Use the power!
iView Author:
Rohan Venkatraman (Sydney, Australia)
Email :
withheld
Use the power!
I have been browsing articles on PFC for just over a couple of months now, and have observed that there seems to exist 2 seas of followers. Rather, a sea and a trickle.
One, the horde who crave a revolution in Indian cinema; by making thought provoking, innovative cinema themselves (read our distinguished authors), or by standing behind these makers and vouch vociferous support in their efforts. The other come across as a bunch of people with a herd mentality, i.e. collectively attack the current crop of film makers for churning out ‘ordinary/ run of the mill’ cinema.
First let me look at Indian cinema from the perspective from the former aforementioned group. There is a strong undercurrent of emotions that range from rebelliousness, desperation for novelty, change that flow through the people in this group. And they are justified in feeling so. Afterall, hindi (read not Indian) cinema seems to have stagnated from a commercial point of view. Yes, there is the odd ‘offbeat’ film that comes your way and gets the ‘multiplex’ audience talking. This usually translates into the movie becoming a cult movie amongst the ‘hatke’ group of movie goers, makes a reasonable amount of money before vanishing away into darkness.
But instead of making it the norm, these kind of movie come your way only once or twice a year. The general consensus is that we need more of such movies. The first group of people react highly emotionally to commercial potboilers, badmouthing it, taking strong note of critics, pundits reactions to their movies. This further invites the wrath of the already established film makers, actors, film critics et al.
Now lets be brutally honest. The country we reside in boasts of a literacy rate of 61.3%(wiki). 40% of them might belong to the category who catch movies on a regular basis and an even lesser number who prefer watching fresh cinema. A vast majority of them crave entertainment when they pay rs 150 at the ticket. Exercising their cerebral muscles in not on their agenda. And our top shot production houses oblige accordingly. They draw the masses, who in turn return the favour in terms of box office success. Maligning them or the type of cinema they make does not help the cause is it? Not that I ask to sing praises and indulge in slavery of these people, but not reacting rather than indulging in meaningless mud slinging might just serve the purpose better. This might also be another reason why someone like Anurag Kashyap had to wait for 8 long years, knocking a 1000 doors to turn out a gem like No Smoking. A business mind has to be coupled along with a creative mind to express yourself successfully.
Moving onto the latter group, who are collectively referred to as the aam junta; in a country such as ours I feel they are completely justified when they reject a brilliant yet offbeat movie. Here we have a bunch of people barely educated trying to rattle the their grey cells over a film like No Smoking, when they could have bought tickets to the film screening on the adjacent screen which would guarantee them a laughs, a few droplets of tears, etc. Film makers around the globe especially in the west have more a liberty to make films that they would like to make rather than succumb to commercial pressures. This is because the producer and the average movie goer there is pretty well educated and is open to new cinema.
The issue here is reaching to a large number of people within India. I dont see this happening unless the new brand of film makers are ready to join hands with the well established production houses who undoubtedly hold a monopoly over box office success. Its hard to deny that, that is what eventually counts to a majority of the people involved in the making of a film. Appreciation is secondary. Of course you might contradict me on that.
I sincerely hope that our talented film makers get a platform worthy enough to express themselves without having to compromise on their ideas. And unfortunately, from a practical perspective, I see no other way than to join hands with the established powerhouses.
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 do not understand what you mean by joining hands. if that means toning down the experimental part of the film-maker’s vision, then it will be the same run of the mill film that comes out of these powerhouses. But if you mean without compromising the film maker’s vision, then I dont see any reason for the powerhouses to collaborate with these hatke film-makers as these subjects are inherently box-office duds. The only way out will be if the powerhouses create a separate indie section (like UTV is trying to do) which will produce and distribute a couple of experimental films every year. But before that happens, they need proof that it will generate enough moolah for them in long run otherwise why would they put money. So in that case the ball is in estd. powerhouse’s court and the experimental film-makers cant do a thing about it. Please dont quote CDI’s example as it may be experimental for powerhouse production houses but not for the first group of people you mentioned.
Dear Rohan,
Your views are justifiable but looking at the current scenario of Hindi cinema, do you think that big production houses even care about churning what can be deemed as quality cinema? as far as literacy rate is concerned, that is a minority here. If you give the masses quality cinema their tastes will definitely improve. The same can be applied to various services in India related to the education system to what not. We never think of upgradation. For different people cinema is a different escapade but that does not mean that those lines can be blurred to make a better film. The best example you can cite is Spanish cinema namely Cuaron, Almavodar or Guillermo del Toro. The aam junta may see a film like children of men or pan’s labyrinth as a good thriller and fantasy respectively. Whereas the distinguished (a harsh word) audience may find many overtones. It is with this balance that western cinema has flourished. As far as other genres of film are concerned, they are targeted at particualar audiences. Hollywood namely targets a certain demographic and relies a lot on statistics and caution. From there on the vision of a film maker is concerned. But you have to give Hollywood credit for pleasing the people overtime because even popcorn films (not all) are value for money. Sadly the hindi film industry has a pathetic outlook. I can say alot but lets just end it here. Nice article though ;)
Rohan,
Well written article with which I completely agree. I do not suppose that by the term ‘joining hands’ you mean the adventurous film-makers should start making regular potboilers. I presume that you mean there shouldn’t be a ‘am better than you, I shall shun you’ attitude.
