Friday, September 29, 2006

Black Friday !!!!!!!!!!!!




It's a shame that this movie is banned in india.Just another example of our government’s attitude of pushing the bad thing under the carpet and act nothing has happened rather than face the truth and correct itself.

The movie tells the story of How the bombay blasts happened .It starts from the incident and takes us on the trip of how the police pieced all the information together. The movie which does a "how the incident happened?", somewhere in between changes to "Why the incident happened?”. The movie which meticulously constructs the whole story of the blast in the movie goes to the roots and completes the circle. The vicious circle of violence, from the Bombay riots to the Bombay blast.

At the start of the movie when the blast happens, you hear that ringing sound that one hears after a blast.A sound that deafness and numbs senses for a while. The movies comes back to the same blast at the end with that same sound, to the deafness, shock and numbing of senses. The movie follows an internationally old filming style of Cinema Verite, but a first as far as indian movies are concerned."Battle of Algiers", Z are supposed to some of the best examples of cinema verite style. This is more like a documentary filming style with focus on realism and the idea, rather than a story about a protagonist (Means no hero/heroine, think about that, an indian movie without an hero, isn't this movie different?).It mostly uses non professional actor's, real location, natural light and most of the scenes are shot on hand held camera's. In black friday you can see that style to a great extent, you can notice that in the movie the, scenes are short, no big dramatics, uses spatial and temporal discontinuity, realistic actions, real locations, non judgmental characterization, news clip inserts for authenticity etc all of which add to the realism in the movie.The fact that the movie jumps from character to character and different locations, breaks the audience continuity on the individuals and makes them focus on the incident. The script is awesome, because the movie follows the book, which is organized by chapters anurag follows a non linear narration, the book constructs the whole story on information that became available to police and not a complete timeline narration. Anurag who is sticking to the book is able to jump from bombay blast to ISI training to ayodhya incident with ease.

He seems to have painstakingly constructed the movie.The movie if broken into distinct scenes, will go into 1000 of small scenes taking place in various locations. The movie is shot in bombay, calcutta, delhi, jaipur and many villages. To capture them one by one at various places that too for a scene that won’t even appear for a minute in the movie is just awesome. It shows the meticulous preparation and the humongous amount of effort that has gone into the movie.In the first part of the movie on an average there is an editing cut for every 10/15 seconds and many of them are scene changes.

Anurag is one unlucky guy for sure. After this much of hard work, his movie still hasn't seen the day.Its hard to think how he will get his energy back to do another movie.After all his movies continually facing problems with the censor board, i wont be surprised if his next movie is a pure dance & fight mainstream movie. As far as the script of this movie is concerned anurag does not take any sides.He narrates the movie from a journalistic point of view.He could have shown more about the root causes of the bombay blasts like the bombay riots and the babri masjid issue, but i guess that would be an entirely different movie. Think this is all he can show within the context of the blast.

For example at the start of the movie, the blast occurs, a typical mainstream indian movie would exploit this scene to the core, mutilated arms and legs lying around, burning bodies, women folks crying, grief all around. The post blast scene could be used thoroughly to get the sympathy out of the audience, you can make the audience cry out loud with those scenes. But in the movie, you just see one guy crying, a few scenes of bodies being taken on stretchers etc. The scenes then cuts to a guy stealing a gold chain from a dead body, soon you move on to the next blast and in a few scenes later you are with the investigation team. There is no time here to waste on sentimentality, the important thing is the truth behind the incident and not the commercial success of the movie.It's like anurag saying, "Let's move on with the investigation". The journalistic writings of hussain zaidi well directed by anurag.

Similarly on an another scene, when tiger memon's house is being searched, everybody is eager to know what is going to come out. The way i would expect this scene to play out in a usual movie would be like this, a group of cops ruthlessly ransacking the house with a fast paced back ground music and finding an evidence. But this is a very different movie, you see the cops joking around, the inspector moving into the kitchen to get something to eat, instead of the pacy BGM you hear the sounds of the outside streets, the scene then cuts to the inspector eating a banana and feeling it bad to eat before the constable. Very unconventional way of handling for a hindi movie but realistic and that is the way most of the scenes are handled throughout the movie.

