IFFI 2024, 16: Quality of films seen and the recurring walk-outs

IFFI 2024, 16: Quality of films seen and the recurring walk-outs

You may find it incredible that I walked out of so many films, and I find it terrible that I had to. Never, in my living memory, have I walked out of so many films at any given film festival. IFFI 2024, however, took the cake. In the recent past, with films being polarised into block-buster, but inane, action extravaganzas and the well-intentioned small films that just do not have it in them to hold a viewer’s interest, there did emerge a slew of Indian films that treaded the precarious middle territory and managed to grab my attention, hold their own and even earned prizes at festivals. Most of these realistic films either ended-up on OTT platforms, a handful got to the release screens while some are languishing in no man’s land, without buyers and distributors. But IFFI is not a release platform, and a viewer may walk out of the film at any time, without the accompanying guilt that he would face at an Indian film preview, held for critics.

A walk-out at a festival makes good, practical sense. I go completely unprepared, without any research or googling, hoping that the film I have reserved tickets for will surprise me, pleasantly. In any case, research can only narrow down your need to get an idea of what the film is about. It might have been shown at other, even more prestigious film festivals than IFFI, and won prizes galore, but the real thing may not make the cut with me. Nothing really prepares you for what will be projected on the big screen minutes after you have entered the auditorium. I give a film 20 minutes to inspire me to stay on and watch the rest of it. In rare cases, I even sit through till half or 75% of the movie, and yet walk-out, feeling drained and uninterested. Once I am out, I have no chance of getting into another theatre within the same multiplex because new ticketing norms deny you the right to walk into a cinema without a pre-reserved ticket, and you cannot book two or more tickets in the same or overlapping show-time slots. So, you are punished. Walking out means being left with no choice but to wait for the screening time of the next film you have booked. This might mean a wait of 2-3 hours. And there is very little you can do to bide time till then.

What follows is a list of films I went to see, and how did I rate them, based on how much I saw of them. Only a few films could hold my interest till the end. Yes, while attending a press show in good old Mumbai, I never walk-out, even if the film is terrible, because that is a professional commitment as well as an occupational hazard. Moreover, the PR team is standing outside and rebukes you if you walk out. It might never call you again for its future press shows of forthcoming releases. I have to review the film, and that cannot be done after seeing only a small part of it. Believe me, after having been immersed in film society culture and being on the selection committees of the Federation of Film Societies of India (FFSI), I have sat through some of the most boring and listless films ever made. But I used to see them fully, because it was my duty, and that of the other selection committee members, in the film society circuit, to separate the grain from the chaff. At IFFI, or any other film festival, there is no such binding. And that is big relief. When the option is between sitting through, and corrupting my hard disk (grey matter inside my skull, which demands high notches from a film when I am at liberty to walk out) and whiling away my time for the next 2-3 hours, I always prefer the latter.

So, here they are.

GÜLIZAR Turkey-Kosovo co-production Screenplay and direction: Bilkis Bayrak Duration: 84 minutes

The show was an Asia première. Gülizar is obviously a variation of the Urdu word Gulzar, meaning garden. It is also the name of the protagonist, a woman. We have a poet-lyricist-director named Gulzar, now in his 80s, who has made some good Hindustani films. Gülizar here is a 22-year-old Turkish woman, about to be married to a man, Emre, from Kosovo. She has been brought up in the traditional Turkish orthodox culture, that restricts any woman from leading a free life. Gulzar is sexually assaulted in a ladies’ toilet and nurses a feeling of retaliation and vengeance, leading to a grim climax. Quite well written and ably directed, the film made me sit through and watch it till the end. Though her vengeance is drastic, it does emphasise the need for women’s safety from male hormones running wild.

Rating: ***

I AM NEVENKA Spain- Screenplay by Icíar Ballain and Isa Campo, Directed by- Icíar Ballain -110 minutes

A member of the council in the city of Ponferrada, Nevenka Fernándes, 23, is sexually harassed by the mayor, and files a court case against him. Surprisingly for those who believe that men can get away with such indiscretions, she wins the case. As a result, she becomes a part of the Spanish ‘Me Too’ movement. I saw 75% of the film, and the rating is based on what I saw. So why did I miss the last quarter? The story became too predictable and I could see no surprises coming.

