Dear Cinema-goers, what are you scared of?
Print
Dear Cinema-goers, so what are you scared of?
Feeling? Caring? Hurting? Thinking, for a change?
I think you are. The numbers prove it. The ticket sales numbers, of course. Isn’t that what cinema is about now. Sales. Who cares about movies that would make one think, provoke one to feel. What sells is the cinema that precisely doesn’t provoke you, the movies that provides proudly, “mindless entertainment”. It’s a ‘market’ now, isn’t it. The product is what? A dose of inanity to shield you from reality. Isn’t that your weekend movie-viewing experience? A cozy blanket of feel-good-ness to numb your senses so you can forget about your sucky week. Isn’t that what you want?
Sure, there’s lots in your life that you want to forget about. Your boss hates you, your parents want you married, your boyfriend doesn’t. Your girlfriend doesn’t understand you (plus she hates cricket). She hates you (you never get what ‘mauve’ is). You hate her (she actually said “who’s Don Bradman?”). Damn it, this angst! It seems to be ‘Battle of the sexes’ time. Hmm, this four-stars review says “Kambakht Ishq – A Movie about the Battle of the sexes”. The trailers prove it. Kareena is being chased by Akshay viciously in Venice. She’s hating it. Her face is visibly the most unhappy and uncomfortable that is possible. The ‘hero’ character is doing stuff that in most countries will amount to criminal molestation (it’s still U rated, of course, big money at work). What a battle! You just have to see it.
The film that inspired this rant. Great movie (coming Aug21) but such films lose out in the 'market' mentality of Bollywood
And you do. And all of Akshay’s tricks work. Despite logic, he gets the girl (true love needs no logic, you say) so you come out all happy and say “Aah. How nice. Hmm, I feel good. Hey, by the way I’m in a mall aren’t I. Let me go shopping to complete the great wholesome feeling of goodness”. After all, your neighbor got a MANGO shirt, so you can’t stay behind, can you. Perfect. “What a good weekend. What a nice movie. I saw a guy win over a girl by being a total obnoxious jerk. Which is great news for me, coz aren’t I a jerk too? Plus lots of micro-miniskirts and Viagra jokes. Wow. And to wrap it all up, a new MANGO shirt”.
You just love this Bollywood, don’t you. What an awesome product. It’s served you well hasn’t it. Helped you decide what saree to wear for your cousin’s wedding. It helped you with steps for your power-dancing aerobics class. “Neal and Nikki” explained love and modern relationships to you. You just had a baby ‘accidentally’ and really felt great that “Heyy Baby” resonated with your life.
Ardha Satya. A masterpiece. Do you think a movie like this could have a easy time today?
Isn’t that why you see all those films? To be stimulated. Of course, “Parzania”, “Firaaq”, “My Brother Nikhil”, why would you see those ‘kind’ of films. Who wants to feel anything. You won’t want to see Piyush Jha’s “Sikandar”, would you? Coz darn it’s set in Kashmir. That must be a serious film, you think, about a serious problem, but its not your problem. Serious is the same as ‘bad’ isn’t it? You’re guessing. It might actually be interesting. But no, can anything serious be thrilling, really? Hmm, you say it doesn’t have any really big stars, only that guy from Jhankaar Beats but wasn’t that a similar ‘offbeat’ film, and the little girl from Black, or the boy who did the Dhara “Jalebi” ad. They might be talented but they are child-artists! The other dude, Arun-something, he’s a newcomer so who cares, yaar! Or Madhavan, but he’s a south star, na? You don’t really want to see any good acting after all, really, do you.
Bengali film Dosar. Compare this to Bollywood's proud 'mindless' takes on infidelity - Masti, No Entry - which were superhits
I’m sure of it. Good acting is not something you care about, so don’t delude yourself. After all good acting generally hangs out with good cinema. And good cinema ‘might’ be serious cinema, and that for you, could (heaven forbid) mean the possibility of correlation with something that is realistic, perhaps a sad ending, a real ending, which might not be goody-goody-happy-happy. Twisted logic? I only wish, but it seems that’s what you follow. All you care about are item numbers, so you can learn about the latest gyrations that your boyfriend depends on for his entertainment.
You’re getting me? I think not. Getting me would be to challenge your thinking, to challenge yourself. To think about the world you live in. To be affected by it. And isn’t that what art was meant for? Cinema is an art-form isn’t it? It exists to make you feel. That’s it. Feel something different. Not just the same pattern of happiness-to-clichéd-conflict-to-happy-ending that you have mugged from the formulaic films which are all you want to see. But complex emotion such as Juliette Binoche feels in “Blue”, trying to find her freedom, after an accident where she lost her husband, and then finding that he had a mistress. Or Rituparno’s “Dosar”. Or the insurmountable lack of hope for the drug addicts in “Requiem for a Dream”. Or the sense of un-fairness in the lives of French immigrants in “Indigenes”, a movie that actually resulted in legislation change. But you might say that these are ’sad’ films, as everything complex in a non-happy-happy-goody-goody way is ’sad’ for you isn’t it, and sad is bad? But then, would you even try to look at the ‘happier’ ones either – say the beauty of the character of love-in-transience in “Lost in Translation”. “What!?”, You exclaim, “he doesn’t get the girl, yet this is a ‘happy’ ending? Is it really even an ending?”
