Wednesday, December 9, 2020

Ennio Morricone (1928-2020): Eight scenes

Ennio Morricone, one of the most influential and prolific film composers ever, died today in a hospital in Rome. He was 91. It’s difficult to convey the vastness of his contribution to cinema except to say that film scoring was immediately and irrevocably changed by his electrifying soundtracks for Sergio Leone’s spaghetti Westerns in the 1960s. He was, however, much more than just a composer of Westerns: he worked in just about every genre there was, collaborating with directors as different as Dario Argento and Terrence Malick. Out of the thousands of movie moments he scored over more than six decades, we pick eight scenes that wouldn’t have been the same without the Morricone touch.


‘The Good, the Bad and the Ugly’ (1966) – The final duel

In the opening credits of the first film of the Dollars trilogy, with an unholy, thrilling mixture of whistles, shrieks, exclamations, bells and twanging electric guitar, Morricone revolutionized film scoring. In the third film, he perfected it. The final duel in The Good, The Bad and The Ugly is a masterclass of cutting and framing but it wouldn't be immortal without Morricone’s music, those ascending guitar arpeggios joined by strings and choral singing and exploding into a searing horn figure. Fans of the film don't just see this scene in their minds, they hear it.


‘Investigation of a Citizen above Suspicion’ (1971) – A little death

Morricone’s penchant for unusual instrumentation didn’t just surface in his Westerns. Elio Petri’s dark comedy begins with a man in a suit arriving at his mistress’ pad, undressing and making love to her. When she cries out, we realize that he’s actually murdered her. All the while, a merry, mocking tune plays. Morricone said in an interview that he felt the scene needed music with “a folkish feel". He used “peasant instruments": a mandolin and a Jew’s harp along with piano. He also asked the synth player to imitate the sound of a raspberry being blown.


‘Allonsanfàn’ (1974) – Vision

Most film fans today know Rabbia e tarantella as the track that plays in the closing credits of Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds. Yet, its original use, in the Italian period drama Allonsanfàn, is even more memorable, as the film’s titular character, suffering from a head injury, sees villagers and revolutionaries performing an incongruous folk dance. Morricone’s theme is sincere and stirring, transforming a moment of madness into one of imagined victory.


‘Sacco e Vanzetti’ (1971) – Handshake

Even if you didn’t know that Sacco e Vanzetti ends with the execution by electric chair of two Italian anarchists, the theme accompanying their last handshake in prison is the saddest music you’ll ever hear.


‘The Battle of Algiers’ (1966) – Before the bombing

Though he did bombast better than anyone, Morricone could also pare down his sound when required. In a tense sequence in The Battle of Algiers, we see three local women fixing their clothes and hair before heading out to go set off bombs in the French quarter. Morricone accompanies the long, tense buildup to the bombing with little more than fast, agitated percussion, picking up from the rhythm of ululations by women in the Qasba in the previous scene. Critic Pauline Kael wrote that "in The Battle of Algiers, music becomes a form of agitation: at times, the strange percussive sound is like an engine that can't quite start…"


‘The Untouchables’ (1987) – Shootout on the bridge

The exhilaration of the raid by Eliot Ness and his men on gangster bootleggers at the Canadian border finds the perfect accompaniment in Morricone’s exultant theme. The old-fashioned joyousness of the piece is in tune with the film’s retro cops-and-robbers brio.


‘Fists in the Pocket’ (1965) – Alone at the party

As a young unknown, Morricone was a trumpeter in jazz bands, so he might have enjoyed composing the jazz-lite dance music that plays as Allesandro, the volcanic centre of Fists in the Pocket, stands alone in the corner at a hip party. The melody is teasing, mirroring his discomfort, then suddenly changes tempo and tenor to something more sympathetic as the camera draws in on actor Lou Castel.


‘The Cat o' Nine Tails’ (1971) – Opening credits

Morricone was as vital a horror movie composer as he was for Westerns. His theme for the opening scene of Dario Argento’s The Cat o' Nine Tails is a wonderful example of music that undercuts genre expectations. Instead of being spooky, the overlaying of acoustic guitar, flute and harpsichord with ghostly female vocals is stately and somewhat mournful.

Olivier Assayas’ altered states

Last week, Olivier Assayas delivered the State of Cinema address for the Belgian film website Sabzian. “I have some good news, for everyone: cinema is in crisis," he began. The transcriptis some 7,000 words and dense in parts: Assayas, after all, was a critic for Cahiers du Cinéma before he became a director. One line struck me as revealing: “…as nature has gifted me with a rather contrary spirit, I am left with the feeling that I had to swim against the tide...of instantly forgotten fashions of a drifting cinephile thought…"

It’s difficult to think of a major film-maker who has been as resistant to settling into an identifiable style as Assayas. There are recurring psychological and stylistic preoccupations: unbroken shots with a roving camera, fractured mental states, eclectic soundtracks. Still, to direct films as singular yet disparate as Summer Hours (2008) and Demonlover (2002), Carlos (2010) and Clouds Of Sils Maria (2014), you have to be a contrary spirit, open to the possibility of failure.

