This article has been motivated by classic filmmaker Wim Wenders’ recent declaration at the Berlinale International Film Festival earlier this year where he headed the jury. “Yes, movies can change the world,” he told reporters in the German capital at the start of the 11-day event. “Not in a political way. No movie has really changed any politician’s idea, but … we can change the idea that people have of how they should live,” he said. This drew angry and pacifist responses with some claiming that Wenders was going back on his own credo as at one time, he made films that made a strong political statement. But these are idle comments thrown in the air by people who are not aware that every person, from a filmmaker to a cobbler, has the right to change his mind, his ideology and his philosophy over time.

Any discussion on political cinema in our country is based on three important considerations: (a) India is the world’s largest democracy; (b) India produces the largest number of films in the world; and (c) India has the second largest population in the world with a very low literacy rate, a high poverty level, the most diverse of language and ethnic cultures and a low per capita income. The first consideration clearly sets out the need for political cinema in India. The second consideration spells out the possibilities of exploring true political cinema. The last tells us about the difficulties structured into ways of creating awareness about and liking for meaningful political cinema.

When silence turns deadly: A film that dares to link child abuse and OCD

From The Kashmir Files to The Kerala Story: Political cinema or Propaganda cinema

How ‘Assi’ challenges the way cinema portrays rape

Why Adoor's crime thriller Pinneyum still haunts us

Mahasweta Devi’s stories in Cinema; From Rudali to Maati Maay

Govind Nihalani says that that cinema is political that “presents the filmmaker’s ideological point of view, communicates this point of view to his audience, and finally, convinces his audience to convert to his point of view.” The late K.G. George, a Malayalam filmmaker who made films with political overtones said,“Almost all good cinema has some kind of political commitment. It is difficult to make explicitly political cinema in India. A good political film is one that clearly exposes the ruling class for its corruption and misuse of the political system. The common man’s reaction to such film is very important because real good cinema does not reach the common man.” He is considered one of the greatest filmmakers Kerala has ever produced. Shyam Benegal said, “Basically, a political film is one that should ask questions such as – is our democracy getting fractured? What is our state like? How can we make it healthier? And so on.”

The late G. Aravindan admitted that his Uttarayanam had political overtones. He said, “In the Indian context, it is very difficult to make an honest political film. I am doubtful that it will reach the screen. This may happen because if one is honest enough, one will have to make devastating statements. Lightly touching politics here and there does not mean anything. When you think of political realities, you should be able to show it directly. In my opinion, an honest political film should be like a pamphlet, a very strong pamphlet, or a slogan. From my limited knowledge, I feel that there was much more freedom in East European countries before the fall of the east to capitalism, to make films with strong political statements. Films like Costa Gavras’ Z, Missing or State of Siege are relevant within their countries. We are not making films relevant to our nation. Our political statements remain confined to someone being denied a job or someone not getting a job. I liked Govind Nihalani’s Aghaat. I found it important for its competent comment on the theories and analysis of Marxism.”

Every single film has political implications. Political and aesthetic approaches differ. For some filmmakers, the aesthetic approach is more important than the political one. The emphasis of an aesthetic approach is centripetal, focussing on the relationship of the parts and the work's fulfillment of the goals, moving from the peripheries of technology, instruments and narratives towards the centre, that is, the goal. The emphasis of a political approach is centrifugal, focussing on how the work relates to power relationships in the external world, reaching from within to reach out. Films with a political subject tend to elicit critical responses that are primarily centrifugal. The political content of a film is partially determined by the artistic form.i But this is not necessarily borne out by fact as we can see from examples of Indian films where form and content are not necessarily in tandem.

Whether a film can be labelled a “political” film or not also depends on the technique used by a filmmaker. Sergei Eisenstein for example, who invented the montage as an editorial technique was considered to be revolutionary because those who used it were consciously rebelling against cinema's dependency on the theatre and on literature. They were consciously valuing cinema for its newness because this would make it an appropriate medium to express the values of a new society. The film was made during the silent era without audio support in the form of dialogue, sound effects and music. It seems as explosive today as it was at that time.

And then, we have the perspective of the mass audience. Each member of the audience reacts to each film individually and over time, might change his/her opinion reacting differently to each film over repeat viewings.

Some films from Southern filmmakers whose films have stood the test of time, place, subject-matter and technique are named as follows:

John Abraham was considered the true maverick of Indian cinema. His first film Agrahaarathil Kazhutai (The Donkey in the Brahmin ghetto) was unorthodox and revolutionary in theme. Abraham’s unconventional, almost radical approach to cinema reached beyond the realms of filmmaking as a form of self-expression. He triggered what eventually became famous as the Odessa Movement where a group of youthful enthusiasts were roped in to take films to the remotest corners of the state of Kerala, fix up a tent-like contraption and screen films there to create an awareness of good cinema among the grassroots people. Voluntary contributions from the gathered audience which could be as small as Re.1.00 per show formed the root funding for Amma Ariyan. The film shot entirely on location, took the crew over a good half length of the state of Kerala.ii

The way Abraham has been able to capture the youth of the time wandering aimlessly, trapped as they were, between the world of the dead and the world where the human being was too weak even to be born had a universal application for the Third World. It is the suicide of a young man, Hari that sets the story rolling. “His passion was Marxism and music,” says one of Hari’s friends. This echoed the feelings of the youth of all countries who were rising or had risen in revolt at a time when a just and happy world uncorrupted by colonialism had become a myth. Marxism, according to this film, becomes a point of deliverance through a harbinger of music. Music, Abraham explains, is the only pure thing left in the world, never mind whether it is classical, pop, light or hard rock.

.(a)K.G. George’s Yavanika (1982)is a subtle, layered portrait of a traveling theatre troupe, the film is part backstage chronicle, part whodunit, and part feminist allegory. Over four decades after its release, Yavanika continues to stand tall as a landmark of Indian parallel cinema, admired not only for its taut narrative and rich performances but also for its unflinching look at the gender and power dynamics embedded within artistic communities. On the surface, Yavanika appears to be a film about theatre-its anxieties, its egos, and its day-to-day functioning. The troupe, Bhavana Theatres, travels across towns, carrying its stage, props, and ambitions on the wheels of its bus. Director KG George and his cinematographer Ramachandra Babu lends the film an extraordinary authenticity: we feel the heat of the lamps, the musty interiors of the bus, and the restless air of rehearsals. George never lets the trappings romanticize theatre. Instead, Yavanika shows that theatre is a precarious institution, forever at risk of collapse, where "the show must go on" is less a noble sentiment than a survival mechanism. If one actor is absent, another must replace them-because the continuity of the troupe matters more than individual lives.

(b)Girish Kasaravalli’s Tabarana Kathe (1987) that narrates the painful journey of a pensioner's struggle and his revolt against a rigid government system. Tabarana Kathe tells an ordinary yet very common story of a man merely trying to claim his pension. Tabarana Kathe fearlessly exposes that system and amplifies the unheard voices of old-age pensioners, who could do nothing but sit outside government offices for years, waiting for their files to move.

(c)Shaji Karun’s Piravi (1989).Based on a short story - on the Rajan case during the Emergency - by journalist Jayachandran Nair, Piravi is a sensitive but disturbing political film which raises significant political and humane questions. Shot in the lush landscapes of a north Kerala village by Sunny Joseph, the film uses rain, thunder. lightning to stunning effect, It evokes the feeling of helplessness that an average citizen faces when he has to confront an oppressive system. The film revolves around an 80-year-old man named Chakiyar - brilliantly portrayed by Premji - who spends sleepless nights waiting for his only son, Raghu, an engineering student, to come home. Day after day, he trudges to the bus-stop to receive him, but returns at night convinced that Raghu will arrive the next day. The eerie silence in his house, which his aged wife and unmarried daughter share, highlights the feeling of desperation and impotency.

(d) Adoor Gopalakrishnan’s Kathapurushan (1995). Based on his story, for which Adoor also wrote the script and the dialogue, Kathapurushan offers a deep insight into a span of historical time in Kerala which saw a series of socio-political changes unfolding through the life story of a fictional character named Kunjunni, brought up totally without a father-figure in a Kerala village, under the protective affection of a strong grandmother. The mother is forever ailing, and so full of self-pity for the breakup in marriage that she fails to play mother, let alone, both father and mother to Kunjunni. He grows up in this predominantly woman-dominated ambience (which includes the maid’s daughter, Meenakshi) trying to create his own space within the constraints life ordains for him.

The film reveals several layers while weaving the political history of Kerala over the past 50 years and its influence on the lives of its predominantly agrarian people. The changes that define Vasu’s life reflect the political changes in Kerala as it moves very definitely from post-Independence Gandhism to the Marxist Left to Mao to saffron asceticism used as a veil for the reality of materialism. Kunjunni’s father’s affluence and dictatorship are underscored with his very absence from the visual and narrative space. Kunjunni’s friends from his political space form a representation of the diaspora of the post-Independence young man.