Blue. Mindblowing! But do you think an Indian Film-maker today would be "allowed" to make such a film?
So nowadays, will we see a Blue, a Dosar, a Requiem for a Dream, a Lost in Translation, or even a Sahib, Biwi & Ghulam in Bollywood? No we won’t. It’s because of what I said. You, the viewer, are afraid of feeling, of thinking, of caring. Why this? I don’t understand, honestly. I don’t believe that the only way to forget your work life woes on weekends is by laughing at juvenile jokes. You can, actually, see a film that might make you cry and feel for something bigger or different than your problems. Maybe even help you deal with those problems, by giving you a new perspective. You might see a film that makes you question your own life, so you actually take that step you had been hesitating at for a long time – leaving your boyfriend, marrying your girlfriend, leaving a cushy job to start a company. A film that provokes you to act, to change, provokes you to dream a different dream. Or maybe not to do anything different, yet still be able to go on a complex emotional excursions, the reason for which art exists. If art disappears, balance disappears.
But film-as-art is a bad concept for you. An Indian filmmaker would hate for the title of ‘art-film’ being attached to his work, as then the audience will disappear. Why is that? Because YOU don’t want to go there. The market provides what the viewer wants. The viewer wants inanity, not art. Ironically, it’s the same everywhere. “Kitna pyara hai yeh pyaar, pyaara pyaara” buzzes on ringtones and playlists, while Bismillah Khan or even Coltrane are being forgotten. The sad thing is that Art being swept into the fringes, the word is becoming almost something ‘extreme’ – but it should not. Munnabhai is art, Dil Chahta Hai is art, Mughal-e-azam is art, Anand is art. But there is much more too. And you need to want to go there.
Lost in Translation. Hilarious! Beautiful! Touching! But will you go see a film like this?
Sure, you argue that it’s not really your fault. The financiers decide what runs. And, sure, that is a problem. Van Gogh just needed a brush and a canvas and paints. Film has camera rentals, actors, locations, film stock. That point about money is logical. But is it really? Most good, serious filmmakers can make a great film for 4-5 crores, easily reclaim their money even with not-so-big collections (say 7-10 crores), just from people who are ready to be provoked. But they are not getting a chance. Because of your celebrity obsession, all the chances go to the multi-super-starrers, with 50-60 crore budgets, which would most probably make a loss of say 20 crore even if they manage to reach the 40 in sales due to their crazy-illogical-screaming-out-loud marketing and pimping. And then the suits who now control the art now will say “Hmm, these losses are bad. Lets cut costs”. And so they cut the small ones which could have made profits, even if small (or just treat like step-children, by promoting badly – look at Haasil). There is no logic. Is there? Its incomprehensible!
But what is comprehensible is that YOU are also responsible. You, with your fear of feeling, have exacerbated this vicious circle. Audiences not going out to see films which are non-formulaic, and hence distributors putting money just into formulaic films. The whole nature of the market (due to the scales of money involved) is such that it amplifies this vicious cycle, so that the formulaic films are so rich that they can blast out smaller ones on the promos, and so, no-one goes to see the small ones… and so, distributors support them less, and so less viewership, etc. and so on and so forth.. the vicious circle grows…
Only you can break this circle. Go see these films so you can support them. Be a patron of this art-form. Its not hard. Go see films without the Khans, see films without Ranvir or Imran or Katrina. See a film about something you know nothing about. See an art-film. Just see films. You may or may not like them – be open to this. Did you really know before you went to Chandni Chowk to China whether you would like it? You just went as Akshay was there. You took a leap of faith. Take a bigger leap of faith. In yourself. In the fact that you will survive being provoked. You will be the better for it. And because of that, Indian Cinema will be the better for it.
And share this with people you know if you want Indian Cinema to change. Provoke them. Provocation propagates. Do it.
[Full Disclosure: This is written by a person indirectly affiliated to Sikandar. But not someone who's getting any money or anything out of it. Having loved everythng from 'Ardha-Satya' to 'Chameli' to 'Ek-aur-ek-gyaarah', he just feels very strongly that its becoming stifling for smaller, 'different' filmmakers. The current situation of Sikandar triggered this post - a beautiful film, but a non-standard story (even though quite a suspenseful thriller), with a non-superstar cast, which results in the fact that it might just go under the radar - hidden - and that would be unfair. So check the promos here or here. You just might like it!]
