By Thulasidasan Jeewaratinam
(Written this when Annaathe came out and my recent viewing of Varisu only confirms this as timely. Posting only now).
My recent viewing of Annaatthe confirmed my long-running doubts over the arcs Tamil Cinema was shaping (the extent of which this discussion prevails in other Indian language cinema(s) is excluded from this, due to my own lack of expertise in them) – that a relationship, be any, exists purely in the realm of black and white. The opposite-ends polarization of relationships in screenwriting arcs serves well, especially since the writing tries to form characters comprising cleavages of opposite ends, and this worked pretty well to many protagonist-antagonist showdowns in Tamil Cinema, namely a labour union leader against a behemoth corporate conglomerate business, jobless against industrial elite heir, poverty against money, all-encompassing leader against a casteist, and it was this kind of distinctions that colored the camps our protagonists and antagonists in since the dawn of MGR’s cinema, to Rajini’s and their successors. There’s a two-part problem to this. One, this tends to colour how directors and screenwriters mold the surrounding gallery of characters around the protagonist-antagonist. Second, it’s a complete black and white, namely you against us, and it’s the latter point that contributes to the much absence of grey shadings in most relationships in Tamil Cinema, whether protagonist-antagonist, husband-wife, brother-sister, parents-children, and such.
I, for one, can never stomach the endless tear-jerking sentimentality of relationships, because they’re inherently artificial. Relationships, be any, aren’t dichotomous. They’re shaped by reverberations from the past, the existing conundrums, and the worries of tomorrow. They’re underscored by fragilities and murmurs, resentments and love, equal parts pain and anger, equal parts sorrow and love, and our screenwriters just can’t seem to fathom this reality. Instead, it’s easier to cave into the brother-sister sentimentality of Annaatthe, Namma Veetu Pillai, Thirupaachi, Sivakasi, Vedhalam (to name some of the recent ones) until all the way to their spiritual predecessor, Paasa Maalar. There’s no one gap of resentment or anger that builds up between them, and when it does, it gets showered over a sudden cloak of forgiveness, and instead, we get lectured through broad sermons that forgiveness is a virtue that should be upheld, even in times of siblings’ rivalry. What causes this line of thinking? Is it ancestral, and a lineage of values that’s colored Indian traditions about how families should always be together, loving and full of affection? Does that, in any way, represent what reality is?
I’m reminded of how, 65 years ago, Satyajit Ray could already fathom the existing contradictions and the push-pull tugs of relationships; according to Ray’s biographer, W. Andrew Robinson, in Satyajit Ray: The Inner Eye: The Biography of a Master Film-Maker, Ray had become moved by the writing of how the son feels upon the death of his mother. Much of this is described on Aparajito’s entry on Wikipedia (check the “Origin and Development” column) and a greater in-depth reading is available through Robinson’s book, but the core is this – Ray becomes fascinated with the idea of a son, when confronted by the death of his beloved mother, feels a ‘strange’ sensation, namely the pleasure of being finally feel, unconstrained and lacking in shackles, unburdened. The grief materializes later, it always does, but the idea of the relief that comes at the end of a relationship ending is almost never addressed in arts because of the taboo and the skepticism that it would invite. According to Robinson (2003), Ray’s wife, Bijoya voiced her concerns to Ray himself, “Do you think people in our country will accept a son’s relief at having won his freedom at his mother’s death?” Such questions propel us to ask what audacity the artist has to question the sanctity of the relationship between a mother and the son, but what fantasy do we live in anywhere? Women, baring nine months, even find themselves cursing at their stomachs, finding walking unbearable – but does that mean they hate their children? Children lash at their parents, throw tantrums and wish for them to die sometimes – aren’t these real fragilities of the minds of the children, or are we censored from depicting the true stony path of relationships?
