A FILMMAKER CONVICTED
iView Author: SHITIZ SRIVASTAVA and SHAMBHAVI MISHRA (Lucknow, India)
Email: SRIVASTAVAPROBABLE [at]gmail[dot]com
Content : A FILMMAKER CONVICTED
Judge: Mr. Filmmaker. You are standing in front of jury today and convicted in several cases. All the cases will be called one by one in front of the jury and your defense in each of them will be called. You are allowed to argue and present facts based on solid evidences, not just theory and you are allowed to take time for preparing the defense, the court is allowing you that. That would be all from me.
The respected lawyer can put his accusations one by one now and the convicted filmmaker is ask to answer them in the politest way possible maintaining the dignity and decorum of the courtroom.
(Film maker is standing still and looking at the ground as if he wasn’t even listening. The judge waits for any reaction, but finally signals the lawyers to proceed.)
Lawyer: With all due permission my lord, I would like to present in front of jury, the case of Mr. Filmmaker. Mr. Film maker has been making films for nearly 20 years now. His first film was released in 1990, as far as my facts go, and then his latest film came in 2009. (To the filmmaker) Not a single of your movies got passed by the censor in one round. A lot of editing became a common routine for your movies, and then out of nowhere, the full versions were available in the market in the form of pirated cds. I reckon it could be done without your permission. Your film portrays many psychological disorders of human life and many dark secrets that are corrupting the minds of youngsters and children. I am not saying this baselessly, five of the top magazines have special articles on you and on your movie style, three newspapers has covered and went through an exclusive research on what and how your films are affecting the society and nearly all new channels are covering your story from time to time, none of them says anything positive.
(To the judge) All the reports are presented to your honor on his desk. You can view them now or later, as you please. A copy of all the cuttings along with a cd is also provided to the jury for consideration.
(To the film maker again)Now, I am confused here. I don’t know whether you are more interested in film making or in cheap publicity. I don’t think this is helping you anyhow. Even your cheap publicity is not doing any good, as 11 of your 13 movies have been declared flops, one was semi hit and only one was super hit. 20 years and one super hit movie, I don’t know how you are arranging funds and producers for your movie?
You film shows extreme violence and sex, along with complex storylines that is not only hard to understand but uncomfortable to watch. Some of your movies were so slow that the characters were hardly moving. You lift the gay rights, you lift the drug culture and you show irrelevant philosophy. Your movies don’t have any morals or lesson; they are just made for the heck of it.Your movies don’t inspire young people to do something good in life. They don’t inspire anyone to love ones culture and country.
I agree your films are appreciated in other countries but in our own country I have read that they are severely despised by most film makers. Your films are appreciated abroad not because of your good direction but because of the controversial topics you choose and also because these countries unjustly want to encourage poor countries in film making to come ahead. You don’t give interviews and live a very private life. You never came out to justify your movies. I don’t know what’s driving you to make them, if it’s not for audience. I am sincerely unaware of any motives of yours for making these films and unable to understand that why anyone likes to waste his life in making things like these. I personally believe that you in different field could have been doing far better than wasting your life in here, when, with no offense intended, you have no talent for film making in my opinion.
That’s all from me. Thank you.
(Everyone starts to look at Film-maker. He is silent. Still in the same calm composure with conceited grace on his face. He is still looking downwards on the floor somewhere. The lawyer is getting irritated. He felt like he wasn’t heard. They wait for another three minutes.)
Judge: Let me inform you that your silence in the court room will be taken as an acknowledgment and acceptance of the convictions and could be held against you. You will be accused of guilty per charge and will be executed accordingly.
(Still silence.)
Judge: I am asking you for the last time. After this I will duly ask the jury to announce their verdict on you being held guilty or innocent. (He stops and waits for any reaction.)
(Unable to get one, he continues) Silence won’t help you. I ask you for the last time that whether you plead yourself guilty or innocent. (No answer. Film maker is standing like a statue.)
Hmm. I respectfully ask the jury to announce their decision and also like to state that the convict is now also charged under the contempt of court for not answering and following the court rules along with maintaining the untimely silence.
(Everyone starts to look at judge now and then to jury, when suddenly….)
Filmmaker: Yeah, excuse me, what were you saying? (Talking as if woke from a long sleep). Sorry, my apologies. I wish you haven’t minded my absent mindedness.
Lawyer: I don’t think you are taking this court any seriously Mr. Filmmaker. You are being held as a convict here. I hope you know that. Now I am not going to repeat my arguments and accusations. If you want to, make you defense howsoever you want.
