Changing Face of Indian Cinema
Bollywood or the Hindi film industry is not what it was in the past. The generation that was enthralled with stars has now grown up. The erstwhile stars are either retired or live only in our national consciousness, having departed for their heavenly abode.
Hand flicks - Rajesh Khanna sir ji
Gap toothed smile - Dev Anand sir ji
The kids and teenagers who went crazy on Rajesh Khanna’s hand flicks and neck tilts wearing a kurta over jeans or the rubber limbed suave Dev Anand’s gap toothed smile with his scarf flying in the wind, in single screen theatres munching Simbha potato wafers are now a bit older , having entered the last quarter of their lives on the third planet from the sun. India, as a whole, has always exhibited uniform tastes for mass entertainer films, irrespective of region or language, and it changes from generation to generation.
The 50s to early 70s saw the popularity of tragedy kings and queens, sacrificing lovers and finding heroes in defeated kings , who maintained dignity in defeat or death. This was an era when India was a “ship to mouth” economy. American cattle rejected wheat used to feed this nation, and we had to crawl in front of powerful nations with a begging bowl for loans, handouts and technology.
Shivaji sir
Dilip Kumar sir and Meena Kumari ma’am.
MGR sir
Legendary Jeevan sir
During these decades this national pain was reflected in movies , be it self sacrificing Shivaji Ganesan movies in Tamil or tragedy glorifying Dilip Kumar and Meena Kumari films. In these painful circumstances heroes like MGR in Tamil films and movies like Naya Daur gave hope to the defeated nation. In Naya Daur Dilip Kumar’s Horse won the race against technologically superior motor transport of the villain Jeevan. The national mood was down in the dumps and the fantasy of seeing a sure shot loser win against a superior foe in a darken hall was like a soothing balm, that was an escape from the harsh realities of shortages, ration lines, scarcity and power cuts.
Angry young man Amitabh sir
The constant stunting of national aspirations and suppressed desire for success created the angry young man hero in the 70s in the form of Amitabh, that channelled the frustration of the youth, and this storm swept away chocolate box heroes like Rajesh Khanna. During the same era the south film industry also saw the emergence of the raw anger and stylised heroism of Rajnikant emerge, taking over from the more handsome privileged actors.
Washed away by Amitabh wave
Anil Dhavan blown away by Amitabh wave
From the 50s to early 70s heroes used to put on lipstick and foundation to appear fair , but the emergence of the dark angry heroes in both north and south reflected a paradigm shift in the taste of audience, who wanted to see their own image as the leading man. Now darker skinned unconventional heroes were accepted with scripts written against the establishment and the wealthy. The raw energy of Amitabh in the north and Rajnikant in the south put paid to many conventionally handsome heroes, who would have attained stardom if not for these two. Naveen Nischal, Anil Dhawan , Jaishankar and many others were forced to take on alternative character roles.
Rishi Kapoor sir ji
This was also the era when there was a leftist and secular influence on cinema. Roles were written by writers for either the minority community hero or if the hero was from the so called majority religion, he definitely has golden-hearted friend or mentor from the other religion. The evil money lender or the arrogant landlords were , more often than not , from the majority community. Multi-starrers were huge draws, usually the heroes belonging to different religions. Who can forget the logic defying title scene from Amar Akbar Anthony where the blood of the three brothers is simultaneously infused into there mother Nirupa Roy.
Only Manmohan Desai could pull off scenes that had an underlying method in the madness. Communal harmony. The powerful author-backed roles that were written to project Amitabh, made midgets of his colleagues. The conventionally handsome Vinod Khanna played a second fiddle as Inspector Amar to Amitabh’s Anthony. If Vinod Khanna had not left for Rajneesh Ashram in his prime, the story of Bollywood would have been different. Rishi Kapoor always had a grudge that even though he got the short end of the stick and was not given author backed roles in multistarrers, he tried his best not to be overshadowed by larger than life co-heroes.
