In absence of decent middle cinema

On the occasion of the 40th anniversary of Bangladesh's independence, eminent Filmmaker Tanvir Mokammel talks to the Daily Star about the deterioration of the film industry, and also about how it can be resurrected.

The Daily Star: During our war of independence, film directors such as Zahir Raihan and Alamgir Kabir played a significant role in the making of an independent Bangladesh. The legacy continued for quite some time until it was replaced by mainstream commercial film which now neither can attract viewers from all walks of life nor can uphold the spirit of independence. What do you think had brought about this deterioration?

Tanvir Mokammel: Our FDC-centred filmdom is a philistine and sheer commercial place. Even during the Pakistan-era, when the whole East Bengal was demanding for autonomy and later independence, except the ones from Zahir Raihan, we find no film of protest had come out from FDC. They even produced Urdu-language films as late as 1970! So what can you expect from them? After 1975 FDC also produced films with such titles as "Hur-e-Arab" or "Taj Aur Tolwar"!! From the very title of these films you can understand how fatuous the ambience of FDC was, and unfortunately, has remained so.

The only well-meaning efforts to make films imbued with the spirit of the liberation war were in the alternative genre which had been initiated by some young film-society activists during the mid-Eighties.

TDS : Did the pervasiveness of mainstream film necessitate an alternative film movement? Or it was inevitable in any case?

TM : The pathetic condition of our mainstream film industry was of course incapable to sustain and reflect the taste of the educated people of the country. So it was obvious that an alternative cinema would emerge in Bangladesh. Such short films like "Agami" and "Hooliya", shot outside FDC and in 16 mm, and also exhibited through alternative means, became the forerunners of a new kind of cinema in this country which later was termed alternative cinema. Although often technically flawed, yet sensitive people took a liking for this kind of cinematic endeavours. Some films made in this genre by Tarek Masud, Morshedul Islam or by myself received international recognition too. Since then there was no looking back, and alternative cinema, both in the formats of fiction and documentary, gradually began to gather momentum in Bangladesh.

TDS : You being one of the pioneers of the alternative film movement, how far do you think it has succeeded to bring about a change?

TM : There were definitely some positive changes. First, the very idea that films can be made outside FDC in 16mm and with shoe-string budget, became a new concept in this country. The alternative film-makers had proved that to make a film you do not need the big production houses, big stars or big money. Anyone can make a film if he or she has the necessary technical and aesthetic preparations. After our endeavours, young people now can gather the courage to take initiatives to make their own films. The alternative film movement, to some extent, has democratised the process of film-making in Bangladesh.

Secondly, it was an inconceivable idea before that films could be exhibited outside cine-halls. By showing our films in the Public Library Auditorium or in other off-cine hall places, the unholy economic power clique, the troika of the exhibitors-distributors-hall owners could be by-passed. People can now watch our films in all different places and this process has caused a change in the traditional ideas of film exhibition too.

TDS : In present-day Bangladesh there is a clear-cut distinction between mainstream and alternative film genres. Viewers of one genre cannot communicate with the other. The widening gap has compelled many to embrace Indian and Hollywood films. Do you think we need a common platform where popular elements of mainstream and rich thoughts of alternative films should be combined to bring our viewers under the same roof?

TM : Society is class-divided, and so, culturally-divided as well. Different sections of people have likings and dislikings for different kinds of cinema. And this is true not only for Bangladesh, but for all over the globe.

I can only tell about myself. My kind of films has a small but niche audience. Just to make my films more popular I have no intention to dilute the subtlety or the political elements of my films. That would be mere box office consideration and I do not make films to mint money.

And so far Hollywood or Indian films are concerned, well, cinema is an international medium. Why should you deprive our people of watching films from abroad? You cannot expect our cine-loving people to swallow all those garbages in the name of cinema produced by FDC just because they are "national"?!

What actually lacks in Bangladesh is the absence of a decent middle cinema, which is neither too fatuous and vulgar like the FDC's run-of-the-mill productions, nor too arty or political like the films of the alternative film-makers. This kind of middle cinema could have established some kind of sanity in our otherwise topsy-turvy filmdom. Let the film-makers, who are keen for box office, go for that. But I personally believe that I should make only films with those themes for which I feel a creative urge within myself. So I will only make those films which I really want to, no matter how large the audience is.

TDS : How do you think the film industry could be revived again?

TM : Film-industry in Bangladesh is lagging almost thirty years behind, not only in the international standard, but even in the standard of this sub-continent. Lot of measures need to be taken to make it worthy and sustainable.

First, there has to be a proper film institute in the country. Cinema is a high-tech art form and its crafts have to be learned. There is no place in Bangladesh where young people can learn practical film-making. So to establish a film institute is an imperative now.

Then, like Nandan in Kolkata, we should establish a National Film Centre in Dhaka where quality films from home and abroad will be regularly shown and where retrospectives and international film festivals will take place. This will create a positive interest among our audience for the better kind of cinema.

Besides, cinema has to be included in the education syllabus. The universities, both public and the private ones, should include film-studies in their curriculum. The private television channels, and there are quite a few now operating in the country, should involve themselves more in producing and showcasing quality films. Most civilized countries now do that, but unfortunately our first generation television channel-owners either lack the sense for better cinema, or are too much indulged in corporate greed.

In a poor third world country like ours, government is the most potent force, even in the field of culture. The mindset of the government policy-makers and the bureaucrats, who control FDC and the film censor board, need to changed. They should know how cinema as an art form can, and should be, in a modern and democratic state.

I believe, all these together, may bring some positive changes in the present moribund state of our film-industry.