(Judge is smirking at the whole incidence. He was expecting some good debates here but it turned out that this guy is lunatic.)
Filmmaker: No, no I heard you. I heard you clearly and precisely. I was just watching that ant going over there. It started moving right from my feet to that corner of the courtroom. It started moving, in the straight direction, I don’t know how she knew that it was straight; I could never myself walk in a straight line until some line was drawn on the ground. This was really genius. She knew where she was going. She didn’t care and give a damn about anyone in this courtroom. In the midway, near the shoes of Mr. Lawyer, when he was accusing me of making unmoralistic films, she took an insect three times bigger than her own weight and dragged her to the other corner, where I assume is her home. This was marvelous.
To me it was amazing, I see a big thing and I judge it whether I will be able to do it not; I don’t do it actually but I weigh the options in my mind. I don’t touch that thing but I think whether I would be able to do it or not. Now this ant just saw something that she wanted and that was a task nearly impossible to do but she did it. That is courage. All we need is a belief that we can do it and we would do it. (The film maker is again looking at the ground and looks like he is talking to himself.)
(Looks back to the Lawyer)Now, Mr. Lawyer. I heard everything you said and I heard it great. I listened to you very clearly. It was an awesome piece of work. You really did some research on me.
Well, when you said that I make films for me and not for audience, you were partially right; as I make films for me but also for audience.
I make films I like, that I want to reach audience; but I don’t let the likeness of audience intimidate the likeness of me because whatever we know about the likeness of audience is based on the experience of previous movies and their plots. What I make is completely new and no one, including me knows whether the audience is going to like it or not. And what audience you are talking about, audience like you or audience like me. Because I like my movies, and a very small though but there are people who like my movies. Then there are people like you, who don’t, then don’t see them. You are never forced to buy tickets, and even if you do, the exit door of movie theatres is always open. Blaming the director for a movie, who is presenting his vision that you consciously chose to see, is nothing but blaming your own thinking powers and insulting them.
You cannot say that we have to be responsible and should make good movies. We never made any rules regarding that. We make movies; that’s it, period. There are no rules attached. You cannot force anyone to be responsible. Those who are, are making so called ‘good and responsible’ movies. Let them make it but no one asked them to be responsible, they just felt it. I don’t feel responsible.
A film maker should be independent of all responsibilities and expectations otherwise no art could ever be perfect and satisfactory to any level. Both of these things hamper his thinking and the characters he create.
I am an artist. I do art. An art is nothing in itself without the appreciation of those who didn’t participate in its making. I like my work to get acknowledge. But on the cost of what! Sometimes you got to choose your appreciations too.
I question myself, that should I change myself and start making films that will get appreciated but kill the man inside me. I immediately decide with no further ado, I have to work for this man inside me. I am not responsible for whole world. Everyone is responsible for himself. You cannot feel responsible for anything if you are not responsible for you and your actions. Being irresponsible to the man inside you and showing that you care for your country and society, in my eyes is a crime.
The basic goal, aim and motivation of any man should be to keep himself happy. Only if he is happy, he can keep others happy. I am in constant efforts to keep myself happy. I get happy by making these films.
You say that nearly all my films except one was flop. No one watched it. And then you said I am corrupting the minds of youngsters and kids. How and in what way it is possible that my films are getting flop, no one is watching them, and I am still accused of harming the innocent minds.
You said that I have sex, violence, gore and whatever in my movies. Isn’t it a part of society? Aren’t those the kind of cases you witness here every day? Am I supposed to put a blind eye towards it? Can’t I show it in my movies if I feel like showing it as I find them interesting enough to re-create them with my own hands? Should I become hypocrite and start showing the good life, larger than life portrayals and give people hope for three hours of better world that they will never ever see?
Just like a film maker imagines a scene in love, romance, fight and give it a shape, I do that too; but in a different way. Whatever I have witness, I put my imagination in it and I write a script. Is that wrong?
I think drugs are taken. I think sex is being done. I think violence exists. I think cigarettes are smoked. If I am showing that; then how much of it is wrong?
I am not asking people to do anything, I am showing my mind, if they feel like doing it, they can do, I don’t force and I can’t force them to do anything, neither can you insult their intelligence by thinking on their behalf and deciding what they must think and what not.
Man has a brilliant mind. It thinks and it imagines. Please do not stop it. The whole human civilization is based on the fact that we think. We can think beyond the truth and we can think beyond the realities. We think, therefore we are. I heard that somewhere. So right it was.
