Festivals, Awards, Celebrities, Recognition – But where is Indian Cinema?

As published in passionforcinema.com

Film Festivals in India/Foreign Lands about Indian Films are a big joke. Except for a rare rebellious one or two, like Beyond Bollywood. While making this statement, I go by the film listing and not by the commitment or hardwork of those involved, which is unquestionably good for any event. Everyone, including me and you are prejudiced by several factors, regional, caste, religion, linguistic, political, social and economic are a few. Even intellect, sensitivity and sensibilities add to the bias we incur.

Now, when someone conducts a film festival with the name “Indian”, should it not showcase the best Indian films, rather than quota contents from different parts of India? Is this possible? Take IFFI or IFFLA, its all about Hindi cinema . Why not a retro on Mohanlal/Nasseer/Soumitra/Kamal, instead of Anil Kapoor, have you heard of him? If not let the world know about him..that is the purpose of such festivals, not promoting already undeservingly up-there people , mainstream or independent. Then, we look around for some Marathi Film, or Forcibly introduce on Tamil film, just to ensure that no one raises a question. Does this behavior not hurt the conscience of cinema lover. Is our love for cinema not beyond this language, community, national barrier? The answer is No.

When San Sebastian film Festival awarded the best film in 2003 to a Korean Film, or Karlovy Vary picks up an Icelandic film for best picture, are we not ashamed as Indians, at having not thought beyond Hindi cinema, when we plan to take Indian films International. The Best Indian Films in the last 100 years, have been from non-Hindi Films. But, who knows of them. Are they being heard or seen anywhere.

Someone would agrue, Hindi is our National Language, what do you have against it? Are you one of those linguistic fundamentalist from down South, who says my language is the best? No. I dont care about language, otherwise, I should be tryping in one of them rather than English. My traditional roots are so distant, that I would not be apprehensive even for a second, for recognizing English as my preferred spoken and written medium of communication. I am seeking my roots. But my personal quest aside, are we as a film loving nation away from our roots? Are we not recognizing good cinema, over and above the language it is made. When someone can see Eisenstein in Russian, why can’t we see Neelakuyil in Malayalam. When one reveres Goddard’s ‘Bout de Souffle’, who cares about Ghataks’ Megha Dakhe Tara’. Those who know Aki Kaurismaki upside down don’t know Girish Kasaravalli.

Why does IFFA promote Hindi Cinema, rather than say Malayalam, or Oriya Cinema ? Is it because Hindi films are the most accessible in Indian Cinema ? Is it because Hindi films have the path-breaking quality of content? The answer is not in the inputs but in the outputs. Hindi Cinema, is the easiest way of money-making in the world. More easier than and equally scientific as gambling. Money making is not bad, but what is provided in return, is important. The value provided to the consumers is of highest importance. Hindi cinema provides near to zero quality, independent, dependent, studio or otherwise. It is sad but true.

If one compares the best Hindi Films of the last 25 years with the best regional films then we are in for a shock. Especially, the Hindi audience will realize what they have been missing for all these years. When we speak of Indian-ness when supporting the Indian Team, or Fighting a war against Pakistan, why don’t we proclaim Indian-ness in seeing and promoting good cinema. How many Hindi speaking audience watch Oriya movies. How many Bengalis watch Kannada, or How many Tamilians watch Malaylam ( Neighbouring State) movies. When all of us in here are discussing classic French, Italian, German, Estonian movies, we just overlook our own back yard. We let the fragrance of the blossoms in our garden, pass by and buy flowers from a distant market.

What are we? Morons, Idiots or Indifferent people. Are we vary of our own country men? Don’t we want Indian cinema to improve? Or is it only Hindi Cinema , that we care about? Madame Tussauds has Amitabh Bachchan, SRK , Salman, Aishwarya and Tendliya….Now Kamals name is up for petition..but where is Ray, is he dead, alright so what about Benegal, Adoor or Shaji N Karun? Has anyone heard of the name Soumitra Chatterji ? When will he be applauded? After his Death? Where are so many other great Indian actors who have really contributed to Indian Cinema, where are those directors, where are those musicians. Tussauds is a private initiative, on which we don’t have any control, but the voting patterns and the choice of celebrities lets us know, where we are heading, to oblivion? Hindi Cinema is already engulfed by these big names and a few others. Even Independent Hindi cinema will die off once they see real money, not is lakhs but crores. Greed and Economics with take over Contentment and Artistry.

Let us look as selection for Oscars in the last few years, it has been Idiotic nonetheless. These committee who select films as Indian Entry to the Oscar, must be experts in selling scraps. Look at the deal, 2008- Taare Zameen Par ( What about Ore Kadal, Anuraanan, Subramaniapuram), 2007 -Ekalavya (Where was AK suggested Vanaja, Paruthiveeran, Pulijanmam, Podokkeph, Black Friday) , 2006- Rang De Basanti ( Where were regional films?). If at all one goes for regional cinema, it is either a poorly selected, Jeans, Indian or Kuruthipunal. It is ignorance, coupled with arrogance that drives these people, who sit on the centre and assume that cinema, if Hindi is automatically good, and everything else is of secondary quality which requires thorough examination or reccommendaiton.

None can help Indian Cinema and the film loving nation, unless we stand up and cry foul. Stop supporting nepotism, lobbying , favoritism in film festivals, celebrity recognition, award nites, and international forums on Indian Cinema. Help the true Indian Cinema stand on its own. Dont cry after it dies….

Homicides and Detectives of the New Millenium

Every crime has a motive, every motive has a stimulus and every stimulus is tied to an event, the cause. The heinous of all crimes is murder, snatching away the right to live. What event might stimulate the motivation to kill? A question that gives sleepless nights to the slueths, as we sleep peacefully in our cozy comforts. Those who guard these sinister forces, driven by whatever reason that maybe, from committing homicide.

Some of the best homicide detective films of the recent years, especially this millenium, is the focus of this piece. Days are getting gloomy, the country is growing unsafe, restlessness and insecurity has lead to high increase in crime levels over the last few years.

Les rivières pourpres – Crimson Rivers (2000)
A sleepy university town in france, wakes up to a crime that would change its fate forever. A man is found killed, hanging from a cliff-edge. Commisieur Pierre Niemans (Jean Reno) is called into action. A parallel investigation takes place in an adjacent town, where a tomb of a six year old has been desecrated and the dead girls mother, claims that the ‘Demons’ have killed her daughter.

Gosford Park (2001)When High Society England of pre-war era, gathers to socialize, a murder reveals the delicate and intricate relationships , both of the inter and intra class variety, in the delightful thriller. The absent minded Inspector Thomson ( Stephen Fry) is the most unlikely person to solve this cobweb mystery

Vidocq(2001)
When the murderer is not human, what does a detective do? Vidocq pursues. A series of killings of young women, bring Vidocq face to face with the most unusual nemesis, the Alchemist. A criminal once himself, Vidocq quickly traces the path and purpose of the Alchemist. The scene is set for an epic battle.

Memories of Murder (2003)
‘FBI have to follow deductive methodolgy because America is a big country. But in Korea ,which is the size of my dick, we can walk across this country. Thats how we investigate here’ rattles a drunken inspector Park Du-Man, as they are faced with a series of murder of young girls, all raped and tortured to death, left in paddy field, gutters or jungles. The methodology of murder is same. Soon Inspector Seo-Tae-Yun arrives from Seoul and brings in some order and technique into the wayard investigation. A ingenous and highly interesting film

Crimson Rivers II- Angels of Apocalypse (2004)
A priest drives a nail through one of the seminary walls, to hang up the picture of Our Lord, and guess what, there is Stigmata on the wall, a river of blood flows down. Elsewhere, a series of dissappearances and murder are reported of a group who call themselves Jesus and the Thirteen Disciples. Each one of them is murdered with biblical overtones. Commisieur Niemans is back, in the Luc Besson written thriller, which takes epic proportions

Myrin (2006)
The death of two young girls due to medical conditions, murder of a middle aged man, whose one friend is in prison, and another absonding, unreported rape of a woman 20 years ago, are all of these related. See this highly engaging Icelandic drama titled ‘Jar City’ in English to find out, how one crime can cascade across generations leading to catastrophe.

