@DeepInThought4U

ॐ तत् सत् || Truth. Dharma. Equality. Free speech. I endeavour to uphold these virtues. I lean neither to the Left nor the Right. Instead I aim to align myself with the Truth. Views expressed in this eclectic blog may be strong, amusing and/or based on personal opinions - all in keeping with the virtues listed above. All open-minded enthusiasts are welcome to peruse, share, learn and teach. Kindly remember to respect copyright and acknowledge this as the source.

Showing posts with label TV. Show all posts

Sunday, June 9, 2019

Indian cinema arrives

As I have often surmised, the marriage between Internet and TV has almost been solemnized and the two have already given us many babies: apps that give us access to quality international, national and regional content.

What a relief from TV's old affliction: K-serials!

From among the few that I have seen recently on these apps, two offerings from Indian cinema are setting the tone for others to emulate: Tumbbad (2018) and Sonchiriya (2019).

Tumbbad is all red and fiery; a superior take on mythology and greed set in an obscure rainy Maharashtrian village. The locations, cinematography, story, acting, music, production values are all first rate. It even has a moral that it delivers without being preachy. Background score by Jesper Kyd and Ajay-Atul's music are exceptional, especially the title track.

Sonchiriya, a sordid tale of betrayal and tragedy among dacoits in the ravines of Chambal is gritty and hard-hitting. All the cinematic virtues I have listed under Tumbbad are applicable to Sonchiriya too.

I have to also make a special mention of Badhai Ho for taking up an unusual subject such as late-life pregnancy, and delivering it well. It's easily the best of mainstream Hindi films in 2018. Terrific performances by the supporting cast: Neena Gupta and Gajraj Rao. Surekha Sikri outshines everyone (she deservedly got the Best Supporting National Award, 2019).

On the other end of the scale, there was that expensive turkey which I was unfortunately dragged in to watch in a multiplex, shelling out hard-earned but easily-wasted money: Zero.

Had I had my way, that's exactly the amount and time I would have spent on this thought-disordered fantasy that neither entertains nor delivers any message.

Sample this: a wheelchair bound genius cerebral palsy afflicted scientist (which in itself is an unrealistic take on Stephen Hawking since CP is associated with mental retardation), rides her wheelchair in a red wedding sari on American roads to meet her dwarf ex-boyfriend who has just won a ticket to Mars aboard a misspelt NASA rocket. Enough said! Zero is easily the worst film of 2018. Can't believe they spent 200 crores on this drivel.

So, what sets apart good Indian cinema from bad? There is no secret sauce that works all the time, but comparing the above films, I could glean the following:

the will and vision to execute collaborative efforts bringing together great professionals across all areas of film-making, regardless of the box-office outcome of these ventures
painstaking pre- and post-production work, such as script, story, screenplay, locations, production values (post-prod work in Tumbbad apparently took > 2 years)
authenticity of story-lines and settings: Indian culture/society depicted with realism; not the usual pseudo-western take on urban India
both Tumbbad and Sonchiriya DO NOT have egoistic super/hyper-stars with legions of blind fans nor any undeserving star-kids who need to be showcased to the world over and above the supporting cast and script
both revel in quality film-making undertaken for the sheer pleasure of the craft

And it shows.

Mainstream filmmakers, watch Tumbbad. This is how all Indian cinema should be made...

Image sources:

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58398243
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?curid=58034304

Monday, July 4, 2016

BGT & IGT: A comparative observation of British and Indian shows

Coincidentally, Britain's Got Talent and its Indian import, India's Got Talent are being aired at the same time this year (2016).

The former was shown on VH1 (in India), and the latter on Colors TV.

I don't watch any of the usual song and dance reality shows, of which there are dime a dozen on Indian TV channels.

Nor of course, do I ever make the mistake of watching any one of the 'rubber-band' drivel.

But talent shows are different. They showcase real talents, of real people.

And they end in time. Well, certainly BGT does, but IGT gets stretched out a bit.

So here's what I make of these two shows:

Britain's Got Talent

The upside:

Short, accurate and crisp. The packaging of the show is just right.

It is blessed with witty hosts - Ant and Dec; and a range celebrity judges from different segments of the entertainment industry - acting/singing/production/talent development (not just acting as in IGT).

Simon Cowell. Yes, I hear you groaning in protest. But like it or not, it is plain to see. Every contestant waits with bated breath to hear his comments on his/her performance. Cowell says it like it is. And it seems to matter to them, as well as the audience.

For comic relief, there is David Williams. Loved him in Little Britain!

There are no commercial and promotional interludes during the program. It is focused on the main content, without pandering (too much) to the diktats of the commercial industries.

The downside:

There were too many singing and dancing acts. Yes these are talents too, but isn't there an endless stream of singing/dancing reality shows where these acts can be showcased?

Here's a minor grouse: this time, there were quite a few acts that were not from mainland Britain. Some were from other European countries. It is, after all, Britain's Got Talent, isn't it? Then why showcase talents from other countries? Perhaps post-Brexit, we won't see this next year!?

