logo

Adoor Gopalakrishnan has resolutely been following a style of storytelling on the big screen that has a definite vision and sincerity of approach, never compromising with his ideals as a creative persona. For him, filmmaking is more than an art form – it is also a social statement and documentation. His sincerity to his craft is unquestionable, and his integrity towards it comes to the fore in his resolute decision not to make a film outside the immediate environs of Kerala as self-admittedly, he would fail to capture the societal nuances of places whose social history he does not know. Gopalakrishnan is in the process of completing his new film, which like his previous film “Naalu Pennungal” (Four Women), is also based on short stories of legendary Malayalam author Thakazhi Shiva Sankara Pillai. Here Gopalakrishnan responds to a range of questions on cinema as he sees it:

Q: The “Naalu Pennungal” project started off as part of the Doordarshan Classic series. Why didn’t you present them as separate films altogether, instead of four short stories in a single film, though there is the obvious thematic link among the stories?

A: As the author wrote it, there is nothing connecting them in the original stories. Doordarshan wanted me to do this series as part of the Classics programme. I told them that making a film only for TV, that too in the video format, will not be a very good idea. At best, it will be shown once, and then forgotten. When I put in so much effort, especially when it is almost a period film with a minimum of 50 years into the past, I have to do a lot of research and recreate so many things – whatever money they were giving was not sufficient to do it properly. I told them I can do it only if I can make films out of the stories – in the film format – and give them the films in the video format separately. They agreed. So, that’s how it started. Since I did not have enough money to put in, I had somebody to collaborate with me. They put in some money. They are also distributing it in Kerala. When I started doing it, it became a very, very expensive project, because each story was like making one complete film – different characters, different stories, different locations, different sets. With all my experience of making films, I never imagined that. The length might be short, but each was like a complete feature film with the amount of effort put in. They (Doordarshan) did not tell me I have to make it from short stories. I could use any story by Pillai – a novel, short stories, anything by him. I on my own decided to choose short stories, because short stories will allow that much freedom, because short stories are at best idea that strikes, a reflection on moments in life, that’s just enough, it does not develop.

Q: How did you choose the stories that you finally dealt with?

A: I read all the novels, stories by Pillai again – I had read them much earlier, of course - in one go, in a period of 4-5 months after the DD proposal came to me. After reading all that, I decided I should have more freedom to develop them as my own ideas, going beyond the stories what is written by him. So, I decided to freely adapt the stories. The essence of the stories is there, but in the film format it is different. It suited me to choose short stories. And when I chose nine stories, it so happened that to my surprise, I found six were about women. It was sheer chance. For you to like nine stories out of about 400 and six of them happen to be about women - it is something very interesting. Out of that, I again made a selection, of four stories, for this film. There have been several been several films like this made in the past. At least a few great exceptions are there – Kurosawa’s “Dreams”, Ray’s “Teen Kanya” are very notable examples. I decided to go beyond that, in the sense that initially they will look like different stories, very unrelated, but at the same time, they have the same idea at work. When you are watching, it is different stories, when you come out of the theatre, you feel you have seen a connected story.

Q: How did you devise the treatment to the theme?

A: I have selected these stories to represent different strata of the society. The first one is the lowest, the second one is a little higher because she is a farmer, third one is lower middle class, fourth one is a regular middle class with that kind of upbringing and some property and all that. That has made the subject very interesting. In the film they are four characters at different levels. There are two progressions in the film. One is the thematic progression. At the lowest level of the society, there is no awareness, there is experience but it is not processed. At the second level, there is some awareness, because she is running a house and she knows what is what. Third one is about taking a decision, and the fourth one is about a resolution. So there is a development of theme. Also, timewise there is a progression. The first one is set in the 1940s, and as the story progresses you find the time is moving forward, the last one happening after Independence, sometime in the late 1960s.

Q: You left out two of the six stories you had selected and found out to be about women …

A: They will be in the next film. It will be further progression thematically. Timewise it will be set in an earlier time zone. It will be called “A woman, two men”. They will be again linked thematically.

Q: When you decided to take these four stories to make this film, did you have in your mind anything like taking up a feminist cause or something like that?

A: Basically it is about human conditions. It is not a feminist film, not at all. Many stories revolve around men, here the stories revolve around women. Only the protagonists are women. It is about awareness of women, the women who are more aware are able to make choices. In the first story she just accepted what was there, she did not know what to do. None of them is a weak-kneed woman. They have their own mind, they are very resolute in one sense. All the women in the film make their own choices, they are strong women.

Q: In the current context, how relevant is it for the society to have films like “Naalu Pennungal” that are set in the past and talk of issues, even though many changes have happened in the society?

