Naranappa, a man born in the community of Madhwa (a community of Brahmins from Karnataka) is dead in the Agrahara of the village Durvasapura. As per the Madhwa customs, the last rites of the... Read allNaranappa, a man born in the community of Madhwa (a community of Brahmins from Karnataka) is dead in the Agrahara of the village Durvasapura. As per the Madhwa customs, the last rites of the dead man has to be performed at the earliest. But, Naranappa was a rebel who fought again... Read allNaranappa, a man born in the community of Madhwa (a community of Brahmins from Karnataka) is dead in the Agrahara of the village Durvasapura. As per the Madhwa customs, the last rites of the dead man has to be performed at the earliest. But, Naranappa was a rebel who fought against Brahminism, who ate meat, consumed liquor and also, married a Dasi (a prostitute). Sinc... Read all
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
- Awards
- 5 wins total
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
One of the best movie in Kannada cinema. the movie is about guilt and honour
. a perfect message oriented movie in Kannada . it is based on the novel of the same name, revolves around ritual of Hindu dharma. the movie tells about the message that doing sin openly or secretly.
It shows that even those who judge others are humans only. The judges wonder if it is correct to pardon the wrong-doer. They search through books of rules, they discuss with other scholars and they pray to their chosen higher authorities for guiding them to reach the right judgement. When they realize that they are prone to making similar mistakes they choose to pardon the wrong-doers.
The photography of this movie is excellent. The location and the costumes look very authentic. The movie gives us a glimpse of life in rural Karnataka during the nineteen-sixties and seventies. Girish Karnad has played the lead role successfully.
The photography of this movie is excellent. The location and the costumes look very authentic. The movie gives us a glimpse of life in rural Karnataka during the nineteen-sixties and seventies. Girish Karnad has played the lead role successfully.
Samskara (1970):
Brief Review -
A pathbreaking film in Kannada cinema that boldly tackles themes of casteism, tradition, and morality. Samskara, which means final rites, revolves around the death of Narayanappa, a Brahmin who had rejected all Brahminical customs-he ate meat, lived with a devadasi, and openly defied religious norms. After his death, no Brahmin in the village is willing to perform his last rites. At the same time, a non-Brahmin is not allowed to do it either. As a result, his body is left to rot. In a striking moment, the devadasi offers her jewelry as a reward to anyone willing to perform the rites. Suddenly, the same Brahmins who earlier refused to go near the body start reconsidering their stance, now fighting for the right to cremate him. Praneshacharya, the spiritual leader of the Brahmin community, tries to find a solution by consulting the Shastras but fails. In frustration, he turns to God for a sign at a temple-only to be met with silence. On his return, he ends up engaging in a sexual encounter with the devadasi, committing the very sin he condemned. This act leads to the death of his ailing wife and plunges him into deep guilt and moral crisis. As the village faces a plague and people begin to flee, Praneshacharya also leaves-now burdened with the task of confronting his inner demons. Can his sins be cleansed? Samskara dares to address casteism and inequality-topics considered too controversial for Kannada cinema at the time, and even for Indian cinema in general. The film doesn't rely on loud speeches or melodrama. Its critique is subtle, intelligent, and powerfully restrained. The cinematography, editing, and direction are leagues ahead of the contemporary filmmaking of its era. Girish Karnad delivers a rock-solid performance, while Snehalatha Reddy is superb as the devadasi. Overall, a poignant, thought-provoking film with a timeless impact. Don't miss it.
RATING - 7.5/10*
By - #samthebestest.
A pathbreaking film in Kannada cinema that boldly tackles themes of casteism, tradition, and morality. Samskara, which means final rites, revolves around the death of Narayanappa, a Brahmin who had rejected all Brahminical customs-he ate meat, lived with a devadasi, and openly defied religious norms. After his death, no Brahmin in the village is willing to perform his last rites. At the same time, a non-Brahmin is not allowed to do it either. As a result, his body is left to rot. In a striking moment, the devadasi offers her jewelry as a reward to anyone willing to perform the rites. Suddenly, the same Brahmins who earlier refused to go near the body start reconsidering their stance, now fighting for the right to cremate him. Praneshacharya, the spiritual leader of the Brahmin community, tries to find a solution by consulting the Shastras but fails. In frustration, he turns to God for a sign at a temple-only to be met with silence. On his return, he ends up engaging in a sexual encounter with the devadasi, committing the very sin he condemned. This act leads to the death of his ailing wife and plunges him into deep guilt and moral crisis. As the village faces a plague and people begin to flee, Praneshacharya also leaves-now burdened with the task of confronting his inner demons. Can his sins be cleansed? Samskara dares to address casteism and inequality-topics considered too controversial for Kannada cinema at the time, and even for Indian cinema in general. The film doesn't rely on loud speeches or melodrama. Its critique is subtle, intelligent, and powerfully restrained. The cinematography, editing, and direction are leagues ahead of the contemporary filmmaking of its era. Girish Karnad delivers a rock-solid performance, while Snehalatha Reddy is superb as the devadasi. Overall, a poignant, thought-provoking film with a timeless impact. Don't miss it.
RATING - 7.5/10*
By - #samthebestest.
Blame it on UR Ananthamurthy (URA) for writing such a marvelous book that making a movie of it, even with the stellar team led by the immensely talented Girish Karnad, is no mean task.
