XPost: soc.culture.indian, alt.fan.jai-maharaj, rec.arts.movies.current-films   
   XPost: soc.culture.usa, soc.culture.british, uk.politics.misc   
   XPost: alt.politics, talk.politics.misc, soc.culture.india   
   From: alt.fan.jai-maharaj@googlegroups.com   
      
   'Dunkirk' Sparks Debate in India Over Failure to Show   
   Soldiers From the Country   
      
   By Nyay Bhushan   
   Hollywood Reporter, hollywoodreporter.com   
   July 28, 2017   
      
   While Christopher Nolan's film has received critical   
   acclaim in India, some media reports have questioned why   
   the film has ignored the "significant contribution" of   
   Indian soldiers in Dunkirk.   
      
   Dunkirk opened in India last Friday to stellar reviews   
   and what is considered a strong box-office opening for a   
   Hollywood film, bringing in an estimated $2.4 million.   
   But not everyone in the country is impressed.   
      
   Various reports in leading media outlets have questioned   
   why Christopher Nolan's movie ignored what the Times of   
   India newspaper calls the "significant contribution" of   
   Indian soldiers at Dunkirk. The article, titled "How   
   Nolan forgot the desis (Indians) at Dunkirk," notes that   
   the omission should be seen in light of the fact that the   
   "British public is more well-informed today about the   
   Indian role in the World Wars."   
      
   It also refers to Oxford historian Yasmin Khan's book The   
   Raj at War, in which the author writes, "Britain did not   
   fight the Second World War, the British Empire did."   
      
   International observers are also echoing a similar   
   sentiment. In a column for Slate, John Broich, an   
   associate professor of history at Case Western Reserve   
   University, wrote that the appearance of Indian soldiers   
   in the film "would have provided a good reminder of how   
   utterly central the role of the Indian Army was in the   
   war. Their service meant the difference between victory   
   and defeat."   
      
   Broich, whose views have also been quoted by the   
   Hindustan Times newspaper, points out that there were   
   four companies of the Royal Indian Army Service Corps at   
   Dunkirk adding that "observers said they were   
   particularly cool under fire and well-organized during   
   the retreat."   
      
   According to historical data, some 2.5 million soldiers   
   from the Indian sub-continent served with the British   
   army during World War II. But the depiction of Indian   
   soldiers in Hollywood films revolving around the war have   
   been few and far between. One of the most notable   
   onscreen appearances was last seen in 1996's The English   
   Patient, which featured British Indian actor Naveen   
   Andrews (Sense8, Lost) in a supporting role as an Indian   
   Sikh soldier, Kip Singh, serving in the Italian campaign   
   of the war in the Oscar-winning film, which starred Ralph   
   Fiennes and Juliette Binoche.   
      
   Referring to historical accounts of the war, in an   
   article headlined "Miracle at Dunkirk: Indians too were   
   trapped with Allied forces," India Today pointed out that   
   1,800 Indian soldiers were tasked with transporting 2,000   
   mules carrying arms and ammunition to the war zone in   
   France. Since the British army had disbanded its animal   
   transport companies after World War I, Indian companies   
   were brought in to transport supplies over terrain in   
   France that wasn't accessible for cars.   
      
   Continues at:   
      
   http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/dunkirk-sparks-debate-indi   
   -failure-show-soldiers-country-1024935   
      
   Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi   
   Om Shanti   
      
   http://bit.do/jaimaharaj   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)