(religion and cricket being the first two)
The popular debate over the significance of Bollywood is perhaps one of those conversations that invariably ends unresolved. Blind faith in the magic of Karan Johar is either upheld or dismissed; there is no middle ground. Has Indian Cinema evolved to finer sophistication or has it taken itself so seriously that it fails to see its own embarrassment? In my opinion, both.
"Bollywood" - the unfortunate front face of Indian cinema, that brings to this art form international recognition and mass popularity, is in fact the strongest factor undermining its credibility. A friend of a non-Indian background remarked excitedly how much she enjoyed watching Bollywood for its songs and dances and girls jumping in and around trees...All publicity is not good publicity. The pure art and talent that seeps from this industry is to befound elsewhere - the increasingly mainstream "Art films". What Indian cinema has largely lacked through its history is capturing emotions and simple human stories, treating issues with sensitivity and creating plausible characters that have reasonable resemblance to real life. I feel that today we have a generation of film makers who have the ability to treat subjects with the intelligence and respect they deserve. Escapism has its place butshould not be an excuse for sloppy film making. For the credibility of a maturing film industry, the ever growingpopularity of the so called Art films is pivotal. It saddens me that despite the presence of credible films, the mascot of our film industry is the 2-D, frivolous, song and dance routine masala movies.
I don't deny that there is a place for the escapism offered by this style. I do deny them any credibility as an art form. They ought to be recognised and acknowledged for what they are and nothing deeper. They provide relief from life's tribulations but life and art would progress without them. When patrons of this genre mislead themselves to believe that they deliver more integrity than in reality, we have a problem. Take the film Black, for instance. An incredibly pertinent issue especially within the context of Indian society is presented by film makerwho's forte lies in over the top sets picturised in palatial haveli's with Miss World overacting her emotions through head aching ballads. Sanjay Lila Bansali does Bollywood masala effortlessly but when he attempts to portray a sensitive issue like Alzheimer's, the focus of the film is no longer the main intended subject but rather the award winning costumes, sets of Anglo-Indian Simla and Impressionist's envy inducing use of colours and light.
Bollywood is popcorn and stall whistles. Indian cinema has far more to offer.
Let me not me not sound like imagination is forbidden and only film reflecting true life has meaning. It is the issue of plausibility that lies at the heart of the argument and the sacrifice of this intrinsic character insults the art and diminishes its worth. Plausibility not necessarily reality.
Shekhar Kapoor has captured the hearts of generations of Indians through Mr India. What made this unrealistic plot line last the ages and hold our love and respect for all these decades? plausibility. The characters are handled with dignity. The issues are treated thoughtfully. All this despite having its share of rolling in the hay andsaris drenched in the rain.
It is disappointing to observe the vast audiences who fail to appreciate the subtlety lacking in mass productions and who may have never appreciated the delicacy of Guru Dutt or the lyrics given life by R D Burman.
Perhaps it is the audience to blame who fuel the fire of Karan Johar's following bringing to our screens mindless, recycled Bollywood. I only hope Karan is not under any misunderstandings about his creations and acknowledges them for the popcorn entertainment that they are.
No comments:
Post a Comment