CROSSFIRE WITH QUICK GUN RANGAN

Ever since I started watching cinema as an art form, with as much seriousness I could garner – I have always had a special place for the cinema of the South of India.

Might be because I am ‘regional’ myself, and even after close to three decades of stay in the national capital, I have never grown out of that fringe attitude.

To start with, those were art-house films; films that you were expected to see to be accepted in Kolkata’s ‘intellectual’ circuit – Adoor, Aravindan, Shaji Karun and the likes. Commercial films, even the mainstream ones that were dubbed or remade in Hindi never piqued my interest – for reasons I am not quite sure of.

Of course there was a ‘Sadma’ here and a ‘Nayakan’ there – but that’s all about it. I admit, I never even saw ’Roja’ or ‘The Gentleman’ when they were released.

But all of that changed when I was approached to research and write a PSBT/MEA Documentary script on A R Rahman, merely a year after his double Oscar win. Those were the days when authentic and credible information on the media-shy AR was tough to come across – but I had to create a research-dock anyways.

The director, my dear friend Umesh Aggarwal, has never been the type that ever wants to go anywhere unprepared – and he was scheduled to go to Los Angeles to interview AR. So I did what needed to be done. The two books that became a life-saver then were Nasreen Munni Kabeer’s interview book on Rahman, and Bardwaj Rangan’s interview book on Mani Ratnam – which also had a preface by Rahman.

BR’s book ‘Conversations with Mani Ratnam’ actually became my bridge for the cinema of the south. Back then, I did see quite a few Mani Ratnam’s Tamil films – primarily trying to trace the growth of Rahman’s music, but also getting besotted with the uniqueness and variety of Mani Ratnam’s chosen stories and their storytelling.

If I remember it right, the edition I had ended with Ravannan.

Bardwaj Rangan book on Mani Ratnam — *Bardwaj Rangan ‘s book on Mani Ratnam*

A lot has happened since then – but that was the beginning for sure. That’s why I wanted to interview Bardwaj Rangan when I thought of doing a mini-series on my blog – to pick the brains of eminent writers on cinema, clearing my confusions, and improve myself in the process. Thankfully, he obliged.

BR is a BITS Pilani Chemical Engineer, who loves writing about Cinema, and enjoys a fair share of credibility when it comes to his opinions about the art of cinema. For the rest about him, you can Google as well as I can.

To start with, the usual question – why??

“IN A WAY, I MADE IT HAPPEN!”

Like many people in my generation, I got stuck in this tidal wave of engineering, and then I was wondering what to do? But then after a point it’s like I discovered that there was another possibility. You know I always liked writing and I always liked cinema – so I thought it would really be great if I could bring the two of them together.

So ever since I was a child I have been drawn towards different kind of cinema; I have always looked at cinema from a slightly different point of view – not just an entertainment point of view. So all these interests and impulses came together and I realized that if anything can hold all these interests together – it will be this that I am doing today.

During the course of my own research on films – I have often ended up going to his personal website as well as the website of Film Companion South – where BR is the editor. Some of his interviews, like the one he did with the writing team of Super Deluxe, do have English subtitles. It helps a lot – I like the way he looks at cinema, like a awe-struck teenager.

*Bardwaj Rangan in and as Quick Gun Rangan*

I have found a well-balanced approach in his writings and videos, be it about individual films or his analysis of varied aspects of cinema. His criticism is never quite scathing nor damaging – rather his love for the medium reflects in his quips and comments.

His write-ups feel personal, while being well researched, almost like a lived-in experience. That’s one quality I would like to emulate.

“MAKE IT PERSONAL FOR YOURSELF AND OTHERS”

I would rather separate film-reviewers from film-critics.

Although it’s not a hardcore division, I would say film-reviewers are those that review a film like a product; they kind of tell you whether you should go and watch a film or not watch a film. That I think is a slightly iffy thing that I am not comfortable doing myself – because I don’t see how my taste can reflect yours or my liking or disliking of a film can becomes yours as well. I don’t see how I can do that.

But as far as the other thing is concerned – that is film-criticism, I find that is basically like Art Criticism.

I mean what is the value of looking at a painting and writing about it? What is the point in listening to a piece of music and then writing about it? So when you get into that kind of stuff and you go deep into a work of art and write about it – I feel that it serves several purposes.

Firstly, it breaks down the piece of art into something that is personal. You take something that is impersonal on the screen and make it personal for yourself and others. The second thing is – sometimes you help people discover things. I mean they feel – wow, so if this person has enjoyed the film so much, maybe so let me try it out. This is all the more important for lower profile films – where the stars of the director may not be well known – so you help spread the word about it.

So basically a film-critic would probably be a person that ‘likes’ the medium, rather than the person who just wants to enjoy the film.

