Categories
Film

European film fest comes to Mumbai

Starting tomorrow, Gallerie Max Mueller will host a nine-day screening of one film each from countries belonging to the EU.
by The Editors | editor@themetrognome.in

Gallerie Max Mueller, located at Kala Ghoda, will play host to the 18th European Union Film Festival, which will start tomorrow and conclude on April 28, 2013. The theme for this year’s fest is ‘Celebrating Women’ – a pertinent theme for the times we are living in.

If you’re a film buff, this is a great opportunity to catch films made in such European countries as Estonia (Graveyard Keeper’s Daughter), Bulgaria (Lora From Morning To Evening), Belgium (Altiplano) and Cyprus (Roads & Oranges). In all, 24 films will be screened over a nine-day period, in three time slots (see complete schedule below).

Entry to the event is free.

The 18th European Union Film Festival schedule is as follows:

April 20: 5 pm, After Five In The Forest Primeval (Germany)

April 21: 11 am, Back To Your Arms (Lithuania), 2.30 pm, Your Name is Justine (Luxembourg), 5 pm, My Personal Life (Romania)

April 22: 11 am, Little Girl Blue (Czech Republic), 2.30 pm, Applause (Denmark), 5 pm, The First Assignment (Italy)

April 23: 11 am, Fast Girls (United Kingdom), 2.30 pm, Graveyard Keeper’s Daughter (Estonia), 5 pm, Beyond (Sweden)

April 24: 11 am, My Name is Ki (Poland), 2.30 am, Athanasia (Greece), 5 pm, Water Lilies (France)

April 25: 11 am, Eccentricities Of A Blond Haired Girl (Portugal), 2.30 pm, The House (Slovakia), 5 pm, Take My Eyes (Spain)

April 26: 11 am, Roads & Oranges (Cyprus), 2.30 pm, Eszter’s Inheritance (Hungary), 5 pm, Lora From Morning To Evening (Bulgaria)

April 27: 11 am, The Dark House (Netherlands), 2.30 pm, Princess (Finland), 5 pm, Altiplano (Belgium)

April 28: 11 am, Installation of Love (Slovenia), 2.30 pm, 32 A (Ireland)

(Picture courtesy poppyjasperfilmfest.com)

 

Categories
Film

‘Our Dhak Dhak was a tribute to Madhuri’

Model, anchor Gaelyn Mendonca talks about her very first Hindi film, and why she wishes she was a part of ‘Barfi!’.
by The Editors | editor@themetrognome.in

She’s been a TV anchor and has even hosted ‘Pepsi Change The Game 2011’ as part of the Cricket World Cup coverage, apart from walking the ramp for every major designer at Lakme Fashion Week. And like most models and TV personalities, Gaelyn Mendonca recently made the switch to Hindi films – Gaelyn’s first film was the just-released Nautanki Saala, starring Ayushmann Khurrana and Kunal Roy Kapur.

In an interview with The Metrognome, Gaelyn talks about shooting for her first Hindi film, dancing to Madhuri Dixit’s legendary ‘Dhak Dhak’ song and shooting with ‘her buddy’ Ayushmann. Excerpts from the interview:

How did you get the opportunity to work on Nautanki Saala?
Gaelyn: The casting director of the film gave me a call and I gave a screen test for the film. Within two hours I was finalised for the role and I started with the workshops the very next day.

Please tell us about your role in the film.
Gaelyn: I play this girl named Chitra who is Ayushmann’s girfriend in the film. She is headstrong and practical. She loves him a lot but has a few issues with the way he deals with certain situations.

How did you prepare for this character?

Gaelyn: Loads of preparation went into this movie. Ayushmann, Kunal, Pooja and I went through an intensive 20-odd day workshop where we rehearsed our stuff and got fully familiarised with the script.

What was it like shooting for ‘Dhak dhak’? How long did this shoot take?
Gaelyn: Shooting ‘Dhak Dhak’ was one of the high points of my career. We shot the whole song in just one day! We tried to recreate the classic with a modern and funky twist to it.