Zodiac (2007)
When the killer sends across mails to the cops and even proclaims ‘I hope a good movie would be made of me’, then how do you decipher his motive? Based on a true, unsolved mystery of the Zodiac Killer. This movie traces the attempts made by county police to track the elusive killer, who strikes at will

Tell No One (2008)
Someone whom you presumed dead, one day makes a call, and appears in public place cctv cameras to prove that the person is alive. You will be as flabbergasted as Alaxandre Beck was, when he sees his dead wife, alive and back again. The same wife whom he buried, and must have died when he was just a few metres away. An exciting thriller, where the husband has to play detective to win back his wife, literally from the dead.

Notable ommissions include ‘The Da Vinci Code’, the highly ambitious ‘Number 23′ , funny and thrilling at the same time ‘Hot Fuzz’ .

Once Upon a Time in America (1983)

Director : Sergio Leone

Cast: Robert De Niro, James Wood, Elizabeth McGovern, Tuesday Weld, William Forsythe, James Hayden

IMDB : http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0087843/

Writing about ‘Once Upon a Time in America’ is as hard as watching the full 3 hr 49 minutes of the uncut edition, which I just finished watching today. Let me start with paying a tribute to James Hayden, who departed this world on 8 November, 1983 after this movie was released. James Hayden was a TV actor till he grabbed the role of ‘Patsy’ in this movie. ‘Patsy’ was trimmed character developed by the writers and Leone. He stood apart from the rest of the group as being non-fussy and Hayden played this part very well indeed. Haydens loss, to drug overdose, is yet another talent lost to the deadly habit.

Once upon a Time in America is a story which begins in turn-of- the-century America and ends in 1960’s. It is in core the story of a few friends, against the backdrop of an American Jewish neighbourhood gangs. The film, however, is a non-linear effort, which starts off with a series of bloody shootouts and torture sequences where a few men are looking for Noodles ( Robert De Niro). The men are cops, who have cleaned up the other 3 in Noodles gang , Max, Cockeye and Patsy ( Woods, Forsythe, and Hayden respectively) and Noodles’s girl Eve (Darlane Fluegel). Fat Moe (Larry Rapp) was tortured to get a lead on Noodles as well. Noodles escapes, flees to Texas.

Then we are taken back to early 1900’s where we meet a young Noodles, spying on Deborah ( Jeniffer Connely), Fat Moe’s Sister whilst she practices ballet in Moe’s restaurant store room. Noodles and his gang are petty theives, Patsy, Cockeye and the little one, Dominic ( Noah Mozelli). The team continue their exploits till they meet Max, who recently moved in from Bronx. Max is a schemer, a man who wants bigger things. They start taking up jobs, until local bad guy Bugsy, one day beats up Noodles and Max for starting off work on their own.

Now, Max and the team go ahead and meetup bootleggers , and pick up the contract of delivering bootlegged liquor off the coast without falling in the hands of authorities. They bring up an ingenious idea which involves a salt bag and a balloon ball (later on conveniently lifted by film maker Mani Ratnam in Nayagan , 1987). Bugsy finds out, and begins to hunt down the team. As the boys escape, little Dominic is shot down, in retort of which, Noodles kills Bugsy and goes to prison.

Now the scene is set in late 1920s or so, when Noodles comes out of prison. Noodles is greeted by Max who now has a company, and Noodles is a part to it. They own a place just behind Fat Moe’s Restaurant, where Noodles gets to meet Patsy, Moe, Cockeye and Deborah. Deborah is now a professional Dancer. Max gets Noodles to meet Frankie (Joe Pesci)who is a big boss, and has a job to be done for his brother Joe (Burt Young), steal Diamonds from a jeweler. The rat in jeweler’s den is his secretary Carol ( Tuesday). A burglary operation followed up with gunning down of Joe follows.

Now the gang is graduated from a bunch of bootleggers to a proper mafia outfit. Max and team now work on the workers union strike and take sides with the Leftist who is lead by the union leader Jimmy O’Donnell ( Treat Williams). A political saga follows. Meanwhile, Deborah leaves for Hollywood , not without being raped by Noodles in a Limousine, and Carol joins the party with Max. The gang goes on with its gang-like activities which include intimidating police officials and industrialists.

Subsequently, prohibition is ended, and the gang feels the pinch. They see the future, where easy money is going to decline. Max, now frustrated, decides to Rob the federal reserve. A worried Carol, who has fallen for Max, talks Noodles into ratting him to the cops, so that Max goes in for a few years till his crazy ideas are gone. Noodles does that , he calls the cops and they, instead of busting the people, just kill them. Noodles alone escapes, or thinks so, until he gets an invitation to attend a party of Secretary Bailey, in 1968…35 years later.

Now, Fat Moe still runs the restaurant. Noodles meets him there . Moe thinks Noodles fled with the fund money of the gang, while Noodles thinks Moe had usurped it. Noodles finds it bewildering when he finds a box filled with cash, in the same locker the gang used to keep their funds, with a note that it is for his next job. Noodles meets up with Carol, who tells him Deborah is a successful actress now. Noodles checks out Deborah at the theatre where she plays in ‘Antony and Cleopatra’ , an indicative choice of shakespearean play, Leone’s little tricks, only realized later. Here, Noodles questions her about Secretary Bailey, and why he was here. Deborah plays ignorant, but is not effective. Later on a boy called David calls on her, whom Deborah say’s is the son of Bailey, and his mother died during childbirthe. Henceforth she is staying with Bailey. As Noodles is leaving, he sees David and instantly recongnizes his face to be that of young Max.

Yes Max is Secretary Bailey, who had faked his death in 1932 and is now Secretary of Economic Affairs. He in now into several controversies and has hired Noodles to kill him as a symbolic avenging of Max and a redemption for himself. Noodles declines and walks off. Max kills himself on a garbage truck.

This long saga is a great attempt, one that has to be acknowledged for its aesthetic content. Otherwise, it doesn’t have the grit of ‘Godfather’ or the brashness of ‘Goodfellas’. A decent movie by a great master. Doesnt live upto its name of ‘Jewish Godfather’ but still is one of the best I have seen in recent times.

An Ode to the Undead

As published in http://passionforcinema.com/an-ode-to-the-undead/

The most difficult sound to hear is silence. We hear it only when all the noises of the world cease to exist, and there is absolute peace , Nirudho. Transylvanian peaks, though, had an eerie silence about them, there was no peace, as the prince of Wallachia was always on the prowl. The silence had hidden screams, squeals of hapless individual who fell prey to the unquenchable thirst of the undead.

‘Gentlemen we are dealing with the undead, the Nosferatu’ revealed Van Helsing in the 1931 masterpiece ‘Dracula’.

Silence represented still life, boredom, monotony or melancholy in most dramatic cinema, while it puts on the long robes of fear in thrillers, mysteries and horror cinema. ”Nosferatu’ the silent, FW Murnau opus (Trailer) aptly calls itself ‘Symphony of Horror’. As Bram Stoker’s widow went after Murnau for unofficially copying ‘Dracula’, into Nosferatu, most of the prints were spotted and destroyed. However, hollywood producers never took this chance, and they bought rights to make Bram Stoker’s ‘Dracula’ in 1931 (trailer ).

Bela Lugosi’s Count Dracula, was not only a blood thirsty fiend as he is quoted to be, he was a count, an undead creature with all the chivalry, intelligence and introspection attributed to royalty. He says ‘ To die, to be really dead, that must be glorious. There are far worse things awaiting man than death.’ The pain of his being, rather non-being, is characterized through the shades that engulf him from time to time.
Historically, Dracula is believed to have been based on Prince Vlad Tepes or Vlad Dracul II of Wallachia, Romania. He was the son of Vlad Dracul I ( the king of Wallachia). Prince Tepes was held captive by the Ottoman Turks in early age, and spent years in their captivity. He learnt the cruel torture methods, like impaling, castration from the Turk invaders. The prince was later on rescued and fought against the Turkish Islamist invasion of the Byzantine empire. He was known for his cruel torture techniques applied on enemies and his own countymen alike. Elizabeth Kostova, in her fiction behemoth the Historian (Link) lets imagination fly from there on, and draws parallel how Vlad Tepes , Dracul II , son of Vlad Dracul I , hence called Dracula (Son of Dracul, Romanian for Dragon), is infact the undead whom Bram Stoker made literally immortal. Some other tales speak of Elizabeth Bathory, a countess of Hungary, who bathed in the blood of virgins, to retain her youth, as the real inspiration behind Dracula.

On screen, however, Count Dracula made several appearances in the following years, with primarily Christopher Lee reprising the role time and again in ‘Hammer Horror’ productions. The Hammer Production Company’s best with Lee was ‘Dracula: The Prince of Darkness’ (1965) (Watch a clip). This was a special movie as Christopher Lee never spoke a dialogue, Lees Dracula just emanated a hissing sort of noise, which haunted the audience for years to come. Lee appeared as Dracula for several years, like ‘Brides of Dracula’ , ‘Dracula has risen from the grave’. Christopher Lee ended up as the Staple Dracula for bloodthirsty audience.