So when I say medium, let’s say we talk about a film about which you wrote in your blog – like ‘Super Deluxe’.

So when we talk about a film like that, we do not talk about the obvious that it has multiple story-lines and all that, but go beyond the obvious and rather adopt an experiential way, and hope that this experience resonates with other people.

Bardwaj Rangan book on Indian Cinema — *Dispatches from the Wall Corner*

For me, it’s my sense of wonderment that eggs me on to like a film enough to write about it. There has to be something new – the approach, the storytelling, the character development, the editing, sound, lighting and all of that – it’s more like a learning exercise from someone’s work I respect.

But this is not what I do for a living.

Since I don’t get to see much of cinema (nowhere anywhere close to BR who, by his own admission, watches more than 50 films in a month) I am more likely to be wonder-struck with a movie. But yes, I do agree, it’s the ‘feeling’ that matters. I have to feel really good about a film to be able to write about it.

But then, like I said, it’s not a compulsion for me. But for someone who has chosen to write about Cinema as a profession, and that too on a regular basis – the norms are bound to be different.

So that’s what I asked BR – about the sense of balance and responsibility associated with being a film-critic.

“I AM NOT INTO THE BUSINESS OF MAKING FILMS RUN”

Actually that question has been answered by social media according to me. In fact those who write about films in social media show zero sense of responsibility – in fact they use words and language, they use means like ‘trolling’ and things like that – none of which a proper film-critic does.

Right now I would say that a film critic saying that a film doesn’t work is actually secondary to what the social media has already declared about the film after its first-day first-show. So when my analysis or criticism of the film comes out, it only addresses the concerns of those who are genuinely interested about the film.

So I am not into the business of making films run (or not run) – that is not my affair at all. My point is to say – look, all these people have come together to make this work of art, let us see what their individual contributions are – and see how they have serviced the overall idea of the film.

I had to ask him next the obvious question – does he accept bribes to give good reviews? Not that bluntly – I sugarcoated the question as much as I can.

But BR came straight to the point.

“PEOPLE GIVE ENVELOPES AND THINGS…”

It has never happened to me, but I have seen that happening in front of my eyes – like people give envelopes and things like that after press-shows. I think since I was always with big newspapers like Hindu or Express I didn’t have to face those situations – I have never seen people from big newspapers being offered these things.

I don’t know how it is now, since now I am in a digital platform – but personally I have never been offered such gifts.

I probably should have asked him how different (and useful) it is to have a digital platform as a medium for in-depth film analysis. It’s an AV friendly platform after all – and the only space where you can actually show the film clips and talk about them – no ‘film-writing’ can match that experience.

Maybe next time I will talk to him and others about that.

For now, to make my point, I insist that you watch this extensive interview BR took of Mani Ratnam, after the release of Kaatru Veliyidai (2017). The fact that he had access to the footage sure made a whole lot of difference.

https://www.filmcompanion.in/interviews/bollywood-interview/the-mani-ratnam-interview-with-baradwaj-rangan/

BR has no formal training in film-making or writing about cinema – yet that’s what he is doing now. From writing reviews in obscure websites to working in prestigious news-platforms to heading a digital platform that has built a formidable repute for itself through quality and authenticity of content – it’s been a long journey for BR.

He is also one ‘critic’ who also likes to dabble into various aspects of film-making. He has written dialogues and screenplays – but that’s because, above all, he loves writing.

I had to ask him whether all of this actually helps him become a better writer on cinema.

“A FILM CRITIC HAS TO FEEL CINEMA”

I think a film-critic has to know cinema – but I don’t think he or she has to necessarily make cinema. And when I say know cinema that does not mean about knowing the rules, like this is a zoom or this is a wide shot and all that, which is somewhat irrelevant to the actual viewer – but they have to ‘feel’ cinema, you know.

I think that’s what is most important when it comes to responding to cinema – because you want to be able to feel what’s happening. Every director, whether they are working on an art-house kind of space or they are working in a mainstream space – they ultimately want to make you either think of you or both. Now therefore, your mind and your heart should be open to receiving the film in its fullest form. As long as that is there – I don’t think your lack of knowledge about the techniques of various things is going to be a problem.

In my case I was genuinely interested in doing something – so when I was approached I thought let’s give this a shot and let’s see how that happens. Like I told you, I was always interested in writing – separately, besides cinema. So that came out – but I didn’t get into writing a screenplay to become a better critic – it was nothing like that. It was more because I was genuinely interested in putting myself through that process.

See once you get inside the industry it becomes difficult – you know everybody so you can’t write objectively about them any more – you can’t stand back and reflect on their work, since you are personally involved.

It’s not that I do not face that problem now – but what I do, if I am reviewing the work of a person I know, I mention that early in my review for my readers, so that they are not left wondering or something like that. See, ultimately I don’t believe that just because I know the person I ought to give him a good review – but I think the viewer is entitled to that information – so I give it to them.

