Since "Truth" is stranger than Fiction

At a time when Hollywood is facing an acute shortage of ideas, proved by futile attempts to repackage (Exhibit A- Jason Bourne http://www.thehindu.com/features/cinema/cinema-reviews/jason-bourne-review-snoop-god/article8948373.ece ) or reboot previously successful formulas, it has found that five words can bring audience in droves- "Based on a True Story". My memory starts with the movie "Titanic", where the ship was just a metaphor for a brief but deeply meaningful love affair that had its impact over a lifetime and not the focal point of the story. The movie was not an attempt to create a documentary, but superimposed a beautiful and haunting love story on the already well known disastrous maiden journey of the vessel.

Recently however, movies based on true stories have deviated so much from the truth that their real life protagonists have had to issue statements and elaborate their actions. The most recent example of this has been the movie "Sully"(http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-09-07/crash-investigators-pan-their-portrayal-as-villains-in-sully). The purpose is to create a drama where none exists and keep the audience engaged. It would have been difficult to portray the self doubt of "Sully", if there was no evil side or opposition against which he had to wage a battle. In fact, merely depicting the mental agonies of one character, no matter how heroic he is in real life, would not have retained the audience for long without considerable directorial skills. In the era of instant gratification and entertainment in short action packed bursts, no one can blame a master story teller like Clint Eastwood in taking the easy way out- add more drama to make it more appealing to all audiences.

Even worse have been digressions from the truth in movies like "Argo" where they portrayed the Iranians- both the King and the revolutionaries- as savage, corrupt and dogmatic. The fact that these nations were used as merely pawns on the Cold War Chessboard is never emphasised.

Here, perhaps, we can find clues to why the truth is depicted in a different way. It is more convenient and necessary for western movie makers to take this route- to portray the actions of their regimes as legitimate, heroic and thus deserving to be praised and supported. Then, tarnish the other as evil and decadent that needs to be "democratised" and rescued. This is then linked to aspects like national pride and patriotism, a trend that has long been in existence in English movies (eg-Bridge on The River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia)

The same aspect is creeping into Indian cinema as well. The movie "Airlift" significantly (http://www.hindustantimes.com/bollywood/sorry-akshay-kumar-airlift-is-short-on-facts-external-affairs-ministry/story-fcQzeFk3l7CqJioB8rJRLP.html) deviates from the truth, but that is irrelevant as far as the movie makers are concerned.

Personally, I feel that claims like "based on a true story" should not be encouraged by the media. No one can stop the movie makers from promoting their movie as based on true events, even if their connections with the truth is tenuous. However, media should stop extending support to the hype behind "true story" claims, which currently includes promotions in news and appearances on talk shows. Next, moviegoers should educate themselves about the truth or at least realise that the full truth can never be portrayed on screen and what is portrayed on screen is only partly true. I also hope that moviemakers stop abusing the the five word phrase, if they don't, it might become necessary to force them to issue a disclaimer (or claimer in this case) reading "some of the events/characters/plot in this movie are similar to real life".

The best solution for everyone would be if moviemakers found inspiration from imagination and, when they depict true stories, do justice the truth without distorting it.

New Generation Only, Kids and Elderly Keep Out

I recently bought a VCD of the new Malayalam movie called North 24 Kaatham and thought of watching it with my parents. Although on the lighter side of the so called "new generation" movies, after watching it for 10 minutes on my computer, I realised that just like other movies of the same genre, it is not something that can be enjoyed with the entire family. Perhaps that would be the best and simplest definition of "new generation" Malayalam movies- movies that would be too embarrassing to watch with the entire family.

Although there are broadly three types "new generation" movies, the common thread could be the depiction of sex, language and lifestyle- use of abusive language, drinking, vulgarity and at least in the silver screen more freedom, low inhibition and liberation for women while taking place in mostly an urban setting. The three types of this genre-

1) A movie that tells a story different from the traditional topics of Malayalam cinema and malayali life while partly describing a new normal of life in Kerala- these include movies like Diamond Necklace, Ritu, Cocktail  etc. The difference lies not in the story but in what the story depicts as life, events, language and
lifestyles.

2) In this category lie movies that present a different type of movie making. It is experimentalisation in what a movie is and what it should convey. Here, an obvious beginning, plot and conclusion or usual melodrama and fuss of popular routines are sometimes absent. Examples include Kerala Cafe, Anchu Sundarikal (anthology movies), North 24 Kaatham, Annayum Rasoolum, Traffic, Thirakkadha and Amen.

3) This is perhaps the most extreme or radical version of new generation movies where the themes and style of movie making is new. These include Trivandrum Lodge, Chappa Kurishe, 22 Female Kottayam etc.