Given the paucity of Assayas’ work on streaming platforms in India, the release of his latest film, Wasp Network (2019), on Netflix last week was exciting. The film, however, is a strangely diffused affair. In as much as it’s difficult to say what an “Assayas film" is, this does not feel like one. It‘s about Cuban nationals like pilot René (Édgar Ramírez), who fled their country for Miami in the 1990s and joined organizations working to free Cuba from Fidel Castro. René is joined by Juan (Wagner Moura), who supplements his income by becoming an FBI informant on the groups he’s helping.

Wasp Network twists unpredictably, as characters are revealed as double, then triple, agents. Yet, apart from René’s correspondence with his wife (Penélope Cruz) and daughter back home, it’s hard to find an emotional through-line. Juan vanishes and isn’t spoken of till the end. Gael García Bernal turns up for a while, as a Cuban government mole. A voice-over is introduced mid-film, to no great effect. There are a couple of sublime touches, like the unbroken shot of Ana de Armas dancing her way across a room, or the Hitchcockian sequence with agents planting a bug, their faces never coming into view. Yet it feels like Assayas needed something closer to the running time of Carlos—his almost 6-hour film/miniseries starring Ramírez as terrorist Carlos the Jackal—to bring order to this packed but rather formless story.

Wasp Network might be many viewers’ introduction to Assayas. Where should you go from there? It really depends on the sort of film experience you are looking for. Fans of perverse techno-thrillers can try Demonlover, set against the backdrop of the anime porn business, or the neonoir Boarding Gate (2007). Carlos is his biggest canvas, a sprawling, elusive work involving a complex tapestry of 1970s insurrectionary politics. Or you can zoom in with Summer Hours, a film in the venerable French tradition of people just sitting around and talking.

There are the autobiographical films Cold Water (1994) and Something In The Air (2012), with their young protagonists trying to find themselves in the aftermath of 1968, as Assayas once did. And there are the films he made with Kristen Stewart in Europe, at a time when she was still the star from the Twilight movies. She gives intuitive, nervy performances as the assistant to a famous actor (Juliette Binoche) in the meta-textual Clouds Of Sils Maria, and a buyer of clothes for the super-wealthy in Personal Shopper (2016), who starts suspecting her dead twin brother is sending her messages from the afterlife.

Or you could start with the one I did, his cult 1996 title, Irma Vep. The film, about a Hong Kong movie star (Maggie Cheung, sort of playing herself), cast in a remake of the silent French serial Les Vampires, is a good introduction to the many moods of Assayas: It has fetishism, nods to experimental film, ruminations on art and commerce, but also moments of human connection. It also has a cracking, eclectic soundtrack—Sonic Youth, Ali Farka Touré, Serge Gainsbourg.

There’s a specific image that Assayas returns to in three of his films: a group of young people who have taken over a country house, drinking and taking drugs, playing music and partying. In Cold Water and Something In The Air, these scenes are simultaneously destructive and introspective, a post-1968 frame of mind. In Summer Hours, things are different. The house is being sold and the teenage daughter has called her friends over to party. She steals away from the group with her boyfriend, unburdens her fears about everything changing. Then she takes him by the hand and starts to run, saying, “I don’t want them to find us." It’s another Assayas motif, from Irma Vep to Carlos, Personal Shopper, Something In The Air and Wasp Network—the desire to outrun one’s circumstances, to escape or disappear.

Part of the intermittent World View series in Lounge. 

Gone With The Wind and the question of context

 Spike Lee’s BlacKkKlansman (2018) opens with the famous scene from Gone With The Wind (1939) where the camera pulls back to reveal a battlefield of injured and dying Confederate soldiers. Audiences have been conditioned to receive the scene as tragic, but Lee cuts on the fluttering of the Confederate flag in the foreground, then shows the same flag in the next scene behind Alec Baldwin’s white supremacist as he spews racist vitriol. Lee’s film also skewers DW Griffith’s straightforwardly racist The Birth of a Nation (1915), but Gone With The Wind—a much more widely seen and beloved film—was the more provocative target.

Two years later, Gone With The Wind is in the dock again. As the Black Lives Matter movement continues to grow, American movies and TV have come under the scanner for furthering and enabling racist attitudes and practices. In an op-ed in the Los Angeles Times on 8 June, John Ridley, screenwriter of 12 Years A Slave, asked WarnerMedia to consider removing Victor Fleming’s film, a paean to the American South, from their recently launched streaming service, HBO Max. “It is a film that, when it is not ignoring the horrors of slavery, pauses only to perpetuate some of the most painful stereotypes of people of colour," Ridley wrote.

On 24 June, the film was back up on HBO, this time with a panel discussion from 2019 titled “The Complicated Legacy of Gone With the Wind" and a filmed introduction by Turner Classic Movies host and film scholar Jacqueline Stewart. “Watching Gone With The Wind can be uncomfortable, even painful," she says in the 4-minute video, which can be seen on YouTube. “Still, it is important that classic Hollywood films are available to us in their original form for viewing and discussion. They reflect the social context in which they were made and invite viewers to reflect on their own values and beliefs when watching them now."

