Mumbai 2010 Afterword: It's A Wonderful Life!

A film festival is like life itself. Too much is packed in a short span of time. There is a mad rush to get as much as we can, and are limited only by our own constrains of body and spirit. There are lots of hits and misses, depending on the choices we make. And in spite of all this we can only have a limited slice of this gigantic pie - it is all over before we could realize it.

"This time they do not have such a good collection of movies." You can often wonder this yourself, if not this being a common complain among the delegates. The truth is, only the most well-informed of cinephiles can be sure of something like this. Out of close to 200 films screened, a person can practically watch a maximum of 35-40. What if he was struck by the worst of luck and those were actually the weakest films of the festival? His complain, though true from his own perspective, would still not be relevant as he missed 160 other films. How can one tell? How much can we know enough to judge something as enormous as this?

My first experience was Pune 2008. Watched 17 films in four days and was extremely satisfied, in spite of some poor bets. I still have that catalogue. And today I regret not having watched "Cries and Whispers", "Red Desert", "Bhuvan Shome", "Devi", and "M" that were screened there. Also, there was a retrospective on Pedro Almodovar. Back then I was not aware of his merits, neither of Bergman or Antonioni or Lang. What would have been my reaction to that impressive line-up had I known cinema a little better? It is only in retrospection that I can see what I missed. The impression of an edition of a festival ultimately depends on the movies you choose to watch, which is also the most fascinating and important aspect of it.

I do not want to know the plot. I choose movies by researching, and picking the ones that have been awarded at other festivals during the past one year. Also, I choose filmmakers whose previous works have impressed me. I also have very interesting experience with Hungarian and Turkish films and am a little biased towards them while making my choices. But the most important thing is - I do not want to miss a film or a filmmaker who has earned a reputation over the decades and is now celebrated the world over. Hence, I did not miss the films by the Japanese masters this time; neither did I miss 'The Exorcist' or 'Khandahar'. Also, I made sure to watch the latest films by Jane Campion, Sofia Coppola, and Abbas Kiarostami. And since I mixed movies - classics and fresh, and filmmakers - legends and first-timers, I had a very wholesome experience.

If you were unsatisfied, you can just say: “I wasn't very lucky”. And hope for a better experience next time. Unlike life, thankfully, there is a next chance in this. I am more than satisfied. Thanks to the makers for all the great films, to my bad luck for all the not-so-good ones, and to this great carnival that has made me alive again with the hope and the inspiration to do some good work. Meanwhile, the wait for MAMI 2011 has begun...

Mumbai 2010 Day #7: Is It Over?

"Is it over?", a helpless Chris MacNeil asks Father Karras after a horrifying session of exorcism performed on her daughter Regan.

"Is it over?". I am saddened as I leave PVR and the festival ends. During the last one week it has been a part of me. It will be a difficult year-long wait for the next edition.

It was my first experience of William Friedkin's 'The Exorcist'(1973) and I believe all the reputation, legacy, and notoriety associated with this classic is justified. Unlike other horror films, it doesn't depend greatly on 'chills' and 'shocks', but there is a lingering, disturbing impact of the film achieved by long sequences of possession and exorcism of the little girl. After all these years, the scariness might have aged, but the psychological impact has not worn out. The film was followed by a discussion on it by Jane Campion.

The German film 'Shahada'(2010), by Burhan Qurbani was like the Islamic equivalent of yesterday's 'Of Men & Gods'. Tackling similar issues of faith, quoting extensively from the religious texts, and made equally brilliantly, 'Shahada' also has a more popular appeal. Undoubtedly, one of the best movies of the year. This film also made me realize that these days I am very fascinated by movies asking spiritual and theological questions.

'Shahada' could have been a beautiful 'last film' of the festival. And after that I was confused whether I should risk its impact by watching the 10.30pm screening of the Turkish film, 'Kosmos'(2010), by Reha Erdem. Some said it was an ordinary film. Thank god I decided to go for it, and discovered that it wasn't ordinary at all. It was in fact very unusual, a tale of a corrupt, lustful 'messiah' who steals compulsively and 'heals' people mysteriously. I won't be able to forget this film. And weird films like these are necessary to complete your festival experience.