A: See, the most interesting thing is that there was a very strong feminist interpretation of the film that I read after the film was shown in London. It says there is no need to mention particular period for the film as it is relevant even today, as it is about today’s women. Mostly the situations have remained the same, they have has not changed much. It is about an yesterday, which is not very far from today. If it was not relevant, it would have become a historical film with no relevance to today. Fundamentally I am not interested in making a historical film. Here I have made them time and place specific, because this film also, like all my works at some level are social documents. That is very important for me as a filmmaker.

Q: When you talk of social documentation through a film, whether you make them or Jahnu Barua makes them in Assam, the opportunity to watch such films in their own regions, leave alone screenings outside except before limited festival audiences, is getting less and less. How do you think such films can be taken to people for whom they are intended?

A: My film has been released and is doing very well in Kerala. The release was one reason I did not go to personally to the London festival. Everywhere people have loved the film very much. Polish TV is buying this film, and it will be released commercially in Poland.

Q: How did you develop the background setting and music of the film?

A: It is set in Kuttinad, Pillai’s home area in the backwaters of Kerala. It used to be the rice bowl of Kerala. As far as music goes, we have strains of music that are typically Kerala, using instruments like veena and violin. The music is not imitating any image, it has been used thematically, not as an image of what we see. That’s why it’s not a split image of what you see. It works at another level of consciousness. All the four stories are connected by music. It is the same theme for the music with variations. That also unites the stories.

Q: You have used a lot of static camera shots in the film. Was there any particular reason?

A: The camera constantly moving, but you don’t realize it as no attention is drawn to it, because what is important for me is to get the attention of the audience to the experience, not to camera movements. I don’t want people to notice that the camera is moving from here to there. It is moving, but you won’t notice as a viewer. There are of course a couple of shots where the camera is not moving, but those are clearly on purpose, like the static shot of the canal before the house onto the still water before which a boat slowly enters the frame. That’s a typical shot where the camera does not move.

Q: How did you choose the actors story? Particularly Nandita Das as she is not from Kerala…

A: Once I read the stories and started to develop them according to my interpretation, I decided that the story will be there at the core of it, but all the details will be mine. The actresses were chosen according to the roles. Nandita has been wanting to work with me for a long time. While casting I told them they have to look the role, I thought she looked the role, she was only too happy to do it.

Q: The film society movement in Kerala was once upon a time a role model for whole of India. What shape is it in right now?

A: In those days, television was not there. The only entertainment available was the cinema halls. Today it is not like that, today there are so many television channels, even in Malayalam, and every one is showing films. So a lot of audiences stay back at home, as they don’t have to go out and spend money in watching films. Also, it is cheaper. That has really affected a type of films. People who go to cinema halls are really a strange sort of people, they want to have that kick of watching a film on the big screen! The dagger, the ketchup blood, they are accustomed to that, that’s how slowly the situation has vitiated. There is a film society movement, and there is a change, as media has changed, a lot of projections are available on DVDs, and then there is a movement where people are projecting DVD films.

Q: Do you see digital format filmmaking or carrying films for screening in the digital format as the future of good cinema?

A: I don’t know, because showing is one thing, but how will get those films made, because making a film means that you have to put in a certain amount of time, money and all that. Video suddenly made it accessible to everyone, It is not a bad thing, but when you don’t take it sincerely, it churn out bad work.

Q: But is it not turning out to be an avenue for filmmakers to make a digital film and screen it in temporary screens in nooks and corners of the country, thereby helping them to show their work and earn their bread and butter?

A: That’s not a bad idea. When filmmakers think it is duty to do that, and audiences also think likewise, it will be good. The future is digital. Any way the film format is going. The only thing is it has to give you the same quality. Whatever you say, the quality of digital is still not as good as celluloid. May be a time shall come, when the picture quality will be as good as celluloid. It is a matter of time, as already digital has become a popular medium. It has several advantages like cost of making prints, piracy fighting, and to some extent easier access.

Q: Would you make a film on digital format if conditions are good?

A: Sure. In fact, this time I started with looking for facilities to make a film on digital, but then after a lot of inquiries I found I will be spending more and getting less in terms of quality. Let it improve first, then I will do it.

Q: Your films are always based in Kerala or its bordering areas. Would you ever make a film that is not based in Kerala? For example, you have spent a lot of time in Assam when your daughter (an IPS officer) was posted there.

A: That’s (spending some time) not enough, See I have made two films that are based on the borders. One is my last film “Nizhalkutthu”, which is set in south Kerala, and on the northern borders I did “Vidheyan”, which is someway bilingual. But to go beyond the borders and make a film is… see, filmmaking for me is not just a question of saying dialogues. A film has to become to become an experience about a specific region, place and people. It cannot be if I go to Assam and shoot a film, where people are very similar to those in Kerala, as there are certain nuances which I won’t be able to capture. I will be a foreigner to that. So, I will leave it to Jahnu or somebody else!

