June 2009 Edition
Govind Nihalani, 68, is a veteran cinematographer and director who, from
Aakrosh (1980) and Ardh Satya (1983) to Drohkaal (1994) and Dev (2004),
has repeatedly dealt with politically sensitive themes. In an exclusive
interview, he talks about the pros and cons of the recent spurt in films
that seek to explore the complexities of the contemporary Indian reality
Is it easier to make political films today than it was when you began making films?
It was much easier in my time. We had NFDC backing and the Script Committee had enlightened people. Once a screenplay was approved, there would be no interference. You could go ahead and make the film you wanted to.
What would you say has changed today?
After Tamas, which I made in 1988, levels of intolerance have gone up both in the public space and in official circles. How many political films are made today? Very few and those that are made are of a rather superficial nature.
Isn't it important to make these films acceptable to a wider audience?
Why should it be so difficult to strike a balance between the need to entertain and the effort to highlight relevant social and political issues? A film can be entertaining and stimulating at the same time without having to make undue compromises. You can hold an audience spellbound from the first frame to the last and yet throw up the issues that you feel strongly about.
But isn't that primarily a question of ability?
Well, that's a given. A filmmaker cannot hope to survive if she or he doesn't have the ability to hold the attention of the audience with her/his storytelling skills. That is an absolute must irrespective of what kind of film you make.
An increasing number of filmmakers are today addressing contemporary issues. Isn't that a good sign?
After Drohkaal, people discovered terrorists as the new villains. In my film, I put forward the views of the terrorists too because they have a political agenda. They are doing what they are doing because they are driven by a cause. It is important to understand their motivation.
Terrorists cannot be equated with ordinary criminals. There is a difference between a terrorist and a mafia don, but that is being increasingly lost sight of.
Why?
The war on terrorists is now being given an overtly nationalistic spin. Films about terror are today's war films. Terrorists are projected as the new demons, the new enemies. These films lack depth and sensitivity.
So you are not one of those who are impressed with these films.
Well, I have some reservations. I feel the politically loaded films of yore had greater impact.None of my films lost money– the audiences responded to them with enthusiasm.
Several of today's reality inspired films are also doing well at the box office.
Yes. The audience has changed. Its concerns, aspirations and idea of entertainment have changed. What they feel angry about is very different from what audiences in the 1970s and 1980s felt angry about. So filmmakers respond to issues in contemporary terms. If they don't, their films won't work. Today, you cannot expect a smooth ride if you decide to rattle skeletons in the cupboard.
Are you talking about the pressures that are put on filmmakers who set out to tackle sensitive sociopolitical issues?
Yes, precisely. I worry about the unofficial censorship mechanism that is gaining ground in India. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) shows Angels and Demons to a group of Christian leaders for their approval. That sets a dangerous precedent. No religion, least of all Christianity, can be so feeble that it needs protection against a film. Today, it's this group. Tomorrow it will be another. Where will we stop?
What should the filmmaking community do to prevent this form of censorship?
Not just filmmakers but also artists, writers and musicians should close ranks and take a stand. Otherwise the situation will only get worse. People resort to violence and are allowed to get away with it. The government seems to have abdicated its responsibility. If you have a problem with a film, you can take recourse to legal action. If the government keeps on giving in to these demands, freedom of expression will soon be a thing of the past.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
|
Disclaimer
The views expressed here are strictly personal and civilsocietyonline.com does not necessarily subscribe to them. We shall endeavour to upload/publish as many of the comments that are submitted as possible within a reasonable span of time, but we do not guarantee that all comments that are submitted will be uploaded/published. Messages that harass, abuse or threaten other members; have obscene, unlawful, defamatory, libellous, hateful, or otherwise objectionable content; or have spam, commercial or advertising content or links are liable to be removed by the editors. We also reserve the right to edit the comments that do get published. Please do not post any private information unless you want it to be available publicly.
Your feedback on this story...
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
About Us | Site Map | Privacy Policy | Contact Us | ©2007 Civil Society
.
........................................Webmaster Vishwanathan ( vishu4@rediffmail.com )
