Saturday, September 2, 2006 |
SIGHT & SOUND Strictly
speaking, Hrishikesh Mukherji was a film man, a director of rare
sensitivity and wonderful sense of humour. Why I am mentioning him in
this column is because he endured so well on TV. I think I have
mentioned this before, but whenever his endearing comedy Golmaal crops
up on TV, I watch it. I am never bored by it. It embodies the best
qualities of Hrishida. It depicts a typical middle class background
with Amol Palekar, who’s shown as the equally typical boy next door,
giving one of his best tongue-in-the-cheek performances. And it has
another of Hrishida’s favourites, Utpal Dutt, the typical heavy-handed
householder. They all started their careers from scratch in Calcutta and
remained friends and colleagues for life. The other reason I mention
Hrishida, who together with Basu Chatterjee, brought subtlety and
genuine humour into Hindi cinema, is because the most highly paid actors
and actresses willingly acted in his films for the simple reason that he
had recognised their talent early and cast them in his financially
modest films with a sure touch when it came to casting. Think of the
list — Raj Kapoor, Amitabh Bachchan, Rajesh Khanna, Jaya Bhaduri (as
she was before marriage), Rekha, Sharmila Tagore, and many more. Having
known him personally, I knew why they treated him with such respect and
affection. He was such a natural, normal person, warm and affectionate
always. He had no airs, not even when he got the Dadasaheb Phalke
award. And the most important reason I mention Hrishida and his films
in a TV column is because Indian TV, notably its serial makers, are in
sad need of a director like him, down to earth, like the Italian
neo-realists. He was a director who made us believe that the characters
in his films were real people. The saas-bahu lot and the makers
of so-called humorous programmes have a lot to learn from him. Farewell,
Hrishida. TV viewers who have had the good fortune of seeing your films
on the small screen will miss you. But your films will endure. We again
lived in the middle of catastrophe. The 12 amazingly ‘un-angry’ men
from Mumbai who returned home after being handcuffed and pushed around
in Amsterdam made a startling contrast to the Dutch passenger, a typical
angry young man with long dishevelled hair who seemed to have been the
sole person to fight on their behalf at Schiphol airport, where, he said
on TV, they were "treated like dogs". TV is indeed at its
visual best in such situations. Also very disturbing was the killing of
Baluch leader Akbar Khan Bugti in Baluchistan. NDTV immediately put on,
with heightened effect, his last interview in Quetta by its Pakistan
correspondent, Munizar Jehangir, where he predicted his own death. A
product of the prestigious Aitchison College in Lahore and then
Oxford, he must have been one of the most disturbing, sophisticated
tribal leaders for the Pakistan government. Meanwhile, parched deserts
like Barmer succumbed to floods. And that terrible sight of five men on
the roof of a car in the middle of a river, watched by crowds for eight
hours and then being washed away one by one, was one of the most
shattering sights one has seen on TV. In contrast, things were very
lively on the sports front. Hair, to make a bad pun, seems to be getting
in everybody’s hair, including the cornered ICC and the drama is being
played to the hilt on TV, its been much more graphic than that in the
press. The US Open Tennis, with the ever-colourful Andre Agassi taking
his last bow, and Sania listed as having dropped to 54 in the ranking
list, even before she played her first match, was very depressing for
Indians. I said long ago that we tend to kill promising youngsters
with too much hype. I sincerely hope we shall not kill Sania with too
much kindness. A quiet entry and less TV exposure might have done more
for her career. |
|
|