Great except perhaps for certain viewers

Rating: 9/10 (24 December 2008)

Appearing on India's version of Who Wants To Be a Millionaire, 18 year old Jamal is one step away from winning the grand prize of 20 million Rupees. Millionaire-style, a question is posed: How did he do it? A) He's lucky, B) He's a genius, C) He cheated, D) It is written
It quickly becomes clear that the host of the show and the local constabulary believe the answer is C. Jamal is a slumdog, perhaps a step or two above the Untouchables, but certainly not much more than that. How could such a cipher be the very first contestant in the history of the show to reach the final question? Impossible without illegal means, or is it? The movie then reverts largely to flashbacks of Jamal's life and his experiences with his brother Salim and soon their female compatriot Latika. We are introduced to Jamal and Salim as young boys, while Mumbai was still Bombay, and the review of the past continues to a time within months of Jamal's appearance on the show. Turns out, why he is on the show is about as important as how he has done so well
Slumdog Millionaire falls almost exactly in between Hollywood and Bollywood sensibilities. The run time of two hours is a bit long for Hollywood standards but short for Bollywood. While there are no true musical numbers (with the minor exception of the closing credits), the soundtrack is heavily featured (and was quite loud in the Arclight theatre where I saw it). The Bollywood chapter-like structure is in evidence but the pacing is far more Hollywood action/adventure. It is quite the unique creature and that, in itself, makes for interesting viewing.
As to where the movie succeeds and falters, it is more of the former than the latter. Danny Boyle most definitely deserves consideration for Best Director this year. He sometimes dances close to the edge of music video cliché but manages to avoid triteness based upon the images and set pieces he selects. His rapid cut modes create exhilaration rather than confusion even when subtitles are required (during the scenes with the youngsters  apparently their English just wasn't sufficient). The acting, overall, is more than adequate, though in this regard, the movie might be benefiting from our lack of experience with Indian emotional expression and body language such that we have more difficulty judging realism; the few American/English tourist characters in the movie come off flat and lame, most likely purposefully but certainly not realistically. As with potentially the acting, the writing clearly does come off better in translation to a foreign tongue. With expectations dampened and exotica abounding, simplistic scenes absorb dramatic weight and play heftier than they would in the middling Hollywood fare they would normally inhabit. On the positive side, the script does manage the majority flashback structure well and rarely creates doubt as to where the story is at a given moment. The greatest weakness is the highly elementary fable plot but worse movies than this one have been forgiven for such things.
When the movie was over, I thought it was one of the best movies I have seen in a long time, however, I am not sure this reaction should be taken for granted. My wife was, in fact, quite upset at the movie. The main thrust of her critique is valid, I believe, namely the movie does trade upon some pretty horrific events, many of which happen to children, in service of generating positive feelings in the audience. Obviously not the first movie to ever do this but, if one is sensitive to such things, this movie may not be "entertainment." Perhaps disturbingly, critics may be inured to such thinking and the average American film-goer may very well be less responsive to the suffering of alien others hence the almost universally positive reviews. Thus a caveat: if you are particularly sensitive to bad things happening to children or extreme poverty in general and you easily empathize across cultural lines, you may wish to think twice before committing to this film.