Sometimes the narration cuts to a few lighter ones too. when the police discovers the unexploded scooter. There is this guy who first noticed the scooter. He keeps saying that he always doubted there was something wrong about the scooter to who ever he sees.

Coming back to the editing of the movie, it employs the goddardian jump cuts at many places which gives the edgyness and pace to the movie.There is a scene to show the efforts that the police have put to get all kinds of information regarding the memon’s. The way the scene plays out. you see, the tired kay kay taking bath for a few seconds, next cut you see him in the car, next cut you see the long shot of a building, next cut close up of the house, next cut the inspector bent to hear a girl.
All these cuts happening in a gap of few seconds.

Like goddard, anurag does this pacy cut followed by a scene that the audience might consider unimportant.The girl tells the inspector about how tiger memon, their angry neighbor used to shout at the kids who were playing outside his house.

Again all these scenes break your effort to make a story out of all the incidents that you are watching. You will fail to get the sense of completeness or wholeness that you get in a regular movie. The narration makes sure that the movie doesn't slip into the tag of another dreamy story which will be forgotten soon, but with the realistic portrayal it makes sure that you will believe the movie 100% and you will always associate the blast with the movie from now on. The movie which is based on the book on the same title by hussain zaidi has been in the market for so many years. But the government has banned the movie. Hussain Zaidi was the reporter of the Mumbai newspaper Mid day, which has produced this movie.

The movie addressing the blind peoples of both communities, starts and ends with Gandhi's statements "An eye for an eye will leave the world blind".

Since the court verdict of blast trials are going on. Hope this film comes out soon and open the eyes of the public.

posted by AJ @ 29.9.06 0 Comments

Monday, September 18, 2006

what’s wrong with indian cinema?

what’s wrong with indian cinema?

What defines a country’s cinema? Let’s take India for example… is India defined by the best it has produced, judged on terms of recognition bestowed by the west – take a Monsoon Wedding (winner at the Venice Film Festival) or a Lagaan and Mother India (Oscar nominees for best foreign film) or is it to be defined by the median that bisects the melee that is Bollywood, Tollywood, Mollywood and Kollywood? Is it about how good we can be? Or is it about how much more we can tow the line of mediocrity to pander to an audience who is sluggishly waking up to good cinema?

First of all, what is good cinema? Film, to a lesser degree, is a lot like abstract expressionism: easy to dismiss and difficult to comprehend in it’s entirety. A good film, therefore, is entirely subjective. In brief, here is what I think are the ingredients of an accomplished film: An eventful story well told through strong central and (importantly) secondary performances, innovative camerawork, unnoticeable sound, and editing of all repetition all coming together to create an experience that an audience appreciates. What clearly don’t matter are budgets and stars. Given this framework, we need to dissect the corpus of celluloid produced in India (a little under 1000 films annually) to understand why we have such poor cinema. Here are the top reasons:

Very little originality – Directors like Abbas-Mustan and Vikram Bhatt are old hands at this. So much so, their indigenized creations are almost at par (at least technically) with their inspirations. Then there are makers like Sanjay Leela Bhansali whose arrogance blinds him to a point where he rips off obscure (for an unsuspecting audience) classics and expect them to go on to win Oscars. And then there is the Sanjay Gupta category – those go all out to a point where plagiarism seems too derisory a word. Sanjay Gupta, after Kaante (Resevoir Dogs, set in LA, not even in Mumbai), Musafir (U-Turn without any surprises), and now Zinda (every wig, every lighting setup, everything is an exact replica of Old Boy) has now announced that he’s going to be doing a collection of 10 shorts titled Dus Kahania modeled after The Decalogue. I wonder how Kieslowski would feel about this. Does he see this as a tribute to his inspirational cross-cultural ideas or Indian morality hitting the Mariana Trench? Personally, I have very little respect for filmmakers (who call themselves one) who do a Sanjay Gupta. I refuse to watch their movies (having already seen the originals) because I cannot contribute to people’s pockets who make films only for cash. It is an easy trap to fall into, for sure, given that everyone from financers, producers, filmmakers, exhibitionists, and audiences will swallow just about anything as long as it’s ‘sellable’. I am going to define this word for you in the Bollywood context shortly.

