THE CREATIVE ART OF COMPROMISE
After Lagaan, Taare Zameen Par and, now, Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na, Aamir Khan has become synonymous with cleverly compromised creativity.
AUGUST 2008 – ON THE FACE OF IT, OUR MAINSTREAM CINEMA spans a spectrum of stories. Love stories. Revenge stories. Stories about friendship and sacrifice and betrayal and honour and tradition. But the story that plays out behind the scenes has pretty much stayed the same: about the filmmaker as Faust, and the almighty box-office as Mephistopheles. With very few exceptions (that actually prove the rule), the crux of this plot is the selling of the soul.
You want to change the world with your film, but you also want to survive in order to make your next film – so you make your peace with the kind of arrangement that’s the bedrock of any kind of marriage, especially the one between art and commerce. You learn to compromise. And that that isn’t necessarily a bad word is what Aamir Khan is apparently on a mission to prove – as actor, and especially as producer.
This isn’t the first time a superstar has channelled his energies into something other than the creation of the next superhit. Kamal Hassan has been doing that for a while now – but with a singular difference, alternating between the unusual stories that he wants to tell (Hey Ram, Anbe Sivam) and the easy entertainment that his audiences want to see (the comedies like Tenali and Panchatantiram), making his monies off the latter and pumping those finances into the former. But Aamir, somehow, has managed to ensure that the unusual stories that he wants to tell are the entertainment that his audiences want to see.
And this he has achieved primarily by making better use of the multiplex revolution than practically anybody else (something that has to be factored into the consideration of Kamal Hassan’s cinema, for Tamil Nadu is still dominated by single screens). Aamir has fashioned these multiplexes into little hotbeds of compromised creativity – compromised, because his films aren’t perfect, but creative all the same, because even these imperfections are loftier in intent than the blemishes that mar other films.
Not for Aamir the silky seductions of an easily tucked in item number, the safety net of a comedy track, or the decadent eye candy of big stars trussed up in painstakingly styled finery and deposited in the kind of mouthwateringly touristy locations that no Yash Raj production can do without. These are compromises of desperation, of selling the soul for silver, whereas Aamir’s compromises serve a higher purpose – to ensure, for instance, wider acceptance of Hindi cinema’s sole instance of a story propelled by a bucktoothed, dyslexic protagonist.
Taare Zameen Par had a truly great first half, one that ended intriguingly with the director-producer-actor in a clown suit – and during intermission, you couldn’t help but anticipate what came afterwards. Unfortunately, what came afterwards did not touch the heights of the earlier portions. The compromise, the pact with the devil manning the box-office, was that the second half became sentimental. This isn’t a problem in itself, but considering that the first half was a remarkably understated, day-in-the-life chronicle of a dyslexic child, the change in tone was tough to take – because where the film was, earlier, grittily individual, it now became generously crowd-pleasing.
But how those crowds responded – the way they never did for the uncompromised vision of, say, Sparsh (one of the finest Hindi films about disability). The compromises of Taare Zameen Par were ones you could at least respect if not respond to, for they were compromises with a measure of creativity; they did not violate the integrity of the premise with, for instance, an item number or a comedy track. And because of these compromises, the film broke out of the “nice little film that nobody saw” niche and became a nationwide phenomenon, making a topical buzzword of dyslexia and a fifteen-minute star of Darsheel Safary.
This is impossible to imagine without Aamir Khan in the driver’s seat, without the goodwill he commands within the industry and with his fans, and without the notion he’s gradually instilled in his audiences that his name is a guarantee of quality mainstream entertainment. He appears to truly believe in the films he makes, and he uses his clout as a huge star to make everyone else believe in them too. And this is surely why Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na (produced by Aamir, starring his nephew Imran Khan) is on its way to becoming one of the year’s biggest hits.
Left to its own devices – in other words, had Aamir not tirelessly spearheaded the publicity for the film and stamped his name on it – Abbas Tyrewala’s directorial debut might have been dismissed as just another love story with newcomers. But with Aamir behind it, it quickly became the must-see feel-good romance of the season. Of course, it didn’t hurt that the film turned out to be quite engrossing – witty and wise about the ways of the heart, with casting choices bordering on genius. But then the audiences already knew all that, without seeing a single frame. After all, the producer’s name was Aamir Khan.
What’s remarkable about Aamir’s stint as producer is that every film he’s bankrolled so far has become an event. Lagaan was a huge hit that went to the Oscars. Taare Zameen Par was a huge hit that went on to redefine what a mainstream audience would flock in droves to see. And now, Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na is a huge hit that… Well, we’ll have to see what the lasting legacy of this trifling romance is going to be, but the way it’s caught on like wildfire, it’s, at the very least, the film that gave Imran Khan the kind of launch few films have given their leading men.
The impact of these films has been such that it’s easy to forget that Aamir Khan has taken to producing only very recently. But he appears to have a bloodhound’s scent for what people want and what will work at the box-office. He knows that, as long as his name is attached to a project, the audiences will line up for anything – even a four-hour film about cricket, or the story of a dyslexic child populated mostly by non-stars.
And that’s why there’s a greedy little part of me that wishes Taare Zameen Par had become all that it could have been – that it had not turned cute and gooey, that it had delivered on its early promise of the tough little trajectory that its protagonist would have to take to triumph over his disability. And the same part of me wishes that Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na had been better, more attuned to the locutions of the English-speaking (and English-thinking) set that the group of friends in the film primarily is.
But if Taare Zameen Par had stayed a bitter little pill, stubbornly resisting the gradual glazing of sugar, and had Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na remained an upscale Dil Chahta Hai for the just-graduated set, the reach of the films would have been curtailed – and the producer knows this. And hence the compromises. He is, after all, the canniest of businessmen, the returns on investment of whose ventures would leave leading industrialists salivating.
