 |
Anupama Chopra is a film critic and author. She tweets @anupamachopra EMAIL AUTHOR |
It’s that time of the year again. A Salman Khan movie has been released and we are playing out a familiar ritual. The film is a blockbuster— Bodyguard has had the highest grossing first week in the history of Indian cinema. But critics have panned it, earning the predictable battering from legions of Salman fans. My Twitter timeline is filled with abuses—from ‘sadistic’ and ‘witch’ to unprintable epithets (and this when I didn’t even review the film; I just wrote a column positing Salman as Bollywood’s last rockstar).
In a post-release interview, Salman said that the opinion of critics hardly mattered since it was four people in a population of one billion. He said: “The aam janta goes to see a film jo unke mood ko theek kar sake. People don’t have the time or patience for heavy-duty stuff. They come expecting to have fun, the way they would if they went to a nightclub.”
Is going to a movie the same as going to a nightclub? There are many schools of thought on the function of cinema. Bollywood’s biggest names insist that escapism and entertainment are the primary ones. In a recent conversation, Farah Khan said to me that films must entertain. “If I want preachy-chatty, I’ll read a book or I’ll go for a lecture.” I remember interviewing Shah Rukh Khan just before the release of Om Shanti Om. I asked him if he aspired to success or greatness. He replied that they were interchangeable. He said: “I think films are meant to be entertaining, and a part of the craft is to be able to entertain. If you can’t entertain, then your craft can go lay an egg, it doesn’t make a difference... the bottom line is entertainment.”
But some (a minority perhaps) hold a different view. Sean Penn, arguably one of the finest actors working today, once said, “People very happily and proudly say there’s room for entertainment, strictly for its own sake. I disagree with that. I think if you want entertainment, you get a couple of hookers and an eight ball. Film is too powerful a medium to be just that. There’s got to be some kind of journey and risk taken, so that it’s exciting not only for the audience but also for the participants.”
I agree with both. I want movies that transport and enlighten and seduce. I want films that give me a sensory head-rush, that force me to think or don’t allow me to breathe. I want excitement and insight and a window into new worlds. And I’m all for escapism. As American critic Charles Taylor wrote: ‘If it’s reality you want, what are you doing at the movies?’ But I wonder, is lazy, shoddy cinema being inflicted upon us in the guise of entertainment?
In a wonderful essay called ‘In Defense of the Slow and the Boring,’ The New York Times critic AO Scott writes that the insistence on entertainment actually ‘masks another agenda, which is a defense of the corporate status quo’. Which means that the Powers That Be—studios, filmmakers, marketing mavens, number crunchers—don’t want to raise the bar higher. Because it’s much easier to make Pirates of the Caribbean Part 4 or Double Dhamaal or the new Anees Bazmee film with the justification that the public just wants entertainment.
Actually, even Ingmar Bergman’s commandments on filmmaking include: ‘Thou shalt be entertaining at all times’ (the other two are: ‘Thou shalt obey thy artistic conscience at all times’ and ‘Thou shalt make each film as if it were thy last’). The key here, I think, is how you define entertainment. For me, going to a movie is much, much more invested than going to a nightclub. After all, if you only expect industrial-strength mediocrity, Bollywood is happy to comply.
OLDER COMMENTS FIRST
15 COMMENTS
Permalink
Salman Khan has the worst fans. They will abuse you for simply not falling at the feet of this mediocre actor. Ready was terrible, Bodyguard made me want to punch myself and Dabaang was average in all areas except for musically. They are so delusional and rabid it's scary. Salman has always been more of a character than an actor. You go and watch a Salman movie to watch Salman not to see a good movie.
This is to Salman fans: Take a chill pill not everyone is going to like Salman and that's okay.
http://bollywoodsecrets.tumblr.com/
Permalink
I agree. there was a time when escapist cinema wasnt just a warrant to make bad cinema. But nowadays, everybad film is being made in the garb of just that they dont want heavy duty stuff.
I am also one of those who will anyday prefer a hum tum or a namastey london over say a shaitan or an aamir. But thats because they were highyl entertaining.
Filmmakers like Sajid Khan, Anees BAzmee and akshay kumar have brought the level so low that even films like bodyguard are a hit. I am sure this wouldnt have been the case say 5 years back. Only good films were hit then.
Permalink
why r u so obsessed with salman khan? why r u bothering for his movies? keep silent. Its better for you and his fans as u can not digest his success.
Permalink
I think there needs to be a balance of both. Who says that we can't be entertained and also pass on a message. We see reality everywhere and sometimes people just want to escape. If I have had a bad day I would rather prefer a bodyguard or mere brother ki dulhan than dhobi ghat. The problem it has now become a trend that the film that says heavy duty stuff about life are liked by critics but the film that is just light and some stupid love story and family drama is written of.
