• krysh

  • Published:
    on Mar 31 2008 @ 5:12 am
  • Popularity:
    Rating: 1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
    Loading ... Loading ...
  • Categories & Tags:
    tags Movies ,
  • Share/Email Article:

« The wallet renovation(A short) | Home | PANCHAM UNMIXED: AN UNENDING JOURNEY »


Angling For A Shot

The other day a friend of mine buttonholed me as he was itching to narrate his debut feature film script. Off drinks, off non-veg, he was a bit put off by my not adhering to Bollywood convention of listening to a script. Somehow he had always given some weightage to my opinions—perhaps that was the reason—as he agreed to go ahead with the narration in this non-Bollywood ambience sans drinks also.

Into five minutes of story telling, my vanity was punctured . He was narrating the script not to get my opinions but to show off his oratorial and directorial skills—whatever they were. More than the plot and characterization he was into camera angles—How the jimmy jib will move from low angle to up up in the sky!How the steadicam will capture the unsteady walk into the wild..Gauging a puzzled look on my face, he started adding more drama, more spice…For one of the scenes he said that even Abbas-Mustan will be thrilled!–where a naqaab will be lifted and man seen to race down the street.. you would have to see to do aitbaar..Wait till I shoot it!

At another turning point, he introduced his heroine falling head over heels in love wearing heels while gyrating on the slopes of Alps.. ‘And then she turns..Camera tracks in and in and in and in, repeatedly, yash chopra style..Then it goes wild in circles as chorus picks up to enhance this romantic, enchanting, bewitching moment!

He was into it and my mind wandered as I wondered, is shot taking such an important aspect? If that’s so then what would one make of 4 months, 3 weeks , 2 days in which going by Bollywood lingo, the director and cameraman seemed to have gone for a rendevouz in a loo—after nailing the camera to a spot.

In OSO, there is this turning point where Shahrukh rescues Deepika from raging fire ( a la Sunil Dutt rescuing Nargis)—And in the beginning of that sequence Arjun Rampal is introduced as a producer whom the director tells that this particular sequence has been wonderfully conceived with one Guru Dutt, one Satyajit Ray angle.. And Arjun Rampal retorts : Have one Manmohan Desai angle too if you want the film to be a hit.

Now what’s it with shots and angles? Do they really make the movie?

In the present times it seems so called whiz kid directors vouch for treatment of the film—fast and furious style. And heads of the head honchos at the corporates go into a tizzy listening to this roller-coaster of a camera ride.For them more the camera moves, more the movie moves b’coz movie is nothing but motion. But in this e-world its conveniently forgotten that the motion hinted at is emotion ( Taare Zameen Par is the recent instance). So many movies are marketed and packaged without emotions but full of motion. They are tom-tommed as racy, pacy, slick and chick! And what happens? They turn out to be chicken feed at the box-office.

It’s never ending source of animated discussions—Form vs Content. Shall form orchestrate the content or content dictate the form? If George Lucas took incipient video games into the realm of star wars—it was not merely a celebration of form. The content demanded the kind of treatment meted out to Yodhas! If Alfred Hitchcock made Rope in eight shots, that was deliberate—From the outset he wanted to experiment with the form..Citizen Kane turned the conventional execution upside down with its deep focus, wide angle shot-taking! It worked!

Does form always dictate the content? Or content rules and ultimately overrules the form?

In Bollywood, we take things literally. So there are connoisseurs of angle and shots, who swear by late Mukul Anand and lately Sanjay Guptas and the brigade. There were master craftsmen like Vijay Anand, Raj Khosla who knew how to use the camera as per the content..And there are many a practitioner today who know how to misuse and abuse it( In fit of anger some of them have sweared at the camera and cameramen!). Their aim is not to deliver but to dazzle, not to tell a story but to torpedo it. For them shots and angles are not the tools but the toys without any vision.

Agreed a script of Sholay being directed by any other director would have gone through a different treatment and execution but surely it would have missed on the vision of Ramesh Sippy ( infact, the script was first offered to Manmohan Desai to direct but he could not take up the project as he had other commitments on hand..One wonders how Manmohan Desai’s Sholay would have worked! One knows how Sholay’s remake has been massacred by RGV).

