An Analysis of Sharat Raju's American Made

Sharat Raju’s American Made isn’t your regular clichéd father-son fare. It is an emotionally arresting tale, with engaging blocking and meticulous staging, reminding me of the mise-en-scene approach of Orson Welles’ Citizen Kane (1941).  However, it isn’t just that. More so, it a relatable conversation-starter on Westernization, cultural assimilation versus identity, and faith versus modernization. It is no surprise that the film earned 17 international awards in 2004 and was acquired for national broadcast on PBS’s Emmy Award-winning program Independent Lens for 4 years. 

The story follows a Sikh-American family as their car breaks down in the remote Mojave Desert highway during their road trip to the Grand Canyon. Tensions rise as Anant must save his family and faces existential questions and a moral dilemma. What makes the film an interesting melee, is that all four characters have non-agreeable objectives and idiosyncrasies. Anant is an optimist who wants to hold on to their Sikh-Indian heritage and identity and wants his first-generation immigrant kids, Ranjit and Jagdesh, to respect their family tradition. In stark contrast, his son Ranjit is more realistic but hostile to traditional methods and ideologies. Ranjit is an agnostic and a heretic, much to the displeasure of his parents. Ranjit enjoys landing his older brother Jagdesh in trouble with his parents, especially about the cost of his phone and by pointing out that he has appropriated his Indian name to an American pseudonym. Jagdesh’s character in the film, however, is the least developed and most sketchy, seeming as a prop only meant to serve as comic relief. He is at odds with Ranjit, especially when Ranjit pokes fun at him. Jagdesh is in a pursuit of cellphone reception throughout the film, which is why a shallow goal such as this doesn’t quite give us a sense of his character or his existential wants. Anant’s wife Nageena is a caricature of a whiny, nagging Indian mother. She’s not thrilled that their car had to break down this way as she is convinced that this will be their last family trip after Jagdesh moves to New York. She too, much like Anant, wants Ranjit and Jagdesh to take some interest in the scriptures, and is constantly after Ranjit to do his reading. With such conflicting interests and clashing personalities, director Sharat Raju has choreographed this chaos with visual mastery. Perhaps one of the most effective tools he uses to dramatize the storytelling is effective blocking and precise staging.

Blocking

As a naturalistic performance-driven piece, it is prima facie the blocking that makes gives dramatic charge and energy of the film. Sharat Raju shows great insight in his understanding of emotional beats and character motivations in the way that he blocks the performances of the film. Characters move with every change in beat, and it is repetitive movements that become a recurring motif in the film, adding charm and lightheartedness to what would otherwise be a very intense tirade. Every single shot reveals something new about their relationship. I will attempt to deconstruct and elucidate some techniques that Sharat uses to dramatize the storytelling. 

Character Introductions

Perhaps the most interesting part of the storytelling is the amount that the director reveals within the first two minutes of the film itself. In two minutes of screen time, we are introduced to the sprawling, isolated landscape of the Mojave Desert, where the family is stranded. In the subsequent two introductory shots of our characters, we are introduced to each of their conflicts and quirks. I will elucidate this argument further:

The film opens with three extreme long shots, separated by cross dissolves of a car going through the Mojave Desert. Tonally, these shots are like red herrings, perhaps meant intentionally to mislead the audience in their pre-supposition of the tone of the film. They also seem to serve to raise the stakes for the characters by showing the minimalistic, sprawling landscape they are stranded in, which is isolated from the rest of the world. Post the title sequence, the car stops, and a man steps out of it. Director Sharat Raju has intentionally concealed exposition here, and we don’t see the face of our protagonist till the point where he opens the bonnet and a gush of smoke that escapes from it clears up. In one shot itself, Sharat has revealed two important pieces of information – our Sikh protagonist Anant, and his conflict of the car breaking down. In the subsequent shot, we are now inside the car itself. Anant’s wife Nageena is inside with Ranjit, his younger son. Nageena asks Ranjit to help his dad, which he refuses to do. As an audience, we get a sense that Ranjit is a rebellious teenager. When Nageena gives him a book to read, Ranjit steps out of the car to avoid her request. Nageena rolls her eyes. This reveals their conflict – that Ranjit wants to avoid his nagging mother, and Nageena wants her son to soak in their Sikh heritage and tradition. Thus, in just 2 minutes of screen time, we establish our world and understand our characters and their troubles.