Did you or the other girls feel any pressure about shooting for ‘Dhak Dhak’, considering that the original starred a legendary dancer like Madhuri Dixit?
Gaelyn: We never looked at it as a comparison to the classic, hence there was no pressure. It’s a tribute to Madhuri Dixit and I completely enjoyed myself, as dancing is my passion and I think we did justice to the brief that was given to us.

Do you feel that your stint on TV helped you in any way for this film?
Gaelyn: I certainly didn’t have any inhibitions or cold feet while shooting as I am used to being in front of the camera. So yes, in a way, my stint on TV helped.

A few TV actors/anchors have recently made a successful switch to films. Why do you think it is that most TV actors/anchors/VJs don’t do so well in films?
Gaelyn: I feel that at the end of it all, your performance in the film matters. If you are a good actor, you will go a long way in films, and Ayushmann is certainly a good example of that. He has proved that even though he has been an anchor for TV shows, he can act equally well, too.

Several new faces are being launched in practically every new film. How can one ensure that one remains in public memory long after the film is out of the theatres?
Gaelyn: The audience will remember only and only a great performance. And that is the only way to remain in people’s minds.

What was most memorable about shooting for Nautanki Saala?
Gaelyn: I loved that I was shooting with my buddy Ayushmann. All the scenes that I shot with him were fun and memorable. Also, the whole film making process was very overwhelming for me.

Of your co-stars, who did you enjoy shooting with?
Gaelyn: All of us as a team were brilliant together, but I had a great time hanging out with Kunal Roy Kapur.

Tell us a bit about your life off the cameras. What do you do to relax?
Gaelyn: I love to talk, so my friends become the unfortunate victims of my talking hobby in my free time, haha! I’m a homebody, and I like to unwind by watching TV or movies and eating. I love food!

Is there a film you wish you had been a part of?
Gaelyn: Barfi!, for sure. I loved every scene in that film.

Do you foresee a long career in films? Which aspect of Indian cinema are you most attracted to?
Gaelyn: Hopefully! I have my fingers crossed. What I love the most about our cinema is the song and dance.

What is one thing nobody knows about you?
Gaelyn: That I’m a trained ballroom dancer.

Is there something about the entertainment industry that you dislike?
Gaelyn: As of now, nothing really. I’m pretty happy with the industry.

(Pictures by Nimish Jain)

Categories
Film

Scripting right with the stalwarts

Nihit Bhave attended a screenwriters’ conference held in Mumbai, which had the biggies in Indian cinema share their writing secrets.

If you’re a writer, you know the ‘blank document’ syndrome, otherwise known as the blinking-cursor-is-judging-you syndrome. It is the awkward pause between opening a document and writing its first word (I would have said ‘pregnant’ pause, but a writer never feels more impotent than at that stage, so I shall refrain from adding salt to the wound). It was certainly a big relief to know that this impairment hasn’t spared the best of the best.

“As a writer, my biggest challenge is a blank document,” said Juhi Chaturvedi, who wrote the film Vicky Donor.

Thankfully, the recently concluded event, ‘The 3rd Indian Screenwriters Conference – Untold Stories: Screenwriting And Truths Of Our Times’ was able to throw up many remedial suggestions for such syndromes, and also went on to shed light on some of the most pressing issues today’s young writers are facing.

Unfortunately, due to my own ignorance and complacency, I missed the first day and apparently a brilliant key-note speech. But going by Day 2 and Day 3, I can safely say that Act I must have been totally worth it.

