Film/Stage
A Disappointing Film:
I Am Singh
A Film Review by SIMRAN JEET SINGH
In many ways, “I Am Singh” calls attention to major challenges faced by the global Sikh community.
Most obviously, the film attempts to share the experiences of Sikhs in post-9/11 America.
It explicitly contests the lumping together of Sikhs and Muslims, and at the same time, aims to dissociate these two religious communities from terrorism and violence. Simply stated, it challenges stereotypes and misconceptions that have become popular in the West.
Early in the movie, Ranvir Singh (Gulzar Chahal) hears about the brutal attack on his two brothers and father in California, and he immediately leaves his home in India to be with his family in the California. Upon his arrival, Ranvir learns that his father is in critical condition, one of his brothers has been murdered, and his other brother has been incarcerated. Ranvir digs around and eventually uncovers that the attack on his family was a hate-crime, and the ensuing plot follows Ranvir’s struggle to attain justice.
In this struggle, the audience encounters a number of other important parts of the Sikh experience in America, including school bullying, civil rights issues, and modern race relations.
While “I Am Singh” endeavors to challenge popular stereotypes, I was disappointed to observe the way in which it uncritically perpetuates other stereotypes.
For example, the Sikh identity is exclusively represented by males - other than Ranvir’s mother and sister-in-law (who, of course, retain the Bollywood caricature of passive, vulnerable, and overly-emotional femininity), not a single other Sikh female appears in the entire film. The film oversimplifies issues of identity by limiting discussion to the turban and beard, and in doing so, it largely leaves the experience of Sikh females out of the narrative.
The typecasting of gender roles also plays into the film’s problematic depiction of American outlooks.
White American males are largely portrayed as unsympathetic and Islamophobic antagonists (e.g., police, hate-crime perpetrators), and this depiction leads to an over-generalization about American attitudes. While there are a few minor exceptions to this pigeonholing, particular moments in the film uncritically suggest that all Americans think Muslims are terrorists.
Certainly these generalizations lead to problematic situations in the narrative, and perhaps the most obvious of these is the sharp tension felt between the local police force and the South Asian men in the film. “I Am Singh” portrays police officers as white Americans who generally refuse to serve and protect Sikh Americans. As a result, the Sikh men and white police officers in the film are pitted against one another, and the resulting animosity reinforces an oversimplified and unrealistic sense of race relations and power in the United States.
The third type of challenge to which this film calls attention is that of community projects. While the production quality, cinematography, and political agenda of this film are all commendable, the acting and scripting leave much to be desired.
Dialogues quickly turn into didactic monologues that leave one with the impression of attending a religious sermon rather than an entertaining movie - although they are informative, these preachy monologues are neither creative nor inspiring.
This speaks to a larger issue in the Sikh community.
As the Diaspora continues to mature and expand, noble projects like “I Am Singh” will continue to receive financial backing and community support.
However, we can build on this groundbreaking film by integrating higher standards of content, quality, and execution - three essentials necessary for a film of any consequence.
While "I Am Singh" doesn't deliver this combination, I am hopeful that future films will begin moving towards these standards.
December 6, 2011
Conversation about this article
1: Kulvinder Singh Dhaliwal (India), December 06, 2011, 7:46 AM.
Sad, but it is what I expected, as there is nothing new in the story of the film.
2: Harinder (Jalandhar, Punjab), December 06, 2011, 8:01 AM.
It is time for us to make better films!
3: Angad Pal Singh (Delhi, India), December 06, 2011, 11:17 AM.
Although there are indeed the above-noted deficiencies, I would like to appreciate the endeavor in this movie, as compared to other Bollywood movies that only claim, but do nothing, to contribute to the betterment of the Sikh identity - such as "Singh is Kinng". If done properly, such future endeavors could very well use media in a positive way to promote Sikhism and the rehat maryada.
4: Inderjeet Kaur (U.S.A.), December 07, 2011, 3:24 AM.
I look forward to the day when Angad Singh ji, and those like him, will be directing major motion pictures. We'll have the quality we need and deserve, then.
5: Tejpal Singh Dhillon (United States), December 07, 2011, 9:02 AM.
This is a good movie with a great theme and message. I feel that all Sikhs living overseas should see this movie and make sure their children see the movie as well. I congratulate the producers of this movie for this noble project, knowing well that they may not recover their investment.
6: Baldev Singh (Bradford, United Kingdom), December 07, 2011, 1:15 PM.
Money is the key here, pure and simple. Anything which makes money is a subject for film-makers. This is nothing to do with Sikhs or Sikhs and Muslims but raking in money out of purported patriotism.
7: Ish Amitoj Kaur (Fremont, California, U.S.A), December 07, 2011, 4:12 PM.
Remember the housekeeper only when the house is not clean? A rebuttal: But here is the teaser. Why do I see people enraged and reacting to stuff about identity and mis-portrayal so frequently as opposed to appreciating or leave alone acknowledging something when something good is done? Why do our pens have automated ink in them when the need to criticize something arises? Why do these pens not work when something needs to be appreciated? It took me six long years to make the films with Sikhs in the lead (the only ones so far made in commercial cinema). How many of the readers here have seen those films which are in sharp contrast to the ones they are talking about? Or what is the real answer to all these problems? It's not the money, it's the eye of the reader that catches a controversial subject but the same eye is irritatingly silent when something plainly silently good is done. It's just like noticing the house and cursing the housekeeper when the house is dirty and not acknowledging it when it's clean.
8: Harnek Singh (Washington, D.C., U.S.A.), December 07, 2011, 5:35 PM.
I have seen all the films you are referring to, Ish ji. If any of them had met decent standards, trust me, you would have heard the praise loud and clear. For some reason, to date, there hasn't been a single quality commercial film product. But please do keep at it, one day it WILL happen! For practice makes one perfect!
9: Pala Singh (Chandigarh, Punjab), December 07, 2011, 11:03 PM.
It is easy to catch the flaws of bad films. However, it needs a connoisseur to critically appreciate good ones.
10: Harpreet Singh (Delhi, India), December 09, 2011, 12:25 PM.
Work done and films made by Ish Amitoj Kaur and Vismad, for example, are certainly an improvement on the standard Punjabi/ Sikh/ Indian/ Bollywood fare we have grown accustomed to - there is no doubt about that.