The character of Dracula, changed hands to Frank Langella in 1979, in ‘Dracula’. This Dracula movie is strange because, Langella insisted on wearing no fangs make-up to make Dracula look more human than he was. So Frank Langella’s dracula was toothless for most purposes. Thespian Sir Launrence Olivier played his all time nemesis Dr. Van Helsing. At around the same time, the veteran Werner Herzog, revisited ‘Nosferatu the Vampyre’ with the eccentric Klaus Kinski, taking up the role of the undead prince. It was this movie that followed the concept introduced by Murnau in the 1922 version, which meant that ‘Dracula’ would be fatally allergic of sunlight (link). Notwithstanding his spooky talent, the vampire managed to tickle a few laughs in the extremely funny spoof version ‘Love at First Bite’ . The Dracula has to confront, communist government, Americans, fashion models, salsa, airport transfers and psychoanalysts (watch this clip where the predator becomes the prey ).

After a considerable gap of 12 years, the caped quencher, reappeared in his most horrific form till date Francis Ford Coppola’s ‘Bram Stoker’ Dracula’. This was one film, that was bore maximum thematic resemblance to the Bram Stoker work, and went beyond Stoker to pick up lost elements of Vlad Tepes life. It was a well researched studio product, that did not fail to impress and remains the best ‘Vampire’ film made till date. Gary Oldman played the wounded, dangerous and charming Vampire prince while Dr.Abraham Van Helsing was played by a poised Anthony Hopkins. The music by Wojcieh Kilar and Cinematography by Michael Balhaus (of the Scorcese camp), was exceptional. The sound of the movie went on to win an oscar as well.

Are there other vampires in the world, apart from Dracula who walk the nights? This question, was in the mind of Louis (Brad Pitt) who in ‘Interview with the Vampire’ exposes us to a world where Vampires live amongst us and prowl on unsuspecting preys in the night. A chilling tale based on Anne Rice’s novel of the same name. It sound and music was also nominated for the Oscar’s. The shadowy dark introspective backdrop of the movie, set the tone for all future vampire movies to come. This was a vampire movie, which entirely dealt with the emotions and existential angst of the undead creatures. Their helplessness and their ferocity. Their pain and their viciousness. A tale about vampires, rather than a tale of them. It pit vampire and man against each other and one another at the same time.

Blade, entered the scene later on with his silver toolkit to kill the ones of his own kind. We welcomed him when he came first, then we put up with him again, but when he decided that he wants a third helping, one had to show him the door. The Blade series fortunately, ended with the badly made third part , Trinity, which had iPod swinging vampire slayers and excellent gadgetry but no content. Anne Rice’s ‘Queen of the Damned’ was made into a film starring Aaliyah, and explored other travails of the vampire queen, again without much success.

Dracula returned briefly to the screen with, Van Helsing starring the hunk Hugh Jackman as Dracula’s nemesis, was a special effects bonanza. It pitted the theory of Werewolf as the only possible opponent to the Count Dracula, who is reproducing in thousands. So we have CG effects transforming Jackman to a werewolf and thousands of small vampire bats who burst like balloons in thin air, when their father is destroyed. This theme had nothing to do with either Bram Stoker, Vlad Tepes or the audience. The same theme is explored in a better and larger scale, ‘ a bunch of dynastic vampires fighting against a dynasty of werewolves’ in ‘Underworld’ series, which like blade released on installment too many. Underworld and Underworld Evolution were comparatively well made as against Blade or Van Helsing. But all said, it was a Hollywood CG extravaganza. I am yet to see the third installment, the reviews are mixed, though.

But, last year one film that swept me off my feet was a Swedish Vampire movie ‘Let the Right One In’ which was based on a novel by John Ajvide Lindqvist, of the same name ( Låt den rätte komma in). An exceptional work, which instigated this post. The movie is essentially about the questions that are raised by Louis in ‘Interview with the Vampire’ and touches the shades of the events that lead Vlad Tepes to what he becomes ( in the ‘Historian). It traces the story of a boy Oskar, who ’squeals like a pig’ when bullied by his classmates. When a father and daughter move in to the next apartment, Oskar befriends the mysterious girl. One day the father, or whoever he is, walks down with a can, funnel and choloform. In one of the most chilling scenes in recent years, we see him kill a young man, hang him upside down, and collect blood, all for his girl Eli, aged 12, but is a 200 year old vampire. When Oskar asks her if she is a vampire, Eli replies ‘I live of blood’.

If you thought, the story is chilling enough, the goodies don’t end there. The best part of the movie is the sound and photography. The background score, mixing and voice received accolades world over, and is one chilling experience,especially if you own a home theatre system. The sound of snowy breeze, the sneering anger of Eli, and immovable camera shots make ‘Let the Right One In’ an exceptional movie experience. Watch out for the climax, where several murders take place, but you never get to see them happen, you just feel them. The magic of cinema at its best.

What to expect in future? Let the right one In is being remade into English by some Hollywood studio, I sincerely hope it doesn’t get made. One movie, I am awaiting is the adaptation of the ‘Historian’ which is planned for release in 2010.

In case you are yet to be baptized into the world of the undead. You have got a welcome note..

‘Good evening, I am Count Dracula. I bid you welcome.’

Reference:-
http://books.rediff.com/book/Skal-David-J/hollywood-gothic:-the-tangled-web-of-dracula-from-novel-to-stage-to-screen/ISBN:0571211585/80571774
Historian, A Novel by Elizabeth Kostova.
Wikipedia and IMDB

Thus Spake Indian Cinema

As published in http://passionforcinema.com/thus-spake-indian-cinema/

‘In 1921, W Evans, a cinema expert in British Government was sent to survey the cinema scene in India. With remarkable foresight, he saw the possibility of cinema being used for political purposes. He recommended close censorship of films.’ says, the seminal work Tamil Cinema (Selvaraj Velayutham, Routledge, 2008. [Ref.1]

India today, as a nation, has millions of ideas to propagate, they include communal, casteist, factionalist, sexist, patriotic, secular, pseudo-secular, apolitical, atheist, communist, anarchist, apocalyptical, escapist ideas that throng the minds of billion strong population. The herd mentality in us humans, lead us to flock together with whom we assume are of the same feather.

W Evans would be nostradamically proud of himself, only if he had lived to see the precariously placed agenda, that finds itself in Indian cinema. Is our cinema propagandist? If it is, has it failed or succeeded all these years?. One would never know, as the whole idea is to deeply ingrain an agenda that needs to be propagated into the minds of the mass and understanding the mind of the mass is the last thing one would attempt first. Before answering these questions, let us briefly visit the century old filmdom that we cherished and nurtured during our lifetime. Memory and prints have vanished alike of British era films. If film lovers world over, look up to Eisenstein, FW Murnau, Fritz Lang, Orson Welles as learning initiation to cinema and film making, we Indians have no such qualms. At the maximum, we speak of ‘Alam Ara’, as the Indian screen spoke for the first time through it.

Indian cinema stood on borrowed legs during that period like Raja Harishchandra, Alam Ara and the social spectacle, Acchut Kanya. The influence of British authorities was high, and primarily harmless mythological and fantasies made through to the audience. Movies like Wrath (1930) were banned due to the fact that they showcase Indian actors as leaders. When the British Monarchy planned phased out transition for Indian Independence, it started off with announcing the Government of India Act 1935, wherein all British ruled regions of India could vote for their government. This imparted a sense of self-confidence , with a mirage of Independence seen at a distance, Indian film makers got adventurous. Studios sprouted like mushrooms in Kolkata, Chennai and Bombay. Mixed films were made, notably the Tamil Film Industry, resorted to patriotic propaganda against the incumbent rulers. ‘So you had Development of the Nation (Desa Munnetram) in 1938 and Motherland (Mathrubhoomi), Lion among Dalits (Harijana Singam), Lion of Bharath (Bharathkesari) and the well known Land of Sacrifice (Thyagabhoomi), all in 1939. Of these, only a print of Thyagabhoomi has survived and is in the archives in Pune.’ writes S Theodore Bhaskaran, in Frontline. [Ref.2

But by 1939, the congress government in Madras Presidency resigned, due to India’s involvement in the World War. Grabbing the opportunity, British monarchy re-imposed censorship and established Film Advisory Board ( read old day CBFC) under the auspices of propaganda officer, G D B Harvey. What followed was a series of anti-axis propaganda in Tamil. Burma Rani (, produced by Modern Theatres, was a Mata Hari style espionage drama, where a Yangoon based spy ring, involving three Indian Air Force pilots and a spy woman, plan their escape from the clutches of Japanese Army; apart from these In Defence of Honour (Manasamrakshamam), Kannamma My Darling (Kannamma En Kathali), En Magan (My Son) were war effort films of the 1940’s . Of these, only a print of Burma Rani is available.

