"I just make films…"

•Unni rajen Shanker: Talking of art and commercial films, what is the process of releasing your films in theatres?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: I am very particular that my films should reach an audience. Fortunately for me, there’s an audience outside Kerala as well, and my films get distributed throughout India and outside the country too. So, somehow you get back the investment you made in the film. I don’t make big budget films. Too much money can really corrupt. Some of the big productions from Bombay look wasteful from the first frame. The money could have gone into some very productive things; it should have gone into construction work, schools, providing water to areas where there is no water supply. Who gave people in the industry the right to spend money like this? I know these are very strange thoughts for a filmmaker, but I am very socially conscious.

•Neha Sinha: All of us in Delhi watch cinema at film festivals. We often see foreign films — a Fellini or a Bergman. These are possibly more popular than Indian regional cinema. Do you see this as a problem that it’s more glamorous to watch an Italian film than a film that speaks of different Indias in India?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: I wouldn’t say that you should give preference to a regional language film. There are many regions in Europe — Spain, Portugal, etc. Similarly, we have many regions — Kerala, Tamil Nadu, etc. Each region has a language and its own cinema. If you get to see any of them, it’s fine. You should get the benefit of seeing the best of world cinema.

•Shubhra Gupta: Your film Naalu Pennungal features Nandita Das. You don’t normally work with people outside your own state. So why did you choose her?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: For a long time Nandita has been wanting to work with me. She is one of those very adventurous artistes who like to have different experiences, like working in a Malayalam or a Tamil film. She is not a typical film artiste. She has the right attitude — what is important is the final work, not the language spoken in the film. I found her extremely suitable for the role she played. I could not think of anybody in Malyalam cinema who could do that role.

•Neelima Menon: You have worked with Mammooty and other stars. Who do you find easier to handle — stars or non-stars?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: They are equally difficult. The star has the advantage of being popular. He may attract more people to the cinema although they may get disillusioned because they have come to see the star play a familiar role while in my film, Mammooty plays a villain. Also, there are few occasions when the star can be moulded. A non-actor comes with a disadvantage because very often he wouldn’t know how to act. You have to train him. But the advantage is he will look fresh and he wouldn’t do any hamming. I have to be cautious with a star to guard against his hamming a role.

•Pallavi Jassi: From the Bollywood pool of films that are considered very popular, are there any films which you really liked and if so, could you name a few?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: I have been an admirer of films by Bimal Roy, Guru Dutt, Raj Kapoor, Hrishikesh Mukherjee and many others. In those days Bombay was not called Bollywood. Ever since it started calling itself Bollywood, I think, it has taken a nosedive down.

•Sharon Fernandes: What in regional cinema do you admire or think has a lot of potential?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: Language doesn’t matter. What is important is the final work. There are great films made in several languages, Marathi, Kannada, Malyalam or Bengali. But there are so many bad films being made in Malyalam too, and in Bengali. When I passed out of the Film Institute in 1965, I went to Kolkata and I told my friend that I want to see every Bengali film. He said don’t do that. Most of them are very bad. I thought every Bengali film was great because I had seen only Ray and Ghatak until then. So, you’ll be misled if you go by the language. If somebody has made consistently good films, then I go by his name. So, when there is a film by Mrinal Sen or Shyam Benegal, I see it.

•Seema Chisthi: The sense of India that we get in films that we watch now is very different from what you saw in a Ray film. Can you just take us through this process of change?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: I don’t make films for daily consumption. That is the role of newspapers. They report on what is happening around us; cinema cannot be doing that. Cinema has to basically deal with some values that are of permanence, certain things which are of concern to everyone. Even when my film is set in a rural background, even when it is talking about a period other than the one we are living in, it should mean something to the audience of today. It should also be relevant tomorrow in terms of what it is talking about. Films do reflect the changing times in a very different way. The approach to filmmaking itself has been changing. So, the future of cinema will be very different — your equipment has become a lot more portable, accessible to everyone. From the ‘50s until the ‘80s, only Films Division could make the short film or documentaries. At the time, it was very expensive to make films on film. But with the advent of digital cameras and equipment, anybody can make a film, and almost everybody is making a film. I don’t know whether it is good or bad, but it has opened up the possibilities of looking at realities. The look of my film today is so different from what I started out with way back in 1972.

