Wednesday, 22 December 2010
MRINAL SEN, Early Years (2)
During 1937 - 1938, the International Brigade was created after the Spanish Civil War. The greatest of writers of all time formed a part of it. Stephen Spender and Hemingway were two of them. I chanced upon a long poem in this paper penned by Pablo Neruda who was then being chased by the police. It was titled, Fugitive from somewhere in America. Ralph Fox who died in the Spanish War at 36 fascinated me greatly.
During that time, I had seen a film of P.C.Barua and these experiences inspired me to write an article entitiled CINEMA AND THE PEOPLE.
Since the Communist Party of India was banned at the time, Sen,s political association were mainly underground. He became an enthusiastic and active participant in the activities of the Indian People,s Theatre Association (IPTA), founded around that time, a cultural organisation aimed at raising political consciousness among the masses against the British rule through theatre. Since the IPTA was known to be the cultural arm of the Communist Party of India. His involvemente with the IPTA brought him in close touch with the masses and also with artists who shared his political ideology and social philosophy. "I was deeply impressed that art could do so much for the people, that it could creat a certain climate." he reminisces.
"I wil not say whether I was more or less of a Marxist earlier. But I definitely know that I have moved from where I stood years ago. I have changed with age and experience. I have seen a lot, lost a lot, gained a lot and learnt a lot. I have a dialogue with myself and I carry it over to my art. Cinema is evolving all the time and evolving quite rapidly. The advantage in technology has a strong bearing on it. It changes the dimensions of the art. I too, have changed with time."
Interestingly, Mrinal-da, has never been a member of the Communist Party of India, in fact, he broke away from it in 1964. "I go my own way. I go by my conscience. I do not have to go by the mandates of the Party." he once said.
The Bengal Famine of 1943 left a deep impression on the Mrinal, just 20 years old. This impression has remained with him throughout his life. BAISHEY SRAVAN, was his way of purging himself of the traumatic memories of the time. The famine saw 5 million people starve to death in Bengal. "I cannot remember a single day when I did not have to step over 7 or more dead bodies, just lying there.... They just starved and dropped dead," he says. The riots in Calcutta on August 16, 1946, which took a heavy toll of innocent lives, also disturbed him deeply. These historical events and the city of Calcutta found expression, reflection, questioning and interpretation in many of his films.
Sen met and fell in love with Geeta, a theatre actress and have a son, Kunal. Sen says, "I was born of Bengali parents, I married a Bengali, and we live in a Bengali milieu. But there is hardly anything any longer which could be called truly Bengali or truly India or purely German. We live in a kind of bastard culture, which is great for me. I feel that, sooner or later, we would arrive at a stage where to find a cultural identity, to find cultural roots, will be an exercise in futility."
After studying sound recording at Aurora studios along with his experience in theatre inspired his very first full length feature film, RAAT BHOR, in 1956.
His journey through his own cinema too, has been marked more by diversity than by uniformity, even by stagnancy at times, when he stopped making films for 8 years. This, however, is precisely what makes him and his films so much the subject of debate, discussion and argument.
Shoma Chatterjee
Saturday, 11 December 2010
MRINAL SEN / Early Years (1)
When Mrinal - da was one year old, Deshbandhu Chittaranjan Das came to Faridpur to preside over the Provincial Ryot Conference -- that was to be his last speech. At the tender age of eight, Mrinal was arrested for having participated in a procession and singing the then banned Bankim Chandra song BANDE MATARAM. As he recalled later, "The police surrounded us, and many people ran away, but i could not, and I was arrested along with the others. I was the youngest of them all. The policeman, told me that I would be beaten to jelly because I was the youngest, and started crying. So I was in police custody for an hour or so and then people from my house came and took me back. That was my first encounter with the police".
"ours was not an economically affluent family. It was not poor either. It was numerically a large family. My father was a lawyer -- independent and upright without being arrogant. He was the leader of the Bar Commission in our small town. Throughout his career he made it his mission to lend active legal support to militant political activists -- "freedom fighters". Very few of who could escape death by hanging. My father suffered disbarment for 6 months when he boycotted the court session as a mark of protest against the arrest of Gandhi.
"My mother was a traditional housewife, loving and affectionate, the likes of whom there were millions in the country".
"From whatever I could collect from my parents I could see that my childhood was neither colourful nor retarded. I vaguely remember a couple of things that happened to me in my childhood".