After Independence, Hindi cinema ran out of ideology, and resorted to mythological and social issues, whereas Tamil cinema was busy promoting the pet Dravidian movement. When congress leaders despised cinema as an evil, like gambling and horse-racing. Kamaraj is said to have questioned ‘ How can there be government by actors?’. DMK cinema proved him wrong. CN Annadurai and M Karunanidhi stole the screen from everyone else. Annadurai’s Velaikari ( which had two zamindar’s cast representing intended characterization of Gandhi and Nehru) and Karunanidhi’s Parasakthi ( a mix of atheism, anti-brahmanism, anti-congress, dravidian propagandist affair) launched assault on the existing system, which DMK cinema finally broke down with the help of its actors like MGR, Sivaji Ganesan, MR Radha, NS Krishnan and SS Rajendran. When congress was overthrown in 1967, CN Annadurai presided as the first DMK chief minister. Never has cinema been used to rewrite the history of a people in such manner.

When the Kerala and West Bengal communist resorted to stage drama, in order to propagate their ideals, Bengali and Malayalam cinema looked at vernacular literature for source, and produced some gems like Ramanan, Nadhi, Bhargavi Nilayam, Asura Vitthu, Apu Trilogy, Megha Dakhe Tara and many more, Kannada and Telugu cinema were still revolving inside the mytho-social circle. Hindi cinema had transformed into semi-Urdu medium wherein lyrical masterpieces like ‘Mughal-e-Azam’, ‘Mother India’, ‘Pakeezah’ and ‘Pyaasa’ were born. It was time when this honeymoon with melodrama was briefly ended by two Sino Indian and Indo Pak wars. Indian cinema did not find the need to defend either wars, as there were no two ideological opinions on the need of war. Though, the travails of war was expressed in semi-propagandist movies like ‘Haqeeqat’ and ‘Ratha Thilakam’ (Tam). However, these are exceptions, not examples.

As communist presence in serious Indian cinema was felt throughout, mostly because of the alignment of several cinematic literary figures towards the ideology. This surely contributed to the primarily socialist nature of mainstream cinema, featuring the rich exploiting the poor, and a good samaritan rescuing the hapless destitute was a regular affair and can be attributed to an attempt of movie makers to reach out to the 700 million poor Indians. This form of tacit socialism was sometimes exposed through explicit attempts at promoting the ideology, often targeting communal agenda. with more effective movies like ‘Garam Hawa’ by MS Satyu.

I intend to keep most 80’s 90’s bollywood masala flicks and its sister products from other regions out of this discussion, as it is almost impossible to categorize nonsense. As Tamil Nadu reiterated its cinematic political manoeuvre, with MGR, probably the most popular Indian actor, not necessarily the best one, succeeded himself multiple times to the Chief Minister-ship. Scriptwriter Karunanidhi, had to be happy with the title credits, whilst the lead actor filled the screen from start to finish. Reel life imitating real life. While the MGR era neared end, in the neighboring state of AP, a fan raised a question, ‘Sir, we treated you like a king, what have you do for us in return?’, an emotional Nandamuri Taraka Rama Rao launched Telugu Desam Party , and placed himself on the high throne of AP. All the existing opponents were crushed. The NTR who was Rama and Krishna embodied, started appearing in socially relevant role and represented the poor mans savior. The unmatched popularity and new found screen image of NTR, combined to repeat the MGR magic in Andhra.

However, when all these happened, ‘Golden Man’ Rajkumar and ‘Evergreen’ Prem Nazir (he never shared the same popularity as the other neighbors, no one in Kerala does, for that matter) stayed out of politics. Rajkumar, though, did deal in propaganda in his films for the cause of Kannada and poor alike. Of late, Films rarely do indulge in full fledged propaganda, other than movies like ‘Gadar’, ‘Hero’ and similar flicks which celebrate brash criticism, laden with innuendoes, satisfying the emotional hunger of an affected population. ‘LoC’ , ‘December 16′, ‘Border’, ‘Keerthichakra’/’Aran’ (Mal/Tam), and ‘Kurukshethra’ (Mal) though devoid of any outright lashout, could not live up to a need for exciting war cinema. They all ended up being propagandist take on the misdeeds of our infamous neighbour.

Recently, I happened to watch gem of film, ‘Thalappavu’ (Headgear), which is based on the real life events on the in-custody encounter of naxalite , Varghese, who worked among the adivasis of Waynad. Cinematically brilliant, the movie announces the arrival of a young and promising director, Madhupal. His control of the craft is commendable, when he chooses non-linear and point-of-view method for telling this complex tale. All said and done, it indoctrinated the naxalite view, when the nation is fighting the menace, forming ‘Salwa Judum’ . The movie and the premise had no two opinions on who was right. Again malayalam cinema, always had a left incline, with ‘Lal Salam’ and ‘Raktha Sakshikal Zindabad’ , however none more vociferously courted the left ideology, than Renji Panicker, who in most of his scripts, covertly instills the left serum. But he came out confidently overt, as left is in power in Kerala now, with ‘Roudram’, where another left cronie, the great Mammootty, blatantly proclaimed their left incline and devotion alike. Marx , Karl not Groucho, would have been proud.

Anyhow, the film arena, which has always been filled with left oriented ‘free thinkers’, has now taken upon itself the task of unmasking the communal forces of our country, carefully avoiding the minorities among them, and promoting propagandist work of the cruel majority force. Films like ‘Naseem’, ‘Parzania’, ‘Zakhm’, ‘Rang De Basanti’, ‘Fiza’ and lately ‘Firaaq’ exhibit such trend. Exceptions like ‘Black Friday’ exist.

‘Any art or literature that causes degradation of the society should be restrained by legal measures’ – Thus spake Hitler. Cinema is a powerful medium, if the audience gets hooked on to the empathy, societies can be changed, governments overturned. A film maker has to be careful as to not utilize this power to knowingly misguide the audience, for popularity and success.

——————————————————————————————————-
Other References:-
wikipedia-Cinema_of_India
Tamil_cinema_and_Dravidian_politics
indiastudychannel.com/india/parties/2-DMK
corporate.lexisnexis.com/news/marketing,branding
hinduonnet.com
wikipedia-Nandamuri_Taraka_Rama_Rao

Of Love, Ghazal, Our Cinema and Beyond

As Published in http://passionforcinema.com/of-love-ghazal-our-cinema-and-beyond/

Chali simt-e-ghaib se ik hawa
Chaman suroor ka jal gaya
Magar ik shaak-e-nihaal-e-gham, jise dil kahte hain, hari rahi
tahaiyyur-e-khabar-e-ishq sun, na junoon raha na pari rahi
Na To tu rah na mein rahi, jo rahi bekhabari rahi

( From the direction of the unknown, a wind blew
The garden of happiness was set ablaze
But a branch of the tree of sorrows, which goes by the name ‘heart’, remained evergreen
Listen to the bewilderment in the news of love, neither did desire exist nor did the angel fairy
You ceased to exist, so did me, what was left was left unknown )

These words by Siraj Aurangabadi encapsulate the pain of love, wherein the lover is transported to a plain of consciousness where one is unable to describe the feeling. It is not desire neither is it without greed. It is not blissful, neither is it painful. It is unknown.
Of all the modern poetic forms Ghazals and Nazms of the Urdu language are perhaps the most love-centric. ‘Although the ghazal deals with the whole spectrum of human experience, its central concern is love’ says KC Kanda, in ‘Glimpses of Urdu Poetry’ . Several great poets like Mir Taqi Mir, Mirza Ghalib, Raghupathi Sahay Firaq, Zafar, ,Faiz, Zauq, Daag Delhvi, Sahir Ludhiyanvi, Qatil Shifai and many eminent others have contributed to this form.