BR has recently decided to participate in a training module – with some fellow critics – Anupama Chopra, Rahul Desai and Sucharita Tyagi. It’s a course that they call ‘Class in Progress’ – and it intends to give students an in-depth look into what is film-criticism.

Let me quote their intentions, verbatim.

“ With each critic discussing and breaking down their movie watching and writing process, by the end of the module the students will be equipped with practical knowledge to enrich their movie watching experience and the ins and out of being a professional film critic.”

Class in session - writing about films — *Class in session – with Anupama Chopra, Sucharita Tyagi, Bardwaj Rangan and Rahul Desai*

It did seem logical asking BR whether it is at all possible to teach Film-criticism. I mean we already have Film-appreciation courses (and I know what that did to me)- so is there a real need to create and execute a ‘course’ directed at making film-critics’ out of students?

“THE BASIC URGE SHOULD BE WITHIN YOU”

I don’t want to necessarily teach students how they could become film critics – right!! Let me explain why.

Say, let’s take writing.

You can go to any kind of journalism or mass-communication program you want to, but they can only teach you the tools and how to hone your craft.

The basic urge should be there within you.

I strongly believe that for any form of art, writing or otherwise – that unless you are naturally pre-disposed towards something, you cannot become something like that.

It’s like becoming say, a tennis player. You are naturally born with those genes that make you a good tennis player. Yes, somebody can make you a ‘better’ tennis player – but they can’t make a tennis player out of a non tennis player – that’s what I am trying to say.

So I feel that if somebody looks at films in a certain way, and already knows, to some extent, what to do – then I can help them and say you can do this and that and whatever. But if somebody doesn’t have that basic inclination of looking at a film – then you can’t do anything about it.

See I have students who come to me and ask – sir how do you know which scenes to search for a metaphor in a film and all that! It’s almost like expecting that there could be a formula – say the third shot in the fourth scene should have a metaphor!! It’s like, you know, the critic is looking at a film and he is 30 minutes into the film and then he suddenly starts looking for a metaphor because it is expected to be there.

It doesn’t happen that way.

So when people ask me those questions, I do realize that they are really not that kind of a person who can get into this area. I don’t mean this in a bad way – because I myself am bad at a lot of things, and you can’t be good at everything that you do.

So basically, I don’t think film-criticism as such, like many other creative pursuits, can be taught; but I do think that if you have the basic way of looking at cinema, you can venture into that domain with a better standing.

All said and done, if I have understood it right, it’s of utmost importance to keep evolving; in any field, for that matter. BR follows that dictum diligently. Take a look at his personal blog – you will know what I mean.

*Bardwaj Rangan Personal Blog. Click on the image.*

We are in it for the fun of it – and where’s the fun in getting stuck in your own rut? Once you start feeling comfortable with something, move on to the next chapter. It’s the unknown that keeps your mind alive, and makes sense of that turn you took in life when you first decided to take the path less taken.

Not just BR. Anyone who has ever made any sense to me thinks like that. I respect them who know how to keep moving.

“YOU CAN’T FAKE IT ANY MORE”

I always push myself into writing for all kinds of films – I write about Bangla films, about Telugu, Kannada films and so on. You know you have to keep pushing yourself out of the zone that you already have – see foreign films, attend film festivals etc.

These are the things that you need to continue doing to keep up with what’s happening, you have to keep learning. But isn’t that true for any subject? I mean you can’t get an MBBS in 1999, and say that’s it – that’s all for me. My learning is done. You have to keep up with the latest advances in medicine and surgery and all that – only then you will continue being a doctor.

And then, we are living in an age where people can really make out whether you have it or you do not have it. You can’t fake it any more – that’s what I am trying to say.

Earlier, when feedback wasn’t so easy to get, I could be in a newspaper, I could know nothing but write something without much care about the world – because no-body is going to write back saying that you don’t know anything about this.

But now, all that has changed. There’s twitter, there’s face book there’s social media – so if you publish anything without knowing it properly, your ignorance will be proven immediately. There will be people who will recognize that you do not know anything about whatever you are writing – and your write-up will be taken apart. You will not be allowed to do that anymore.

Today, it’s become all the more critical that you keep updating yourself so that you remain up there – so that your credibility doesn’t become suspect.

That’s what – you can’t fake it any more, in any field.

That’s all for the day.

To inform all of my readers, I am now in Kochi for a project, and finally out of my quarantine. You might think that’s not a good enough reason to lose the rhythm and regularity of my blog – and I agree with you on that. But in a personal blog, sometimes personal mood swings have to be also factored in.

I have some projects here, but more than that – I have some dreams to fulfill, and some promises to keep to myself.

So let’s see where we can reach. Stay with me.