I think the big film-makers are opening to the possibilities of making more ‘hatke’ films. Most films now try to be different in some way or the other. Ofcourse, from time to time, you have your OSO’s that come out and make our cinema seem like circus to the world – even if they might be truly entertaining.
In our country, cinema is not considered art by the masses. It is an entertainment and solely entertainment. Here in Sydney (Yes am in sydney too and have my tickets booked for OSO in Greater Union Burwood), we have true aficionados of good cinema. That is because there always seems to be a lot of time for us to do things as compared to our friends and family back home in India. We can appreciate good cinema as an art and the masses in India do not have the time, patience or energy to admire art. They want a quickie – and our cinema is mostly a quick-fix.
Parralel/art/intellectual cinema will always come. But you can never convert the audiences or the film-makers. A Ghai/Chopra can never make a No Smoking the same way you can never expect AK to make a KKHH/Yaadein.
So although joining hands seems probable… it isn’t plausible.
P.S. Where in Sydney are you from?
Thanks for the feedback guys. Pleasingly constructive.
As for clarification on what I meant by ‘joining hands’, it was more from a ‘you be nice to me and I shall be the same’ perspective in conjunction with the process of film making.
Agreed that most established powerhouses are going to turn down a good yet what they deem ‘hatke’ script 9 out of 10 times, it does not make sense degrading their mentality or the kind of products they churn out. I see it as a lose-lose situation. Neither have you earned any sort of respect from them nor will you have a chance to work productively in the future with them. Now I dont advocate ‘Chak De India’ as a pathbreaking film, yet for a powerhouse like Yashraj to back it probably indicates that the director and the writer went about expressing themelves in the ‘right’ manner. I use ‘right’ in the same vein as ‘joining hands’.
Your comments make perfect sense to me Saad. It is true that each person visits a cinema hall with a varied agenda. And it is ridiculously hard to satisfy each and everyone of them with the cinema you make.
Omprakash, I agree with you that the only way out seems to be the UTV way. I am not in a position to comment on the revenue that ‘No Smoking’ has made, but I wouldnt be wrong in saying that producers in the future (barring Vishal Bharadwaj and a selected few, god bless him) would be apprehensive of producing such movies. From their perspective its a lose lose situation.
To conclude, I would say that its extremely hard for a film maker to freely innovate, find a producer to back his efforts, reach out a sizeable audience AND return sufficient revenue. There has to be a compromise somewhere..
Forgot to mention it in my previous post Anand, I am from Holsworthy. And yes I have tickets booked for OSO on Sat @ Liverpool Westfields as well. No regrets.
@Rohan
>-
So you only mean that the hatke filmmakers shouldnt criticize powerhouse products and they will in turn maintain a creditable silence. I am not sure if this joining hands will be of any help to anyone. Or based on keeping mum, the powerhouses will start producing indie efforts. I dont think so.
About expressing CDI in right manner (as you said), I suppose, it is nothing but toning down (by curtailing the director’s vision) and create a product which caters to their taste. So, I dont see this marriage happening.
As I mentioned before, maintaing a public silence is better than creating a lose lose situation by flogging them powerhouses.
And I am sorry I quite didnt get by what you were trying to imply with the ‘CDI’ statement.
There is one more class which appreciates good cinema be it Hum AApke hai kaun or Manorama Six feet under and hazaaron khwaishein aisi hi.
This group which I belong to wants to see good movies, movies which hold their attention for 3 hours.
I do get bored with overdose of so called “comedy movies” but also get irritated by so called experts in cinema who think the ppl who do not understand their movies are idiots
Thank you Rohan for the wonderful post. I’ve been trying to say similar things, but it never seems to go over as well as when you said it. I agree with you about “joining hands”, but I doubt that will happen for a while. It was interesting about the literacy aspect of the types of people going to certain films. I live in Virginia near Washington DC and the other day when I was at my local Indian store I started really looking at who was renting movies. The families and older people were wanting the regular Bollywood stuff, but I noticed a man in his late 20’s returning MANORAMA and after reading about it on PFC and seeing this young guy returning it I decided to rent it (and I’m glad I did). I also mentioned NO SMOKING to the owners of the store, but they weren’t interested in seeing it and they only seem to want to see American action movies, so that Indie-Indian Cinema is a hard sell. I hope it is received better in the coming years otherwise we would miss out on a lot of talented people and their films.