Identity crisis – This is a huge problem Bollywood is struggling with. The stories that are being told on celluloid are either aping their counterparts in Hollywood or regressive as they are re-inventing the wheel with their style and technique. Indian cinema has reached a point where it doesn’t know where it’s heading. People keep saying we’re 20 years behind Hollywood in cinema. Are we really? And if we are, are audiences going to accept that, given the simultaneous release of high on SFX Hollywood films released in India, not to mention DVD accessibility? What’s the way forward? Certainly not films like Krrish. One can understand the success of the first super hero film with okayish special effects, but how many more jump-suited heroes can we see leaping across buildings one minute and prancing around trees with the heroine the next? Surely it cannot become a trend! What about Golmaal, Masti, Hungama, Phir Hera Pheri, and No Entry? Surely there is a limit to these crass comedies. And if there isn’t – please – this fare belongs to non-primetime television. And then of course there is the Karan Johar/Yash Chopra genre, Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna was nowhere close to Kal Ho Na Ho, proving that even the great KJ is not infallible and as for the Chopra camp, well Fanaa says it all as it is a most regressive film. As of this 2006 so far, only 3 films deserve some credit. Rang De Basanti for its rock solid style and treatment, Omakara as a mega budget art film with no compromise on the script, performances, and even the camerawork, and finally Lage Raho Munnabhai for it’s striving for perfection and relevance and achieving it. These are the only films all of this year that indicate a path forward for our cinema. And if you’ve seen them, you know how different they are from each other. The only common factor is strong original ideas backed by solid direction.

Star Power – There is an adage – Stars make or break a film. As of today, this has never been truer. This alone could be the only raison d’etre for the lack of any experimentation or sustained quality in cinema. Having experienced it first-hand, allow me to explain the methodology of ‘making a film.’ New Indian directors and writers, whose favorite films are more likely to be a Fellini rather than Manmohan Desai, are constantly looking to break barriers and change (or at least multidimensionalize) the identity of Indian cinema. Once a script is done, what do they do? Say the below-the-line cost is upward of Rs. 3 crore (a meager $650,000), the first natural step would be to approach producers. What they hear is this: Given the cost of production, the film will not recover its money (they haven’t even read the script yet.) Your best bet would be to get a star onboard. Okay, how? Oh, that’s up to you of course, producers can’t get the makers the stars. Get a star and we’ll do it.

Note the last line carefully. Get a star and we’ll do it. Nobody has even glanced at the script (in fact, it’s pointless to even carry one to meeting with a producer.) They’re making a commitment based on nothing except the basic amount of ticket sales, overseas and satellite rights rate that the star’s popularity can muster. They’re just assuming that if something moves on screen with the bloke’s pancaked head in the frame, it’ll “recover costs” at the very least.

So the young director’s sojourn to get a star begins. How does he get a meeting with a star? There are no agents (only sleazy secretaries), no formal approach, nothing. He needs to depend on his networking skills to somehow get a number, call, call, call again till he finally gets through, somehow (an impossible process) get a 15 minute meeting and cram a full screenplay, his track record, answer all questions regarding the script, producers in those precious moments. If the actor is convinced, he’ll nod. It’s a cakewalk from then on. The director will have a line of producers at his doorstep. And herein lies the problem. We all know that the cumulative IQ of Indian stars is a shade below the average eight grader’s, and in the circumstances the star has made a commitment based on his ‘judgment’. So much for quality control. Is it any surprise that in Bollywood, films get made based on people skills and past relationships, rather than lesser important ingredients such as good scripts?

Nepotism is another niggling problem. Either you AD and network for half your life or you need a Godfather in the industry to reach a point where someone is willing to back you as a filmmaker. There is no system in place to recognize fresh, original talent. It’s a wonder that any independent films get made at all in India.

Lack of options – Given the case, what’re the options filmmakers have? To make any kind of cinema that reaches out to an audience (and all cinema must), there has to be at least some basic financial backing. With the dissolution of NFDC, most filmmakers will now never get a chance for that crucial first film. This is the system that enabled makers like Kundan Shah and Vidhu Vinod Chopra to make their mark with films like Jaane Bhi Do Yaaron and Khamosh and now the only real government agency that helped aid such films and discovered makers has shut down because it was a loss making venture. Pathetic. Instead of re-inventing itself by, say, enabling low budget films converted-from-DV and enforcing it in multiplexes (what are all the tax-sops for?), they just throw their hands up in the air and give-up! So what do you do? No sensible production house or financer is going to back you till you have a star. How do you get a star? As of today, there are barely 5 lead actors who you can sign on and make a film with a decent budget and a wide release. 5. That’s it. How many quality directors out there? At least 2000 for a conservative estimate? They have no option. The mathematics cannot work like the way it does in Hollywood because in America, even a film with all new faces has a budget equaling our top grossers.