The entire program is directed towards only one goal in mind: entertaining the Royal Family - the Lords, Masters and yes, Gods of Britain. It is as though the entire event is meaningless without the blessings of one family. Sorry, I find the concept of swearing allegiance to one individual (over and above the nation) appalling. Therefore I do not consider performing in the Royal Variety Show to be the pinnacle of showbiz success.

India's Got Talent

The upside:

The talent this year has been especially amazing. Kudos to the team for having reached out to the smaller towns and cities to unearth unseen talents.

Just when you think you have seen them all, along comes another act that throws you off your feet; especially the acrobatic and aerial acts.

Bharti Singh as the comic relief, is great.

Unlike BGT, thankfully, IGT is all about the common man; often even the poor man, who has fought circumstances to present his talent to the entire nation (and not just one family). And I feel that this is telling; it is the desperation to escape from the routine drudgery of their daily lives that brings out the best in these small town folks - this you don't get to see in BGT.

The downside:

As with BGT, there are too many singing and dancing acts. There is a rock band this year which has been murdering old Hindi film songs. Unless it is something extraordinary or different from the usual singing/dancing, none of these acts, one hopes, wins.

Film promotions: we are cursed with the actors/producers/directors of upcoming releases imposing themselves on reality shows and serials. Just blatant commercialization! Sometimes the entire episode is devoted to promoting the film or serial, and pampering the superstars' egos. Worse, some of these are star-kids, who should not be there in the first place, let alone sit alongside judges! Just hate these promotional interferences!

As if that weren't enough, irrational decisions by the judges - all three are from the acting stream, mind - and additional rounds only end up marring the show. For example, the golden buzzer round comprised of participants who had already received that honour from the judges. But in the semifinals, the judges again selected four acts to send through to the finals. One would have thought that audience poll would be in order, considering the judges had already decided once as to who should get the golden buzzer. And sometimes, the judges give a standing ovation for a lackluster act, and remain seated after the ones we think are outstanding. Curious!

There was at least one act, whose family members were seen distributing pamphlets and canvassing votes from the public. Does this mean that even though the participants have an off day during the semifinals, they should still get the vote from the public? What is this, a political election? This is the downside of public vote; and it appears to be a curious affliction of public voting in Indian reality shows.

So there you have it: my take on BGT and IGT.

For the sake of the common man, woman, boy and girl striving to entertain us and make a name for themselves, perhaps we can overlook the downsides and give them their one chance in the spotlight.

Image sources:

http://www.applausestore.com/images/showlarge/BGT2016large.jpg
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgE64TPWYK3hW-vZGYWAALGXAC9NjHj7qqu1ClOv_A6T1rCFTV3hNXqh0CS5BSRrkf59QJZG36hIyq2Frm-ApPVV-UQsPDHQYVXRXE4i4JR7euCjNDnuqif37hnLkg-gb4LSnCQtzh5kUzu/s640/Indias-Got-Talent-season-6audition.jpg

Monday, June 23, 2014

Satire: Breaking news!

Yes, we have moved ahead since the days of good old Doordarshan newscasts. Back then, a rose-bedecked Salma Sultan would read out sedately from a prepared script in front of her, with hardly any visuals supplementing what she was reading out.

Then came the teleprompters, and anchors would read the news from the screen in front, without having to look up and down from their scripts. I remember one of the viewers complaining through his letter that reading from teleprompters made anchors appear to have stiff necks, as they did not move their necks up and down! But now teleprompters are the norm, of course. As also visuals - supplied by travelling cameramen and on-field correspondents.

The studio anchor interviews the on field correspondent, who then interviews another correspondent, or comments on the goings on behind her. There are so many questions and answers relayed back and forth that it can become exhausting - and pointless. The only option then would be to zap them - with the remote - thank god for this invention! Works very well with that other telly abomination as well: K-serials.

Sometimes the entire newscast is broadcast from a particular place of topical importance. There was such a telecast in UK, when global warming was an issue - the anchors were standing in a distant mountainous area with a backdrop of melting mountain snow! What for? Won't we get the picture if the same visuals could be projected while the anchor speaks from the studio? How much money did the channel spend on this arrangement? By transporting the anchors and setting up the equipment in such a remote area, did they not ironically contribute to global warming?

The other irritating aspect of news channels these days, especially Indian ones, is the panel discussions. First of all, they get more panelists than their air time would allow, and then the anchor interrupts them so many times, that hardly any point is put across by any one panelist, hardly any conclusion reached in the end. Grrr...either increase the time allotted for your program or reduce the number of panelists.

Another very irritating behaviour by anchors: neverrrrrr ending questions... Or poly-thematic questions - asking about two or more issues in the same question. An example would sound like: "what were you doing in 1987, why did you do it and what impact has this had on your career and your family life: did it improve your prospects at work and your love life, or were you left to fend for yourself?"

Err... could you repeat that please?