Rating: ** ½

PIERCE Singapore, Taiwan, Poland (rare combination, this), Screenplay and direction Nelicia Low, 107 minutes

The title refers to dangerous sport of fencing, at which, the protagonists, Zijie and his older brother Zihan are accomplished practitioners. Both are high school students. Zihan kills an opponent in a bout and is sent to juvenile prison. But he maintains he was innocent. After his release, he helps Zijie hone his skills. Gradually, the brotherly bond, broken after the incident and Zihan’s incarceration, begins to strengthen. But the question remains: Is Zihan really innocent? This is director Nelicia Low’s debut film. Some novelty in the shape of sabre-clanging. Not much more.

The above three films were in the International Competition, though only Gulizar made an impression on me. This speaks volumes about the selection jury’s wisdom in slotting these films for an international competition.

ARTICLE 370 India Screenplay by Aditya Dhar, Aditya Suhas Jambhale, Arjun Dhawan and Monal Thaaker Directed by Suhas Jambhale

Moving into the Hindustani language domain from Marathi film successes, Jambhale uses a fictional tale, wherein India’s Prime Minister and Home Minister are replicated by actors. Article 370 of the Indian Constitution is, or rather was, a provision which granted special status to Jammu, Kashmir and Ladakh. Among many other privileges, the region could name its head of state Prime Minister and have a separate flag. When the political scenario changed in India and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), they re-looked at this Article, and abrogated (scrapped) it by an Act of Parliament, in 2016. Indian secret agent Zooni Haksar played a key role in silencing the separationist powers, said to be sponsored by Pakistan. She, and only she, has a back-story, though even that is skeletal. Jambhale balances the National Intelligence Agency (NIA) cell meetings and incidents that preceded the abrogation. In the process, she made friends with a Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) officer, but lost him during attacks by the revolutionaries.

Devoid of any glamour, sex, nudity or escapism of similar kind, the film sticks to its secret agent/double agent/spy/subversive forces and counter revolution against stone pelters in Kashmir theme, showcasing the grim determination of Zooni very well, thanks to a good performance by Yami Gautam. Other actors are good too. One gets to see veterans Arun Govil and Raj Zutshi after a long hiatus. Problem is that we have seen at least a dozen films on very similar lines and 370 just manages to go past the 360 degrees by 10. In choosing a subject that is based on real incidents, you have to think out of the circle (films with similar stories and tropes, which it manages to do) by adding 10 to 360, but does not deliver enough. You could remove 10 tropes from Article 370 and substitute them with matching scenes from other films, and no one will be the wiser. Everybody knows the Indian government’s stand on the territory of Kashmir and its measures to not only drive out separatists from there, but teach Pakistan a lesson. Pakistan currently occupies 1/3rd of it and has its own stand on the burning issue. What a tragedy! Often called the heaven on earth and rated a notch above Switzerland as the most beautiful place in the world, it has been blanketed by a pool of blood. The film insists that the abrogation was achieved without killing any innocents, though dozens died in stone throwing, cross firing and explosions, both on the Indian military side and the militant separatist’s side.

Rating: ** ½

BETTER MAN Australia Screenwriters: Oliver Cole, Simon Gleeson, Michael Gracey Directed by: Michael Gracey, 134 minutes

A biopic about Robbie Williams, the British pop legend, it is directed by Michael Gracey, who also made The Greatest Showman and was Executive producer on Elton John’s biopic, Rocketman. Williams is played by Williams, and although the catalogue calls it a performance of startling vitality, Gracey seems more concerned with VFX, and the ‘monkey business’ (an attempt at being different that could be better) in tracing the life of Williams as the youngest member of the group Take That, and later, a solo performer. Robbie’s ‘wit and indomitable spirit’, to quote from the catalogue again, failed to stop me from heading towards the exit. By no standards should it have been an Opening Film. At 134 minutes, it was dragging its feet. Anyway, the Opening film was Closed as I walked out after about 30 minutes. No rating, obviously. And what about the ape? Keep guessing about its genre: monkey, ape, gorilla, chimpanzee, baboon, simian, and what made Gracey use this costume and make-up for his protagonist.

Much more to come. Keep following these pages.