And what about the ones who do manage to sign these 5 big guns on? What do they do? They try their very, very best to try and stick to tried and tested subjects that they know will work. All films must have a love angle, the must have songs, and so on and so forth. They’re diffident of experiments, because the fickleness of the industry doesn’t allow leeway for failure. And so, there is an abject lack of subjects; all films are beginning to merge and look like one continuous never-ending reel.

And it’s not just stars and subjects. Every maker would like Himesh Reshammiya, Farah Khan, Anil Mehta, everyone shoots at the same locations… it’s all about a lack of options and a fear of experimentation. A film needs to be sellable (to the star, then the producer, and then the audience) and what will sell best? Something that’s been sold in the past. This is where ‘pop’ cinema comes from isn’t it?

Distribution pains – It’s a miracle films make money theatrically. Certainly we have come a long way from days when distributors were expected to finance the songs of a film, before they were shot. It was an amazingly stupid way to work and distributors now have a cushier life with little monetary risk. But with the currently scenario, one just wonders if it’s not just better to get into the ‘business’ of piracy. Almost every non-discerning film-goer would rather just wait a day or two till an illegal copy of the film is available on the streets in either VCD or DVD formats. To hell with the fact that it is a camera-print and that people might keep walking past the camera, that the sound quality is abysmal, and that the picture pans left to right depending on the action on screen. They really don’t care. They just want to know what happens next. Why is this happening? Prohibitive cinema ticket prices? Laziness? Perhaps it’s just bad cinema and these guys just need a break with a remote to skip the boring parts? So how do we fix this? We need wider distribution. This is happening with the 30-cr plus films with over 1000 prints releasing on the opening day. Otherwise they travel from A centers to B to C centers. There is significant activity on to install digital cinema projectors in B and C centers so that films can be released simultaneously in more theaters. However, implementation is taking ages for reasons best known to them. We need more affordable cinema-going experiences. A night out for a family of 4 to watch a new release is well over Rs. 1000. 35% of this figure is entertainment tax. It’s senseless. Even people who want to watch films regularly cannot. Films are mass entertainment and the value-chain involved is too pre-occupied to not lose money. A regulation fixed here and some common-sense applied there will drive hordes of people back to the theaters and films can be watched the way they were intended to be.

Lack of appreciation of good films – The audience is completely to blame here; they don’t know a good film when they see one. It’s no secret that in our film-crazy country, film-literacy is very low. Parallels to Hollywood are inevitable, but we need to take a leaf out of Europe. Obsessing with Bollywood and turning a blind eye to alternate Indian and world cinema is a bad sign. Kerela has taken major strides in the last few years with even rural villages being exposed to film camps and seminars that regularly show Bergman and Bertolucci; but why isn’t this concept permeating to the rest of the country especially the metros? The handful of film clubs are too elitist insisting that the cover charge include a glass of wine or at least beer. Exhibition honchos are of course only concerned about maintaining the 40% capacity-rate that they need to fill for every show. Needless to say chances of them allocating off-beat films a screening a day will severely affect their bottom-line. But I have a solution. What’s the one kind of film that all audiences will watch regardless of where they’re coming from? R rated ones. I propose that this is where theaters should begin: screen classics with nudity. The Canterbury Tales, Last Tango in Paris, and Y Tu Mama Tambien, will all find an audience. Then steadily, wean them away and simply show them good films. Women will come too, coaxed by their husbands and boyfriends: this is not porn, this is cinema. But of course, there is one major flaw in this plan: our good ol’ government and its whims of

Censorship – With our dear health minister Ramadoss’ capricious ban on showing smoking on screen, censorship in India is taking regressive steps. While there is more kissing, risqué content is getting sidelined. However, I strongly feel this is something that really can be fixed overnight if the right people take over. Here is the only aspect we need to ape the west and put a stringent rating system in place with appropriate warning tags for all films. It’s really that simple as far as the law goes. Enforcing it is where the difficulty lies and the responsibility is the audience’s too.

