Art & Entertainment

Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro?

Till the '80s, they were the bedrock of an offbeat film culture. Now, NFDC and its ilk are facing closure.

Advertisement

Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro?
info_icon
info_icon
Bhavni Bhavai
info_icon
info_icon

It also tried to get into building theatres and film distribution. But the latter was done haphazardly and theatre-building never took off. Says Shyam Benegal, filmmaker and ex-nfdc board member (1980-86), "A business model has to be clear. The theatres were supposed to bring in revenue but NFDC was led by the idea of welfare. So it thought of building theatres where there were none. This led to a clash of objectives.It also did not have the expertise to build and market theatres."

The FD, on the other hand, has been producing mediocre films at best.Its image took a beating last year when it undemocratically rejected films outspoken in content from participating in the Mumbai International Film Festival. Similarly, CFS has hardly produced anything that's left a mark on public memory.

So, does NFDC deserve to die? Mukhopadhyay doesn't think so. After all, he points out, it was profitable till two years back (Rs 7 crore in the black in 2002-03). It has made 25 films in the past five years, all of which have got some measure of recognition. As he says, "No organisation that promotes art can survive on its own. Anywhere in the world, art is subsidised. Cinema especially needs it as it is a very expensive form of art. Even the rich European nations that make some of the best films provide for subsidies."

Advertisement

info_icon

Filmmaker Kundan Shah insists that we need to understand the role of cinema as an art form, its potential to impact social change or reflect social realities, rather than in pure business terms: "Just linking it to profits is a very limiting approach." His NFDC-financed debut movie Jaane Bhi Do Yaaro was a critical and commercial hit. Other than the FD, can we imagine anyone supporting documentaries on famines or farmer suicides? "What NFDC needs is not closure but a lot of energy and vision," says Shah. A government body serves society, whether it is in making cinema or supplying electricity. Profit cannot be a motive.

Then again, why can't it be profitable too? For instance, asks Shah, why can't it be made mandatory for TV channels to air NFDC films? Commercial cinema that caters to the lowest common denominator and keeps an eye on profits has to be offset. And this is within the mandate of a governmental body, to provide some effective resistance to the widespread dumbing down in our cultural spaces. Otherwise, the government would be tacitly admitting that commercial cinema is the only valid cinema. Surely, it's not too difficult to commercially leverage—both nationally and internationally—nfdc's library of 500 critically acclaimed films it has financed over the years?

Benegal's argument is that being government bodies, they cannot be shut down. Now Manmohan Shetty, owner of imax Adlabs theatres, and a man in tune with commercial cinema's successes, has been appointed chairman. He definitely has ideas—one being to tailor the NFDC along the lines of the UK Film Commission or the Canada Film Board that would amalgamate the disparate film bodies. But he will be able to execute these only when he has the powers and the present mess has been sorted out. As of now, he's been quoted as saying: "I have nothing to do as chairman." Seems an uphill battle already.

Advertisement

Tags

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement

    Advertisement