But, at the same time, Aamir Khan is also an artist, and at least in the films he puts his producing cap on for, he appears genuinely interested in more than just making money, and in shepherding mainstream cinema to new grazing grounds – for if that weren’t the case, he could merely divert his funds to the likes of Fanaa, which made pots of cash while doing nothing to his reputation as a stickler perfectionist. For the one question on our lips as we exited that Yash Raj production was: Just what modes of black magic were employed on Aamir Khan to make him consent to this script?
Instead, the films with his imprimatur – namely, the films that he’s not simply acting in – take on a life beyond their run at the box office (though, admittedly, it’s too soon to say that about Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na). They go on to define the zeitgeist, redefine the contours of commercial cinema, and because few others follow in these footsteps, taking these risks, Aamir Khan’s films take root as definitive pop-culture signposts.
Because for all the compromise, there’s still the creativity. Because for all the watering down of Taare Zameen Par, there’s still the highly atypical soundtrack by Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy, which is the closest that Hindi film music has come to channelling the indulgent, rock-fuelled angst of Pink Floyd. Because if the heroine of Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na (played by Genelia D’Souza) is a lame construct full of I-love-my-best-friend clichés, there’s still Meghna (played by Manjari), who’s easily one of the most complex female characters written for a mainstream cinema culture that’s rarely interested in women, let alone a woman who isn’t the heroine.
The character of Meghna was written by Abbas Tyrewala, sure, just as Taare Zameen Par was Amole Gupte’s brainchild – but it’s not difficult to imagine the reception these films would have received had they been backed by another producer (and if, at all, they’d been backed by any other producer). Looking back, Lagaan seems to have revitalised Aamir Khan, whose famed script sense, whose famed audience connect was nowhere in evidence in Mann and Mela, the films he made just earlier.
But practically everything Aamir has touched after beating the British at their own game in those four hours – Dil Chahta Hai, Rang De Basanti – has gone towards cementing his position as someone who’s as attuned to artistry as the audience, at least as much as is possible within the commercial format. He’s discovered a startling middle path between selling his soul and still somehow saving it, and, in the process, he’s made a fine art of compromised creativity.
Copyright ©2008 Man’s World. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
Bhargs
August 12, 2008
Can we say that Aamir now represents what Apple represents in the tech industry? The products may not be the best,but with the brand name associated, they generate enough interest in the industry and consumers.
“He’s discovered a startling middle path between selling his soul and still somehow saving it, and, in the process, he’s made a fine art of compromised creativity.”
Necessary evil, I would say. This is the reason why I feel its necessary. “But how those crowds responded – the way they never did for the uncompromised vision of, say, Sparsh (one of the finest Hindi films about disability)”.
With Aamir as a producer, people were willing to a take a risk to watch an off-beat(i hate this word) film on Dyslexia. can you imagine how many ppl esp parents came to know abt Dyslexia? I am not saying that only because of the film,ppl came to know of the disability.
Taking the help of celebrities to deliver messages via a mass communication medium is a long standing practice. Remember how every year, actresses,sportsmen advocate polio vaccines? I have never seen a doctor/scientist appearing in those adverts?
The real question now is, having tasted success with his 3 films as a producer, can Aamir take that extra effort to produce a “bitter pill” type of movie? Can he put up a film, which is a serious contender for an Oscar? we all know his opinion regd Indian awards (filmfare,screen),but I clearly do not see a negative attitude towards Oscar.
LikeLike
raj
August 12, 2008
“..The compromise, the pact with the devil manning the box-office, was that the second half became sentimental.
”
Are you sure? Is it not possible that that was Aamir Khan plugging his selfless, crying heart(as you noted in your review) persona in the second half. In other words, a bit of megalomania? Are you sure that he had this altruistic notion of getting ignorant parents to see his film and thus get ‘educated’ on dyslexia? And is that a valid elevating cinematic notion anyway? Why should a movie have a message?
I have mixed feelings about Aamir. Sure he makes some of the best movies one can expect from bollywood. But I am not really sure he is more than just a canny businessman? Plug a cola?No problems. Rake up an issue just during the release of your film and then disappear?Check. Follow up on ‘soc(i)al consiesness’ and stand up for something? No. Play friends with Salman Khan and SRK?Check. Respect them, admittedly difficult for anyone, but for someone who professes I have no enemeies, sharuk and salman are friends, why that dog named sharuk bit.
he comes across as an impostor on all fronts – and his sincerity, except to some extent towards cinema, and that compromised by a little of megalomania, is always in doubt.
LikeLike
Shashi
August 12, 2008
People seem to have completely sold out the corollary of “High on quantity leads to deteriorating quality.” Since so few movies of Aamir Khan are released, they all must be zenith of hindi cinema.
His last few works – as an actor, director or producer – were moderate on content and super-high on buzz. The last best thing from him was DCH. As you pointed correctly, he is a shrewd businessman than a fine artist. Somehow he has managed the impossible – fool all the people all the time. At least, till the date.
Baradwaj, with this bitterly truthful article you have kissed goodbye to any future interview opportunities with him. That is one price you have paid in advance.
LikeLike
brangan
August 12, 2008
Bhargs: “Taking the help of celebrities to deliver messages via a mass communication medium is a long standing practice.” I’m not sure he made the film to shine a light on dyslexia. I think it’s more because the storyline appealed to him, and he felt it would work. It’s still a very brave movie, but I’m not sure the reason you say is what went into its making. But yes, it would be interesting to see if, down the line, he does graduate to making exactly what he wants to make — without even these “creative compromises”
raj: “Are you sure that he had this altruistic notion of getting ignorant parents to see his film and thus get ‘educated’ on dyslexia?” Where did I say that anywhere in this piece? This just about how, as a producer — *not* a human being — he’s found a nice middle path, with good (“creatively compromised”) films that also work big-time at the box-office. You yourself said it — “his sincerity, except to some extent towards cinema” That’s really all I wanted to talk about.