So who is to blame? Filmmakers and producers for not trying too hard, distributors and exhibitors for only looking after their interests, the government for their arcane regulations, the audiences for not giving more-deserving films a fair chance and creating stars out of actors; in short, everyone really.

- with thanks from textonthebeach.com, a multi-topic blog that looks at India in the 21st century from the deck chair.

posted by AJ @ 18.9.06 0 Comments

Sunday, September 17, 2006

Sanju

As the focus is on Sanjay Dutt with the judgement in the 1993 Mumbai bomb blasts case coming up for hearing soon, Arshad Warsi talks to BT about his buddy Sanju from Toronto:
“For the past couple of days, for the screening of Kabul Express. But I know what’s happening back home to my friend Sanjay Dutt. And I sincerely hope he’s fine. The guy’s gone through hell. The people who’re making him go through this ordeal must realise he’s not a criminal, he cannot have been party to illegal activities. He’s just a regular guy who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time.
“Even if he made some mistakes, he’s been made to suffer enough for them in these last 13 years. Wherever he goes, he has to take permission from the police first. But, despite all this, he tries to put up a brave front. I’ve known Sanju from the time we made the first Munnabhai together. And while we’re very good friends, I have a great deal of respect for him, after all, he’s a senior actor too. And he’s often shared with me what he went through — of course, I wouldn’t like to talk about that. But yes, the one person he missed while we shot the sequel was his dad. We all missed him. Sunil Dutt saab was like the head of the family for all of us.”

posted by AJ @ 17.9.06 0 Comments

Aamir Khan’s ready to roll

He’s been basking in the glory of Rang De Basanti for a while now. He seems to be going for film premieres and catching up life beyond movies. Now, it’s time for this Khan to get back to the shooting grounds. Apparently, in the next couple of weeks, Aamir will start shooting his next film titled Sitarey Zameen Par. The film has a child artiste in the lead with him. He’s also the co-producer of the film, so you can imagine how Aamir will move aasmaan and zameen to make this a success! Seems like Aamir is ready to get back to the studios and sweat it out.

posted by AJ @ 17.9.06 0 Comments

Wednesday, September 13, 2006

Young techie makes film on child labour

A young technie from India's sunrise industry – software is trying to throw light upon some forgotten aspects of life in Bangalore.

He is using film and his spare time to draw attention to child labour.

"Maybe we are not accepting that they are human beings, one among us. That's why we leave them like that.

"In your home, ten people are there. Six people are eating food and the remaining four don't get any. That is not fair," said Alexis Dias, software professional.

The short documentary is just six minutes long and it has already begun to circulate widely on the internet and at public screenings.

What made you want to make a film on it?

Alexis "A movie is the best medium through which you can express your feelings in the best possible way. Maybe I am not talking to you in very good English but when I make a movie I can interpret the things in the best possible way.

"When we go through traffic signals, if we have to wait for the signal, we get suffocated because of the pollution, but the children are there throughout the day.

"From morning to evening we see these children suffering and we don't really have to get motivated for this because this is not hidden. This is open. We are seeing everyday."

The image speaks of the passion of this man.

posted by AJ @ 13.9.06 0 Comments

Tuesday, September 12, 2006

Romantic comedy opens later this month

Pratibha Parmar's debut feature film Nina's Heavenly Delights will open later this month.

Starring the actress Shelley Conn and Laura Fraser, the light romantic comedy revolves around a Scottish town where the former's family own an Indian restaurant.

A death in the family forces Nina (Shelly Conn) to come back after years of separation over a family feud. Her return brings her face to face with many surprises - her father’s gambling debts, old friendships and new problems over the family's future.

While juggling personal issues she makes a determined effort to save her father's restaurant by making a bid to win the local curry competition. Events however don't exactly go according to plan.

"The inspiration for the story came from my own experiences and in some ways it's autobiographical," its director Pratibha Parmar says.

"The title of the film actually comes from my sister, Nina who once owned a catering company called, Nina’s Heavenly Delights. So that’s how those different personal elements came together. Ultimately it’s a film about family, food and love, all themes that I am interested in."