One painful memory is of a sister, younger than him by around ten to 12 years, who drowned and died when she was five. A small bedi - a memorial - was built in her memory.
Sen recently happened to visit Faridpur with wife Geeta. "I was visiting tha place after a gap of 47 years. Everything had changed completely. I wanted to visit this bedi. By then, we had a hundred people following us. Someone came out of the crowds and said, "You are looking for that bedi, aren,t you? Come, I,ll take you there." So saying, he led me to the bedi, aged and forlorn with neglect, the only trace of a sister who died before I could know her better. I could not hold myself. I broke down", says Sen.
At 17 his parents sent him to Calcutta to study for a degree. "On the eve of my departure to the great city, I asked them if, so far, they had noticed any streak of genius in me." They felt awkward. I told them not to worry and quoted one of the greatest thinkers of the contemporary world who said : "All are genius up to the age of ten". My parents had to give me the benefit of doubt."
"As soon as I came to the big city, I was seized by a kind of fear. I confronted a crowd, a huge crowd, I felt lost. I felt I was standing alone in the crowd -- anonymous, selfabsorbed, indifferent swarms of people, even menacing and monstrous. The predicament of a small - town boy being suddenly thrust into an Alien world. I was an average boy of average intelligence. In retrospect, coming from a man who went on to make nearly 30 films between 1956 and 2002, this underscores how little Mrinal -da understood his own potential.
The initial response was depressing. but "I underwent a metamorphosis. Through increasing interactions of diverse kinds, with people around me, close to me and not very close, through continuous exposure to world events and domestic chaos piling up at an incredible pace, I was beginning to change." says Sen. he read the last manifesto of Tagore -- The Crisis of Civilisation. This make him see wisdom. With time, sen discovered that Calcutta had become an inseparable part of his entire existence. He had grown to love it. His growing love - hate relationship with the city, "till today, acts both as my stimulant and irritant. I am both touched and shaken by its vibrancy and youthfulnedd, its humour and flippancy, and indeed, by its tragic dimension, by its greatness and its meanness."........WILL CONTINUE.
SHOMA CHATTERJEE
Friday, 22 October 2010
Interview to KIM LONGINOTTO
Kim Longinotto is a highly acclaimed, multi award-winning British documentarian. Her latest film Pink Saris celebrates an exceptional group of women fighting repression in India.
I'm attending this year's festival... with a new film, Pink Saris.
You should see my film if... you can. You won't be bored.
The best thing about film festivals is... getting to see lots of films that aren't usually around.
The worst thing about film festivals is... feeling overwhelmed by the amount of choice.
Film festivals matter in this day and age... because film is a window looking out on to the world around us.
The first thing that springs to mind when I think of London... Hampstead heath. I don't know why, I hardly ever go there.
If I could sit next to anyone during a festival screening it would be... Renu Devi Paswan.
The last film I saw was... Fish Tank (I saw it last night)
and it was... fabulous.
The filmmakers I'm most inspired by... Lukas Moodysson (particularly his early film Show Me Love), Florian Henckel von Donnersmarck (The Lives of Others), Shane Meadows, Stephen Frears (for My Beautiful Laundrette), the makers of Mad Men and The Sopranos - I could go on & on! I'll probably think of loads of others after this.
If I wasn't visiting the festival I'd be spending my time... seeing friends.
London Film Festival
Imagineindia
Saturday, 16 October 2010
LONDON FILM FESTIVAL / IMAGINEINDIA : Interview to ANANTH MAHADEVAN
I'm attending this year's festival... because my film I Am Sindhutai Sapkal is an official selection. It's a great feeling to be part of a festival renowned for showcasing the world's best new films.
You should see my film if... you want to see brought to life the true story of a woman who was twice driven to attempting suicide, but who picked up the fragments of her life to stage a miraculous comeback.
The best thing about film festivals is... they open a window to a world of films that you never knew existed.
The worst thing about film festivals is... trying to keep pace with all the good films - you're bound to end up missing quite a few.
Film festivals matter in this day and age... because technology is at risk of triumphing over substance. Ingmar Bergman and Jean-Luc Godard have become history; now more than ever we need to be reminded what the grammar of cinema is really about.
The first thing that springs to mind when I think of London... is a rich cultural heritage.