As I was returning home late night, I crossed the Lakshmi-Narayan temple on my way. As a habit, I closed my eyes and uttered a prayer. What instantly came to my lips was a 'Thank You God' along with a wide smile that lasted for some time. Blessed to experience cinema at its best!

P.S. For the record Must Watch Movie Before You Die #6 The Exorcist (1973)

Mumbai 2010 Day #6: Duties and Dilemmas

I chose to watch Benedek Fliegauf’s ‘Womb’(2010) because its script had won Krzysztof Kieslowski Award at Cannes this year. And it was apparent why. The film deals with the ethical and moral questions related to cloning and incest, and tells an immensely dramatic story without appearing to be doing that, very similar to Kieslowski's cinema. It will take a thousand years for such a film to be made in India.

‘Certified Copy’(2010) was a popular choice among the audience. A day in the lives of an English author and a French lady, and set in Italy, directed by the Iranian master Abbas Kiarostami, the film was a confluence of cultures. Ending on an ambiguous note, it was like an O. Henry story in ‘Before Sunrise/Sunset’ flavour, with Kiarostami’s touches. Loved the film, and Juliette Binoche, again. She had won the Best Actress award at Cannes for this film.

I just realized, three of today’s films were honoured at Cannes. ‘Of Men and Gods’(2010), directed by Xavier Beauvois won the Grand Prix this year. Based on the real story of a small group of Cistercian monks serving the Muslim community in Algeria and trying to survive the hostility of the local terrorist groups, it was one of the most spiritual films I have seen, besides being extremely affecting and well-made. My pick of the day.

Another special screening late night. Sofia Coppola’s ‘Somewhere’(2010) won the Golden Lion at Venice 2010. It was her second film that I watched, and like the hugely acclaimed ‘Lost in Translation’(2003), it left me wondering – Why is this such a good film? It had just a glimpse into the superficial luxuries and the lustful life of an average Hollywood star, and the responsibilities he has to fulfill towards his daughter. Neither a definite progression of story, nor a clear ending, it didn’t even try to be taken seriously. Perhaps some day I would know why.

On the penultimate day, my count reaches twenty-four. I don’t expect much from tomorrow. Just one good movie would do. And the one I have selected is truly special! Just a few hours left for that…

Mumbai 2010 Day #5: Family Matters

Could watch only three movies today. Seems this is how it's going to be for the next two days as well. If only I had finished my assignment before this fest...

Tai Kato's 'In Search of Mother'(1962), the story of a drifter looking for his mother who had abandoned him as a child was very good in parts. But it was inconsistent. I liked the ending, though.

Rajko Grlic's Croatian film 'Just Between Us'(2010) used an interesting structure to tell the story of a family of promiscuous people, just about everyone sleeping with multiple partners. Call it a sex comedy, but it ended with a message. The last line of the film was: "These bones slept with that bones. So what?"

Thanks to another 'public demand', I got to watch the third film of the day. 'Next Year in Bombay'(2010) is a documentary by Jonas Pariente and Mathias Mangin on the small Jewish community in and around Mumbai. One interesting thing I would like to share here is this. There was a shot of a public transport bus stopping at the stop before moving ahead. That shot was an inversion (mirror image) of the original shot. The entrance and exit to the bus were on its right side and the bus-number was inverted. I asked the directors, who were present during the screening, the reason for it. They said, while shooting they shot this bus that moved from right to left of the frame. During the edit they realized that it was not a desirable motion. (Psychologists say our perception of motion is largely affected by the way we write. So, a left-to-right motion is more comfortable for the eyes of English/Hindi audience than a right-to-left motion.) So, in the edit, they decided to invert the image.

Alfred Hitchcock has used the reverse of this principle. In 'Vertigo' when the protagonist, who fears height is running up the spiral stairs of a tower, he moves from right-to-left-to-up. This, psychologists say, is the most disturbing motions for our subconscious!

P.S. It is interesting to note that cultures reading right-to-left would probably find the same shot less disturbing!