Tags: Audiences, Future, new indian cinema, Sikandar
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
Loved and felt every word of the post.
loading...
What a useless post. It aims at playing with one’s pysche while promoting a movie. For the kind information of the writer, the people who come in here are fairly intelligent enough to differentiate between crass and class. The fact still remains that a Kambakht Ishq raked in moolah…and loads of it. Make me understand why it did that and I am willing to listen to what you have to say. It was a crappy movie but it obviously got the support of the front benchers who whistled each time that the hero and the heroine got locked in a battle of the orbicularis muscles (lips). The good movies always get an audience and appreciation but it is rare that they become box office super hits. This is something I will never be able to understand. Eventually, who do you make movies for? Rave reviews or box office success? Beats me…I am still searching for the perfect logical conclusion.
loading...
@Aarti:
Why should you start a comment calling it a “useless post”?
A little courtesy should not do any one any harm.
And is it that much complex? So much complex that you will be never able to understand?
- KI rakes in moolah because of the star-power. Screen presence. Reputations. Expectations. Simple.
- Eventually we make movies for the people. You can choose between reviews AND/OR Box office successes. If you wish to get both, it would take some homework, honest effort and luck. There is nothing much to search for a conclusion, though there is a lot to think regarding the means to achieve that conclusion…
loading...
Point accepted, Rahul.
loading...
I dont get it. I sense some pseudo-elitism there. Most of the so called lower starta or front bencher people don’t watch movies like KI anymore, at least in Northern belt. They are happy watching the hindi dub of south potboilers or those so called B and C grade movies or regional movies.
loading...
Translate this article in Hindi and get it published in ‘Amar Ujala’ or ‘Navbharat Times’. Most of the people who need education when it comes to movie choices, don’t dwell in here. We already understand good cinema or atleast, we know what we DON’T want to see vis a vis what we want to see.
loading...
loading...
Does anyone really need education for movie choices, Arati? I wouldn’t, even if I watched only KI or SiK.
“We’re grown-ups now, and it’s our turn to decide what that means.” – http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=47667016510#/photo.php?pid=30656845&op=1&o=all&view=all&subj=47667016510&aid=-1&oid=47667016510&id=1088280650 – in case you cannot open that, go to Facebook -> Bohemian Revolution -> Really Good Day -> Pictures!
loading...
We don’t Tejas. I agree with you. Our tastes are different. Our definition of entertainment is different. What I don’t like is the round about way in which someone says- watch this or else you’ll come in the bracket of losers. The real people who need education when it comes to appreciating good cinema, belong to the lower strata of the society. On second thoughts, I don’t really blame them for advocating movies that make us cringe. They want cheap thrills. They spend money on something which titilates them, which transports them into a world which is alien to theirs, albeit for a few hours. Because their world is a struggle anyways, they don’t want to see anything morose or serious on the screen. I hope you know what I’m trying to say.
loading...
and again: It is a sweeping generalization that you’ve made! I guess it mite be unintentional..
lower strata of the society,cheap thrills– what does this mean? In all classes of society, whether lower or higher or middle, there would be audience for both kinds of films…
“Because their world is a struggle anyways, they don’t want to see anything morose or serious on the screen”
- Taste in films has nothing to do with struggle in life. People who spend half a day sitting idle in air-conditioned rooms would also enjoy mindless entertainers..
On the other hand, I guess struggle in life is essential to developing an empathy to what is happening on screen, and also to conceive something meaningful..
loading...
I agree, but I feel there is too much banging head on the wall about this ‘this type of movies’ v/s ‘that type of movies’. Agatha Christie’s The Secreat Adversary had this prologue, “To all those who lead monotonous lives in the hope that they experience at second hand the delights and dangers of adventure.”
Same goes for the movies. I was a Linux advocate (I still am) and I read this terrific article on why people would choose Windows over Linux. Without much digression, one analogy was that if we lost the remote of our TV, we will not stand up and change channels every 45 seconds. Same with our movie-watching habits.
Glad you liked the pics! Peace, Love and Bohemia! ;)
loading...
The pictures were refreshing, by the way!!
loading...
Dosar was a bullshit movie, bigtime.
Rituparno is a majot poser.. I don’t know why people can’t already figure it out. He’s a wannabe, the only nice movies i saw of his were ‘Hiirer Angti’ and ‘Subho Mahurot’
loading...
Its easy to say shit, if you belong to a rich family and travel around the world for 10 months in an year. Try leading a less privileged life and stop judging people.
loading...
I find this post enlightening. I’ve often had the same thoughts, and I find the writer has written well. He is being quite candid in saying what got him thinking the thoughts he has expressed. Why should we attack him when we all do agree with him? I think we should support him.
loading...