Indian Cinema, which has been active for almost a century now, has dedicated most of its offering towards this feeling. When a prince,Salim fell head over heals in love with a courtesan, Anarkali, Mughal-e-Azam was born. Jehangir, conqueror of the world, as his name goes, was a helpless no gooder under the spell of a dusky Anarkali, pomegranate blossom. The flower bud conquered the sword, and proudly announced ‘ Jab Pyar Kiya To Darna Kya, Pyaar Kiya Koi Chori Nahin Ki, Chupp, Chupp Aahen Bharna Kya’…. (I loved,why fear? I loved, never stole anything, why hide and repent? )

Shakeel Badayuni’s self-imposed 105 time imposition resulted in Lata Mangeshkar crooning ‘Insaan kisee se duniyaan me Yek baar mohabbat kartaa hai, Is dard ko lekar jiitaa hai, Is dard ko lekar marataa hai’ ( Man falls in love once in his life, he lives with this pain and dies with it). The epic adventure ends in doom. But love in its purity prevailed.

Another attempt to capture this emotion during the same era, was ‘Devdas‘, which started its journey on the silver screen as early as 1928, in silent mode. Then P C Barua, who bitten high-time by love-bug, remade Devdas 3 times. After satisfying his appetite for the Sharat Upanyas, Devdas fell in the hands of Nageswara Rao, who exemplified the role, in a Telugu version, and cried ‘ Jagame Maaya…’ ( The World is and Illusion, life is an illusion…) in the sweetest voice of the great Ghantasala. In 1956, Dilip Kumar immortalized ‘Devdas’ in a shattering performance. Again the theme was same as Mughal-E-Azam or any other love story of the time, a high caste boy falling for a sweet ‘Naach Gaane Wali’ girl. When Devdas was forced to leave her, he said

Ham Jaise, Ham Jaise Barbaad Dilon Kaa Jeenaa Kyaa Aur Marnaa Kyaa
Aaj Teri Mahfil Se Uthe Kal Duniyaan Se Uth Jaayenge

( For us heart-broken, what is life or death
Today I leave your entertaining eve, tomorrow I leave this world)

The 2002 version is quite forgettable, which was full gizmo, colors, costumes and no content. In the much better 2009 Anurag Kashyap version Devdas is same lovetorn fool he was, but a bit more realistic in the e-mail era. Abhay Deol’s feeling’s are let out by two bandmaster’s Rangeela and Raseela as they say, do not sing

‘Bol Bol why did you ditch me,
Zindagi bhi lele yaar kill me,
Bol Bol why did you ditch me whore.
Bol Bol why did you ditch me’

Amit Trivedi, unlike his more worthy predecessors, spared me the job of translation, by doing the rites himself.

Getting back, Pakeezah, captured the essence of love, in all its unexpected uncertainity and fatal pain, as Kaifi wrote ‘Chalte Chatle,

Yeh chiraag bujh rahe hain
Mere saath jalte jalte
Yunhi koi mil gaya tha
Sare raah chalte chalte

(These lamps die,
burning out with me,
As I just walk by,
I got to meet someone )

Then romance got lighter, movies like Aradhana, Chaudvin Ki Chaand, Kashmir Ki Kali had their heroes shower praises on their lover with out of the world comparison, literally

Chaudvin ki Chaand Ho
Ya Aaftaab Ho,
Jo Bhi Ho Tum Khuda Ki Kasam
Lajawaab ho

( Are you the full moon,
or are you the sun,
whatever you may be, upon god
you are beyond words)

And Shammi Kapoor, tumbled, rattled and swayed in a petit canoe showering flowers and praises alike in Rafi’s golden voice

Chand sa Roshan Chehra ,Zulfon ka Rang Sunehra,
Ye Jheel si Neeli Aankhen, Kya Raaz Hain Inmein Gehra
Taareef Karoon Kya Uski, Jisne Tumhe Banaaya

(Face as lit as moon, Golden colored hair
Eyes as blue as the lake, what deep secret lies in them
What praise should I bestow upon, the one who created you?) Was it Sharmila Tagore or Ursula Andress ? golden hair and blue eyes.

Even a possible physical angle to love was precariously entertained in Aradhana when Rajesh Khanna gyrated in Kishore Kumar’s lust-filled voice
Roop Tera Mastana,Pyaar Mera Deewana,
Bhool Kabhi Humse Na Ho Jaaye
(Your appearance is intoxicating, my love is insane
We should not end up doing something silly)

When the audience got fed up of middle-aged men singing songs of love and lust with young women. The directors of the mainstream Hindi cinema decided to bring in a major difference. They cast young heroes. Story was the same, songs similar, heroes younger, heroines younger, sexier. Then you had Love Story, Ek Duje Ke Liye, Ram Teri Ganga Maili, Bobby .

Young love was innocent, when Bobby sings ‘Hum Tum Ek Kamre Mein Bandh Ho, Aur Chaabi Kho Jaaye’ ( ‘What would happen if both of us get locked up and the key is lost?’ ) , or quick learning ability shown in ‘Main Shayar To Nahin, Magar Ai Hasseen, Jub Se Dekha Tumko, Mujhko Shaayari aa Gayi’ ( I am no poet, but became one the moment I saw you). A fumbly Kamalahaasan (phonetically correct spelling of his name), impresses Rati Agnihotri with a song made up of movie names. Later on sings ‘Tere mere beech mein, Kaisa hain ye bandhan anjaana’ ( What is this bonding between us unknown?). Invariably, all the juvenile, inter-caste, inter-class, inter-religion romances end up in tragedy.

Then, every star kid in Hindi Cinema ( not yet popularly christened Bollywood, HFR Keating and Belinda Collaco notwithstanding), debuted in a lovestory. Sanjay Dutt in Rocky, Sunny Deol in Betaab, Aamir Khan in Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak, Salman Khan in Maine Pyaar Kiya and so on. Love language got softer again, with lovers exploring the unsure future that lay ahead of them, in Beetaab ‘Jab hum Jawaan Honge…’ or QSQT ‘ Akele Hum Akele Tum, To Kya Gham Hai’ ( You and I are alone, why sad?) or MPK ‘ Kabootar Ja, Pehle Pyar ki Pehli Chitti Saajan Ko De Aa’ ( ‘Pigeon go and deliver my first love letter to my first love’)

All this shallow expression of love continued as the next generation of actors or some starlet made a debut or a major breakthrough. The same story, same villian, similiar songs, new actors. As we saw Bobby Deol singing to Twinkle Khanna in the nasal Kumar Sanu tone ‘Nahin Yeh Ho Nahi Sakta Ki Teri Yaad Na Aaaye…Tujhe Bhoolne se Pahle Meri Jaan Chali Jaaye’ ( No it is impossible that I am not reminded of you, ….I wish that I die before I forget you) or Shahrukh Khan sings Aur Raj ne Simran se Kaha.’….’Tujhe Dekha To ye Jaana Sanam…Pyaar Hota Hai Dewaana Sanam’ ( The moment I saw you I realized that love is insane) .

More recently, Hrithk Roshan hogged the lime light with immense biceps and calf muscles only to sing to an equally well built Amisha Patel …’Kaho Naa Pyaar Hain…Kaho Naa Pyaar Hain’ ( Tell me that you love….Tell me that you love) or Harman Baweja singing some unmemborable babble from Love Story 2050. If we have to judge the passion of the filmmaker by the kind of songs that are churned out in our love stories, then we have fallen down, too deep to climb up now.

Some filmmakers have started to look beyond love stories as the staple content of Hindi Cinema. Let us hope these attempts would bring out the same magic as it happened when Faiz looked beyond love in a Nazm of his

‘Mujhse Pehli Si Mohabbat Mere Mehboob Na Maang
Main Ne Samjha Tha Ke Tu Hai Tau Darakshan Hai Hayat,
……….
Ja Baja Bikte Hue Koocha-o-bazaar Mein Jism
Khak Mein Lithre Hue, Khoon Mein Nahlaae Hue,
……….
Ab Bhi Dilkash Hai Tera Husn, Magar Kya Kijiye?
Aur Bhi Dukh hai Zamane Mein Mohabbat Ke Siwa,
Raahaten Aur Bhi Hai, Vasl Ki Raahat Ke Siwa’

( Dont expect me to love you as before, my love
I assumed that with you around life would be dazzling bright.
……….
Human bodies are for sale in ever street, every shop
Bathed in blood, splashed in the dirt
………
Agreed that you are as beautiful as ever, but what to do?
There is more pain in this world than love
There are more satisfying moments in this world, than moment of union in love)

The camera lenses that make Hindi Cinema, and most mainstream Indian Cinema, have to expose themselves to the pain that Faiz talks about, and explore the solutions that are more satisfying than celebrating victory of love over and over again.