The movie script stays mostly true to the novella, though it glosses over a couple of interesting situations, but that's not it's biggest failing. The depth of emotions, the subtleties of (brahminical) traditions, the helpless pathos of Praneshacharya and finally his resignation to existential angst are barely captured. The casting is ok, but misses the mark on a few instances. The music is ok, given the times when the movie was made, but anyone re-imagining the movie in the age of computers would expect the music to contribute in a huge way to fill in the gaps mentioned earlier.
That said, it must have been a Himalayan task to make the movie in this first place ! And given the socio-cultural mores it addresses, one can barely begin to understand the commitment of the people behind this venture ! Hats off to them !
However, while one can objectively look at the work in question and critique it, let's also be cognizant of the fact that a large number of viewers of the movie can barely connect with the story (that's true for readers of the novella as well, though I suspect more viewers sense the disconnect than the readers). In fact, given the deep rooted traditional setting of the story, and one that few people can ever relate to, one needs a precursor to appreciate any of this. Instead of continuing with general statements, let me illustrate this with an example and rest my case.
Praneshacharya runs out of his house when his wife dies. Girish Karnad (playing Praneshacharya) tries his best to depict the emotions that drive him out of the house, screaming "Chandri Chandri"..but the novella has a far more detailed explanation of this. The village is reeling under plague. Dead rats and the unbearable stink, abound. The frail, perennially sick and honestly nauseating body of his wife is finally rendered lifeless. Contrast this with the description of aesthetic and sensual beauty that are contained in Kalidasa's work, which Praneshacharya, a scholar, has been reading, reciting and educating people -- with no expectations to see or experience any of this in his own (celibate) life -- so far. One fateful night with Chandri and things are changed forever !
His running out of the house on his wife's death is in sheer disgust, in his first ever experience of hatred and resentment, his first ever experience of nausea kindled by an experiential moment of sensous joy that he knew of, but only theoretically. And one, his bete-noire Narayana personified. Praneshacharya doesn't merely run out of his house - he practically runs out of his (erstwhile virtuous/celibate/theological) life and embraces the depraved (?) life of Narayana whom he so much despised.
Alas, when you see the movie, this is not the mental image that stays behind.
Given the rich layers of meaning that only URA could pack so densely (Samskara is barely 130 pages long, but is the most dense story I have read), one feels that there needs to be a precursor or a "readme_first" for the benefit of the non-south-indian-brahmin readers. Otherwise, a tonne of meaning will be lost - be it the choice of the names Praneshacharya or Bhagirathi, the name of the town, the pun in Samskara, the madhwa-smartha quarrels....URA was a veritable genius !
The movie script stays mostly true to the novella, though it glosses over a couple of interesting situations, but that's not it's biggest failing. The depth of emotions, the subtleties of (brahminical) traditions, the helpless pathos of Praneshacharya and finally his resignation to existential angst are barely captured. The casting is ok, but misses the mark on a few instances. The music is ok, given the times when the movie was made, but anyone re-imagining the movie in the age of computers would expect the music to contribute in a huge way to fill in the gaps mentioned earlier.
That said, it must have been a Himalayan task to make the movie in this first place ! And given the socio-cultural mores it addresses, one can barely begin to understand the commitment of the people behind this venture ! Hats off to them !
However, while one can objectively look at the work in question and critique it, let's also be cognizant of the fact that a large number of viewers of the movie can barely connect with the story (that's true for readers of the novella as well, though I suspect more viewers sense the disconnect than the readers). In fact, given the deep rooted traditional setting of the story, and one that few people can ever relate to, one needs a precursor to appreciate any of this. Instead of continuing with general statements, let me illustrate this with an example and rest my case.
Praneshacharya runs out of his house when his wife dies. Girish Karnad (playing Praneshacharya) tries his best to depict the emotions that drive him out of the house, screaming "Chandri Chandri"..but the novella has a far more detailed explanation of this. The village is reeling under plague. Dead rats and the unbearable stink, abound. The frail, perennially sick and honestly nauseating body of his wife is finally rendered lifeless. Contrast this with the description of aesthetic and sensual beauty that are contained in Kalidasa's work, which Praneshacharya, a scholar, has been reading, reciting and educating people -- with no expectations to see or experience any of this in his own (celibate) life -- so far. One fateful night with Chandri and things are changed forever !
His running out of the house on his wife's death is in sheer disgust, in his first ever experience of hatred and resentment, his first ever experience of nausea kindled by an experiential moment of sensous joy that he knew of, but only theoretically. And one, his bete-noire Narayana personified. Praneshacharya doesn't merely run out of his house - he practically runs out of his (erstwhile virtuous/celibate/theological) life and embraces the depraved (?) life of Narayana whom he so much despised.
Alas, when you see the movie, this is not the mental image that stays behind.
Given the rich layers of meaning that only URA could pack so densely (Samskara is barely 130 pages long, but is the most dense story I have read), one feels that there needs to be a precursor or a "readme_first" for the benefit of the non-south-indian-brahmin readers. Otherwise, a tonne of meaning will be lost - be it the choice of the names Praneshacharya or Bhagirathi, the name of the town, the pun in Samskara, the madhwa-smartha quarrels....URA was a veritable genius !
Did you know
- TriviaSamskara was initially banned by the Madras Censor Board in late 1969. It was the first Kannada film to receive a ban. The Board however gave no reasons for the ban in its letter to the makers.
Details
- Country of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Bestattungsriten
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
- Runtime
- 1h 53m(113 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content