Some Mainstream Films

The relationship between cinema and politics in the four states of the South – Tamil Nadu, Kerala, Andhra Pradesh and Telengana is fraught with the complex issue of top film stars, directors, producers and others being actively, intensely and passionately involved in the real politics of their home state – electoral politics, creating and leading political parties, which has had a tremendous impact on the mass popularity mainly among the stars. This leaves cinema and real-life politics in a problematic position as the two fields in the Southern states could create either conflict or compromise leading to questions about the veracity of what precisely defines political cinema.

The proliferation of ‘political’ films in the South was thought to be a natural process to use cinema to further the political cause of the Left or the Right or those in political power. I.V. Sasi’s Eenadu (1982), meaning ‘This Land” explored the conspiracy between politicians and hooch kings of Kerala. The film’s narrative could be linked to the Punalur and Vypeen liquor tragedies in which people buying arrack from Government shops died after they drank the arrack! Sasi then made Eniengilum (At Least Now) dealing with how chronic strikes and agitations paralyzed the lives of innocent citizens in Kerala.

Bharat Ane Nenu (2018) (Telugu) directed by Koratala Shiva is a film that is a brazenly mainstream attempt to send across a political message. But the main motive is to capitalize on the box office prospects of the big star Mahesh Babu who becomes the dreams-never-come-true Head of the State who does away with the corruption in high places, abuse of power and so on. The film is thoroughy enjoyable as a wonderful provider of entertainment with a big B but that is where all the political pretensions end.

Komal Swaminathan who wrote more than 20 plays, several of which were made into films, himself directed some political films. His famous play Thaneer Thaneer (Water Water) was made by K. Balachander. Despite its serious storyline, it was a very big box office hit. It focussed on unscrupulous politicians and unfeeling bureaucrats through a brilliant satire reflecting contemporary reality. The then- CM M.G. Ramachandran and the then-information minister R.M. Veerappan were not pleased. They threatened a ban on the screening of the film leading to a massive crowd lining up to watch the film! The threat had a reverse effect n the box office of the film. Two other films, Oru India Kanavu (An Indian Dream) and Anal Katre were strong political statements. The former dealt with the exploitation of tribals while the latter demonstrated the slow and sure transformation of an honest man to a political extremist establishing Swaminathan as a committed maker of political cinema.

In Karnataka, Rajendra Singh’s Antha (End) got into trouble with the Censors. It narrated the story of the police officer who joined a criminal gang to bust it. The film was a direct indictment on political interference in the honest work of law officers. The film was released after some major cuts, then banned after a four-week run then released again. It was made in Hindi, Tamil and Telugu versions and each one ran into censor trouble mainly because of the graphic violence.

In Andhra Pradesh, Madhala Ranga Rachas made a couple of films lampooning people ranging from those in the government and Godmen. His Era Mallalu (Red Flower) dealt with an employee’s agitation against a mill-owner while Swarajyam laughed at and satirized fake swamis. U. Viswesara Rao made Theerpu, Marpu, Nagna Satyam and Keerti Kaantha. Most of these films were targeted at the mainstream audience and did very well. But when Hindi versions were made, they flopped at the box office. Examples are T. Rama Rao’s Yeh Desh, Inquilab and Dasari Narayan Rao’s Aaj Ka MLA. Dasari Narayan Rao made Aaj K. MLA because “I wanted to stamp on the public the value of their vote and to impress upon them the caution they need to exercise in giving it to the politicians. My film intended to make the public aware of the gross abuse of its vote.”

Jean Louis Comolli and Jean Narboniiii outlined a classification of films on the basic premise that no film can really afford to be apolitical. The classification rests on whether certain films perpetuate and support the so-called depiction of reality propounded by the ideology they are produced in, or whether certain other films are able to disrupt and sever the connection between the cinema and its ideological function. They classified political films into seven groups. Looking back, some of these classifications would appear to be overlapping while some would call for a redefinition in terms of the changes in the form, content and technology in cinema over time and in most ways, their ability to lend themselves to a reading of Indian cinema. Besides, today, there are hundreds of films that defy any kind of classification because they offer multiple perspectives and contain multiple narratives.

© Mathrubhumi English