Sometimes, I think the censorship and the taming nature of our artistic depiction goes hand in hand. Perhaps we’re past the age of censoring authorities, because we’re self-censoring these days anywhere. Questioning country’s policies can be anti-national, pointing out our dubious hypocrisies in history can lead to a social exile – and these aren’t just different entities from cinema. Especially in Tamil cinema, politics and cinema goes hand in hand. These are broad blanket of ideas of how we must interpret things around us, and they’re being confronted upon us. This is why, in places with rich histories of traditionalism and conservatism, the conversations and discussions about rape culture, sexual harassment within family members, and mental health, are often greeted with loud choruses of boos. A son, can never and ever, feel anyways different for his mother, besides love, affection and a bullet-greeting sacrificial loyalty. Anything else is taboo. This is especially worrying, because literature and the broad sphere of arts has greeted us with various complexities within relationships and to reduce them to mind-numbing dichotomies isn’t just pain, but a great disservice to art itself.
Just to take the case of mother-son, there’s a rich history of subtext. You can refer to Ray’s source material, Pather Panchali, or even before that, Hamlet, or study the theories of Freud, or analyses the tragedies of Oedipus, and you’ve barely scratched the surfaces. These are the most often quoted materials and sources of references. Tarkovsky once said, the inclusion of classical music in his films, is because, he’s trying to ‘deepen’ the film (per se), with an ever-reaching subconscious pools of associations. According to Tarkovsky, cinema is the youngest of all arts, and therefore, it must do a greater deal to involve other arts (music, paintings, architecture, literature) to deepen the pools of association within the works of arts, to make it mean something. Whatever your preferences in films are, you must admit, there’s a greater urgency to deepen our films from the cookie-cutter products (or theme park rides) that litters our halls these days than during Tarkovsky’s time, yet his advice goes unheeded. We have to deepen our cinema, and for that to happen, we must first confront the complex contradictions that exists within the spheres of all relationships.
I mentioned Incendies, the superb Villeneuve film, because the brother-sister plight in the film was something astonishing for me to see. The casual tone, the highly provocative altercations, the fights and hugs that bond them later, and the hug in the swimming pool that nearly teeters between a soul-warming comfort refuge and the incestuous bond that gave birth to them. Kenneth’s Lonergan’s realistic overlapping dialogues gets more credit that his almost-documentary level depiction of love, hate and care between the two siblings in You Can Count on Me. Again, you don’t have to Asghar Farhadi to portray siblings with all the complexities they come with, but just start with understanding that people don’t just walk around making proclamations that they’ll take a bullet for their siblings. Nor do siblings heed to each other’s words all the time. Some find each other annoying (not the “cute” altercations that exists between siblings in Tamil Cinema) but real annoyances. Doesn’t Vijay ever get angry at his little girl being irritating in Theri? Doesn’t Keerthy Suresh ever feel annoyed about coming back every week from the North? I can go on and on, but you get the point. For now, just a sigh.
brangan
January 18, 2023
Good to hear from you, Thulasidasan Jeewaratinam — this was too good a comment, so made it a post.
If you ask our filmmakers, they will blame the audience that “the audience does not like complexity”. (There may be sone truth in that.)
Or they themselves have very simplistic worldviews as writers.
But most importantly, they do not care. The moviemakers do not care. The audiences do not care. The stars do not care.
Another thing: there are some filmmakers trying to make “relatiionship movie”. Like NITHAM ORU VANAM, the recent Ashok Selvan movie. But again, very simplistic.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Sri Prabhuram
January 18, 2023
This reminded me of the fragile relationship between family members was the father-son relationship in Indian. The son had “modern” (read: corrupt) views whereas the father was still keen on not losing his sense of morality. The incident that caused them to separate only made them pursue different pathways, until the “reunion” causing the father to kill the son. I don’t think I will ever see such a relationship arc like this and that movie was directed by SHANKAR of all people.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Cholan Raje
January 18, 2023
I think one reason why things are the way they are is that people want relationships to be simple– everyone wants to feel loved and it’s hard to feel that way when you know the people you have relationships with are complex and often inscrutable. Film is many things, and one of those things is a coping mechanism.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anand Raghavan
January 18, 2023
This reminded me of 70s Sivaji movie, Thangapadhakkam, strict father-corrupt son which was well etched.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
January 18, 2023
Along the lines of what Sriprabhuram said, we are seeking simplicity in a complex world. And that is disappointing indeed because I for one would like to see art mirror life at some level. So the hyper complexity around us should in fact provide fertile material for filmmakers but the opposite seems to be happening.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
January 18, 2023
Sorry, that was Cholan Raje who said it.