Permalink
hmmm its true its very much easier makin a non sense movie and mask it in d name of entertainment ..... i also think bottom line of movies are that they should entertain
but still dey shud hav a message no matter what ppl deny dey still learn frm movies.... as a matter of fact u cn learn frm nething u want...... look at 3 idiots, rang de basanti, chak de , taare zameen par tell me guys after watchin dose u dint learn nething tell me if dose movies dint had a message ???
Permalink
Didn't belive in escapist tag on films.For me movie is much above that.Movie should be touching.Very difficult to describe a good movie.But defnitely the movie & characters should stay in our mind ,the craft the director used,the risks director took ,stays in your mind the for a long time ,then defintely i don't mind spending those precious bucks in a cozy multiplex.Ppl like farah khan or a sajid khan doesn't understand the craft and pain the ppl put in making a good movie.It's worth failing making a good movie rather than making an escapist movie suiting a happening star.Do they have gut's to make film with out a matnee star.For them manmohan desai is an excuse to make films which may fare well commercially .Sad thing is that bf4 the ppl realises this is a badfilm the makers get their money,thanks to multiplex and satellite rights
Salman is doing the same thing again and again.Somewhere fatigue factor will set in& they move to next star .Lokk what happened to akshay kumar.
Permalink
Who defines good or bad? What bores us might transport and seduce another. And what seduces us might just go over their heads. Appreciation of art matures with other criteria - education, exposure and introspection. It is akin to Maslow's hierarchy. If too many people are still watching "bad" movies, it is only because, they have still not been able to afford better experience in life. Or haven't suitably matured yet. We can't blame them.
Permalink
Who defines good and bad? What bores us "intellectuals" might transport and seduce the others. And what enlightens us might go over their heads. Film appreciation is something that matures with time - directly correlating with other factors such as exposure, introspection and out-of-the-box experience. It is akin to Maslow's hierarchy. Not everyone's thinking level is the same. It is not about escapism or entertainment. It is about fulfilling needs. All of us are fulfilling some need by watching movies. And the majority's needs will dictate what genre the majority of movies coming out will be on. The 'deep-thinking' kinds only have to realize that they constitute a small percentage. Unfortunately.
Permalink
your comment : I want movies that transport and enlighten and seduce. I want films that give me a sensory head-rush, that force me to think or don’t allow me to breathe.
if you want enlightenment & seduction : go to swami nityanand.
Permalink
Your comments are interesting and I appreciate your take/definition on what entertainment is or should be. But that is ONE perspective. There are gazillion people out there who would rather go to a nightclub rather than a book club meeting. Respect that perspective too. You keep targeting Salman when legends like Amitabh Bacchan have repeated themselves in movies and "entertained" ( Mr Angry Young Man). What irks you so much about Salman that makes you repeatedly target his acting skills, dredge out his personal life, rubbish his movies time and time again. He may not be India's finest actor but he can certainly act pretty well and connect with billions. So what's your point? That we "dumb" Indian movie goers change our views on what entertainment is/should be? Your snobbishness knows no bounds Ms. Chopra. Live and let live.
Permalink
As usual, the so called critic anupama chopra has criticized SALMAN BHAI. I dont know who gave her the right to say anything about BHAI when she herself have not achieved anything in life. She should see her face in the mirror first and then write anything against BHAI. The worst thing is that she is citing few critics to endorse her opinion. Anupama needs a psychiatrist to get out of the obsession of criticizing BHAI. Her worthless comments are not going to change an inch of our opinion for BHAI.
SALMAN BHAI - WE LOVE YOU.
Permalink
Ah, the high priestess of movie critiques does it again. Trash Salman Khan and his genre of movies. While I totally respect your orgasmic views on what works for you vis-a-vis entertainment, I'd like to add that it is ONE perspective and you are entitled to it. Just like millions of others in our country that disagree with you and would rather go to a nightclub rather than a book-club when they go see movies. Are they dumber than you are Mrs. Chopra? Are they lesser human beings? Are they intellectually challenged? What are you really trying to say? That Salman's movies are replete with "industrial strength mediocrity"? Oh, but Amitabh's "angry young man" pics were not? They were a hit time and time and again with the audiences were they not? Was watching a "Mr. Natwarlal" a giddy intellectual experience for you that seduced your grey cells? Or did a "Namak Halaal" leave you breathless with the intellectual head rush it gave you? Yet, Mr. Bacchan is a legend is he not because he connected year after year with Indian audiences. How is Salman different? Have the decency to acknowledge your bias against this actor in your columns and quit trying to be objective about him because you are not. You are a snob. Quit quoting people left right and center to make your points. You are entitled to your views on entertainment as are the millions of people in this country who go to see movies to uplift their spirits. They may not be seeking intellectual orgasms like you are; they appear to really appreciate what Salman's movies give them. Have the decency to respect that and not denigrate it. Live and let live Mrs. Chopra.
Permalink
Anupama , thank you !! finally someone speaks on the quality of cinema and what can it mean.