Q: Putting the question slightly differently, would you make a film in another language?

A: I would not like to. Because I don’t know the subtleties of another society and I cannot write or speak English like the English do - that means you are not knowledgeable that much in English. Whereas I am very knowledgeable when I write in Malayalam. I write very original Malayalam, I can write innovative Malayalam, I can invent things, new things, which is exciting for my reader and for myself. I cannot do it in English, I have to look at somebody else for approval.

Q: Many of the regional filmmakers known for their work in their mother tongue, are now working in Hindi, may be because it gives them access to a bigger audience. How do you see this phenomenon?

A: It’s not the language, it is the kind of film you have to make. For instance, in Mumbai, Shyam Benegal makes good films in Hindi, but they have a problem of release. Even Jahnu will have this problem of getting released even when he makes films in Hindi. May be in the cities or multiplexes one will get a release. But that’s not the case when I make a film in Malayalam. It goes to all the big cities and small places. Whether they like it or not is a different thing, but they get an opportunity to watch it. Some films they come to watch in large numbers, and some they don’t. Anyway, it is a better proposition to make films in your own languages and show it to your own people as your basic audience. Fortunately for me, I have an audience outside Kerala, and also outside India.

Q: How important it is for filmmakers to have this dialogue with their audiences, not only through their films, but through their writings which explain why I did this or did that, like you have done quite a bit?

A: Great masters of cinema like Sergei Eizenstein used to write on cinema. That’s how we came to know about his cinema. That means there is a certain commitment to your medium and also to your people and for the future. That, I feel, is very important. Many people in Kerala read my books on cinema, and my scripts. It’s very important to understand cinema, to keep cinema beyond access of public is not a very good idea. Cinema should be accessible to everyone and understood by everyone, so that there will be better works in future.

Q: Cinematic literature becoming part of curriculum - that has not happened anywhere in India except Kerala…

A: Yes, we have toiled for that, we have been working as a pressure group on the government and universities. It should be followed in all the states, now that there are several courses on communications.

Q: Cinema as an art form is still not taken very seriously. The basic definition is it is a mode of entertainment for people who toil during the day and seek some entertainment in the evening. How do you think this perception can be changed?

A: You cannot take cinema alone. How about the standard of music, or poetry, or painting? It’s a part of that, it’s not in exclusion of that. It’s a question of educating people. The Hindi commercial cinema and those copying them in other languages - they stop people from being intelligent, they treat you as dull people, they don’t want you to improve, because it suits them. These are films which are exploitative.

Q: Films like “:Lage Raho Munnabhai” or “Rang De Basanti” are touted in the media as cinematic revolutions. All the time very mediocre work is done in commercial cinema, and even slight variations are billed as revolutions. How do you see this trend?

A: I have not seen these films, but it is a good thing if media embraces something different. See, the Bombay industry never has had this ambition about going abroad or doing different things. They are very happy with their business, with the NRIs watching their films and giving them money from everywhere. Now they have the ambition, but they don’t have the equipment. They try to promote rubbish at international level. You take all the Bombay films to a place like Brussels and from there you have international awards for the Bombay films – that’s a very stupid notion. You congratulate yourself for producing rubbish, and you do it 20 times every year. It is self congratulatory and it is a very pathetic situation. People laugh at you and ridicule you because of that.

Q: You never watch the commercial cinema, even if just to keep yourself updated about what is happening?

A: Once in a while I watch on television, but I have no time to waste, so I cannot tolerate stupidity. If a filmmaker compromises, I cannot sit there and watch. I have no time for that. Life is so short, and we have so many other things to do, why waste it on inanities? Let’s do some pleasurable things instead.

Q: But people who watch commercial cinema call it a pleasurable thing…

A: That’s a very sad thing - they have been brought up like that. It’s not their fault. Even as a child, you grow up with it. Now it starts at home, through TV, so there is very little scope for our future generation, as they are systematically weaned away from anything that is meaningful. Even Doordarshan has stopped showing Indian Panorama films as they are ‘slow’ films and do not bring in enough revenues. But that should not be a public broadcaster’s attitude. This shows a country’s attitude to art, it is appalling. Even the Sunday daytime shows are stopped. They now pay one fourth of what they used to pay for award-winning films. It sends a very bad message, that ‘don’t make this kind of films, nobody wants to see them’. It is a very sad situation. Those responsible in government say we are withdrawing from all this and leaving it to the private enterprise – private enterprise is what Bombay gives you.

(This interview, taken at Nantes, France, during the last Festival of 3 Continents where Adoor’s “Naalu Pennungal” was screened, has been published in “Chitra Chinta” (roughly translated it stands for “Thoughts on Cinema”), the annual publication of Guwahati Cine Club. Since the journal has very limited reach, I thought of sharing it with PFC readers.).