What ails Indian Cinema?
iView Author: Siddhartha Banerjee (Kolkata, India)
Email: sidban1[at]gmail[dot]com
What ails Indian Cinema?
A wrong title at a wrong time, given the mass orgasm Indians are having at the success of ‘Slumdog etc etc…’
The media is almost making us believe that we’ve arrived; the age of cosmetic cinema in the shinning multiplexes of a ‘shining new India’. With reports of Bollywood movies grossing millions and receiving awards in the International space, it may appear indeed that Indian cinema is at an all-time high. A closer scrutiny, however, may reveal a different picture.
Firstly, the millions (so proudly reported by the Indian T.V channels) flow-in primarily because of the NRI population, rather than a true broad-based International audience. Organizing a Filmfare award in Dubai or Maldives in itself can hardly create a global audience. Secondly, the self congratulatory myth of Bollywood finally making it big internationally is largely created by a myopic and popularity-focused media taking recourse to selective highlighting. Films from countries like Japan, Iran, Korea, etc. (producing far lesser films in numbers) have a much bigger and broader international following. The Indian media is either ignorant of these, or chooses to keep its audience comfortably basking in a narrow, parochial self-glory.
Cinematic tradition, like any other art form, has a historical context and continuity. While sifting through my memory, trying to dig out what cinema had meant to me, I couldn’t resist repeating Bergman: “Film as dream, film as music. No form of art goes beyond ordinary consciousness as film does, straight to our emotions, deep into the twilight room of the soul.”
Unfortunately for us, Bergman, like Ray, Truffaut, Antonioni, Fellini, etc., is dead. While in many countries, a new generation of filmmakers, like Gus Van Sant (USA), Zhang Yimou (China), Wong Kar-wai (Hong-Kong), Majid Majidi, (Iran), Richard Linklater (USA), Tareque Masud (Bangladesh), Krzysztof Kieślowski (Poland), etc. are trying to keep the experimenting tradition alive and to create their own cinematic language, in India, we’re a generation without memory, without history, without knowledge, basking in the transience of junk entertainment, a T.V promoted ‘make-believe’. Unfortunately, we still do not know the difference between acting and modeling. We are primarily concerned with copying, stealing, and organizing Filmfare awards, flushing everything with vulgar glamor and money.
One of the most deep-rooted causes of the problem is the tendency of the film-makers to be formulaic (dance, action, melodrama). Most of the film-makers in India are driven not by any artistic urge but by a vague, mythical notion of ‘what sells’, altogether bypassing the rigor and discipline of creation. As a result, there’s neither much experimentation with the art form, nor much variety in themes. This, precisely, is the problem with formula: it eventually replaces the imagination of the creator, creating a tendency towards short-cut and mass manufacturing; while in true art, there’s neither a short-cut, nor a chance to replicate or mass manufacture. Hemingway had once said: ‘For a true writer, each book should be a new beginning, where he tried again for something which is beyond attainment.’
Well… what’s true for literature is true for cinema as well.
Another troubling trait in the Indian film industry is a wholesale focus on packaging and promotion (though again in formulaic patterns), while neglecting the product itself. Unscrupulous self-promotion to grab attention in an over-crowded space, plagiarism, and manipulation is sadly replacing the art and the essence of film-making. While packaging and promotion may serve some purpose, but in itself cannot substitute for the product itself. Hence, irrespective of the self-congratulatory statements and uncouth media promotions, the fact remains that a large part of Bollywood and Indian cinema continues to cater only to junk entertainment.
The industry is much too cluttered with dynastic heredity and much too focused on instant fame and big money to have space left for the true artists, for creativity, or for experimentation. The sad aspect is that even if there are exceptions (like ‘Ocean of an Old Man’; a brilliant, evocative film by FTII graduate Rajesh Shera), even if there are encouraging initiatives like FulMarxx Shorts Fest, these hardly find their way through the manipulative nexus of the industry or the mainstream media.
Unless the industry finds ways of encouraging new voices and new experiments in syntax and themes, unless the media takes the responsibility of constructive criticism and highlight new artistic voices (a classical example is André Bazin’s Cahiers du cinema in the fifties and the sixties of France) , unless the audience becomes matured and open enough to appreciate and patronize (in some form) non-mainstream films (media again needs to play a big role here), Indian cinema will continue to be what it is: an ugly, grotesque, money-making machinery capitalizing on titillating a mass of junk-focused audience.
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
@Siddhartha…sensible article..we are hell bent on promoting nonsense propounded by bollywood…we give it several reasons..cinema as a an dies and business survives…there is no balance in bollywood anymore..it will result in the total decline of the industry in time of crisis..Its high time filmmakers , supporting professionals and audience wake up…
typo…it is ‘cinema as an art dies’
The question is twisted.
Right now the biggest peril is Bollywood spreading its tentacles and spoiling other sensible film industries with its ’song and dance magic’.
@Siddhartha.
a poignant post. Cinema for art’s sake has existed for a while now. Call it parallel, indie, arthouse. These films were and are being made. The problem is that no one is watching them! The ‘aam aadmi’ like me, has no access to film festivals or special screenings to watch the “other’ cinema. And the media, as you rightly said, is only exacerbating the issue with biased, sensational or irrelevant reporting about the business of cinema. Where are the (legal) DVD releases, where are the publications and the forums (PFC excepted) that can reach out to film lovers? The movement has to come from a grassroots level or a whole generation (unfortunately) is gong to grow up thinking that Bollywood is all there is!!