I don’t give interviews as I don’t feel justifying my actions to anyone. Who needs the explanations? I don’t think anyone does. All they want to do is nail me down. The truth is that they don’t want to know me; they want to create something that could be sold. When I say “they”, I mean newspapers, magazines and news channels. No one has time to know the subtleties of my thinking; yes, people are too immature for that and why to tell them anything when I am already telling them in the form of my movies. All they want is news, I give them enough of that through my movies, why interview?
Spare me the luxury of thinking and I will change my profession. I might become a lawyer; but not today. Today I can think and am still thinking.
I don’t know what punishment you will decide for me and I don’t care. Whatever happens to me now, I will be happy and you will be irritated by thoughts of me because you don’t have the courage to think and so you don’t like anyone who does.
If you think that I have a film making as a profession and taking it away from me, you can cut my hands, well you all are grossly mistaken about that. I am not a film maker and that is not my profession. My profession is thinking, I can very well do it all the time and no one in this world can stop me from doing it. Movies are just my medium of presenting my thoughts. You can ban my movies but not my thoughts.
I am standing here, all alone, daring you to give me the worst that you have.
(The film maker was released and his films were sent to the film committees for reconsideration.)
Tags: censor, film, filmmaker, filmmaking
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
I thoroughly enjoyed reading this piece. Thanks!
coincidentally….yesterday i was watching a german movie ‘the lives of others’ which was about policing the cultural scene in east germany; how tabs are kept on the creativity of the playwrights because the right-wingers were of the opinion that plays/movies influence people and drives/mobilizes public. they were trying to cut-down the civil and creative liberty and create a homogenic society
.
anyways, nice work…a little too contrived though. u could have been more precise. nevertheless, keep writing…
@crazyrals
There is nothing contrived about the writeup. Its a brilliant and well written one. I have read most of what you have written in PFC. Your’s is a cinephile thing, this write up comes from somebody who knows art.If you are rational, then beauty escapes you and disappears. This one is emotional.
Fabulous article, and i could make out who the movie maker is being referred to here also, but wud keep it to myself. GReat work, keep going, and whatever be the movie maker’s identity, the eternal struggle between art and responsibility would always be going on.
@ Rals: BTW East Germany was left wing not right wing.
Anyway left or right, conservative or liberals, Govts are same the world over.
Or as Pierce Brosnan puts it in Goldeneye, “Governments change, lies dont”.
@juliet: plz relax and dont jump the gun. i did mention abt the movie i saw and how art was being strangulated. so, i do understand art
.
i have appreciated the post as well
.
my mistake, i shud not have given any feedback on the writing style…fine…cheer up
.
thanx for reading my posts, pushes me to write better…i am quite mediocre, i know … still learning :(
@ratnakar: by right-winger i meant the ‘conservative’ types, was not trying to be politically correct
. yes, left right or center …they all screw-up :D
yes ‘The Lives of Others’ is a good movie to co-relate with this post- no doubt.
The censors have always been a problem for quite a lot of film makers in India.Hope there’s some out of the box change that happens in the way they function & hope it happens soon.
This is a good reply from every type of filmmaker to, each and everyone, who criticises any movie.
“Then there are people like you, who don’t, then don’t see them. You are never forced to buy tickets, and even if you do, the exit door of movie theatres is always open. Blaming the director for a movie, who is presenting his vision that you consciously chose to see, is nothing but blaming your own thinking powers and insulting them.”
—
Most of the things i read in this post, reminded me abt RamGopalVarma.
Kudos to Shitiz & Shambhavi for this insightful & well-ornated article. My first impression was of it being a bit lengthy but really, it ended up being a thoroughly interesting read. I personally am a huge believer in the phrase “cinematic freedom”, and the writers here have reinforced this belief; shared by numerous patrons of cinema. Keep up the good work!!!
“In relation to the political decontamination of our public life, the government will embark upon a systematic campaign to restore the nation’s moral and material health.
The whole educational system, theater, film,
literature, the press and broadcasting –
all these will be used as a means to this end.” -Adolf Hitler…
Is this Ram Gopal Varma?
hmmm…is it Ramu in a Fountainhead scene?
sounds like Anurag post 20 yrs in courtroom scene of Fountainhead..though i hope he has more hits
but no Ramu movie has released in 2009 yet
It sounded like RGV for me, becoz i keep visiting his blog, and his style is like this. (not same sentences).