You make it really hard to read, the cynical tone works for a bit but then the point gets lost. Who are you speaking to anyways? One person can’t be all that things.
loading...
@Udai – STOP BLOGGING NOW! You are single-handedly killing every remote chance Sikandar has at finding its audience!
We at PFC know why you’re on PFC. It sure as hell is not to talk about cinema or change our views. It is to promote Sikandar and this certainly is NOT the way to do so.
Do not blame the audience. Markets don’t exist or come into existence on their own, their potential has to be identified, then they have to be carved and developed. If people are not interested in a film like Sikandar because it does not have Akshay and Kareena, don’t blame them. Blame yourselves for not making up for that with an innovative, aggressive publicity campaign…umm…let’s take a further step back…a marketing/publicity budget.
Cinema-goers are not the ones who are scared here. It is pretty darn obvious who is ain’t it? A company produces a movie, but then doesn’t have the guts to stand by it all the way through.
And as far as chiding the audience for their narrow-mindedness, PFC certainly is not the place. While some may call your post “heartfelt” or honest, I am calling it a form of defence mechanism.
loading...
Vijay, I seem to recall Kay Kay Menon saying pretty much the same thing (in a less verbose way, of course). He was probably a little less bitter, but only a little…
So this isn’t the first time someone has addressed the “audience is responsible” point on PFC, is it?
loading...
It’s a bullshit argument. Some of our filmmakers on PFC themselves have attempted to make it. Independent or smaller filmmakers are not doing any charity for the audience by making different movies or eschewing mainstream conventions. Audience is not responsible. We watch movies for entertainment, and we pay well for that entertainment, be it buying DVDs or buying the tickets at the box office. Different people are entertained in different ways. Some through masala, some through comedy, some like violence, some like content that is avant garde, some like content that tackles social issues. We all have our poison, and we pay for it. If you’re going to show me your film free of cost, I don’t care what you call me. Call me irresponsible, call me ignorant, call me narrow-minded, lazy…whatever. But when I pay, customer is king.
And sure as hell ain’t my responsibility to go find your film, then pay, then watch no matter how good it may be. It is your responsibility as the filmmaker to let me know that its out there.
loading...
Nice Vijay. There is no point in trying to force someone out of the target demographic to experience/use a product. Simply wont work.
loading...
Oh, I agree with you entirely. But there are others who’d accept it (and agree) from Kay Kay but not Udai. And that is bs.
Putting the onus on the audience is nonsense, irrespective of who is doing the talking.
loading...
I did not get the point of article.At the end of the day, i feel we are living in a democracy and audience can choose what they want , you can not say this is bad and this is good.
World over, not only Indian filmmakers, would want tag of art film.Cinema is an art i agree, but i think every art form will be a successful only if it is appreciated by masses.
But i also believe that to cater to masses you do not have lower standards also.
@Debarun,
I agree with your comments 100%.
loading...
Filmmaking is too expensive in most economic environments, especially the Indian one to be an art alone. No matter how artistic the film, it has to be treated like a product and sold…sold very very hard to the audience.
And even for the flip side of the argument, what use is the creation of art if it is not seen?
loading...
Hehe.. all this is perfectly true..
But this is what everyone here on PFC has been telling for a long time..
all here were tearing apart KI, LAK into shreds..
So your worries are our worries. If you post this on PFC, i dont think it will make a difference..
We have to understand that, there are people who want to see Cinema as a less serious medium. You can keep on telling that the word ’serious’ or ‘art’ isn’t a proper and a righteous classification, but one can’t change it.. People who are interested in commercial films look at films in a different way, we can’t blame them. They would feel about “Dosar” in the same way that we feel about “KI”.
The real strength of the film-maker is to merge that divide. Only a handful hav done that so far. Sadly there aren’t many who can do that now. Let’s shift the blame to ourselves.. and work towards making sensible, watchable, thought-provoking films, which can be entertaining as well…
loading...
Very well put Udai. You should consider publising this in the papers
loading...
I think Udai shud publish this too…
loading...
Udai, I would agree with the thoughts but you have grossly overlooked the heterogeneity Indian audiences. It is perhaps the variety of audiences that bollywood has that makes the entire film making process exciting. Not many Indian filmmakers have not been able to successfully make movies that caters to most of the groups in this heterogeneous lot. And that is the challenge the film community should take up rather than continuing to be operating at extremes. There are examples like Taare Zameen par that have not only won accolades of critiques but has also raked in enough moolah… I hope sikandar does that too..
loading...
So you think people should watch movies which you approve of? Great. Everybody has different taste and we are nobody to judge them. Not everybody wants to watch realistic art type movies. People crave for what they miss in their life, a fantasy that they can live in 3 hours. That’s why a poor man will go for a movie where mithun as a collie get the rich and beautiful girl.