Please don't let the detractors (numerous though they may be) convince anyone that movies are only about entertainment, to quote your own article "they are too powerful a medium"
--------------------------------------
Mr. Sangy - can you read and process ?? or do you only know how to rant and rave, read the article again - it talks about the importance of entertainment but also not to confuse entertainment with lazy. shoddy cinema. We are movie buff's deserve a lot more of Andaz Apna Apna for entertainment than Double Dhamaal.
Permalink
Agree with commenter Moviefreak. Anupama, pl don't let your numerous detractors stop you from speaking out some unpalatable truths. I am actually apalled that Salman equates a cinema outing with a nightclub outing. Yes, one should get entertained---but that cannot be the only truth, cinema should make one think and feel the way good writing does. Anupama Chopra's columns are like a breath of much needed fresh air, a gust of sense and sensibility in a world where trashy commercially successful cinema is accepted with equanimity, complacency, open arms--simply because fans are there to speak up for it, for a favourite star.
Let films make money, let there be patrons for enterrtainment of the sort provided by films like Bodyguard and Ready--i am happy for the star salman and his fans---but let's not kid ourselves that this is memorable worthwhile cinema.
Watching a film like Teesri Kasam on video. soaking in its lyricism and rustic beauty, its liveliness, i realized that this is why we watch movies--to make us feel alive and happy, happy that one is able to partake of something beautiful and lasting. This film may not have worked at the box office when it was released in 1967--and yet all these years on, the film moves and charms us. Raj Kapoor in a 'hatke' role, yet so perfect and just right, Waeeda charming and saucy, the amazing music ...this is cinema, memorable, timeless. It is certainly NOT a nightclub show.
Permalink
Response to MovieFreak's comments on my raves and rants: I am fully capable of processing this article and the high points--that we collectively as moviegoers and moviemakers need to strive for a higher quality of cinema in this country. I don't think there is anything earth-shatteringly original about what Mrs. Chopra highlights in this piece and I don't disagree with it actually. It is predictable, and expected given that 90% of the movie critics in our country think Salman's Khan's movie never pass muster. Mind you, I am a huge fan of movies like "Pyaasa", "Teesri Kasam", "Sahib Bibi aur Ghulam", "3 Idiots"....and the list goes on. My issue, and this opinion has been crystallized after reading numerous pieces of Mrs. Chopra's and other critics where they regurgitate the same view points on this actor, is that articles like this scream of double standards and bias. It's OK for Shahrukh to repeat himself movie after movie (romantic hero ad nauseum) and make the box office jingle; it is OK for Mr. Bacchan to have repeated himself in movies as the Angry Young Man, and pleased millions in our country, and yet, they are considered legends. Their movies are not mediocre or "lazy". But when Salman makes a dent with our "masses" somehow, the movies are "mediocre", "lazy", and "shoddy" :). Mrs. Chopra's views are not like a breath of fresh air, they are stale and reek of deja vu and only insult the choice of millions in our country. That is what gets me furious. Every one, including Mrs. Chopra is entitled to an opinion about what entertainment is or should be. Let's respect differing view points on the issue. Let us also acknowledge the fact that today's audiences enjoy Mr. Khan's movies. Why is that? Today's audience also enjoyed "Three Idiots"...a brilliant movie might I add, not too long ago. Why is that again? I am pretty sure many of the "masses" that enjoyed BodyGuard must have gone to see Three Idiots too. We speak of Salman's fans like they are a cult of brainless people lacking any sense of movie aesthetic. Millions, mind you in this country enjoy his movies so that makes our country replete with a bunch of seriously unintelligent movie-goers per critics like Mrs. Chopra--it is not said overtly but implied throughout her sophisticated, suave style of critiquing. The insinuation that somehow these movie goers need to be shown the light of day on what truly exemplary cinema is comprised of. That is what upsets me in all this rhetoric. Movie critics in our country have a huge problem with Salman Khan and his movies. There is a bias inherent in many a review. Rather than dissecting why his movies have been resonating with the audiences of late, they insult millions in our country by relegating them to one bucket--the brainless movie goer for whom Salman can do no wrong. I would turn the tables on the likes of Mrs. Chopra and say you critics need to be a lot less lazy and spend a little extra time dissecting the phenomenon that is Salman Khan. He's a very easy target for critics in our country. If I started reading more reviews that spent less time trashing his acting skills and his "dumb" audience, and more reviews on why his movies are managing to connect with audiences a la SRK or Amitabh Bacchan, without taking a condescending attitude and stepping out of their comfort zone on what critics would define as high quality cinema, I would be ranting and raving a lot less :)! If a movie is really bad, even a Salman cannot save it (Veer, Main Aur Mrs Khanna etc). Let's give the man and our Indian audience a little more respect today--and this particular message is actually directed at the esteemed movie critics in our country. Let's attempt to ponder a little more on why an actor has managed to wow audiences with four back to back hits since Wanted, shall we?
Post new comment