In the bygone era a Yusuf had to become a Dilip Kumar to gain acceptance. It is to the credit of writers of movies in the 70s and 80s who wrote scripts about minority heroes and do-gooders, that a Khan suffix became acceptable hero-material. No minority community mainstream star had to ever change his name in the 90s. The secular movies for many many years , with special Eid releases, made it more acceptable. The public were influenced by films to be more acceptable to this idea. It is thanks to the powerful dialogues and stories of 70s and 80s that Salman, Shahrukh and Amir did not have to become a Kumar or Kapoor. They were accepted in their original names. This was the power of films. The angry dark hero of the 70s and 80s were replaced by pocketbook edition chocolate box candy floss 5 foot few inches Heroes. The midget heroes lasted till recent times.
But now the era of the Khans have come to an end. The rein of Kumars too have ended. Now, there will be none who will command the superstardom of Rajesh Khanna or Dev Anand or Amitabh. There is a profound reason. Social media. Now all the Khans, Kapoors and Kumars are just a tweet away. Actors are overexposed. They have become more talkative. More they talk on matters other than films, more they dig a hole for the Hindi film industry. A wrong word against the general national sentiment and the producer faces a loss of a few hundred crores.
Actors like Dilip Kumar, Dev Anand were highly evolved individuals ; educated and wise. They had the pulse on the national mood. They rallied the nation during the wars of 62, 65 and 71. The Hindi Film Industry raised crores and donated it to help in the war effort. In india, the personal posture and thoughts of actors had a direct bearing on the success of their films.
Take the case of the film Lal Singh Chadda. An old statement of Amir Khan and his ex-wife is haunting the prospects of this frame-to-frame copy of the 1994 film Forest Gump. However hard the actors may have worked in the film, the general public is constantly reminded of Amir’s 7 year old statement through social media. Kareena is also projected to be haughty and her alleged statement , “if you want to see my film see it , if you don’t nobody is forcing you”, has affected the prospects of the film. Boycott Lal Singh Chadda is trending. This could be an orchestrated campaign.
Tastes all over India has changed. A uncouth desi hero in Pushpa was the darling of the crowds. RRR , a clever mix of mythology and patriotism, was a stupendous success. Public clapped when the hero took the Lord Ram like avatar. Contrast this with the dud film Prithviraj Chauhan. The hero Akshay appeared insincere. He reprised the same comedy Bala -Bala getup of Housefull movie to play the role of the greatest of Indian warrior kings. This was rejected by the Indian audience. In the last decade the Bahubali franchise minted money as it appealed to the changing taste of the audience. More majoritarian storyline with the hero lifting a Shivling and highlighting past civilisations glories were the reason for the success along with very high production values.
Now let us discuss the mega flop Samsheera. Ranbir Kapoor and Sanjay Dutt worked hard. But film was a dud. The producer lost 160 crores. Why? Great film. Great location. Superb Actors. Beautiful female lead with item songs. There was only one reason.
The audience was did not accept a Vibuthi-Tilak wearing villain. This is the only reason.
As I said earlier, the audience is unwilling to accept this.
Society does not mirror cinema. Cinema is now forced to mirror the society. A few decades ago a film like Kashmir Files would have got a few film festival awards and some highbrow reviews, but it would never have been a blockbuster success. The audience wants to see films that they can actually relate to. The Akshay Kumar starter Rakshabandhan is once again facing the heat since the unpopular statements of the writer have been highlighted in certain sections of the social media. Akshay had a great thing going for him. The flag waving patriotic movies of the past had made him a darling of the masses. But his Canadian citizenship and his arrogance that he finishes his shooting in 45 days have changed his image to being insincere. All heroes who appear in Gutka advertisements would also face the wrath of in social media.
Do they consume what they advertise?
They want to see the glory of the Ahom kings of Assam, the Cholas and Pandiyas of the south. They want to see another movie on Ramayana and Mahabharata, where actors who are declared truly nationalistic in social media.
Success of movies like Dhurandhar 1&2 conveys the changing requirements of the audience.
Arrogance is out. Humility is in.
Recent hits of Shahrukh like Jawan , Dunki etc are due to drastic change in script and public behaviour of the actor.
Stars , actors, writers and producers …. think twice about what you type on Twitter. It could cost you crores.
Cinema has changed. Changed forever.