And it’s not exclusive to bollywood only, There is nothing intellectually stimulating about Transformer but people will go and still watch transformer 3 if it comes out.
loading...
The audience will always watch what it wants. What really bothers me is when a good movie gets no attention from the people who understand movies- the media, the journalists, the film critics, the actors, the actresses, the directors and the likes. There will always be movies like Transformers and Saw and I know what you did Last Summer that make a lot of money but then there will be movies like Benjamin Button and Wrestler that people will also go to the theaters to watch. Now why doesn’t that happen in Bollywood? 1) Some of the serious film makers take themselves too seriously and make bad films and when people are not interested they blame the audience…that pisses the audience off even more 2) Some of the mainstream film makers and their supporters put too much emphasis on how much money their film made in the first week or opening weekend even if the majority of the audience hated the movie after coming out of the theater. Neither is good or correct way of looking at a film’s success or failure.
loading...
It does shock me to see the abysmal and disinterested publicity for Sikandar. Udai’s piece is pertinent (though tedious and rambling). The motivation behind writing it does not really matter. If it is motivated then it is a poor attempt at apologizing for a bad job. The truth is that a corporate house has all but washed its hands off one of its films and is in no mood to attract people to the cinema halls. Why would somebody spend money on making a film and then do nothing to recover that money? That is the baffling question. Also I am surprised to read Sudhir’s low-key, monotonous blog for the film and the absence of the director Piyush Jha on any forum let alone PFC.
loading...
I JUST saw a trailer on TV for Sikandar and it whizzed by really fast, it didn’t even tell me what the film was about, did not generate any interest. It has known faces like Sanjay Suri and Madhavan in it. I had NO idea! Why wasn’t this built on?
loading...
udai,
I have the following points to make:-
1)The first image you use proclaims Sikander as a Great Film. Who decides that? Are we to go by the credentials of the Producer or the eclecticism of the films that you’ve mentioned thereafter?
2) You are antagonizing the same people you hope to sway with references to films that you liked. DOSAR is widely regarded amongst RG’s lesser, degenerative works (despite its facile B/W look). This only highlights your ignorance of Rituparno’s better works- Bariwali,Titli, 19 April.
3) The very fact that you’re forced to talk about an indie venture like Sikandar in the same post as Kambakht Ishq is enough proof of your desperation.
Instead of whining about lack of recognition for cinema that matters(according to you) and transferring the blame to the audience, you should put your head down and deliver a memorable MASOOM or at least a tacky but amusing HYDERABAD BLUES.
Or maybe try to hook up with the newly crowned queen of the Children’s Film Fed ( Nandita Das) for some meaningful tax concessions.
3)
loading...
We, as an audience, are not part of the film making process, nor do we understand the nuances.
We will watch any cinema if its entertaining all the way. Jaane bhi do yaaron was entertaining all the way, dont mind the ending-get the drift! Dont care at all about the serious cinema movement. Will watch Munnabhai and Dil Chahata hai and Bheja Fry and Don and Terminators and Matrix and Transformers and 2012 and Avatar. Will never go for Firaaq or Gulaal or Kambakhht Ishq or Agyaat. Dont care. If you want a bigger audience, reduce multiplex rates to below 100 rs per ticket. Apart from that, MAKE THE CINEMA ENTERTAINING. Here i dont mean cheap thrills at all.
Its the producers’ fault that they dont market their film thinking that it wont be worth it.
Us at PFC went and watched Sankat City, because it was promoted here at PFC. Others didnt even watch it. It is declared a flop. Only becuase it wasnt promoted.
Sikander will meet the same fate if its not promoted well.
loading...
(apologies for the length of this comment, but better here, in context, than another post)
Of course, its true: its democracy and a free-market. I’m not disputing any, just talking of some side effects: As both, no matter where they are implemented (governance, finance, cinema, whatever) are imperfect systems by definition, which is not necessarily a bad thing, as their power comes from this lack of homogeneity and allowance of subversion, in theory. But makes them prone to massive skews of perception, which can be triggered/amplified/weakened/manipulated by lack of awareness, the contrary (awareness itself) and provocation, in any direction good or bad (however u define good/bad).
There is a reason for talking of the audience. Of course, first, I must say fellows, do note that the tone is meant to be semi-sarcastic semi-humor almost tongue-in-cheek (at least the attempt is – perhaps I should have put it in “creative” –a “hypothetical letter to hypothetical audience”). Also c’mon, I’m not attacking the readers *here* – I’ve been exposed to a lot of new “different” stuff at this very forum. But forget “attacking” anyone really, it’s more a “shaking-up”. Remember, say, when you were a kid and just listened to one kind of music. But they a friend came along and “forced” you to listen to another thing – you resisted at first, but perhaps they new thing then became your favorite. Happens a lot. Awareness/provocation is important. If you’re yourself already there, great!