Well, this article is universal. Even Dev-Anand can say all this, Subhash Ghai, Mahesh Bhatt, David-dhawan, Or Any director whom u don’t like, and don’t like his movies, he can say the same thing.
Very nice post. Straight out of climax of Fountainhead. Filmmaker sounded like Anurag after 10 more years!
Beautifully carved. “impressive” is an understatement.
eye opening article….well written.
I don’t think it is Anurag.
this is my 7th reading i guess, i found something more in this article.
–
The director here, doesn’t care abt anyone, he makes movies for himself, he is not responsible to make any good movie. He can go beyond realities.
He doesnt force or request anyone to watch his movies. he doesn’t do interviews, and doesn’t try to justify anything.
This director never said that all other audience is dumb or has poor taste. And i am the best, my movies are the best.
The best thing i like abt this director is, though he is talking abt his freedom, he respects the freedom of audience too.
He is neither boasting abt his movies, and nor he claims that all other movies are worse. And all other ppl shud watch his movies. if u don’t like my movies then either u r a dumb, or u dont know cinema.
—-
Now doesnt it sound like Dev Anand. We may not enjoy his movies, but he enjoys making them. And i believe that there is something in his movies, and in his ideas, which he wants to tell. (he is not totally dumb guy, he is an intelligent person). But i cudn’t get it yet.
—
And there are millions of mithun movies, (it is impossible to list all his movies, those are infinite in that sense). Here those filmmakers can say the same things, we are not responisble for good cinema, we show whatever we want, and we have few ppl,who love our movie, and we don’t care what u other ppl decide. (whether our movies are junk, or dimaagBaajooMRKDK, or c-grade whatever)
This articles has two sides.
One. We can assume, that director here is someone brilliant director,whom we admire, and the judge-lawyer and the opposing audience is the stupid one.
Two. We are that opposing audience, and director is someone, whom we consider that he makes junk, uses stupid scripts and adds unnecessary stupid masala. And we think his movies are bad movies.
——
Instead of saying, “I didn’t like this movie’, we have started saying, “This movie is boring /bad /stupid” (And whoever loves this movie, has poor taste, And whoever made this ,is a studpid too.)
We became judge.
HAHAHAHAHA……. pyar diwana hota hai mastana hota hai…… seriously dude aaj yeah article SHURU se padh ke yeah to pukka hua
. anyways this is the second time i think you have been able to put your thoughts into coherent words and let me congratulate you that you connected this time. for those of you who are thinking who the director is let me throw some light. the author is the director. some one here wrote that this peace is emotional…. it is because this is years of soul searching (which by the way is still going on) put on paper. the article does talk about freedom of thought and action but reading this article makes me think about our own inability to do any thing about it. yes i know that some of my friends might say “no i do what i like’ i make my own rules” but consider the fact how much our likes and dislikes are dictated and shaped by the pezznovante( i hope i spelled it right) of the world. I like to look beautiful…. thats my choice. but is it ?????? one day straight hair are beautiful and the next day curls are in fashion now my definition of beauty is dependent on a fashion guru who wants to promote his line……… this is just a small example of how hard and utterly frustrating it can be to be totally detached. characters like roark exist but then they become fathers of nations………. just thought to introduce some food for thought….. good work my man 
Jitesh needs to read this article. In last fortnight’s Filmfare he said that that Anurag should make better films ( that public “will” understand ) – else he will prefer seeing Dostana2 or Dhoom3 :-)
Loved the article. Exactly what I feel about reason to make films.The hypothetical director in this article for me is the most ideal filmmaker.
thanks to all of you for reading my article and appreciating it beyond my expectations.
i knew that the most of you who would read the article will have an innate desire to know who i am talking about. what is the significance of characters and who is the film maker?
i would like to clear some things, things that existed in my mind while writing this article. first of all, its not fountainhead, no matter what resemblance and reasons you could come up with it. Just because its a court room drama with an ending monologue from a character who seems indifferent to the society and opinions of others, does not mean that it is “fountainhead”. Believe me I didnt think it would be compared to it though now i feel that my writing howsoever got intimidated with the writing style of Ms. Ayn Rand, courtesy you all, thanks, i will try to be more myself from the next time. However i feel that the main reason, apart from the scenic resemblance of the last chapter of fountainhead, of comparing it to Howard Roark is that this guy is ideal if nothing else.
