CORPORATE POWER AND FUTURE OF SMALL CINEMA
Those who celebrated the demise of Soviet Union, crumbling of Berlin Wall and diminishing of left ideology since last 15 years or so, are perhaps confused and surprised to witness the fall of capitalism in the west, the demonstration in wall street, Madrid,Paris and London. The 95% are asking the 1% to return the wealth accumulated at their cost and downtrodden of the world at large. Is it pay back time?
The root of the issue is not related to the type of Government, but with the people, power and justice. People have thrown out the powerful who have for long ignored their cause.
We got a glimpse of the people's power in the recent Anna's agitation. What has emerged sufficiently is that the 'corporate' culture which is the offshoot of capitalism has cheated the society. In the name of efficiency, competition, market it has extended its reach to the various areas which it perceives would provide them with wealth- education, health, land, entertainment etc.
Since the adoption of 'corporate culture' by the film industry there has been some improvement in work culture. The 'scripts' are now worked in advance and are less frequently written on the sets, the payment to crew and technical staff has improved and some order in the 'unorganised' industry is in place. The release dates are announced in advance, sufficient marketing in carried out, a separate marketing Budget ( in some cases it matches the budget of the film itself) is earmarked. There is much 'management', something which the American/Hollywood cinema adopted much earlier. However; one cannot think of any movie in recent times which has been of significance and contributed to cinema; only efficient products of corporate culture, gloss, glitter, loud, slick without soul. In essence the 'corporate culture' has multiplied the greed of the people associated with cinema. From crude financiers to crass distributors the cinema has moved to sophisticated, cold and cunning corporates.
Along with the extreme commercialism has arrived the superior technology which has made mass release achievable in that the Big film makers who have borrowed the corporate ideology smother 'small films' by occupying all available 'screens' across the country. This is done through satellite ( U F O )technology and through prints which are mass produced. The result is that most mediocre films muster sufficient money during the first weekend itself and are declared 'hit' which in older times they would have not. Therefore, the 'corporates' and the Big film makers not only survive by producing bad films but edge out smaller films from the theatre in order to hog all screen space. The recent case is of 'Sahib Bivi aur Gangster' which was doing good business but was removed from all cinema halls of Mumbai to make room for 'Ra One'.
Therefore in real terms films such as 'Ra One', 'Tees mar Khan' would never be hits if the norms were what were followed for 'Sholay' or any of the films of that era. During that time a film had to run for months to muster returns and be declared a hit and so survived on 'merit' rather than 'marketing'. This trend of mopping up money in the first week itself has given rise to a particular brand of films which appear attractive but lack depth because much attention is applied to amass money quickly. These films are therefore much like 'one night stand' lacking emotion. A 'quickie' perhaps rather than a long 'love affair'. The quality of films such as 'bodyguard','Rascals', 'Ready', reflect 'quickie culture'. That is why we have not seen a 'Sangam','Waqt', 'Deewar', 'Guide' etc. The rural themes are dead, because the urban ceteres make money.
What is therefore required is protection of 'small' and 'medium' film makers from the onslaught of Big film makers and in this a 'regulatory' body is required to be set up consisting of film makers, distributors, exhibitors, journalists and Government representative. The release of films should be regulated to allow for space for small films and control of 'monopoly' of Big banners. In the name of market and competition smaller films should not be edged out. Unions of the film industry should also look into the matter and allow space for small film makers. There should therefore be'cut-off' number beyond which a new film should not be screened.
कोई टिप्पणी नहीं:
एक टिप्पणी भेजें