First of apologies to all our readers, the article is not on the site due to some technical reason. But the discussion should continue without any problem.
Cinephile Report: MumbaiShubhank
I'll start with Mumbai since it was chronologically the first.
The Mumbai Cinephile meeting was postponed by a day since the original schedule was on the same day as the closing day of the
Kala Ghoda festival. A couple of fellows, who seemed interested in attending the meet, sent me e-mails. They, however, could not turn up for the event. Hopefully they will be able to make it to the next, whenever it happens. The day brought with itself a slew of dramatic events. My favourite one - when I lost my cellphone in the train.
Well, we did meet ... an hour after the actual schedule, at Prithvi Cafe, Juhu.
There were 3 attendees; really.
1. Udita
2. Abhay
3. Shubhank
To be honest, I was never concerned with the participation, this being the first meeting. It is something we can always work on when the word spreads. One of my agenda was to discuss ways/methods of attracting more cinephiles and increasing the participation.
Obligatory disclaimer - I may not remember most of the details about the meetings. I also may interpret certain things wrongly which is why I would restrict the comments to a single line summary. Correct me if I am wrong Or add further opinions if I missed anything, the comment section is for you.
2nd disclaimer - Plagiarized from Ronnie Sen's article on no smoking - I hereby make no claims of knowing exactly what a film should be and how a film should be made. My knowledge of cinema is extremely rudimentary.
The meeting started with a very brief introduction followed by a not-so-brief but brief nonetheless discussion about the manifesto. There were doubts and issues related to it. Udita primarily felt that our cinema is changing, there is appreciation for slightly different and not-so-mainstream films. Abhay acknowledged and commented that the new breed of Bollywood, which is called urban/multiplex-Bollywood, has seen certain interesting films which have marked a change in the way we tell stories. I think we have seen certain interesting ideas and stories in films but the way they are shot still remains the same. The so called new-breed/new-wave of movie makers have the same objective as certain others its just hidden in the veil of pretentiousness they wear.
There was a discussion regarding the content of the manifesto. We had some issues. I'll, here, play a diplomat and request the attendees to address their issues in the comments section. As far as my comments go, I basically have an issue with the evolution of the manifesto and that it does not give much emphasis on education. More on that later.
Other than this we did talk about Slumdog Millionaire. Interestingly Abhay was reading the book on which it is based. More interestingly, the Agra and Taj Mahal scene is not present in the book, if it is then it has not arrived yet.
The most interesting part of the meeting involved a recently released film called, A Wednesday. Here are the opinions ...
1. Udita - Didn't like the film because in times like these pseudo anarchy is the last advice anyone would want to give through their films.
2. Abhay - Liked the film and said that we are not insane enough to take the film seriously and adopt similar tactics as the antagonist of the movie.
3. Shubhank - Agreed with Abhay but didn't like the movie. I thought the movie was too contrived with stereotypical characters (a hard-ass guthka-chewing cop, a sincere cop, a teenage hacker etc etc) and the last bit when Naseeruddin Shah meets Anupam Kher, the dialogue "Mera naam hai ....... " creates a false sympathy for what could have been a good anti-hero if the movie was written well. And yeah, the usual direction/technical issues.
There were further talks about a lot of films and events. The Reader, Dev D, New York, Urban Isolation and Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, really.
The meeting was wrapped up in a couple of hours.
Challenges – Mumbai is never going to be an easy place when it comes to meetings like these. There is a lot of influence from the industry and participation of filmmakers and people from the fraternity is highly probable if not inevitable. The next issue is to find a representative who can take things forward.
Cinephile Report: HyderbadThe Hyderabad meeting took place on the 28th of February. Once again, participation was very little. There were 3 attendees (deja vu?).
1. Himanshu
2. Faisal
3. Shubhank
We met up at Barista coffee shop in Kondapur. Later we went to my place and Himanshu was generous enough to provide me and Faisal a copy of Cinema Paradiso - Director's Cut. After this we took a walk to a place Himanshu had never seen before. He had a slight doubt that we might kidnap him and probably harvest his organs but nothing of that sort happened. Sorry to shatter your dreams man.
Coming back to the point, the discussion was healthier than the one I had in Mumbai. We covered a range of topics, from Godard to Mard Tange Waala; from Tolkien to Kafka and from the Cuban revolution to post apocalyptic fiction. Nope, no Slumdog Millionaire here. The highlights follow ...
Dev DIt was collectively agreed that Anurag Kashyap is a brilliant writer, stuff that no one can ignore. There were, However, individual concerns, I'll be a little selfish and start with mine:
1. The biggest fault of Dev D is the title. Anurag Kashyap, who proclaims to make films for the thinking audience, throughout the move tries to shove it in our throats that this is essentially the story of Devdas, set in a modern world. From the 'Maar Daala' song to posters in the background it is everywhere. Even the stories begin with a huge title which has the name of the character.
Why did he name the movie Dev D? Why not 'Emotional Atyachar' or something else? What would have been the reaction of the audience if the whole 'this is a cool-hip tale of the modern day Devdas' was in the subtext of the movie and not as blatant as it is?
2. How is the back story of Chanda relevant to the whole movie and not manipulative?
3. What's up with the ending? I'm not against happy endings but a character has to earn the ending. In case of Dev, the writer definitely wants us to have no sympathy for the character, it defied all the self-destruction that we had seen till that point.
Himanshu agreed with the fact that they film would have been perceived differently if there was no in-the-face Devdas remake. But did say that it would been a conscience decision to market the film, no one would have watched it otherwise. He also agreed with the fact that the movie was very well written, especially the exchanges between Dev and Paro.
He commented on how the film did well in the non-metro cities, which is great for a, for lack of a better word, non-mainstream (is this even a word? pardon me) film. I think it could have been because of the shock aspects and the sex-comedy bits .... which leads us to the next topic of discussion
The ManifestoWhy do people in this country watch films?
The most common answer will be escapism and it cannot be denied. We want to see our delusions come to life. We want to see good looking people dressed beautifully and living the life we always dream of living. But, are we selling our dreams too cheaply? Someone I know loved 'Dev D' and was depressed watching it because it reminded him about his past. A couple of my friends hated 'Oye Lucky' for the lack of a coherent plot.
Different people, different reasons. I threw my remote at the TV when I watched Kiarostami's 'The Wind Will Carry Us' first time - I did enjoy is some 4 years later but something was different. Education. Quoting from the manifesto itself, a common man does not understand that his 'emotions are guided by leitmotifs placed deftly, and religious beliefs exploited.' There is a need for film education, spreading awareness. We do appreciate and wholeheartedly support the cause of Indian Auteur and Cine Darbaar. In fact this is the reason we planned to have this meeting and have set a goal for ourselves for the next one.
The last point which says 'to work towards a film love which adopts a middle ground, to reinstate the cinema director to his deserved position, to celebrate Indian cinema of the past and the present, to examine its potential' is argubly the most important one. Especially the part which talks about celebrating Indian cinema.
We discussed a bunch of ideas. One was to screen Indian movies (Ghatak, Ray, Dutt etc) during the meetings and then talk about it. Figure out what makes that film, a film.
Second was to talk about terms such as 'mise-en-scene' and explain why it is important in cinema. Another idea was to hand out or atleast announce non-monetary awards to people who actually deserve to earn recognition. This can be decided by the editorial panel of 'Indian Auteur'.
That would be it, I think. If I did miss a vital point I hope people who attended the meetings can cover them in the comments.
pic- NT Rama Rao and Dev Ananad.
Coming Up:1) New Cinephile Listing- anyone interested this time, please contact
editor@indianauteur.com
2) New issue on Ghatak.
