PROJEKT iVIEW : Filmwriting from a Scientist’s eyes
iVIEW AUTHOR:
Hemang J, Shah (Philadelphia, USA)
email: hemang.shah [at] drexel.edu
I got the idea for this post after reading an accusation about a writer picking a story from some non-Indian movie. I am a PhD student working on the development of liquid crystal displays (LCDs) and at present time I am working on my dissertation. A dissertation is a long document that starts with what has been done previously before I started my research work. A huge chunk of our initial work (at times a year) requires us to read and understand what other researchers have done.
Many a time, this sows multiple ideas in our brains of which we select one to work on. Isn’t this being inspired by somebody else’s work? I think so. So why is it that people don’t accuse us researchers of being “inspired” the way filmmakers are? Many a time, the work chosen by a PhD student is a mere follow up of an already published work. Isn’t that similar to a sequel? Well, again we are not accused of being ordinary when we should be.
Many a time, the research project is borrowing ideas from different fields and customizing it to one’s own. Isn’t it similar to what some of our filmmakers do? One example that comes to my head is Kaante where Reservoir Dogs and Usual Suspects are merged or Kill Bill, which was an amalgamation of some Japanese/Korean/Chinese movies.
I believe that no work is original. Even our thoughts are inspired by our or somebody else’s actions. Even an extraordinary scientific work is inspired from someone. If you don’t believe me, check out any publication in a top journal. The authors will have listed other papers/ideas/patents from which they have borrowed. It’s no shame but rather a requirement to do so. Maybe filmmakers ought to do that as well.
By no means do I advocate plagiarism but rather an acknowledgement of the source if you are moving the work further. Look how easy it is for Vishal Bharadwaj when he makes movies on Shakespeare plays. What aids (hampers) other moviemakers is that our film industry has conveniently substituted inspiration for plagiarism.
Filed Under
PROJEKT iVIEW
Loading ...
7 Responses to “PROJEKT iVIEW : Filmwriting from a Scientist’s eyes”
Leave a Reply
(Ref smilies)
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.
-
Advertisement
-
- Dev.D- Emosional Aty
- Sorry Bhai R
- The assault on our intelligence, no pun int
- Irresponsible medium:Shame on me to be an aud
- SORRY
- Do Hanky
- Bollywood Bombed?
- Dev.D- Emosional Atyachar
- The assault on our intelligence, no pun intended
- Catherine Deneuve in India - Win World Cinema DVDs
-
Advertisement
Hottest Today:
Recent Posts:
Hemang: There is a thin difference between new concepts in arts and in science. Science is a vast area and its heavily dependent on verification by experimental facts and hence while sending works for publication one has to connect his work with the past work because many people around the work will be working in same field and as somebody will be doing a part of that area and other will be covering some other part of the work, so to maintain that connection references are given from already done old works. If scientists will not follow this reference pattern then new scientists will be at loss and will do all the things already done by old scietists. To make progress fast its a must step.
and more over now PhD is like making a young scientist prepare for his independent future research work. and while submitting your dissertation you have to sign a paper that its not plagiarised material and legally you are bounded with this oath and Universities can take away the degrees if plagiarism is proven later.
Even if one is not working in hard core sceince and working in technology development even then one has to show results with some new parameters change.
It cant happen in science that one takes old research work and just type on his own computer in his chosen fonts and format and submit as his own work.
But in art and especially in music and films this happen. A film made in different language is copied scene to scene in other language and this is a different case.
For director its evry easy job and all the hard work is done by actors because they still have to enact those scenes.
Its much severe in books, because its very easy to write in own hand writing what Kabir had thought and told some 500 years ago. Old work is there to learn. If one is copying MonaLisa painting, will we call it great painting now. he can do it to refine his painting skill only.
But once he is prepared and confident he has to paint his own ideas.
In films, old dieas can be borrowed but something of director’s own shd be there.
This tendancy to immitate films made in differeent language because not many people know abt them is a danegerous attitude and especially as far as creativity is concerned as it hinders creativity.
Be it sceinec or art only those are trewated as innovative and great who have done something original of their own. Rest crowd is just busy in maintaining status quo, hence busy in doing production necesary for society to run. Creators are few.
On a totally different note, Drexel has been one helluva place to discuss plagiarism for a while now. I have been there talking PFC for nights on end. Will give you a heads up the next time I am there… in all probability a couple of weekends from now.
Welcome to PFC! Interesting read.
I endorse RK’s view at least on this aspect. Comparing inspiration in science and arts are comparing apple and oranges.
Poincare proved (few days before Einstein as his paper published before Einstein and even he acknowledged it) E=mc2 but Einstein gave a better physical insight in his paper on the theory of spl. relativity. Scientific research is to constantly redefine the boundaries of the same topic again and again. Look at how the definition of function evolved from Euler’s time to Riemann’s definition of analytic function. Even in arts, one can argue that one can always redefine the previously filmed stories but it has to be novel like Vishal Bhardwaj in Omkara and not like Sanjay Gupta in Kaante (He actually lowered the movie several notch below by his interpretation :d)
I agree with RK on this one at least. I fully endorse his views. To tell you the truth, “tumne meri muh ki baat chinn li”
RK and Omprakash: I agree with your comments. What pisses me off is the exact imitation you both mentioned. I cannot understand how these imitators can strut around as “creators” or speak about the originality flowing in their veins. Least they could do is acknowledge that they lifted from some work. I found RGV’s thank you note to Godfather a great gesture that someone is open about it.
What I was kind of getting at is a peer-review process with art. I know its too idealistic. If I have to publish something in engineering, the paper is published only if a board of editors and anonymous reviewers in the same field approve the work. In cinema or any kind of art, this may be horrendously difficult, but it can be a great screening procedure.
Ravptor: email me the next time you are around. I will be here for one more month or so.
p.s.: I successfully defended my thesis yesterday.
Congrats Dr Hemag J Shah!!!!!!:):)>-
Hey RK, Thanks a ton!