Day 2 was primarily about the upcoming talent and the hurdles they face taking their stories from paper to producer, and from producer to the parda of cinema. The first session of the day, ‘The charge of the new ‘write’ brigage’ included panelists like Juhi Chaturvedi (Vicky Donor), Sanjay K Patil (National Award winning Marathi film Jogwa), Reema Kagti (Talaash, ZNMD, Honeymoon Travels, etc), Habib Faisal (Ishaqzaade, Band Baaja Baaraat, Do Dooni Char) and Akshat Verma (Delhi Belly) and was moderated by Pubali Chaudhari (Rock On!!, Kai Po Che). The insights from this session were unparalleled. From a coy Habib Faisal to an outspoken Akshat Verma, and from a commercially successful Reema Kagti to a relatively underrated Sanjay Patil, the writers put forth their points about creativity, content, contemporary challenges and personal hurdles for writers.

“I’ve never set out to write earth-shattering cinema. In fact, I’ve never done anything original. I’ve done clichés with my own twists and gotten away with it!”, Habib Faisal  (in pic on left) said.

Speaking about the very unusual storyline for Honeymoon Travels, the film’s writer and director Reema Kagti said, “When I was writing Honeymoon Travels…it was the story of a pitch-perfect couple who then turns out to be a superhero couple, but since no Indian producer would let me make a feature film on it, I added six other short stories and juxtaposed this one with those!”

Other memorable quotes during this session came from Sanjay Patil, who spoke of his Marathi film Jogwa thus: My film Jogwa was lying with me for 12 years because throughout the film, both the heroine and the hero were in sarees.” Juhi added, “Nothing scares producers like a writer who can’t categorise his own work. I did not know whether Vicky Donor was a rom-com or a social message film, so I said ‘drama’ and that threw people off.”

The second session, and the most entertaining one at that, was ‘Is the old order cracking?’, where moderator Govind Nihalani (Ardha Satya, Dev, Thakshak) quizzed panelists Urmi Juvekar (Oye Lucky…, Shanghai), Sanjay Patil, Bejoy Nambiar (David, Shaitaan), Rakeysh Mehra (Rang De Basanti, Delhi 6) and Abbas Tyrewala (Jaane Tu…Ya Jaane Na, Maqbool, Main Hoon Na) about the age-old three-act structure of screenwriting, linear and non-linear narratives and challenges writers face with them.

Abbas Tyrewala (in pic on right) was a revelation in this session. His explanation of a ‘structure’ for writing films was incredibly clear. “Imagine this. A smoker feels the need to smoke because he ‘imagines’ that his mind and body are lacking something. After a cigarette, a sort of ‘high’ replenishes this missing element and the person reaches the same level of normalcy (that a non-smoker is always at!) Similarly, when a viewer walks into a theatre, they’re at a level of normalcy. Your story has to create a trough and a consecutive crest – a conflict and a resolution – but with the effect of a (cinematic) high that will ensure that the viewer exits the theatre at the same normalcy level, but with an enhanced experience.”

It was interesting to see the linear v/s non-linear narrative debate between these young writers and Javed Akhtar, who nonchalantly took them on from his seat in the audience.

After two more sessions on TV content and the (hypothetical) revolution that’s in store for us on the small screen, the evening was concluded by a ceremony awarding special FWA honors to Gulzar and Salim-Javed. The awards were presented by Hema Malini.

Day 3 forced writers to face their fears and talk about what they hated the most – numbers, contracts, statistics, constitutional acts, royalties, infringements, arbitrations, etc. So after a brief morning session, ‘The empty playroom: why such few children’s films?’, led by Gulzar and Nila Madhab Panda (I Am Kalam) amongst others, we proceeded to the dark side and shed light on the things that also matter.

This day also proved fruitful, as the people at Film Writers’ Association managed to string together lawyers, Producers’ Guild representatives and writers on the same stage to discuss minimum basic contracts for writers, copyright issues and the implication of the amendments to the Copyright Act 1957.

FWA also celebrated the work of the father of Indian TV, late Manohar Shyam Joshi, who created mega TV serials Hum Log and Buniyaad.

Just to be in the same room as Gulzar and Javed Akhtar, Rakeysh Mehra, Zoya Akhtar and Reema Kagti and listening to them talk about screenwriting, made attending the event worth it. There was surely a lot to learn and understand. Because unlike what we’d like to believe, screenwriting is much more complicated than putting pen to paper, words to a story and a climax to a beginning.

