Bookmyshow employs young people – fresh out of college (or, not yet) for
the Mumbai Film Festival. There is fresh release of energy every moment; but
young age calls for rashness, quick (and wrong decision) and pride – symptoms
of inexperience. Jio MAMI should check prevent this from happening on its
second edition.
The festival is running well. The choice of films is predictable for a
city like Mumbai. So, it would be redundant to comment on that. This is not
Telluride, or Melbourne, or Rotterdam. We do not have a culture of visual
communication, let alone art or cinephilia. Almost all filmmakers (that include
writers, actors, technical crew and, above all, producers) imitate what others
have (i.e. foreigners) have done before. The situation was not so pathetic when
Ray was making films in the 60s. Or even when a bunch of filmmakers came out
after the critical success of Bhuvan Shome (1969) a new gen of filmmakers took
the alternative cinema space by storm. Critics termed this the Indian New Wave,
which Satyajit Ray maintained (although he tried to show that this was a false
wave, and hardly new).
Most of them have retired now. Adoor Gopalakrishnan is still making
films. His new film Pinneyum (Once Again) is a star attraction in the MFF too.
This is exactly eight years since he made a film. The last time his film was
showed in Mumbai, I interviewed him. Surely, a relishing experience. But, one
Adoor or a Amit Dutta do not make a difference to a culture. It is important to
note that our classical music has always been connected to religion and rites.
Both the Hindusthani and the Carnatic schools never attempted a secular
framing, the way it turned its face just before Bach in the west. This is
probably the main reason that our music never embraced harmony despite knowing
the multiscale, polyphonic structure, and the impact of harmony, pretty well.
It is the same for our dance forms – both the classical and the folk.
The rejuvenation and popularization of the dance structures, in the last
century, by people like Rukmini Devi and Uday Shankar, did not generate a true
secular dance structure.
This religious structure is rooted in our upbringing, which is why Marx
and Lenin are the modern gods. So are Rajinikanth or Shahrukh. This is why we
take Bollywood so seriously, our wedding parties so ultra- seriously, and
personal happiness so negligently.
The choice of films in the current MFF, just like any other, reflects
this attitude. Some of my friends, such as the film critic Dalton L, think that
an individual’s past (or, history) does not necessarily influence her/his
future choice of actions. But, I have a serious disagreement with them, here. A
person’s individuality is made up of several traits and experiences. One does
not know the full range possibilities of her/his actions most of the time. More
so when s/he is inexperienced in that particular situation. If s/he is not
influenced by win or loss in the situation, and correspondingly her/his
personality and further choice of actions do not change, then there is a
serious problem regarding that person’s general and social intelligence, and
her/his love for life.
Whatever we do in life is either influenced by our past, or it is
imposed upon us by an outsider who hegemonizes us in believing that we are
acting out of our own will. Such outsiders chalk out our lives for us, and expect that we follow
their plans happily, yet feel that we are totally free.
Bollywood is among the set of cultural tools that effect this kind of
false consciousness excellently. It produces, and reproduces, our minds
throughout our lives. It does that through a process called socialization. On
top of that, Bollywood, along with our morality systems and their agents (such
as parents, family, friends, peers, school, police, army, judicial systems and
the press), make us believe that this is the only type of socialization.
The films that we are allowed to watch are part of this socialization.
However, just like anything else, some structural fault-lines grow prominent in
this lab-process. Some films show up in those fault-lines.
Lav Diaz’s new film The Woman who Left is among those. Suddenly Lav has
grown popular with his Venice victory. I never expected the Mumbai crowd flock
to make the first screening houseful. But, the impossible occurred.
I am not sure how many of these called him a swine, after the 227 minute
experience. The auditorium was almost empty when the film got over. No official
MAMI reportage wrote much about the film, anyway.
Readers, please feel free to share your views/opinions in the comment box below. As always your feedback is highly appreciated!
People who liked this also liked...
0 comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for sharing for valuable opinion. We would be delighted to have you back.