MUSIC SUPERIOR TO CINEMA AS ART FORM --- A CASE OF SELF CENTERED KHAN

MUSIC HIGHER ART FORM THAN CINEMA --- A CASE OF SELF CENTERED KHAN


You all are ‘idiots’ ! Does this what Aamir Khan think? I was shocked (but not surprised) after learning the likely reason for Aamir’s resignation from the copyright committee appointed by the HRD minister Shri Kapil Sibal to revise the 1953 copy right’s Act in order to entitle royalty to song makers – music director, lyricist and the play back singer. It seems that he wanted the actors as well to be granted royalty for the song , his argument was that the actors make the song popular and therefore have a certain right on the film. Well, by that logic if actors make the film popular then they should be entitled for royalty of the film too , but that is not the law; the royalty of the film goes to the producer who is the proprietor of the product.
How wrong and warped his thinking is indeed. Or does he want to be seen as the leader of the actors? Don’t the actors get credit enough by merely enacting the song or their appetite for free publicity has not been satiated . Probably Mr Aamir Khan is unaware that the mere enactment of song does not make it popular ,it is the substance behind that façade created by imagination and toil of song makers that makes a song hit or miss.
A little history of Indian cinema should be appropriate in order to recall the contribution of song and music in our films . During the late thirties and early forties prior to the advent of talkies a live orchestra used to play with the movie and there were about thirty to forty song on an average in a film. Our cinema has evolved from our folk music tradition and from such a background and therefore music remains central to the cinema. In fact prior to the arrival of stalwarts such as Raj Kapoor, Guru Dutt,Vijay Anand, Raj Khosla the music was superior to the very film for which it was made, a cursory look at the poor quality of song picturization will confirm this. I am still disappointed to see many melodious old songs so unimaginatively picturised that no memory other than that of the song is retained there was no movement or action whilst the songs were played.The film posters had the names of the music directors boldly displayed in order to attract audience --- Naushad, O P Nayyar, Shankar-Jaikishen and S D Burman were stars of that time as big as any actors. By according credit to actors Aamir is discrediting the value and contribution of music makers. He may not remember that during early days of cinema , after the movie would end and we would reluctantly leave the cinema hall thereafter the first act outside would be to buy the song book containing the lyrics of the songs. On most occasions the song would remind us of the heroine and not vice-versa.
Aamir’s tendency to exercise complete control over the project he undertakes is well known . He is known to be obsessively possessive about the work he undertakes . What he does not understand is that the filmmaking and song making is a collective creation. Once the song has been created the actors are but mere masquerades, an outer shell of the body whose soul is the combined effort of the three creators—lyricist, music director and the singer. A true Sangam of The Ganga, Yamuna and the elusive Sarasvati. If at all we propose to give credit to some person in addition it could be the Director , because Cinema is essentially the Director’s medium not the actors . Actors are glamorous props.
Aamir’s stance displays test of his newly acquired power with successive success of his films – Tare Zameen Par, Gazni and the Three Idiots. His posturing is not only self centred but is bordering on fascism. Though he has propagated innovative education and compassion in his recent films he himself would require some formal lessons on democratic principles and collective effort.
To the members of the committee it is a plea that they should work to honour our great music makers and provide economic sustenance to the generations to come by enacting laws giving due credit which was not given in the past.
Songs of cinema once played on screen escape the captivity and acquire life and identity of their own in the memory of song lovers, this memory is independent of the film the director and the actors. It remains like a mini film engraved in the hearts of those who know that music is a higher Art form than Cinema.

MY NAME IS KHAN AND I AM HUMAN

MY NAME IS KHAN AND I AM HUMAN !