Stewart’s address is thoughtful and concise, but there’s something strange about a disclaimer for a well-known, much-discussed film that’s been around for more than 80 years. The “context" provided in the video—essentially, that the film glosses over the terrible details of slavery and the complicity of the culture it celebrates in perpetuating it—isn't something most viewers would need (whether they agree with it or not is a separate matter). Its primary use is in allowing WarnerMedia and HBO to save face, to keep a beloved movie up on their channel while also appearing sensitive to the feelings of its viewers.

A context-supplying video, whatever its impact, is an infinitely better response than what many thought HBO had done, which is remove the film entirely from its site. Contrast this to NBCUniversal’s decision last week to remove from circulation four episodes of the Tina Fey series 30 Rock that featured characters in blackface. 30 Rock was a popular show, and for them to have dealt in racial stereotypes several times and remained critically and culturally relevant says something about the TV watching public and the creators. To erase this fact under the guise of sensitivity is dishonest and misleading—a retroactive falsification of a political and social climate. There's also a danger of corporations fearing to give offence where none ought to be taken; Hulu recently removed an episode of Golden Girls where the characters are wearing a mud mask, apparently because it might resemble blackface.

With the current wave of introspection that’s sweeping Hollywood, it would be interesting to see which other streaming titles are deemed to require context, or a disclaimer. The many classic Westerns depicting Native Americans as savages are as deserving of context as Gone With The Wind. What about smaller instances, like Mickey Rooney as a bucktoothed Japanese man in Breakfast at Tiffany’s (1961)? Barring isolated bursts of conscience, the likelihood of added context should depend on the capacity of the aggrieved party to make the network or studio look bad.

Bulbbul: Review

Bulbbul opens in Bengal in 1881, at the wedding of a little girl to a grown man, almost half a century before the first law banning child marriage came into effect. On the way to her new husband’s home, Bulbbul is told a story by her brother-in-law, Satya, a boy around her age. It’s a standard scary folk tale, about a chudail, a female demon, said to live in those parts, who has backwards-facing feet and a thirst for blood. In the next scene, Bulbbul, decked up, sitting on the bed, is visited by not one but two demons: her husband, Indranil, and his intellectually disabled younger brother, Mahendra.

The film jumps 20 years, and resumes in a Dracula frame of mind. Satya (Avinash Tiwary), just returned from his studies abroad, is being driven through a forest in a horse-drawn carriage. Its driver warns of the chudail. Strange noises emanate from the dark. The screen is a feverish purple. Satya is even dressed like Jonathan Harker, in a waistcoat and long jacket. At the mansion, he lights a lone candle and looks around. I half expected Max Schreck or Bela Lugosi to emerge from the shadows.

Satya is reunited with Bulbbul (Tripti Dimri), who was in love with him before he left. She's now the lady of the mansion; Indranil (Rahul Bose) no longer lives with them, and Mahendra (also Bose) is dead, the victim of a mysterious, violent attack. His widow, Binodini (Paoli Dam), has to shave her head and live apart from the rest of the household. Bulbbul has an unsettling fixed smile, one that seems almost cruel when used in the presence of the unhappy Binodini. But as flashbacks start to interrupt the narrative, we learn more about the family and begin to sympathise with Bulbbul.

This is Anvita Dutt’s first film as director; her earlier work has been as a lyricist and writer on films like Queen, Phillauri and Shaandaar. Working with production designer Meenal Agarwal and cinematographer Siddharth Diwan, she directs some impressively hallucinatory sequences. As a screenwriter, though, I wish she’d been bolder. When bad men start dying around Bulbbul, it’s fairly clear where the story is heading. This was fine in Stree, where the lack of suspense was compensated for by manic energy, but not in a film that doesn't quite work as relationship drama or as horror movie. There’s a mysterious character, a doctor named Sudip played by Parambrata Chatterjee, whose unspoken bond with Bulbbul kept me guessing. The rest are predictable, and talented performers like Tiwary and Dam have to work hard to enliven thinly drawn characters.

Dutt does have a keen eye for the small and large aggressions against women. When he first lays eyes on her, Satya says of Bulbbul: “She’s unkempt. But she’ll do." Years later, in love with her but jealous of her ease with the doctor, he snaps that she isn’t in purdah when meeting outsiders. Till then, Satya is the film’s hero; his saying this is a way of showing how the instincts of patriarchy are lurking under the surface of even untowardly nice men.

Bulbbul is best thought of in conjunction with two other films by its producer Anushka Sharma. In Pari, Sharma is a victim of a satanic cult with otherworldly powers; in Phillauri, she’s a ghost in limbo. Taken together, these three films are a loose trilogy of supernatural feminine power, each concerned, in its own way, with the injustices women have faced, and continue to face. Phillauri moves towards reconciliation, Bulbbul towards revenge, and Pari – a disturbing and original horror movie – finds unexpected grace in a gesture of sisterly solidarity.