Good arguments, Siddhartha. It is courageous of you to discuss the greats of cinema and compare them to the sad state of affairs in the present day.
“a new generation of filmmakers, are trying to keep the experimenting tradition alive and to create their own cinematic language, in India, we’re a generation without memory, without history, without knowledge, basking in the transience of junk entertainment, a T.V promoted ‘make-believe’. ”
I would agree about the cinematic language part, I would say we are in a transitional phase, it will go through lots of churning and sommersaults, then we could possibly define if there is a unified Indian cinema out there.
While we are at it, we must consider the diverse Cinema being made and appreciated/acknowledged in India are two diff ball games. While all the other countries’ examples that you quoted might have formed a distinctive voice of their own, we still can take pride in the fact that we do so much, high on variety and quantity even if low on quality.
@VPJ, completely agree. Bollywood should either celebrate it like a Dev D or trash it like a Sarkar. It is hard to find a reason to hold on to the YRF brand for obvious reasons, unless some one like Shaad Ali reinvents the wheel.
Shaad Ali??
Were u being sarcastic, Tushar?
No. Why would I be sarcastic. Shaad Ali is one of the few hopes out there.
The ‘maturity of Indian cinema’ buzz was only convincing in that peculiar fall season of 2006, with the likes of RBD, KANK, Omkara, Lage Raho MB.
Afterwards, it was as if big banners were doing everything possible to negate that statement.
great post! Thats what I always say….acceptance has to come first. Then, as Bazin said, the only way to criticize a film is to make another film. Now that we know what is wrong, why not do something about it? I know there are some people roughing it out there but what we need is to achieve critical mass. When the filmmakers refuse to make crappy films and when we as an audience refuse to pay money to watch crap. The point is to create a crisis. To shake the very foundations. We can keep writing and talking on PFC for a loooong time but nothings gonna change by doing just that, believe me. The only way we can change this is by making good films ourselves. Period.
How many movies can you recall being promoted on the strength of their content alone in recent times?
Either its some star kid’s launch or a hero’s 6-12 pack abs or a heroine going ga ga about how she is gonna wear a bikini for the first time or about how the lead pair is going around or an item number shot in Antarctica or some heroine’s 0 size waist.
When movies stop concentrating on content, and focus on marketing hype,you just keep getting duds 1 after another.
Are we, the indian audience, especially audience of bollywood cinema..not responsible for this?..Are we going to hide forever giving reasons for the need of ‘Time pass’ Cinema, just for relaxation and continue to enjoy this nonsense? Dont we want our cinema to mirror the society more often? Dont we want our cinema to showcase Indian culture, traditions, contemporary issues, philosophies, way of life to the world? Dont we want our cinema to excel? Dont we want each rupee that we spend on the ticket be worthwhile and entertaining at the same time? Dont we want our children to grow up more aware of the world we live in? Dont we want to remember the greatness and mediocrities of our past? Dont we want our cinema to pull us back to the cinema halls?…All this will not happen if bollywood continues its idiotic success ride..It will not happen if we continue to patronize bad cinema..whatever may be the reason..
What’s the point of this discussion?
yeah it is true we want junk entertainment too. Whether cinema is that special-art or not, For normal audience cinema is entertainment.
How many people prefer classical music to filmi-music or sugam sangeet ?
How many people are purchasing good hindi literature ? how many ppl purchased a hindi poetry book ?
Even many so called cinema-lovers don’t do such things.
And the normal audience is busy with roti-kapda aur makan and many other things. They have so many problems that they want entertainment from movies.
—
But there are good rich ppl, who have luxuries, they can enjoy a dark or so-called-thinking movies.
—
What i mean is, parallel cinema, this-different-cinema works too. but they shud not expect house-fulls. They want audience to support their cinema. Their movie-tickets have same price too. and they will keep the huge profit in their own pocket too. And we can’t question anything, we will get the same reply, “I make movie for my happiness, if u want to watch it, then watch it, don’t criticise, u r dumb, u don’t understand cinema.”
—
There is one section of audience, who knows inside details of movie-making, and are related to this field. they appreciate parallel cinema.
And there are some other fortunate people, who came in contact with other such people, or who got opportunities,free passes to visit such festivals, or who got good money to spent.
And there is one section, of farmers,workers, servants, lower middle class, or some middle class. u can’t do anything for that section now.
But there is one more section, of software engineers, students etc. They can be made aware of good cinema.
In my opinion, good filmmakers shud start their own blog, where they can explain many things abt their movies, where they can explain and educate some curious ppl. They shud review the review of reviewers there. (As amitabh did on his blog).
And many other intelligent people( mostly from PFC) they shud point out the positive things of a good movie. And shud not focus much on negative things.
(I mean, there was something good in gulal, and WTSajjanpur, but many ppl here criticised weakenesses )
And such intelligent people, or filmmakers, shud not insult the normal audience. These people think, that they know good cinema, they watch foreign movies, they understand technical things, so they can insult anyone, they can use abusive,insulting and sarcastic words too.