Nihit Bhave is a film journalist based in Mumbai. 

(Pictures courtesy piquenewsmagazine.com, firstpost.com, c2ctara.com))

Categories
Film

‘People can protest, but State cannot pander to them’

This, and other illuminating thoughts from film personalities, at a talk on 100 years of Indian cinema at St Xavier’s.
by Vrushali Lad | vrushali@themetrognome.in

Cinema, especially Indian cinema, is increasingly being derided for being the opium of the masses – something which it is praised for, in equal measure, but in the light of negative portrayals of women in films and the recent Delhi gangrape and murder, what we are choosing to watch is as important as what filmmakers are choosing to show us.

“It’s been only a little more than a century that we have understood our own evolution,” said independent filmmaker Anand Gandhi. “And it’s been just two or three decades that we’ve realised that culture mimics life. So when we talk of a century of Indian cinema, we have to understand that we have had very less time to really understand the question: does cinema imitate life?”

Anand was speaking at ‘Century of Cinema – the challenges in the next 25 years’, a talk held at St Xavier’s Multimedia Centre, recently. Joining him on the panel were film scriptwriter, filmmaker and member of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), Anjum Rajabali, and current Managing Director of the National Film Development Corporation (NFDC), Nina Gupta. Film theorist and researcher Narendra Panjwani chaired the panel.

Anjum replied to a question on why non-masala films were not marketed enough in India, or why they faced a distribution problem, by saying, “If a product has to connect, it does. Look at a film like Ardh Satya (starring Om Puri). It was a disturbing film that ended on a note of despair. It barely had conventional, masala elements in it. And yet it ran for 20 weeks at Novelty Cinema in 1983 – in those days, if a film ran at Novelty and Chandan (considered the massiest cinema halls of Mumbai) for a long while, it was considered a sure hit. Despite the likes of Salim-Javed and Manmohan Desai being immensely popular at the time, writer Vijay Tendulkar had still penned a script that connected.”

 

He also responded to a question on the portrayal of women in cinema. “Yes, the portrayal of women is a concern. We have to examine how popular culture portrays them, and does it have an effect on social psyche? There are no easy answers, but a collective interface is needed and we need to be conscious of why certain characters are shown a certain way. Filmmakers must be careful, because the audience may see things shown in films as endorsements of behaviour.

For instance, the portrayal of Sonakshi Sinha in Dabangg. Is her character’s portrayal a recommendation of that film for how women should behave? If not, why has she been portrayed that way? These are questions that filmmakers need to ask themselves,” he said.

To a question on whether good Indian cinema could possibly become mass, even as films like Rowdy Rathore and Dabangg ran to packed houses across the country, Nina (in pic on right) said, “Films combine an element of art and an element of commerce. The reason films are so expensive to make, is because a film requires a huge collaborative effort from several different people who must all be on the same page. With such a big canvas, the element of risk is greater. If a certain kind of cinema, parallel cinema for example, does not have an audience, it is not going to be made.”

 

Anand (in pic on left) interjected when an audience member said that mass entertainers only dwelled on escapism, “Cinema serves extremely complex functions. Films do mirror who we are, our relationships, the times we live in, but they also mirror our aspirations, dreams and memories. A film is an anthology of our responses. Films that mean something to me have reflected the environment I have been in, and my introspection. So I don’t think that idealism and realism can be mutually exclusive of each other in cinema.”

An audience member asked Anjum if he felt that cultural and political interference in films could be a factor to consider for the Censor Board in the coming years. He replied, “Look, certain statutory guidelines are very strongly put down while passing a film. The Constitution does guarantee freedom of expression, but with the rider that we should be sensitive to others.

