When I saw Sita Sings the Blues, I was enthralled by the distinct artistic portrayals in the film. To be perfectly honest, I actually found myself intimidated by the precision and craftsmanship with which every unique form was made. The story and songs themselves were also quite compelling in their own right.
However, the piece has received quite a bit of criticism for either being insensitive to Hinduism, or that it lacks the logical, standard pacing of a regular film. Although I cannot address the first complaint, the second one is one to consider. I feel as though there is an interpretive problem with Sita Sings the Blues, wherein viewers expect a cinematic movie, get something different, and simply dislike it.
I think Sita Sings the Blues should be taken and appreciated in the same way as a nice painting. All things considered, the piece was likely made in the same way as a painting would have been: by someone, alone, in their home. The piece also is particularly notable for the artistic style, like a painting often is. Thus, I feel as though for one to completely appreciate the work, one must view it as though it were a beautiful painting. In that way, he or she will be able to enjoy the work in its purest form, and savor in its most wonderful features.