Raising the Stakes and Creating Conflict

Now we are introduced to the conflict of Jagdesh, who isn’t getting his cellphone reception. He walks over to the other end of the frame to accentuate this beat, and the mother and father are thoughtfully framed in between the two kids, to show the conflict between the two brothers that the parents must mediate. Ranjit wants Jagdish to land in trouble with Nageena, and he pokes at him to reveal the cost of the phone. As the argument between Nageena and the two kids continue, Anant walks back over to inspect the bonnet. He shuts it and the camera dollies in when he announces with ease and optimism – looks like it is beyond my expertise! Each camera movement is motivated by the movement of the actors and a change in beat. This moment in the film raises the stakes higher, and the camera dolly movement emphasizes it further. Ranjit walks over to the highway. He says there are cayotes in the desert. The father walks up to him, telling him not to fear, quoting The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost. Sharat Raju has created an interesting mise-en-scene at this point. Ranjit crosses Anant indicating his amused disagreement with Anant, calling him a dork, and going back into the car. We see all four characters in one frame. In the background we see Jagdesh still searching for signal. In the middle ground is Nageena who now confronts Anant, asking him about his plan of action. This is very interesting composition/staging, as once Ranjit exits frame, Nageena and Anant are now directly facing each other for a short confrontation. Besides, placing the four characters in the foreground, middle ground and background further leads the eye to see the shift of perspective between the characters. 

The break into Act II is when the father goes to the highway and sticks out his hand to find help. The car that passes by doesn’t stop, but he doesn’t lose his optimism. He tells his pessimistic son Ranjit that he will keep trying, and that he’s always wanted to hitch-hike across America. The recurring blocking/motif of the movement from the car to the highway and then back to the car adds an element of subtle comedy, but more so an element of restlessness and desperation to the drama. Nageena is back at nagging Ranjit to read a book of Indian scriptures, further raising the stakes for the characters as the chaos keeps building and their heads continue to butt, this time stronger than earlier. Jagdesh rushes in, cutting Nageena and Ranjit’s conversation short, claiming to have seen a cayote in the desert. While the film largely relies on a mise-en-scene approach, the conflict has been ratcheted up by cutting Jagdesh’s entry shots in quick succession.

Just then, Anant exclaims – here comes another one, spotting a car approaching on the highway. He says this line just before moving to the highway, which accents and calls attention to the line. According to filmmaker John Badham’s basic rules for character movement, character movement before the line accents the line, and movement after the line accents the movement. Sharat Raju seems to have a good grip over these blocking techniques to raise stakes, create tension and build drama. Since the story is told from the perspective of Anant, he has the most movement, and therefore he gets the most attention. 

Unmotivated Movement and Forced Staging

A lot of the blocking of the film seems forced and unmotivated, as if it’s been done to create aesthetic compositions/staging. 7 minutes through the narrative, Ranjit and Anant are trying to stop another car. It just speeds past them. Ranjit tells him that nobody is going to stop, but Anant insists that Ranjit is just being a pessimist. That’s when Ranjit breaks it to him that he looks like a terrorist. There is a pregnant silence. Ranjit goes back over to the car. At this point (8:11), Anant conveniently enters frame just to retort to Ranjit – he said I look like a terrorist. In my opinion, this is problematic blocking since it seems like the characters have been blocked to force a certain kind of aesthetic staging. More so, it affects the performance of the actors when they’re told to hit very specific marks. Anant’s entry and stiff positioning seems rather unnatural. As a filmmaker, I can almost imagine where the crew must have placed T-marks on the ground for the actors. While the shot is interesting by placing Ranjit dead-center of Anant and Nageena, it looks highly doctored.

Politics of the Film

As discussed in Prof. Wolansky’s class, the politics of the film are problematic. When Ranjit tells Anant that he looks like a terrorist, and tells him to take off his turban, Anant retorts saying – Sikhs aren’t terrorists, those Arabs are. This can be problematic depending on how you look at the film. If this dialogue represents the view of the filmmaker, it is incorrect in our progressive times – as it is an attempt to use hate to fight hate, by deflecting the terrorist stereotype on another minority community. However, if the dialogue represents the bigoted moral compass of Anant as an individual and a character, then there should be no moral debate about the political correctness of the film. If cinema is meant to reflect life, this is life – and it’s the responsibility of the filmmaker to create characters that are morally grey. In fact, then, Anant’s statement is a subtle commentary on the cut-throat minority competition in America. 