Politically Correct Untruth

As published in http://passionforcinema.com/politically-correct-untruth-mere-pass-maa-hain/

Sex is Taboo

Mainstream cinema’s self-righteousness is forcibly bequeathed to the national culture. What is exactly India’s culture? Are we keeping sexuality in closet in a nation whose culture boasts the only available sex manual written by mankind? We even have a temple which proudly details the methods of the act.

The only movies which exhibit love making are raunchy potboilers dealing with infidelity or pornography. The tasteless filmmakers who fill up the screen with colorful aesthetic material forget that the most beautiful of all visuals that god created is that in which a man and woman merge as one in the union of love.

Good guys are not horny

When interacting with female co-workers in office, the good guy puts on a face of the perfect gentleman. While in the pantry, the same guy says, ‘ Arre yaar, kya scent maar ke aai thi. Mein tho khada ho gaya’. (‘What a perfume she had put on, I was immediately turned on’). I don’t propose to disclose your feelings immediately to the girl, which might result in your termination from the services. But I write this to bring it light, the real self that we possess.

We have been scampering all these years with hero’s libido shown in a positive light, where as the villain sexual impetus is evil. Let’s slow down and analyze the fact. The world and we as a nation follow many leaders, religious and political. Few of them are the best of men, the most intelligent, or the most integral, who at the same time are extremely horny; a few are homosexuals, some impotent and even pedophiles.

That does not belittle their greatness. Our cinema cannot take this truth head on.

Speaks no evil

If one has to be creative there is no choice but to be honest. Osho, the great master, once gave a discourse on the word ‘Fuck’ . It’s even more hilarious when we hear it in his voice, with all the modulations. I have a friend who can live without eating or sleeping for several days, but cannot spend even an hour without once spitting out ‘Bhen Chodd’ or its more impacting ‘Madher,,’ version.
All said, he is one of loveliest, most reliable person on the earth.

But in our mainstream cinema, he would be the worst villain. How can a hero be so sacrilegious? We need good boys who respect women, firmly footed in cultural ethos , those who don’t even open their mouth to utter a single curse save ‘ Kutte’ ( Dog) or ‘Kameene’ ( Rascal) ‘ Main tera khoon pee jaaonga’ ( I will drink your blood). Our heroes represent the pseudo-righteous society that we attempt to be.

God Fearing and Homely

Most of the women leads are as described in our matrimonial columns, the ‘Fair, Slim, God Fearing, Homely’ girl. Which righteous Indian young man would marry a girl if the matrimonial read ‘Dark, Plump, Atheist, Firebird’, even if she had a gem of heart, and extraordinary intelligence. Dark men/women are diplomatically placed as ‘wheatish’ in the matrimonial columns. If that was too much of a exaggeration, visit any pub in Mangalore. You might bump into one of these fair/wheatish homely women.

Barring a few rare exceptions, the Hindi cinema and most of mainstream Indian cinema strongly resort to the matrimonial while sketching the character of their leading lady. Even if they wear nothing, they are homely, at the end of the day, when it matters most.

The Good Poor and the Evil Rich

The communist party has miserably missed the opportunity for the last fifty odd years. Such socialist propaganda cannot be found even in their bible, Das Kapital or the psalms, Communist Manifesto. Each one of the major super hits followed the same theme, the megalomaniac rich egoist cruelly exploits a benevolent and ‘gold-heart’ poor. Ultimately, poor love and integrity wins over the rich atrocity

Good and bad people don’t exist. It’s a combination of the context, social environment and intention that decides whether a person’s action is good or bad. Point of reference, logic and depth of reasoning take the pillion seat while time tested emotions and factionist agenda drives away in our mainstream flicks.

“Cinema must never become simply a mirror in which the audience sees itself, recognizes itself and is thus satisfied. It should be rather a deforming mirror, that allows you to look behind reality” said Gabriele Salvatores as quoted in threemonkeysonline.com (acclaimed director of ‘Mediterraneo’, ‘Marrakech Express’ and others).

There are exceptional cinema made in India which break this barrier where the protagonist is a womanizing, drunkard professor of economics who believes all relationships are founded on physical needs or the gangster’s lieutenant who exclaims that ‘ Apni kismet gadhe ki ling se likhi hai’ ( ‘Our destiny is written with a donkey’s dick’, pardon my translation skills) or the guy whose only aim is to make money and at least once sleep with the his dream girl who in turn would willingly spread her legs , not even for her husband , but only for her communist lover who works with the poor in Bihar.

These are exceptions, not examples. Rare gems in a sea of soap stones. Many regional cinema and offbeat Hindi cinema from India has trespassed these forbidden boundaries often, but went relatively unnoticed due to lack of proper exhibition channels and general reluctance shown by Pan India audience, industry giants to accept different and regional cinema.

Does this mean that only the bad mouthed movies which have love making scenes reflect the real society? No. It means that all aspects of the society have to be addressed in the portfolio of cinema that an industry output contains.

Worldwide scores of filmmakers like Goddard and Almodovar have repeatedly questioned the depriving sensibilities and increasing intolerance of mankind. While films like Little Miss Sunshine and Life is Beautiful explore the other end of the horizon. Mainstream Indian cinema is no where in this spectrum and turns up the same sanctimonious yarn every other time.

We as a society have to throw away this pseudo-puritan hypocrite gentleman mentality borrowed from our imperial rulers and learn by marching further backwards to the free thinking nation, culture that we once were. If Indian cinema has to sustain and win the race against television, web media, which feed equally good and sometimes even better nonsense, in the long run, then it’s high time the film makers stand up and speak the truth, even if it is politically incorrect to do so

Tigers and Monkeys

As published in http://passionforcinema.com/tigers-and-monkeys/

I celebrated a tired Holi evening by reliving Satyajt Ray’s ‘Jalsa Ghar’, as I watched Ray Sahib unveil the human soul naked and beautiful, through the sounds of Indian classical music. The sound of classical music was never utilized before to such dramatic effect. I was reminded of a recent interview in rediff with Adoor Gopalakrishnan, a living master. He said “Sound is as important as the visual in films. I am very particular about the sound factor. In fact, I always have a separate screenplay written just for sound. …. Like some scenes in “Mukhamukham.”

After placating my hunger with such sumptuous feast of imagery and aural delight, I realized that people like Adoor may be richest artists that we have, they are amongst the poorest film makers, and still he wrote a separate screenplay for sound. An avatar once said ‘Do you work without any expectation’, we as an audience are trying our best to make it true.

The successful filmmakers argue, there is no demand for their kind of work. Average audience cannot take it. They then build a stone well, jump inside it, drag us along, and then proclaim ‘This is the world, 3m in dia. Live here and enjoy’

How much did Jalsa Ghar (1964) or Mukhamukham (1984) collect at the box office? Nothing, Zilch. Which films are they actually losing out to?

For analyzing that let us travel forth in time to the recent past 2003 when ‘Hazaaron Khwahishein Aisi’ hit the big screen, ‘Jism’ walked away with all the money. Later on in 2004 ‘Murder’ did kill many good movies. Is it a movies fault that another movie fails? No it is not. What would you do if someone sold you a toned-down bad copy of a Monet impressionist piece for Rs./$100000 telling that it is his own work of art? Even a copied Monet is preferable over an original low-life artists work. We, thereby, ensure that the world has no more Monet’s.

Shameless vultures they are who blatantly encroached into bits-pieces and sometimes even the whole creative unit from Hollywood or any foreign/regional source and put their name in the credits. Moreover, such film makers come forward and claim ‘It’s a different film that we are making’, ‘I got a different role, never like the one you have seen before’, and I hear them telling the audience and the public all over India ‘You all are dumb idiots, we know that’. Some of them even protest against CD piracy. It’s like the dacoit telling the petty thief not to steal.

One of the funniest moments in my life was when I went to see ‘Sangharsh’ (cheap remake of ‘Silence of the Lambs’), when it played in a theatre during my Engineering days. We laughed our heart out to see Akshay Kumar, sorry, Dr. Akshay Kumar, hamming the life out of Hannibal Lecter. I still remember a television interview, wherein Tanuja Chandra proudly expressed her uncontrollable emotions when she saw Dr. Akshay, as he was promenading inside a cage like a ‘Lion’. God saved Sir Anthony Hopkins, he was never taught Hindi, and neither is he interested in watching Bollywood movies.

