Following the surgical strikes on terror camps in PoK, it’s not just the artistes, but even filmmakers who are on the razor’s edge
Following the surgical strikes on terror camps in PoK, it’s not just the artistes, but even filmmakers who are on the razor’s edge
The problems related to Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s Padmavati are rather complex. From the enormous budget to the complex casting procedure, and the script, the project is facing trouble. Given the current pro-Hindutva mood in the country, are production houses being cautious about backing such scripts
Some say the main reason for the film navigating through choppy waters, is not only the budget. Nor the casting. Both can be fixed by a filmmaker of Bhansali’s stature. (For one, he can cut down on his own Rs 22-crore fee by half).
The real big problem lies in the plot itself. An Islamic invader Alauddin Khilji lusting after the beautiful wife of the King of Chittor, Rawal Rattan Singh.
Also, some believe the legend of Padmavati has no real historical foundation — Padmavati is Ramayan from Raavan’s point of view. It’s the story of the arrogant, tyrannical invader who sets his eyes on the beautiful queen of the invaded kingdom.
Seen in the mythological context, Ranveer Singh will play Raavan, Shahid Kapoor, Ram and Deepika Padukone, the archetypal Sita.
But the focus in the plot would be the conflict between the foreign invader and the righteous and stunningly beautiful queen, who will not succumb to the invader’s lustful gaze.
Padmavati is not the first film to be seen from Raavan’s point of view. Six years ago, Mani Ratnam tried the same in Raavan, with Aishwarya Rai Bachchan playing the abducted Sita and her real-life husband as Raavan. The film was a colossal disaster.
Padmavati, too, subverts a real-life couple Deepika Padukone and Ranveer Singh’s Ram-Sita relationship into an antagonistic Raavan-driven equation on screen. There are also references to the banned practices of Sati, at least in the opera version of Padmavati that Bhansali had directed in Paris, way back in 2008, in which the queen prefers to perish in her slain husband’s pyre rather than succumb to Alaudin Khilji’s sexual advances.
Will Sanjay Leela Bhansali stick to his original script or change it
Karan tweaks ADHM story Regardless of what anyone may say, when you have more than Rs 50 crore riding on a film, you will heed popular advice. Rumour is Karan Johar’s leading ladies in ADHM, Aishwarya Rai and Anushka Sharma, were playing the roles of young Muslim women from Pakistan. Now, the script has been changed. They are Muslims from Lucknow and Fawad Khan “has just a small special role, so he was anyway not needed to be part of the film’s promotions”, said a source from Dharma productions’ team.
Filmmakers empathise with Karan Johar Vikram Bhatt, filmmaker You need to look at this from the perspective of a filmmaker who has already made his film. Karan Johar has already made Ae Dil Hai Mushkil. He and the producers have poured crores of rupees into the film, so when a political party threatens to stop its release because it has a Pakistani actor, you look at the State and the police for protection. Now, neither of them have been vocal about providing any sort of protection to the filmmaker. So, as a filmmaker, I would feel unsafe in this situation, and would try to salvage the situation however I could.
A filmmaker is vulnerable to political noises. Sadly, Ae Dil... was shot before the Uri attacks but people are looking at it as a violation in context of the present scenario. I do not feel safe as a filmmaker and I think that this is a defeat of democracy.
Javed Akhtar, writer and poet We must draw a distinction between the Pakistani establishment and the public. The public loves Indian artistes, be it actors or singers. If there are no public performances by Indian artistes in Pakistan, they are not to blame. It’s the establishment that won’t allow it. Artistes in Pakistan and India are equally innocent. Their presence in either country should not be politicised. About them being silent on the Uri attack, I would understand the anger if Pakistani artistes tried to defend Uri or any other terror attack. But their silence doesn’t mean approval. They are being cautious for the safety and well-being of their families.
Vivek Agnihotri, director of Buddha in a Traffic Jam It’s a complex situation. I believe it is the writer or the director’s prerogative if he decides to change his work. If I were to ever face such a situation, I hope I stand by my creative conviction. For instance, if I were to make a film on Manto, I wouldn’t change the fact that he has lived in Pakistan. However, in today’s scenario where India and Pakistan seem to be at loggerheads, I won’t take up a project that glorifies Pakistan.
Karan Anshuman, writer and director of Bangistan I don’t think we should backtrack from our original creative ideas. As filmmakers, we should have the gumption to follow through. Whatever unrest is taking place between India and Pakistan is on a political level and not interacting between citizens because of that is rubbish. Take a look at the filmmakers in Israel and Palestine for instance. They do not get swayed by the state agenda and make films on human stories. That perspective can only be brought through films and we should not close that single window. If anything, this is the time to push the boundaries.
Ajay Devgn has the last laugh Devgn’s film Shivayy was to release along with Karan’s Ae Dil Hai Mushkil. When trailers were released, the latter got more eyeballs. Thanks to Kamal Khan’s baseless tweet, rivalry spread to both camps. Luck seems to have favoured Ajay Devgn. Karan Johar is on the backfoot, being very careful as his film is the target of people’s ire at the moment.
Ajay Devgn has taken this oppurtunity to go the whole hog publicise Shivayy. And he’s also annouced that “he won’t work with Pakistani artistes for the time being”. Just what the Hindutava brigade would love to hear.
(Inputs from Dyuti Basu and Subhash K. Jha)