Like Paatal Lok, another Sharma production, Bulbbul’s plot also turns on the depiction of violent crimes against women (the scene that draws out and aestheticizes spousal abuse left me feeling very uneasy). This puts us on Bulbbul’s side, though it would have been more impressive had our sympathies been won through the bravery or ingenuity of the character. Dimri’s implacable smile doesn’t allow Bulbbul much personality – it’s only in the flashbacks that she shows a broader range of emotions. Towards the end of the film, Satya calls the mysterious killer a rakshasa, to which Sudip responds “Devi hai." The suggestion that a woman must either be demon or goddess to be able to get her way is a provocative one, though beyond the scope of this film.

Bulbbul is streaming on Netflix.

Sushant Singh Rajput: The outsider

Hours after news of his death broke, scenes from Sushant Singh Rajput’s last big screen release were being posted on Twitter. In Chhichhore (2019), the actor plays the father of a troubled boy about to give the national engineering entrance exam. He doesn’t succeed and, mortified at the thought of disappointing his parents, both of whom were at the National Institution of Technology (a stand-in for IIT), he throws himself off the roof. The rest of the film is Rajput relating the story of his college days to his critically injured son to get him to realize that suicide isn’t a solution. Chhichhore saw middling reviews and huge commercial success when it opened in September last year. For the worst reasons, it’s unbearably poignant now.

Sushant Singh Rajput died by suicide on the morning of 14 June, at his home in Bandra, Mumbai. He was 34—the same age as Ranveer Singh, a year older than Varun Dhawan. The police investigation is still on but that didn’t stop media outlets from speculating, with unfeeling sensationalism, on the possible causes. Photographs of the body turned up on TV and WhatsApp. Actor Ankita Lokhande, his former partner, trended on Twitter as people gossiped about how the end of their six-year relationship had affected the actor. The scavenging media coverage was exacerbated by the film industry using the death as an excuse to point fingers and settle scores.

Amid all the ugliness, my thoughts kept straying to a time before the fame, when everything lay ahead of Rajput. It was just over eight years ago that he decided to leave TV for film: a young man with a soft voice and a bright future. There’s a video from around then on YouTube, of him being interviewed on the sets of Pavitra Rishta, the show that made him a soap star. “They say everything must end—this too is ending," he tells the reporter. “Whatever I do next, I am going to do it well, put my heart into it."

How intimidating must Bollywood have looked to Rajput then? He grew up in Patna, Bihar, in a middle-class family. His father was an engineer; he too studied engineering. He had no godfathers in the film industry. He was famous—but TV famous, which counts for little in Bollywood. He was, in industry parlance, an outsider.

In Hindi cinema, the actor sons and daughters of famous film folk are “launched" (and relaunched if they don’t take off at first). Everyone else must count on being “discovered", whether through modelling, commercials, theatre, dance or TV. Shah Rukh Khan is the Cinderella story that launched a million unreasonable dreams, a nobody from Delhi who parlayed his popularity on TV into movie stardom. Yet, of the many actors who have crossed over from TV, only Rajput and Ayushmann Khurrana, who began his career as a reality show participant and host, achieved something close to Khan’s level of stardom.

Rajput did a bit of everything in the beginning: He was a dancer in Shiamak Davar’s troupe, a student of acting with Barry John, part of Nadira Babbar’s Ekjute theatre group. He began his TV career on Kis Desh Mein Hai Meraa Dil and became a star when Ekta Kapoor batted for him to play the lead in another show she was producing, Pavitra Rishta. When he left the safety of TV in 2011, he was looking at a decidedly uncertain future. Then, as now, there was no shortage in Bollywood of young actors with industry connections—Ranveer Singh had burst on to the scene with Band Baaja Baaraat (2010), Ranbir Kapoor had been around for a few years, Varun Dhawan had been signed by Karan Johar for Student Of The Year (2013).

Despite the odds, Rajput’s entry into film couldn’t have been smoother. He was spotted by casting director Mukesh Chhabra in a coffee shop and brought in to read for Abhishek Kapoor’s 2013 film Kai Po Che!. He was cast, alongside Rajkummar Rao and Amit Sadh,both fairly new to the business, in the part of Ishaan, a carefree jock who finds purpose in coaching a young cricketer. The film was a huge success, with Rajput its breakout star. There was an ease to his performance, a non-threatening manly charm, as well as a quality that would seem old-fashioned in most actors but which Rajput made his own: sincerity. He wasn’t the most complicated performer but you believed him because he seemed so earnest.

His charmed run continued. Maneesh Sharma’s sharp comedy Shuddh Desi Romance (2013), in which he played a commitment-averse man in love with Parineeti Chopra’s equally commitment-averse manic pixie, came next. He cameoed in Rajkumar Hirani’s smash hit PK (2014) as Sarfaraz, a Pakistani national in love with an Indian girl; that brief appearance, and the line “Sarfaraz dhoka nahi diya tha (Sarfaraz didn’t betray you)", became popular across the border. With Yash Raj Films’ (YRF’s) Detective Byomkesh Bakshy!—a big film by a major studio, planned as a franchise—and Shekhar Kapur’s ambitious Paani under his belt, the future seemed very bright.

In Detective Byomkesh Bakshy!, Dibakar Banerjee’s adaptation of the Bengali detective series, he was a delightful Byomkesh—energetic, brilliant, visibly pleased with himself (unlike your typical inscrutable sleuth, this satyanweshi smiles a lot). But the 2015 film, immaculately designed but inchoately plotted, was a commercial failure. Rajput followed that up with a big hit, playing the former Indian cricket captain in M.S. Dhoni: The Untold Story (2016). Then came the lean period—a box-office failure in Raabta (2017), an average earner in Kedarnath (2018). He left YRF Talent amid rumours of a rift with Aditya Chopra over preferential treatment to Ranveer Singh. There was also the long grind of waiting for Paani to materialize (it never did), and the projects turned down in that period.

It’s not so much that he had two middling films in two years. Actors with far worse career graphs are working in Hindi cinema today. It’s more that Rajput, even at the height of his fame, was never spoken of as a truly big star. That seems incredible on the face of it: In his seven-year career, he was the lead in three big successes and cameoed in a monster fourth one. But box-office popularity isn’t always a guarantor of stardom in a town suspicious of talented strangers.

“It takes double the talent, energy and hard work for an outsider to convince the audience and the industry that he or she is as safe a box- office bet as a mediocre, unmotivated and entitled establishment elite," Banerjee told PTI after Rajput’s death. “This leads to deep anger and frustration. Those who can let this slide survive. Those who can’t—those who hurt a little more or are vulnerable and impressionable—they are at risk."


OUTSIDE IN

In a discussion taped a few months after the release of M.S. Dhoni, critic Anupama Chopra asked Rajput how he had navigated Bollywood’s nepotistic waters. “I can’t complain because I got the films I wanted to do," he replied. “But that doesn’t mean it isn’t there…. When you are successful as an outsider you will be discussed, but in a hushed tone. And people are willing to forget about it." Asked whether stardom is important to him, he says, “If you give it to me I will keep it…. But at the same time if you don’t give it to me, I don’t miss it."

It’s tough to imagine a second- or third-generation Bollywood actor voicing a similar sentiment. You get the sense they would miss stardom terribly if it slipped away. But Rajput probably wasn’t as detached from ambition as his response made him seem. When he dropped out of the Delhi College of Engineering to try his hand at acting, “I was already a superstar in my mind", he told Man’s World. Instead, his response to Chopra reads more like a careful covering of bases by someone who had been a star in Bollywood long enough to know that he couldn’t take success for granted the way some of his peers could.

Film-maker Abhishek Kapoor spoke with feeling of the difference between the newcomer he directed in Kai Po Che! and the media-hounded star he worked with in Kedarnath. “I used to tell him, you are already a star, you don’t need other people to validate that for you," he told Shoma Chaudhury in an interview on 16 June. Kapoor said Rajput was ostracized by the industry for not being a typical star. “It’s like, if you don’t fit in our box, we have no use for you. It was the systematic dismantling of a fragile mind."

In the last three years, there has been increased criticism of Bollywood’s clique-ish workings. Kangana Ranaut created a stir in 2017 when she described Karan Johar, on his own talk show, as the “flag-bearer of nepotism" in the industry. More recently, in a newcomers roundtable hosted by Rajeev Masand, Gully Boy’s Siddhant Chaturvedi wryly responded to Ananya Panday’s assertion that star children also had to struggle, with “where our dreams come true, that’s where their struggle begins". Yet, in a country that has had film families almost from the time it has had films, this is a criticism easily shaken off. At the 2017 IIFA Awards, Johar, Saif Ali Khan and Varun Dhawan—second-generation celebrities all—performed a skit aimed at an absent Ranaut that ended with them chanting “nepotism rocks".

After Rajput’s death, Johar, his producer on Drive, shared a post mourning him on Instagram (“I have felt at times like you may have needed people to share your life with...but somehow I never followed up on that feeling"). By late evening, Johar’s name was trending on Twitter. Most of the mentions were angry reminders of occasions when he was seen to have slighted Rajput—in particular the time on his show when Alia Bhatt, asked who she'd kill/ marry/ hookup with between Ranveer Singh, Ranbir Kapoor and Rajput, opted for "kill Sushant". It was a typically catty and vapid Koffee With Karan moment, featuring a star child launched by Johar, a friend of Aditya Chopra—all the concentric circles of insider-dom from which Rajput was excluded. Nevertheless, to link this, as many did, to the actor’s death is unfair and irresponsible. The same goes for the “blind items" that painted Rajput as difficult and brash over the years. But these slights do serve as an indicator of where power in Bollywood lies and who wields it.

By the evening of 14 June, the conversation about the death had turned into a shouting match over nepotism in Bollywood. Ranaut’s team posted a video in which she suggested Rajput was driven to suicide by a nepotistic industry’s lack of recognition of his talents (she also said the same forces wanted her to die by suicide and it was Rajput’s “mistake" that he listened to them). Sonakshi Sinha and Sonam K. Ahuja tweeted, without naming Ranaut, about people using Rajput’s death for their own battles. Abhinav Kashyap, director of Dabangg, wrote a long Facebook post alleging that Salman Khan and his family members had tried to ruin his career. Lost in all this were the voices calling for more open discussions on mental health, and the ones who just wanted to remember Rajput without speculating about his death.


HEAD IN THE STARS

In story after story about Rajput, there’s one constant: He always had a book around. Most of the time it was a science book; the actor was particularly interested in astronomy and had wanted to be an astronaut when he was young (he attended a Nasa workshop in 2017 and later sponsored two students to visit the US space agency). His Instagram was unlike any other Hindi film star’s, a mix of philosophical musings and pictures of telescopes, starry skies and scientific instruments. In a post from April, he writes that he’s learning coding because he loves computer gaming and “wanted to learn the language behind it".

Anand Gandhi, director of Ship Of Theseus, recalled on email how the actor came up to him outside a hotel in Goa during IFFI 2017 and introduced himself. “He started quoting me from my talks and interviews, which he seemed to have gone through many of. We shared many of our heroes—(author Richard) Dawkins, (philosopher Daniel) Dennett, (neuroscientist) V.S. Ramachandran. We must have stood on those steps for hours talking." The two became friends and planned to collaborate on a film about a worldwide pandemic called Emergence. “Over the years, Sushant would bring up Emergence often," Gandhi said. “In the last few months, he would bring it up every week or so. I felt certain that I could cast him in a part that amplifies who he was...an artist of life, a seeker, relentless in his inquiry."

Director Abhishek Chaubey told me that while they were shooting Sonchiriya (2019) in Dhaulpur, Rajasthan, the actor would spend his free time reading tomes on quantum physics. “He wasn’t bullshitting either. He knew what he was talking about." He even lugged a 100kg telescope to the shoot because there were astronomical events taking place then. Rajput tended to converse about everything other than cinema, Chaubey said, quite unlike other stars, whose interests rarely extend beyond the movie business. “He was unique in that sense. You don’t get many geeks in Versova."

The revisionist Western Sonchiriya is Rajput’s best film, and his most intense performance. He plays a Chambal valley dacoit, a man who begins to question his purpose in life and eventually sacrifices himself helping a runaway woman and a little girl make it out of the ravines. Surrounded by expert growlers and grunters like Manoj Bajpayee, Ranvir Shorey and Ashutosh Rana, Rajput roughens up convincingly. “There’s something desi about him," Chaubey said when asked why he cast Rajput. “He doesn’t have that Bandra-Juhu image which most of our male actors have."

One crucial piece of the character fell into place by accident. Chaubey had planned to ask the actor to incorporate the dacoit’s contemplative nature in his performance. He realized he didn’t need to—Rajput’s slightly faraway demeanour was a ready-made fit.

By all accounts, Rajput was a hard worker, pressing directors for notes, going to lengths to enter the mind of the character. Screenwriter Kanika Dhillon recalled how her 100-page script for Kedarnath became a 300-page document after Rajput was done adding his own notes. He didn’t disappear behind make-up or accents, preferring to make changes in body language. His Mahendra Singh Dhoni looks nothing like the cricketer but he moves exactly like him on the field. He wisely avoided speaking Hindi with a Bengali accent in Detective Byomkesh Bakshy!, instead inventing a lithe, slightly comic physicality to match the detective’s mental agility. With attentive directors, he could slip a lot into a scene without doing much on the surface. The scene in Shuddh Desi Romance when he wakes up after sleeping over at Parineeti Chopra’s flat for the first time is a marvel of unarticulated emotions—giddy joy and sexual pride giving way to confusion and emotional vulnerability and finding its way back to joy.

Chaubey said Rajput was a loner, though also a regular guy with few airs and a “college canteen vibe". “I had heard he would be difficult, that he would have all these demands, but none of that happened." This image of Rajput as a tantrum-thrower is derived largely from blind items and unattributed quotes—testament to the power of the Bollywood gossip vine. The biggest controversy involving the actor was an unsubstantiated rumour that he had harassed co-star Sanjana Sanghi while shooting Dil Bechara, an as-yet-unreleased remake of The Fault In Our Stars (DNA quoted an unnamed source as saying: “Sushant was trying to be ‘extra-friendly’ towards newbie Sanjana Sanghi. On one occasion, she seemed to have got uncomfortable."). The actor denied the claims. Sanghi later tweeted that the story was “baseless and unfounded".

Over the past couple of days, everything from the death of Rajput’s former manager on 8 June (police are investigating if it’s a suicide or accidental death) to his final Instagram post have assumed an eerie air of significance. As of now, there are only unconfirmed reports that he was depressed and undergoing treatment. The only references he appears to have made to mental health were oblique. There was a remark in an interview to Hindustan Times in 2017 (“Who says actors are maintaining their mental health?"). And last year, he tweeted a Gillette ad about not bottling up your feelings with the words, “It’s okay to let it out and not hold it inside. It’s not a weakness but a sign of strength."