They were welcomed because they came at a time when we were fully fed up of the antics of relics who were playing ridiculous roles that were an insult to their previous accomplishments, to Malayalam movies themselves and to us the audience who were used to much better acting, stories and depictions. Things got to such a low that we even cheered for, accepted and made a celebrity out of the totally outrageous and ridiculous creations of Santosh Pandit.

Before "new generation" movies arrived and was accepted as a new genre, there were movies like Thirakkadha, Pakalnakshathrangal, Ritu, Traffic etc that provived much needed relief, quality and was a sign of things to come. It is perhaps with the return of Fahadh Fasil that "new generation" in Malayalam cinema got a clear- cut identity as a genre of movies. Movies like Chappa Kurishe, 22 Female Kottayam and Diamond Necklace being the actor's major successes.

"New generation" movies have not completely replaced regular movies and both of them have had equal measures of good and bad movies,  horrible failures and remarkable successes. Even in this era, movies that tell a simple yet lovable family story, comedies, dramas etc are succeeding.  These include Celluloid, Beautiful, Ayalum Njanum Thammil, Indian Rupee, Passenger, Grandmaster, Ordinary, Romans, Robinhood, Arabi Ottakam P. Madhavan Nair some of which are obvious recycles of old banal stories and yet can be enjoyed without shame, apprehension about the next embarrassing scene which will make us dread the moment we have to face the elders or kids.

I do not hold a puritanical view of movies and so a change in attitude, openness and liberalism must be welcomed as long it does not become ridiculous and tries to make a mockery of the viewer's intellect like what was in attempted in "Bachelor Party" and "Casanova".

In the end, it does not matter whether it is a new or old generation movie- if it is good, people will watch, appreciate and remember it. But one thing is for certain, "new generation" movies have a connotation about age, they are not for children, middle-aged and the elderly, they cannot understand it since it is not from their time. So watching these movies is an awkward experience for everyone in a family setting. It is more suited for hanging out with friends, a sign of changing times in Kerala.

Learning History and its Lessons

The job of a historian is to record events, analyse them and produce an objective version of what happened, how and why. Some also offer versions different from recorded and accepted history while others probe the 'what if' angle and how things would have turned out so different, so well and so pleasant if it hadn't been for a minor mistake, grudge or oversight. But these offer us academic closure and explain things neatly to be stored and retreived to analyse the present through the past or in my case currently, to answer questions for an exam. The reasons can be numbered, the events dated and the aftermath judged through influence of these events on the future.

Of late I have read books dealing with historical events, but viewed through the life of people. The fact that the movie 'Titanic' became a super-hit and won 11 academy awards proves the impact of telling a story through the lives of people which makes it different from a historical documentary. 'Saving Private Ryan', 'Schindler's List', 'Mother India' are among the long list of movies that recount real history through the life of people. Sometimes they are fictional characters, like in 'Titanic' and 'Saving Private Ryan', made to give order, structure and the human element to complex events which when viewed only objectively will mean something to us who are far away from them. Sometimes they are real, like in 'Schindler's List' or 'Gandhi'.

The fact remains, history through the life of people allows for better understanding and emotions than any objective work. It allows us to relive the pain, agony, joys, relief and hopes of the characters thus leaving a deeper and clearer impact on us than pure academic history. Whether books or movies, stories of people allow us to relate to events and emotions and get a clearer understanding. My sojourn through 'Unheard Voices' by Harsh Mander, 'Poor Little Rich Slum' by Rashmi Bansal and Deepak Gandhi (both non-fiction), 'Long Walk Home' by Manreet Sodhi Someshwar and 'Winter Nights' by Navtej Sarna (fiction) told me about incidents and realities in India- omnipresent injustice perpetuated on lower castes, tribals, women, farmers and apathy of state to their plight, communal riots, our prejudice and ignorance on issues of poverty, our snobbery and indifference towards urban poverty, our obsession towards a glitzy, glamorous model of development, partition and its violence, the loss of sons and daughters to wanton violence- all these were presented through the lives of people.

This is why artists, writers and performers require the freedom to express their views- to bring out the real human stories behind events and not be circumscribed by the need to present everything in a neatly written plot having a clear beginning and end with lot of song and dance and cliches thrown in. They need to write these so that those far away in time and space understand these events. We need to understand them because we have to learn to overcome our differences, live in peace and harmony with ourselves and the world and realise that to forget is to repeat. Human emotions and feelings are the same everywhere and although we cannot experience the same events, learning about the lives of others we relive it and it teaches us a lot more than objective history. There is no better way to learn the lessons of history than the words of those who lived it. This is why 'Anne Frank, The Diary of a Young Girl' is read across the world in dozens of languages even 70 years after the author's death and remains a defiance and defence against despotism, hate and violence.

Trivandrum Lodge

Been trying to put finger to keyboard for sometime, but then after having written over twenty five thousand words, just as part of civil service exams, on paper makes one lose the free flow on typing to pour out my mind. I have backspaced atleast a dozen in these three lines and it has taken me well over 15minutes to consolidate what I had to say. But then, I am not sure about what I have to say? Today's movie? About the state of humanity? Corruption?

