Categories
Watch

Watch: Films by Satyajit Ray

Today and tomorrow, two Ray classics will be screened at the Max Mueller Bhavan. Don’t miss these films for anything.
by The Editors | editor@themetrognome.in

This evening and tomorrow, spend your time wisely – revisit Satyajit Ray’s iconic classics Charulata and Mahanagar. Max Mueller Bhavan is screening both these films in the evening hours.  (See directions and timings below).

Charulata is based on a story by Rabindranath Tagore ‘Nastanirh’ (The broken nest), Satyajit Ray’s exquisite story of a woman’s artistic and romantic yearning takes place in late 19th century, pre-independence India, in the gracious home of a liberal-minded, workaholic newspaper editor and his lonely wife, Charulata (Madhabi Mukherjee). When her husband’s poet cousin (Soumitra Chatterjee) comes to stay with them, Charulata finds herself both creatively inspired and dangerously drawn to him. Charulata is a work of subtle textures, a delicate tale of a marriage in jeopardy and a woman taking the first steps toward establishing her own voice. The film was shown at the 1965 Berlin Film Festival and is considered one of Ray’s finest works.

MahanagarMahanagar (in pic on left) is based on Calcutta in the mid 1950s. The film opens with a vignette of a lower middle-class family. Based on a novel by Narbenda Nath Mitra, Satyajit Ray takes a rare foray into social satire with 1963’s The Big City. Anil Chaterjee stars as the typically subjugated wife of an Indian bank official. When the banker loses his job, he orders Anil to find work to make ends meet. The wife subsequently runs the household finances so brilliantly that soon she is in the driver’s seat, in direct opposition to long-established Indian matrimonial custom. This film was seen by some critics as a subtle plea for improving the status of Indian womanhood.

Both films will screen at Bibliothek, Max Mueller Bhavan, Kala Ghoda, at 6.30 pm. Charulata will screen on Friday, October 10 and Mahanagar on Saturday, October 11. Entry is free.

(Pictures courtesy www.livemint.com, ibnlive.com)

Categories
Cinema@100

The man behind the genius

Satyajit Ray, for all his fame, was seldom written about in detail. Biographies reveal bare details about the maverick filmmaker.
by Humra Quraishi

satyajit raySatyajit Ray remained an enigma all his life. Even today, not much is known about the extraordinary filmmaker, India’s first recipient of the Lifetime Achievement Academy Award in 1992, apart from the bare facts that he is survived by his wife Bijoya, son Sandip and grandson Sauradeep.

It’s a bit disappointing, not having reams to read about the man who redefined Indian cinema. His handsome looks, his rich booming voice, the classy sophistication that stood him apart from his contemporaries…there could have been much fodder for sensational scandal, for stories of unsavoury escapades away from the eyes of the world.

Instead, his name was never linked to any woman. He was a very happily married man, married to his first cousin and best friend, Bijoya. The only nugget of information to come out about their marriage was that Bijoya had pawned all her jewellery to help finance Pather Panchali, his first film.

But the relationship must have been sweet and a mutually beneficial one. Satyajit was barely two years old when he lost his father, and his mother took him to live with her brother. Bijoya was his uncle’s daughter, and the two became very good friends because she was of a musical bent of mind, and he was greatly attracted to music. Not many know that Bijoya enjoyed a brief spell in the Hindi film industry before she quit acting for marriage to Satyajit.

Her presence was invaluable to her husband. In his biography (by Marie Seton), Satyajit says, “She is always the first person to read my scripts. Her comments are often pertinent and sometimes, ruthless. She always has very instinctive, feminine reactions to certain things, which I find very useful. And I almost always incorporate her suggestions.”

What did Bijoya (in pic on right) feel about her husband, the genius Satyajit Ray? In her biography (penned by Andrew Robinson), she says, “What I admire about Manik (as Ray was called) is his Bijoya Raysimplicity, his honesty, his generosity, his kindness, and above all, his ability to mix with people from all walks of life. He is at home with everybody. This is the hallmark of all great men.”

Another biography on Ray, The World of Satyajit Ray, written by veteran journalist Bidyut Sarkar, was to be released on April 24 in Calcutta, but Ray’s death overtook the release by a few hours. Sarkar spoke of Ray and his association with him thus: “In 1958, when I was in New York, I got the news that Ray was planning to visit New York on the occasion of the release of Pather Panchali. I wrote to him, inviting him to stay with me. I could feel that as a man of domestic habits, he would not be comfortable in impersonal hotels, and he wrote back accepting my offer.

“Whilst he was there, I’d see him sitting and looking at the gorgeous view of Central Park facing his room and the apartment, but it seemed as though the Park seemed to magically vanish from his horizon when he would look out and conjure up in sketches the sequences and settings of his next film set in Bengal…”

Sarkar writes on the lesser-known Ray thus: “Only two women appeared to have influenced him – his mother and his wife. His mother, a remarkable woman who was widowed early in life, played a key role in Ray’s growth. Bijoya, his wife, took over the role so far as Ray’s artistic development was concerned.”

