Wednesday, April 24, 2013

Roja / Amar Akbar Anthony

What a relief! Something besides the same old same old sad black and white art house films.

Starting with Roja :
Roja was such an over the top film. I haven't seen anything like it. So nationalist. So patriotic. To me it felt like the equivalent of a guy holding a gun in one hand and a bible in the other with an airbrushed mural of  a bald eagle behind him with the words "Freedom ain't free" in red white and blue letters. The story was easily digested but at some points the acting was so bad that it hurt. The woman playing Roja is constantly running around flocking and screeching about her husband being kidnapped. She is very over dramatic and a bit disappointing  I was excited to see that she was a strong willed Indian woman in the beginning of the film. Somewhat defiant, sassy, and goal oriented. But of course that was short lived as soon as she comes around to her husband, at which point she becomes this helpless naieve little girl with no direction. When Rishi is kidnapped, the shit hits the fan. Roja spirals into a frenzy of yelling and running against the backdrop of a very unimpressed military. I thought it was cool how the film took people from southern India (Roja) and plunged them into the more modern, westernized North India (specifically Kasmir). I think the split second that the film focuses on that cultural dissonance  is the most interesting part. I feel a little offended by the film even though I'm not Muslim. It was so over the top hindu and over the top India that it was hard to watch (in the same way that its hard to watch Die Hard or any film that generalizes any sort of ethnic group or religious group. The flag burning scene, or rather the flag SAVING scene was so ridiculous  The song that played in the background was some sort of Indian nationalist tune as if I needed another reminder that this film was pro India. I wish there was more of a moderate Muslim voice in the films we have examined, because this film made them look like crazy terrorists. Crazy, weak, unable terrorists. Over all the movie wasn't bad but it does warrant a shake of the head and a rub of the temples to help you cope with the cheese.

Amar Akbar Anthony was awesome. As a guy that loves the "so bad it's good" genre of movie, Amar Akbar Anthony was right up my alley. It was overall a comedy which was nice and light hearted. The story is totally unbelievable and improbable but really, who cares? It's fun to just enjoy a crazy story unfold in front of you. The interplay of religion is interesting, but really its the examination of 3 different types of Indian young men that make the movie interesting to me. Since all three boys are so different its cool to see how they each fall in love, solve problems, and understand the world. Something else I enjoyed about the film was a bad guy that was generally secular, that way there was no obvious religious critique or attack. Really the only critique is in how the young men act and represent their respective religions. The actors are so charming that its hard not to like them. It's very over active and over done and that is nice when you have big modern song and dance sequences, cheeky fight sequences, and over the top charming romances. Quite the break from the politically charged, depressing films of the 40s and 50s. Such a good movie to end on. The secular themes in the film are nice and not over done, the actors are overactive and charming, the story is engaging (despite how unreal it may be) and the cinematography is about as good as you can get for 1977 Bollywood! Never would I have ever believed you if you told me I would have a song from a 1977 Indian film stuck in my head, but of course this one won't stop playing on repeat...
Thanks Bollywood.

Monday, April 8, 2013

India - home of sadness.

Garam Hawa, in classic Indian art house films, is ANOTHER sad ass movie. I think that this class has made me hyper critical of high production happy films or god forbid children's movies. I think this film was particularly successful in the way that it presented the social stress that partition (and general class or religious dispute) put on families at that time. There are so many aspects of partition that are left un attended and once we cover one I always tend to feel like that is it but it never is. It was interesting to see how the director completely removed the personification of the villan from the film and replaced it with a disembodied voice. It made for a very uneasy/tense experience. I felt as if there was no peace or outlet for the feelings I had for all of the characters. Either way Garam Hawa ended again with the death of a young woman over marriage (or lack there of) and the demise of her ability to function without the support of a man. I feel like these directors all attempt to give women a stance or a platform by making their stories so tragic, which in turn only makes people feel guilt and sadness rather than conviction, but who knows, maybe it works.