If a filmmaker wants to be like that, i make movie for myself, if u don’t like the movie,then **$#. Then he has no right to complain, that ppl dont appreciate his movies, and don’t recognize his talent.
—
I am a junk loving audience, i like some good movies, and i am trying to understand cinema as an art. I find out which movie was classic, then i get it, yeah i don’t understand many hidden meanings, then i read reviews and comments on net. then i watch it again, and i understand and appreciate many things in the movies, and i learn a little more abt this art. then i appreciate next movie, and i learn more.
For many foreign movies, i get many reviews, and a lot of information on net. so it is easier for me to understand such movies.
But i don’t find such reviews, comments, explanations for indian movies.
Even at this site, there are more negative reviews than positive one. (postive ones are for foreign movies mostly) Many good-movies don’t become superb, and sometimes as a whole package they are not good, but still they have some good qualities, so highlight those points.
—
When i was a kid, i used to like amitabh-action movies, mithun’s dialouges. and when they used to show, “trikaal” movie on DD. we used to feel disappointed. When i was growing up, i talked with friends, i read books, newspapers and i started to understand these movies a little bit.
Now i am reading more, and watching and trying to understand more with the help of internet.
—
And one suggestion i have for cinema-lovers is,
Write articles like, ” what i liked in gulaal” what i liked in WTSajjanpur”. And if u didn’t like 8×10 tasveer, then write that article in fifty words only.
—
The audience who doesn’t understand good cinema. And the audience who understands good cinema.
I think, ‘that understanding audience’ should educate, make aware, write good things more and shud try to help other audience, instead of insulting them for their poor taste.
–
will write more later.
To answer the question raised in the title of this article… In my opinion, the one and only thing which ails Indian cinema is the Audience…
As stated in the article, it is true that most film makers dont make movies for the sake of art but they dont need to because majority of the Audience doesnt watches the movie for the sake of watching a work of Art.
Film makers dish out one trash after the other and yet the Audience watches it in the name of relaxation from day-to-day tension, escaping from reality, time pass, market hype, lack of options and what not…
@ Ram V (11): I agree whole heartedly. We the audience are equally (perhaps even more than filmmakers sometimes) responsible to bring about this change. Amazing films often come and go, and are wiped off from the pages of history for want of an audience. We need to stop patronizing silly stuff. But the point is, you and I are probably in the minority. Most of our people do actually enjoy ‘timepass cinema’. These films make bumper business. Why would some filmmakers even bother to do better stuff? Thankfully, I see a change happening since a couple of years.
..
@Siddhartha: I second all that you have written on this post. But I beg to differ on the Ocean of an Old Man bit. I had a chance to see the film but for me, it was plain boring and lacking in depth. Nothing, absolutely nothing, happens in the film. I couldnt feel anyone’s pain, I didn’t see anything apart from one beach, I had no idea why it went on for a 100 odd minutes. But I respect your views. Sometimes, a film just connects. Sometimes, it just doesnt. It didnt for me.
@Arati..Exactly the point…when the filmmaker can make easy money out of con-cinema..why would they even bother to make good cinema..
For last 30-40 years we have been conditioned to take in this stupidity film after film..and now, we as an mass audience have agreed to the fact that..the sole purpose of going to a movie theatre is to ‘Relax’ or ‘Time pass’ and therefore need primarily light entertainment..We have somehow kicked out ‘Thinking’ out of the cinema hall…
Filmmakers in reality show figures of 80-90% of the films failing in the box office every year…If this is true ..that itself is an example of Masala Formula failing miserably…our filmmakers are acting as if they have not seen the ‘Elephant in the room’…
All of us- audience, film makers, other associated industry people,media etc are all responsible for the current state of affairs of Indian cinema.while there are some attempts being made both in Bollywood & regional cinema to shift the tide, a lot more such attempts would be required to make any significant impact.So lets all try our part to be a part of the change otherwise we will keep complaining & nothing will change.
And I frankly think there’s nothing wrong in wanting to make money from films.after all this is a profession too.But yes what is important is that money should not be the sole driving force behind making a movie.Dont we feel happy to see movies like Dev D or an Aamir making money inspite of them being good movies?
Money making should be one fo the prime agenda in any business including movie making…If I go by pure business terms..the paradigm has shifted over the years from ‘Profit Making’ to ‘Customer Satisfaction’…and customer satisfaction can be achieved only if you exceed the expectations of the customers…The film makers in bollywood are underestimating the expectations of the mass audience… How can we assume that mass audience need Masala Potboilers when 90% of these movies are failing for the last 30-40 years?
Whereas Hollywood, which is a money-making machinery, has worked out the process to exceed customer expectations more often than not…They reinvent their film outputs every now and then..their policy is simple at the global level and complex at the detail level..like any good process…Idea at the global level is ‘High Investment High Return’ and at the local level the investment is properly distributed in bringing out a good product…But here, our film makers are improperly investing money in assumed expectations of the public…and creating a product which has a lesser probability of working…When the focus increases on the quality of the product…automatically customer satisfaction increases and profitability increases…For example, if you have made a movie like ‘Crash’, you can make an attmept in repackaging, marketing it because you have confidence in the product…But if you make something like Ekalavya..whatever marketing you do wont work..as the core product is not good…
Bollywood filmmakers are running away from this blatant truth…
@Ram V (18): Yup.. A lot of these masala potboilers have failed. In fact, even a Singh is King lost money in some territories because it was bought at a high price. Tashan flopped, Thoda Pyaar Thoda Magik flopped, Chandni Chowk to China bombed.. And smaller films like a Wednesday, Mithya made money. So hopefully we will see a change happening. Fingers crossed!!