Mumbai 2010 Day #4: Ruins and Regrets

A family of husband and wife with their kids, twins. A tragedy. Father dies. Son and Mom go on to live a life of poverty. Daughter is adopted by a rich family. Decades pass. In the end they reunite, again due to a similar tragedy. Add to this some subplots like: pre-marital pregnancy, lonely mother at home as son is away working, the new daughter-in-law complaining of the house being small, and all, and all. What looks like a summary of popular Hindi cinema cliches of the 60s is China's Official Entry for the Oscars this year, Feng Xiaogang's 'Aftershock'(2010). Easily the weakest movie this festival. I don't know why there was such a demand for this film, so much so that it had to be re-screened at 10.30 in the night. China's last year's entry, 'Forever Enthralled' was such an amazing film, and even that couldn't be shortlisted in the top five. I don't see any hope for 'Aftershock'. By the way, the friend sitting next to me claimed he heard some sobs during the movie!

Mikio Naruse's classic 'When a Woman Ascends the Stairs'(1960) tells the story of a virtuous bar-woman and her journey through customers' infatuation and the desire to live a better life. Naruse is not as popular as other Japanese masters, but after this I would like to watch more of his films. I was very tired when the film started and could not pay much attention to it. But it slowly engulfed me with its beautiful emotional appeal. Also, I don't think I have seen a Japanese film of that era with such a formal grammar of shooting and edit. Very impressive.

I was called for an important meeting. So I could watch only three films today. But thank god I watched Mrinal Sen's 'Khandahar'(1983). The film made my day. Easily, one of the best Hindi films you are going to see, starring Naseeruddin Shah, Shabana Azmi, Pankaj Kapoor, and Annu Kapoor, this film is also a mesmerizing visual experience, shot at a vast landscape of ruins. Three city boys visit what was once the palace of a royal family over a weekend. And they meet a girl living with her paralyzed mother, both waiting for a man who would never come. Like the old building, slowly awaiting its death, this mother-daughter duo's indefinite wait is not very different. Eventually, time will take them away, and we won't be able to do anything. This film was chosen as one of the ten best films released all over the world in 1983-84. I am not surprised. Watch it if you want to experience the rare gems of Hindi cinema. I feel proud again.

Mumbai 2010 Day #3: Biutiful Day

Nagisa Oshima is one of the pioneers of Japanese New Wave. And the first thing I noticed in his film, 'The Sun's Burial'(1960), was the highly saturated shades of primary colours, reminding me of Godard's 'Pierrot le fou'. 'The Sun's Burial' is a view into the criminal lives of slum dwellers in Osaka.

Yojiro Takita's 'Departures'(2008), that won the Foreign Film Oscar last year, is one film you would find difficult to forget. Introducing us to the traditional Japanese custom of preparing the dead for cremation or burial, the film truly, as the festival catalogue says, was 'a moving celebration of life in midst of corpses and coffins'. Whether it was better than 'The White Ribbon' is a question I need time to answer. And that is a beautiful situation to be in.

First-timer Natalia Smirnoff's 'Puzzle'(2010) was a sweet surprise. The story of a middle-aged Argentinian woman's discovery of a passion for solving jig-saw puzzles left me wondering - why there is such a huge difference between the first-time directors in our country and those abroad. I wish some Indian filmmaker could make a film as good as this.

Another first-film, that was awarded the Best Debut at Berlin this year, Babak Najafi's Swedish movie 'Sebbe'(2010), was extremely well-made. But the writing left me unsatisfied. The story of a mother-son bond amidst conflicts within and around left me wanting for more.

But the best of the day, and till now of the festival, turned out to be the film I had most eagerly awaited. Thanks to the organizers, they screened it again tonight after yesterday's mad rush and disappointed faces. Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu's 'Biuitiful'(2010) does not have the structural complexity of his earlier films - 'Amores Perros', '21 Grams' or 'Babel', but it is way more complicated and layered. The story of Uxbal, brillinatly portrayed, as ever, by Javier Bardem, is almost straightforward in narration, but the way it explores the protagonists' character, it leaves you grieved and elated at the same time. It is as if the master has overcome his wonderful fascination with screenplay structure, and has moved to a higher level of artistic maturity, something not many can achieve. For creating something like 'Biutiful', you need to be a genius. With this film the filmmaker affirms his position as the one the living greats in world cinema.