now secondly, the film maker, is neither Ram Gopal Verma nor it is Anuraag Kashyap. i like them but they don’t have this kind of thinking i think. And its not Dev Anand for gods sake, he make crap movies(no offense intended). And why not? well i mentioned that Film makers’s films are part of various film festivals, so… i think you get it. there is no excuse for bad films i guess. if you want to hide behind the fact that you tried to show your mind and justify your bad execution in the movie, then i think i don’t find that any accountable. If i had any director in my mind while writing this monologue then it was Pier Paolo Pasolini and Andrei Tarkovsky.
i gave the court scene in this because there is no other place where this character would like to say or justify himself. he can only be forced to speak in front of judge. he very well knows that he is a part of society so he has to follow their rules but that only too an extent where the rules do not interfere with his personal sphere of independence. no film maker wants to make a movie that he wants no one to watch. there is no satisfaction in unappreciated art.
i am happy you all appreciated my article, and thanks again. thanks PFC too.
@shitiz (24),
[And its not Dev Anand for gods sake, he make crap movies(no offense intended). ]
Really is it true?
Hope you make such statements studying well all his films which he has done as an actor, producer and director. Hope you have studied deeply all the departments of filmmaking in all his films and has gained the insight to call his films as CRAP.
Hope you can justify such statements by writing in details on music, writing, acting, technical departments etc etc of his films.
World can be benefitted with such generous help if people can take pain to dissect every department of filmmaking.
Opinions belong to consumers and not to film students.
Waiting for a detailed post on such topic.
Sir, with all due respect I agree to what you are saying. saying anything about Dev Anand is like spitting on sky, when no matter how high it goes, it will come and fall back right at your face.
But when I say “make films”, I am not talking about the legend that he is, in the acting or any other thing bcoz I know he is pro at that. I studied his films as well. I was only replying to the answer of one of the fellow responses that this film maker is Dev Anand.
Please sir, allow me to take the liberty of citing this:
1985 Hum Naujawan
1989 Sachché Ká Bol-Bálá
1990 Awwal Number
1991 Sau Crore
1993 Pyaar Ka Tarana
1994 Gangster
1998 Main Solah Baras Ki
2001 Censor
2003 Love at Times Square
2005 Mr Prime Minister
.period
To make movies with passion is different thing and to make god movies is different, but then I ask myself that how do you decide what is good or bad, and what is passion and else.
I may not be the most intelligent person to judge any movie or the passion behind it, but I know this much that some times when I don’t like the movie, I may not like it because of my own issues of life and education-surroundings I have got, though I will always appreciate the technicalities it went through in its making and the idea behind it, if there is some.
When I referred Dev Anand here, I didn’t talk about his cinematic skills in acting, I am no one to doubt his talent. He is an acting genius, no doubt about that; I don’t even doubt his direction skills as well since he gave us “Hare Rama Hare Krishna” and no one can question that, once the film complete its run.
Personally I don’t care whether he has any talent or not, I don’t know him and I am not personally related to him anyway. I am not emotional about any actor to follow him blindly to where ever he takes me …He is good then he is good, I will appreciate. But if there is something grossly wrong with the kind of work he is doing, then I think I should give words to my thinking rather than satisfying myself with, “OK he is great, maybe I am not getting what he wants to say” and eat whatever given to me.
Though I know a lot of film technicalities, I don’t believe that anyone possessing the good knowledge about film making should criticize any movie. Because dissecting it with medical knives and forks will take all its beauty. Everything gets back to the fact that whether you were stick to the seats or changing your postures continuously when watching the movie. There is no beauty in knowing that the moon is rock.
Sir, but I am concerned. I am myself amused at the plight of some of the great Indian actors. Take for instance, Rajesh Khanna and Manoj Kumar. I start loving Rajesh Khanna the moment I come across any movies like Anand, Safar, Aradhana or Hathi mere Sathi. Same is the case with Manoj Kumar; if anyone goes though the journey of his films like Gumnaam, Upkaar or Hariyaali or Rasta, I don’t think that by the end of these films you can be left out un-intimidated. But they cannot and should not (as I am no authority to tell them what to do) justify their present actions by saying that once they did good films and acting. The movies they did later, that is now, were not only technically bad but aesthetically and acting wise too.
@24 shitiz,
As i already mentioned that, this director clearly says that give him , his freedom, he makes movies for himself. He wants to create something he creates, and in this articles, there are some ppl who oppose him.
—
Now this whole article can be applied on anyone, whether u like him or not.
It doesn’t matter that few facts abt movies, or dates don’t match to anyone.
But when there is a article abt Freedom, then it will apply on everyone.
If lawyer and other audience is accusing ur director. Then u r doing the same against Dev Anand too. Or whoever director, u think, is making crap movie.