Well, a nice and detailed article.
But i would like to disagree with some comments which hold audience responsible for this sad state.
I mean if look at hit and flop ratio, we know the audience have been rejecting movies left and right.Dynasty politics is i think one of the reason,e.g being Telgu Cinema industry, i think NTR clan is responsible for the downfall.As a Audience only have the power to reject bad products, but they can not create good products.
I also disagree with comments made about song and dance, it is way of our narration, it is unique,why should we care about western people, if they do not understand our form of story telling.
I’m surprised u mentioned Shaad Ali, Tushar, as his portfolio hasn’t (to me, atleast) displayed his directorial abilities.
‘Saathiya’ was a frame to frame remake of ‘Alaipayuthey’, so I credit Mani Ratnam for that.
‘Bunty aur Babli’ wasn’t a bad take on ‘Boney And Clyde’, but it was the performances, music and cinematography that stood out really.
I refuse to even comment on ‘Jhoom Barabar Jhoom’!
Maybe he should’ve remade another classic, asusual?!
I really don’t know if he is the right person, Tushar.
@ Siddhartha:
Nothing ails in Indian cinema.You are part of a minority.You will have to watch whatever is dished out to you.Its all perceptions.
Pertinent issues. Relevant concerns. Many voices. Strong opinions. Misplaced passions. Corrupted sensibilities. Star system. Stagnant audiences. Bankrupt writers. Proposal makers. Cynical bloggers. Sceptical commenters.
No discussion. No debate. No solution.
The sad aspect is that even if there are exceptions (like ‘Ocean of an Old Man’; a brilliant, evocative film by FTII graduate Rajesh Shera) – Siddhartha
——
I had a chance to see the film but for me, it was plain boring and lacking in depth. Nothing, absolutely nothing, happens in the film. I couldnt feel anyone’s pain, I didn’t see anything apart from one beach, I had no idea why it went on for a 100 odd minutes. But I respect your views. Sometimes, a film just connects. Sometimes, it just doesnt. It didnt for me. –Arti
—-
Most of the time, even two Cine-intellectuals don’t agree on these good movies. And we want normal audience to appreciate good cinema.
—-
People shud understand the difference between classical music and light filmi music.
Hindi literature and pocket books.
u can’t force everyone to listen classical music.
Many people like that silly ‘emotional atyachar’ song.
—
Experimental movies have their own space, their own audience. u can try to bring more audience to it. but one shud not call other audience dumb and stupid.
—
Either make an intelligent experimental movie and get satisfied with the limited intellectual audience.
Or if u want other audience too, then add something for them.
—-
Raj kapoor made ‘prem-rog’, it was a nice movie with many good messages in it.
One other person can make same movie, with lots of pain, and abuses or very hard to understand technique too.
Today i was watching ‘Krantiveer’ on TV. it has some so many good dialogues in it Plus entertainment.
—-
And normal audience is not that dumb too. Every masala movies doesn’t work. Noone could understand this audience.
Take one best director, story writer, music-director and everyone the best in that field. still there is no gaurantee for a superhit movie.
Recently, many noted film directors made movies, which cudn’t please many cine-intellectuals.
Then why blame normal audience.
–
In the article “Movies u have watched more than 10 times”. where are the good movies ?
Mostly we find either english movies, or the normal movies which general audience appreciated too. (there are very few exceptions)
—-
Normal audience too like good cinema. but give them some entertainment, or a simple style. Don’t expect them to be a viewer of festival-movies, that they can understand all the experiments.
Or do whatever u want, then be happy with the people who can enjoy that.
—
I think there are two types of movie. one for society and one for cinema-art.
For society- either make for full entertainment, or try to give a little message in it. And/or do little experiments in it.
For art- then make movie for urself and for the growth of cinema-art, without caring abt others. whether anyone watches it or not. Then even cine-intellectuals may criticise u.
Some ppl try to mix both. but sometimes they fail in the eyes of cine-intellectuals, or fail to satisfy the normal audience.
some people, sometimes make good movie in both fields.
—–
I have one another question.
“Is there any reviewer out there, whom all ppl unanimously find ‘the best’. and agree with him on his all reviews ?
—–
I think, the best option is to make audience aware of cinema-art. By showing them Good movie won’t make them cine-intelligent. u have to explain many things. or highlight the best things abt them.
(this is what Anurag wrote in his article, why there are not many good reviews abt ‘barah aana’ and such movies.)
Take the example of ‘Gunda’. it is one totally stupid movie. But few ppl started this movement, to give it 10 at imdb, and started praising it everywhere. It has made so many ppl curious abt this movie.
If u find a good cinema, even a little bit, then flood the net with it. write comments at imdb,rottentomatoes, on blogs. try to ignore negative things, bring out the positive things abt it. Instead of many foreign movies or very old movies, focus more on recent cinema. Criticise less, appreciate more.