But, if only to speak oery generically, why the audience? (note I’m not the first dude to say this here – KK said that here too, and another good thread countering him is also there, scroll for the links). Please don’t think my focus was dissing the others’ for their choices. Let there be KIs and so on, and mindless stuff too – good “mindless stuff” is hard too, none of these guys are a shade on David Dhawan. BUT if I have a point, it’s just that lets not let it become such that non-mindless things can-not exist there. Lets prevent that skew from happening, as that is not balance.
My background is in research. And there, to be able to come up with the kind of great free thinking that changes the world, in physics, computer science, whatever – you do need to open up the thinking to allow freedom to blue-sky research and not just applied research. The blue skies might be economically less viable for the ppl who grant money to research (the financiers here). But some of the things that only blue-sky-open research can provide, do go to change the world, and eventually provide the stimulus which would create applied research of the future, and eventual economic value, and growth of science. Let’s not break the chain. As its that process of opening the door fully also means a lot in creating a more creative environment. Sure it’s a stretch comparing research and cinema, and the models are very different – but there is a relevant analogy there somewhere ( the completely esoteric superblue sky research will eventually die, not sustaining itself, too). Again the key here is ‘balance’ – between the blue sky and the commerical. But in research there is more awareness of the need for the blue sky – hence we have the fact that research is funded – by grants, govt, etc. If it was a pure free market, short term lack of profitability would trump long term value, and hence all of science would lose. Research needs the grants. Science needs it. Art needs it more, esp coz no patrons of old left. The patrons are now the audience.
The practical nature of film is that a lot of pre-judgement is done, which is fair, as there is tons of money at stake, but so it’s not really a ‘free’ market. But the overall thing that emerges is that the pre-judgement might end up just cater to lowest common denominator. And not often just for logical reasons (but things like super-star casts). The blue skies become grey. I am not saying that ALL be made, just a shift in the equilibrium state. Hence the “shaking up”. It’s about the average nature of the skew that exists in the system.
And so on to the audience? It’s coz we as audiences are the prime driver – in sense of the source of the demand, and the only entity that puts in money, comparable in quantity to the financiers (in bulk of course, not in individual basis). Its coz of the ‘vicousness’ of the vicous circle. Who are the actors in this circle. The Producers/Financiers, the Directors/Creators, the Audience/Consumers. The change has to come from any of the three. But its interconnected and in some way the most powerful actor is the audience, and most open to change. In volume and power both.
Take the other two actors.
I am not a producer/financier nor work for one. But it’s a small niche community I guess which has by definition the need to focus on the economics. And I do think that economics and art are not easy bedfellows – not that they can’t be – but somehow it doesn’t happen.
Then what – the directors – sure, here I will say that, agreed – if a director wants to be seen, yet do different – then take the middle path. That is the pragmatic approach. Sure. And there are tons of examples – from Khosla ka Ghosla to Iqbal to whatever which don’t seem to sacrifice on the art and are brilliant.
But don’t you think these are still outliers and not even close to the norm? that they were the ones who succeeded despite the system? which is great. But that the system’s value systems as such make it harder for “allowing” (the word I used often) a lot of stuff made. A related point is w.r.t. Taare Zameen Par – I love that movie – it does everything that I was talking about. It exists in the middle ground perhaps, but note the super-star, but using that as an example supports the (dominant mode) case, might get taken that unless the director gets an Aamir Khan to work on his film, its going to be damn tough.
I won’t deny that the director/creator should be a mover too. Indian film industry – 1400 movies a year. 1400 directors working a year. If 1% are revolutionaries – 14 guys who can be like that childhood friend who introduces you to a new thing – great. Lets try to be that! Honestly… but I’m not there yet. That is the direction…
But in terms of choice, an “easier to implement” (don’t hit me) choice is in the hands of the audience. Don’t see the movie, or see it. Don’t recommend, recommend. And the population of the country is way more than 1400. There is the maximal power in this democracy we talk about. Not all of the billions of India can afford to see TV, forget movies, forget multiplexes. But a large no of millions can. If we can provoke some of them to “change”, won’t it be great? We don’t have to lose the multi-super-starrers. But I think the audience has a lot of power to make sure we don’t lose the non-multi-super-starrers either.
Sure maybe I need to have more faith in producers and directors. Sure. But I do think out of the three entities here – the audience’s power is most potent. My current faith lies in the audience. And Hence directing all this to the audience…
(ducking behind the podium while the tomatoes and eggs fly)
(Btw – I just thought – after reading the RGV post that the vicious circle I describe has a fourth term – the reviewer :-)
Footnotes:
http://passionforcinema.com/guest-blogger-kay-kay-menon-sankat-cinema-2-my-reply-to-your-responses/
http://passionforcinema.com/audience-to-blame-really/
loading...