Even as clues to Rajput’s state of mind emerge in the accounts of those who knew him, there’s an urgent need for public discussion about fame and mental health. Already, there have been two deaths by suicide, reportedly triggered by Rajput’s demise, of teenagers in Bareilly and Patna. Deepika Padukone, a rare actor to discuss her struggles with mental illness, tweeted on the evening of 14 June about the importance of reaching out, as did Zoya Akhtar, Anil Kapoor, Richa Chadha and Shabana Azmi. That several celebrities were framing depression as a matter of willpower instead of an illness tells you how much work is yet to be done. Still, the best way to honour Rajput might be to work towards creating a kinder, more understanding film industry.

In mourning the recent deaths of Irrfan Khan and Rishi Kapoor, fans could draw upon their decades of screen work. Rajput left us just 10 films from which to create a mental reel: memories of young men like Ishaan, Sarfaraz, Lakhna, who stood up for what they believed in, and an actor who smiled often and made his job look easy. I find myself returning to a brief moment in Sonchiriya. Lakhna, tired, dishevelled, possibly sensing the end of the road, sees a vision of himself in clean clothes, well-groomed and riding a camel. Is it a glimpse of a happier future? Or a road never taken? That’s the image of Rajput I will take with me: at peace, unhurriedly exiting the screen, a hint of a smile on his face.


Apart from qualified professionals, there are helplines operating across India that you can reach out to if you are struggling with mental health. Here is a list of five that offer their services free of cost.

Sahai: +91-80-25497777 (Monday- Saturday, 10am-8pm)

Sneha: +91-44-24640050 and +91-44-24640060 (all days and hours)

iCall: +91-22-25521111 (Monday-Saturday, 8am-10pm)

Parivarthan Counselling Helpline: +91-7676602602 (Monday-Friday, 4-10pm)

Aasra: +91-22-27546669 (all days and hours).

Gulabo Sitabo: Review

Gulabo Sitabo is the first Hindi release since the start of lockdown that’s made me miss cinema halls. Shoojit Sircar’s film isn’t a “big screen watch" in the typical sense – it has no set-pieces or CGI or franchise potential. Its virtues are more contained. The corners of the frame are alive with action. Avik Mukhopadhyay’s cinematography has a lovely burnished quality. There’s always some fascinating ephemera lying around. There are ornate insults that would have been fun to hear with an audience.

It might make you long for human company to watch it with, but the film isn’t enamoured of humankind. In fact, Gulabo Sitabo – the latest from Sircar and screenwriter Juhi Chaturvedi, makers of Vicky Donor, Piku and October – is a stronger argument for hell being other people than the Anurag Kashyap film last week. At its centre are two unprepossessing men in a decaying haveli in Lucknow: the mansion’s nominal owner, Mirza (Amitabh Bachchan), and Baankey (Ayushmann Khurrana), a tenant who’s lived there all his life. Because of ancient property laws, Baankey and the other tenants cannot be evicted, or be made to pay more than a meagre rent.

The haveli is in the name of 94-year-old Fatima Begum (Farrukh Jaffar), Mirza’s wife. She’s not quite there – her husband has to remind her that she once eloped with someone else, not him – but she’s still around: a headache for Mirza, who married her for the mansion but doesn’t know if he’ll inherit it after she passes. His cold-blooded wait for her death and his daily fights with the belligerent Baankey gain urgency when an official from the archaeology department (Vijay Raaz) gets wind of the mansion and begins the process of declaring it historical government property.

With the prospect of their home passing into the hands of the government or, worse, another owner (Mirza has engaged a lawyer to sell the place before it’s seized), the tenants band together. Mirza – huge nose, hunched gait, outsized spectacles, guttural croak – is a Scrooge without redemption; he’s couched in comic terms, yet is one of the darker characters Bachchan has played (more shocking than him saying “I’m waiting for her to die" is his admission that he never had a child with his wife because he wanted the house). But this isn’t Khosla Ka Ghosla – there isn’t a virtuous side to root for. The tenants are just as grasping and mendacious, each working their own schemes to keep their squatter rights and get ahead in life.

There is no love lost between the people in the film, but they’re lovingly drawn: the slightly dense Baankey and his three sharp sisters; Raaz’s unflappable bureaucrat, who announces himself with “Archaeology hain (I’m archaeology)"; Brijendra Kala’s lawyer, with his insistence on speaking broken English; Fatima, enjoying head massages and trips to the city and the spectacle of her husband losing his mind. The setting is even more affectionately rendered. Chaturvedi is from Lucknow and the film is, among other things, a love letter to the city, namechecking Qaisar Bagh, Aminabad, Chowk, The Residency, the two Imambaras. Baankey draws a tenuous parallel between Mirza and the mother of Asaf-ud-Daula, Nawab of Oudh, as the tenants stand around one of the 19th century canons at La Martiniere, a school founded by a Frenchman who joined the British army (the bricks in Fatima Mahal are later deemed to be a 20% match with “French-British structures"). Instead of an overarching old-Lucknow speaking style, we hear a variety of tongues, some old-fashioned, some bracingly modern, each with a knack for caustic put-downs.