—
“Ocean of an Old Man” is listed at imdb.com too. but no-vote, no user comments.
Atleast go and write something good abt it, if u like it.
–
And appreciate the efforts, and positive qualities of Delhi-6 and WTSajjanpur too.
—
When i want to watch or purchase a dvd of any english movies. first thing i do is surfing the net, i check what ppl said, which is good movie, what is special abt this. and i get lots of info. even if very few viewer wrote good things or something special abt it, then i watch that.
i have learnt about many good movies. and many movies which i watched earlier, and found normal, i found many special meaning abt those movies.
So why don’t we do the same abt our hindi movies, why don’t we write more positive things.
Suppose our audience level is 1. and when someone tries to make a level 2 movie for them. Then why many reviewers start attacking that movie, and start comparing it with some hollywood level 10 movie. There, audience is uncomfortable with that movie already, and here so many knowledgeable ppl want that movie to be of their level, or to surpass the the level of many festival movies or foreign movies which they watched.
I think, the need is, filmmakers shud raise the level of movies slowly, and we shud appreciate those good qualities, instead of asking them to make level-10.
why do many ppl think that delhi-6 was disappointing. yeah it was not level-10, but still it was better than most of the masala movies. But why can’t we focus more abt its positive things ? I didn’t like delhi-6 so much, but still i consider that better than ghajini,rnbdj and devD. I didn’t like DevD very much too. but still i am not criticising anything about it. because devD deserves appreciation in some fields so why shud i add some negativity in it.
I haven’t watched Gulaal yet, but i think it must be a good movie. And some ppl are praising it too. But then what is the need of writing articles like, “gulaal disappointed.” Isn’t there any good in it, isn’t it a different movie better than ordinary masala ? Even if it is not a level-10, isn’t it a level-4-3-2 too ?
This is the problem with many reviewers too. there are level-100 reviewers, who watch festival movies and classic foreign a lot. they find a simple hindi movie of level-4, they will criticise it a lot. bcoz according to them there are lots of shortcoming in that movie. But the simple audience doesnt know abt this level-100 funda, audience simply sees that intelligent ppl are criticising the movie.
ok will write more later.
@AB
“Is there any reviewer out there, whom all ppl unanimously find ‘the best’. and agree with him on his all reviews ?
Bhardwaj Rangan…maybe….
@AB – absolutely good pertinent points.
There is no comparison between nascent new wave movement and the established Frech and iranian cinema. Without state patronage for good movies, very few independant makers are trying out their own and meeting with different levels of critical and commercial success. People opinionating about such movies should write it in an encouraging tone rather than thrashing totally. I agree and would take care the next time I write about a movie in PFC.
@Steve, my right is your wrong so no point.
good article…..and equally good comments by AB too…
In the end, it all comes down to how good the story of a film is…and how well it is executed..
A bunch of good films at regular intervals instead of a lot of flops and one sudden hit(something hollywood has) is what’s needed IMHO. Big names(like Shahrukh, Salman.etc)should start doing something that actually tests their talents.
Its hard to make a film without love in it in India. But how many of them can be termed fresh? Look at Korea for that-they come out with film after film in the romantic comedy genre and rarely do you get a deja vu feeling.
Even movies with junk entertainment can have innovative storylines.
@comment 10:-
agree with you. Im yet to see a trailer of a bollywood film which blows your mind away the moment its over. After watching the trailer for 13B, I went on to watch the trailer of an upcoming hollywood flick called Orphan, and I saw the difference.
Tushar, ur right is also my right most of the time :-)
@AB (25): Spot on! Of course we dont expect everyone to like all cinema. Especially ’sensible cinema’ as we like to believe. Like wine, cinema is also an acquired taste. Let people get a taste of it every now and then. Let them know what they have been missing out on. Let a (although far and apart) Khosla Ka Ghosla, Black Friday, Welcome To Sajjanpur work. Slowly, we will get there. Let’s not think that all is over. I disagree with Hansal on this. It’s not as bad as we think.
@Siddhartha Banerjee
you forgot Adoor gopalakrishnan(Kerala)
Plz read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoor_Gopalakrishnan
Let’s make films
If everyone started making ‘good’ films, I am sure we would long for today’s ‘bad’ films. It’s not just about films or any other art forms. Few good human beings might approve the mob mindset. It’s personal battle — between trying to become a good human being or surrender to the animal instincts.
“If the hordes of people — this mainstream media — don’t like a film, doesn’t it give its filmmaker the right to hate the audience? Have you ever disliked your audience? If yes, after which particular film?” I wanted to ask this question to Anurag Kashyap and Shyam Benegal during a recent interaction at India Habitat Center. But I knew that was not an acceptable question. So I added, “In short, what do you expect from us (the audience)?”
I really wanted them to tell something to the audience. But they were mature enough to fall in the trap. They said, “We want the audience to love our films.”
They are tired of preaching. And I also believe the only way we can change the present situation is by making good films. No matter who makes them, let’s start making films. Let’s get into it. Let’s be the change we wanted to bring.
