Vishal Bhardwaj, who recently made news by portraying Kashmir problem in a new light in Haider, has said that a filmmaker need not be burdened with the responsibility of being meaningful.
Participating in a discussion on “Cinema as a tool for social change” at the recently concluded NFDC’s Film Bazaar at Panaji, Bhardwaj said, “What is meaningful for me may be meaningless for you. Of course, one needs to be socially aware that films are a reflection of society but a society is made of individuals and one man’s perspective can be different from other. If we keep on curbing thought in the name of mass sensibility no new point of view will ever emerge,” said Bhardwaj.
Taking a jibe at the political class, Bhardwaj said everybody knows that if you buy a house one has to pay up to 40 per cent as black money. “Has any Finance Minister taken note of this parallel economy? But they come down heavily on one line here, one song there in a film.”
Taking the discussion forward, Jaideep Sahni, writer of films like Khosla Ka Ghosla , Company and Chak De India, gave his version of Gulzar’s Maachis .
“It brought a new perspective to Punjab insurgency, which many might be aware of, but was not in the public domain.
Or take the example of Chak De India . Many might have thought why the men’s Indian cricket team finds space on the front page even after defeat, while the girls hockey team struggles to find coverage even when it brings laurels but the film gave it a voice.”
Sahni stressed that he is not saying that the filmmaker was the last word. “It is like a youngster trying to put his point across in the company of family’s elders. Even if they don’t like it, he tries to put it across smartly in different ways. The right word is social engagement. Society is our family where different points of view should be accepted,” stressed the writer of Shuddh Desi Romance , which tackled live in relationship out of metros.
Bhardwaj said films become easy targets of political outfits to gain publicity. “ Kaminey was about to be banned after getting a censor certificate because in ‘Dhan te naan’ song the word teli was used. Suddenly, I was told the community has been hurt and ultimately I had to change the word in all the prints.”
“And what about the social responsibility of Khap Panchayats and outfits like Sri Ram Sene,” Sahni chipped in. He said in India a lot of self censorship is in place as far as tackling political issues are concerned. “You can’t make a nuanced film on caste because you know you will be clamped down even at the shooting stage.”
He said television requires much more structured censorship than cinema. “But that requires lot of brain storming which many don’t want to do.” Bhardwaj said because of television censorship, lot of mature subjects have to be tweaked at the scripting stage because satellite rights play a crucial role in financing. “So we can’t have a film for the adults without compromising on the budget.”
Writer Urmi Juvekar pointed towards the commodification of woman. “Here Fire gets threats while ‘Sheila Ki Jawaani’ slips through. Doesn’t it reflect that even our authorities concede to the mass taste implying society has no problem in seeing women as objects.” Juvekar said we should stay away from labels.
“When a filmmaker or writer says his basic parameter while touching a so-called controversial subject does no harm, it upsets me. For it is a label in itself.”