LikeLike
vijay
January 18, 2023
Thulasidasan, I think Kannathil muthamittal to a certain extent, just off the top of my head, portrayed the not-so-simple relationships, the resulting tensions in the family etc.. because of the adopted daughter. I think a writer being involved there may have helped in addition to a sensitive director. Vinnaithaandi Varuvaaya was another. But you cant expect such treatment in Vaarisu or Annaathe type films much. These are pre-packaged variety meals with only the wrapper color changing everytime. Even Thambikku endha ooru had more shades in it than Annaathe.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jeeva Pitchaimani
January 18, 2023
Don’t all these depictions owe pretty much to our mythological heritage? The stories that have no grey areas in their characterization when everything the characters feel about the other is either all or nothing? I recently read an old mythological tale in AL Basham’s magisterial The Wonder That Was India where a husband sleeps on the lap of his wife. Their child crawls towards the fireplace without knowing its potential danger. The wife does not wake her husband since it is a/an sinful/unwifely act to disturb him from sleep. She starts praying and the child ends up touching the fire and getting engulfed by it. Suddenly her prayers are answered when Lord Agni appears before her and returns her child and lauds her devotion to her husband. We see tons and tons of stories like these in mythology where there is absolutely no place for grey areas and most film-makers love these broad touches where it is easy to milk tears and emotions. When they are done well, like say in Sholay/Baasha/Bahubali, we don’t complain and in fact love these stories. But when done poorly like Atlee or Siva, we have no other choice but to rant.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Jeeva Pitchaimani
January 18, 2023
To add to Thulasidasan’s point, I notice families that have recent deaths at their homes depressed and paralysed more often than not due to one single reason- the families somehow get over the fact they miss the ‘departed’ one over time but what pulls them down emotionally is the fact they feel responsible for their death somehow. One of my friends lost his dad to Covid recently and he still thinks that he is the one whose irresponsibility and callousness that triggered his father’s death. When Covid struck his dad in his village, he was also struck by the same disease in Chennai. When he recovered, within less than a week his already hospitalized dad passed away. He still thinks that he ought to have travelled back to his village as soon as he heard the news that his dad has Covid and made prompt decisions with regard to the management of his illness.
The reason why I am writing this is, our deep-rooted grounding in mythology and ‘mythology-like’ stories in pop cinema makes us super-responsible for the well-being of our loved ones. If our child grows up to be a brat despite best efforts at parenting, the parent gets blamed for that. Whenever I visit houses of relatives where a natural death has occurred, at least one person I have seen would have used the word ‘kill’ (naan unna konnuten/unna konnutaingale) so indiscriminately and unscrupulously. People do not think twice to even consider the fact that almost 80 percent of our lives are determined by causes beyond our control and assuming or assigning complete blame on yourself or others, even after months and months of the tragedy is an act of complete ridiculousness and one of inviting substantial emotional disaster.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Raghu Narayanan
January 18, 2023
If we are to keep aside for a moment how relationships are being depicted in cinema and look at how we, as a society, handle relationships in real life. How many of us are really willing (firstly) and (then) capable of facing the complexities that we encounter in our relationships in day-to-day life? Every sort of relationship – husband-wife, parent-child (kid), parent-son/daughter, grand-parents-parent-children, siblings, and then the next circle of immediate family consisting of uncle, aunt, cousin, etc., comes with its own challenges and complexities. Has anyone ever encountered any individual in their lives who has had the willingness and wherewithal to handle his/her relationship with all others with the right approach, all the time? Me, never! Mostly, the types I have come across are those who are not willing to invest the required time and effort that is required to face the complexities and give its due, me included. Most of the time, we are so busy doing something else, that we hardly have the time (before) or the energy (after) to give the relationships the kind of attention they need. And we have suffered, are suffering, and will continue to suffer because of this. Most of the time, when faced with a complexity that we are too tired or too hurried to encounter, we just want to swipe it away! Or simply, we will turn it back on the other person, confusing between ‘you have a problem’ and ‘you are the problem’. It’s as if the society, collectively does not want to look itself in the mirror, afraid that it will see such a bad reflection of itself that it will be forced to do something about it for which it neither has the time nor the inclination. If this situation really does exist in society, then is it surprising that we will not be ready to consume it in the form of a movie?