YAWWWWN! Yaar Pankaj ko bolo isko vijay palace le jake monk se milane ko!
loading...
You should become a politician. You are simply responding by beating around the bush ambiguously, talking about esoteric blue sky research instead of specifically and directly addressing the comments and criticism readers have put forth for your write-up. We get the sarcastic tone man. We’re not stupid. Tone or not, we’re still criticizing what you said, the crux of your argument that puts the onus on the audience.
Firstly be clear in what role you want to express your opinions on this forum. You can do so as a frustrated lover of indie cinema who wants to encourage the audience to support small films, but in doing so, do not also assume the role of the Big Pictures representative promoting his/her movie. Otherwise, be the representative alone, and promote the movie shamelessly. We’ll respect you for it. Like you said, “Awareness/provocation is important”, but provoking or “shaking up” without investing well in awareness which is what you have done is hypocritical.
loading...
“we’re still criticizing what you said, the crux of your argument that puts the onus on the audience.”
But isn’t audience all what I talked about in the followup comment… all the way down. even the research analogy was there to end just to say that low profitability sometimes needs to be supported, and that whole para ends with “audience is the patron”. Then the whole vicous circle argument to say that audience has the power can break it…then i talked of why not director/producer but audience, etc…
In fact i wanted to focus on that point and so did not write about dosar or anything else…Except a few lines on tone as a few complaints were in context the tone…
Then now, for Dosar as that is something that has been cursed – fair enough – it’s not a brilliant film. But I didn’t ever say you have to love each film. i was (in the caption) comparing to some existing films on “infidelity” theme. My point, look from first principles – if a director goes to find a producer for a film in that mood/tone/etc., will he be “allowed”. maybe yes, maybe low probabilit, maybe no.. what is the skew towards – “yeh movie nahi chalegi” will be a very probable answer, no?
As for politician :-) well doubt its possible
loading...
Hey Udai,
Loved your analogy. I accept with your point and can empathize too. Audience share the criticism as much as directors/producers/multiplexes etc. Change in attitude of one segment of the whole film business (i.e. audience here) will not solve the problem. But I have some faith for sure. These days theatre shows are running to full show and they deal with serious issues and they are finding their audiences. Some new form of such low cost multiplex should evolve which will screen such movies and directors/producers/actors should bear the costs for an year at least so that the initiative runs without losing its steam.
loading...
As Shripriya said, “So this isn’t the first time someone has addressed the “audience is responsible” point on PFC, is it? “.
Even Anurag Kashyap has indirectly or directly resorted to this kind of a rhetoric somewhere.
loading...
Yeah. Doesn’t matter though. Rhetoric of that sort will find its supporters but will never make a huge audience flock to the cinema to watch films it doesn’t want to. Additionally, it makes the author sound redundant to the critical reader like Anurag does to me.
loading...
Selection of movies is individual choice. No one can force to enjoy any particular movie. Watching these movie does not mean support. There may be other methods for these persons to promote their movies. Why will I spend my 500 bugs in PVR and will come out with tears.
Entertainment is must in the movie for success. You can compare some movies one with artistic direction and another with masala. Can writer say that he has watched original art movie which was released very earlier than masala movie. (Shhot on Sight Vs NewYork, Matrubhoomi Vs Firaq)
Do not use these methods to promote your movie. I was thinking to watch Sikandar, but now I would not.
Do not forget these type of publicity can give harm to u also.
loading...
i’ll tell you what the cinema-goers are scared of…
they are scared of being taken for granted,
being treated as a commodity/ number/ metric/ market-segment,
being subjected to pseudo-elite pontifications like this,
being told what to like what to dislike,
being thought of as dumb sheep who needs to be rescued/ shepherded,
being emotionally blackmailed and then short-changed…
and i can keep going … but enuf said.
loading...
arey yaar zabardasti ka jhagda hai!! main allahabad mein rehta hun,theek hai!! 15 cinema halls honge!! condition bataunga to aap logon to ulti aayegi!! seats ke cover phate hain, parda saalon se saaf nahin hua hai, pankha kabhi chalta hai kabhi nahin, saal bhar hua ek cineplex khule, usmein AC chalta hai!!
ek bhi movie release nahin hui yahan jo upar mention ki gayin hain but i’ve seen them all!!mere jaise bahut logon se mil chuka hun yahan par jo Sankat City aur Sikander jaisi films dekhna chaahte hain!! lekin aap logon ko to lagta hai ki paisa kamane ka saara theka delhi,mumbai aur baaqi metros ne le rakha hai!!aur expections hain ek aisi generation se jo “bubblegum” se zyaada aur kuch nahin kahi jaa sakti!!
loading...
