|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Based on the life
and times of the dictator, Dear Friend Hitler has generated
much controversy, even before it has been shot, writes V.
Gangadhar
Filmmakers, the world over, agree that biographies of famous people have often been good topics for films. The characters can be from history, distant past, good or bad, but must be interesting. Hollywood had come out with films on Alexander-the Great, Julius Caesar, King Henry V, Queen Elizabeth, Marie Antoinette, Shakespeare, Beethoven as well as a number of legends from the nearer past. The trend will continue because these characters figured in the imagination of people. Same was the case with real-life villains like Rasputin, Genghiz Khan, Al Capone, Papa Doc Duvalier, the notorious Haitian dictator, and so on. The directors and producers of such biographical films, interpreted the characters in their own way. Some succeeded, others did not. India, which makes the largest number of films, could not miss out on the trend. In fact, our earliest films featured as heroes, mythological characters because they were immensely popular. Bollywood did not ignore great historical characters like Akbar, Ashoka, Raja Raja Cholan, Tansen as well as characters from more recent past like Mahatma Gandhi, Sardar Patel, Veer Savarkar Bhagat Singh, Phoolan Devi and a leading don from Mumbai, Varadaraja Mudaliar. Films are also being planned on Kishore Kumar and producer director Guru Dutt, who are still fresh in our memories. With so much good material around, why did two comparatively lesser-known producer and director, Anil Sharma and Rakesh Ranjan Kumar announce a film Dear Friend Hitler with Anupam Kher playing the lead role. Then came reports in certain sections of the media that Anupam Kher had opted out of the film because of ‘national and international pressure’. Replacing Rakesh Ranjan Kumar with Ashwini Chowdhary, producer Anil Sharma explained that the former director had failed to clarify the controversy surrounding Hitler’s role in our Independence struggle. His film, Sharma claimed, would dispel all controversy on the impact of World War II on India. According to Sharma, the reason why international media ‘lashed out’ against his film was because it saw Indian cinema as nothing but stereotyped ‘nach gana’ stuff. In fact, his film was not about Hitler, but the clash of two ideologies, the non-violence advocated by Gandhi and the violent one, which Hitler used. Well, all this is rather confusing. Also Anupam Kher’s reasons for quitting the film — national and international pressure. Occasionally, films released in India like Water, Earth, Fanna and My Name is Khan; did face different kinds of pressure mainly from political groups because they dealt with controversial themes dealing with the Indian way of life and history. But a film on Hitler? How many Indians would even bother about a film on the German dictator? And what is this ‘international pressure’? If the statement attributed to Kher was true, didn’t he know that thousands of books had been written on Hitler and dozens of movies and TV documentaries and films produced on him. Some of them were indeed controversial, but had been accepted by the international community. A couple of films questioned Hitler’s sexual prowess but no one bothered. The movies presented different views on the conspiracies against Hitler and his final days in a Berlin bunker. On the lighter side, did the producer and Anupam Kher fear a rupture in India-Germany ties with Chancellor Angela Merkel cancelling future state visits to India? Are our producers capable of making good, realistic biographical films? Despite feeble attempts by our producers to make films on Gandhi, it was Sir Richard Attenborough’s Gandhi, which scored as a major hit. We make biographical films like dull documentaries because any realistic portrayal of our past heroes would arouse the anger of the loyal supporters and politicians with vested interests. Naturally, films on Dr Ambedkar, Subhas Chandra Bose and Sardar Patel resembled documentaries. Apparently, the producer and director of the proposed Hitler film felt they could garner some media publicity. Will they visit Germany, Austria and other European countries for researching material on Hitler? Knowing our Hindi filmwallas, it is quite possible they could portray young Hitler chasing his heroine by running around trees and singing romantic duets. Even Hollywood which had come out with major biographical films on unsavoury characters like Ugandan dictator Idi Amin, American gangster Al Capone had not come out with a full-fledged film on the life and times of Hitler. In that context, producer Anil Sharma and his future director certainly deserve a medal for their courage.
|
|||
|
|
|||