LikeLiked by 2 people
Voldemort
January 18, 2023
Great post, and really interesting thread.
I think people would be willing to see complex relationships portrayed in cinema or literature, if they are realistic and done well. But the challenge is in making them believable and relatable, instead of giving in to easier cliches.
LikeLike
kaizokukeshav
January 18, 2023
Glorifying simplication is what every Telugu director would do. Be it Sirutai Siva, Vamsi Paidipally…or a Trivikram, Rajamouli. It’s not an Annathe and Varisu problem
LikeLike
Cholan Raje
January 18, 2023
100% agreed w/Raghu Narayanan. There’s a show named Moral Orel that, despite being American, I think reflects India more than Indian films do. India is not AS awful as Moral Orel’s characters, but there are a lot of things one can identify as relatable; the dad who feels inadequate in his ability to meet masculine standards and lashes out at his wife and kids, the mom who is often too exhausted from 24/7 chores and babysitting to fully accommodate the emotional needs of her children, etc. The characters are realistic and thus so exhausting that the main character is made “simple” and “naive” (like characters in our Tamil movies) in order to keep the viewer from being too exhausted to watch. BoJack Horseman also does a surprisingly accurate job of portraying humanity, but it too is exhausting. This is exactly why most filmmakers choose to keep characters and their relationships simple.
I suppose the solution to this problem is to ensure a realistic relationship drama is always (1) lightened up by some kind of distraction from the drama; Better Call Saul does this by having a cartel crime drama subplot, BoJack by having cartoon comedy and (2) keeping one of the characters unusually/unnaturally sweet and kindhearted to give audiences a rock to hold onto so the wave of realism doesn’t push them away from watching the film; BoJack does this with the character of Todd and Saul does this with its titular character (before his moral descent).
LikeLiked by 1 person
musical v
January 19, 2023
There are takers for both. Why not ask complex film makers to make it somewhat simple? Take songs or music for example. Most of Naushad’s music is classical but simple for the layman to enjoy his music.
Even literature can appeal if the stories told are simple. Shakespeare’s plays are complex only due to those dramatic language of those times being used. But the stories themselves are simple . Thats why those dramas got their versions in bollywood films like Omkara, QSQT, Maqbool etc. and were enjoyed by the audience.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Madan
January 19, 2023
Very good point. In music itself, the art of writing a simple and infectious motif and THEN building a complex arrangement around it seems to be lost.
LikeLike
Macaulay Perapulla
January 19, 2023
“Even literature can appeal if the stories told are simple. ” Allow me to share my disagreement gently. Literature is a mirror that reflects who we are. We are complex human beings. We love and hate people. We love and hate our parents. Our relationship with our partners is anything but simple. Our relationship with our work is anything but simple. In such a case, why would we want stories to be simple? Literature is that cave you enter into, in order to en’lighten’ those uncomfortable parts you didn’t know existed in your mind. You better have that cave strong and robust and intricate enough so that you discover something valuable in your life.
LikeLike
Macaulay Perapulla
January 19, 2023
@Madan In music, I think the power of simplicity is understated as what makes a song infectious is its grammar. Birth a song from a different grammar premise, and you will create something that is so familiar, yet so new. When ARR burst into the scene in the 90s, as you’ve written more eloquently than me, he had a new grammar. That made underrated songs like “Palakattu Machanuku” so cool and so much fun. It is timeless. If I had the money, I would build a shrine for that song. Today, everyone circa 2022 follows that grammar, and so he has to work doubly hard to not sound like him, and sound like him.