Bollywood alone is not the culprit, down south, non-consented remakes, scene stealing, thought picking, idea theft, and even cheap tricksters like shot lifters, dialogue dacoit do exist. Hope the ailing Robin Williams (Get well soon!!) hasn’t seen ‘Avvai Shanmughi’ / ‘Chachi 420’. To the best of Amal Neerad’s luck John Singleton and Mark Wahlberg don’t watch Malayalam anymore, to find out that ‘Big B’ is a scene by scene parasite on ‘Four Brothers’. More recently, poor Zhang Yimou will have to learn Telugu to find out that the mega-hit ‘Arundhati’ stole the Peony Palace Drum Dance’ sequence from ‘House of the Flying Daggers’ shot on shot, frame on frame.

Mind you, dear friends, these are not exceptions, but just examples of the deep pit of horseshit that these great filmmakers have been feeding us for all these years. We ate stomach full, burped out, and slept. However, the stench of burglary still fills the air wherever I go, whichever cinema hall I visit, whichever trade analyst I meet.

Someone argued that our audiences don’t know the foreign languages that you are talking of; they have a right to see these movies in their own mother tongue, with their favorite stars. Point taken, there are several ways to do it, dub the film. Why don’t you do an inspired remake of ‘Jurassic Park’, ‘Independence Day’ or ‘Lord of the Rings’? Why does one choose a sleazy drama or crime thriller to copy from, which would be achievable in a controllable budget?

Another way is to buy the rights. If you don’t have the money, just recognize the inspiration, if your work is truly an inspired one, the creative mind of the original’s maker might come forward to appreciate.

Some others say, the remakes are better than the original, its true, who would watch a boring psychological thriller told upside down, when it’s pepped up with a love-story, a bunch of beautiful songs and a hamming villain? Agreed, Like and dislike is your choice but good and bad is a question that needs analysis. If copying is bad, then copying badly is even worse.

There have been frame by frame remakes, inspired movies with consent, exhibiting the decency of acknowledging the source. ‘Sholay’ by Ramesh Sippy was inspired from ‘Shichinin No Samurai’ by Kurosawa, When RGV made ‘Sarkar’, he put on a tribute to ‘The Godfather’ just before the title credits. When Kamal Hassan remade ‘Drohkaal’, he gave title credit to Nihalani in ‘Kuruthipunal’. But these are just rare exceptions. He / His producers, though, somehow forgot for ‘Thenali’ which was ripped off from ‘What about Bob’ and few others.

Adoor, Ray, Benegal, Chandran, Nagabharana, Kasravalli detested mainstream as it was and bore the cost. One feels they deserved better though. A new generation of film makers cropped up later, who realized that cinema needs to be effective along with being efficient. The best screenplay, lighting patterns, innovative editing, and rebellious shots alone don’t make good cinema. Good cinema is interesting cinema, with the mentioned traits augmenting the effect.

A bunch of good and interesting filmmakers were always around Sai Paranjpe, Balu Mahendra, Balachander , Puttana Kanagal, Padmarajan, K Viswanath, Bharathan, Nihalani, Ketan Mehta, Tapan Sinha and many more have made exciting original cinema.

Whenever we buy tickets to see these unauthorized inspirations, unacknowledged remakes, non-consented copies please be reminded, that we are abetting the crime. A crime which not only questions the fiscal right of the person on his intellectual property ( like piracy) but also in an even drastic impact , bereaves the creative rights of the person who made the original and replaces it with that of a cunning copy cat.

Let’s prove them wrong, in this age where ‘the world is flat’, with the License Raj been long ended and the average Indian is getting exposed to all the goodness of the world. With technology and information fast spreading to every nook and corner of the nation, empowering the poor to exercise his right to think intelligently, let us move from the darkness of this Leviathan’s well towards the light of common sense.

Let us decide what we want to see and who needs to be accountable for that. The Indian Film Industry has to grow and bloom new flowers, not plastic impersonations, which without any imparted life, however many they bloom will never fill the air with the fragrance of creative salvation. Let us water, nurture and at the same time prune away the infected parts of our industry to let it bloom as it likes.

Let’s give originality and individuality a chance, future generations would thank us for that.

Oscar’s and Our Cinema

“I come from a country and civilisation that gave the world the word that precedes silence and is followed by more silence. That word is ‘Om’. So I dedicate this award to my country,” Thus spoke Resul Pookutty, of whom only ardent followers of cinema had heard, before the Oscar night at Kodak Theatre.

Resul’s speech was invigorating because of the fact that he spelt out what most of us Indians shy away from, which is recognizing our roots, and being proud of our culture. For false pretense of socio-economic, politico-religious reason we put on a facade of the secular epitome of modern India, thereby tending to forget or even ridicule the exceptional civilization where we belong.

The honesty and innocence in Resul’s speech has won many a heart. It instantly instigated a two-pronged thought, on why do Resuls and Rahmans of India, value Oscars more than their Indian counterparts (like Filmfare, State and National Awards) and why dont we have more Resuls/Rahmans, who are able to produce the top-notch work with state of the art technology skills,but firmly footed in the cultural and traditional values of India.

Let us ponder on the first question, Oscar’s, as we know, are the sublime bliss of any movie-maker. It is the dream merchant’s dream. It is so because of the emphasis on quality and rigourous attempt ( inspite of all political lobbying) to spot out brilliance. I would attribute this religious attempt at skimming glory, to Hollywood locally and the American culture globally than microscoping my laud’s all over the AMPAA (the Academy).

Let us forget about the history of the Oscar’s, which in itself is an exciting treatise on how to continuosly re-invent and improve, for a brief moment, to focus on this year’s event. This is an year when Mickey Rourke (My choice for Best Actor winner) was nominated for ‘Wrestler’, Richard Jenkins (hitherto an unknown entity to most mainstream audience, but gave a scintillating heart-touching performance) for ‘Visitor’. Both extremely superlative performances, but over-shadowed by an exemplary ‘Harvery Milk’, Sean Penn. A fully satisfying moment for any cineaste is this one. If you win a competition, it should be the oscars. The beauty of this win is that neither Mickey nor Jenkins have little reason to be dissatisfied, as ‘Harvey Milk’ was equally stunning as their performances. That is why Oscar is so exciting and exalting to any artiste.

Some argue that ‘Slumdog’ got its recognition because of the bollywood style dance sequence in the end. Which is entirely nonsensical and not worth a discussion. Even the sound track, has excellent pieces like ‘Liquid Dance’, ‘Gangsta Blues’, ‘Latikas theme’ and ‘Paper Planes’, which contributed to the movie’s cause at crucial junctures. But ‘Slumdog’ is a exceptional work of cinema, with exquisite screenplay, innovative directiorial techniques and some excellent technical achievements put together. Thematically we may or may not agree with the content but cinematically it is a brilliant work of art. That is the whole point. Recognition for ‘Slumdog’ is not recognition for Bollywood, it is the recognition of the adapatability of movie makers from Hollywood ( I would prefer to use Hollywood even if it was a british film maker and a european production house, as the movie-making style of ‘Slumdog’ is entirely credited to Hollywood Studio movies).

But, why has India not been able to represent itself better than Bhanu Athaiya, Rahman and Resul. Do we have less talent. The answer is No. India Produces 600 odd films in an year. Nearly 100-150 is produced by Bollywood and the rest 450 odd by the other film producing regions/states like Andhra Pradesh,Karnataka, Kerala, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu and West Bengal. But, these 450 odd movies are not sifted, churned or mined to dig out the jewels of Indian Cinema. The movie going audience and the authorities are hell bent on promoting meaningless nonsense called Bollywood Films. Barring a handful of talented filmmakers, the industry called ‘Bollywood’ is full of rotten apples, whose only intention is to make easy money.

The profound stupidity executed tirelessly, film after film, in the form on novel innovations called ‘Item Number’. ‘Time Pass’ capers , proudly exclaiming ‘Leave your brains at home’, the Bollywood is an artistic disaster and this huge bunch of rotten apples are rotting the other regional industries as well. Nowadays, the serene Malyalam film industry and Bengal Movie scene is bubbling with activity, and filling the screens with absolute horrific, nonsensical material borrowed from their bigger brother. Kannada is just coming out of a bad patch of experimenting remake from all possible sources. Telugu and Tamil always were mixed in their output , they still continue to give a blend of rare good movies, while the large portion continues to be filled with idiocy.