Coming to the point of bans and protests, let me give you the example of the film Aarakshan (directed by Prakash Jha, and which Anjum wrote). Even before the film’s showing, a preemptive ban was imposed in three States, which the Supreme Court struck down. The film ran in theatres and there were no protests after release. But in the case of Vishwaroopam, a ban was imposed because the State chose to pander to protests. In my opinion, we should give groups the right to protest, but the State has no business pandering to these groups’ emotions, which are not in the guidelines of the law. If you play to the gallery, there will be several threats to the identity of artists.”

Categories
Film

Banning films is our new pastime

If we’re banning films anyway, can the State ban films that hurt our intelligence, several of which release this year?
by M@themetrognome.in

This has been some week for the film fraternity. SRK’s ‘victimised’ (or not) statement created quite a stir and a ban on Kamal Haasan’s Vishwaroopam proved how flat the fraternity falls in a face-off with the State. But Vishwaroopam is not the first film to go perilously close to getting the axe. Many films in the past have been ‘modified’ to suit the sensibilities of a few people who find some material in it ‘objectionable’. Some films like Anurag Kashyap’s Paanch are still in the cans due to this.

Even Hollywood is not spared. Remember how David Fincher gave the Indian Censor Board the finger when he was asked to remove three scenes from The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, that were apparently gore and sexual in nature? People who managed to get a bootlegged copy of the film and have seen it, will tell you how important the ‘unsuitable’ scenes are to the plot of the film. Similarly, The Da Vinci Code was banned in States like Goa, Andhra Pradesh and Nagaland because of its controversial plot revolving around the manifestos for Christianity.

In Malaysia, Mel Gibson’s The Passion of the Christ was banned only for Muslims, while the film was deemed suitable for Christian and Buddhist audiences. The film had the potential to create unrest amongst Muslims, thus the unusual ban. In retrospect, it seemed like a wise decision – it makes sense to not watch it if you don’t like it. But now, the Malaysian Government has failed to do the same for Vishwaroopam; the film was removed from theatres just a day after its release.

If banning films in the name of religion irks you, then this would definitely make you furious. In 1917, Birth Control, a film on family planning was banned in the United States of America in the interest of ‘morality, decency, public safety and welfare.’ The only reason one can let this pass is the year of the ban, when a not-so-modern America upheld a stereotypical image of the real woman and her moral values. Maybe a hundred years from now, even we will stop banning films for unjustifiable reasons.

But, can a ban really make the filmmaker bankrupt? The answer is ‘yes’ and ‘no’. Hollywood film that don’t get a release in a few foreign countries are seldom affected. They recover their costs on the home turf. But Indian movies banned in Indian states take a severe hit at the box office. Indian films are specifically made keeping the Indian (sometimes regional) audiences in mind. While some movies do extremely well with the Indian diaspora overseas, most of the moolah is generated at home. The ban on Vishwaroopam can cost Mr Haasan a whopping Rs 95 crore, by trade estimates.

Instead, there should be a ban on Non-Entertaining Films. These are movies that serve no purpose whatsoever, and require the viewer to keep his brains in the freezer before watching them. Like the No.1 series of Govinda – Aunty No.1, Anari No.1, Beti No.1 etc. These movies impair one’s judgement to the extent that one spends his hard-earned money to watch a grown-up man behave like a monkey. Maybe in the future, the Censor Board or the State can do the people a huge service by banning films that should have never be released.

Just to make the task easy for the Censor Board, here are a few upcoming films in 2013 that are very suitable for imposing a ban on:

Rangrezz. It stars Jackky Bhagnani. Censor Board, there’s your reason.

Zanjeer remake – The Classics should be sacrosanct and not allowed to be re-made, especially if Apoorva Lakhia is directing them.

Mere Dad Ki Maruti – Really? There is a big brand in the title. YRF has already recovered its production costs, so this one doesn’t need any box office collections.

Raanjhnaa – Sonam Kapoor cannot act. Period. Remember Mausam, with its riots, wars and 9/11? Sonam was worse than all these disasters combined.