Rohan, I think the link between education and cinema appreciation is true only to an extent. For many people cinema is timepass, a reason for a date etc. If one watches movies only as a consumer, you can watch any number of movies, but you will not be able to tell the difference between good and bad.
But try saying this to anybody and nobody will admit to not knowing good cinema from bad. One needs an inquisitive attitude and take additional efforts to know one from the other. It’s an aquired taste just like any other art form.
In most of our cinema that’s the problem. We assume that the viewer is so dumb that he needs to be explained to till his head hurts. Unless the ‘big powerhouses’ have a vision to extend their purpose from a purely commercial standpoint to an artistic one, there is no hope. They are the ones who need to do it. They have the money and the people. That’s why CDI is a small step in the right direction whose success is so important to the evolution of Indian Cinema.
The authors here will keep making movies which a few people will like but that’s just ripples in the ocean.
@dazedandconfused, you said “One needs an inquisitive attitude and take additional efforts to know one from the other. It
I agree with Dazed that the link between education and appreciation is tenuous for the most part.
Anecdotally, I have cousins/nephews/nieces, all reasonably educated who won’t watch anything but hardcore mainstream masala.
On the other hand, my maid’s cousin (drives an auto) loves hatke films and even went and saw Manorama twice (no, he hadn’t met me or even knew who I was or my connection with it)
At the extreme end of things, the education-appreciation thing might hold; Do most PHDs prefer hatke films? Probably yes.
I used to work in a big company….. From my experience I will point out some traits of average moviegoer….
1) A star movie is a big hit even before it is released. Omkara is sure to do well but not Blue Umbrella.
2) The name of the film matters. ex, People will not go to see a movie like “Dharm” just because of the name of the movie. So if the name of ur movie has some high fundu meaning it is sure to doom.
3) After this they see the review in major newspaper and website….By this time most of the good movies are already filtered. No need to mention here how the movies are reviewed
Thats why it is not good to blame anyone else. Producer or Director or anyone.
Once I am reading an interview by Adoor Gopalkrishnan. He said that there used to be a time when if a movie won a national award then people used to go to see it. Now its just the opposite.
Just saw ‘Saawariya’ and was horrified. I prefer parallel cinema but I love all kinds of movies. Yet I could not bring myself to appreciate anything about this one. And this is what brings me back to this particular article… ‘use the power’.
People talk about AK’s brave’n'brilliant No Smoking being self-indulgent. What is Saawariya then? An absurdly plotless movie as colourful as Finding Nemo which could not keep people sitting calmly for more than the first 30 minutes. I saw 20 people walk out from a total of 35 during the interval here in Sydney’s biggest screen!
With the 35+ crores SLB has spent to make Saawariya we could have probably got to see atleast 8-10 MSFU’s. And am sure this would give more return and turnover more tickets than Saawariya would. So where is the economic sense in making such an absurd movie with new comers?
Sigh. It was heartbreaking to see money spent that way when there are so many talented film-makers and directors who struggle to make one decent film with a measly budget. Could not this 35+ crores be spent to make 20 experimental low-budget movies by budding film-makers armed with great scripts?
I was vague in my earlier comment but am sorry to say that I am now sure that ‘joining hands’ with the so-called powerhouses is impossible.
Anand, check out the OSO thread, posted some links to Saawariya reviews…
Another argument in favour of people saying that education does not mean interest in experimental films.
I went to see the afternoon show of No Smoking at PVR Vikaspuri, Delhi. I walked in 15 minutes before the start and sat before the audi for about 5 minutes with my girl friend before she grew impatient and wanted to know when would the audi doors be opened. I enquired with one of the PVR guys who looked a little baffled and went somewhere only to come back two minutes later to tell me that the show has been cancelled.
Me: Why?
PVR: Sir, you are the only two to watch this movie.
Me: So what. I want to watch this.
PVR: We are sorry sir. You can watch Jab we met in the next audi. We will give you last row seats. Or you may sit anywhere you want to.
Me: (looking at my GF) Well. Your wish granted.
To put things is perspective, Vikaspuri is a middle-class dominated locality with most residents working in either govt. jobs or private sector.
My thoughts on education and its link with being able to appreciate good cinema seems to have been taken out of context.
What I meant was that an educated person would be able to appreciate cinema as an art much better than one who isnt. This should not be misinterpreted as saying that the former group holds more interest in experimental (I detest the use of this word) cinema, which could possibly be true as well.
And I belong to the same group as you Karthik. As long as the movie holds my attention span for 3 hours or longer, either by entertaining me or getting me raking my grey cells, I am a satisfied man.