Shashi: Wow, all that from this article? And I thought this was a fairly positive piece 🙂 “His last few works – as an actor, director or producer – were moderate on content and super-high on buzz.” Fanaa wasn’t good, but I’ve liked almost everything else.
LikeLike
Anand
August 12, 2008
First things first..what an awesome post!!Congrats BR!!
To compare Aamir to Kamal..I think it is unfair, because they belong to different generations, beacuse the maturity of the markets are different. As you have mentioned, Aamir has the advantage of multiplex audiences, and it is definitely a more mature market. I truly believe that an artist performs best in late thirties and early forties. It is applicable to any artist..take the example of Mani ratnam, KB, Spielberg, Ilayaraja…Aamir is in his early forties! Now let us list Kamal’s films in this period..Nayagan, Satya, Apoorva Sahodarargal, Chanakyan, Michael Madana Kama rajan, Thevar Magan, Mahanadi and Hey Ram!
It is not fair to compare!!
On his own merit, Aamir deserves every amount of praise and adulation he gets. He makes a difference.
And Shashi, BR has not said that Aamir is a shrewd businessman than a fine artist..that could be your opinion, but I think you have missed the spirit of the post.
LikeLike
madhu
August 12, 2008
how tedious.. BR, I know when it compares to the national award and all yoyur fawning fans, my opinion is worth absolutely nothing to you, but of late, it’s becoming a chore to get through your sentences.. there’s no joy in reading what you write.. everything’s just so heavily constructed and over analyzed, probably why you’ve been so anamoured with a “complex” character like manjari while not liking someone who is transparent and uncomplicated like aditi…
LikeLike
Shalini
August 12, 2008
“This is impossible to imagine without Aamir Khan in the driver’s seat…without the notion he’s gradually instilled in his audiences that his name is a guarantee of quality mainstream entertainment.”
I think this is a spot on evaluation. As someone who has virtually no interest in contemporary Hindi cinema, I have to admit that Aamir is the *only* Bollywood actor whose movies I anticipate and who can induce me to plop down $10 and venture down to the local Indian theater and brave all the chattering aunties and squealing teen-agers just to see him film on the big screen.
LikeLike
Ramsu
August 12, 2008
Nice article!
However, on the issue of Aamir riding the multiplex revolution, I am not so sure. Movies like Lagaan and JTYJN have done so well at the box office that it seems like they have attracted a wider audience than just the PVR crowd. I think it is more the case that there has been a rise in Bollywood-focused TV coverage, and Aamir has figured out how to use it to his advantage. He restricts his appearances to when his movies come out, but during that window, he promotes them well. He’s very canny about having a different “look” for each movie and making sure it gets ample coverage. (So does Kamal, come to think of it.)
~r
LikeLike
raj
August 12, 2008
br, i didnt come across correctly. his failings as a human being are none of my business – he is probably still a better human being than me:-)
I mean, TZP, the second half that you had problems with, I think speculatively, we can assign that to a megalomania on his part(see, I am a bleeding heart, see my heart cries for children, see I can empathise – I being Aamir Khan not Nikumbh), as much as to a crowd-pleasing instinct. That same megalomania that brings down Kamal and his movies now and then. Only, this was in a different way so it is more difficult to pan…
LikeLike
Jaiganesh
August 12, 2008
Unusual stories he wants to tell??
Are you sure that he wants to tell stories.
As far as I see it, if there are unusual stories, he wants to sell them and not tell them.
LikeLike
abhishek
August 12, 2008
Intersting read brangan,i’m commenting for the first time on your blog evenif i’ve been your reader for a long time.Agree with your observation of TZP’s sugar coated second half which almost seemed like another movie as bum bum bole simply shifts the gear jerkingly,though i the idea that it gives the movie its commercial clout is what i find unverified and contestable,Aren’t we simply assuming, in our snobbery that audience would not have liked it that way? Maybe there the filmmaker underestimated the audience?
btw have you watched gulzar’s kitaab-a movie in a similiar vein although more even and better imo.
LikeLike
Sid
August 12, 2008
Huh? What is Shashi smoking? I thought this article was… positive?
Anyway, as someone who’s favorite actor in Bollywood has remained the same for 2 decades now (the man in question), I can say that he’s easily been part of some of the most defining films — QSQT, Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander, Andaz Apna Apna to name a few even before this decade hit. I think Sarfarosh completed his ascendance from a chocolate boy to mature actor, he proved with Earth that he could handle grey characters better than most hamsters (I’m talking to you Mr. King).
DCH, Lagaan and RDB this decade cemented his place in the pantheon and TZP has only furthered that cause — I myself thought it was slightly overrated — I sat down to make a top 10 list of 2007 and as much as I loved the film, TZP wasn’t even on it — but, it was certainly directed with flair.
After three viewings, JTYJN is, I think, the second best film of the year — not to mention the most re-watchable — after Mithya. I can only hope for great things from Ghajini.
PS: Fanaa and The Rising are forgiven Aamir, even Mann and Mela.
LikeLike
Ravi K
August 12, 2008
“The real question now is, having tasted success with his 3 films as a producer, can Aamir take that extra effort to produce a “bitter pill” type of movie? Can he put up a film, which is a serious contender for an Oscar?”
Lagaan was nominated for an Oscar.
Aamir doesn’t have to produce a “bitter pill” film. I’m fine with him sticking to quality crowd-pleasers.
I recommend reading The Spirit of Lagaan, as well watching the documentary Chale Chalo, also on the making of Lagaan. Even if you did not like the film the story of the production is highly interesting. Aamir could have easily chosen to produce some romantic comedy or something but he chose to produce a nearly four hour underdog-sports/British-colonialism film to be filmed in Kutch.