Meghe Dhaka Tara, another black and white film, followed suit in being completely depressing. The family members all happened to play very extreme roles. Nothing really subtle about this movie. Lots of patriarchy, but the mother seems to challenge that a little bit as she sways everyones decisions. I'm not so sure how I feel about this film on a personal level. I think I'm ready for something light hearted. It's strange because Indian films don't tend to have those brief moments of comic relief that American films have. What is that french word for "pleasure in misery"? I heard it once in passing and made a mental note to remember it but of course I didn't. Well whatever that word is, I think it describes the Indian art house movie industry. This film had so much less historical influence and was so much more personal, which makes it that much more astonishing that people watch them for recreation. I imagine that the process of picking all of these films was a depressing one. At this point in my life I think I NEED something more light hearted. If I have to stay up until 2:30am again writing about these depressing Indian films I'm going to really decline into some sort of depressive state I don't think I'm fully prepared to handle. If I watch one more Indian girl grip the hem of someones garment in pleading it's going to kill me.

*sigh*

Friday, March 8, 2013

No Happy Ending

It has been a while since I've reflected on the films we have watched in class, part of this is due to the crazy class schedule, part of it is due to the frequency at which we are watching these films. One day for the film, and another for discussion provides for a busy week! I feel like the films we have watched since Train to Pakistan are all very familiar, but the film styles are beginning to change and evolve, as well as the topics. Partition still plays a big part in the films, but in Earth and Subarnarekha, it only provides a backdrop for a more personal story, forcing me to look at the details rather than the big picture in order to analyze the film and understand the directors' respective decisions involving cinematography. 

In chronological order : 
Earth is the cinematic adaptation of the book Ice Candy Man. To me the story is divided into two parts, with the crux or center of the story where it all shifts is the train scene. Lenny provides a young childlike view of the world around her, making her the perfect narrator, but she is not a neutral party or omnipotent observer. Lenny is new to the events that are surrounding her, which happen to be scenes of violence and disagreement. An important point that was brought up in class was her ability to sort of move in and out of the adult world and the world of a child. I feel like the film neutralizes Lenny a little bit more than the book did, but with good reason. I feel like the relationship between Shanta and the other adults works much better on film than the childlike workings of Lenny's mind that lend themselves to the written word. 
Having only seen Amir Kahn in one other film (Lagaan) it was still hard to see him as the villain. That's not to say that he was not a good actor. I felt like Ice Candy Man was  a great character for the big screen, despite the few differences that existed between the book's character, and Amir Kahn's character in the film. One important difference between the two that is important to note is that Ice Candy Man in the movie is much more charming and confident, where the book makes him out to be a lot more brooding, shy, and creepy. I feel like this was an adaptation to Amir Kahn's acting style and general good looks, but it also strengthened the idea of the "love triangle" that existed between Ice Candy Man, Shanta, and Hassan, and after all, isn't that what people want to see in the movies? Love triangles, conflict, lovers scorned, lovers reconciled, unrequited love, etc.?
The images of Partition violence in Earth are much more evident and violent than they have been in any other film we have watched. I feel like the harsh imagery is important in order to truly show the conditions of Partition, but I feel like they were a little out of place. Sure this film is about Partition to an extent, but really the audience has to focus on the love triangle, rather than the problems happening to the country. Shanta and her group of male friends provide a kind of microcosm that represents the country as a whole. The earlier scenes are of tranquility and tolerance, where after the train scene the friends are never seen again in a large group without a sense of difference. If there was an American film to compare Earth to it would have to be Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor at first sounds like a historic retelling of the famous Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, right? But really what we care about is weather or not Josh Hartnett, Ben Affleck and Kate Bekinsale will ever resolve their love triangle, and the attack on Pearl Harbor is just the backdrop for this romance.
Overall I enjoyed Earth and viewed it differently once we took into account some of the subtleties in the film. I would go about listing all of these but each one calls for an explanation which would prove for a very long blog post. So in the spirit of laziness I move on to.....

