How do you look at the greater representation of regional movies in the National Awards 2017?
It is obvious. Because, I believe, the heart of Indian cinema lies in regional movies. I have directed the highest number of Hindi films after David Dhawan. The basic problem with Bollywood, right from the beginning, is that it is meant only for glitter and gloss. In the early years, relatively there was a space for so-called parallel movies which carried the spirit of ‘real Indian movies’. Nowadays the Bollywood is aping the English films i.e. Hollywood. Now we cannot even relate the
characters in Hindi movies to the real life of Indians, not even in attires. As far as the realistic movies or parallel movies are concerned, the condition is more or less similar to that of the commercial Hindi movies because market is the
primary concern for all. In the end, you cannot be true to the cinema. As a result, the quality has completely gone to the astray. Here, the advantage of the
regional cinema is that it represents our true culture base. I would say, even if we are compelled to lie, it must be convincing. The regional cinema still maintains the soul of Indian cinema that is completely lacking in Bollywood movies.
Is this the main reason why our movies are not finding favour in international award competitions?
By and large, none of our films
qualifies for Oscar nomination. We boast that our movies are nominated for Oscar every year but, I would say, it is just made-up. They will throw those movies off right in the first round. The movies sent from here won’t even get an entry to the nomination round. Because they know that whatever is featured in the films is unrealistic and not going to happen anywhere in the world. So if asked, I would set a criterion that the films which win the National Awards be sent for Oscar and other international awards. Be it Iranian movies or French movies, they send their best movies to international forums that have already won their national awards. We never do that. We have got a federation for Oscar nomination and what they are doing is just nominating the movies of their Chamchas. When regional cinema
ceases to exist, Indian cinema will lose its identity. Then there will be no more Indian cinema but only Bollywood.
Indian cinema is often dubbed as Bollywood. How do you see it?
Yes. You know what is the adverse side of that? For the same reason, the international film world sees Indian movies with the utmost contempt. They are not at all aware we have plentiful genuine and quality movies being made here based on burning social issues, environmental issues and human emotions. So it is imperative to encourage regional cinema to preserve our true cultural identity.
This year, there were over 300 films before the jury. As a veteran moviemaker, how do you evaluate the content and quality of contemporary movies?
This is a good question that I would like to answer. There were 344 movies before the Jury. In my experience, the major issue was if a movie is rich in content-wise, its making is not up to the mark. If it is better in making, its content is poor. So while taking both content and making into account, there were only a handful of movies which can be called admirable or remarkable. The makers of the films, which are conceived from literature knowledge and social issues, seemed to be lacking a good sense of cinema, while people with good understanding of cinema as a medium are lagging behind in
choosing right content. We need to blend best of both to make a good film.
As it happens every year, there were controversies associated with national awards in this year too. How do you look at the
criticism over the rejection of the popular movies like Dangal?
See, I was the chairman of the central jury committee. Simultaneously, there were other juries for north, south, east and west parts of the country. That means we could make a final judgment only on the basis of the movies that came before us after the filtering by regional juries. It is impossible for a single jury to watch all the 344 movies. That is the reason why there was a division of four jury panels. It all depends upon the sensibility of the regional jury panel members. Suppose, if all the five members of a panel do not like commercial movies, the movies like Dangal might be rejected. So Dangal didn’t come on my table but I had to recall it to give the best-supporting actress award to Zaira Wasim. The appreciation level is very subjective, it varies according to people.
Being the jury chairman, did you face difficulties to handpick the best from diverse languages and backgrounds?
I think only a jury from India will come to face such a situation as this tremendous diversity is not seen
elsewhere. More often, it was not the language but the various vernaculars of the same language posed greater inconvenience. For instance, sometimes, a jury from Bengal fails to understand the regional variants of Bengali
language. We can get an overall picture of the contents on the basis of the English translation. But only the regional juries can grasp the nuances of the movies made in regional languages. So it is a very complicated screening process. This year, I have made a strong
recommendation to the concerned authorities to make it mandatory that all jury panels must contain a director, a
cinematographer and a music director.
You said ‘Indianness’ is completely missing in Indian cinema. So how can we bring the ‘Indianness’ back to our cinema?
May be in Bollywood, but it is not at all missing in regional cinema. For example, Marathi and Bengali movies bagged more awards this time. They
produce very interesting and genuine movies based on the social issues in their regions. So the Indian cinema, in fact, is not Bollywood, but it is what we see in regional languages. Unless we bring this truth out to the world, Indian cinema won’t be recognised internationally.
How do you remember your
life-journey? How did it shape the filmmaker in you?
I belong to a very conservative Hindu family. Hinduism is not just a religion, it’s a way of life. This aspect is totally missing in our cinema. In cinema, people tend to challenge it instead of admiring it. These days, the cinema is all about controversy. To make it controversial, the best way is to unleash violent attacks on the basic culture. You know, there was a time when only Malayalam and Bengali movies were constantly winning national awards. The reason was a myth was prevalent in those days that if one made a film against the establishment
or the system, it was hailed as a
revolutionary cinema. I have never done so in my life. I have an audience in my mind. So I like all genres of films, from cartoons to the films of MGR, Ray or Mrinal Sen. Maybe that’s why I was able to make all genres of films. Because I loved cinema as it is, not any particular genre of cinema. From satire to period films and thrillers, I have attempted all kinds of movies. This is why, in this long journey, I could survive in my career for the last 35 years with 91 films in credit when more brilliant filmmakers failed to endure in the course of time.
We say there are no such formulae to make a successful film. But still, what makes a successful film?
I have understood one thing that inside every Indian, however apparently modern she or he is in the society, there is a kid as well as a conservative. We all have been brought up in middle-class values. If we make films based on middle-class values it will survive commercially, culturally and content-wise. This is what the lesson I have learned in my life. A sincere approach towards our work is the most important factor. So I don’t need much preparation prior to a new project.
n How do you see the changing trends in Malayalam cinema where you contributed predominantly in your long career?
Going against the establishment is a general trend in Malayalam film
industry. Recently, I have observed that there is an alarming rise in groupism
in Kerala. I was branded as
anti-Communist after directing the movies like ‘Advaitam’. This is a very unhealthy trend. In cinema, there is only one religion. Previously, it was the culture of Kerala. The film world was also free of religion and all. Prem Nazir had remained as an unchallenged
matinee idol in Malayalam for many decades. Nobody seemed to be bothered about his religion or caste. Now that culture is slowly eroding. It is very dangerous. Though it is not that overtly, one can make it out from the tussle between the fans associations in the name of two most popular actors in Malayalam.
How do you analyse the rising anti-nationalism in our cinema and literature?
I was closely watching the incidents similar to what happened in JNU. Whenever there is an attention deficit, some people turn against the
establishment. It is widely prevalent in cinema. It is the same in literature too. But, to a certain extent, it is healthier in literature because we have the freedom of choice there. We can reject it after analysing the content. But cinema is not like that. It is a very powerful medium. Here an idea is being thrust upon you. By the way, I am not of the opinion that a cinema must carry a message to the audience. I would rather send an SMS if I want to convey a message. Why should we spend a huge money and make a film for that (he laughs). It is not about the message. We should add an entertainment value to what we want to convey to the masses. Because,
basically, we make films for a common man who goes to a cinema hall for entertainment and relief.
A few words about your future projects.
My next movie is in Tamil. The Hindi version of my Malayalam thriller ‘Oppam’ is also coming. Ajay Devgan will play the lead role.
(Priyadarshan chaired the jury of the 64th National Film Awards, 2017)
Leave a Comment