get in the way of a movie-ready myth. Interestingly, Mariam of the Age was an astute and aggressive businesswoman, but evidently her mind wasn't deemed interesting enough to warrant her own The Wolf of Wall Street (2013) style film.

Jodhaa Akbar is instead a sweeping romance of love across faiths, overcoming scheming interlopers, and hitting the arranged-marriage jackpot. The film doubles down on the religious tolerance for which Akbar's reign is rightfully famous. He opened the administration of his empire up to bureaucrats of any religion, and abolished faith-based pilgrim taxes. He pursued alliances across faiths and invited allied nobles to join his court. He joined his Hindu wives in worship and celebration. His ibadat khana (house of worship) in Fatehpur Sikri, his erstwhile capital, found Hindu, Roman Catholic, Zoroastrian, Jain, Islamic and atheist thinkers together discussing theology. Extremism was discouraged, as was sati, and under Akbar the Mughal Empire grew in size and influence.

The film does not double down on the intelligence of Jodhaa, who is lovely and "spirited" in the "she can do xyz as well as any man" way. But being proud is not the same thing as being interesting. It is definitely not the same thing as being smart. Aside from a political science 101 lecture, we never have any indication that Jodhaa is interested in anything besides Akbar. Unless you count that scene where she is playing with rabbits? And rabbits are really more a metaphor than an interest.

Sheesh Mahal, Palace in Rajasthan 

Hritik Roshan, one of the most famous (and famously handsome) Hindu actors in Bollywood was chosen to the play the role of Akbar, romantic Muslim hero who isnt a terrorist. Given that the Hindu-right loves to use the fear of the sexuality of Muslim men as a dog whistle (much like fears of the sexuality of men of color is used as a dog whistle in the U.S.), the casting choice was either brave of Roshan or cynical on the part of the filmmaker, who got to have it both ways. He's a hero but also really Hindu, its fine!

Roshan's casting as Akbar was excellent, regardless of motivation. His Urdu deserves special praise. His accent is delicious. The locations, costumes, and music are sumptuous proof that if money cant buy happiness, it can sure buy a whole lot else. Tanishq provided the jewelry for the film, which likely cost a king's ransom all on its own. The music, by A.R. Rehman, again draws on the variety of musical styles on the Subcontinent for inspiration, including dervishes and Hindu religious music, as well as the more contemporary "Jashn-e-Bahara".

Speaking of delicious, Jodhaa Akbar also caters to the female gaze in a way that continues to be highly unusual, as no one seems to have learned the lesson of "Jab Se Tere Naina". Hritik Roshan playing with his sword is another wonderfully understated metaphor, but it is also proof that this film knows its audience. The full scene is here.

Same, bitch.

The film lasts more than 3 hours, so I wont try to describe the plot. It is an epic film, so there is a lot of plot. It is loosely based on history, punctuated by some things that actually happened in a way that may have vaguely resembled the way they happened on screen. This film is about myth-making, and if the myth in question takes religious tolerance (albeit limited to Hindu/Muslim tolerance) as its jumping off point, that isn't the worst thing. Khuda knows there are far more dangerous myths. The disappointment comes from the fact that if the film was going to be mostly fiction anyway, it could have done a lot more.

Particularly since there were protests against the film throughout North India anyway. These were ostensibly about historical inaccuracy but unsecretly about the fact that the Rajput and Hindu right are Islamophobic- even thought the film isn't exactly groundbreaking in its political message. Some of these same groups were back at it last year protesting the release of historical epic Padmaavat (2018).

Now, are Jodhaa and Akbar in the running for "most awkward "first time" musical number"? Yes- and in Bollywood the competition is tragic. Is there some over-acting? Yes. Was Ashwaria Rai underutilized? Yes. Did the film need to include Akbar taming a wild elephant? Debatable- even if it is true. Its not like they needed to fill time. Is the film as good as Mughal-e-Azim? Surely you jest.

A surprisingly lovely collection of Mughal miniatures, including one featuring Akbar and some elephants, can be viewed for free at the Walters Art Museum in Baltimore!  

Film: Jodhaa Akbar (2008)
Director: Ashutosh Gowariker
Writers: K. P. Saxena, Haidar Ali, Ashutosh Gowariker
Runtime: 214 minutes
Language: Hindi, Urdu
Country: India

×