LikeLike
Vivek
August 12, 2008
Is it just me or was this article really difficult to read. Too repetitive and a little too much rambling? What’s up BR? Tough deadlines or an attack of analysis paralysis
LikeLike
Vijay
August 12, 2008
Ah..the art of Creative compromise -Mani Rathnam patented it long time back when there were’nt any multiplexes anywhere around. Aamir is merely infringing upon it 🙂
I admire these kind of efforts more than that of those arty types like Adoor and so on. I believe that it is easier to swing firmly to either side of that art-commerce divide, than it is to tread that fine line every time. Only a few could manage that. Hope Aamir retains that balance in his future ventures, although Ghajini seems more along the lines of Fanaa than TZP.
LikeLike
Aspi
August 12, 2008
BR, enjoyed the article. But this line here:
“And this he has achieved primarily by making better use of the multiplex revolution than practically anybody else”
Its hugely intriguing but largely unexplained in your text. I remain hugely curious. How exactly did Aamir ride the revolution? By blanketing the market with prints? But that hardly has anything to do with the success of compromised creativity. Even a YRF release could do that.
LikeLike
oops
August 12, 2008
!Hola que tal! Good post BR, good post. The buzz on Aamir is so hight now that it’s difficult sometimes to be objective about what he does. Someone talked about making a film that can bring back an Oscar to India. I don’t think B-wood should think like that. Other countries make better movies, take risk and improve their “skills” without thinking of that little gold man. Why should Aamir be obsessed about it ? (hum hum but everyone knows he is 🙂
I don’t like the man that much, but we should all give him his due : thks to his reputation, indian audience wants to be more open minded. And thk god… Aamir’s not foolish enough to think that he could do it with auteurish flick totally ignoring what the public wants. He’s still a real producer, thinking about gains and losses (i read somewhere that he doesn’t think about money… hopefully he does), and now has become a good producer.
LikeLike
Arif Attar
August 13, 2008
What an absolutely beautiful piece Brangan. Well, I myself have been planning to write something on the topic for a long time. But I need not bother now. It is all I have been wanting to write, only more eloquent.
Aamir is probably the only one to have managed to straddle the mainstream-offbeat divide successfully.
LikeLike
Shankar
August 13, 2008
Well, Aamir has been successful in creating his own brand. On one hand, you have a brand such as AB who is now woefully over-exposed and on the other, you have an Aamir or a Rajni who maintain the aura due to limited access, exposure etc. It is a clever strategy, mind you.
But as Vijay says, Aamir does tread the fine line between art and commerce quite successfully…and strategically. But one thing’s for sure…the Aamir of today has firmly shed the “cho-chweet” lover boy image of his past and moved on.
BTW, rock-fueled angst of PF…hmmm, me thinks it should be smoke-fueled!! 🙂
LikeLike
Deepauk M
August 13, 2008
After I read this and Ramsu’s follow up I held back from commenting and let the thoughts stew. Way too many disjointed thoughts. But one in particular I wanted to bring up.
There is a line in Deer Hunter, one that was IMO the best reason to watch the movie, when the group of guys go up into the mountains to hunt: “Stanley, see this? This is this. This ain’t something else. This is this” . And as I read the parts about how TZP could have beeen Sparsh or JTYJN could have been Reality Bites for Breach-Candy Born South Mumbaiites, this line just kept coming back to me. How certain are we that these movies would have been better if they had taken an alternate route?
LikeLike
Tejas
August 13, 2008
Now that you mention Pink Floyd – Is it just me or someone else also agrees that if PF ever did a Hindi song, it would have been ‘Maa’? And the PF song in consideration here is, well you guessed right, ‘Wish You Were Here’.
LikeLike
Rahul
August 13, 2008
The first half of TZP was good ’cause it told the kids story, the second half was a ‘wtf’ as the director focused his attention on the teacher (Aamir Khan). That has been Aamir Khan’s biggest problem…attention seeking in the guise of someone who is above everyone else around him. For someone who claimed to have not heard of ‘Memento’ even as he was readying to shoot for Gajini, or afterwards clarifying to say that Memento didn’t do anything for him. I respect his opinion about another movie…its a very personal thing, but its that duplicity involved.
Someone here said the multiplex crowd is more mature, which is so much BS. In fact I believe that the multiplex crowd is farcical and too pretentious, which is why they will gush about a TZP or any other maudlin piece masquerading as ‘different’ movie. Aamir Khan is a media fav, and the multiplex crowd joins right in behind the ‘Mr. Perfection’ bandwagon. If the said audience was really mature…how would movies like Mithya or a No Smoking not attract an audience. Multiplex attracts low brow entertainments…nothing more. You wouldn’t catch the said crowd throng to watch a ‘Veyil’ or a ‘Paruthiveeran’ or a ‘Subramanyapuram’…but yes the movie halls will be full for a ‘Dasavatharam’ or a ‘Fanaa’…why, not cz of the movie, but because of the actors playing in it…so that puts to rest the ‘seeming’ maturity of the multiplex crowd. Here I agree with you that, Aamir Khan probably pulls in the crowd, but I disagree that he is doing or has done anything to establish credibility of being ‘creative’. In fact, has there been any movie, other than ‘Lagaan’ which was a Ashuthosh Gowrikar movie, which was decidedly different from mainstream movies?
Sorry for the long rambling comment BR 🙂
Rahul
LikeLike
Rahul
August 13, 2008
Sorry, I forgot to add…that I have to agree that you are right when you say that he is as canny as the next businessman in all his actions and that makes the brand Aamir a successful one…the one which sees all the english speaking desi channels fawn over everything he does and says and the supposedly intellectual urban upper middle class talk about him in reverential tones. Which is why most of his movies are a hit with the multiplex centers…while being average outside it. I have watched TZP in a half empty single theatre in the first week of its release cz I couldn’t get tickets at the local multiplex as was the case with the highly promoted RDB too…:)
This is a case study for a social behavioural thesis more than a comment on one of India’s successful actor 🙂
Cheers,
Rahul
LikeLike
Ramsu
August 13, 2008
Deepauk>> Good point. We can’t really compare. I figure, if a movie manages to find a level of emotional truth in its setting, and manages to engage the audience, it has achieved its objective.
Sparsh did that. Did TZP do that as well, or did the shift in tone in the second half detract from its power?
There’s an additional complicating factor. Movies are very often informed by the social mores of their time. While some movies do break free of that constraint, the way we see old movies is coloured by our world view, which in turn depends on the time we live in. Sometimes it makes us miss some things that only someone who knew that time can relate to. And at other times, we overcompensate by reading subtexts where there are none. So how do you compare movies from different eras?
~r
LikeLike
zoombash
August 13, 2008
Hello BR,
I read ur most of the reviews @ naachgaana( never bothered to register there as well).
This post is very true in its spirit and I must say u r one of the best critic and writer.
BR I will like too add that its not only post Lagaan, but nobody except Aamir would have done “RAAKH” as well.
I would say that he is at par as comparison with Amitabh Bacchan as well, who I think after so many decades is still insecure( I hate that).When u hav da power use it properly. And AB is gifted, while Aamir is not gifted (screen presence , voice etc etc). I only liked AB in Nishabd lately. All these so called top actors are relying on the pshycy that”Indians like to be entertained not developed”…So in a way all these so called superstar are making money only and fuc..ing the country with all the power they have got like politicians(corrupt & narrow minded).I would like to have a say from u. Hail ur thoughts!
LikeLike
brangan
August 13, 2008
Anand: “To compare Aamir to Kamal..I think it is unfair” I wasn’t comparing the performers. I was talking about the kind of films, and that where Kamal alternates between “very highbrow” and “very lowbrow,” Aamir does a middle-path. That’s all.
madhu/Vivek: I don’t have enough distance from this piece yet, so I can’t say what went wrong (if it did ) — but if there’s a problem it could be one of many reasons. The usual suspects are deadlines and the fact that editors, while they take care to ask you edit it down to a certain word length, rarely ask you to tweak anything in terms of style (except, of course, if there’s some realy bad grammar and stuff, in which case, they do the cleaning up).
Also, my primary purpose in writing anything is to (1) satisfy myself (with what’s being said), and (2) entertain myself (with how it’s being said). And sometimes, that means playing around with constructions to see where they can lead you (I get easily bored with subject-predicate-object sentences). And during this process, you could lose the plot and end up in knots. C’est la vie, and all that.
The national award, by the way, has nothing to do with feedback. If you see a film by a NA-winning direcrtor and it doesn’t work for you, wouldn’t you feel free saying that? It’s the same here, never mind the “fawning fans” 🙂
Shalini: Thanks. But you have no interest in contemporary Hindi cinema? Didn’t you sit through Jodhaa Akbar, of all things and write in a comment? 🙂
LikeLike
brangan
August 13, 2008
Ramsu/Aspi: What I meant about the multiplex thing is this: the chances of movies becoming all-India hits (like say Sholay or HAHK) are next to none these days, the collections from the multiplexes more than offset the underperfomance in say Bihar and so on. But I was also talking about the multiplex “mindset,” (i.e. open to a certain kind of film) and that audience could just as well see the film in a single-screen theatre. I guess that didn’t come through.
Jaiganesh: Isn’t TZP an unusual story? Or Lagaan? or Rang De Basanti? At least, I thought so.
abhishek: “Agree with your observation of TZP’s sugar coated second half which almost seemed like another movie” Hey, where were you when I was getting bashed for my TZP review? A little support then may have helped, you know? 🙂
Of course, you could wonder if the filmmaker underestimated the audience by diluting the second half. But you can never prove such a thing, and all you can say is, considering the dismal fate of very similar (and relatively uncompromised) Apna Asmaan, the compromises in TZP helped it reach a wider audience. And I did mention Kitaab in my review.
Sid: Thanks for bringing up Earth. That’s a very good performance. I wish he’d do a few offbeat films like this once in a while.
Vijay: “although Ghajini seems more along the lines of Fanaa than TZP” I believe they’ve completely reworked the latter portions, so at the very least, it should be far better than Fanaa.
LikeLike
brangan
August 13, 2008
oops: So you think Aamir is obsessed with the Oscar? 🙂 I somehow don’t get that impression.
Arif Attar: “Aamir is probably the only one to have managed to straddle the mainstream-offbeat divide successfully.” I’m not sure you can talk about offbeat cinema entirely (with the exception of say Earth) It’s more like he’s into “quality” mainstream cinema.
Shankar: Regarding his lover-boy inmage, he did begin with Raakh… I guess the success of QSQT turned him towards a more hit-oriented path for a while.
Deepauk M: “How certain are we that these movies would have been better if they had taken an alternate route?” We can never be certain, because there’s no guarantee that the film in a filmmaker’s head is going to be the film that eventually lands up on screen. But as Ramsu says, they would have been truer to their intentions, and possibly, therefore, “better” (from an idealistic standpoint)
Tejas: I did talk about this in my review. In fact, I stole this line from my review 🙂
Rahul: You’re right about multiplex audiences, but they’re at least open to new themes (provided there’s a big star in it). Okay, so Black or TZP may not have worked without AB-Rani and Aamir, but a few years back, they’d most likely have bombed even with these stars. That’s something, right? So in theory, something like Kamal’s Anbe Sivam *could* have fared better in a multiplex culture.
zoombash: Thank you. But I do think Aamir has screen presence, which I don’t think is about a booming bartone or six-feet-plus stature. Sometimes, just the intensity of a performance can make for a strong presence on screen. And I have no “say” about what other actors do. If they want to treat cinema as a business, it’s entirely their call. Who’s to judge them? It is a “profession,” after all.
LikeLike
Gaurav Agrawal
August 13, 2008
‘fifteen-minute star of Darsheel Safary’ 🙂
Nice use of ‘Warholism’ … kept me smiling throughout the article for some strange reasons.