Silent Waters (or Khamosh Pani) is a film that provides a look at Partition involving Sikhs and Muslims. Until this film I felt like the Sikh population had been underrepresented, but what do I know? I've only seen 5 or 6 Indian / Pakistani films in my entire life, all of which are from this class. My inexperience in Indian cinema aside, Silent Waters was a great film. I feel like there was a proper representation of Partition violence without being too explicit. It was also interesting to view Partition from the Pakistani point of view, since until now we have only really examined it from a Hindu/Indian standpoint. I feel like I'm being redundant when I specify Indian, but whatever.
The most interesting thing about the film to me was the prominent representation of moderate Muslims. In America there is almost no voice for moderate Islam and to see a somewhat critical view of militant Islamic people is very stimulating and provides for an interesting movie experience. I feel like the "happy ending" was something that Indian cinema never really mastered, and Silent Waters definitely strengthened that for me. What a bummer this movie was. Though there is some comic relief in the beginning of the film, its very relentless in it's seriousness.
Ayesha is a complicated character with a disturbing past as she is forcibly assimilated into the Muslim community by radical Muslims only to be attacked and rejected years after her devotion to Islam by radical Muslims, one of which being her own son. What this film brought up that I don't think any other film has is the fluidity of religion during Partition. There were a lot of forced conversions from Hindu to Muslim, Muslim to Hindu, Sikh to Muslim, and every other religion. This conversion supposedly made you safe among whatever governing group was staking claim to the land you occupied, but in Silent Waters it does not protect Ayesha, despite her devotion. Her son, Saleem, plays out a typical role of young impressionable male swept up in the wrong crowd. It's like something from The Outsiders or The Lost Boys, where the young men are swept up into a crowd for a cause and never look back but once. Unfortunately for Saleem, this means sacrificing a lot of what he believes and cares about in his life. It was like any other political or religious fanaticism where they prey on the complacent and the lazy and give them purpose through rewarding them with compliments, hard work, and responsibility.
The topic of honor violence was lingering in my head when you find out that not only was Ayesha forced to convert to Islam by extremists, but it was in the stead of killing herself to preserve the honor of her Sikh family. This is a little disheartening and makes the viewer care more about poor Ayesha, especially when she returns to the well that she was faced with at 16 to ultimately kill herself. The last well scene was very understated and calm, making the imagery of her jumping in much more powerful in my opinion. Overall a great movie. The romances are not played up at all, and the topic really is a critique of radical Islamist society through the view of a small family (which is kind of related to my thesis for my research paper!) *taking mental notes*

So from one sad story to the next...

Subarnarekha is one of the few art house films that doesn't have a lot of the Bollywood flare that Earth or Lagaan has, but that doesn't make it a well thought out film. It was a little hard to follow because it moved so fast. I felt like the director didn't take enough time developing the story before Ishwar takes in Abhiram under his wing. Being made in the 1940s, it is replete with choppy theater style acting, and usual poor editing, but this doesn't really distract from the essence of the film. I think the black and white made the landscape of the story feel even more mundane than it was intended to be. Short, controlled speech make the characters seem very matter of fact and not very emotionally accessible. The timeline jumps around skipping years at a time so some of the critical character development we get in more recent films is replaced by short quick character interactions that give the audience understanding of their feelings towards one another but not much else. You really only know what any of the characters feels about one another, but really I couldn't tell you what Abhiram is like on his own, nor Ishwar or Sita. The characters are overacted and intense, but this helps to provide some comic relief in this otherwise bleak story. I don't have as much to say about Subarnarekha, because there isn't much that rests below the surface. With an abbreviated understanding of Bengali Partition, one can decode this film with ease. 

Wednesday, February 20, 2013

Train to Pakistan

We recently finished two movie in rather rapid succession. The first of which was Train to Pakistan, a movie adaptation of the Book by Khushwant Singh. The movie and the book bear differences (as to be expected) but overall I think I enjoyed the movie a little more. I'm sure that's just me being simple and liking to watch the events unfold in front of me rather than read about them, but the movie was very dynamic.
From a cinematic stand point, Train to Pakistan didn't rely on any sort of dramatic editing tricks or over the top production. It was an honest film. The dialogue and movement of the characters seemed a little play like, but overall it was an easily understandable film. The topic of love during the time of Partition seems to be a recurring theme in these films. I've read about splitting up families and friends but usually the focus of these films involves lovers of either Hindu or Muslim affiliation that are torn apart. I would like to see more examples of the family displacement or the separation of family members in these films, but I suppose that is less dynamic and ultimately less romantic for the average viewer.
Powerful shots of the train and the epic sound of the whistle blowing help to guide the viewers emotions. There are powerful scenes of death and post-violence, but very little scenes of actual violence. I believe this lends itself to the viewer to feel immersed in the story rather than making it seem like an action film. There are complex emotions and a few lesser storylines within the main plot that are addressed in the film such as the odd relationships between people of different ages, and religious affiliation. There is a little bit of power struggle, but it doesn't seem to come to a head until the end of the film (which is obviously intentional, considering the calm, communal nature of the village in which the violence occurs). Overall a great film, and tells the story of Partition in an honest way with consideration. The love story accompanying the film is a little more than i look for in films with historic context, but I can appreciate that element as a part of the depth of the film.