LikeLiked by 3 people
musical v
January 19, 2023
I should have said that Even literature can have mass appeal. Its appeal to the regular booklovers will always be there. And there are those who dont read books at all. When the latter is told that QSQT is like Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet, the said audience will have some idea of the great playwright and poet. Regular booklovers will always go for more complex literature of not only fiction but of more forms of literary works which cant be simplified for obvious reasons.
LikeLike
Macaulay Perapulla
January 19, 2023
நான் பெற்ற இன்ப பெருக இவ்வையகம்
LikeLiked by 1 person
Empty Musings
January 19, 2023
@Jeeva Pitchaimani, not sure I agree. Mahabharat is a treasure trove of complex characters and relationships. That’s why it has stood the test of time and writers still find new angles and perspectives in it.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Jeeva Pitchaimani
January 19, 2023
@Empty Musings Mahabharata is a complex tale with different shades of characters only for those who care to investigate it. Most of Mahabharata that is popular among common people are all simple tales that teach people what to do and what not to.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Raghu Narayanan
January 19, 2023
Yes. What most people know of Mahabharta and Ramayana are what were shown in the TV serials – over-simplified and over-dramatized versions, where more importance was given to emotional aspects and less to the complex questions. I am curious if at least the makers of these serials had someone who had read the original versions as part of their team.
LikeLike
aet
January 20, 2023
Just have patience. Look at mammootty in malayalam. He waited till he got into his ’70’s to do interesting roles that he likes. He seems to be on a roll doing different films . Also it helps that he has an audience who appreciates and accepts what he makes.
Maybe in their ’70’s ViJay and AJith too would have made enough money from their business ventures and would have gotten their kids well settled that they too would start doing more sensible roles and movies.. One can only hope so. One never knows. Maybe they dont even have the aesthetics and sensibility to know or choose good roles. In their heads ,they might be happy and content with what they are doing and would never want to do anything different.
Yes to more complex stories on screen. The standards movies set of being the best ever son/ daughter/gf/bf/wife/husband /friend is so unrealistic.
TV serial ramayana and mahabharatha was definitely a ploy by the rss to “hindutvise” the whole nation by making a glamorous oversimplified version of the epics to lure and brainwash the whole nation . At present, they surely are reaping the benefits of broadcasting that serial .
LikeLike
brangan
January 20, 2023
The simple truth is that most people watch movies for entertainment and do not want to be “disturbed” – at least, too much. Tha maximum you can get to is the “son hating father” dynamic in THIRUCHITRAMBALAM or Nithya Menen talking about her parents divorce in OKK, but even these were camouflaged by their rom-com arcs.
The cost of filmmaking was so low during K Balachander’s time that he could pull off an AVARGAL, for instance — where Rajinikanth plays a truly sadistic bastard. But even there, he remains one-dimensional – the shock lies in the STORY, not in the (Rajini) CHARACTER.
I think the only time mainstream audiences have embraced complex characters as a movement was in the New Hollywood phase. I mean, VIRGINIA WOOLF was one of the top hits of the year. After the 80s, though, the landscape changed, filmmaking became more corporate than personal, and only in the indies do you find characters who have shades of grey.
LikeLiked by 2 people
JPhil
January 20, 2023
?Kumblangi Nights .
LikeLike
Raghu Narayanan
January 20, 2023
“The simple truth is that most people watch movies for entertainment and do not want to be “disturbed” – at least, too much.”
@BR: With you on that. To add further, most people look at entertainment as a form of ‘escape’ from the reality of their everyday lives, and cinema has taken the prime spot as a form of entertainment. Not surprising, given how accessible it is and how easy it is to cause an impact on human senses using this medium. So hardly surprising that people, in general, would not be ready to see a very close reflection of their everyday lives being played out in what is supposed to be an ‘escape-time’ from the very same thing.