@Siddhartha Banerjee
You bring in examples of ‘experimental’ filmmakers such as Zhang Yimou, Gus Van Sant etc but for the sake of your argument you have left out several Indian filmmakers who are more than willing to break the boundaries of what you call ‘junk entertainment’. How could you ignore Aparna Sen or Shyam Benegal or Anurag Kashyap or even Sanjay Leela Bhansali etc? Okay, given that you suggest that these films never enter the mainstream or are never get widespread appreciation, but neither do the films of Zhang Yimou or Apichatpong Weerasethakul (Thailand) (and the others you mention). Their cinema too is largely considered film fest cinema. So while you could blame ‘Bollywood’ of catering only to pop culture, it may not be possible to cast the same accusation on Indian cinema as a whole.
Hi,
According to me we can only improve if we have more “cinematically knowledgeable” people at all levels i.e producers,directors,writers & audience. Also our independent cinema is not even a decade old whereas Hollywood’s independent cinema is in it’s fourth decade.So there is hope for us but we have 2 persevere.
Regards,
Santino
Very good article though a rather simplistic take on what the title entails. You have raised right concerns and made right observatins but the fact is that, you are in minority. Majority of the Indian population or population of any country for that matter, looks at cinema primarily as a means of entertainment, as a sort of emotional escape. That is the basic condition. Some sort of engagement and some emotional connect has to be there. Either it has to reflect their own life with a twist so that, there is a connect or it has to show a fantasy so that they can take it home and play it in their minds again and again.
majority Indians lead a very hard life fighting on all fronts and trying to live up to the ideal of what a good or fulfilling life should be. Esacpist entertainment is their very important need. Running away from the reality for that brief period, getting into the world of dreams and aspirations or getting a peak into the incredible life of someone else, is what makes the moviegoing experience worthwhile for them. That catharsis, that escape from drudgery of their own life, is something that keeps them positive, full of hope and makes them go on with life.
In this dream world, the heroine has to be beautiful, she has to fall for the hero, no matter what, hero has to be a good looking strong guy, the bad elements have to get defeated, the relationships have to be ideal and things should mostly have a happy ending after the problems cropped up in the lives of protagonists are sorted out.
That doesn’t mean filmmakers should make utterly predictable formulaic films. They can still come up with engaging stories, interesting characters, innovative screenplays and off beat ways of story telling. At the end of the day a stroy well told, will always find takers.
So, what matters here, is the sincerety of the intent. You should tell something because you want to and not only because its going to add a few lakhs to your bank balance.
When this sincere intent is followed by equally sincere artisitc efforts to make the best possible product, the film can be called a good film. The packaging in keeping with the broad outline of audience preferences would be an added advantage. Such a film then need not be a arthouse or parallel film. It will be lapped up by the masses and still would qualify as a good film for the discerning classes.
eg – Lage raho munnabhai, DDLJ, Hum Dil de chuke sanam, Satya, Taare Zameen par etc. ( You can add many more to this list)
@5 Tushar.
“Have always wanted to catch a masala potboiler in the theater where I can’t understand the dialogs for the love of me, but still enjoy the fun cus’ it really wouldn’t matter in the masala state of affairs. Then the talk about the film being expensive, all style no substance et al got me even more excited. I mean who the hell wants to make sense on weekends anyways!”
——
@26 Neil.
I read one or two of his reviews earlier (brangan). but i didn’t know his name. i read some more of his reviews. It seems ppl really like him a lot.
I wanted reviewers to be more encouraging one. i mean, if there is no ordinary hero-heroine romance and filmi dialogues of love, then +1. villain is not ordinary gunda whom hero will kick without planning, +1. Songs are not attached unnecessarily anywhere. +1. Script is new and it is innovative and good at few places +1.
Reviewers are cine-intellectual ppl, they shud understand the new and different and good cinema for the art too. so few good movies already shud have minimum 5-6 stars. after that criticise other factors of the movies, in the same way, what we do with masala movies abt acting, shots etc.
ppl are saying, ‘barah aana’ is not good. but i already consider that movie as 5 star+ without even watching.
we all know, what is a good movie, ‘delhi-6,gulal,firaq etc.” shud be a good movie. but yeah, some good movies fail. but still they remain failed-in-some-fields-but-good-movie. bcoz there r still many good things in those movies, or ppl dared and tried something different.
—–
@27 V.P.Jaiganesh. Thanks :-)
yes. sometimes a masala-maker tries to do what he always dreamt to do, making something which is new and good. or sometimes a intelligent-director wants to reach normal audience, so he lowers his standards a little.
or sometimes some ppl,who make good movies, add little something for normal audience (happy ending, or song, or little something). so that he can get enough money from them, and can satisfy cine-intellectual by rest of the movie.
But then we shud not criticise ppl for their smaller weaknesses. ok, we shud. but not too much. we shud understand that director is trying new things, and he wants support from a large part of audience.
What if we find five minutes of a stupid song, or a little stupid scene. or in the end , director made it little happy for general audience. let it be.
I don’t like Ending of DevD. but i assumed that maybe director wanted this happy ending for some reasons. But for me, the movie ended at the car scene, the way, movie ‘charulata’ ended. Freezed there. Sometimes if i see an unnecessary song with bikini in a movie. I think, “ok, if this is attracting some more ppl to this movie, then it is fine for me. i liked this movie so much, let producer get more money from bigger audience too’
I think, this is the ’support’, good-moviemakers want from us. That we shud appreciate the new experiments, fresh scripts more. and in some places where they compromised little things, so that normal audience too, become interested in that, then we shud overlook those things.