A movie review is long overdue and the movie that I saw today definitely deserves one not just due to the unreasonable incessant criticism it has faced from many quarters, but also because it is actually a good movie. The recent trend in Malayalam movies has been about adultery, women drinking, free exploration of sexuality and liberal references to swear words and kickstand jokes. This movie is not about that, it is not about a lot of adultery and then projecting it as the new reality or alternative.

This movie is about contrasts, it shows how different things can be, it shows how meaningless some relationships can be, how even some relations that can be frowned upon can have a meaning and also about tributes to some of the most wonderful and memorable characters in Malayalam cinema.

I would divide the relations in the movie into three- the first one involves just merely the physical act of love, lust and desire. It is about just the superficial aspects of it and about fulfilling one's basic needs and changing to suit situations. The characters of Dhwani, the one played by Devi Ajit, the one who gives others the false movie hopes etc fall into this category. This dominates the movie for more than forty percent of its duration. Then comes relations where people are actually good, but circumstances force them into difficult choices, seemingly shady and meaningless lives- in my opinion Abdu (Jayasurya), Kanyaka (Tesni Khan) and Thangal (Babu Nambudiri) portray such characters, the seemingly unholy partnership between Thangal and Kanyaka and the character that doesn't appear, but is actually an important part of the story- the original owner of Trivandrum Lodge, the mother of Ravishankar (Anoop Menon), too would fall in this category. This constitutes another twenty five percent of the movie.

By the time this sixty five percent of the movie was done, I had almost given up hope and felt this was one of those "new generation" stereotypes. But that is when the real purpose of the first sixty five percent became obvious- it is only as contrasts and backdrops for the real love stories- the one between Relton and Peggy Aunty, then the characters played by Bhavana and Anoop Menon, Anoop Menon and his son, this son and his young, innocent love with a classmate.

Perhaps this is the way everything is in life- there are those who do things just for the sake of it, some since they have no choice, some for the wrong reasons and with wrong priorities. But then there are some who do it for the right reasons, due to the right motivations and with the right intentions- a small minority.

The movie pays small tributes to one of the strangest, yet the most powerful driving force characters in one of Padmarajan's movies- Thangal from Thuvanathumbikal makes a brief cameo and is still in his old job. The portrayal of this character in both movies have been nothing short of exceptional and it does require skill to create such a character- acknowledged by borrowing the character full with references to the support received by Thangal in Trichur from Jayakrishnan.


Even the movie's title is meaningful not only because it brings together the characters or forms the backdrop, but it is actually a witness to all these relationships and the people tied together in it. The movie initially seems like a colossal waste of time, full of beeps and expletives and nothing even remotely resembling a story. But it takes on a new life when the story that makes sense of everything appears and gives us a glimpse of true love and if we can identify this play of contrasts and relations, then the movie becomes a truly enjoyable and meaningful one.

PS- If I sounded overly analytical or methodical, I put it down entirely to post civil service exam hangover.

Paris je t'aime

I just could not resist. My right hand is paining after a long trivia battle, my eyes are puffy and sleep beckons, my stomach rumbles on and my mind is not working properly either. It is a quarter past two of the thirtieth day in the month named after the Roman god of the Gates, the year 2010.

I saw the movie 'Paris je t'aime', meaning 'Paris, I Love You'. I had heard about the movie somewhere along the long walks that I take through the corridors of wikipedia or it might have been during one of those channel surfing marathons as I sat alone at home with just the TV for company during my tryst with entrance exams(the movie was released in 2006 May).

I used one of the clips for the 'Travel & Tourism' Quiz for 'Waves Winter-09', my college's Cul-fest. I did not expect it to be answered, but it was worth asking. Interestingly, it was answered by 'the guy who sat in the audience and was shouting the answers' during his first quiz in BITS in 2008. Kudos Mr.LDC cordi, nice work. Needless to say, his team won the quiz.

Enough blabbering, on with it. Or perhaps, in keeping with the spirit of the movie which has 18 short stories, taking place in different parts of Paris, I was just sharing my own stories. Now, to the matter at hand- the movie is about love, how Paris is the city of love. A lonely person finds love, a blind man finds love, a vampire finds love. It is about rediscovering love and life in Paris. 18 beautiful stories, each one some of the most impressive stories I have ever seen.

Each of them with a twist, a heart-wrenching tale of loss, couples reigniting the spark in the marriage and the most beautiful one is directed by Alfonso Cuaron. Do watch it, for it will make you fall in love and believe in love and fall in with the 'City of Love'. I wish I could go to Arc de Triomphe, Champs Elysees, Eiffel Tower, the streets and the cafes and of-course the museums. It's a dream, a wish, a love that will never go away.