Filmmaker S.P. Jhananathan belongs to that rare breed of filmmakers who thinks that cinema must positively be used for the common good. All of his films, barring his national award-winning debut romance flick, Iyarkai , have dealt with pressing global issues such as big pharma companies exploiting the poor ( E ) and how the West wants to stall the progress of the third world ( Peraanmai ).
When he chose to name his May 15 release after a Tamil slur, Purampokku , the intention was not to shock or scandalise the audience. He clarifies, “In Tamil, the word was used to denote useful land on which the administration can build necessary infrastructure needed for the people. Purampokku lands are those that are held in common.”
The multi-starrer, featuring actors Arya, Vijay Sethupathy, Shaam and Karthika Nair, is about Balusamy, a revolutionary on death row, who is trying to escape from jail before he is sent to the gallows.
“He belongs to the people and works for the common good. That’s why the film is called Purampokku Engira Podhuvudamai . There are two other characters in the film countering Balusamy (played by Arya). One is the police officer named Macaualay, played by Shaam; he believes that the rule of law must be dispassionately applied to the society. Then there is Yemalingam, a hangman played by Vijay Sethupathy,” says Jhananathan.
Is the film a pamphlet against death penalty? “The film doesn’t even go into that debate. It explores whether Balusamy’s actions are morally deserving of the death penalty,” he says. He further adds, “Shaheed Bhagat Singh was adjudged a traitor under the law. But today, we call him a great patriot even though we still have the same laws. The film explores this contradiction of how time changes a traitor into a patriot.”
When asked how he managed to strike a balance between being fair to the subject he was exploring while ensuring that all three actors had equal screen space, Jhananathan says, “It wasn’t difficult at all. When you honestly try and explore a subject from different perspectives, you tend to offer fair perspectives from every side.”
He is unapologetic about using cinema as a political tool. Even in his last film, Peranmai , he included a 3-minute sequence, where the protagonist, a forest ranger from the Scheduled Tribe community, teaches his students about the basics of political economy, the role of money and the emergence of ‘surplus profits’. In Purampokku , there is apparently a scene where Karthika Nair explains the impact of global economy.
This has led his critics to make two persistent criticisms: one, that stuffing of politics into the narrative is old-fashioned and passé, and two, it makes his films too dense and verbose, a contradiction to the very nature of cinema.
“I have been told this before. My own crew members have told me that too much politics is unwarranted. But how can my approach and message be deemed outdated when my movies have done well? Haven’t the audience embraced my films?” he asks.
Can this strategy be employed every time, even when he does, say, a love story? “Why not? If I make a love story, the couple will still be in love, but the problems they face and the conversations they have will be completely different,” he says.
Jhananathan hints that the political perspective in his films is more important than the film itself.
If that is the case, would it not be better for him to pursue a career as a documentary or an indie filmmaker, where he wouldn’t be pulled back by trappings of commercial cinema? “The so-called ‘art’ or experimental films are not watched by the masses. I don’t want to dedicate myself to the art of cinema. Even while I make films for profit, I want to project messages that I think is necessary for a healthy society.”