Mumbai 2010 Day #2: Inspiration in Chaos

It could have been a great day with such high-profile movies in line. But it turned out to be a little disappointing. And the disappointment is more on my own diminished stamina. After two back-to-back movies today, I genuinely felt the need to take a break. I was hungry and had this headache. So, missed the third movie and prepared myself for 'Biutiful', one of the most eagerly awaited movies this year. But it was so crowded that I couldn't enter the theater. Finally, watched only three movies today.

Kenji Mizoguchi's classic 'The Story of the Last Chrysanthemums'(1939) takes us to the journey of an actor's achievement of his true potential with the help of the woman of his love. Deeply moving, this was my third Mizoguchi film and I believe the warmth that his films have is very rare in cinema. In that aspect, he is certainly way ahead of Kurosawa. Also, this film was unique with the presence of long scenes rendered in one shot. Text-book stuff.

Jane Campion is the President of the Jury this year. Her film 'Bright Star'(2008), the kind of love story I have stopped watching, is about the great romantic poet, John Keats' love affair with the protagonist, Fanny Brawne. Beautifully shot, and with some great performances, this one is for you to watch with your girlfriend, especially if both of you love romantic poetry.

But the movie that made my day despite the above-mentioned disappointments was to come last. One of the most celebrated films in the last couple of years, 'The White Ribbon' from Germany, blends drama with mystery in an unusually affecting way. Unforgettable characters, and layers upon layers into the lives of a village community, full of sins, and still hopeful of purity and peace, this movie made me react (for the first time): Wish I could write something like this! It shouldn't be difficult to find it. Go for it. My first 'must watch' recommendation from the festival.

For the record: Must Watch Before You Die #5 The White Ribbon (2009)

Mumbai 2010 Day #1: Of Battles and Wars

Out of the five movies I watched today, the protagonists of three die in the end. That apart, most of the primary characters in these movies lost their lives. What a bloody day to begin with! Also, since this festival has a special section on the best of Japanese Cinema, three of today's movies were Japanese classics.

'No Regrets for Our Youth'(1946) is one of the earliest films by Akira Kurosawa. It is also very different from his other films, having a female protagonist and being extremely political in nature. In fact the unique blend of politics and personal lives of a woman and two men reminded me of 'Hazaaron Khwahishein Aisi'. After finishing all of Kurosawa's major works, it is good to find these rare gems.

Seijun Suzuki's 'Branded to Kill'(1967) doesn't just sound like a Tarantino film. The very first few seconds into it and you will realize, this film must have had a big impact on him. And I just read that it actually did. Noir elements stylized to create a stuff that is still fresh, I am sure this film would have been a sensation back then, as much as it was in that PVR screen today.

The day also introduced me to Takeshi Kitano, the great contemporary Japanese master. 'Boiling Point'(1990) is the kind of stuff you look for in film festivals. I was badly hoping that the last film of the day should make me laugh and it did made me do that badly. Plus, it was weird, and did not make much sense - an essential ingredient for festival experience.

Also watched two recent movies. 'Kick Off'(2009), the story of a group of Iraqi refugees residing in a football stadium after the US invasion, and 'The Man Who Will Come'(2009), an Italian film set in the Second World War period. The impact of the latter was so immense that I would rather call it a horror film. The story of German cruelty against the women, children, and elderly of a countryside community was easily the most powerful film of the day. And it was the reason why I wanted to follow it and conclude the day with something funny.

Tomorrow promises to be even better. For now, I should just take a good sleep.

Mumbai Film Fest Opening Day: Got Last-Minute Lucky

Just after writing the last post, my brother informed me that he has a pass for the opening movie and he won't be able to go. So, I got lucky!

As expected, the Opening Ceremony started late, and the punctual ones like me were thanked 'for our patience'. And when the hosts, Minissha Lamba and Prachi Desai, did come on stage, it was followed by one embarrassing show. It was only after two hours that the opening movie did start.

And thanks to cinema, and what better than a good Hollywood movie in a situation like this, that my evening got made. David Fincher's latest 'The Social Network' on the story behind the creation of Facebook and its emergence as a major social phenomenon opened the festival.

It is an involving and if you may, inspiring, movie and I would recommend you to watch it. The poor sound system of Chandan Theater (the Main Venue for the fest) didn't allow me to comprehend all of the dialogue and I would want to watch it again. Right now, I am going to read about Mark Zuckerberg and his partners. And then will go to bed early: the next few days are going to be busy.

