Despite being slightly indisposed, Sudhir Mishra, whose iconic film 'Hazaaron Khwaishein Aisi' is taught as a dialogue-project in Indian film-schools, was his robust self, if a bit meandering, while winging The Satyajit Ray Memorial Lecture at the 28th Kolkata international film festival titled, 'Understanding Cinema In Changing Times of OTT' recently.
In fact, just before the Q&A session, he dismissed a coffee-request to perk up his energy. "People generally don't complain about my lack of energy." To be fair, the maker of 14 films till date, including 'Dharavi', declared at the onset that, he's "not the lecture sort."
He began by recalling his period of entry into films as an assistant in '82, "just before video came in", alongside Saeed Mirza, Ketan Shah, Vinod Chopra, Ketan Mehta, & Mahesh Bhatt.
"Just because it's Satyajit Ray lecture I don't necessarily have to talk about him", he clarified, "But it's interesting to imagine how Ray would have dealt with these times (of OTT), through him. He might have found it difficult (to get an OTT project) but he was persuasive as well. So, he might have managed."
Launching into the topic, he observed, "OTT.....you are living in over the top times, there are over the top responses to everything". However, he lauded it as, "an online library, especially for films that's not immediately popular." He even considered it "a necessary platform to circumvent the bothersome theatrical-release rituals". Having said that, he wants the budding filmmakers to make films "which should be a proof for future and not just for ephemeral mobile or laptop viewing".
That's because he thinks, "OTT is mostly for thrillers. I think it's a carpet of 'tenseness' to base on everything". Wishing the OTT heads to be more encouraging and inclusive, he joked that, "Imagine Satyajit Ray walking into an OTT office to pitch 'Pather Panchali'..... It's as if film makers are setting out to present problems....", pensively adding, "But then the ideology of films, among other things, is to provoke the senses".
He continued wistfully that "OTT should take freewheeling chances with young talents beyond its current brief. Otherwise, a Tarkovsky would be impossible. And Godard...forget about him. A budding Ray would be asked for bio-data, a box office analysis of his pitch, etc."
Dipping to positives, Mishra informed, "No Steadicam-operator in Mumbai is free." Extolling OTT virtues he exemplified, "Today, a Manoj Bajpayee is perhaps as popular as a Shah Rukh Khan. It has given Nawazuddin Siddiqui, Pankaj Tripathi, Shefali Shah, Ankita Tiwari the platform to do justice for their talents." He did put in a check: "It's time to make easy money. Any actor with some skill can get work, but you can also get lost. Lots can get lost but lots can be found as well.'
Reminding that formulas don't always work, he stated, "'Paatal Lok', 'Panchayat', 'Scam' etc. They got made. So formulas don't work, as don't the stars. In fact stars are a detriment. It demands certain skills. I hope OTT encourages another way of seeing cinema.' He explored the cinematic potential in OTT by citing, "'Better Call Saul', in which one gets to see all sorts of cinema effects. You can show it in the theatre. Same can be said about 'Irishman'."
Personally, having worked on OTT projects himself, he finds fervour with series rather than one-off feature-lengths, calling it "a long-form cinema, where one gets to explore the elements with greater depth." However, it's important to exercise control, he cautioned. "Every story should be as short as possible. Every word should be important. In OTT, the duration is not a contingency". Averse to the term, 'content', he cautioned, "It's important to understand what you can do, the limits, and not jump around doing everything. It is imperative to calm down."
Mishra advised: "It is also incumbent on filmmakers not to be greedy. That's another lesson we should learn from Ray." He envisaged the best efficacy of OTT is to successfully replace TV, enlightening us that, "Then there'll be a way for films surviving like in Europe where films are mostly made through back-end TV deals."
Film Financing concerns saw him dwell on government-fundings. He did benefit greatly from NFDC & DD, after all. "I always wondered why cinema is not considered a social act. But the government always considers it as sinful and taxes it like some bad habit. I think all the tax-money that the government earns from films must come back to cinema", he asserted. Optimistically he wished, "They can fund two-three films of an aspiring filmmaker. If he isn't worthy enough, another talent should get a chance."