@30 Jibin, “Im yet to see a trailer of a bollywood film which blows your mind away the moment its over.”
There was a time, when trailer used to be promising one, and those movies came out bad. there was nothing good in the movie, other than those trailer parts.
So i stopped making any opinion abt the movie based on its trailer.
@Arti (32). yes. We are getting there :-)
yeah we can’t expect everyone to like every sensible movies. And sensible movies require a connection too. It is not possible for everyone to get connected to the movie in the same way.
When ppl here are making their favourite list, they don’t always include ALL movies of satyajit ray, shayam benegal, bimal roy, govind nihalani, prakash jha, sudhir mishra etc. movies.
Because they don’t get connected to every movie.
And they don’t get connected to every festival-award winning movie too.
Then if such movie gets released to mainstream, and normal audience can’t connect to it, then why cine-intellectual ppl think that audience is stupid and has poor taste.
Sometimes even these directors don’t appreciate each other’s movies.
What i mean, is, even if so many intelligent-ppl-abt-cinema don’t agree with each other, than why audience is getting blamed for not making the house-full, who surely has less knowledge abt cinema-art.
—–
In my opinion, we have good moviemakers willing to make good movies. we have audience who can watch movies. But audience is poor too, they can’t watch every movie. And sometimes they can’t understand the message and main theme of the movie, and sometimes the movies are not interesting. Noone can rely on a specific director too. So audience depends on reviews, and news too.
We need the intelligent-audience to guide the normal audience. To make them aware of the good qualities of such movies. Now we have power of internet, if ppl can write more abt positive things abt a movie, can write abt their perspective. (for example, Delhi-6 or welcometosajjanpur, give entertainment and different meaning, if u r already prepared for that)
Director/writers shud come to internet, and should connect to the audience. should reply to important reviews.
I am sure, when ppl will reply back to those negative reviews,or will write good reviews, then newspaper/TV ppl will notice that. They will become more responsible. And now internet is available to many ppl, so audience can be informed abt many aspect of the movies.
—-
This is a typical conversation betn two ppl
A- this movie is not that good, why xyz did that ?
B- director gave us hint in the previous scene by that symbol
A-wow, i didnt know, hmmm, director is genius.
B-yup good director don’t spoon-feed everything,they talk in different way
A- i will watch this movie again now, this is brilliant movie.
–
And then A says that to his friends too.
—-
And if we expect that A can become educated by himself after watching a lot of movies, then we are wrong.
I think, we need middle-men between good cinema and normal audience more.
So this middle-man, shud focus more on positive things abt good different movies.
didn’t get you. why are you quoting me from another article?
Nice article… the comments are more interesting!
Let’s face some facts – for every big bidget, mindless, non-artistic trash that makes a profit, a bunch of “smaller films” get the greenlight!That’s the case with the studio system in Hollywood and the film industry in Bollywood. Where do you think the money comes to make a “No Smoking”? You think Dawood bhai was dying to fund it?
I think your argument ought to be for some degree of redemption and not a complete revival of the commercial space. If everyone and his brother is out “experimenting with artisit form” then lets be assured that the industry would fall like a deck of cards.
It’s just films and a big majority of the audience don’t take it too seriously, they have a life you know. The purpose of cinema was never intended to be anything more than an entertaining medium… The Truffauts and Bergmans and neo-realist, experimenters came and went … the filmmakers you list above (the current ones) are playing in their own sandbox with some success… and thats great! But for the vast majority this is still a medium of entertainment and nothing more so lets not take that away from them
What are we discussing here: Cinema as an Art form or Cinema as Business ?
I guess with I billion in-house suckers, more lollipops are sold everyday in our country than choco-bars.
—
Cinema as Art or Cinema as business.
–
@siddhartha. Sir i respect ur article, and we need such concerns too.
i just want to write, as a part of junk-focussed audience. the so called poor-taste guy. And who wants to change his taste, who wants to focus away from junk.
–
What ails…
The answers might be same as some other people may ask, “why people don’t appreciate good paintings, why don’t they buy it (All paintings are not so costly.)
Why people don’t like classical music. most of the classical pundit and singers were not happy with the standards of film music. (at this site music-lovers may say that because this site is about cinema, this is why when we talk abt singers/music directors, we don’t mention abt their classical non-filmi songs. and we mention only those songs which were in the movies. And then too they will not list the songs accordig to the standard of the songs, they will select the songs which they liked.
When a music-director talks abt his songs, he mentions the song, which he thinks were the best in the artistic sense. But when his fan makes a list, then he can rank not-so-good-songs at higher position.
—-
What u wrote in ur article abt Ray, Truffaut, Antonioni, Fellini. We don’t have people like them now, Because we don’t have that talent. This is the simple and obvious truth.
—-
Now after reading this article, we started discussing many other issues.
The first thing, what people here always do, they start accusing the normal-audience and bollywood movies.
I wonder. if we can name few famous directors of other countries, and we believe that they became great because they don’t have our stupid-audience and bollywood movies. Then why don’t we get 1000 names from each such countries, why most of them dont get our attention ?
