Highlights From The First Meetup | Revival Cinema Project
It has begun.
Once upon a time, a group of highly intelligent beings descended upon a patch of land. They had been victims of their nature, of their uniqueness, and their intelligence. A vast majority of the world didn’t appreciate or understand their visions. The beings pooled their efforts and gradually, applying their skills and a strong conviction, they created a window to another world on this land. Slowly, they showed off their invention to others and the world softened. Infact, it celebrated them.
Kings lined up outside their doors, bearing gifts and jewels and deeds of land. Everyone wanted to take a peek through the window. In the middle of all this, the beings made the most surprising announcement- the window would be free for all. Suddenly, it didn’t matter if you were rich or poor; everyone would have it. The world was delighted. Wonderful things happened- people bought back things from the other world which made life back on Earth better. Everyone seemed to be doing much better in every sphere of their life. The world had never witnessed so much beauty. And everyone thanked these beings.
As time went on, gradually, Earth started resembling this other world as well. Soon, it stopped mattering if you had the window or not. The lines got blurred for the masses. However, for the beings themselves, it never changed. The cruel world which had mocked them and harassed them now belonged to them. And it was the only real one that mattered. By changing the very nature of reality, they had amassed immense power and relevance, as those who they presided struggled to understand what was real and wasn’t.
Did this even fool you for a second? The metaphor is too thin? Perhaps. But then that is the point.
This is my way of introducing you to the topic which took up most of our energies at the FIRST meetup of Revival Cinema Project in Mumbai - Technofeudalism.
I was originally preparing to share the above story as participants were asked a simple question- why are you here? The question operated at two levels- why come here on this hot Saturday afternoon and why in general was cinema your choice- either as a profession or as a passionate audience?
The following are some of the highlights from the wide ranging discussion - which recognised that cinema doesn’t function in isolation from our precarious, present daily lives.
There was a sense of concern on the decline of the big screen experience in India. The widespread closure of single screens, the multiplex model which created an unaffordable environment not just for the working class but nearly everyone, and the poor theatrical experience at present in a monopolistic system.
I had raised the same point as the first newsletter- the depressive personal phase and its link to the state of cinema in India, as well as the lack of imagination in the filmmaking process itself. Someone raised their own concerns over the sudden flood of dark and intense content of the past two years. Where has joyful cinema gone?
The draining effect that digital culture had on real life was discussed. The scary addictive implications of social media, the fight against boredom through audio-visual entertainment, and the implications of Reel culture. A scary anecdote was shared by someone: A volunteer education effort with underprivileged teenagers included lessons on Cinema. The kids didn’t understand what was being taught; they kept asking- do you mean something like Reels?
A decision must be made in the life of every nation at the very moment when the grasp of the enemy is at its throat. Then it seems the only way to survive is to use the means of the enemy. To rest survival upon what is expedient, to look the other way.
Well, then the answer to that is: Survival as what?
Judgement At Nuremberg (1961)
The conversation touched upon the future of cinematic exhibition. A concern raised was on the gatekeeping by those at the top, across the various genres and types of films in India. What happens to the so-called “festival films” beyond the film festival runs, for instance?
The discussion concluded with a brief mention of other topics and concerns which will be explored in the future meetings. Since this was an orientation and there had been an uncertainty on the final number of participants, I could not take minutes of the meeting. This will be corrected going forward, with each discussion structured around set topics, notified to the participants.
As I always say, one can only make one half of a film. The other half happens in the darkness of the theater, in the hearts of the audience. What form will this film take in your hearts? As a filmmaker, that's what I most look forward to finding out. And so let us meet again one day in the movie theater. - Juzo Itami, The Making Of Tampopo
There are various other threads, anecdotes, and abstract moments from those two hours which I will fail to translate into words. The experience reinforced my belief that it was only in offline spaces, away from the glare of social media and the pressure of instant gratification, that Revival Cinema Project can thrive. The anecdote about teenagers today being alien to cinema did disturb me at first.
But as we stated in the meeting, it’s important to place things in the historical context and to understand that time is often cyclical. To consider Reels as the benchmark of audio-visual language is to think that a dirty pond is the only water body in the world. The first encounter with a vast ocean renders almost all human beings speechless. I wondered about the joy awaiting these persons when they watch a good film for the first time. How I wish I could relive the time I felt cinema touch the deepest parts of my soul.
Television, VHS, and home video certainly played a role in delaying subsequent generations’ encounter with films in theaters. But ultimately, that is what it always is- a delay and not a denial. The inherent power of any great film, viewed as intended, remains incomparable.
Where there is a catastrophe, look for the helpers.
- Fred Rogers
Before I conclude the newsletter, I wanted to make a few announcements. Firstly, as the registered participants already know, the Revival Cinema Project symposiums will function as per Chatham House Rules. What this means is that anything which is said in the meeting can be mentioned outside of the forum- but without any attribution. For eg, if someone shares details of a chaotic production, it’s more vital for the forum to know about the mistakes made in the event and the ways it can be prevented than to devolve into a game of blame, gossip, and shaming. The secrecy on attribution and even direct names will ensure that we remain serious and focussed on the mission at hand, in a safe space without any fear of retribution or adverse actions, in an industry notorious for wafer thin egos and delusions of grandeur.
Secondly, as opposed to my original plan, I will have to keep a charge for the registered participants. There were many last minute cancellations and in one instance, a complete no show without any communication. I need to reiterate that these forums are not frivolous or vain pursuits. The spaces for the symposiums are rented for those few hours and I cannot bear the expenses in perpetuity. The charge will be fixed at ₹200 per person for the next few meetings.
I want to offer my sincere gratitude to all those who came for the meetup on Saturday. And I wish to thank all those who have subscribed. The Quest has begun.
Regards,
Devang
Other Suggested Reading/Viewings:
“This kind of disheartenment, this pain, is beginning to morph into anger. That might mean trouble for the film industry. When you want to make films, you will need stories and then this anger will show itself. This is going to cost us." - Anjum Rajabali
Bollywood Writers Battle Mental Health, Cruel Contracts, Contemplate Quitting Amid Historic Slowdown
Related Video: You Are Witnessing The Death of American Capitalism
‘Death to streamers!’: can a New York video store start a revolution?
According to statistics compiled by the Government of India’s Ministry of Statis-tics, the number of permanent cinema halls in India decreased approxi-
mately 27 percent between 1999 and 2009, from 9,095 to 6,607.44 Of these,
about 300 are multiplexes with a total of 900 screens, which leads to an
estimated total of 7,207 screens for all of India in 2009—a 20 percent de-
crease in the number of screens from the previous decade. Therefore, the
expansion of multiplexes thus far appears to not have actually increased
the overall number of screens in India, despite the main argument ad-
vanced by members of the industry most involved with the development
and expansion of multiplexes: that India is severely “under screened,”
hence their ventures are necessary to rectify that situation.
From Vice to Virtue
The State and Filmmaking in India, Producing Bollywood (2012) by Tejaswini Ganti
For any feedback, you can always send a mail to revivalcinemaproject@gmail.com.