Kalyug (1981)

The Shashi Kapoor-Shyam Benegal combo worked well in Junoon, which was an adaptation of a Ruskin Bond novella. Apparently wanting to take the successful collaboration forward, they decided to adapt the great Indian epic Mahabharata into a film by weaving it into a corporate modern-day scenario. This was some thirty years before Prakash Jha successfully aped the idea and applied it to a modern-day political setting.

Before I go on to talk about the film; I feel the word ‘epic’ has been coined just to describe the magnanimity of our two ancient relics- Mahabharata and Ramayana. Like most others from my generation I got introduced to both through popular tele-serials and some school text-book reading. Recently however I found time to go through some excellent re-telling of both- CR Rajagopalachari’s Ramayana, and Devdutt Pattnaik’s Jaya (an illustrated version of Mahabharata). The latter was a more enriching experience than the former as Mahabharata truly is an amazingly sinuous yet cohesive work of art. It is so wonderfully detailed and multi-dimensional that it is difficult to remember most of the things. On the other hand I know pretty much all the things about Ramayana which, comparatively, is much simpler and easier to comprehend. So post reading Jaya, I got the feeling that I had never really known Mahabharata.

So when I sat down to watch Kalyug, I did it with great anticipation and excitement. I had thing movie with me for the past 3-4 months but never really got down to watching it, for at the back of my mind I always had this thing that I would read the epic once prior to experiencing it. With Shyam Benegal at the helm I was quite certain that the film would enthrall me. But now after watching the movie, in retrospect, I feel that I did great wrong by having such high expectations from this endeavor.

Kalyug is by no means a bad film. It is definitely a notch above the regular 1980s fare. However that aside, I am quite surprised by the lack of a lot of things in the movie. Coherence, for one. Emotional appeal, for another. Good acting (most surprisingly) for another another. The movie starts off with a rather simplistic narration of the rather simplistic (as compared to the one Mahabharata had) family tree of the two families involved. It is perfectly justified, and rather thoughtful, of the makers to keep the number of protagonists limited or else it would have been difficult to do justice to all of them in a 150 min motion picture. The two families are two rich business houses of India, fighting for the same contracts and tenders. The movie wastes no time in establishing the hostilities between these two families of cousins, related by blood but separated by their love for power and ambition.

As soon as the drama started, I excitedly started to draw parallels between the characters from the great epic and the movie. It is surely captivating, for someone who knows a bit of Mahabharata, to decipher and witness the way in which Shyam Benegal has made some interesting moves. Some of the characters are given the same names as in the epic. Karan Singh (Shashi Kapoor) plays Karan, a devoted friend to Duryodhan in the book, who is Dhanraj in the movie (essayed by Victor Banarjee). Karan Singh is pretty much the central character in the movie and it seems to be an adaptation of the saga from his perspective. Other characters with the same names are Subhadra, Krishna, Parikshit, amongst others. Many plot elements are cleverly harmonized with the ones from the book (something that Mani Ratnam tried in Raavan) and identifying the same is quite enjoyable for the first few minutes. Post the hour mark, however, the movie becomes quite bland and lifeless in its treatment.

My main issues with the film are-

·         The characters are not well developed. None of them are likeable and the motivations behind many of the things the various people do are quite unclear. I couldn’t understand the role Rekha played for instance. She is Supriya, the wife of Dharmraj (Eldest brother of the troika playing the Pandavas), and throughout the movie comes across as an irritable lady who finds it tough to get along with her mother-in-law and her younger devar’s wife (who is also her niece). This younger devar Bharatraj (Anant Nag interpreting Arjuna) and his Bhabhi share a very unclear relationship. Till the end there is no clarity whether their relationship is just one of mutual respect or something more (In the Mahabharata there is no Bhabhi and Draupadi is wedded to all the five brothers). Similarly the relationship between Dharmraj (Raj Babbar essaying Yudhishtir) and his wife is shown to be dysfunctional but there are no reasons given. Balraj (Kulbhushan Kharbanda as Bheem) is shown as a pleasure-loving guy, but plays no critical role in the narrative (except being a trigger to the accidental death of his cousin Sandeep- a mentally unstable Dushasan?). Also, there is no explanation given for the great dislike Bharatraj has for Karan Singh (The Arjun-Karan war).