LikeLike
zoombash
August 13, 2008
thnaks a ton man for reply..but I still think that Big B could be more mediocre than Aamir and still pull the movie… that was my point.I read ur review on SIK as well, they made fun of Sikhs(watever they claim) and are making money..if they had a MOVIE with hindus or muslims on the similar lines they wouldnt have able to show it to India or Gujarat(:)). Its high time Akshay Kumar should realise his power.
AB is trying too hard to push his son upward.He is in the mess.
Good nite BR.
LikeLike
Shankar
August 13, 2008
Baddy, I’m confused by your comment…Raakh came after QSQT. If I remember, Aamir’s first sizable role was in Ketan Mehta’s Holi.
So to that point, I think he was pitched as a lover boy by his family right out of the gate. Some of the immediate films following that also followed the same formula. I guess it was Raakh that was the first film that really deviated from that path.
LikeLike
brangan
August 13, 2008
Gaurav Agrawal: Yeah – and where’s Safary today? That’s the point 🙂
Shankar: Aaargh. Holi is what I meant.
LikeLike
raj
August 13, 2008
“..So in theory, something like Kamal’s Anbe Sivam *could* have fared better in a multiplex culture.
”
Dont think so. oh yeah, you said *could* any way.Didnt Anbe Sivam release in Satyam Multiplex anyway? Most of Kamal movie profits come from Satyam, dont they, anyway?
LikeLike
Shankar
August 13, 2008
Digression: I just happened to read that Saif Ali Khan, Darsheel Safary and Lara Dutta have been selected for the Rajiv Gandhi awards for their “contribution to Indian cinema”!! I’m still trying to figure out what was Lara Dutta’s contribution!! 🙂
LikeLike
Tejas
August 13, 2008
@Zoombash – why movies with Muslim/Hindu themes are not being shown in Gujarat is because it could have an entirely different impact. It may or may not touch on rather sensitive nerves in that case, something much more serious than making fun.
LikeLike
Arif Attar
August 13, 2008
“I’m not sure you can talk about offbeat cinema entirely (with the exception of say Earth) It’s more like he’s into “quality” mainstream cinema.”
Let’s have a discussion on defining offbeat and commercial cinema. May be you could write a blog entry on the topic. Ok I understand this current blog entry is actually just that.
But what makes “Earth” an instance of ‘offbeat’ cinema, and films like “Lagaan” and “Taare Zameen Par” ‘quality’ mainstream cinema?
Was “Lagaan” compromised as well? Or does the budget involved makes its classification as ‘offbeat’ blasphemous?
In fact, take even”Rang De Basanti” and compare it with a couple of Nana Patekar movies in the early and mid-80s which had a similar subject matter of the youth disillusioned with the system.
Most would classify the latter as ‘offbeat’. I want to know, why?
I may sound a bit contradictory in my two posts…may be I am. Perhaps you could help me out of my confusion:-)
LikeLike
Anand
August 13, 2008
raj..satyam is not a multiplex. They brand it as one. A multiplex is generally part of a shopping mall. Mayajaal and Abirami are examples. But I think in Chennai, Inox is the only one which truly can be called a multiplex. Compare it with Mumbai where there are at least 20 such multiplexes with an average of 4-5 screens.
LikeLike
Sal
August 13, 2008
The thing is, I think Aamir generally LIKES the elements that one may view as creative compromises. I mean, it’s not just that he thinks that more hindi (which is what he reportedly asked Abbas Tyrewalla to put into the screenplay) or musical sequences will draw in the audiences. I think he as an actor who grew up in and on the mainstream fold of cinema enjoys these parts and thinks that cinema he’s part of should have these to be enjoyable. In fact, the whole amole gupte ouster thing – I’ve always wondered if it were because Amole was making the film in the style we see in the first half – because for me, the second half had an increasingly obvious and dramatic shift in style. Maybe it’s that Aamir likes telling his seldom told stories in his idiosyncratic, uncliched ways, but also likes to have those comforting trappings that make a commercial film a commercial film – not necessarily a bad film, mind.
LikeLike
Supremus
August 14, 2008
Err… dont worget the wretched “Mangal Pandey” – a very kamal hassan like self obsessed flick!
I really hope he doesnt go the Kamal Hassan way of wanting to be in every single frame of the story.
LikeLike
zoombash
August 14, 2008
@ Tejas
Fanaa did not have Hindu/ muslim theme:))..anyways bro., take it easy.
@Sal, I agree with you, I think after watching TZP making (from the DVD) its clear what Aamir did. We have to wait Amole’s next to see how good he is as director and his vision.
The word compromised is not that correct to use I guess. It is always nice to make movie in a simple way which can easily hold the audience as compared to movie like “NO SMoking” where one pay to get tortured:).
LikeLike
Ramesh
August 14, 2008
How ironic, the photo displayed here is of
Aamir Khan in Fanaa. Editorial glitch eh?
LikeLike
Radhika
August 14, 2008
Very interesting post, Baradwaj. While reading, two thoughts occured to me. One was an old saw about how a compromise is when neither side is satisfied – in the face of such success, one could argue that he has actually satisfied both creativity and commerce, ergo there is no compromise. Splitting hairs, I know, I understand what you meant. The other was – is Aamir consciously compromising? I mean, does he view his films as eroding some of the inherent integrity of the stories? or does he merely see it as good storytelling in the only way he is used to? he does come from the Nasir Hussain fold which had some story elements woven through immensely watchable hits like Teesri Manzil. Unlike, say, DilSe, where Mani Rathnam had woven songs in that stood out like warts each time one of the fantasy numbers took off, at least TZP and JNT did not have elements that hit you with a WTF moment.
Re Raakh – I saw it just a month back, and what a powerpacked performance. As far as I know, Raakh was made before QSQT and released later – since he was only one of the actors in Holi, I’d still say Raakh was his first real movie carried on his shoulders.