I had expected ‘ My Name is Khan’ to be yet another confusing representation of the terrorists problem post September 11 2001. Karan’s earlier film ‘Kurban’ had failed to attract audience attention being too serious terrorist matter( people prefer feel good cinema).The scepticism is understandable as the issue is so widely pervasive and deep rooted at this point in human history that no cinematic solution is satisfying. The subject is also topical as it occurs world wide with regularity; it is too hot yet to handle .
However, I was mistaken; the publicity and opposition aside it shows Karan in new form. Johar has indeed reinvented himself and has cast himself in a new mould. His earlier love ‘quadrangle’—‘ Kabhi Alvida Na kehna’ was a disappointment and was rejected by the audience for not conforming to general Indian sensibility; similar such bold attempts by his Guru ( Yash Chopra) had failed in ‘Silsila’ and ‘Lamhe’ despite being better films. Therefore I had considered him only fit to narrate teenage love tales; which was his maiden best attempt.
With ‘Khan’ it seems that he has redeemed himself, he has been successful in presenting an effective screenplay and maintained the ‘emotional bubble’ with surprising consistency. From the credits it appears that some consultation on script writing was done which has paid dividends. In fact more film makers should do so as it remains singularly neglected area; it is a better investment than spending on location and special effects!
It was not an easy attempt for primarily it is a ‘didactic’ cinema. Didactics dilutes cinematic beauty . Few can convey in commercial cinema the message boldly without compromising the cinematic flow and popular appeal. Mehbbob Khan ( Mother India. Amar),Raj Kapoor ( Awaara, Shri 420, Jis desh men ganga behti hai), Manoj Kumar ( Upkaar and Purab Pachim) are few successful directors but many failed. Karan Johar has been successful in conveying a simple message effectively. The audience weeps and smiles and nods approving the stance taken by him . The ‘mantra’ applied here is of keeping the theme simple--- there are only good people and bad people and their religion is of no consequence. The story is related through a character who suffers from ‘Asperger’s’ syndrome. It seems ironical that to convey to supposedly normal public we need assistance of a character who is autistic as in these absurd times normal characterization will fail to convey the crisis of situation and the anguish and helplessness of those who are affected. Moreover the standard means adopted to tide over the situation have failed and therefore a new perspective is required to examine the issues. The journey of ‘autistic’ Khan after he is asked by his wife to leave her to seek approval of his innocence from the President of USA is also the path of realization by all of us that we need to reconsider the cause of our hatred and pause a while to think.
The screenplay is the clinching factor in the film , the test is that the audience is not aware of the sermon on communal principles being given . They get engrossed in the story, the trials and tribulations of Rizvan --- his mother instructing him on the foundation of judging good and bad humans by drawing in his note book; being taken by her to Wadia’s house to be taught rather than to a madarsa, Rizvan exhibiting his innovative skills of pumping out water from the premises of his teacher by using bicycle as pumping mechanism are all novel scenarios on which the film stands. The peculiarity
Of this film is that the story may seem predictable the screenplay is not. The journey of Rizvan to America, he joining his brother’s cosmetic business, his meeting Mandira( Kajol) their courtship and his insistence to her to marry him are all portrayed refreshingly. Karan tries hard not to use his usual song and dance routine and so the music is essentially sufi and in background. The period of crisis where Khan is shown repeating his muslim prayer among fellow mourners of sep 11 tragedy and the rejection of his presence by them is well crafted, the plot may have dragged to its end but it was necessary for the love story to be completed. His arrest on being suspected and his interaction with the authorities wherein he faces his humiliation and torture boldly, his donating 500 dollars for the victims of famine when he is denied a paid dinner with the president owing to his identity add newness to the narration.
As I am completing this review the reports on internet indicate that after the initial surge for the film the response has receded and the halls have registered 60% fall. It is indeed sad for this was also a test of our tolerance and secular credentials as a community. Maybe it is too early for the final verdict as the movie will make a place in the minds and hearts of the people .

WILL SHAHRUKH RISE OR RETREAT ?

WILL SHAHRUKH RISE OR RETREAT ?



The release of ‘ My Name is Khan’ has been affected by the agitation of Shiv Sena , it is indeed a partial victory for the party as they have been once again successful in demonstrating their brute might on the city. However in my estimate the last round ( reel) is yet to be played. This morning Shahrukh’s statement appeared in news ,it said “ My stardom is transient.( But) my integrity is non-negotiable—my being Indian unquestionable—what happens with the release of the film, is the film’s fate”.The words convey maturity and sincerity of high order. What is to be seen in days to come is how Shahrukh converts the extended sympathy, fondness and of course respect that he has earned is converted into far reaching benefits to him and society. The film will definitely benefit commercially all over the world ( it’s a global release) and losses of Mumbai will be compensated by the surge of solidarity for his film to which many non movie goers will also contribute. Shahrukh will be seen as the sane face in the ongoing conflict and crisis arising out of terrorism and its subversion by the west and America .In my assessment he has the potential, but will he take the plunge to moderate the situation. In India too Congress will provide him with full freedom and platform to take on the communal parties. He may even become the symbol of Hindu – Muslim, unity and would overshadow Rahul Gandhi ( or am I imagining too far).
The choice is for Shahrukh to make, will he retreat to films and find shelter in the cosiness of his stardom or move forward to to more murkier arena of politics as history offers few such opportunity.

Many years ago a lawyer of Indian origin was thrown out of a train in South Africa for being dark skinned. He resolved to restore dignity of his slave nation and was successful.

As I file my report the news of multiplexes standing upto the threat and showing the movie has started appearing. The shows are full they say. well! The show must go on !. But will Shahrukh keep his tryst with destiny which beckons him expectantly?