Second point, which we say, our audience has poor taste they don’t recognize the talent.
If some ppl here like Bergman, then do they like him bcoz of his countrymen’s opinion ? or do they like him, bcoz they liked the-art in his movies ?
If we have such talent, and if some of our movies are going in the festivals, however small those festivals are. Then why the art-lover-audience-of-the-world, doesn’t recognize his talent.
(one reason i think, the international-art-lovers already know a lot of directors and their best work , and our talent is not of that standard.
Or sometimes the ppl we admire here bcoz they did different and new. those ppl don’t get appreciated by international-audience bcoz they already know that from where our director got inspired and learnt and use those already-done experiments.)
And few directors here watch lots of bergmans, and think, ‘ok , in india we don’t have such styles, such knowledge. so i will learn and will make movie like that. so that we can have higher standard of cinema-art”
But as usual, normal audience can’t even appreciate bergman. the cine-intellectual ppl who don’t know bergman, some of them appreciate it, some of them still can’t understand it.
(becoz watching lots of bergman’s movies, can’t make anyone bergman, and doing something what bergman does, won’t necessarily make something of that standard)
And here we have a general feeling, that if u don’t like something abt ray’s movie, or bergman’s movie, or some others. then u can get insulted by these intellectuals. While at international forums, there are many people, who criticise many things abt bergman’s movie too.
–
Then people talk abt changing the taste of the audience. This i see, as i see the state of music/literature.
It is very hard to make someone to love classical music, if he likes film-music more. I think, the pure art of music is in classical.
I tried to love classical, i tried to learn basic singing, i forced myself to listen what i cud like. i listened to classical songs of movies. my taste changed a little bit. (because one of my favourite song is ‘manmohini morey’ from yuvraaj)
Now my curiosity is, how many cine-intellectual ppl can sit through a classical concert and have music CDs of only highest quality. And how many people have pundit Bheemsen Joshi in their fav singers list.
And how many people are aware of latest hindi literature, which writers are the best but not getting readers ?
My point is, if someone who is passionate abt cinema, is happy with his medium choices in music/literature. Then why do they want normal audience to have a taste of classical cinema, with which audience can’t connect and enjoy?
I am sure many of the people have heard of joshi ji, and everyone will praise abt him. But how many went and purchased the collection of joshiji ? Same thing normal people do, they praise Ray, but they go and watch something they like.
If u like ur normal singers more than joshiji.
then they like to watch salman etc. more than Om-puri.
more to come…
Tushar, i quoted u that time, and i wanted to quote many other people. I didn’t want to talk clearly at that time. I thought that maybe it was sufficient to quote without writing much. i will try that now.
—
people say, we need matured and open audience. And all other movies are junk.
First, all movies are not junk, many movies have good messages for normal audience. Bollywood movies talk abt many issues related to normal audience. And many of those are in simple art form, which a village person, or small town person can understand easily.
yeah some may be called junk. but most of them became junk, becoz directors failed, they were trying to make one good,interesting movie, but it didn’t come out that way.
and there is some junk, becoz there are junk-lovers. And that happens in every field. However much, u try to tell people not to eat pani-puri, they will eat it. Tell people not to smoke, and they will.
—-
Previously i used to watch hollywood movies in theatre, and then on TV. i thought , ‘wow, these movies are mostly superb’. but later i found out, i was watching filtered movies. worse movies were neither getting released in india, nor were coming on TV too. By the availability of DVDs and internet, I found real junk there too. I feel if i will go to other countries’s forum, i will find junk there too, but generally people don’t talk abt junk much.
—
I wish, some of our talented directors take our indian style, and make an important place at international level, by doing some important and new changes in it, while keeping some indian-ness in it. and then directors of other countries try to copy that style in their movies.
—-
We do have a little percentage of that required matured audience, who is intelligent. but that audience is not doing what it can do.
Most of this audience watches good movies, and talk abt the art and growth of cinema. but on the other hand still watches junk too.
they will criticise and berate the bollywood movies, but u can find many of similar bollywood movies in their fav lists. they have some fav songs and their picturisation, but they might be criticising those movie and dance-songs-style in other article. If masala movie has their fav actor then they have watched it.
Or u tell them, xyz is good bollywood movie, and u can get answer, “no, it is not, i have seen it”. they write negative reviews of bollywood movies, becoz they watch that junk. They will watch hollywood movies too, (if that script or idea wud have been converted to hindi movie, then they wud have criticised that junk bollywood movie). They will watch hollywood action/fantasy movies, but will blame the normal audience, that it likes to live in dream-world.
The matured audience is not faithful to the new-cinema.
AnuragKashyap wrote in his article, “All the indie, low budget movies are here, the kind we want to make or watch and noone is going to the theatres. Ignore the reviews, make your opinions, love it , hate it, discuss it later but first go and watch it.”
When many of the mature audience go to imdb to find out details or comments abt their favourite movie. Why ‘ocean of an old man’ has nothing there, no vote and no comments.
Find om-puri at imdb, and find hollywood actors, and see the difference in comment’s section.
If i want to watch a certain bergman movie or some other movie, i get so much information easily. but where is our information ?
The reviews can be copy-pasted from our blogs to there at least.