Satyakaam (1969)

Many great men have exhorted the importance of following the path of truth, however arduous, in amazingly simple words (almost nonchalantly in many cases). Our holy relics, our Upanishads, and our two most significant historical texts- the Ramayana and the Mahabharata- too have averred vehemently that there is nothing greater than reveling in the knowledge and the spreading of truth. Hrishikesh Mukherjee, in his 1969 feature Satyakaam, pays homage to these thoughts by means of depicting the journey of a man who never wavers from this formidable path of truth.

Satyakaam is the story of Satyapriya ‘Sath’ Acharya (Dharmendra in what’s as per his own admission the best performance of his career), a young man born in a family that’s boasts on an illustrious lineage- all great men who spent their lives in the worship of truth and banished all thoughts of giving in to worldly pleasures that might have caused them to compromise on their ideals. His early education came from his grandfather Satyasharan Acharya (Ashok Kumar in a look that was used by Hrishikesh Mukherjee in another film with the actor at around the same time- Aashirwaad), who continued to remain the ultimate source of enlightenment and inspiration to him. The story is narrated through the eyes of Satyapriya’s best friend Naren (Sanjeev Kumar) and begins with both of them coming to the end of their engineering days in the year 1947, just months prior to India gaining independence.

Satyapriya and Naren pass their final exams and await their encounter with the real world where they would have to use the wealth of knowledge they had gained in the four years of their engineering (The story is set sixty years before our times so the engineers of today might not identify with their earnestness- even I don’t). Just fresh out of college they and their colleagues embark on a fun trip to celebrate their success, but on the way their bus meets with a terrible accident in which they lose one of their classmates. This incident is not touched upon later in the film, but it seems like the director wanted to make a statement on life and its unpredictability through this misfortune that strikes the young Satyapriya and his friends. Soon after this mishap Satyapriya applies for and secures a job with a rich industrial estate as project engineer. In his first assignment he is sent to a remote Central Indian region to make a survey and appraise a huge land holding for the company. There he discovers that his bosses are in alliance with the prince of the particular riyasat and were least concerned by the actual project at hand. They instead had some ulterior motives for which they needed Satyapriya’s assistance. Also, during his assignment he meets with and strikes a companionship with Ranjanaa (Sharmila Tagore) who becomes a victim of the prince’s sexual assault on her. But despite this Satyapriya decides to marry her being fully aware that his grandfather would refuse to accept this match. But he makes a decision that goes with his ideals and his dharma. It is one chapter of his life that is given a lot of emphasis, but moving on the proceedings become rather less hurried and the story takes a lot of time leaps (though with not much time interval passing between them).

Three years subsequent to their marriage Satyapriya and Ranjanaa are living happily, though their only son (who is not Satyapriya’s own but instead a result of the Prince sexual assault) acts like an uncomfortable reminder of their past. Satyapriya keeps on taking up a lot of jobs but everywhere he finds it difficult to make peace with the corrupt ways of his colleagues and the society in general. With every such job he becomes more and more steadfast and life becomes a tough battle for him and his family. He takes to smoking and becomes quite irritable and discontent. Naren meets him more than once at various junctures of his life, and ultimately in a curious turn of fate Satyapriya gains employment as a junior engineer below him in a Government set-up. Even in his new role Satyapriya refuses to even pay heed to Naren’s slight requests for slowing down a bit and taking things easy. He even picks up a fight with his best friend over a difference of opinion in how to deal with a contract. Things in fact become worse that what they look on the surface- Satyapriya becomes so finicky about honesty and doing the right things that he even refuses to leave his office a few minutes before the official closing time of five in the evening. It is here that Naren makes a telling remark that excess of everything is bad, even the excess of ideals. Soon, in a tragic turn of fate, Satyapriya develops lung cancer and the last few minutes of the film deal with the last few days of his life.

Hrishikesh Mukherjee chooses a very complex subject and treats it in an unconventional manner. The movie is definitely a critique on our society and how we tend to ignore a lot of things while leading our lives. Through the ordeals of Satyapriya he makes a defining statement on how difficult it is for an honest man to live with his head high in today’s materialistic and insensitive set-up. But at the same time through the dissonance and irritability of Satyapriya, he makes the point that it is futile to stop appreciating the life around us by becoming a cynic and seeing the worst in each and every thing. By the end of his life, Satyapriya becomes so obsessed by his ideals that he even started ignoring the interests of his own family. In a way God decided to end his trials and tribulations by giving him the lung cancer, after having given him enough time to fall in love with life. So Satyapriya can be seen as both a loser and as a winner. In my view he was more of a loser than winner, but I am sure people will form quite diverse impressions if they decide to watch this movie.