These films (and more are coming up this year) are a bigger threat to the nation and hurt sentiments across religion. They should be banned purely on the grounds of offending the religion of Sanity. If the Censor Board fails to be the do-gooder, then maybe it’s time we take the matter in our own hands. Let’s impose our own ban on crappy films, by not watching them on the big screen and forcing distributors to take them down. It’s a thought fit for a utopian world, but hopefully we’ll get there soon.

M is a media professional with an eye on entertainment.

(Picture courtesy ndtv.com)

Categories
Film

‘Bollywood has not called yet’

His national identity fades in the face of the character he plays. Satya Bhabha portrays Saleem Sinai in ‘Midnight’s Children’.

British-born actor Satya Bhabha will be seen this Friday in the Deepa Mehta-directed Midnight’s Children, based on Salman Rushdie’s novel of the same name. Satya, of mixed Parsi-Jewish roots, grew up in London, graduated from Yale and is based in Los Angeles.

In an e-mail interview with Salil Jayakar, Satya talks about his ‘identity’ as an actor, the challenge of playing Saleem Sinai and working with Deepa Mehta…

Salil J: You were in Mumbai recently for a wedding. Were you recognised as the lead actor of Midnight’s Children?

Satya Bhabha: Ha ha… no. At that point nobody had even seen the film!

SJ: Do you identify yourself as British, British Indian or Indian? As an actor does it matter, both at a personal level and a professional one?

SB: I consider myself British and American, due to the fact that those are the countries I was born and have lived in for my entire life. However, my ‘ethnic’ or ‘genetic’ identity is a more complex one which involves both my father’s Parsi family and my mother’s Jewish roots. As an actor, my national identity fades easily in the face of the character. In the face of the industry, however, it can be more of a challenge…

SJ: You’ve worked with an ensemble cast with some of India’s finest actors. What was the experience like? 

SB: It was a total honour and dream to have had the opportunity to work with such an exemplary ensemble. Each actor brought such depth and detail to their role, and I learned an invaluable amount from watching and acting with them.

SJ: Given that you had little or no Indian experiences before you shot for the film, how easy or difficult was it to play Saleem? Had you read the novel before being offered the film? 

SB: I have had a long relationship with the book, Midnight’s Children, and also with India as an ancestral home, which I visited over the holidays. However, in order to fill my mind and memory with images from Saleem’s story, I travelled extensively in India and actively sought out many defining experiences. It was challenging, certainly, even after all the preparation, but luckily most of the time the work supported me and I was able to play freely with my co-stars without consciously thinking about performing the nationality of my character.

SJ: Some actors often claim to ‘live the life’ of the character they portray to bring an authenticity to their work. Was that an option you considered?    

SB: There certainly was an element of that, spending months living in my grandmother’s home in Bombay (which is not entirely dissimilar to Saleem’s home), and then travelling alone through India by buses and night-trains, landing in unfamiliar cities and having to find friends, food, and shelter… It certainly echoed Saleem’s path to an extent.

SJ: Working with Deepa Mehta… what was that like?

SB: Fantastic! Deepa is a strong and trusting guide who steers you in the right direction and holds your performance up to a very high emotional standard. She is fascinated by truthful human responses and goes to any lengths in order to get them. It was a real honour to work with her.

SJ: Does it bother you that Hollywood does not have starring roles for actors from the subcontinent? That you and most others with an Indian connection are mostly considered for an ethnic role?    

SB: It is challenging at times, but I do hope that there is a sea change in this regard and I very much hope that once films like Midnight’s Children and others spread to wider audiences, the universality of our stories will inspire less mono-cultural story telling…especially when it comes to casting.

SJ: Do you watch Indian/Hindi films? Has Bollywood called yet?

SB: I love Hindi cinema but, no, Bollywood has not called yet.

SJ: To audiences everywhere, what would you tell them to expect when they go to watch Midnight’s Children?

SB: I would tell them to allow the story to wash over them and that they may see far more similarities with their own lives in the film than they may have imagined.

Exit mobile version