So Indian industry have ended up producing nearly 550-600 good-for-nothing movies, making morons and stagnant retards out of our movie loving audience. Thousand’s Crore worth Rupees are being spent on this pawn broker business called movie making. Its ‘Kya Milta Hai’ all the way, as my Marketing Professor, Mr.Kulkarni, used to say. Not even a single work of ‘Fiction’ was adapted into a major commercial vehicle in the last ten years in Bollywood, whereas, Shyamaprasad from Kerala adapted the Bengali novel ‘Hirak Deepti’ by Sunil Gangopadhyay into a brilliant malayalam movie,’Ore Kadal’and to my dismay ‘Ekalavya’ was sent across to Oscar’s as India’s entry that year.

A R Rahman is a acclaimed genius, and he won, there’s nothing to be suprised about it. People like Speilberg, Kurosawa, Rahman were born to rule the field of art they work in and any institution should be proud to honor them. But its a ‘golden feather on the cap’ for AMPAA, Hollywood and in a larger sense , the USA, that Resul Pookutty won for Sound and he gave the acceptance speech.

USA might have the worst war policy and world domination agenda, but without mixing up two different issues, these are some good aspects that we, as a nation, should recognize. It was these qualities that ancient India once boasted of and what our historical, mythological literature is filled with. It is the unending pursuit of excellence and recognition of the same in a particular field of knowledge.

The only two Kazhaksthan productions in the last few years, ‘Mongol’ and ‘Nomad’ were both widely acclaimed, and highly watchable movies of great quality. ‘Mongol’ in particular was an exciting affair. If Kazhaksthan,due respects to their talent, could create such excellent movies, why cant we, the world’s largest movie producing nation, just produce one good movie of ‘Mongol’s’ quality.

It is a myth that west only recognizes movies that are done under western influence or by western filmmakers. Purely chinese ‘Red Shorgum’, a communist tale, by Zhang Yimou was recognized worldwide. Purely farsi in soul and body, ‘Gaav’ by Dariush Mehrjui and later on works of Majidi , Makhmalbaf, Kiarostami were acknowledged in spite (rather because of) of their exceedingly local flavor

I want to see the day, before I die, when the world looks upon India to provide the best in class of literary, artistic, spiritual, economic and social platform. I want to see the day, before I die, when a Malayalam film is running in full houses in a B-Class cinema house in UP. I want to see the day, when a Gujarathi Novel is adapted into a successful Telugu film. I want to see the day, When a Mizo director is able to direct a local language movie with leading Bollywood stars and a distributing network is able to market the content to the nation and the world.

Its time to wake up. India as a nation is waking up to new political upheavals. Let us bring artistic renaissance in India. Let us bring back the culture and civilization that Resul so lovingly reminded us of. Let us unite in promoting good art and culture, specifically, good cinema. We have atleast 1 billion original stories to say from the past, present and of the future. Let us drive out these easy-bucking film makers on to the streets, searching for stories flavored in the smell of the rain drenched dust of our beautiful motherland and make them earn every single paise of the ticket cost.

If this is too much to ask for, why are we a boasting of being a united great nation?

This article is published in http://passionforcinema.com/oscars-and-our-cinema/

Oru Vadakkan Veeragatha (1989, Malayalam, India) ( A Ballad of the North)

‘Chadhiyan’, Betrayer, was the adjective adorned by the villain of a folklore in northern Kerala, Chandu. Chadhiyan Chandu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chadhiyan_Chanthu)  later on became a ‘Judas’-like synonym for a deceiver amongst the malayalam speaking population of India.

But, a movie, released in 1989, re-positioned Chandu as a hero and reminded us of the fact that ‘History is written by the Victorious’.  ‘Oru VadakkanVeeragatha’ is perhaps one of best movies ever made in the history of world cinema. Technically the movie stands tall with authentic production design, exclusive action choreography, exemplary cinematography ( Watch out for the ‘Kalari Exhibition’ before the Chieftain) and magnificent Score.

M T Vasudevan Nair , the script writer, has created a flawless re-interpretation of a folklore which is ingrained into the psyche of every Malayalam speaker. He ingeniously turns the table upside down and we are left agape by the masterly act. Hariharan, the director, remains true to the script and sketches some ever-lasting visuals in the canvass.

 

Mammootty as Chandu in Oru Vadakkan Veeragatha

Last but not the least, cliche, the lead actor, Mammootty resurrects Chandu in full flesh and blood. If Chandu were alive, there is no doubt he would be proud and grateful.

Now lets get on with the plot, which is set in 16th century Kerala  in the Northern region. The plot unfolds in the household of ‘Puthooram Veedu’, the house of great Chekavar Kannappan ( the charismatic Balan K Nair). Kannappan adopts the son of his estranged sister when the boy looses both his parents and brings him to Puthooram Veeduto live and learn along-with his cousins. The boy, Chandu, a quick learner, earns love and admiration of his uncle, while is loathed by his cousin Aromal ( Suresh Gopi).

As they grow up Chandu is betrothed to Aromal’s sister, Unniyarcha( played with elegance by Madhavi). Several events unfold where in Chandu finds himself being pushed to the corner by his cousin and flees to further learn kalari under the guidance of Tulunadan expert and master Chekavar , Aringodar ( the majestic Captain Raju).

Chandu has to recount only losses in his life, as Aromal ensures Unniyarcha is not married to Chandu. He even deceives Chandu by usurping and marrying Kunjinooli ( Chithra) , who was interested in Chandu. Our Heartbroken Hero moves ahead and continues to master the art of Kalari Payattu ( the mother of all martial arts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kalari ) from Aringodar.

Meanwhile, Chandu is still smitten by his childhood sweetheart Unniyarcha, and does not miss the boat when Unniyarcha invites him to her bedroom one full moon night. Chandu swims across raving waters and gallops miles across barren land to consummate his love. A Chandu and Unniyarcha get intimate in her bedroom, suddenly Unniyarcha’s Husband , the eunuch Kunjiraman ( Sreeraman) knocks the door. Unniyarcha, the clever vixen that she is, creates a mayhem and convinces her husband that Chandu broke into her room as she was awaiting the arrival of Kunjiraman and tried to misbehave. Chandu gets a sobriquet ‘Penmohi Chandu’, Womanizer Chandu.

A dejected Chandu finds solace in Kunji ( Geetha) Aringodar’s daughter. One day, a feudal lord, Unnichandror ( Ramu) arrives at the footsteps of Aringodar and invites him to represent his cause in an Angam( Duel unto death) against a property feud with his brother Unnikonar ( Devan) . Unnikonar, in turn invites Aromal to represent him.

Chandu is now caught in a dilemma, when his uncle requests him to play second hand to Aromal in the ‘Angam’ against his teacher Aringodar. He decision is made easy, when Unniyarcha appears and offers to give herself fully to Chandu if he assists and helps Aromal win against Aringodar. A tempted Chandu, decides to second Aromal.

Chandu, takes upon himself the task of revitalizing the swords of Aromal by providing them for treatment to the Kollan, blacksmith. However, Kunji, Aringodar’s daughter bribes the kollan and makes them brittle.

On the day of the duel, the highly skilled Aromal is no match for the master Aringodar. To add to the misery, Aromals Sword breaks into two. As Chandu placates an attacking Aromal seeking ‘Time Out’ to replace the weapon, Aringodar obliges, but wily fox Aromal, throws the half broken sword and kills an unguarded Aringodar.

Aromal is declared winner. As he retires to his resting place, Chandu follows him to tend to his injuries. Aromal blames Chandu with cheating, by treating the swords to make them brittle, and attacks him. Aromal kills himself in an accident by falling over a sharp lamp. As people gather, Aromal breathes out his last words ..’Chandu Chadhichu’..Chandu Betrayed.

The ill-fated Chandu escapes the mob and finds the Kollan, who informs that he was bribed by Kunji. Amongst spectacular action sequences, Chandu storms into Aringodar household seeking Kunji. Again he is defeated, as he finds Kunji, commit suicide by hanging herself.

Chandu returns to ‘Puthooram Veedu’ and is greeted by a raging Unniyarcha, who vows her son’s will avenge her brother’s death. Years later, Aromal Unni and Kannapan Unni ( Son of Unniyarcha and Aromal respectively) come to the doorsteps of Chandu’s House seeking revenge.

Chandu explains to them the situation. They don’t listen and insist on a duel to death. Finally Chandu agrees and defeats both the boys with extreme ease.  But the boys refuse to leave.  Aromal Unni exalts’ I son of Unniyarcha, will die or go back with you head’.

Chanduin one final act of Valour stabs himself with a sword and says to Aromal as he dies ‘ You are my unborn son …’ his love for Unniyarcha still intact.

A Magnum Opus…near perfect Cinema.