The next best thing to happen should be the linking of theatres through satellite. Small towns will benefit the most through this. Plus all towns and cities will be witness to the viewing along with the world rather than after some weeks.
loading...
CINEMA, when I think of this word what comes to my mind is the always house-full multiplexes showing latest big-budget movies, non-stop advertisements for upcoming big-starrer movie, the continuous gossip about Saif-Kareena, shahid-someone etc on the news channels and tabloids
. Why is this happening? Is it because the Film makers/TV/Media want to show all this or is it because they find a huge audience for such things. I would not like to blame the audience for making such things a success becuase the everyday grind 
that we go through wants us to spend some time doing mindless, illogical stuff. But does that mean that we give into this desire completely. I dont think anyone of us does. I still read a good book on the same weekend I watch a stupid movie. It wouldnt hurt me watch a logical, thought-proving movie once in every 3 movies that I watch. So why are people getting so offended when the writer talks about the audience challenging their assumptions. 
loading...
Sour grapes. Heard it before. Sorry all this intellectual talk is not going to make feel guilty. The moment the author of this intendingly moralistic high ground principled talk gets a good commercial offer, they will forget what they wrote and take it. Have we not seen a shah, a das, an azmi, a benegal accept commercial offers.
I have a choice of what movie I want to see. Yes, I do not want to see what I go through life every day. Yes, I do not want to think. Because let us face it people who can think like this author probably is sitting in an A/C room typing on his/her laptop.
Since when did acting become only a domain expertise of non commercial actors. Why does an act by Govinda or Akshay not considered acting just because it is commercial. Most Oscar winners by the way are commercial people.
Anyway yes I am afraid to think just like this disgruntled author is afraid not to think.
Stop thinking. Human beings have done lot of damage by thinking.
For once try not to think or read too much into things. Let movie just be fun.
I have a choice of watching what i want and you have a choice of watching what you want. Let us stop giving lectures on which form of film making is better. Let the masses decide what they want to see. This is a democratic country and bollywood is a democratic place.
loading...
I like intelligent cinema, but I was thinking of giving Sikandar a miss because of
(a) the actor who plays the kid. Kuch Kuch Hota Hai made me hate him so much that I can’t bear to see his face now!
(b) the previews/trailers are pretty sad.
loading...
Don’t preach to the audience- Let them know your movie, what the story is about, who the cast is, and where it is released. Whether the movie is Good, Bad or Ugly, the audience will make the decision. Its not a perfect world we live in, sometimes rubbish products will sell, while the good ones will lie unsold. Accept, take the failure, and move on. Let the audience decide what kind of movie they want to see, or if you want them to see the kind of movies u want to see, create an audience, and you don’t get that by writing angtsy blogs for sure.
As a movie goer, i have 1 thing, i dont care if the movie is post modernistic, or refers to European avant garde or is influenced by XYZ technique, when i watch a movie in the theater, and come back, my rule of thumb is just one- Did the movie have enough moments that would stay in my mind? Movie making is not just throwing around terms like “New Age” or blogging about references to X,Y and Z, its about creating the moments in the audience mind, which stays with them. Sadly i found many of the “New Age” movies in recent times, lacking in this. Making a pretentious flick in the name of “New Age” is as bad as churning out “rubbish” in the name of entertainment like KI or Luck. In both cases the audiences come home feeling cheated.
loading...
I think this article is quite ahead of its time. People don’t watch so call ‘art’ movies… not becuase they like or don’t like… it’s more about their cultural developmemnt, background score of their real life style and substanse they eat, consume and live everday. If I summarize it’s like this:
1. Elite Class watch these movies more for elaboration of thoughts but with social tag so no way investment can be recovered.
2 Middle class likes to live in ideal dreams because of our social faith and melodrama lifestyle… TV shows are best example of this successful factor
3 Lower Middle class either like to watch complete opposite of what they live… and that’s why AK, SRK etc name tags sell in this market without logical hierarchy.
Having said that I still believe without these kind of movies emotional pattern of human behavior not possible to depict in our Bollywood so called slapstick comedy movies.
loading...
Have not read the post … as for the title of the post …
My answer : am afraid that the person next to me in the cinema hall has swine flu …
i live in Pune …
now let me read the post …
loading...
Hilarious! Living in Pune, I know what you must be thinking about the post, when you read the title!
loading...
IMO Rituparno’s “Dosar” is insult to intelligent Bengali cinema. Have you seen ‘Ek Mutho Chhobi’ ?
Can’t comment on Sikander till I see it, but the tailor didn’t make it feel like a gripping thriller anyway.
loading...
Tailor = Editor of the trailer.
loading...
Finally!!! Someone thinks Dosar as insult.
loading...