Cinema as a political tool has enduring appeal

The medium of cinema has not always been seen as one dishing out escapist entertainment for the masses. However, from time to time, it has served other purposes as well. Especially, when a production banner, affiliated to or sympathetic to a political ideology, comes up with a venture which has got a definite message to be shared with the public. One has heard of how films glorifying the freedom struggle movement faced harsh censorship during the early days of the talkies in the 1940s.

It was then left to the collective craftiness of the film producing team to use its own methods to subsume the actual message in an acceptable format and get it cleared by the authorities and ensure that it reached the targetted audience. Among the earliest to use cinema as a medium for political message dissemination were the Dravidian parties, who were very effective in making the larger population aware of what they stood for socially and politically. Cinema stars of the 1950s and 1960s going on to become Chief Ministers in their respective states and later emerging as politicians of national repute are all too well known to be elaborated here.

In a circuitous manner, the saffron lobby too has deployed its own set of creative craftsmen to popularize its ideology, rewrite existing socio-political narratives and use popular stars to openly advertise government schemes like hygiene and sanitary practices. There have been biopics of not only stalwarts like Atal Bihari Vajpayee but also one revolving around incumbent Prime Minister Narendra Modi, which met with varying levels of success at the box-office but went on to make a detailed AV depiction of their lives and times. Controversies have dogged a few of the films, which have not made any attempts to disguise their political slant and what their films stood to depict – the allegedly lopsided depiction of historical events which have impacted India.

Vivek Agnihotri has forever drawn sharp reactions in the filmi and political circles of India and elsewhere for his brand of films, which have met with reasonable box-office appeal but have been pilloried by critics for its one-sided and ‘dangerously biased’ narratives.

Having come up with films on the mysterious death of the then prime minister Lal Bahadur Shastri – Tashkent Files – six years ago, Agnihotri has gone on relentlessly with his pet project, having openly declared himself as a Modi admirer. Basing his style of filmmaking on a borderline hyper tone, his films have spoken about Kashmir imbroglio and recently the Bengal political controversy.

This film, concluding part of Agnihotri’s Files Trilogy, revisits the August 1946 Calcutta killings, which were triggered by the Muslim League’s call for Direct Action Day, leading to widespread communal violence, mass casualties, and eventually Mahatma Gandhi’s peace fast at Beleghata. Quite expectedly, the film has not found widespread release in Bengal, where multiplexes have taken the safe route not to screen it as the local government has taken a strident and hostile stand against the release of the film, running to 204 minutes, considered one of the longest Indian films in recent times.

While the production house has appealed to the President and appealed to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee not to unofficially ban the film, the outcome has not been favourable for the filmmakers, who have been criticized for distorting history. At the time of writing, the see-saw battle continues. As thigs stand, with the Centre inclined to support the film’s nation-wide exhibition and ensure it has an audience, the last is yet to be seen as the rest of the country has already given the film mixed reviews.