With steadicam in hand—nothing is steady. With jimmy jib to rotate everything is a swirl..And with motion control technology emotions are on the ramp..

All these thoughts flashed across my mind by the time my friend ended his narration..It seemed we were on parallel tracks..He looked at me assuming I was mesmerized by his narration..I stared at him wondering whether he was out of his senses. He expected a response regarding his subject and its treatment. He was angling for a compliment..And I was angling for a face saving answer. I could not be inauthentic, so I ventured : ‘ Good subject ..ah..ahm..but where is the emotion?’.. And he brushed aside my skepticism, ‘Oh you just wait and watch. The way I am going to shoot this film,people will be moved beyond imagination’..

And I shifted my fingers from drumming on the table to crossing them and murmured : ‘Hope they are not moved out of the auditorium’!Amen.

6 Responses to “Angling For A Shot”

  1. cdrakenc on March 31st, 2008 5:29 am

    maybe you’re not the right target audience for his narration,which should have been to a bunch of distributors after many drinks (non veg?).

    This is one reason why they sell the songs first and then shoot the film(sometimes)

    emotion is really a tracking shot. how would yash raj have explained the chorus in the alps heroine in plain saree hero in black turtleneck…feeling which brought in crores at the box office?

    I think with liquor (and non veg)

  2. Mithun Gangopadhyay on March 31st, 2008 9:44 am

    Ok here’s the skinny on it. Nowadays attention spans are so less that most people don’t wanna sit through tableaux shots and films. It’s all quick cuts and snazzy camera movement.

    You would understand the general audience but why would the filmmaker fall prey to it ? Simple. The original practitioners if this style of filming were cool, hip and edgy until everyone started to copy it and it became lame. Almost everyone used to idolize Guy Ritchie, Tarantino, Wachowskis and Stone. This of course I’m talking bout my generation.

    I’m prey to it as well but my fascination stems from my obsession with anime and the hyper realistic style they employ. I also swear by the invisible camera of Alfonso Cuaron and Chivo.

    Film is a visual medium and believe it or not a
    lot of the impact is due to how the camera is used. Think of the car sequence in Children of Men or the opening shot of Boogie Nights.

    Gratuitous hipness like “Running Scared” or “Revolver” is very off putting but if done well camera movement is an evolved art form. Just ask Max Ophuls.

  3. J on March 31st, 2008 10:15 am

    If content is great, form can be simple. I think the directors feel the pressure to show their technical skills (besides the treatment of course) because the credit for content is mostly given to the writers.

  4. Sudhir Nair on April 1st, 2008 11:33 pm

    There’s this article in today’s Times of India wherein Nikhat Kazmi talks about the success of Race , Welcome and Dhoom 2. She says that this shows that the audience loves style and doesn’t bother much about storyline. Hence, even the producers are recognizing stylish treatment as a money spinning idea.

    If this is the conclusion of a mainstream movie reporter, then no wonder we have ppl like ur friend (and many more) who will only think of how to present a stylish flick rather than focusing on a strong story.

  5. Sreehari. on April 1st, 2008 11:57 pm

    Content isnt important;technique is.
    And technique should always attempt to capture realism. But the realism that ought to be captured must never be absolute. A reflection of realism is more sensual than realism itself..
    And content is not at all important. Its because we believe that content is important that we see movies like “Halla Bol” coming up every now and then.
    Technique in cinema comes first. And technique should be weilded properly to capture truth..

  6. Tushar on April 2nd, 2008 11:58 pm

    Good post. I actually like such visual narrations. They are fun. May be I am biased towards camera but I feel there is nothing wrong with any sort of indulgence in cinema if done tastefully and not just for the sake of reaching somewhere with it.

Leave a Reply







Our Comments Policy : The following kinds of comments are troll capped, blocked and/or commenter's identity reported publicly: Verbal abuse, personal attacks, hate statements, spam, trolls, advertising. Please assist us in keeping the comments clean. Use the contact form to let us know if you find unwarranted comments on PFC. Thank you.