•Coomi Kapoor: You have won every conceivable national award and lots of international awards. But why is it that your films that are about Kerala have received little recognition in Kerala?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: I am inexorably linked to life in Kerala. I love Kerala. What will I do outside Kerala? I don’t want to be a fugitive from Kerala. My films are about Kerala. Someone asked me why I made so many documentaries about Kerala’s arts. I said it’s a great treasure. I learnt so much about my past, about myself, about others living in Kerala. Why is it that Kerala should be the home of Koodiyattam, which is the longest living theatre in the world? Why is it that Mohiniattam doesn’t happen anywhere else? Why is it that Kathakali is nowhere else? There are more than 1,000 folk art forms in Kerala. But many of today’s Keralites do not know about those things. Many Keralites have never seen a Koodiyattam performance, or even Kathakali.

•Sharika C: Your movies are about Kerala of the 1940s or the 1960s, not the Kerala of today. Why?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: There are only three or four films about the ‘40s. Those are also about my experience of Kerala. I was born in the ‘40s; my perceptions grew in that period. So, I am re-telling my own life. It was a very interesting period that I lived through and I observed many, many things. It’s a part of history. All art is about yesterday. It is not about today, because today you are in the midst of the happenings. You cannot have a proper perception of things as you live through them.

•Joel Rai: How would you feel about your film being sent as India’s entry to the Oscars?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: There is no chance. The nominations are made by the local film-industry, in this case, the Indian Motion Picture Producers’ Association. They have never chosen a Ray film, a Ghatak film or a Shyam Benegal film for an Oscar, so there is no chance of mine being chosen. I don’t think very highly about the Oscars either. A Cannes, a Berlin or a Venice film festival is much more honourable. For us to feel excited about the Oscar selection, I think, is a little too much.

•Dipanita Nath: In the first story of Naalu Pennungal, the prostitute insists she is the wife, somebody’s wife. But you, as a film-maker have entitled her story as The Prostitute. Aren’t you stereotyping her?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: It’s not me who terms her as a prostitute; it is the society. That’s what the film is all about.

•Dipanita Nath: So you are upholding the voice of the society as opposed to hers?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: What happens to a prostitute when she wants to become a normal wife and lead a decent life? What is wrong in calling her a prostitute? Her image from the past follows her. Her past catches up with her. That’s what it says. What is wrong with that? Prostitute…is it a bad title?

•Dipanita Nath: Well, it does label her and she is trying to fight the label.

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: Let me tell you, it’s a great title. It’s a profession. Why do you think it is demeaning? Is there no prostitution in this country? Why do you decry them? There are lots of people in it and lots of people think that is a very important profession. It’s the oldest profession, in fact, where money is transacted. There is nothing wrong with a title like prostitute.

•Shubhra Gupta: How do you deal with professional criticism?

Adoor Gopalakrishnan: There is hardly any good criticism. What happens is that the people who write reviews, who think they do critiques, they are hardly equipped to do so. Go and equip yourselves. It’s very important because if you have seen a lot of cinema, it is fine. But what kind of cinema you saw is very important. You have to be very open. When I make a film, I am very particular that I don’t repeat myself, whereas the person who goes there, who is going to write a review of it, has never seen anything new happening on the screen. A critic should be as equipped, as informed as the creator. I hardly read a very good review in any Indian language. We don’t have good films so we don’t have a good evaluation of films, so we don’t have good films — so goes the cycle. I think there are opportunities here. There are so many universities that teach visual arts. There’s a lot of awareness, it can also go the wrong way. When multiplexes opened, we thought it was a great opportunity to show the best of cinema, in those small cinemas. It did not happen. Instead, they were showing the worst kind of films — there is no choice. This is our misfortune: when things look like clearing, it gets enshrouded.

Transcribed by Paromita Chakraborty