In its more eccentric moments – an invasion of foreign tourists, Mirza digging for gold – Gulabo Sitabo threatens to become a shaggy dog story. But the two ticking bombs – Fatima’s impending death and the government sealing – keep it from straying too far. Khurrana switches off the charm; his grumpy, unambitious Baankey feels like a supporting turn in front of Mirza, an authentic villain, played with gusto by Bachchan. Though it must be said that the real villain is Shantanu Moitra’s score, especially the clarinet motif that plays every time something funny happens.

For all the affection, this is a clear-eyed film. Throughout, we’re shown professions that are struggling to get by in the modern world: roadside puppeteers performing the warring-couple routine that gives the film its title, pawn shops, tongawalas. The film’s characters too, living in a hundred-year-old building, are being left behind by the world. They're clinging to an archaic law, and it’s notable that the ministry of ancient things – archaeology – is the one that comes calling. Even Baankey’s flour business is judged behind the times when a customer asks for an organic variant and moves on when she’s told there isn’t any. The film itself seems to leave its dusty world behind with the last two shots: a modern-looking bridge, and an antique chair with a hefty price tag in a posh store.

Gulabo Sitabo is on Amazon Prime.

Basu Chatterjee (1930-2020): The maestro of Middle Cinema

Is your go-to image of Bombay on film Amol Palekar nervously approaching Vidya Sinha aboard a bright red BEST bus? Or Amitabh Bachchan and Moushumi Chatterjee walking in the rain on Marine Drive, drenched and happy? Perhaps it’s Palekar sketching Tina Munim in a crowded local train. All these moments come from the films of one man. Basu Chatterjee, whose four-decade career yielded some of Hindi cinema’s most beloved films, died this morning at his Mumbai home, of age-related ailments. He was 90.

Along with Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Chatterjee was the undisputed master of Middle Cinema, a strand of Hindi film which emphasized everyday settings and concerns, a happy mean between commercial and arthouse fare. His glory days were the 1970s, a decade where he directed 18 films, most of them gentle comedies and dramas about teachers and secretaries, struggling artists and government employees. Several of these are classics: Chhoti Si Baat (1976), Rajnigandha (1976), Chitchor (1976), Baton Baton Mein (1979) and Manzil (1979).

His first film, though, pointed in a different direction. Sara Akash released in 1969, a remarkable year which also saw Mani Kaul’s Uski Roti and Mrinal Sen’s Bhuvan Shome. Filmed in dramatic black and white, Sara Akash, with its dream sequences, angular compositions and Bressonian non-acting by lead Rakesh Pandey, was indebted to art film traditions both Indian and global. These experiments would persist in his later films, but in a less stark form: the freeze frames in Rajnigandha, the charming “Jaaneman Jaaneman" daydream in Chhoti Si Baat.

It’s with his second feature, Piya Ka Ghar (1972), a comedy about newlyweds played by Jaya Bachchan and Anil Dhawan unable to find privacy in their cramped living quarters, that Chatterjee settled into the style we now associate with him. Though the inconveniences and disappointments of daily life are at the heart of the film, the tone is forgiving, hopeful. It’s a small but crucial adjustment from the harsher Sara Akash – which is why Chatterjee’s first film is mostly associated with the serious, socially minded Parallel Cinema movement and his work after that with the milder Middle Cinema.

Chatterjee’s films are often spoken of in terms of their simplicity, which belies his eye for striking images. Working with the great cinematographer KK Mahajan, he found a sort of poetry of the everyday in parks, verandahs, bus stops, movie theatres, office spaces, cafes. Since many of his films were set in Bombay, the city in the 1970s was immortalised in his films. Few directors used clothes as effectively to draw the viewer’s eye, whether it’s Vidya Sinha’s white sari with dark red flowers in Rajnigandha or the inspired idea of having Bachchan in a suit and tie in the rain for “Rim Jhim Gire Saawan".

Chatterjee continued to work steadily in the 1980s, making popular films like Shaukeen (1982), Chameli Ki Shaadi (1986) and the 12 Angry Men adaptation Ek Ruka Hua Faisla (1986). Like many of the Parallel and Middle Cinema directors, he also turned to TV, directing 34 episodes of the beloved 1990s detective series Byomkesh Bakshi. Even as his own career stalled, he continued to influence younger directors. A film-maker as different as Ram Gopal Varma wrote: “I remember seeing Chitchor seven times somewhere in the late 1970s or early 1980s, and the simplicity of narration that I learnt from it was pretty much what shaped my vision of Rangeela." Indeed, beneath its MTV-style flash, Rangeela (1995) was a film in the Chatterjee mould, a sympathetic look at middle-class dreams and struggles.

Chatterjee’s influence on the New Middle Cinema of recent years is also pronounced. A key film in this movement, Dum Laga Ke Haisha (2016), is basically a smart update on Sara Akash. Films like Bareilly Ki Barfi (2017) and Shubh Mangal Saavdhan (2017) might be more outspoken than anything Chatterjee made, but the immersion in the everyday, the attention to speech and clothes and setting, is much the same. These films are part of his legacy. It’s fitting that he occupied the middle ground, for it becomes clearer with every passing year how central Basu Chatterjee is to Hindi cinema.