Speaking of reality in cinema, on a tangential note, have you ever come across in Indian cinema a movie that has no background music? I don’t mean just absence of songs, like Kuruthipunal, but just total absence of background music at all. Was thinking, wouldn’t that be an obvious first step towards making a ‘realistic’ movie? Whenever, whatever emotion we feel in real life, there’s no one helping us with a background score at that time 😀
LikeLiked by 1 person
Hari
January 20, 2023
Yes, there is no music in real life, but then, you can’t choose the frame in which you view other people, you don’t get to choose the colour of lights, and you don’t get to skip over the boring parts of life.
But if you are really curious, Nadunisi Naaigal by GVM did not have any music.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Macaulay Perapulla
January 20, 2023
“Yes, there is no music in real life” W.H.A.T. A.R.E.Y.O.U.S.A.Y.I.N.G”.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
January 20, 2023
Ditto, I hear entire Ilayaraja and other interludes in my head when I’m just tryin’ to think!
LikeLike
Madan
January 20, 2023
The counter argument to that – the music part – is cinema is an art form so it’s not intended to be a documentary. It approaches our life from an artistic perspective. The issue with only depicting simplistic relationships and characters is that it’s a bit like saying only comic books are good for your health.
But I have a theory too as to why, let alone Tamil cinema, you can’t make a Gone Girl for wide theatrical release anymore. Why did blue collar audience seek escapism in cinema? Because their worries were very real and they needed cinema like they needed, well, sarakku. The professional class had it good for the last three to four decades though they, especially Indians, may strenuously deny it. So they wanted stimulation from cinema instead. Covid has been the beginning of pricking that comfort bubble. With layoffs spreading and inflation biting, the part of the audience that comes from the professional class may also be gravitating to escapism. So, the message to Bollywood is also that it’s not just that you have lost the multiplex audience to OTT. But that the multiplex audience too wants more of KGF now. Or Avatar, for that matter.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Macaulay Perapulla
January 20, 2023
@Madan Escapism has been an old staple strawman argument. Today, when faced with a surfeit of choice, we think tent pole movies have to offer something that is so unique that it merits us to make an effort to go and watch.
Before I knew anything about Kantara, I remember how my Kannadiga friend went about convincing me to watch. She was ready to plan my tickets and join us. That was the amount of inspiration she got from the movie which showed, at least in the last 15 minutes of the movie, one of the powerful descent of god from humans captured on screen.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Madan
January 20, 2023
That’s true as well but on the other hand, the fact that something like this is happening in Hollywood suggests this may also be a more secular trend.
Also I don’t really regard Kantara as a classic tentpole. It’s so unique – intensely regional and about a subject that would otherwise be considered dull (govt vs tribals) and it elevates it with brilliant filmmaking and deep conviction. In a way, it is like the simple motif-overlayed-with-textural complexity kind of art I mentioned upthread. That’s why it broke all sorts of barriers and did totally unprecedented business.
LikeLike
Macaulay Perapulla
January 20, 2023
@Madan To me, tentpole is post-facto definition. Apparently, in STR’s recent hit movie, there was another such aspect that was written by Jeyamohan focusing on the local sudalaimadan deity. Apparently, Gowtham got afraid of how it would be taken and chopped off those parts. Jeyamohan wrote about it recently after the success of Kantara. Now, we will see so many gods coming to screen, thanks to Kantara.
LikeLike
Madan
January 20, 2023
There is that too but the fact that it’s happening in Hollywood too suggests to me that this could be a more secular trend. I mean, they have always had choice unlike the Indian market.
Also I think Kantara is quite unique and not like a classic tentpole really. The premise of tribals vs development sounds dry but the sheer conviction of the makers makes the film succeed against the odds. I think that’s why AK warned against trying to repeat ‘Kantara’. You can’t. It’s not a formula. And if all tentpoles were this authentic I for one would hardly complain about them.
LikeLike
Madan
January 20, 2023
Double comment, sorry. The first one didn’t show up.
LikeLike
musical v
January 21, 2023
Cant help but recall La La land film, its songs and its lyrics. Especially the lyrics. Can they be called simple or profound?
LikeLike