The film also stars other familiar actors such as Art Malik (Holby City), Raji James (Eastenders), Ronny Jhutti (Eastenders, Bollywood Queen) , Veena Sood (Touch of Pink) and Atta Yaqub (Ae Fond Kiss). 14 year old Zoe Henretty debuts as Priya Shah, Nina's younger sister.

Shelley Conn's credits include the films Entente Cordiale, Charlie & the Chocolate Factory, Possession and Man & Boy. She is currently filming Blue Murder for ITV.

Farook Shamsher of the Asian alternative band Joi provides some of the music. The film is being distributed in the UK through Verve Pictures. It was written by Andrea Gibb.

www.ninasheavenlydelights.com.

posted by AJ @ 12.9.06 0 Comments

Tate showcases alternative Indian cinema and modern Mumbai

The Tate Modern in London is hosting a day long event next week to celebrate the contemporary cultural scene of Mumbai, India.

The event is part of a wider series of historical and contemporary film and video screenings titled 'Cinema of Prayoga: Indian Experimental Film and Video 1913-2006' – being held at the Tate Modern gallery between 15th and 19th September.

The art institution will later kick off a year long cinema tour of these films and mark the publication of the first ever book on this little-known subject.

The films will range from the magical silent era experiments of Dadasaheb Phalke right through to politically engaged contemporary video art from Bombay, Delhi and Bangalore.

On Saturday 16th September the venue will host 'Saturday Live Mumbai', a day long series of events includes discussions, films, performances, poetry and music; exploring the remarkable cultural scene of contemporary Mumbai and explore the pioneering work produced in the metropolis.

The day will start with a symposium, Mapping Mumbai, which will examine the role arts and culture have played in regenerating the city. In the galleries and around the building it will showcase a performance called Encounter(s) by artists Tejal Shah and Varsha Nair.

Swathed in embroidered white fabric, the two will be linked together and position themselves in different parts of the building during the day.

In the afternoon there will be a performance by Monali Meher, who wears a half sari with half of her body covered with gold leaf. In the evening there will be a screening of Migration and [Dis]location, part of the Cinema of Prayoga series.

Later there will be live performances by D’Archetypes, London-based poets Shane Solanki and Nikesh Shukla. Using poetry and rap to discuss identity and its role in multicultural societies, the D’Archetypes combine engaging lyrical content with elements of comedy cabaret.

They will be followed by a performance by Sujata and Taek Halaby, enacting a dance adapted from the 1982 Indian film of the same name, and Mumbai-based musician Mukul.

posted by AJ @ 12.9.06 0 Comments

Sunday, September 03, 2006

What is wrong with Indian script writing?












“The script is the hero of the film”. How many times have we heard some film personality quoting this line while speaking about their film! Ask any actor what made him or her sign a particular movie and pat comes the reply, “The script of the film”. Ask a director what is that one unique factor that anybody should watch his film and the regular reply will be “The script is the USP of my film”. But how much truth do these statements hold in the world of Hindi cinema. Almost nil! This unarguable fact came out as a conclusion to the ‘All Indian Screenwriters Conference’ that was held at Film and Television Institute of India (FTII), Pune last weekend. This one of its kind attempt was the first ever endeavor in the film industry where prolific writers throughout the country came up to speak about the plight of screenwriters and the quality of screenwriting in India.

Anjum Rajabali, writer of films like Drohkaal, Pukar and The Legend of Bhagat Singh was the brainchild behind this conference. And from the very outset, the conference appeared to be a genuine effort since the speakers in the seminar included some established writers and directors like Javed Akhtar, Shyam Benegal, Govind Nihalani, Sudhir Mishra, Kundan Shah, Jahnu Barua, Shekhar Kapur and some new-age storytellers like Anurag Kashyup, Madhur Bhandarkar, Abbas Tyrewala, Sriram Raghavan with some prolific names from the South film industry like Adoor Gopalkrishnan and Balu Mahendra, as well. And if one notices, all of them have indulged in some superior quality original work as filmmakers in their career. So when I first got an invitation for the event, it was the writer in me who wanted to attend a seminar on the social issues relating to screenwriters rather than a regular media journalist who would mechanically go and cover any film event. To have all such talented personalities under one roof, speaking on an important but long ignored issue in the industry was an enriching experience in itself.

