Features: Magazine | Literary Review | Life | Metro Plus | Open Page | Education Plus | Book Review | Business | SciTech | NXg | Friday Review | Cinema Plus | Young World | Property Plus | Quest |

Made in India

PHOTOS: COURTESY THE MUSEUM OF MODERN ART, NEW YORK

A DIFFERENT SIDE OF INDIA: (Above) Spoofing Superman in "Supermen of Malegaon"; bringing alive tribal life in "Roots" (below).

Bollywood films, huge hits in many countries across the world, never caught on with Americans. Now, as The New York Times observed, “the outsize success of ‘Slumdog Millionaire,’ a movie about India but not an Ind ian film, has awakened a taste for the real thing.” Not surprisingly, it was New York’s highbrow Museum of Modern Art that provided that “real thing” — a rich selection of diverse films — in a festival simply called “The New India,” a sequel to 2007’s “India Now.” Both festivals were co-curated by Joshua Siegel, Associate Curator in MoMA’s Department of Film, and Mumbai film connoisseur Uma da Cunha and sponsored by “Kent” (Srikanth) Charugundla — a Telugu-speaker who came to the U.S. in 1983 with an MBA from Osmania University, Hyderabad, wrote an innovative software programme that helped him make a fortune in real estate and telecommunications — and his art-loving Armenian wife Marguerite. They own and run Manhattan’s Tamarind Art Gallery, known for its programming of cultural events.

That is how New Yorkers were treated to 16 contemporary films — documentaries, shorts, regional features, and three Bollywood blockbusters — over two weeks last month. The hugely successful festival’s sold-out shows drew young and old, Indians and non-Indians, the curious and the knowledgeable, to MoMA’s auditoriums. Many were so impressed they bought memberships to the museum; others hoped the festival would become a regular event. Its unqualified success led MoMA and the sponsors to making it a biennial commitment.

It all started with the Charugundlas looking to invest in a museum project. Over tea, MoMA officials suggested the film festival for which they had not found sponsors. “We were happy that a globally recognised institution like MoMA was interested in doing a programme related to India. That drove us,” Charugundla recalls. “They wanted us to defray only a portion of the cost and offered to bring in partners. I didn’t want to be belted down with people whose interests I did not know so we offered to pay 100 per cent. Since MoMA doesn’t accept commercial or brand-name sponsors, they were pleased.” MoMA came up with the festival’s name, its concept, and the films. “We had no involvement with that,” Charugundla concedes. “It’s a pleasure working with Uma and Josh because they don’t ask anything, they just do it.”

The curators return the compliment. Da Cunha says, “You could not find better sponsors — the Charugundlas are supportive and generous, they care for the filmmakers, make them feel welcome and host events that highlight their work. Above all, they remain unobtrusive, giving the spotlight to the talent and to the event’s exceptional venue.” Siegel adds, “It is important to maintain boundaries, to avoid conflict of interest. The Charugundlas were appreciative of that. They responded generously — it’s not cheap to host a film festival which involves bringing in filmmakers, prints, and paying for promotion. What they’re doing is a testament to their passion for culture and for educating New Yorkers in Indian arts. They’ve been enthusiastic and helped bring people to the films.”

Of the films, Siegel says, “After the success of ‘Slumdog,’ we showed a different side of India — films in different genres, languages, formats.” Da Cunha points out that she is constantly surprised by the talent that surfaces unexpectedly. “New films are being made in little-known languages in regions like Tripura (e.g. “Yarwng or Roots, a Kokborok-language film about tribals made by a Roman Catholic priest) that bring alive remote communities that we would not experience otherwise in as immediate a visual form as cinema.”

The title “New India” became the guiding factor in the films that she, as guest curator, brought to Siegel’s attention: “Films that denoted trends and forward looking ideas, films that looked at the country’s current problems and preoccupations, films made in distant regions, sequestered communities experiencing change and hardships brought about by relentless mechanisation.” Her mandate? “To choose quality films that are accessible to an audience eager to know about lives and conditions outside their own confines.” Between them, they came up with an impressive cross-section of thoughtful — and thought-provoking — new films.

Opening the festival was Megan Doneman’s “Yes Madam, Sir”, a candid, inspirational documentary about first policewoman Kiran Bedi, narrated by Academy Award winner Helen Mirren who plays a strong policewoman on a popular BBC TVshow. Bedi won a standing ovation and tremendous admiration from American viewers. Actor/activist Nandita Das’s powerful directorial debut “Firaaq”, a haunting feature on the Gujarat riots of 2002, moved audiences profoundly with its subtle condemnation of all prejudice and its surprising restraint — there are no graphic depictions of violence. Another woman director’s debut, Zoya Akhtar’s “Luck by Chance”, evoked the glory of Bollywood; Neeraj Pandey’s clever, deftly made thriller, “A Wednesday”, (starring Naseeruddin Shah), gripped New Yorkers who have known the angst of terrorism and the frustration over government bungling. In “The Voyeurs”, Buddhadeb Dasgupta told a dark tale of repressed desire, surveillance and spying, while Faiza Ahmed Khan’s charming documentary “Supermen of Malegaon” delighted as a hilarious spoof on Superman, and “Quick Gun Murugan,” Shashank Ghosh’s tongue-in-cheek Tamil “curry western,” had viewers guffawing at its parody of American originals.

Several films featured children: Megan Mylan’s Academy Award winning “Smile Pinky”, about a six-year-old, cleft-lipped village girl; “Children of the Pyre,” a disturbing portrait of teenage boys who stoke the fires on a Varanasi burning ghat; and “Bilal” about an eight-year-old boy who helps his blind parents move around city slums. All exposed a society’s underbelly, none lacked optimism.

Finally, there was Bollywood’s over-the-top gem, “Jodhaa Akbar”, with beautiful Aishwarya, heartthrob Hrithik Roshan, the grandeur of gold and 1000 elephants — a historic, colourful conclusion. Siegel says, “It’s important to put these films in the larger context to see where they’re heading and where they come from. That is one of the organising principles of a show like this.”

And, he’s pleased with the results: “We had enormous success in critical and public response — people on Twitter recommended films, blogs continued the dialogue after the films — thousands of people came, the Q&A’s with the filmmakers were very lively.” The New York Times, ultimate arbiter of American taste, declared: “The series could easily serve as a primer for the curious and a horizon-expander for the knowledgeable.”

Da Cunha is simply grateful. “MoMA has done a great service to our cinema by bringing it to the respected space it denotes in the U.S.” Founded in 1929, MoMA was dedicated to “helping people understand and enjoy the visual arts of our time.” It was the first museum to collect and show films, to educate people about the history of cinema.

Interestingly, MoMA’s connection with Indian cinema goes back to 1955 when a MoMA curator, visiting India, found “a kid named Ray who’s making this incredible film but doesn’t have money to finish it.” MoMA trustees paid the completion funds for Satyajit Ray’s “Pather Panchali” including Ravi Shankar’s music. “Pather Panchali” premiered at MoMA before it was shown at the Cannes festival, which launched Ray’s career and put Indian cinema on the world map.

Later, MoMA co-organised (with the Asia Society) a comprehensive historical survey of Indian cinema, “Film India”, June-August, 1981. Since then, it has shown the films of Ray, Adoor Gopalakrishnan, Buddhadeb Dasgupta in different non-Indian contexts because, says Siegel, “it is important to show these filmmakers as world filmmakers.” Now, with these two latest shows, MoMA has cemented its fruitful relationship with the new Indian cinema.

The writer is Contributing Editor, Newsweek International, New York.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail