Bina Paul: The Tuesday Interview
DH Illustration
Palestinian films No Other Land and From Ground Zero were removed from the Dharamshala International Film Festival (DIFF) last week after failing to secure the necessary screening permissions. In March, a film about farmers’ protest was dropped from the Bengaluru International Film Festival (BIFFes) for the same reasons. DH’s Pranati A S discusses the current state of film festivals and film societies with Bina Paul, director of programming at DIFF this year.
Responding to concerns over festivals showcasing films that propagate right-wing narratives, she noted that the value of a film should be judged by filmic quality, not its content alone. Bina was instrumental in shaping the International Film Festival of Kerala, where she served as the artistic director. She co-founded the Women in Cinema Collective, which played an important role in bringing out the Hema Committee report. Excerpts:
Two Palestinian films were removed at DIFF this year. Why? What were the films about?
Since 2006, there has been an order that films shown at international film festivals in India must obtain permission from Ministry of Information and Broadcasting grants, as they are uncensored. There are various reasons the MIB can cite for not granting permission. This time, No Other Land, From Ground Zero, and a Ukrainian film were held back. They wanted to watch the films first. While the Ukrainian film was granted exemption, the other two were not. The MIB cited 2(iii) of the Policy for Certification of Films for Film Festivals (‘impinge on the security or integrity of the country or affect law and order or affect relations with other countries’). We requested a clarification but were unable to screen the films since the festival dates were upon us. No Other Land is a documentary by a Palestinian-Israeli collective about issues in the region, and From Ground Zero is a series of short films shot in Gaza.
What do you think about this rule the MIB brought in 2006?
It’s a double-edged sword. Earlier, we weren’t allowed to show uncensored films. At MIFF in 2003, they said only films with censorship would be allowed. There were protests, and as a result this rule was brought in. I suppose the government wants more control over what’s being screened in the country. We have not really had any problems so far, but this was surprising.
What do you think of films like ‘Veer Savarkar’ opening film festivals and ‘The Kashmir Files’ winning national awards?
I haven’t seen either of them. I know it sounds a little odd. I have no idea. But I would always say that the value of a film should be judged by its filmic quality rather than only its content.
What changes have you seen in Indian festivals over the years?
All of them are just trying to show the same films. IFFI has changed a lot. Their focus is different now. They’re trying to pose as a big festival while Kerala, Pune, and Bengaluru are still exploring smaller, unknown films.
What kind of responsibility does a film programmer or a curator hold?
It is a big responsibility both to the audience and the filmmakers. It is one way that people get to see films from different parts of the world. It opens opportunities to filmmakers. But to think that it’s the best film because it was shown at a festival is not right. There are many considerations when we programme — the region, the filmmaker’s history, and the content. In larger festivals, there is a wider choice to choose from. But at smaller festivals, a conscious choice must be made. Dharamshala’s focus is clearly on promoting mountain filmmaking and small independent films.
What role do film festivals play in shaping the intellect of young cinephiles?
A big role. For example, in Kerala, IFFK has been running for 20 years now. Cinema literacy is very high. This influences the audience’s expectations from their own regional cinema. It inspires young minds to make films. It’s a two-way process. Young filmmakers in Kerala today will say that they learned filmmaking at IFFK. And with an audience who are willing to accept the films, they can be released. It’s not absolute, but there is an effect. And it’s not immediate. Cultural impact can only be felt over a long period. That is why in Kerala, now we see filmmakers drawing inspiration from a wide variety of global filmmaking styles. One can watch films on OTT platforms as well. But film festivals offer a certain amount of intervention in terms of choice.
Is the film society culture vanishing?
Not really. In Karnataka, for example, there is still a strong culture. Film clubs are changing in their nature. Earlier, there was no other way to watch a film than to go to a film club. But now the film clubs serve a different kind of purpose. Apart from watching a film, they meet for discussions, meet the filmmaker, etc. It’s much easier now. You don’t have to have a formal film club to set up a projector. There are smaller film festivals all over the country.
How can film sets become safe for women?
There is no one fixed solution. This is an old problem. The first thing to say would be to pay attention. So far, gender issues on film sets have been overlooked. The #metoo movement brought a slight intervention, but it was all squashed by power dynamics. But now, the Hema Committee report has very clearly shown that there have been systemic problems in the film industry, and film industries mirror each other across the country. When state governments make film policies, do they have gender as a component to understand how it plays out? Cognisance of the fact that there is a problem and you need to address it. In every workplace there have been solutions, solution findings, and strict implementation of the POSH Act, labour laws, women’s rights, and women’s bodies. The Hema Committee report should not be viewed as only a sexual harassment report. It is a report on working conditions, professionalisation, and labour issues.