Because who can decide what is crap ?
—
Now u became the audience at the lawyer side. and u r attacking Dev.Anand.
—
Even if a director’s movie never win any award, doesn’t go to any festival. and Top directors of the world don’t approve his movies. Still he has right to do whatever he wants.
–
And if a filmmaker’s movie is not going into any festival. does it mean, it is crap ? If only 100 ppl watched his movies, does it mean, it is crap ?
Why can’t u call it his Art which u don’t like personally.
—
as i wrote in @20. That we have started saying, “this movie is bad” instead of saying, “i didn’t like it” .
—
After reading this article, we may forget this, and start accusing anyone we don’t like. But u wrote this article, atleast u should remember ur own article.
—
And yeah, i still like this article :-)
But now u become biased, u like this, becoz u were already at the director side.
I read it as any Director’s voice first.
Wow this is tarkovsky, then what he says is right, we shud try to understand his point.
What ? ‘any other director is saying all this whose movies we don’t like’, no, now it doesn’t sound right, we still believe that he makes crap and he should stop making movies.
——
In indian context, i have seen ppl accusing dev anand’s recent movies that lawyer way. I too don’t understand what dev-anand tried to say in some recent movies which i watched. but i feel he has something in his mind, and he tries to make what he wants. And i always wonder abt money, his enthusiasm, his audience. But i never consider him as stupid or crazy. And if i don’t understand what he wants to say, that doesn’t make him bad. bcoz i can’t understand many classic famous movies too.
I gave his example later, bcoz in this article, lawyer is so sure abt his beliefs and thinks that he is right, and this director makes nonsense-bad-harmful-flop movies.
Well Dev saheb are not making such harmful movies too. But still he can have same voice for his movies too.
@26 shitiz,
Now u r sounding like The Lawyer.
He called movie bad flop boring not-useful for society, he showed magzines which says that these don’t have any positive effects. irrelevant philosophy, no moral, no lesson. etc.
only once he says,
“I agree your films are appreciated in other countries but in our own country I have read that they are severely despised by most film makers. Your films are appreciated abroad not because of your good direction but because of the controversial topics you choose and also because these countries unjustly want to encourage poor countries in film making to come ahead.”
But then he gives the reason too, that why does he think that those are getting appreciated in other countries.
—–
What did u do, after making that list of movies ?
—–
Ok, u don’t like his movies, then in the Director’s opinion, “Don’t buy the tickets..”
But what i want to say, “Why this voice can’t be of ‘Dev-Anand” ?
Even if another director makes movies, which noone watches at all. then why can’t he say the same thing ?
@AB
sir, I only wrote the article thinking about the characters and how they would behave. i don’t associate them personally to me. i am none of the characters in the article. i am a general audience. when i say Dev Anand’s Movies(some, i forgot to mention) are crap, then i don’t need anyone to convince me that they are good. to my personal sphere of independence, i am democratically free to say anything and give my opinions.
please, the character “film maker” do not exists. i like his philosophies and would like to believe in him, but can’t. you ever met any Howard Roark?
may be my article ended at the film maker getting released (which now i think was a mistake on my part) confused you that he is right.the world and the court doesn’t works that way. another thing is that, yes the the whole article is well planned and contrived, i wanted the film maker to win, he won. but then that’s the world i created for the sake of a story.
you just cannot excuse anyone by saying that may be we don’t understand him? you just don’t have to feel responsible for every artist and justify his hidden talent that no one could see. of course, sometimes we don’t, but then what is the need. the art is to pleasure you. the artist dont care about it but the viewer still have the right to say anything in any way he wants, not because he can but he is been given that license by artist himself, by publicly displaying his art.
Dev sir puts his movies to public so that they could judge it. i am judging it, is that wrong. no i dont think so.
the problem here is that i used the word “crap” too rudely and i apologize for that if it hurts the sentiment of anyone. but i am not sorry, i am his fan too, you too are i think. you have the equal right to defend him and i have too, to criticize him.
i am not writing these responses as film maker, please be clear about that. i am not the “film maker”. its a character of a story. not a biography of me. i wasn’t citing an auto biography.
i might be talking like lawyer. but in my article i never said that lawyer was wrong. the lawyer signifies whole world. whatever he was saying was truth and facts. whatever film maker was saying was philosophy and morals. none of them was right or wrong. i made the character of film maker strong because i wanted to.that’s it. these are characters that don’t need justifications. they are like that, good or bad, right or wrong, is the play of our perception. let them play their part and lets us live our lives too.[:)]
Have you seen Abbas Kiarostami Nema-Ye-Nazdik? a must see!
