|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The trend was set a long time back by Amitabh Bachchan, who portrayed a psychopathic serial killer in Parwana (1971), much before he became the Angry Young Man of Hindi Cinema. Navin Nischol played the romantic lead opposite Yogita Bali.
The film was a flop but his performance of the quiet, low-key introvert stands out in contrast to the image he created in Zanjeer and Sholay and the films that followed. In Dasharupa, a classical treatise on Indian dramaturgy, the hero of the play is defined as “well-bred, charming, liberal, affable, popular, upright, eloquent, of exalted lineage, resolute, young, heroic, mighty, endowed with intelligence, skill in the arts, pride, and a just observer of laws.” In contrast, his opponent is described as “avaricious, stubborn, criminal and vicious.” Similar attributes define the hero and the villain in folk theatre too. This is how the hero in Indian mainstream cinema evolved from the time Dadasaheb Phalke made Raja Harishchandra in 1913. But things changed over the years and today, as a reflection of real life, a hero readily steps into the villain’s shoes without any market or rating risks in the commercial arena. There was a time when the characters of the villain and the hero were sharply defined in Indian films, which in turn led to compartmentalisation of the actors playing those roles. Villains had a greater staying power than celluloid heroes in those days and the examples are aplenty. Actors like Pran, K.N. Singh, Jeevan, Premnath, Prem Chopra, Ajit, Kanhaiyalal, Amrish Puri, Danny Denzongpa, Amjad Khan, followed by Ranjeet and Shakti Kapoor and Gulshan Grover were just ‘expected’ to be ‘bad’. So, when Pran portrayed a positive character in Shaheed and K.N. Singh did ditto in Woh Kaun Thi, the audience was pleasantly surprised. Since the late 1990s, the trend of the hero and the villain within stars defining the dividing line between ‘good’ and ‘evil’ changed. So, matinee idols ranging from Shah Rukh Khan to Aamir Khan, Saif Ali Khan, Akshay Kumar, Akshay Khanna and Emraan Hashmi have ventured into the villains’ territory willingly, as a challenge to themselves and the filmmakers who cast them and finally, to discover and explore their range and versatility as creative artists. Raj Babbar’s role of obsessive lover in Yaarana (1995) where Shakti Kapoor portrayed good-hearted eunuch is another example. Never mind that the film was an Indian ‘adaptation’ of the Hollywood chiller Sleeping With the Enemy. Over the years, the true-blooded villain in Hindi cinema has all but faded away because today, top stars vacillate between playing hero and villain in every other film. The leading ladies, too, are no different. Kajol set the ball rolling with Gupt in a well-made thriller, taking a big risk when she was a much-in-demand leading lady. The film is one of the greatest thriller hits in Hindi cinema. Priyanka Chopra was outstanding as the cool and calculative woman in Aitraaz (2004), bent on destroying the life and career of the hero because she could not bear his rejections of her propositions. Shah Rukh Khan debuted as a villain who killed without mercy to avenge his tragic past in Baazigar, a big hit. He also did a wonderful job in Darr as the pathologically obsessed lover, a role that Aamir Khan had refused. Ironically, Aamir Khan essayed the suave, cold-blooded terrorist in Fanaa with great conviction. In Kaun (1999), Urmila Matondkar plays the role Nanda portrayed in B.R. Chopra’s Ittefaq many years ago. Ajay Devgn played a ruthless killer in Anees Bazmi’s Deewangee (2002), an Indianised version of the Hollywood film Primal Fear in which he pretends to be a schizophrenic to avoid conviction for murder. The Hollywood original had Aron Stampler in the same role. Aetbaar (2004) is another psychological thriller featuring John Abraham as a mentally disturbed pathologically possessive man given to violence, arson and murder. It brought to the fore his talent as a villain. The same year, he played the suave, sophisticated and sexy villain in Dhoom, one of the biggest boxoffice successes of the year. Not all villains in films are psychopathic killers. Some of them are while the rest are villainous either by virtue of their nature or because they lack any moral responsibility towards society and; therefore, do not suffer any remorse. In this scenario, one is tempted to ask — “Kya Mogambo khush hua?” To this, the safe answer might be — pata nahin!
A brand of his own
But here he is. All smiles at having directed a campaign film for &Pictures, which he is adamant, is not just an ad film. Rather, like any other feature film of his, it has his brand of realism writ large over it. Clearly, he brooked no interference while making this one. He says, “The reason why they came to me was for they like my work and wanted the same touch.” The film, which is being touted as the shortest feature film and the longest brand campaign, has viewers bowled over by it already. Like his heartwarming feature films, this one, too, tugs at our heartstrings and it comes as no surprise that Kukunoor enjoyed the process of filming it thoroughly. Did it also provide him a breather coming as it does on the heels of heavyweight somberness of his last film Lakshmi? Dealing with a hard-hitting subject of women trafficking and child prostitution, Lakshmi’s treatment (raw and straight to the point) had viewers gasping for breath. Kukunoor, however, offers no apologies to those who found the brutality of it all difficult to stomach. On the gruesomeness of the reality that he portrayed onscreen, he reasons, “I don’t make films with viewers in mind. It’s the subject that decides the tone and tenor. Since here was a slice of ugly reality based on a real-life incident, I wasn’t going to sugarcoat it to make it more palatable.” He considers boxoffice or audience expectations peripherals and something he couldn’t care less about.
Filmmaking, he believes, is essentially an art of storytelling. To tell a story well and honestly, he feels, the script i.e. the starting point is most crucial. Thereafter, of course, it’s individual vision that defines the course, “There is no right or wrong way of doing things.” Sure some of his films like 3 Deewarein may not have worked as well as say Hyderabad Blues, Dor or Iqbal. However, he has no regrets whatsoever. Looking back at his journey from Hyderabad Blues to Lakshmi, there is no other way he would have liked it to shape up. “You are what you are and that includes your successes and failures, your pluses and minuses.” He applies the same yardstick to actors. Having worked with the very best of them, including actors like Naseeruddin Shah, he wouldn’t say whether directing one or the other is more exhilarating. The director who has himself played stellar parts such as that of a despicable pimp in Lakshmi avers, “Each actor has his or her strengths and weakness.” This recipient of the National Award for best film on other social issues (for Iqbal) takes life with a pinch of salt. On the obstacles en route his journey, he says, “It’s often difficult to raise the money.” But right from his first film, this engineering graduate has been putting his money where his mouth is, and often is the co-producer of his films. Once he reposes faith in a project, there’s nothing that can hold him back. Making films with courage of conviction, he not only makes the kind of cinema he believes in but is ready to go an extra mile to ensure it gets made. Whether India is more ready today for his kind of films than when he first made Hyderabad Blues, he can’t say. But he insists that the Indian audiences, whose changing mindsets are the leitmotif of the brand film, do deserve a greater choice. This is something he is determined to deliver.
|
|||||
|
|
|||||
M
A brand film Sapnon ki Udaan. So, what has an independent filmmaker Nagesh Kukunoor got to do with it? After all, the man, whose distinctive voice has rung out loud and clear in films like Iqbal, Hyderabad Blues and more recently Lakshmi, can’t possibly be expected to sing another man’s song. 