·         A lot of the things from the Mahabharata are necessarily forced-fitted into the narrative, while many crucial things are not touched upon at all. So there are the incapable parents, growing senile and having no control over the actions of their kids. Similarly Arjun’s marriage to Subhadra (which wasn’t a big plot point in Mahabharata) is given great prominence by the introduction of a sappy and boring romantic track between Bharatraj and Subhadra. There is a Bhishma Pitamah too (played by AK Hangal!), but too plays no real part in the drama unlike the book where he was termed as the root-cause of the entire war. Also, in today’s context a woman bearing kids with Sadhus and priests as a mark of her devotion is too much to digest. There is also a fleeting mention of a past love affair between Supriya and Karan Singh (In the book Draupadi had prevented Karan from participating in her Swayamwar on the grounds of him not being from a royal family. Much later she had admitted to being attracted to him despite her being married to the Pandavas).

·         The central conflict in the Mahabharata had its roots in the fight for the throne. Both parties believed that they were the true heir to the throne of Hastinapur. The hostility got to the highest point post the game of dice between Yudhishtir and Shakuni (representing Kauravas), in which Pandavas lose everything, followed by the subsequent disrobing and public humiliation of Draupadi. In the movie, there is no apparent central conflict. There is a slight throwaway to the Draupadi humiliation episode when income tax officers treat Savitri with disrespect while frisking her wardrobe. However the entire war between the two families comes across as manufactured and unreal.  

·         The acting by many of the leads looks embarrassingly amateurish. A part of the discredit for this should also go to the writers who didn’t really develop any of the characters well. Anant Nag seriously hams it up in the last few portions of the film. Victor Banarjee as Dhanraj fails to evoke sympathy or ethos despite playing a bit of a loser (again contrary to the tough and overbearing Duryodhan of Mahabharata). Sushma Seth is given too much to do, and is unconvincing in many of the scenes. Supriya Pathak irritates as the young bride of Bharatraj who has nothing to do in the world except listening to a formulaic Bappi Lahiri’ish’ love song. The only actor who actually does well is Shashi Kapoor, who is convincing as the angst ridden Karan Singh. He gets the meatiest part and does a good job of it.

It is not that there is nothing to appreciate in the movie. The idea of retelling Mahabharata in the corporate world itself deserves kudos. Some of the references to the epic are done really well. For instance the death of Karan while he is changing the wheel of his car is striking. Similarly at the end how Parikshit (a kid) emerges as the only heir to the entire set-up highlights the futility of the war between the cousins. Apart from these few well thought of references, the entire corporate set-up is done realistically. The fight for a Government contract, the intricacies of law, the dissatisfied union, the import of raw materials etc. is shown in an authentic manner (though in a certain sense it reminds of the Trishul corporate conflict). The first hour is quite fast paced and engaging.

Parting Note: All said and done, Kalyug is in no ways a perfect modern-day interpretation of the Mahabharata. It suffers from the similar flaws as Prakash Jha’s Raajneeti (a far more entertaining film). However, for the people who are aware of the epic saga, this movie is a good watch if only for the effort it makes. 

Vijeta (1982)

While no one can put a stop to ageing (the world is still waiting for the chemical formula), coming of age  is an arduous job. It is a journey like no other, which is more psychological than literal. Unfortunately history tells us that the best men, more often than not, get made only after facing a lot of hardships and going through personal losses. Maybe it’s a small tax that they have to pay on their path of self-discovery and conquest. 

Govind Nihalani’s Vijeta is a movie that emphasizes on the above fact and explores human relationships through challenging times. It is basically a story of guy’s journey from boy to man, and how he conquers his doubts and apprehensions to emerge victorious in life. The movie has been produced by Shashi Kapoor, and stars his son Kunal Kapoor as the protagonist.

Vinod (Shashi Kapoor) and Neelima (Rekha) form an estranged couple, who despite their differences live together for the sake of their only son Angad (Kunal Kapoor as a young surd). Vinod is in the entertainment business, while Neelima is a housewife who is highly involved with her pursuits in classical music (This deep involvement suggests a void in her life that she is trying to take care of). One day Angad, their son, returns home after leaving his boarding school. Utterly confused about what to do in life, and highly troubled by the shaky relationship his parents share, Angad feels that his life is completely worthless and confesses contemplating suicide in front of his mother (with whom he shares a friendly relationship, contrary to the acerbic one that he shares with his father). Neelima’s young brother (and Angad’s uncle), a Naval officer, takes Angad to stay with him for a few days. During his stay with his Uncle, Angad finds life in the armed forces highly disciplined, challenging, and adventurous, and decides to enter the National Defense Academy to train for becoming an Air Force Pilot.

Soon, after countering the initial resistance to the idea posed by his father, he enters the Academy and settles into a new regime that throws more challenges at him that he anticipates initially. Thus his journey ensues, and how along the way he forms new bonds- finds few friends for life and finds love, and how his success in life helps resolve the issues between his parents, is what the movie is all about.

The one thing that striking about this movie is its authenticity. Be it the manner in which human relationships are depicted, or the way the life at the Defense Academy is showcased- everything is done realistically and nothing is over the top. Even the love story between Angad and Ana (played by a young Supriya Pathak) is unconventional in the way it has been handled on screen- minus any melodrama and the usual kitsch associated with Hindi cinema. There are many sequences that deserve mention-right from the initial ones involving Shashi Kapoor and Rekha, to the pre climax when Angad is at the front fighting the 1971 war. Certain scenes are so powerful that they can be easily included in the best shot scenes ever in Indian cinema. One such lengthy sequence is at the Air Force training academy when the handling of an in flight glitch is depicted wonderfully. When one contrasts it to one such scene in the latest movie ‘Mausam’, one can only feel highly impressed by the way Govind Nihalani shot the scene almost 30 years ago without using the kind of digital technology that is at the disposal of the directors today (incidentally, just struck me, Supriya Pathak is another connection between the two movies).

This movie is embellished with truly remarkable performances, led by Shashi Kapoor and Amrish Puri. The latter is, in my opinion, the greatest character artist ever in our movies, and the respect for the former has grown leaps and bounds in my eyes after watching this and Junoon (both unconventional movies produced and backed by him). The people who play Angad’s friends are all very efficient, and so is Rekha, in a complex role that required much emoting but no histrionics (again unconventional by usual standards). Om Puri, who plays Angad’s Uncle, is effective in an extended cameo. Supriya Pathak is damn sweet in her portrayal of Angad’s love interest, and I wonder why she didn’t do better as a mainstream actor. The only one who disappoints a little is ironically the main lead- Kunal Kapoor, for whom this movie was a kind of launch vehicle. Maybe in an effort to remain restrained, he is surprisingly insipid and dull in many scenes, and does not enforce himself on the movie at all. He shows flashes of talent in a few sequences, but overall, it is not hard to understand why he was not a success as a mainstream actor after watching this movie where he was handed a role of the lifetime by his father.

Parting Note: This movie is a must watch for many reasons. One- it is a technically brilliant film that has a strong theme and an engaging storyline. Two- it is an unconventional take on human relationships, the kind is realistic and at the same time has tremendous entertainment value. Three- it shows life in the Air Force, and the growth of an individual as he progresses through the various stages of his career in the defense forces. And lastly, it is an ode to the human spirit, undying and relentless in its pursuit of acceptance, peace, satisfaction, and victory…

P.S. A poster of the movie, that did not care to even slightly depict its central theme. Commercials trappings hard to eschew completely in the big bad world of Bollywood.

Junoon (1978), A Flight of Pigeons (Ruskin Bond)

Unlike the west, Indian cinema has seen very few books being adapted into movies. Shyam Benegal’s ‘Junoon’ is one of those rare features that sources its material from a book; Ruskin Bond’s novella ‘A Flight of  Pigeons’ being the subject of attention in its case. The book was written by Bond in the early 1970s, and is the story of the trials and tribulations faced by an English family during the Indian mutiny of 1857, in a small Indian town-Shahjahanpur. It is a true account told from the perspective of Ruth, the young daughter of an English officer, who witnesses the brutal killing of her father at the hands of the communal mob that breaks out during the mutiny. How she, her mother, and the rest of her family including her granny and a cousin manage to keep themselves alive over the course of the next one year, is what the book talks about. But more than being a story of survival and an account of human helplessness, Bond’s book is a showcase of how human compassion and empathy has no communal boundaries, and how true love can keep the worst in a man at bay.

It is a powerful written material that Shyam Benegal chooses to bring alive on celluloid.  However what he puts across in his film is an entirely different perspective that follows a texture that is far from what the book adopts. While the book has its focus on the humane relationships between people from two communities at war, the movie treats the backdrop of the 1857 mutiny as an opportunity to make some political points (including some slightly jingoistic ones) and centers the plot around the obsessive love (‘Junoon’) that Javed Khan (Shashi Kapoor as a dashing Pathan) had for Ruth (Nafisa Ali in her debut role). The movie is also an ‘Indian’ version in a way that the mutiny is shown in a highly positive light (something that was not done in the book written by the Anglo Indian Bond), and the atrocities that the British Raj committed on the helpless Indians are brought out emphatically. Also, while the book condemned the violence committed on Ruth’s family and their ilk, the movie somewhat justifies the virulent means adopted by the rebels lead by Sarfaraz Khan (Naseeruddin Shah is a role that seems to be written for him).

The movie takes off with a starting credit ‘qawalli’, featuring a vagabond fakir and introducing the protagonist Javed Khan on horseback. This qawalli is a really stretched one and tests the patience of the viewer, and in my opinion should have been done away with or compressed generously (I can imagine some people in the audience contemplating leaving the auditorium when the movie would have been playing in theatres). However, like in the book, the actual story starts off with the killing of Ruth’s father in a church, and her and her family’s subsequent surreptitious refuge in Lala Ramjimal’s (Kulbhushan Kharbanda) house. Soon their nervous and unsafe stay at Lala’s home ends when Javed Khan (one of the rebels who were fighting the ‘firangis’) discovers them and takes them to his place where his wife (Shabhana Azmi) welcomes them reluctantly owing to her fears about the supposedly illicit and open ways of the English women. Her fears prove somewhat right when Javed Khan admits being besotted by Ruth since a long time and expresses his wish to marry her and make her his second begum. This proposal by him starts a slight battle of egos and wits between him and Ruth’s mother (Mariam).

The movie from here on becomes a tale of Javed Khan’s unrelenting pursuit of Ruth’s love. Being a true Pathan he refrains from having her by force, and rather shows great dignity and poise when his people accuse him of putting his obsession over everything else. A great deal of spark is added to the proceedings by Javed’s wife Firdaus (played by Shabhana Azmi). She is quite expressive of her dislike for Ruth and her mother, and revolts quite vociferously in front of her husband, who determinedly ignores her constant complaints. Parallel to this, Sarfaraz Khan (the leader of the rebels and Javed Khan’s brother in law) is shown marshalling his troops against the British in Delhi, and subsequently in Kanpur.

Meanwhile Ruth’s mother and Javed Khan agree upon a condition that she would give him her daughter’s hand in marriage if the British lose the battle (otherwise Javed would never even think about her again). Javed Khan reluctantly accepts this agreement on the insistence of his ‘Chachi’, who incidently had grown very fond of Mariam and Ruth, and at whose place they both were residing for a while. So the fortunes of Javed’s love get attached to the sepoy mutiny that was burning in many of the country, and which was being brutally suppressed by the British troops at most places.

A tale of fierce love that remains unrequited in an extremely volatile political situation, Junoon is more than an account of India’s first war for independence. It is a complex film, which has more meaning than what it conveys overtly through its narrative. Shyam Benegal has left it upon the viewers to form their own interpretations and opinions. One question that arises when you finish watching this movie is whether Javed Khan was justified in putting his love over all other rational and irrational things in the world. Frankly, there is no answer, to this- but this tale suggests that love may be a human failing, but it is also the most powerful emotion in the world. The last scene of the film, when Javed returns to the village while risking his life, to catch a last glimpse of Ruth before escaping with his family to safety, is one of the most powerful ones of the movie. While Mariam refuses Javed to meet Ruth even one last time, Ruth by herself disobeys her mother and lets the Pathan have a final gaze at herself, till he turns around and trots away on his horse. This gesture by Ruth is a silent acceptance of her love and affection for Javed. So while Javed loses Ruth, he does manage to win her love and devotion, and that too quite handsomely for it is mentioned that Ruth decided to remain unmarried for the rest of her life.

To do his bidding, Shyam Benegal chooses a splendid star-cast. While Shashi Kapoor (in his first film as producer) is phenomenal in the central role, Jennifer Kendel (Shashi Kapoor’s wife) who plays Ruth’s mother is heartwarming in her portrayal of a strong woman faced with a very difficult situation. Shabhana Azmi is energetic and excels in an extended cameo, while Naseeruddin Shah is his usual brilliant self in a powerful role of a leader of the rebels. Nafisa Ali, in a central role in her very first film, is raw and somewhat amateurish (her discomfort comes across more glaringly in company of seasoned actors as the rest of the cast). Deepti Naval, Kulbhushan Kharbanda, and Sushma Seth pitch in with solid supporting acts.

Shyam Benegal paints the movie on a very realistic canvas. The 19^th century Indian town is recreated authentically, and the other elements of a good historical like the costumes, dialects, and vocabulary seem all in place. The music of the film is classical Hindustani, and may appeal to the connoisseurs of that kind of music.

Apart from giving a different tenure to the story, what Benegal does differently from Bond’s book is that he gives a lot of emphasis on the metaphorical title that Bond chose for his book (The flight of the pigeons). So while at one level Javed Khan is shown to be quite fond of his pigeons, on the other Sarfaraz Khan in anguish equates Ruth and her family to worthless Pigeons that had captured Javed Khan’s thought process. At another level, the film culminates on the note when all the local people are forced to flee from the town to save themselves from the fast approaching British troops.

Parting Note: For people who are interested in History, and do not mind a leisurely pace to the proceedings, Junoon is a must watch. And for anyone who is interested in reading, ‘the flight of the Pigeons’ is a must read (it’s a short novella and won’t take much time).