Ankur

Unlike most of the bollywood movies having masala without any story. This movie highlighted a social issue of that time. Loved the movie.

Ankur is to my mind one of the very best Hindi films ever made. Unusually for Hindi cinema, it is an entirely realistic film without singing and dancing. Since music is of huge commercial importance to Indian cinema, the pressure on directors to include it tends to be impossible to resist and is a constant problem facing 'serious' Indian film-makers. The late seventies was a very special moment with a concerted attempt by some directors ('New Cinema") to buck the commercial trend, of whom the most important were Shyam Benegal and Govind Nihalani (who is responsible for the cinematography in Ankur). Ankur was the first and most strikingly successful films of the "New India" movement (which only lasted some five or six years), Nihalani's Aakrosh (1980) being amongst the last. Working with a young cast (who formed a virtual repertory company for the "New Cinema" films and a committed team, Benegal was able to produce one of the freshest and most compelling of films. Without being in the least pretentious or even belonging to that nebulous category 'the art film', Ankur is a realistic drama without concession that managed also to be a significant commercial success. The acting is superb. Shabana Azmi has had a long and glorious career but has, in my view, never been better than in this, her first important role. Anant Nag (an actor who has never entirely received his due) is also as good here as I have ever seen him. Sadhu Meher (as the deaf and dumb husband) very deservedly won a national award for his performance and Priya Tedulkar is chilling as the narrow-minded malicious young wife. Nihalani's camera-work is also exceptional. In all it is one of those rare occasions when brilliant teamwork around a clearly thought-out project results in a near-perfect film.

For the anecdote: There is a nice moment towards the end of the film where Surya (Anant Nag) is playing records and his wife requests something by Nimmi. Before playing the record, he corrects her by pointing out that the record is in fact by Lata. This is a very typical Benegal touch. Not only does it fix the date of the events (c. 1950) but is at once a comment on Hindi cinema history and on the character of the young wife. 1949 was the key year in establishing the absolute domination of 'playback' singers, notably Lata Mangeshkar whose annus mirabilis this was with massive hit-scores in three films, Barsaat, Mahal and Andaaz. In those days, playback singers were often uncredited and many (like the wife in the film) believed the songs to be sung by the actors and actresses themselves. The reference is particularly sardonic in a film that is itself songless. Nimmi made her début as an actress in Barsaat where she plays a simple mountain girl seduced by a cynical young man from the city and this became her typical role in subsequent films. The wife's preference for Nimmi is therefore a comment on the hypocrisy of her harsh attitude towards Lakshmi in the film.

Ankur means the Seedling. And indeed, this film was a seed to the parallel movement in films that ran in 70's and 80's. It's a wonderful depiction of the reality which existed then, and even today in some remote parts of India.

The narrative is simple and indeed very slow, there are no major subplots as the main plot in itself is heart rending and superior to many films that have come till then. In an age, where superstars were being made, and Amitabh Bachhan was transformed as Angry Young Man, this film silently made its way into the public with a limited released and later on with the word of mouth. All because of many good traits that the film possesses.

Shyam Benegal, who is now considered as a father of Parallel Cinema, wrote this long back and had to go to struggle to a lot to get this made. All this was done with a meager budget and the product that was obtained out of the hard work is a stand-out even today. Ankur is a pioneer and has it's moments of greatness considering the time, it was made. Subsequently, even Shyam Benegal was revered as a great film maker as many more wonderful films came from him.

Now, today when I saw it, it felt a bit anachronistic and antiquated coz I do not see such kind of vulgar oppression anywhere now, may be there is but it's not reported or it's not there any more. Having said that, the emotions are universal and the feeling of being oppressed, the helplessness, the hopes that are there for well being and then a revolution being sparked. All this is put wonderfully. The last shot where a boy throws a stone at the Zamindar's house is of great symbolism and portrays a feeling that echoes with the poor who keep the poor as poor.

The acting was superb, Shabana Azmi was a revelation and a blessed actor and we were grateful to have firstly and also grateful for makers to give her ample opportunities that helped her showcase her talent with an array of emotions. Thanks to Benegal to have found her and given Shabana to us.

It needs applause in many areas, firstly for starting a kind of cinematic revolution in India. Yet, my only crib is the editing, I wish the film could have been slicker with sharp editing. It would have added to the pace and helped the new-age viewers like me.

I am going with 4/5. It's a kind of film that's strong in social issues. But it's a laid back film that makes us recede in time. So just be warned of the pace coz it's a great film.

This is one of the first Hindi movies of the art movie genre. This movie was released when bollywood was undergoing a sort of writer's block. At the same time the alternative cinema was in a creative ferment. This movie is truly a work of genius directorial talent. The characters of this movie are so real and their psychology is shown in a unique way. The acting in this movie is just great. The director's deep knowledge of the human psyche is reflected in this movie. The hypocrisy and innocence of human nature is so beautifully pictured. The camera work is great. The viewer could get a glimpse into the rural India as it is without any makeover or idyllic transformation. This movie doesn't tell a story ; rather the actors as well as the viewers live the story. So engrossing is this movie.

A treat to the eyes.

Review By Kamal K

Ankur is a layered film and deals with issues of caste, sexism, patriarchy, privilege, hypocrisy, the ironies and vagaries of human nature, in an extremely nuances manner.

The fact that Lakshmi is a Dalit is starkly present in every scene. She is shunned by the villagers and even herself. When Surya asks her to make tea and cook for him, she refuses, saying he can't touch anything she has made.

Surya's privilege as an upper-caste, educated, rich man is equally apparent, as he brushes away the issue of discrimination easily and orders people around to do work he has very little knowledge of.

Benegal's talent lay in bringing out the subtleties of Lakshmi's character and Surya's slow maturity. He also deftly depicts the various issues plaguing this part of India, especially in the contrast between Azmi and Nag's roles and how well each is played.

Ankur may not be an easy watch, but it is a necessary one. The language of patriarchy still pervades every aspect of our lives, women are still treated as property.