Wednesday, February 6, 2013

Lagaan - More than meets the eye


We just finished watching Lagaan in class and I, along with Cass were chosen to present and look further into the film for class. I took a bunch of notes on things I noticed in the film which are available below. I liked the film a lot more than I expected too, but that seems to be the intention of the filmmakers. The movie felt familiar although it dealt with a part of history that I (until the last 2 years) have not been very well acquainted with. I had to force myself to look deeper into the movie and not just take it at face value, which is kindof hard to do whenever its so easily portrayed in a high production and care free light. I particularly enjoyed the song and dance sequences. Eastern music has never been something I've given much attention to because the vocal ranges and styles are a little hard to digest when all you have been exposed to at a young age are more western music styles. The songs in this movie were very enjoyable and I even showed them to a few friends despite their disinterest. I understand that the songs and dances are a bit campy, and I'm sure a lot of Indian viewers may see them as I see the Sound of Music or West Side Story, but for me, a 21 year old man being exposed to Indian cinema for the first time in his entire life, I loved it. As for the more serious issues with the film, I addressed them in a much more scholarly way (even though my notes are a little bit convoluted and mashed up. I also included some questions and statements from fellow classmates that I responded to and elaborated on!

_____________________________________________________________________________________

Angry young man
stark contrasts in caste, religion, status.

Class / cast specific problems – agrarian society
  • drought, farming problems are able to be applied to more modern problems such as taxes, wages, government
  • westernized “Bollywood” story and technique to reveal a very specific Indian story or problem
  • broad story telling with a definite “enemy” and a definite “hero” but the story itself is a very specific account.
  • Addresses the poor and untrue historiography surrounding the british involvement in India by portraying a fully conscious emotional people
  • Appeals to the lower caste
  • was very culturally relevant at the time of its release
  • Although it appeals heavily to the lower class/caste people in India, it also covers a wide scope of Indian people in general as it tells the story of liberation from British occupation
Focus on the family
  • every “family” in the movie shares a strong close bond
  • members of families tend to rely and confide in only other members of their family
  • multiple layers of bond and family – Country > Province > Village > Family > Couple
The reliance and kindness shown to the Chief reveal the villagers understanding of the true “enemy” being the British Captain.

The team coming together despite differences between the respective members displays a drawing together of varied social groups within India itself to unify against the “other”. The varying groups of people within the village display a conscious emotional people, but their conflicts within the village force the viewer to consider the clarity, structure, and functionality of the British.

The social structure of India is not changed in the film, and the villagers do not seem to contest the British occupation of India, but only the unjust (or in this case impossible) taxation of the people in a particular point in time.

The language barrier is turned on its head as the imperial power attempts to learn and harness the language of the indigenous people.

The song and dance sequences are of a folk style and strengthen the communal aspects of folk culture and simple living. All of the villagers bond together in song and dance in a free moving fashion where as the ball room style dance of the english is stiff and structured, strengthening the difference in the cultures. The free spirited emotive dance of the villagers give strength to the notion of self awareness and consciousness among Indian people at this time in history.­


RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS FROM OTHER STUDENTS

We have talked about some of the things that Indian film uses like the up close shots of peoples faces. The Lagaan chapter by Melanie Wright talks about the eyeline match that occurs with the shooting of the rabbit at the beginning of the movie. What other tactics are used in Indian film so create these illusions?
  • The juxtaposition of religious icons such as Krishna and Rhada in the temple scene as well as the constant monumental framing of the Temple are less subtle devices used in the film to strengthen the Hindu tones of the film. More subtle film tricks I noticed were the close up bright shots of Elizabeth, where the color of her clothes somewhat reflects her role in the movie. For instance when she comes to the realization that she is in love with Bhuvan, in the next scene she is wearing all red, a color of passion and love. In scenes where she only admires Bhuvan before and after this realization she is wearing white, the color of widows in eastern civilization and of virgins in Westernized civilization, and seeing as how Lagaan kindof blends a heavy Eastern story with Western film making tactics, this seems to be intentional. Other things pointed out in the Chakraborty article are Bhuvan's always unbuttoned shirt, portraying him as a man of action, informality, and passion. He is the young angry man of a hero and his unbuttoned shirt is a sign of that.

After watching Lagaan and reading Chakraborty’s “History of the ‘Other’” and Melanie Wright’s “Lagaan”, I realized how multilayered Bollywood films actually are. It is so easy to watch an Indian film and just think that they are trying to tell an inspiring story to uplift the spirit of India. However, there are many issues that the film addresses: religion, politics, social, etc. Religion is as important in Indian films as it is in their daily life. In Lagaan, Krishna’s temple is the highest point in the village and is activated in the film as a sign of hope. For example, when the rain clouds were approaching the village during the drought, the temple was shown and the drums were sounded in the doorway. Another example of the temple portraying hope for the village was when Bhuvan hit the ball with the bat the first time and it hit the bell of the temple. Religion is also portrayed in a motif of the main characters of the film. The villagers were watching Bhuvan and looking up to him (as if he was their god) as he stood in front of the village and gave them some hope. Unlike most Bollywood films, Lagaan does not focus on the wealthy upper class, but rather the peasants. This tells the story of India in a historical fashion, but is still portrayed in an idealized way. The hero (Bhuvan) is fair skinned and beautiful, as well as Gauri. The reason for this is possibly to levitate their god-like status. I thought it was interesting how Indian films pull together multiple aspects of different religions to appeal to the audience. 
  • An interesting observation is the way that the film sort of glamourized the life of these oppressed agrarian people. They are struggling against wrongful taxation but are ultimately only fighting to have the taxes relieved for 3 years rather than fighting to end the British occupation of their country. It is interesting that Bhuvan seems to be the first person to openly challenge the tax, and that is where the conflict sets in.
  • It is obvious that the British have the ability and resources to completely take over India and also to rule over their land, but at no time do the Indian people in the village strive to change their overall status or situation. In a way they are fighting to make things better for themselves by not having to pay lagaan, but at the same time they are attempting to keep things the same and continue about in their laborious lives.
  • The high production qualities of the film such as the song and dance numbers are always involving the villagers. The grand choreographed dances and songs somewhat glorify the oppressed/minority/agrarian people. The songs and dances of the villagers are very sporadic and fluid with a lot of movement and volume, strengthening the passion and excitement that the people carry with them, while the scenes involving the English are accompanied with classical and baroque scores at low volumes as well as one structured ballroom dance. This helps to glorify the villagers lives and create a cultural dissonance between the two groups.
  • There isn't much subtlety in the film as it obviously portrays the heavy Hindu cultural influence, but there are many other aspects that rest under the surface such as inter-religious communities and inter-racial communities.

This is just a comment on the Gowariker reading, but I though it was interesting that he breaks down the film in terms of the Bollywood tropes it upholds as well as where it veers to appeal to a more western audience. At some point it calls lagaan an introduction to Bollywood for the west which will be interesting to consider as we finish the film and think about ways that film narrative traditions are negotiated for a more global audience.
  • The film has some universal elements that appeal to a wide audience such as the two enemies that eventually come together to work as a team
  • Gauri's father initially dissapproving of Bhuvan as a match for her and being overly protective, but eventually coming around to their love for each other
  • the underdog hero rising from disrespect to ultimate respect
  • traditional love marriage and relationships instead of arranged marriage between bhuvan and gauri.
  • Focus on a trivial event (such as a sport/cricket game) to decide something much larger.
  • The fact that the different religious people do not ever conflict with each other helps it to stay light hearted and easily digested by a western audience.
  • Clear enemy and definite conflict.