Time whizzes by and I, I write of glimpses I steal

Thursday, April 25, 2013

Intelligent cinema

What is an intelligent movie? I had this long discussion with a friend of mine on what I perceived as dearth of intelligent cinema coming out of the Tamil film industry. And how watching a much-touted film like Enthiran or Vishwaroopam is painful. I couldn't quite boil down a definition of what makes a film quote unquote intelligent, because saying something like "the film was so intense that it moves you" is too abstract. Perhaps in the famous words of Supreme Court Justice Stewart, "i know it when i see it".

One of the definitions that I found online is that a movie is considered intelligent, when the idea is new. Another definition was that intelligent cinema is that which entertains and provokes a mature viewer to reflect on what they saw, long after the film ends--extending the entertainment value. Someone else suggested something worthwhile and lasting which will impact the audience and remain with them and form a part of their collective memory.

One could argue that there is no such thing as intelligent cinema but this would probably entail that a Vijay flick is then just as good as a Kamal film. I don't see a lot of people accepting that. Or one could argue that we don't 'need' to have intelligent cinema. That is a whole other argument (that I will deal with separately). Mind you, nobody is arguing that we shouldn't have any escapist entertainment capers. I liked Gilli as much as the other guy. My argument is that we could do with some smart films. Not many. Just a few.
And if there isn't consensus on what intelligence is, let's substitute it with terms like innovativeness, inventiveness.

It is not controversial to say that nothing in at least the last 25 years in Tamil  cinema has pushed the frontiers of film-making. Not even 'Hey Ram', which is a pretty decent flick. The problem is that directors like Maniratnam, Kamal or Shankar pretend that their movies are somehow 'different', 'historical' or 'profound' or 'pushing boundaries' when they are none of those. They balk at making anything that hasn't been already made a million times.  I'm perfectly happy for them to come out and say that I am not in the business of making intelligent films but let's not pretend that they are making the Metropolis. 

Kamal for instance complained that he won't get an Oscar because there is an Indian sensibility and the West doesn't get it. He won't get an Oscar because he is just not that good. It is like the Olympics. You may be the unrivalled National champion but you don't even get to run in the Olympic finals because you are running a full minute behind the top athletes. (I actually pity Kamal the actor - he just doesn't have a good screenwriter or director to bring the best out of him). It is not just a matter of taste.  I have more respect for a person like Vijay or Vijaykanth who has no pretensions of intellectual fortitude.

And I can't stress this enough - I am not calling people dumb. Quite the opposite, I believe people are not stupid but are treated as such by film-makers who think something is too high-brow or as some idea as too difficult for an average person to understand. It is these so-called 'good directors' that say I could totally make a world-class film if only I didn't have to consider the B and C-centres, that make the argument that people are too dumb for intelligent films. And my beef is with sophisticated film-goers in India who have lowered their expectations so much that even a smattering of 'sense' from a director is lauded as the next best thing since sliced bread. This is what allows film-makers to produce films that are for the lowest common denominator without even having to justify it or pay a price for being so mediocre.

My point is that some film-makers, despite commercial constraints that are just as true everywhere as they are in India, do not shrink from doing the smart thing. I am not talking about the Terrence Malik and Jean-Luc Godard kind of art-house independent films. I am talking multi-million dollar summer blockbusters. I am talking of typically juvenile franchisees like the Batman and James Bond becoming deep and well-rounded films and still earning truckloads of money. Inception is another example of a mainstream blockbuster being incredibly smart. Yes, we want someone to make "American Pie-25" or "Die Hard 18 - This time is the Hardest", but we can also be certain that there is someone out there who will make the next 2001: A space odyssey.

There is literally no Indian Woody Allen. No present Indian director is making films remotely on the same level as Chris Nolan or Aronofsky, no screenwriter is writing as well as Charlie Kauffman. There is nothing written that matches 'Eternal sunshine of the spotless mind'.

Perhaps we have to admit - we are just not capable of it.

Update: While we are at it, can we get a Tina Fey and a Steven Moffat

No comments: