A Humour Fest from Menzel
I took leave from office today to watch films. The film I Served the King of England, directed by Jiri Menzel, justified my decision. This is a hilarious comedy, which explores how the tyrannical regimes – be it fascist or communist – affect the lives of a ordinary people. The film opens with an old man coming out of jail. Soon he sets the tone for laughter with this witty remark: "I always had the fortune to run into a misfortune". The film is studded with flashbacks – memories of the protagonist. He was a bar attender. The film revolves around changes in his life and in society at various historical events in Czechoslovakia, like German invasion and Communist revolution. Also the film detailedly depicts the highly imaginative sex life of the hero. I think the film is a fine mix of sexual comedy and historical satire.
Now I am going New Theatre to watch Chihawaseon, a Korean film of Im Kwon Taek retrospective. I haven’t seen any of his films and I guess today is my last chance to see one. So far this year’s festival has been conducted exceptionally well. The usual drunken arguments in Open Forums and sometimes in the theatres have been almost non-existent. The only controversy is regarding signature film of the festival. Some noted filmmakers and some in the media have demanded the withdrawal of the signature film, which is created by Vipin Vijay, an upcoming film maker whose films include Hawa Mahal and Video Game. The festival authorities are defending the signature films by criticising the audience who boo the signature film and the media which portrays the signature film in bad light.
My view, if you are interested, is that both sides are wrong. Festival authorities selected this signature film obviously after seeing some merit in this film. So no question of withdrawing the film. Also, it would be great insult to a promising director. Also the audience have the right to express their displeasure and the media have the right to criticise. So let the signature film be continued and so be the boos.
2 comments:
dear friend, your comments on the signature film seems very facile. i do not know Vipin Vijay by any ways. But he seems to have initiated a major debate vis-a-vis the film culture in kerala. You seem to be one of those bloggers conscious of reportage. i really thought the signature film consolidated the history of image making knowing well the kind of films that we churn out in kerala. By any chance have you watched Vipin Vijay's films? I have had the opportunity to watch them and he is such a gem of a filmamker. I pity people like you and T.V. Chandran ....birds of the same feather....
Dear Payal
I have no objection to signature film or its director. I haven’t had the chance to watch any of Mr. Vipin Vijay’s films. I have read somewhere that he is a talented director. I wrote in this blog what I felt about the signature film. If you read carefully, you can understand that I did not subscribe to. T.V. Chandran’s view. (Mr. Chandran demanded the withdrawal of the signature film). What I wrote is pretty clear: If some people think that the signature film is bad, please let them express their displeasure. But the festival authorities do not necessarily need to withdraw the signature film, just because a majority of the festival audience do not like it. Well, I feel it is a question of freedom of expression. I really cannot understand why you are so hostile in your comments. You feel that somebody like me, who is among the unfortunate, so-called sub-standard folk who happen to think that the signature film is not good, should keep silent? I accept that the festival film initiated a kind of discussion regarding festival signature films. V.C. Haris mentioned in last day’s Open Forum that he had requested festival authorities to include a package of signature films of various film festivals across the world. If something like that happens, it is really great and then everybody will give the credit to this signature film for creating a spark for such an idea. Still, I feel the signature film is not of my liking. How can you say that the same people who thunder down applauses for the films of Almodovar and Kim ki Duc fail to spot the immense greatness of the signature film? We are not talking about the ordinary Malayalam film viewers here. As far as my understanding goes, people coming to IFFK are the cream of best film-watchers in Kerala. Most of them know a good film when they see one. You cannot debate vigorously and stick a “great” label to a work of art. I accept your view that you think the signature film is great. I respect that view. But I still feel signature film is quite ordinary and stand by that. And I have written here previously why I don’t like it.
Post a Comment