If I could sit next to anyone during a festival screening it would be... Steven Spielberg. Festival programmer Cary Rajinder Sawhney very kindly states in his synopsis that my film invokes The Color Purple.
The last film I saw was... The Secret in Their Eyes, the Argentinian film that won last year's Best Foreign Film Academy Award.
and it was... a deft human thriller that built towards a gripping finish.
The filmmakers I'm most inspired by... Akira Kurosawa, Satyajit Ray, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Andrzej Wajda, Ingmar Bergman, François Truffaut, Federico Fellini, Abbas Kiarostami, Mohsen Makmalba.
If I wasn't visiting the festival I'd be spending my time... scripting my next movie!
London Film Festival / Interview to JOHN SAYLES
Prolific American independent filmmaker John Sayles returns to the BFI London Film Festival with Amigo, an illuminating tale of invasion and resistance set during the Philippine-American War.
I'm attending this year's festival... happily.
You should see my film if... you’re interested in history or human behaviour.
The best thing about film festivals is... a chance to show your work.
The worst thing about film festivals is... spending time in airports.
Film festivals matter in this day and age... because distribution has gotten even more tenuous.
The first thing that springs to mind when I think of London... is rain.
If I could sit next to anyone during a festival screening it would be... Maggie Renzi.
The last film I saw was... Winter's Bone.
and it was... really well-made.
The filmmakers I'm most inspired by... are Akira Kurasawa and Mario Monicelli.
If I wasn't visiting the festival I'd be spending my time... making a living writing screenplays.
London Film Festival
Imagineindia
Saturday, 9 October 2010
Akira Kurosawa and Antonioni in India
I recalled a story which Ray told me when I visited India for a film festival quite some time ago. It was about a huge tree in India which measures approximately one mile in girth.
I wonder why I suddenly recalled that story. Perhaps, it is because I have always felt from the first time I met him that he is the kind of man who is like a huge tree. A great tree in the woods in India. Please grow more and more to become one mile in circumference. You are the only one who can become such a great tree.
Akira Kurosawa
Director
Wednesday, 15 September 2010
About MRINAL SEN, doyen of Indian Cinema
Mrinal Sen is a legend, a cult figure. He represents an era that reflects itself through him. He is the lone ranger in a field that is now filled with other people, other cinemas, and other worlds. But he holds on to his own principles. He is prominent at book exhibitions, plays, film festivals, special screenings, art shows for charitable causes and diplomatic parties.
The anger of yesteryear has given way to cynicism, to a sort of biting satire that is charismatic enough to attract you, yet scary enough to want to pull away from him. Age has invested him with the reverence that prevents you from attacking him with questions he may not like to answer. Problem is -- there is hardly a question he does not like to answer. His alacrity and his nervous energy surprise you, considering his age --- he is touching 90.
Spiking his answers with the right dose of barbed smiles and caustic one-liners, Mrinal Sen, the doyen of India,s parallel cinema, faces every question with the brashness and courage of a young soldier. He is warm and pleasant to be with because he is very anecdotal and is not inclined to didacticism. He does not threaten you with his intellectual inputs. "Anecdotes make life interesting. Theory is boring," he says. He quotes anecdotes all the way and each one is as good as -- if not better than -- the one that went before. He is an extremely unpredictable man. Just when everyone was convinced that he was suffering from a mental block so far as film - making goes, his last film having hit the screen in 1993, he surprised us all by making a beautiful film, Amar Bhubon (This, my land) in 2002, after a gap on 9 years.
Over the years, Sen has acquired the physical manifestations of a public image that is now an integral part of his persona. He sports longish sideburns, generously dotted with salt and a little pepper. He wears spotlessly white Kurtas. His spectacles are black-framed with angular corners that cannot hide the glint in his bright eyes. Thanks to a gall bladder surgery not long ago, his cigarette has been replaced with the ultimate insignia of the Bengali intellectual, the pipe. Of late, even the pipe is no longer visible.
Sen picks, awards left, right and centre. They dont matter to him any more. Much of his archival clippings, posters, press coverage and photographs are in France which bestowed on him the honour of Commander de L,orde des Arts des Letters. It also held a retrospective of his films, a rare honour for an Indian film - maker. USSR gave him the Soviet Land Nehru Award.
He has won numerous awards for his films at international film festivals like Cannes, Berlin, Moscow, Karlovy Vary, Chicago, Montreal and Carthage. The Government of India bestowed on him the Padma Bhushan in 1980 while the West Bengal Government gave him the Satyajit Ray Memorial Award in 1994.
Over the years, his films have won four Golden Lotuses. He bagged four Silver Lotuses as Best Director at the National Film Awards. He represented India at the UNESCO Comission to celebrate the centenary of cinema. His films have had retrospectives at many international film festivals. He has been a nominated member of the Rajya Sabha. In 1991, Sen was elected chairperson of the International Federation of Film Societies, taking over from Carlo Lizzano, a famous Italian director. He takes all this in his stride. The honours do not seen to have made a dent in his accessibility to the masses.
Shoma Chatterjee
Sunday, 22 August 2010
SHANTARAM, 73 years of Filmmaking
V. Shantaram lived a log and presumably a very happy life, just short of 90 years. Of these he gave 73 years to the cinema. He began his professional life on his entering his teens with the legendary singer and actor, Bal Gandharva,s theatre company as a gofer and odd job boy. Within a couple of years he found employment at a local cinema and shortly after he became an assistant to the photographer, Baburao Painter. Soon, Baburao turned to filmmaking. Shantaram used the opportunity to learn all he could about cinema. He assisted in direction, production and editing and also became the principal actor in several of Painter,s films while he continued to be an odd job man. He would act in 15 films over the next nine years, plaing roles ranging from impoverished peasants and opulent princes to gods of the Hindu pantheon. In 1929, he directed his first film, Netaji Palkar, a historical film of one of the heroes of Maratha history. All this while most of his contemporaries were going through school and college. Shantaram,s university was the film studio.
At the age of 28, already a veteran actor and director, he started the Prabhat Film Studio with three of his colleagues, Fattelal, Damle and Keshavrao. For the next 13 years Prabhat Studios would produce some of the most path breaking and memorable films of the Indian cinema, a large number of them directed by Shantaram.
His early films were mainly based on mythology and history; costume dramas, which were in vogue at the time. But a stint with UFA studios in Germany in the early 1930,s seemed to have affected him quite profoundly. His lighting style and the manner of framing his images changed dramatically, his work became more expressionist and the montage techniques he used put him well ahead of the other filmmakers of his time. More importantly, the subject matter of his films had a strong reformist intent and social concern. Anti – colonial, political overtones could be seen in several of his films during the decade of the 1930,s. This was perhaps the most creative period for Shantaram, Films that are acknowledged classics today like AMRIT MANTHAN, AMAR JYOTI, DUNIYA NA MANE, ADMI and PADOSI were made during his time in Prabhat. The other filmmakers who made some remarkable films at the time were Fattelal and Damle who together directed SANT TUKARAM, the very first Indian film to wing the highest prize at the First International Film Festival at Venice in 1936.
In 1942, Shantaram broke away from Prabhat to start his own film studio, the Rajkamal Kalamandir in Bombay. Most of the films that he made at Rajkamal became huge successes commercially, but critically they were not as well received as his earlier films. Some of the memorable films he directed at Rajkamal were : DR KOTNIS KI AMAR KAHANI, DO ANKHEN BARA HAATH and LOK SHAHIR RAMJOSHI (a musical based on folk theatrical form popular in Maharashtra). This film would eventually create one of the most successful genres in Marathi cinema.
Prolific as he was as a producer and director of cinema features, Shantaram helped to set up a Film Advisory Board for the Government of India as its Chief Producer during the war years. Shantaram continuesd to be an active filmmaker until the very end. The film, Jhaanjhar was under production when he died at the age of almost 90.
When Shantaram passed away in 1990 the Indian film business as an established industry was 77 years old. He was part of it for 73 of those years.
His first 15 films were made during the silent era. His las film was made when digital technology had made its entry into the cinema. He was not necessarily the best filmmaker that India produced, but he certainly was among its most innovative, with a curiosity and passion for learning that remained with him till the end of his days. Shantaram was at his best when he dealt with social issues albeit done with rather heavy doses of melodrama and sentimentality. A large number of his films were hugely successful.
If you wish to know the history of Indian cinema you only need to read Shantaram,s autobiography.
SHYAM BENEGAL
Saturday, 21 August 2010
THE ONCE AND FUTRE LIVING DEAD
The Once and Future Living Dead
A Fast Walk with Zombies and Other Revenants through Cine Fantom Times
Considering the Russian - Orthodox - obsession with the spirituality of the material world, the confrontational quality of godliness, it's not too surprising that death'n-decay're at the core of all things underground in the Soviet Union as well as Russia. Or: In the netherworld of all things post - from Communism to Modernism to the office -, the post mortem is the sole sign, even proof of life; the underground, the beyond has to be the zone of aliveness when daily life as such is dead: Zombies walked, ghosts spectred, cinema that made real(ist?) sense - avant-garde?, retro-garde?: fuck! that! in this fecid constant becoming - had to be a phantom.
Originally, Cine Fantom was a somewhat samizdat, homemade film magazine published for the first time in Moscow supposedly in 1985 by the late Igor Alejnikov. He and his younger brother Gleb were part of the Conceptualist Art-circles of the day, tinkering around with notions/practices like mail art etc. – and filmmaking, in a way nobody in the Soviet empire ever had made films yet, too, in a way that didn't feel alien in its obsession with violence and morbidity, as well as its absurdist sense of irony found when looking at things from just the opposite mind-angle. Just like, unbeknownst to them, several other people at that time did, most importantly: Evgenij Kondratev (nom de guerre: Debil), Evgenij Jufit and the (rest of the) NekroRealists in then-Leningrad-now-Saint Petersburg, and Boris Juhananov in Moscow.
All these people learned about each other mainly through their audience, common lore has it: They showed their works in all kinds of off-off-spaces/venues – (their own) apartments more often than not - where, sometimes, they were approached by viewers who told them about some other mad mavericks in this town or that, or just one ward away. Their backgrounds as well as artistic foundations were varied: the Alejnikovs, as mentioned, had a solid basis in the world of arts, ditto Jufit (painting, photography…) and Kondratev, whereas Juhananov, more a video- than a film-guy, came from the theatre (and psychiatrical work); as filmmakers, they’re all autodidacts, although Jufit and the Alejnikovs later were for some time adopted by major film studios: Jufit and the other NekroRealists, whose first essays were produced via an independent studio called Mžalalafilm, found shelter in an Aleksandr Sokurov-supervised experimental wing of Lenfilm, while the Alejnikovs were granted sanctuary in a somewhat similar arm of Mosfilm – alliances both doomed to fail, which they did, although they produced some of strangest works both fractions came up with: Jufit’s Rycari podnebesja (1989) and the Alejnikovs’ Zdes kto-to byl (1989) and Traktoristij-2 (1992), the latter being one of the most ‘generally readable’ works from the Parallel Cinema trenches.
It took until 1987 for Cine Fantom to become more than a notion: Starting for real with the first festival of independent cinema called, surprise!, Cine Fantom, it developed into an ever more officially recognized - if not necessarily but then again totally sanctioned - magazine-cum-screening-organizer which served as a forum for all kinds of shadow film and video activities in the Soviet Union – all that which is usually referred to as Parallel Cinema, a term coined by Igor’- some say Alejnikov, others Pospelov (a nowadays somewhat forgotten original fantom). That said: For all its transUSSR'ish attitude as well as its part-rootedness in the Leningrad/St.Petersburg underground, Cine Fantom was more a creature of Moscow than anything else: The alliances of the Moscovites with folks from anywhere else where mainly of a tactical nature – while the NekroRealists in their aloof less-being!-more-nothingness!-ways cum rather more classically materialist approach to cinema probably didn't mind using the more klischee-clusterfucking, hypersurrealism-prone dudes from the capital whose sensibilities seemed better synched to words and metaphors than images and the false safety of surfaces...
Over the decades, Leningrad/St. Petersburg developed it’s very own underground idiom, quite independently from the Moscovites – just take the experimental animations of Boris Kazakov, an epigone in the noblest and truest sense of Evgenij Kondratev, Oleg Kotelnikov and many an other tinker and thinker of things sratch- ‘n painted onto celluloide who - might have - belonged to the legendary group avant-garde outfit Severnyj poljus… Cine Fantom's heydays were the early Perestroika-years when exploring new ideas and aesthetics was something of a national pastime: Everybody incl. granny and her goat, they fondly remember, checked out these weird experiments in subversion, just to know what it is, this strange creature developing in their midst, this freedom-thing a lá Wäst.
The Alejnikovs as well as Jufit became international cause célèbres, while at home Sergej Solovev knighted Parallel Cinema in his classic ASSA (1987): the title itself is already an homage(-by-mimicry/appropriation) to Evgenij Kondratev and Oleg Kotelnikov who in 1984 made a short named AssA in which a dead chicken is ‘resurrected’ by running the material backwards (which, again, goes back to at least Vertov, etc.); more importantly, there’s a sequence for which Solovev re-mixed Kondratev’s Nanajnana (1986) with footage from Kotelnikov sporting shakily-shot scenes of performances at Puškinskaja 10 (Leningrad/St.Petersburg’s legendary cultural center) vis-à-vis weird hand-drawn and -painted images suggestings dreams and nightmares. (In 2009, Solov’ev presented 2-ASSA-2, a sequel to his cult classic that took a long, hard look at what had become of this underground’s dreams and hopes twenty years later – which is little, and most of that is the stuff too much of modern event culture is made of… Call it: a film-implosion.)
In 1990, the 17th issue of Cine Fantom appeared – the last one. Other attempts at a Cine Fantom-magazine would follow. All things Cine Fantom petered towards the mid-90s, with the plane crash-death of Igor Alejnikov in 1994 as a crassly slashed exclamation mark: End!; only Jufit developed a career inside his own system and aesthetic, even if his latest work, Pryamohoždenie (2005), a(nother) speculation about strange Stalinist experiments in quadruple-cloning (cf. 4, d: Ilja Hržanovskij, 2004), shows signs of an irritating interest in coming to terms with a wider arthouse audience.
Otherwise, other folks took over organising the unorganisable: from 1993-5, eg. a festival of underground cinema was held under the umbrella Exotica. That said: As cinema was always only one of several arts in which most of the fantoms created, they didn't really go astray, just shifted focus – Juhananov, e.g., became a kind of counter-paragon of Russian theater whose experimental offerings, adaptations of classics like Cehov's Višniovij as well as his own works like Povest o pryamostojašcem celoveke, folks still talk about; his theater group MIR, again, proved to be a breeding ground for new underground hopefuls, like Aleksandr Doulerajn who’d develop into a key-figure of Russian Parallel Cinema, or Andrej Silvestrov who’d turn into one of the most interesting video artists of the new millenium’s beginnig, or Olga Stolpovskaja and Dmitrij Trojtskij whose co-directorial feature debut effort Ja ljublju tebja (2004) became an international break-through film for a contemporary Russian indie-cinema (early Sundance cool with a Moscovite lip…).
In 1995, Cine Fantom was resurrected for the first time under the aegis of above-mentioned MIR’ean plus Gleb Alejnikov – as something like the experimental film-arm of the Moscow Cinema Museum. This went on till 2000. In the early third millennium, 2002, to be exact, the Fantom was back again – and stranger then ever: First, Cine Fantom tried to re-group in the Moscow Cinema Museum, but after a famously scandalous screening session head-lined “Better Porn than Never”, officialdom’s mighties turned uncollaborative. So, Cine Fantom became a non-structure: It exists as an idea plus social network that occasions events – an already established organizational force cum klischee, supported in this way or that by STS-TV where several of its key players could carve out (at least for some time) fat careers for themselves (above all Gleb Alejnikov who stopped filmmaking and serves now as the Fantom's organizational mastermind, Aleksandr Doulerajn and Olga Stolpovskaja); fittingly, some of the most fascinating and old school-Cine Fantom’y productions from the last years got made for TV, cf. Dulerajn’s full frontal trashy-nuts 20-part series Bunker (2004) – Lloyd Kaufman of Troma who’d been a guest of Cine Fantom would surely approve of this gem.
The development inside Cine Fantom, the whole Parallel Cinema-world, well, Russia in general, come to think of it, is probably best hinted at by looking at two quasi-remakes, the Alejnikov's seminal Traktoristij-2 and Pavel Labazov & Andrey Silvestrov & Vladislav Mamyšev-Monroe's irreverent masterpiece Volga-Volga (2006): The first, a true Perestroika-beast - and the Brother’s already second assault on the sacred tractor -, plays with, twirls, jerks around motives from Ivan Pyrev's classic of Stalinist enterganda Traktoristij (1939), while the latter invades Grigorij Aleksandrov's Volga-Volga (1938) by taking this darling of Sovtainment as such and changing only a few things around, like replacing the head of the film's star, Ljubov Orlova, with Mamyšev-Monroe's impersonation of her... The Alejnikov Brothers, during the years their country changed around and around, contemplated the notion - echt Russian: the folly of change as such: Traktoristij-2 is a sequel-as-remake, a study in aesthetic haunting, and how one can't just shed some old skin for a new one – the past is a construction one needs to work with - ever so gleefully iconoclastically - in order to get a grip on it; or: Even taking the piss is work. The film's cast presents something of a stand-of between the Old Guard and the avant-garde, with several Soviet stars in the lead side by side with icons of the underground – and it works, as a confrontation, with no quarter considered by any side.
Seventeen years later, it has become possible to campolustily indulge in the kind of aesthetics the Alejnikov Brothers needed to question: Labazov & Sil’vestrov & Mamyšev-Monroe reclaim the Soviet era for themselves, an impossible thing to do without taking an ever so pranksterish critical stance towards it, but also a necessity, for it would be a waste of history/lives/possibilities if one just wanted to forget about it; in a certain way, their Volga-Volga does similar things as a bunch of film historians and theoreticians have been doing in the last about-decade when they worked on reassessing the œuvres of masters like, well, Pyrev and Aleksandrov.
The past is also one of the many subjects of Boris Juhananov's hopeful monster Ludog princa (1986/2006-), an everything-at-once of documentary, fiction, essay, and if one can think of something else, just add it. The project, a video-roman of 20 chapters, was started in 1986, principal photography ended about '89, the basic conceptualization of how to deal with it all fixed in the mid-90s – and then, Juhananov stopped (and did other extraordinary videos), hundreds of tapes were lying around and starting to fade, some got lost, among them the chapter Godard (yes, there is significance and justice in decay).
It was only in 2005 that Juhananov started to finish his opus super-magnum – and what a whatthefuck!soever it became: A memorandum to an era whose protagonists are by now more often than not dead - that the image is so statograiny and already magnetopaled gives the whole damn thing a ghost photography charm -, as well an an exemplification of that era's theories/notions/ideals, in particular chapter #5, Nipponese, an exercise in what Juhananov calls 'fatal editing'. Two of the four chapters Yukhananov was able to finish first are, quite simply, extraordinary: #2, XO Game, and #3, Esther. The latter is a lamento-variation on the biblical story of Esther done as an allusion to the Chechen catastrophe(to come back then) as well as an essay over the ever-latent antisemitism in Russia and beyond (the credits quote Luther's ranting against the canonical status of the Book of Esther). As always, Juhananov took only a few choice elements - ranging from a Falco's Austro-pop-paean to a serial killer to a discussion with a Chechen writer going nationalistoballistic - and arranged them in such a way that they open each other up: The whole thing goes BOOOM with meaning and poetry.
XO Game, then, feels - looks, sounds, stinks really - as if someone just vomited out his soul-guts: It's a thick, rawest slice of Fuck You!, an acting-out of a sense of lostness in a country that's just not able to take whatever any more – Russia as a prison cell and a bomb is ticking, with people hemorrhaging words, walking blind in a visionless world. The main thing here, as well as in the other chapters so far, is the editing, live-giving however fatal it might be. Juhananov has a fine sense of rhythm as well as the kind of artistic ego that's capable of creating-by-chopping: Each cut is so decisive that everything happening in the image always feels just and there for a reason, no matter how amateurish it all looks – it's really more Punk than anything else, SovPunk, therefore inyerface,r than anything those Western sissies could ever gob up. Besides all that, XO Game is a most haunting experience: Not only are the images sometimes bordering on gone - cheap technology that took a hard hit from time and its desolate frolic: destruction -, but quite a lot of people seen are: gone. XO Game is the head stone of Cine Fantom.
These days, Cine Fantom is more a brand than an organization: a celebration of a fascinating past whose values and ideas/ideals shan't have been in vain. Besides having more or less regular shows with excessive after show-discussions (especially whenever über-orator Juhananov shows up…), Cine Fantom features all kinds of media works ranging from videos by artists like Jurij Lejderman or Olga Cherniševa to low-budget feature films like Petr Hazizov's forgetable Manga (2005). The presence of Hazizov shows quite well the kind of cultural/industrial ley lines along which the revenant Cine Fantom moves: Hazizov owns one of Russia's biggest CGI-outfits and is, like Gleb Alejnikov or Dulerajn, something of a force in the new world of Russian media.
Fittingly, Cine Fantomis mellowing a bit towards the middle ground and -brow, it seems: Dulerajn & Sergej Koryagin’s feature-length grotesque Ivan durak (2002) eg. feels, for all its bite and often cruel jest, positively charming and almost mild-mannered in its view of the world, while the Cine Fantom Screenings during the XXIX Moscow International Film Festival consisted mainly of works one finds in competitions of places like Locarno or Rotterdam (the most outré work on offer was easily Nina Šorina’s Nietzsche v Moskve, a fantasy about the Tyrant of Torino’s visit to nowaday’s Moscow). One should also mention that Cine Fantom isn’t cinema/video avant-garde’s centre anymore, but one of several players in the field – let’s only mention the International Kansk Video Festival (aka. The Thinking Man’s Cannes aka. The Eastern Kanne) which established itself as a prime force in underground cinema, Cine Fantom's partner eg. at a Russian Avant-garde Film festival in London, 2009; fittingly, Cine Fantom doesn’t seem to be interested in supporting as vast a range of experimental film or video modes of expression, their makers, even if they’re from around the corner – the works of Moscovite Viktor Alimpiev and his epigones like Marian Žunin and Sergej Višneskij eg. seem to mean precious little to them, ditto the mad movideo outbursts of Svetlana Baskova whose Zelenyj slonik (1999) shall for all eternity be considered a world underground art axiom…
Let’s say: Cine Fantom is the Russia avant-garde’s arrière-garde – they keep the overall project alive from the back and side-lines. As a paragon of artistic disobediance, they cast an almost impossibly long shadow over Russia’s alternative arts and mediae – essentially, they’re still the measuring rod.
OLAF MOELLER
FILM CRITIC
Tuesday, 17 August 2010
The making of SHANTARAM
Much of Shantaram,s education was in the university of life, moving from job to job. He worked in a railway workshop, then became a sign painter, a photographer,s assistant and finally an usher in a cinema hall in Kolhapur.
Movies had developed with lightning speed and whatever was shown, Shantaram watched avidly. Most of all he enjoyed watching D.G. Phalke,s films. In 1920 when Baburao Painter set up his Maharasthra Film Company, Shantaram took the first opportunity to join him as an apprentice. And caught the attention of Baburao and was cast in the role of Krishna in Surekha Haran (1921), till Baburao asked him to direct Netaji Palkar (1927).
In 1929 Shantaram formed Prabhat Film Company in Kolhapur and it,s first success was Gopal Krishna (1929). In quick succession five more silent films followd, Khooni Khanjar (1930), Rani Chandrasena (1931) and Zulum (1931). His films were marked by an inventiveness of visuals and camera movements. He was just as concerned about their social imports, even though the subjects he chose were either mythological or quasi-historical.
With the advent of sound, Shantaram did not rush into production to cash in on the new novelty. He reflected, "My first reaction to talkies was rather one of diffidence. I felt that they were just stage-plays". In 1932 he made his first sound film, Ayodhya Ka Raja. For colour processing he traveled to Berlin at the peak of Hitler,s popularity and got fully cognizant of the power of film as propaganda. What particularly impressed him was the technical virtuosity of the German cinema, evident in Lang, Lubitsch and Ophuls.
On his return made Amrit Manthan (1934), reminiscent of Luis Buñuel in Un Chien Andalou. Dharmatma (1935), social reform versus orthodoxy, clearly taken from Gandhi,s crusade. Shantaram seemed particularly concerned about the condition of women in Indian society, Amar Jyoti (1936), Duniya Na Mane (1937), Admi, the story about a prostitute, (1939) and his last film at Prabhat Films was Padosi (1941), about communal tension between Hindus and Muslims.
After his departure from Prabhat Films became producer at Film Advisory Board helping the government of India in its war propaganda, but stayed less than a year and joined Wadia Movietone where he directed Shakuntala (1943). The striking success of this film, which ran for 104 weeks in Bombay, permitted the impressive anti-Japanese "war effort" film, Dr Kotnis Ki Amar Kahani (1946).
The times had by now changed and so had audience tastes. There were also market compulsions and he had to make certain compromises. However he remained till the end a socially committed and self-sacrificing artist. One cannot resist the temptation of comparing him with Frank Capra whom he had admired. Both were about the same age and had struggled for survival to see their name above the title. Both believed in the final triumph of the human spirit.
B. D. GARGA