LikeLike
Anand
August 14, 2008
Yes Supremus… I also agree..Why should anyone go the Kamal Haasan way..There is too much of Narcissism!! May be he should try out people like Ajith, Vijay, Vishal, Vijayakanth, Sarathkumar..or may be Salman Khan, SRK, Akshay, Govinda will also do fine. Kamal is such a hopeless guy!!
LikeLike
raj
August 14, 2008
anand, ok. however, if there were 20 multiplexes in Chennai, wouldnt the crowd visiting be the same as the one that visits Satyam? (i.e.) isnt it presumptuous to attribute ‘higher intelligence’ to multiplex crowd? (i.e.) Assuming my first statement here is true, Anbe Sivam was actually not taken seriously by the multiplex audience. Why attribute non-existent taste to this crowd? Why is Akshay Kumar’s mass(or Junior NTR’s for that matter – I would suppose Junior NTR’s mass would be even below the chain compared to Akshay’s in the estimation of BR and the *multiplex audience*) inferior to this crowd?
LikeLike
raj
August 14, 2008
Anand, that was some angst:-).
Mangal Pandey is an example of the Aamir Khan way. Lagaan was the director’s way. TZP obviously had a significant input from the writer and it does seem to me more logical that the difference in styles in the halves would be more due to the difference between the writer and Aamir Khan rather than any canny calculation on the latter’s part. A happy coincidence passed off as a bollywood star’s intelligence? Whats new anyway?
Dil Chahta Hai – was that a Aamir Khan movie or Farhan Akthar movie? (btw Answer that one, AK fanatics.
So, you take the best movies of Aamir in recent times and you cant attribute too much credit to him except for consenting to be part of them.(and producing Lagaan)
Yet, we will have paens(spelling wrong) to him that he has struck the golden balance between art and commercial etc. WTF?
LikeLike
Anand
August 14, 2008
Raj..My comment was not on Anbe Sivam..It was on the definition of multiplex. A film which may have the potential to bring in the crowds (at least initially) will surely get a better opening if released in multiplexes. A multiplex offeres ease of ticket booking(I have managed to book tickets for Dhoom 2 two hours before the show in the opening weekend), better ambience, locational advantage(you need not drive more than 3-4 kilometres if you wnt to watch a film) and parking ease. Unfortunately, except Inox to certain extent, no other theatre in Chennai meets the above standards. Can you book tickets for a movie like Robot at Satyam multiplex in the opening weekend? Impossible. Once the above factors are taken care of, it would motivate people to visit theatres. I am not saying that multiplex crowds are intellectual, I am only saying any film with reasonable opening potential, will realise its potential, if released in multiplexes. After the first weekend, the film will have to sustain on its own merit. By that argument, Anbe Sivam would have still failed but would have recovered the investment in the opening weekend itself, had it been released in 20 multiplexes in Chennai. You and I know in hindsight that it is a slow paced film that tried to convey too much. But before the release, it had a fantastic potential…Kamal and Madhavan together (It was Madhavan’s first release after his superhit “Run”).
LikeLike
Anand
August 14, 2008
Raj..Mangal Pandey also was not an Aamir Khan film….it was directed by another strong individual..Ketan Mehta. I think it is unfair if Aamir has to bear the blame if things wrong but will not get any credit if things go right. I think the credit for all his recent successes, Lagaan, DCH, RDB and TZP should go the directors(in case of TZP, it should be shared between the Director and the Creative Director). But look at it this way…after Lagaan, Ashotosh has not been able to repeat the magic. After DCH, Farhan has not been able to do it. We need to wait for Amol Gupte’s next script to come up on screen to see if he can recreate the magic. Aamir has been able to do that in films he is associated with.(mostly at least). It could be just plain luck or he has the vision to foresee a quality product.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Shankar
August 14, 2008
Anand, I beg to differ with you on couple of points. I think both Ashutosh and Farhan did create wonderful movies following Laggan and DCH. At least for me, Swades worked…I loved it. I loved the fact that he didn’t let SRK run loose with his hamming stuff. Similarly, I liked both Lakshya and Don. For all their noted faults, those movies did entertain quite nicely. I loved the twists in Don…I thought it was quite brave for the director to attempt that with a classic…unlike Vishnuvardhan who made the lame Billa remake. If the movies didn’t run as well as Lagaan or DCH, well, that’s another matter altogether. I’m sure you’ll agree that not all hits are great movies either.
LikeLike
Aspi
August 14, 2008
BR, gotcha. Thanks for the explanation.
LikeLike
raj
August 15, 2008
anand, gotcha. Thanks for the explanation.:-)
I am with Shankar on Swades. Though watching Jodha Akbar admittedly on TV, has left me underwhelmed. Really bad.
Cant say the same for Farhan though Lakshya was bearable and Honeymoon Travels produced by him was ‘interesting’.
LikeLike
Shalini
August 15, 2008
Question for BR (or anyone else equally informed about the mechanics of filmmaking) – how does one parse/assign responsibility for a film?
For instance, the “bum bum bole” song in TZP didn’t work for me on any level. So, for my dissatisfaction with the song/music itself I blame SEL. But what about the cinematic aspects of the number? Who decided that such a song was needed and at that particular moment in the film? The scriptwriter, the director or the star-actor?
LikeLike
brangan
August 15, 2008
Arif Attar: “Commercial” or “mainstream” in the sense of intended for large audiences. That’s all.
Anand: Another thing. Multiplexes elsewhere have 10-12 shows per day of a film, so recovery is exponentially greater in the first three days when the craze is the most. Compare that to multiplexes here, which still go by four shows per day.
Sal: “The thing is, I think Aamir generally LIKES the elements that one may view as creative compromises.” Sure. I don’t mean to say he put these in his films with a gun to his head 🙂
Supremus: MP was misguided, but I didn’t think it was “wretched.”