P.S. Last time I went to Chandan, a major single-screen theater, it was to watch 'Dabangg' at the stalls. And today it is welcoming International delegates for a prestigious film festival, despite not being well-equipped. Guess, this is how things will always be in this country!

Binge Time

It is back to the madness. Mumbai Film Festival 2010 begins today. As always, the opening movie can be attended only by invitation. And no body remembered inviting me, so I am not going. I would rather wait for it, ‘The Social Network’ by David Fincher, to get released in the theatres. Guess it will not be before December. But it’s OK.

It’s OK because the line-up of the movies in the next seven days is so exciting that missing the opening movie does not seem to be an issue. This time, it is indeed the best of modern world cinema. And they have a special segment on the best films from the Japanese film history. After a long wait I finally got the schedule last week and spent hours making my own plans for the next seven days: what to watch, what to miss. It is such a pity that you can practically watch only up to five movies a day. The day gets over by the time you finish the fifth!

Last year my days at the fest also included three hours of travel time – I stayed far from the venue. This time, I would save time on that. Hoping to post a daily report on this blog.

But this time there is one little problem. There is this assignment I have taken and am afraid they would call me for a meeting or something. Hope they do not do that before 28th, the day when the event ends and I do get to beat my last year’s record of 34 movies.

What I most importantly hope from this fest is that it inspires me to write a good script again. It has been quite some time since I did that!

The Natural Successor

Following is an extract from Richard Linklater’s philosophical animation film ‘Waking Life’: “If you look at the time scales that are involved here (in the evolution of man) -- two billion years for life, six million years for the hominid, 100,000 years for mankind as we know it -- you're beginning to see the telescoping nature of the evolutionary paradigm… when you get to agricultural… to scientific revolution and industrial revolution, you're looking at 10,000 years, 400 years, 150 years. You're seeing a further telescoping of this evolutionary time. What that means is that as we go through the new evolution, it's gonna telescope to the point we should be able to see it manifest itself within our lifetime, within this generation.”

I have always believed in this. The species that follows us should take less time to evolve from us than what we took to evolve from our predecessors. And, this does not happen overnight. We must be able to find the initial hints of it among us. Also, there is another kind of ‘telescoping’ that nature has achieved. Evolution has progressively condensed the learned behaviour among species. In fact, the present state of information technology is another step towards that – we know infinitely more than our predecessors a few centuries ago. An average man today knows so much more about such a varied range of topics. And all is made unbelievably accessible to us by the Internet which I believe is the next great invention in the series of agriculture, the wheel, and steam engine.

Nature has a grand plan manifested in the form of the wonderful evolution of life. Presently the humans are at its pinnacle. But the height of this summit is constantly increasing. We will perish if nature decides to do so, but its great journey will never cease. And to achieve its forward motion, it will choose a species better suited to carry on its expectations than us. Going by the discussion above, the initial hints of that species must be present among us.

Is that species the Artificial Intelligence? Can it be considered a species at all? Why not? The difference between living and non-living is incomprehensible if we consider all that exists as different manifestations of the same space-time or mass-energy continuum. A polythene bag, filled with air like a balloon, dancing in the wind, I believe, is as living in its existence and capacities as we are. It is matter, and energy, some chemicals, and some internal and external forces, and all this cause a perceptible ‘event’. A kettle filled with boiling water makes noise and vibration. Again, and interplay of matter, and energy, and some internal and external forces. We might be more complex, but essentially are manifestations of similar forces. Our living and thinking and indulging in abstractions are nothing but more complicated ‘events’ generated from similar forces. Why then are we called ‘living’ and the polythene bag is not? And if there is indeed something, evolved out of us, that can perform most of what we can, including the telescoping of knowledge and information, does calling it ‘artificial’ rule it out as the potential species that would replace us?

Shankar’s ‘Robot’ begins with the haunting tune of ‘O naye insaan, dharti pe aa’, welcoming a ‘New Human’ onto this earth. I can not help but think whether it is a prophetic call to the true and ‘natural’ successor of man.