Because of my above view, I see don’t see this movie as a perfect film. Although the narrative and story as such is unique and the intentions are definitely quite honest, I didn’t like Satyapriya’s character and was left disappointed by him- and it was his story. Of course it was how Hrishikesh Mukherjee must have intended it to be, but because of the way the story was treated, the movie failed to either inspire or educate or educate. It is lengthy and has many unnecessary sequences that don’t really add up to the central theme. Also, Satyasharan’s (Ashok Kumar) character is shown as caught between his Dharma and his traditions. He is neither here nor there- and so is the film in its entirety. The performances by the lead cast otherwise are indeed praiseworthy- Dharmendra especially more because he was Satyapriya- and he was the entire film.

Parting Note: More than a film, Satyakaam is a comment on the society in the form of a biopic of a fictional character. It is most certainly an important film and showcases the range of Hrishikesh Mukherjee as a director. But overall the film is not the classic that it promises it to be. 

Koshish (1972)

Koshish…

The one thing common to all Gulzar movies is that they all have very simple titles. Write a story (or a poem for that matter), and you would know that sometimes it is a lot tougher to think up a title for it than the actual writing itself. Kinaara, Parichay, Khushboo, Mausam, Lekin, Angoor, Kitaab, Namkeen, Achanak, Ijaazat, Maachis… all these names tell so much about their respective movies- not always before viewing them- but more so after you experience them. Try asking a few people to give some alternative names to these stories- most likely you would get really varied answers and none would have the pertinence and relevance of the titles Gulzar chose for them. Only a highly observant and artistically articulate man like him can think of things like these. However, try doing the same exercise for the 1972 movie by him starring Sanjeev Kumar and Jaya Bhaduri, and I don’t think you would need to put in much ‘Koshish’ (effort), for there can really be no other name for this sensitive feature by arguably (and most certainly in my eyes) the best story-teller that Hindi cinema has seen…

It is a movie that would have most certainly provided reference points to films like Khamoshi (The Sanjay Leela Bhansali one). A story of a deaf and dumb couple (Haricharan and Aarti) and their attempts to lead a normal respectable life is a delightful watch for more reasons than one.

First. It’s abstinence from melodrama for most parts- For a movie on two handicapped people, Koshish is amazingly restrained in most things it attempts and refrains from the clichéd trappings of such stories. In that sense it is fresh perspective, and a few scenes bring out this perspective wonderfully well. One such scene is when the two, relieved at finding out that their new-born son does not suffer from the same handicap as they do, start whistling alternately to capture the attention of the kid from two sides of the bed on which he rests comfortably. The rapturous whistles (growing in intensity every second) attract the attention of all the people on the street, who are shunned out in good humor by the joyous father Haricharan. The people continue with daily chores after having a good laugh. It is the treatment of this laughter by the normal people around the two, which is really different here. The focus is entirely on the world between Haricharan and Aarti, and the rest of the world doesn’t really matter. 

Two. The detailing- Utmost care is given in depicting the sign language authentically. In fact the schooling shown for the deaf and dumb kids is heartening to see. The way the two interact with each other and with the rest of the world is so realistic, and so well researched, that it is hard to believe that Sanjeev Kumar and Jaya Bhaduri have the gift of sound and speech in real life.

Three. The thought- The idea is not only to show the difficulties that a handicapped couple may face while trying to lead a respectable life, but also how such people can rise even above the normal people if they remain optimistic and are given the right environment and opportunities to succeed. One thing that is repeated more than once in the film (or in fact said more than once in the film by one of the characters) is the deaf and dumb are blessed for they will never hear the bad things that are said in the world, and will never say the bad things that are said in the world. It is a refreshing view that acts as the thrust for the narrative.

Four. Its love story- If one has to put a genre to this movie (forget for a moment that its leads are handicapped), then it is no question a love story. It has everything- from the initial meeting, to frequent interactions, to those stolen moments, to the hesitancy and ultimately the acceptance. Even post marriage how their love stands the test of time and difficult times, is what the movie emphasizes on.

And Last. Its performances- Yes, it is a kind of movie where even average performances from the leads would have appeared wonderful. But leaving aside this fact, both Sanjeev Kumar and Jaya Bhaduri pitch in with WONDERFUL performances- it is actually hard to find the right words to describe the finesse and the polish in their efforts. Right from the start to the finish, Sanjeev Kumar just converts completely into the deaf and dumb Haricharan on screen, and not even for an iota of a second does his real life persona becomes visible from behind character that he plays. The same goes for Jaya Bhaduri, who delivers a knock-out performance that will rank amongst the best if one has to make a list of the top performances by female actors in Indian cinema. The supporting cast provides able support, especially Om Shivpuri who plays a blind man and a friend to the couple. 

But there are certain portions in the film that are not as convincing as the rest. The entire Asrani track is kind of tangential to the central theme, and does not actually add anything to the plot, except a few bits of drama. The track is not even given a proper closure, which is highly uncharacteristic of Gulzar (but then this was just his second film). Also, I felt that the climax raised more questions rather than answering some- and the end was slightly hurried and meek. But even then, in a delightful trick, Gulzar smartly completes a circle by referencing an earlier dialogue in the narrative. One slightly disappointing thing about the movie is that its music (by Madan Mohan) is nothing to write home about, which is so unlike a Gulzar movie. 

Parting Note: The movie is certainly a must watch for its freshness, its novelty, its finesse, and most importantly- its thought. Another gem from Gulzar…

Namak Haraam (1973)

What’s more important- profits or people? Now this is a lot closer to my current project in life- the Masters in Business Administration that I am pursuing. And this is also what Hrishikesh Mukherjee essentially tries to debate in his movie Namak Haraam starring Amitabh Bachchan and Rajesh Khanna in principal roles.

A story of two thick friends who can’t even imagine leading their lives without each other, this is a sensitive representation of the clashes between the capitalists and the labor class- a subject that had relevance not only in India, but also the world over.

Vicky (Amitabh in a boisterous and aggressive role that is light days apart from what he played in the earlier Rajesh Khanna-Hrishikesh Mukherjee collaboration ‘Anand’) and Somu (Rajesh Khanna) are alter-egos. While Vicky is the son of a rich industrialist, Somu comes from a family with limited means. Their bonding is so strong that Somu doesn’t mind Vicky funding the day to day activities of his household. They go to work together, they get fired together. They go to ‘mujras’ together and do pretty much everything together (it may be difficult to comprehend such a bonding in today’s times and some people might view it with suspicion).

Their lives take an unexpected turn when Vicky goes to Bombay and look after his business after his father suffers a mild heart attack and is advised rest by the doctor. While handling his business he refuses to accept some demands of the union leader Bipinlal (played by AK Hangal) rather bluntly- leading to the workers going on a strike. Later, on his father’s advice, Vicky has to publicly apologize to the Bipinlal- in an effort to pacify the agitating workers. He considers this act of apologizing utterly humiliating and vows to take revenge. For that very purpose he calls Somu to Bombay and places him at the factory with the workers, as one amongst them. They both hatch a plan which involves Somu gaining the support and trust of the workers, and in the process alienating Bipinlal from rest of the work-force.

Initially the things go according to plan but soon Somu starts getting affected by the plights and pains of the workers while being in close contact with them. The trigger proves to be an alcoholic poet Alam (Raza Murad in a heartwarming performance). Gradually Somu realizes that the workers’ demands for better wages and better working conditions are completely justified and the stance taken by Vicky and his father is a selfish one. There ensues the conflict and it is with Somu’s retaliation to Vicky’s claims that the title of ‘Namak Haraam’ gets justified.

The movie is really different from what was usually attempted in Hindi cinema in the 1970s. Some might even say that it was made with a socialist propaganda and tried to show the capitalist in a negative light. But I feel that such was the demand of that time when there was rampant exploitation of the worker class by the money minting factory owners. Of course today with human rights, labor rights, and Corporate Social responsibility things are much better. But the central idea of Profits Vs People is still relevant.

The performances, as expected, are top notch. Rajesh Khanna’s Somu steals the thunder from Amitabh Bachchan’s Vicky. The former is brilliant as a man caught between his best friend’s interests and the calls of his conscience. Simi Garewal and Rekha pitch in small-almost insignificant supporting acts. But for me the character of Alam was the highlight of the movie in the sense that it performed the role of the catalyst in taking the drama forward. His lines in the movie reflected haunting sadness-

“Nadiya se Dariya, Dariya se Sagar, Sagar se Gehra Jaam- Jaam mein doob gayi hai meri Jeevan ki har shaam”

Parting note- Namak Haram deserves to be seen by the lovers of Hindi cinema for it attempted something different from what was the norm and also boasts of powerhouse performances from two of its most popular superstars.

Sparsh (1980)

The subject of disability on celluloid has its share of fans but I am certainly not one amongst them. I, for one, could not comprehend Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s ‘Black’ and found it quite tedious to sit through. His ‘Guzaarish’ was no masterpiece for me either. So when I decided to watch Sai Paranjpai’s ‘Sparsh’, I was a little apprehensive despite being a great fan of her other noted works- ‘Katha’ and ‘Chashme Buddoor’. It stars Naseeruddin Shah and Shabana Azmi- two of the most celebrated actors in Hindi cinema- and after you finish viewing this little gem- you would have no doubts remaining as to why these two are so highly rated. Naseeruddin Shah plays Anirudh, a blind man, who runs an institute for blind children. Shabhana Azmi plays Kavita, a widow, who has not recovered from the death of her husband even three years hence.

Anirudh is shown to be self-reliant man who scorns at any efforts made to help him lead his life. He hates it when blind people are referred to as ‘Bechaaras’. His is a really strong persona that commands respect from his students and staff alike. One, however, wonders whether this show of strength and courage an effort made by him to conceal the pain and incompleteness he feels within himself. Kavita on the other hand makes no attempt to hide her dolefulness and lack of purpose in life. She spends all her time in singing and gardening.

The story starts off really slowly with hardly any movement in the first twenty minutes. However things pick up considerably when Kavita joins Anirudh’s institute as a mentor, guide, and friend to the children. They warm up to her immediately and start reveling in her presence. Even she is thrilled to receive so much love and respect from them. She starts coming to the institute on a regular basis and starts devoting her entire time and energies completely to the happiness and benefit of the children. She tells them stories, helps them prepare for dramas, but more than all this, she gives them the motherly love they were devoid of earlier. Meanwhile, the bond between Kavita and Anirudh starts getting stronger with each passing day. Regular meeting and interactions slowly gets translated into mutual liking. So much so that after some time they realize that they both need each other in their lives and decide to get married. However complications arise in the form of Anirudh’s self doubts that get elevated by a few stray remarks made by his acquaintances. He starts to feel that Kavita is making a sacrifice by marrying him and is forcing herself into lifelong misery and compromise.

The running of the blind school is shown remarkably well. It looks like considerable research went into the whole thing and the results are just amazing. All the kids perform naturally, so much so that one is forced to wonder whether they were actually blind or just acting. There is one kid ‘Paploo’ who stands out, and incidentally he is the only kid in the school with the gift of sight. There is a small track about him feeling jealous of the blind kids as they managed get more attention from their aunty Kavita. There are a lot of moments between the kids and Kavita that are so endearing that you can’t help smiling. The drama between Anirudh and Kavita too is very engaging. Same is the case with the interactions between Anirudh and his sighted assistant to whom acts as a ‘love guru’ (borrowing a modern lingo).

The strength of this movie lies in its dialogues. Unlike many other movies from the 1970s and 80s that looked like they were made without prior written material, this one looks like it was made after meticulous planning. The story is set in the suburbs of South Delhi- and even the locations are devoid of any misery or darkness just like the content. The music is soothing and works well for the film, however it boasts of no songs that are popular even today.

Parting note- Sparsh is a happy movie about life and learning to cope with its losses. Never once is a kid shown crying over his lack of sight, or feeling depressed about it. And that, for me, is film’s greatest victory. Sai Paranjpye more than deserves all the plaudits she got for making this, so did Naseeruddin Shah (who got the National Award) and Shabana Azmi. Sanjay Leela Bhansali needs to take a cue from this movie and reflect on how he could have treated his earlier movies better.