Producer is the villain; Writer is the Victim

Anurag Kashyup, writer of films like Satya, Shool and Yuva, started the event on a rebellious note speaking about the current scenario of screenwriters in Bollywood. He took direct names of industry people in his speech to substantiate his claims about the plight of writers. He brought out the point that writers are inadequately paid in the industry citing the example that a production company was paying 5 crore to AR Rahman for music and 1 crore to Kareena Kapoor as the lead actress but were only willing to pay 5 lakhs to the scriptwriter claiming that that was all they could afford for a writer. Ironically the script is supposed to be the foundation of the film and nobody is willing to make it strong. How can one expect the building to stand tall for long?

Producers are not open to innovative ideas. When Kashyup approached Boney Kapoor around 8 years back with a script, Boney replied saying, “Go back to the planet you have come from”. Fortunately today Kashyup is making a film on the same script. Also producers want to resort to commercial clichés in cinema and have a lot of creative interferences with the writers. Kundan Shah, director of the cult black comedy Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro recently made a film called ‘Three Sisters’ that dealt on the social issue of dowry. He approached a prolific producer to take over the project and the producer could even identify with the film as he himself has three daughters. But then he wasn’t willing to finance the project since he felt it wasn’t economically feasible. And this despite the fact that Shah had completed the entire shooting, editing and even the subtitles of the film on a shoestring budget of 52 lakhs. “Add a star, include 4-5 songs and I can think of buying this film, even if it costs 1.5 crore then”, replied the producer. Anurag added, “The Hindi film industry starts and ends at Juhu. The other end is at Manhattan”.

The Hindi film industry starts and ends at Juhu. The other end is at Manhattan – Anurag Kashyup
By the time Anurag concluded his speech Sudhir Mishra reverted saying, “Like always, Anurag has invited trouble for him again. And that is the reason we love him”. Sudhir’s comment is (unfortunately) corroborated by the fact that the two films directed by Anurag Kashyup, Paanch and Black Friday have still not released due to censor and social issues. And Sudhir Mishra wasn’t wrong because Javed Akhtar was quick to retort saying, ‘Anurag’s is one of the most incoherent speeches I have ever heard. I would just suggest writers to stop complaining and better themselves’.

Copy-cut-paste to Indian taste

Well, Javed Akhtar wasn’t wrong on his stance either. In the present scenario when writers are blatantly copying foreign DVDs and transcribing it to Hindi screenplays, why would anybody pay the writer? How much originality exists in his work that he should get credits and recognition?

Referring to Kundan Shah’s Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro, Sudhir Mishra commented, “It was a great spoof of its time. Actually much ahead of its times! But you cannot make a spoof today”. Why? “Because the current scenario is already a spoof. So if somebody has to make a spoof today, he will, in fact, have to make a realistic film”. He added, “Mahesh Bhatt often says in his trademark style ‘Nothing is original’. My answer to him is ‘Arth was original’”.

Mahesh Bhatt often says in his trademark style ‘Nothing is original’. My answer to him is ‘Arth was original’ – Sudhir Mishra
On a hilarious note, Madhur Bhandarkar added, “A DVD librarian at Juhu is more aware about which filmmaker is remaking which movie than anybody else”.

Rajan Khosa also brought out the point that Bollywood stars should be more ethically responsible. “Why should Amitabh Bachchan play a Denzil Washington in Ek Ajnabee when he can get 10 writers to write a role for him”. Point to be noted!

Learning the craft

While any writer should have an inbuilt flair for sketching out a screenplay, it’s also important to learn the craft. While the new bunch of writers has learnt it on their own, they didn’t deny that training and guidance on writing could add to the skill. However some felt that it was necessary to move over from the age-old Aristotle principles applied in learning the craft of screenwriting. One can explore new methods in scriptwriting than sticking to the standard books of Syd Field (Syd Field is to scriptwriting, what Newton is to the science of gravity)

Shekhar Kapur went over the craft of writing stating, “The 3 essential elements for a good script are – craft, passion and hunger. The hunger pangs in stomach make creative juices flow in your brains. That’s the reason most successful people don’t make good films”.

Cynical Critics

Cinema is always said to be a director’s medium. But Javed Akhtar objected saying, “That’s not completely true. Whenever a film turns out to be good, critics credit it to the director’s vision. Whenever it turns bad they blame it to the writers. A good script can be made into a bad film, but a bad script can never me made into a good film”.