Ramesh: That’s just the first nice picture I got. That’s all 🙂
Radhika: If he was fully from the Nasir Hussain school, he wouldn’t have made the first half of TZP that way, IMO. There’s a dark vision at work there. So I feel it *is* a conscious compromise.
Shalini: In general, I find it useful to attribute everything to the director. That’s why, in my reviews, I never mention other names (except the cast). There’s really no way of knowing who did what — a line of dialogue, for instance, could have come from a light boy — and as the director is the overall authroity, all praise (and all blame) must go to him. Even with Bum bum bole, how do we know SEL didn’t create a “better” tune that Aamir rejected as, say, too non-kiddy? And songs, generally, are a part of the script — at least their placements are. And with scripts, again, the final say lies with the director.
LikeLike
Vijay
August 16, 2008
Regarding “attributing everything to the director”, it happens only in movie reviews. Notice that if it is an album review of the same movie, and not a movie review, the music director somehow gets all the blame/credit and the movie director is left out. This is most often the case from what I have seen of reviews from all over. Only when a MD-director combination is throughly established as a successful one, is the director’s name even mentioned in music reviews(like say, Rahman-Mani).
Otherwise,I guess since the reviewers generally do not know what truly went behind the scenes, they assign the entire responsbility to the supposed creator of the product they are reviewing.
There was a dismal album by Karthik Raja sometime back, I dont remember the name(manadhodhu mazhai kaalam? or something like that), which had a lone OK song and he was mildly praised for that song in album reviews. Later it turned out that even that tune happend to be the director’s contribution and not Karthik Raja’s 🙂
LikeLike
DPac
August 16, 2008
Rangan saab,
im glad someone saw the meghna-liking girls angle. i was hopelessly being categorised as a perv just for suggesting the angle by others, when it was soo evident for everyone to see
LikeLike
brangan
August 16, 2008
Vijay: Oh man! ‘Kangal theduthey’ isn’t KR? Damn! But about MDs and music albums, it’s actually the same thing as movies and directors – because, I guess, the “buck stops here” authority is perceived to be the MD. In that sense, just as a director gets the praise/blame for a movie, a music director gets the praise/blame for an album.
DPac: Okay, I’m so not getting what you’re referring to. What’s this pervy thing about Meghna and the girls? Pray tell 🙂
LikeLike
karthik
August 17, 2008
Rangan….Would you count Dasav to be a creative compromise gone extremely overboard ??
LikeLike
raj
August 17, 2008
BR, appo who is responsible for Hey Ram, Dasavatharam, Gunaa etc? Santhana Barathy?KS Ravikumar? Kamal? Appo, Mahanadhi credit ellam Santhana barathykka? Appo Dasavatharam discredit ellam KS Ravikumarukka? Ergo, Kamal no longer is an egoistic, star-power, driven, self-obsessed, narcisstic megalomaniac. It is the director, silly :-). (Adhu ennavo, there seem to be different rules for different people – I am not saying consciously, but sub-consciously!)
LikeLike
brangan
August 17, 2008
karthik: Actually, no. IMO, Dasavatharam is an instance of a cleverly written film (on paper) that lost its way in the execution. What I’d consider a creative compromise — though in a slightly different sense than I’ve talked about in this article — is the 1980s setting of Subramaniyapuram. It didn’t have anything to do with the film (in the sense that the film could just as easily have been set in today’s times) — but it was a creative gimmick that didn’t violate the nature/intent of the film. It gave a buzz to the film and using IR’s Siru ponmani was a great touch. If they had to pander to the audience, this is a great way to do it — rather than putting in a koothu item number, which could have easily have been justified given the milieu.
LikeLike
Anand
August 18, 2008
Good example of creative compromise in Tamil would be Hey Ram!! (Song with Shah Rukh, Bringing in Tushar Gandhi). BTW, I saw Hey Ram recently on TV. It worked even better!!
LikeLike
raj
August 18, 2008
br, two gripes on SMP.
1. If you take out the 80’s recreation, there is nothing in the movie.
2. Nit picking – Siru Ponmani was late 70’s. It may still have been well used but the point is the movie seems to be getting accolades for wrong reasons – succesfully recreating the 80’s while the best song sounds like a harris jayaraj output from last year whereas the IR song reference belongs to late 70’s. Even if you say not much difference between 1979 and 1981, I would say there was a lot of difference in IR’s output post 1981.
LikeLike
Anand
August 19, 2008
Raj..some nitpicking on your comment 🙂
Shelf life of songs were longer during that period..today we do not listen to ballelakka but we listen to nakka mukka, at that time, I remember songs were played out in tea shops for months and in some cases years together!!
LikeLike
raj
August 19, 2008
anand, however I still do listen to Munbe Vaa and even ‘Thambi’.
About shelf life of IR songs, especially in and around Madurai, thats a different point altogether.
For that matter, I recently went around Madurai, Azhagar Kovil, Thirumogur etc. and IR still rules there! You wouldnt believe it but I hardly got to hear the latest hitz as I went around especially as you got out of Madurai and veered towards the small villages – it was still Annakili, Kunguma Chimizh(can you place that one), Raasave Unnai Nambi(Can you place THAT one?) etc.
LikeLike
Shankar
August 19, 2008
raj, are you from Madurai?
Of course, we do know the shelf life of IR’s 80s hits!! I don’t think there is any need to elaborate on that. 🙂 That was an altogether different plane…
BTW, Goods vandiyile and Raasathi manasule are still eminently listenable…
LikeLike
Anand
August 20, 2008
Nilavu thoongum neram was even better…the song’s pitch suited Mano to a T!
LikeLike
raj
August 20, 2008
shankar, yes
LikeLike
Shankar
August 21, 2008
raj, my mom is from there and I did part of my schooling in Madurai!! This was in 86/87.
LikeLike