Another bus approaches during this conversation about Anant’s turban. Anant heads back over to the road to signal for help. The bus doesn’t stop, but Anant continues to be optimistic. During this drama, Jagdesh has finally got his reception. He introduces himself to a certain Frank over the phone as Paul J. Singh. Anant ratchets up, asks him with disdain if it’s embarrassing to keep his own Indian name. We get a greater glimpse into the troubles of Anant as he is disappointed that his children don’t care about their heritage. We also get a glimpse into his struggle as a minority and as an immigrant who had paved his way into America to build his dreams.

Anant goes inside the car and looks at himself in the mirror, inspecting his beard to see if there’s any validity to Ranjit’s statement. The camera gently dollies to indicate a change in beat, and a new realization. Another car approaches now, and Anant decides to do things differently this time. He takes out a God Bless America sticker from his car and holds it up as the car passes by. That doesn’t help him either.

Build-Up, Tension, and Climax

A lot of events take place in quick succession after this point, further escalating the dramatic charge. Ranjit says that Jagdesh should try summoning a vehicle. Jagdesh, meanwhile, is still trying to find reception. An annoyed Ranjit takes his phone and throws it away. Both brothers get into a brawl and their parents rush to the rescue. This erupts into a family fight. Anant insists that someone will stop, whereas Ranjit is being pessimistic, and says that nobody cares. Nageena says that this is their last vacation together, and it doesn’t have to be this way. Another car approaches, but this one almost stops, and takes off.

Finally disappointed, Anant begins to reflect. He walks by to the highway, giving up. Ranjit is in the car, finally opening the book of scriptures, and reads a quote from it – whosever assumes a religious garb pleases not God even a bit, o ye men! Realize this clearly in your minds that God is attained not through showmanship.

Anant has an epiphany. He walks over to the back into the desert. He sits down.  Meanwhile, the banter between the two brothers carries on. A car pulls up, asking if the stranded family needs a hand. Ranjit goes into the desert to find his father, only to see that Anant has taken off his turban. Anant has had a change of heart which made him take off his turban, as he now sees Ranjit’s perspective. However, this is a moment of reflection for Ranjit as well, as his pessimism had proved to be incorrect. Someone had in fact pulled over to offer them help. He feels regretful about his prejudices about his father’s turban. Both father and son, who were at logger heads with each other, have now been able to get into each other’s worlds.

Silence speaks louder than words. In a montage separated by dissolves, Ranjit makes his father wear the turban. This gives the audience the space to reflect on the pre-suppositions made by Ranjit and the pain of his father’s entire belief system and tradition being challenged by his young son. The film ends with a shot of the father as he sits in the car of the man who had offered them help, contemplating on his learnings of the day.

Conclusion

Overall, Sharat Raju’s American Made is a film that has been made with a certain kind of integrity. While some portions seem appropriated for American audiences, especially the bits about the scriptures, the film largely seems personal and heartfelt. I could particularly relate to the characters, their quirks and even to the themes of the film. The minimal use of music, and the focus on performances, makes the film feel organic and real. The story hits the right screenplay beats, with a neat blend of comic relief, political deliberations, and family drama. The camerawork and staging are precise and well-planned, especially the timing of the camera movement. The camera isn’t self-conscious and doesn’t move on its own but is subservient to the movement of the actors. Editing and overall packaging is effective, largely following a blend of a mise-en-scene approach and a classical/continuity approach. The edit doesn’t call attention to itself. 

The performance in the film is the North Star.

Bibliography

 

“Long and Embellished Bio.” Sharat Raju, 4 Apr. 2019, sharatraju.wordpress.com/about/. 

“American Made.” ITVS, itvs.org/films/american-made. 

“American Made.” PBS, Public Broadcasting Service, 30 Mar. 2022, www.pbs.org/independentlens/documentaries/americanmade/.