And if these sort of questions are asked to a panelist far away, with a time delay on the phone, then you, dear viewer, are in for some serious entertainment:

"what were you doing in 1987..."

"I had just finished the course and..."

...why did you do it and what...

...I had started a part time job at... sorry?

...yeah, why did you do it and what impact has this had on your career...

...yes, I am coming to that...where was I....yes, the part time job...what?...

...you career and your family life...

...family life...well let's see...

...did it improve your prospects at work and your love life...

...family was in India at the time and... sorry, love what?...

...your love life... did it improve or were you left to fend for...

...family... love... oh get off me!

Yet another irritant: introducing the interview standing right next to the anchor prior to starting the interview. "Well, we are here with so and so, who in 1992 was the first person to jump off a plane and do a perfect somersault before landing on his mother-in-law's barbecue! Now let's talk to him about his..." (okay, I made the scene up, but you get the picture).

The studio anchor has just told us the whole scenario, why repeat the entire thing before talking to the person? Just get on with the questions!

And then there is...

Breaking news! A celebrity sneezed today: how's that for news that could affect your life endlessly? One of the channels also has a scheduled breaking news segment! The only thing breaking would be the TV screen when you chuck the remote at it!

Sensationalist headlines: Bomb blast rocks Chennai! You later find out that the blast was on a localized railway track, and a handful of passengers were injured - the rest of the VAST city went on its business as usual. But no, in news language, Chennai was rocked!

Can we have DD and Salma Sultan back please...yes, yes, even without the rose is fine!

Image sources:
http://www.indyarocks.com/blog/50650/Doordarshan-turns-50
http://thiruvananthapuramupdates.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/3.jpg

Wednesday, June 11, 2014

Satire: K-Serials are putting the meaning of idiot in the idiot-box

I must say I find television very educational.
The minute somebody turns it on, I go to the library and read a good book.
Groucho Marx, US comedian

There is no other situation where this is more applicable than with our K-serials, if you leave out irritating news channels.

I call them so because of their common theme: all begin with 'K', thanks to the fad of a certain TV production house. Nothing to do with K-pop, don't worry.

Is it five-year-olds who come up with the story lines for these serials? Probably not, because that would be like insulting five-year-olds.

It all started with Hum Log and Buniyaad. Later, with the advent of cable-TV, rubber-band epics entered our lives.

There was one which declared 'because a daughter-in-law was also a mother-in-law once', the title sequence of which had a current politician invite you into a large house with an extended family.

Another purported to depict 'story of every house' - heaven help us if this is really the case.

Since then there has been a never ending parade of similar cheesy, gaudy, loud, stretched-out affairs flooding each of the entertainment channels.

Yes, initially there was a novelty factor: women cried buckets over the travails of Tulsi. But if you have to eat baingan ka bharta 365 days a year then deliciousness quickly changes to 'pukishness'.

Each of these soaps begins with a specific theme: child marriage, widow re-marriage, women's lib, etc. But if the TRPs rise:

the producers milk the story line to stretch and modify it beyond recognition, with more and more implausible twists added in - carefully timed towards the end of the day's episode, so that interest is maintained

newer and irritating characters are added on, existing characters made to disappear or die, only to resurface later, until you can't be bothered if the bahu eloped with her 2nd ex-flame, or the saas threw herself off the cliff

It is also recommended that you disconnect your brain while involving yourself in these plots:

a lover who was once thought to be properly bumped off, comes back with a new face - thanks to the wonders of plastic surgery, which strangely also alters his voice

the vamp's attempt to poison the patni's juice with the contents of a bottle that is helpfully marked 'poison' is foiled at the last minute

the gaudy makeup and dress changes each time the bua leaves the kitchen to go to the toilet

the irritating camera pans repeatedly along with a thunder-clap on each of the 21 faces every time it is announced that the bahu's child is not her pati's

Some of the gems that I have observed over the years (when I had the misfortune of encountering these sublime moments during idle channel-surfing, or when the wife insisted that we watch what she wanted to watch):

pink uniform for nurses working in the NHS in UK (yeah, pink!)

a matriarch who would be at least 150 years old by a rough estimate involving the ages of her grandchildren and great-grandchildren

and the classic - the good doctor who declares 'mubharakho... aapki beti ma bannewali hai' just by feeling the beti's pulse

Who watches these? Bored housewives? Entertainment starved 'desperates'? Desperate housewives?

What does it say about us? Yes we like drama, with a little bit of tadka added... make that a lot of tadka.

But these soaps take it to another level. To the point of being regressive and retarded.

Soap-fans appear to have an inherent tendency to look into the other person's life, into her intimate details, into her affairs, into her failures.

Perhaps their inquisitiveness gets a daily dose of fulfillment with these K-serials.

I would rather watch paint dry. Or, join my daughter in the adventures of Indian cartoon heroes.

Ah well... each to his or her own.

Resources:
Quote: brainyquote.com
Image: https://in.bookmyshow.com/entertainment/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/desktop15-compressed.jpg