Even in his leading ladies, Ray never looked for dolled-up glamour, but for intelligent beauty. Madhabi Mukherjee, Sharmila Tagore, and in his last three films, Mamata Shankar, best fitted this description. Ray’s biographer, Andrew Robinson, throws more light on the pains Ray took to project Madhabi Mukherjee (in pic on left) as aesthetically as possible in Charulata. “Madhabi charulatahad bad teeth as she was addicted to eating paan, just like the character Charulata, which destroys the gums and stains the teeth black,” Ray said. “I had to photograph her very carefully so as to not show that side of her.”

“The lower set of teeth was bad. I had to put the camera at a low angle, so that even when she spoke, the lower set of teeth wouldn’t show. I suggested taking out her teeth, but her mother objected, it was too early for that. But I knew the camera could manage it.”

Ray was also a teetotaler. Sarkar writes, “Ray was a man of very simple habits…only once I was put in a situation of embarrassment with him. I had written a cover story on Ray for the Gentleman magazine. In Bombay, the stereotypical editorial picture of a cosmopolitan man was suave and sophisticated, and it led to Ray’s identification in the introduction of my article as ‘a connoisseur of fine food and wine’. He said I’d made a closet drinker out of him. Fortunately, Gentleman magazine, in the next issue, published his rejoinder that ‘his eating and drinking habits probably made him only half a gentleman, but there it was.’”

Not many also know that Satyajit Ray could have been the President of India, according to the strategy of the Opposition parties and if he had agreed, or that he could have easily been in the Rajya Sabha if he had accepted Prime Minister Indira Gandhi’s invitation. “But he was not the man to be led into temptations or compromises of any kind,” said Sarkar.

 

(Pictures courtesy paragraphpost.blogspot.com, satyajitrayworld.com, raylifeandwork.blogspot.com, 7-art.blogspot.com, lalitkumar.in, www.gonemovies.com, www.desitorrents.com)

Categories
M

Will Bollywood ever get a Bond?

Or at least a super-successful series of spy movies? We’re not asking for much, if you really think about it.

by M | M@themetrognome.in

With James Bond’s 23rd instalment around the corner (releasing next week), I started to think – will Bollywood ever get its own series of good spy movies? We are the second largest film industry in the world, but we are still light years away from Hollywood in terms of owning a super-successful franchise that the world will watch.

I really don’t get why we haven’t been able to do it yet. We obviously have the talent – no, I am not counting Salman Khan or KJo – and we have reasonably good actors and directors. So why aren’t we there yet?

The last attempt at making a spy thriller was Agent Vinod. It was nowhere close to the savoir-faire and panache that even the less-thrilling Bond movies carry. Saif Ali Khan as an undercover agent was the worst casting choice made in the history of cinema. I know many who liked the young baddie more in the film.

A series of spy films might be too much to ask for at this point, but a few good ones that bring us to the edge of our seats would suffice. So, what does it take to make a spy thriller? Let’s break it down.

The James Bond series can be primarily credited to its creator, writer Ian Fleming. The compelling stories were adapted into gripping screenplays that captivated the audience. Fleming’s style of writing and a set of characters so well-defined and well-embedded  in the audiences’ minds, ensured that plotlines outside of the novels he wrote are still being explored – and Skyfall is a case in point. This simply means that James Bond is not about to holster the gun any time soon. Thank God for small mercies.

Lack of compelling stories keeps Bollywood from making good movies. Not. Recent whatever-you-call-it Student Of The Year proves this amply. We’ve already got great Indian spy stories that we have not tapped into – consider the magnificent detective series Feluda written by Satyajit Ray. The series of short novels and stories is a fascinating combination of Sherlock Holmes-style detection and Bond-like execution, and has all the ingredients for a Bollywood masala film – suspense, drama and action. There are a couple of films and telefilms based on detective Feluda, but these hardly translated into commercial success. These stories are denied of the distinction that they deserve and someone should re-visit them at the soonest.

Plus, the Bond films have the most admirable cast. All of the Bonds thus far –  Sean Connery, Pierce Brosnan, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton and now Daniel Craig – have had one enduring quality each, and some were dreamier than others. M and Q, with Judi Dench playing the former and Desmond Llewelyn as the latter, have done a splendid job in each film. And what can be said about the Bond girls? With each film, they are just making temperatures soar higher. Even the bad guys are in a league of their own.

Okay, so Bollywood doesn’t have too many options for a James Bond-inspired character, but I would still think Akshay Kumar is worthy of a chance. And we have stacks of bombshells to play his lady, or we can always import them.

Is it the money that keeps us from replicating a successful formula? I don’t think so. Hindi film-makers are never shy of blatantly copying foreign films, even if it means bringing in the crew of The Matrix or The Terminator to reproduce the exact same scenes.  Ra One and Robot established that there is no scarcity of money in Bollywood. Bollywood films may seldom have a storyline, but exotic locations are exploited only for songs and dances and not on any pathbreaking scenes. Obviously, budget is not an issue for us.

I think the real problem is direction. I cannot remember the last Bollywood film that showcased the work of an outstanding director. The current crop of directors who film sequels largely comprises failed actors (Pooja Bhatt, who directed Jism 2) or directors who refuse to quit directing (Vikram Bhatt for everything he’s ever made). We can only come up with a Farhan Akhtar who would take up the challenge of directing a spy thriller and do a decent job of it.

Dear Bollywood, man up and get cracking. Give us meaty spies, let our adrenaline flow, entertain us, and in the bargain, get acclaimed for making good cinema. Of course you’ll make money, dummy!

 

Exit mobile version