What is this urge which brings back Actors from movie to theater? A performing Art which is more time consuming and less paying. Al Pachino does it often and so do many western stars. In India we have our Naseeruddin Shah who does theater regularly and only reluctantly does cinema. Apart from the easy pace of theater; a place where one can schedule the dates according to one's requirement there are other considerations as well. The foremost being the urge to express. Remember! that theater is an actor's medium where as cinema is director's. On stage the actor; despite physical restrictions gets larger freedom to perform wherin he seeks compensation for the restrictions cinema imposes on him -- primarily creative.It is to say that this is my territory and i will perform here the way i want to unhindered by the director and technology. It is also in a way preparatory /training ground for future progression in cinema .
Is cinema sought for fame and money and theater for inner sustenance? is cinema more material and consumeristic ( made in bulk ) and theater more spiritual ?
unfortunately despite the recording and retaining facilities the joy of theater is direct. it therefore does not have longivity ( i only hear the great performance of Balraj sahni as Mirja galib in 'akhri shaam ' somewhere in forties ) which cinema has.But; that is what gives it a special identity. unlike cinema it has to be created performance after performance and hence is more dynamic. There are numerous interpretations of Hamlet and Merchant of venice. Theater gives longivity to the writer like a piece of music.
Is theater therefore a superior form of expression and Art?
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें