Why can't big be successful?

Ever since S S Rajamouli’s epic saga ‘Baahubali’ picked up the National award for Best Film there has been renewed, though hushed, discussions in certain sections about the ‘saffronization’ of art and culture in the present regime.

If we look at the National film awards this year at least three of the winners reflect a parochial socio-political and national pride. ‘Baahubali’ seeks to glorify dynastic rule, its hero is a man of royal parentage brought up among the plebian class as a diehard Shiv Bhakt.

Salman Khan, whose father, the writer Salim Khan, has been displaying a propensity towards pro-government statements in recent times, played a Hanuman Bhakt in Kabir Khan’s Bajrangi Bahijaan, while Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s stunning pseudo-historical ‘Bajirao Mastani’ has Ranveer Singh chanting Har Har Mahadev as a war cry.

Are we, then, looking at the celebration of a ‘Hindutva’ cinema at the cost of the smaller anti-establishment films? Many feel the Tamil film ‘Visaranai’ directed by Vetrimaaran, a merciless expose on police brutality deserved to win the Best Film prize. But then, anti-establishment films do not seem to be the flavour of the year at all.

A prominent young filmmaker who wishes to go unnamed says films that question the Establishment would find it hard to acquire funds from the government. “The NFDC would not entertain themes that question the government. Independent cinema is our only hope.”

However Satish Kaushik, a member of the National film award jury, thinks politics is unnecessarily being fastened to cinema. “Baahubali getting attention at the National Awards has nothing to do with the BJP's choice or aesthetic preferences.”

Kaushik says the choice of ‘Baahubali’ for Best Film was solely the decision of the democratic jury headed by Ramesh Sippy. “We felt proud of this Indian film which with its epic scale and its technique on a par with Hollywood war dramas. It was a first for Indian film making. The Jury took decisions for announcing the winners totally on merit and not on their box office performances. It was just a happy coincidence this year that the winning box office successes were of high aesthetic values and cinematically of high standards.”

Satish feels the pattern of National film awards ought to vary and not be segregated into commercial/non-commercial, or establishment/anti-establishment ventures. “Every year trend changes. The jury too changes and it has its own point of view. I think independent experimental cinema which has been the darling of National Awards every year was also included this year in big numbers and will always be there in coming years. But why grudge mainstream cinema its glory this year?”

Are we reading a political pattern merely because the big awards didn't go to the small films? Are we a nation of breast-beaters, celebrating only those who are down and out? Check out the list of favourite films each year. Chances are most critics would rave about films that show no profits at the boxoffice. This is not to say that films like ‘Masaan’, ‘Titli’ and that Tamil masterpiece ‘Visarana’, which has the entire community of critics shuddering in a collective orgasm, are not deserving. Of course they are!

But why frown at any attempt to honour commercial cinema? If for once the National film awards have been given to the blockbusters of the year, what is wrong with that? The logic according the very erudite yet entertaining Javed Akhtar is, “You can’t be big and successful, just like you can’t be beautiful and talented.”

Well, too bad. This year the National awards decided to celebrate the big and the successful. So we had ‘Baahubali’, traditionally not eligible for top honours at the National awards as those slots are reserved for the underdogs. Suddenly, ‘Baahubali’ is seen to be unfit for the national award. Satish Kaushik feels ‘Baahubali’ scored over the other films for its sheer scale and magnificence. “Yes, it did not score very highly in terms of its social content, like the Tamil film ‘Visarana’ or the Marathi film ‘Ringer’. But in its visual scale and grandeur it took Indian cinema to another level.”

There is a growing resentment in the Hindi film industry regarding ‘Baahubali’ receiving the national award. “It’s at best a massive populist film with elements from our mythology and folkore. But the special effects that you critics have so raved over are actually quite mediocre,” opines a leading filmmaker who wishes to go unnamed.

“I personally thought Rajamouli’s Eega was far superior. Baahubali was at best a visual treat,” observes another filmmaker. So there we have it. Last year ‘Baahubali’ belonged to the sacrosanct can’t-do-any-wrong club of selected films. But now its spectacular success—India’s only 500-crore boxoffice collection film—is being held against it.

As far as honouring that hard-hitting disturbing Tamil film ‘Visarana’ goes, I personally feel it’s a path-breaking expose on police brutality. But it didn’t make me smile the way Baahubali did. And I want to feel happy at the movies. The way Balki’s ‘Ki & Ka’ makes me feel.