A good script can be made into a bad film, but a bad script can never be made into a good film – Javed Akhtar
Madhur Bhandarkar blames back to the critics lamenting, “Critics should learn to appreciate. This ignoramus bunch of the so-called trade pundits go on to declare that a film worked in metros but didn’t do business in the interiors. They should understand the fact that if a movie was targeted at the multiplex crowd, it’s purpose was successfully achieved since it reached its target audience. If I had to make a ‘Corporate’ for masses, I would have rather titled it as something like a ‘Business Ka Saudagar’”. So the concept of a pan India script is almost redundant. If one goes out to write a film for every category of the audience, he wouldn’t be able to please all and would end up disappointing most.

Film Writers Association (FWA)

There is a Film Writers Association (FWA) in India but primarily not of much help to aspiring writers for several reasons.
  • The only office that the FWA has in India is in Mumbai. So if a writer from Patna wants to register his script, he has to personally come down all the way to Mumbai.
  • In the jet-age, the FWA still doesn’t have a website either, from where people can send in their scripts for registration.
  • Despite getting your script registered at the FWA, it still doesn’t come under copyright. To gain a copyright, one should get the script published somewhere. So registering your script is of no legal help.

Finding a way out

While writers so far brought out the flaws of the screenwriters and the system, Abbas Tyrewala (writer of films like Munnabhai MBBS, Main Hoon Na and Maqbool) was smart enough to chalk out some ideas that could lead to the solution of these problems.
  • He pointed out that while all other technicians in the industry from the makeup men to the stunt masters have a union of their own, the writers happen to be the only members of the crew who do not have any association that will take up their issues. The FWA existed but wasn’t of any major help either. So the need of the hour was to have a strong and solid writer’s association.
  • The copyright laws in the country are so fallacious that any person can turn a writer and opt to remake a DVD. The laws have to be made stringent enough so that no writer dares to copy a foreign film and thereby producers have no easy alternative but to hire original scriptwriters who will subsequently get their due.
  • Writers in the industry are grossly underpaid. There should be a resolution passed by the above formed writers association wherein the writer should get, at least, 1.5% of the budget of the film as his remuneration. On an average, any film is made on an approx budget of 3 crores; so the writer will get a minimum amount of 3 to 4.5 lakhs as his fees for a movie.

Indranil Chakravarthy who played a major role in the success of this conference stated that transcriptions of this conference would be brought out in the form of a book. This book can immensely help a new writer to know the issues and intricacies of a scriptwriter in the industry.

This wasn’t a conference of the kind where the speakers just keep cribbing about the problems. At the end of the second day, there were extended open sessions held between the panelists and the audiences where various issues and concerns were discussed in detail and some way out was also instituted.

  • Anjum Rajabali, who played a major role in the entire seminar, was instrumental in forming a volunteering committee of 11 people. The committee includes sensible names like Javed Akhtar, Abbas Tyrewala, Jaideep Sahni, Anurag Kashyup, Akash Khurana, Kundan Shah and Anjum Rajabali himself. This committee will volunteer to get a clear understanding on the legalities involved with copyrights of scripts and other varied issues relating to scriptwriters. This will be subsequently conveyed to aspiring writers.
  • As things work out, the volunteering committee might form an association of its own that will take up issues related to screenwriters or might ask the FWA to revise themselves and come forward with more accessible help.
  • It’s also important to have the reality check. On their own merit, this association won’t be able to change much in the industry. So it also plans to coordinate with the FPGOI (Film and Television Producers Guild of India) for control over the industry. Since FPGOI has a wide reach in the industry they would be influential in helping the concerns of writers. For ex: the FPGOI can stop a producer from financing a plagiarized script.
  • If everything goes fine and smoothly, the association can consider taking up further issues like registration of scripts, a website for scriptwriters and possibly a library that could give access to screenplays of Hindi movies.

Happy end

The two-day conference was no less than any Bollywood film with all masala ingredients of action, emotion, drama, social cause and an interesting climax with an end that though cannot be tagged as a happy end (there is a long way to go), was surely an inspiring and promising conclusion. Here’s looking forward to the sequel of this film in the form of more original scripts and duly credited scriptwriters in India.

posted by AJ @ 3.9.06 0 Comments