The Lunchbox
released on Friday in India. The praise is starting to pour in. Reminds me of
the time when Shaitaan was released and everyone went mad over a film where all
they did was use slow-motion which apparently blew off people’s minds. Still, since
I have not yet seen the film I won’t comment on it. My problem is that whenever
a good movie comes out, and I’m going with the majority in calling it good,
everyone seems to just jump on the bandwagon and start making statements like “this
is real cinema” or “cinema should be like this”. Seriously, these are the same
people when you ask them their favorite films, they will give you a list that
comprises of each and every Govinda release from the 90s.
The point
is, and this is obviously not just about Indian films, that cinema is such a
diverse art that you cannot under any circumstances make a film stand on a
pedestal and say this is how movies should be made. Every film, no matter how
good, how bad, or how much immersed in mediocrity has its rightful place. There
is no denying that cinema can be good or bad, but then that comes down to
personal opinion. We all talk about our guilty pleasures and films that are so
bad that they are good, so there is obviously something that these films
achieve. Let’s face it, even porn has a place and a reason to be part of
cinema.
When I speak
about Indian cinema with people who are not from the country, the most common
reason for not watching Indian films is that they are perceived as musicals. To
each his own, but I argue about the importance for three hour long films in our
society and how music, dance, comedy, romance, and drama are essential. Film
watching is primarily a family/friend outing in our country and thus a three
hour film, even though it might drag beyond belief, is considered to be more
about getting your money’s worth and forgetting for a while about your everyday
worries. So a film like Hum Aapke Hain Kaun with 14 odd songs is as essential
as a film like Black that focuses more on story and acting and sending out a
message that isn’t too obvious. The same could also be said for films like
Grand Masti which obviously cater to a certain younger crowd with its raunchy testosterone
filled scenarios and films like Udaan which are more metropolitan in their
appeal and doesn’t hide away from challenging the audience to think.
Films are
made with an audience in mind. Take Chennai Express for example; I still in all
honesty don’t know people who would have gone and watched this film since I
could not even stand the trailer. Again, I haven’t watched the film so I won’t
comment on it much. Now why is it that this film is one of the highest grossing
films of all time in India right now? Shouldn’t we then say “this is real
cinema” because unless the trade analysts are lying obviously a vast majority of
people went and saw this film. I know you may argue that it opened up in many theatres
etc., but in the end it was the audience who decided to buy the ticket and
watch the film. Even if you blame is on “star power”, I say the power was given
by you, the audience, to these very stars.
So what exactly
is “real cinema”? Is every film that YOU like as an individual classify as real
cinema? Or is it only films that get critical acclaim that can claim the title
of being “real cinema”? Better yet, what about international fame, isn’t what
we all really care about unfortunately, some sort of approval from the West to
tell us that our cinema is as good as theirs? Is “real cinema” in our country
also considered “real cinema” elsewhere?
There is no
end to the questions. Anyone who considered themselves to be a true cinephile
in the most minute sense should be open to all cinema. To disregard one film just
on the basis of songs or subtitles or being in Black& White is a huge loss
to cinema and the character of the said person. Everyone has the right to an
opinion, and talking and defending your opinions is what makes this art all the
more special, but under no circumstances anyone has the right to point at one
film and make an élan that “this is real cinema”, because if you do say that, then
you have no clue what cinema is or what it is meant to do.