All in the Name

Theo Angelopolous’ ‘Eternity and a Day’ is a beautiful movie. But look at the title. Isn’t it beautiful by itself? There are some movie with such interesting titles that we instantly feel like watching them. Bergman’s ‘Smiles of a Summer Night’, Polanski’s ‘Cul-de-sac’, Linklater’s ‘Me and Orson Welles’, and Scorsese’s ‘Last Temptation of Christ’ belong to different genres. But I find all of these titles extremely interesting.

Was going through The Guardian’s list of must-watch movies and came across some truly catchy titles. These must be good films, having been recommended in such a list. The following are a handful of them – films I want to watch just for their titles.
1. Closely Observed Trains (1966)
2. Eyes Without a Face (1960)
3. Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill! (1965)
4. Five Easy Pieces (1970)
5. I Walked With a Zombie (1943)
6. Man Bites Dog (1992)
7. My Life as a Dog (1985)
8. Nil By Mouth (1997)
9. Play It Again, Sam (1972)
10. Serial Mom (1994)
11. Spanking the Monkey (1994)
12. Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song (1971)
13. The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension (1984)
14. Thirty-Two Short Films About Glenn Gould (1993)
15. Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown (1988)

Do you find any of these interesting? Can you and I predict, without going to IMDB, the genre and the premise of these films? I just feel intuitively that ‘I Walked With a Zombie’ would be a sweet romantic film. Also, ‘Closely Observed Trains’ reminds me of ’12 Angry Men’ or of Wong Kar Wai films. But what the hell is the Buckaroo Banzai adventure? Any guesses?

Intentionally Inconsistent

Last week, I got the chance to watch Woody Allen’s ‘Crimes and Misdemeanors’ (1989). I am dying to write a shot-by-shot discussion of it. Guess this shows what impression it had on me.

The film is a uniquely heterogenous, and successful, blend of drama and comedy. Heterogenous, because it distinctly carries the flavour of the two genres by juxtaposing two different stories, and their contrasting protagonists. The alternating narration of these parallel stories is so self-assured that each would make a separate film of its own, and would be definitely within their genre-defining parameters. I can’t be so sure, but I don’t remember Woody Allen photographing his characters in close-ups and shot-reverse-shot patterns. He keeps the shots medium-close, with the characters within the physical or psychological edges of the frame. Their staging is purposeful and theatrical, and camera renders them generally as a neutral, objective narrator, without trying to draw our attention to details. Allen’s wonderful writing does that for us. Unlike other filmmakers who tell intimate, personal stories, he does not make us ‘read’ them through their face, though they are psychologically as interesting as any of other great cinema characters. He wants us to sit back and enjoy. I believe this is the style most suitable to all intelligent comedies, mimicking the experience at a theatre. This is the common style of most Woody Allen comedies.But in this film, in spite of sticking to his style, Allen has taken pains to elaborately explore the dramatic potential of his scenes, esp. narrating the track of Judah Rosenthal. He is a rich, and successful ophthalmologist, revered by society, loved by family; apparently, he is all you want a man to be like, despite the fact that he is a ‘non-believer’. And in the first scene itself, we are informed about his extra-marital affair. His track stays absolutely true to the grammar of the drama genre, both in the writing, and especially, in the mise-en-scene. So much so, that it draws our attention to its sticking-to-theory nature.

On the other hand we have the character and the black comedy of Cliff Stern, played by the writer-director himself. He is a loser in every sense – a complete contrast to Judah. There is infidelity in his life too, only it is too naïve and unintentionally funny. And we laugh at this miserable state of Cliff. Essentially Woody Allen stuff, this half of the film is in fact a huge and obvious distraction from the immensely dramatic moral dilemma of the other. I kept wondering on this obvious inconsistence. Only later I understood that the philosophical question behind the film – whether God is our moral guardian with his “eyes always on us” or not – is the spine of both of these stories as well. The writer’s triumph is to give us a fulfilling end – that justifies both stories and their convergence – and the director succeeds in meeting the challenge the writer set-out to achieve – to explode two genres and come up with a unique and memorable work. Roger Ebert says about this heterogenous, parallel narration: “The technique is Shakespearean: The crimes of kings are mirrored for comic effect in the foibles of the lower orders.” This realization suddenly makes things even more significant. But the unusual impact of the film, its brave and fresh attempt at creating something new out of itself was something that impressed me while the end credits rolled.

Hope to come up with the shot-by-shot study some day in the near future.