@shitiz (26),
Anyone (audience) has full right to like or dislike any film but anybody (trying to be an analyst or trying to write something, be it a post or a comment like a knowledgeable person) does not get liberty to write anything and everything in the disguise of personal opinion.
“Watch like an audience and write like an analyst with objectivity incorporated” is the simple formula for cine lovers. While watching one can not be an analyst as that will break the continuity and while writing one can not remain an audience as that will remove the objectivity from his/her writing and it will become a biased writing and will not serve any purpose than to bring false pleasure to the person on whom or whose films writing has been based.
First “Crap” is a very rude and unjustified word. Dev Anands even in their worst form don’t make crap films. Few films can be weaker or many of the films released in past many years may have weaker points but at same time even weaker films may have some merits and which save them from being called as crap.
As an audience one may dislike the films but when writing on a cinema portal then one can not ignore whatever merits are present in the films.
Did he copy some foreign DVD?
His films are single person’s vision and he is not supported by any filmi group, star, stars of technical fields etc. He makes films by investing his own money or arranging himself. He arranges for the whatever marketing he can afford. His films are single person’s efforts.
Mighty Ram Gopal Verma has made many weak films in last 2 decades and hardly he has made any film which can be said as continously good in every single frame. His best of the best films have shortcomings and he has not crossed yet the age of 50 so he has been at the peak of his creative phase in the last 2 decades and it is almost clear (if miracle does not happen) that after 50 he will make much weaker films because creativity is declined after some age. It happens with everybody especially in the field like cinema.
He is relatively young and he can still bring reform in his way of cine making to adapt to new demands of cinema of present era.
Another name you mentioned Anurag Kashyap. He is even far younger than RGV. You can not take Gangajal in the hands to swear that all his films are too good in every single frame and there are no shortcomings in his films which have hitherto been released. His first claim to fame has been writing and one can not claim that there is no shortcoming even in his best of the writing.
If relatively younger and even much younger creators, who can modify their creations because they are enjoying the peak years, can have shortcomings in their writings, films etc then to selectively exiting (while writing) Dev Anand, whose prime creative years have passed many years ago, is quite unjustified approach. He does not control market and it is very easy to attack him and his films.
But if one is doing so then one should be brave enough to opt same approach in case of present days younger filmmakers who control the market.
You forgot to mention Anand aur Anand in the list of films after you metioned a word “Period”.
I believe that you have seen each and every film you have mentioned and not writing simply on the basis of a trend where people without even watching these films start calling them crap films because they have read it or listened it from others.
When compared with the launching films of other star sons in 80s, Anand aur anand will present something different.
There may be reasons behind weakness in his films and these things can be discussed but one can not neglect his films with a single word. Even now in his weakest films he does not have any dull moment and when young characters are on screen he brings in young energy on screen.
Making film is his hobby. He is not disturbing anyone to make his films. He is not forcing anyone to see his film by opting mean ways of harsh marketing. He is not making plots to make his films hit.
He loves making films and that is it. It is like some old painter paints in his very old age also. If he makes an exhibition of his work then people may not like his work but they have no way to call his work as crap.
This is same thing which people do with kids. Kids do not make master pieces but we dont call their creations as crap.
Dev Saab has passed that age where he can modify to suit the demands of present days world. If a man is continuously making efforts and is not bitter because of the commercial results of his creations and is not bitter because of harsh criticism he gets on his efforts then one should admire the love and passion of such a determined man. Nobody asks to write high praises to his films when one has not liked them but do not opt violent approach.
Here in cine world younger guys are lost in the darkness of depression when majority of people start criticising their works and when other cine people do not pay any attention to their presence and here is a man following his love of making films continuously.
Nothing deters his spirit of making films. It is not a blind following. He surely knows what he is doing but making film is as necessary for him as taking next breath. We do not call breating bad. If we can not appreciate it then we should not criticise unnecessarily.
Writing does not tell about object always, it shows about the writer also. How we look upon a thing suggests about us also.
Dev Anands are not failed. Failed are we, who dont know the way to see things in right perspective and who are biased in 99% cases.
@Rk
Wow. u have written so nicely. And it is complementary to this article too. I was not fan of Dev Anand’s new movies. But when i saw his interviews, his passion and enthusiasm. i realized i was wrong to have bad opinion abt his new movies.
