Biutiful was not an exception. David Fincher’s Social Network, a sharp, irreverent and entertaining take on the Facebook phenomenon, saw a similar mad dash, as did Abbas Kiarostami’s Certified Copy, a beguiling film on reality, replication and role-playing in art and relationships, Takeshi Kitano’s Outrage, a kinetic, playful, funny yet uber-violent film on gangland rivalries, and Mike Leigh’s Another Year, a meditative journey through time, relations and emotions. “Films are all that matter in a festival,” said filmmaker Sudhir Mishra. Good cinema certainly ruled at MIFF.
Delhi’s window to cinema from Asia and the Arab world—Osian’s Cinefan—died quietly this year for lack of funding, the Calcutta festival has been limping along in a lacklustre manner. and the official International Film Festival of India (IFFI), Goa, has forever remained caught in a bureaucratic stranglehold. The only consistently stimulating festival has been the Kerala International Film Festival. However, for the past couple of years, a similar energy and commitment have begun to underline MIFF also, the only international festival in India organised by practising film professionals under the aegis of the Mumbai Academy of Moving Images (MAMI). “It is fast emerging as the best film festival in India,” says filmmaker-actress and jury member Suhasini Maniratnam. And Amit Khanna, a MAMI trustee and chairman of Reliance Big Entertainment, says, “We aim to make it one of the top 15 festivals of the world in three years.”
MIFF has not always sported this significant a profile. This year, it seemed to have acquired edge and identity. A lot of thought and intelligence seems to have gone into picking the right films. Contemporary films, celebrated at the leading festivals—Cannes, Venice, Locarno, Berlin—managed to travel to Mumbai. Unlike iffi, the approach was not to wait but actively seek them out. “MIFF’s not run on bureaucratese but on the passion of film buffs,” says Khanna. The festival also put together a gem of a retrospective —43 classic Japanese films, from the 1920s to the present. “Young filmmakers and technicians get to benefit from such classic packages,” says Mishra.
Besides the thought and effort, the financial backing of Reliance for the past two years has also been a booster. “It has helped us access the best producers and distributors,” says MAMI chairman, Shyam Benegal. No doubt the handsome prize money of $150,000 for the international competition for first feature films has been attracting the best. “The competition entries have been of very high standards,” says Benegal. The festival also attracted international presence, with Oliver Stone holding a round table discussion and getting a lifetime achievement award. Little details mattered. Like an all women’s jury headed by Jane Campion, who also held master classes on direction and acting.
For every film you’d pick, there were two to sacrifice. Among the best were the Danish-Swedish Submarino, about scarred childhoods; the Romanian-Serbian If I Want to Whistle, I Whistle, an aching portrayal of delinquents’ brief brush with freedom and love; the Russian How I Ended This Summer, about the loneliness of two meteorologists at a desolate research station; the Korean Poetry focused on an aging woman’s urge to write a poem as she struggles with the guilt of her grandson’s misdemeanour and her failing health; and the French Of Gods and Men, about monks caught between the army and fundamentalists in Algeria.
The standout Indian efforts were Srinivas Sunderrajan’s The Untitled Kartik Krishnan Project, a film on filmmaking, made on Rs 40,000; Sudhish Kamath’s Good Night, Good Morning, a romantic film about a phone talk between two strangers; and Girish Kasaravalli’s Kanasemba Kudureyaneri (Riding the Stallion of a Dream), a tale of a grave-digger’s loss of faith in the power of his dreams.
However, not everything was uniformly rosy. The opening ceremony was marked by embarrassing glitches and shoddy performances and the closing was tacky too. The business centre needed to get more serious and focused on the game of buying and selling. The media, especially TV channels, complained of the lack of star presence. However, for Khanna, the challenge for the future lies in getting a good festival venue like Delhi’s Siri Fort or Calcutta’s Nandan complex. And Mishra looks forward to a better response from the industry: “After all, it’s our own festival, in our own city.”
Thank you to all those who have taken the trouble to read the article and share their thoughts. Out of the arguments made here, there are two that perhaps need answering. So here they go.
1. The first part of the article compares outcomes (relative percentages of population of the religions concerned) irrespective of the process that led to those outcomes - whether immigration, relatively faster population growth or conversions. This was for two reasons. One, to put the figure of 2.3 per cent in "numerical perspective", as the article itself explained. The second reason was that outcomes are ultimately what the crux of debate is about. The rest of the article in any case dealt with process - or conversions in this case, from both a contemporary and historical perspective.
2. Some commenters have tried to cast doubts on the reliability of Census 2001. Those who do this should bear in mind that Census 2001 was conducted by a BJP government. Considering the extreme importance that BJP gives to this issue, it would be reasonable to expect that IF it had perceived a problem with the methodology that was distorting the numbers, it would have fixed it. As the article mentioned, BJP or BJP-supported governments have been in power for 10 of the last 40 years, or about a quarter of the time, and the only reasonable conclusion one can arrive at is that any misreporting of numbers, real or perceived, would be marginal and hence, not of importance.
To all other arguments made, my answer is the following: Please read the article again, with particular focus on the quotations of Vivekananda and Monier Williams, and the history of the missionary efforts in Bengal and their outcome.
We at Outlookindia.com welcome feedback and your comments, including scathing criticism
1. Scathing, passionate, even angry critiques are welcome, but please do not indulge in abuse and invective. Our Primary concern is to keep the debate civil. We urge our users to try and express their disagreements without being disagreeable. Personal attacks are not welcome. No ad hominem please.
2. Please do not post the same message again and again in the same or different threads
3. Please keep your responses confined to the subject matter of the article you are responding to. Please note that our comments section is not a general free-for-all but for feedback to articles/blogs posted on the site
4. Our endeavour is to keep these forums unmoderated and unexpurgated. But if any of the above three conditions are violated, we reserve the right to delete any comment that we deem objectionable and also to withdraw posting privileges from the abuser. Please also note that hate-speech is punishable by law and in extreme circumstances, we may be forced to take legal action by tracing the IP addresses of the poster.
5. If someone is being abusive or personal, or generally being a troll or a flame-baiter, please do not descend to their level. The best response to such posters is to ignore them and send us a message at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT
6. Please do not copy and paste copyrighted material. If you do think that an article elsewhere has relevance to the point you wish to make, please only quote what is considered fair-use and provide a link to the article under question.
7. There is no particular outlookindia.com line on any subject. The views expressed in our opinion section are those of the author concerned and not that of all of outlookindia.com or all its authors.
8. Please also note that you are solely responsible for the comments posted by you on the site. The comments could be deleted or edited entirely at our discretion if we find them objectionable. However, the mere fact of their existence on our site does not mean that we necessarily approve of their contents. In short, the onus of responsibility for the comments remains solely with the authors thereof. Outlookindia.com or any of its group publications, may, however, retains the right to publish any of these comments, with or without editing, in any medium whatsoever. It is therefore in your own interest to be careful before posting.
9.Outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for how any search engine -- such as Google, Bing etc -- caches or displays these comments. Please note that you are solely responsible for posting these comments and it is a privilege being granted to our registered users which can be withdrawn in case of abuse. To reiterate:
a. Comments once posted can only be deleted at the discretion of outlookindia.com
b. The comments reflect the views of the authors and not of outlookindia.com
c. outlookindia.com is not responsible in any manner whatsoever for the way search engines cache or display these comments
d. Please therefore take due caution before you post any comments as your words could potentially be used against you
10. We have an online thread for our comments policy:
You are welcome to post your suggestions here or in case you have a specific issue, to directly email us at Mail AT outlookindia DOT com with the subject header COMPLAINT