And few times i watched his movies on television, and some of the scenes in the movies, and the way he was playing his character, i found those mysterious. there is something special abt few scenes, but i cudn’t get it.
and yes, u said it very correctly. There are many many movies by other ppl, which we can find only in vcd stores or in small-town-theatres. those movie, which were made only for nudity, obscene language, or so called horror copied from ramsay brothers.
Dev Anand, doesn’t make that type of movies too. he always has some theme or idea. and he wants to say something nice.
But maybe he doesn’t watch modern movies. or as the director of this article. he does what he wants to do, without getting affected by audience’s liking or disliking. Now this is an ideal director, ppl keep talking about.
He does what he wants. he doesn’t let other ppl affect him. And in addition to that, he is not making something harmful to the society.
OK, maybe his movie are not the best, and many ppl may find those boring, or repeat. and because, he cudn’t get best technicians, actors, and asistants and his script didn’t excite others. And ppl didn’t like his acting, and his enthusiasm of behaving like a young person.
Boring and Bad are not same. “boring’ is a totally personal word. But for calling something ‘bad’ we shud have stanadards to compare with. And there shud be something ‘negative or absent’ in it.
Thanks for writing ur comments.
———
@shitiz
Thanks for writing the article. I like it very much.
When i read it, first i said abt RGV, bcoz on his blog most of the time he talks abt Howard-Roark.
Don’t say that ‘this filmmaker doesn’t exist’. Actually we never acknowledge such filmmakers.
In the past, many directors were criticised this way. And many of the directors, whose movies are getting awards in the festival, what does our local magazine, tabloid, and our moral-gaurdian say abt those movies. you can find ppl, who criticise satyajit ray. If u know a good director of such movies, and u will find some ppl who criticise him. Or show such movies to a normal audience, or masala-lovers or to those ppl who don’t like cinema at all. If one group is appreciating, then there is other group who will criticise it.
—
I read fountainhead two times, but i guess i still cudn’t understand it properly, bcoz i don’t find drastic changes in my life. It cud change me a little bit only.
Yeah, i think, i have seen glimpses of HR in many people. Not as a complete person like HR, but as a fountainhead.
And chance of meeting with a HR type person is very less, not becoz he doesn’t exist. But becoz we can’t recognize these people. In the book, we cud see the character in detail, and cud know his thinking. But in real life, to know a person like that, we have to be very close friend to him. because from a distance these ppl get mis-judged.
And we surely have ‘fountainheads’ in this world.
—–
Music, painting , cinema, dance.. the Art.
It is very difficult to judge these things on the basis of boredom/interesting/pleasure.
I can’t enjoy many of the music style, which other ppl call classic. i don’t understand many paintings, i don’t enjoy many classic dance of other countries. Many classic movies gave me headache.
And as some ppl call XYZ as the greatest director, and the absoulte standard. Then it means, noone can surpass him, noone can become better than him. And we will never allow, any new experiment, different style. we will want duplicate of XYZ.
When criticising album of Rahman, many ppl say abt a song, this is bad composition, this is weak. But a master like Rahman loves that song more than others. now who is right, Rahman or that normal listener.
Shyam benegal can be called an intelligent director but he doesn’t like many other famous directors. But do we ever watch only those movies which he approves ?
–
I like the article, bcoz i am the part of this accusing-audience. And this article again proved to me that i am wrong. (but i am a hard-skinned one, i can’t reform myself so easily )
I am still learning.
And maybe u wrote ur article for different reasons, and i liked it for some other different reasons :-)
And it is good that we talked abt DevAnand too. bcoz then Rk explained so many things. Which i cudn’t see earlier. And it is not abt only ‘Dev Anand’. It is abt passionate filmmakers, who have good intentions to create something good.
@shitiz – “you ever met any Howard Roark?”
—
this is RGV wrote on april 24th, at his blog.
“For all those who believe that Howard Roarks do no exist in the real world I want to tell them that “they do” and that I met and interacted with one. If Satyendra was Howard Roark in Fountainhead, I am not even a Peter Keating or Ellsworth Toohey. I am just a guy who tried to study and understand him… and I think I understood a little. ” -RGV
—
I have seen glimpses of howard-roark in many ppl, and i had a friend like that too. But as i said earlier, the problem is i cudn’t go much closer to him, to understand him more.
I believe there are many howard-roark. They must be in every field, but they don’t want to come on front page, and others don’t allow them. we can know them, if we can get close enough to them. Another problem is, will they let me come so closer to them, do i deserve ?