Sunday, July 10, 2011


It was born in 70s, mid 70s. The conception was taking place for a very long time but it was delivered late in the mad mad world of 70s. I am talking about what was named the ‘Parallel’ or ‘Art’ cinema. The parallel or the unconventional cinema was a felt need in a world which was becoming largely commercialized and superfluous. It was a promise to portray the reality as it really is without any embellishments of astutely rehearsed and decorated drama. It was a promise to provide new dimension and meaning to Indian cinema. It was smartly called ‘parallel’ so that it could run its own course without interfering with the mainstream. It was unconventional too because of the avant-garde methodology it adopted in saying what it wanted to say. It marked the birth of neo-realism in Indian cinema. It was a dream which was painted by stalwarts like Guru Dutt, Bimal Roy, V Shantaram and many others who had to even see it getting tainted in the age of commercialization and style. It would not be unfair if a large part of the credit goes to a man named ‘Shyam Benegal’, a cousin of Guru Dutt, hailing from Andhra Pradesh, originally a documentary filmmaker, who made his mark with his first full length feature film ‘Ankur’ starring Shabana Azmi, Sadhu Meher and Anant Nag in the year 1974. The movie was received with a critical acclaim and bagged Shabana Azmi her first national award. It was a sensitive portrayal of rich poor divide and the place of a second woman in our society. Thus was born a filmmaker who had the courage to be different and stubborn in an era of blockbusters and superstars. There were of course intellectual filmmakers like Hrishikesh Mukherjee, Gulzar and Basu Chaterjee who were running a parallel brigade but their cinema still had certain limitations of sticking to the popular and politically correct themes unlike Shyam Benegal who adopted an entirely different format of movie making and often narrated stories that were not only difficult to be told but also had never been told before. He introduced theatre in the arena of cinema. He always worked with his own team of gifted actors. Some of them were remarkable theatre artists of their time and some of them were products of National School of Drama. His actors were not conventionally good looking and attractive but had the vigor and brilliance of representing a common man on celluloid. They wore simple, unfashionable clothes, sometimes even torn, to highlight the poverty and demise of our social structures. His characters conversed in local dialects to connect to the reality and ecology of the subject. Most of his movies were impressive adaptations of important plays and novels. Shyam Benegal was unique in his approach of vividly conceptualizing the entire scenario, bringing it out on screen and reaching out to his target audience.

Justice is well denied and needs to be snatched from the people responsible. In 1975 he used this concept in ‘Nishant’, based on Vijay Tendulkar’s play and introduced Naseerudin Shah and Smita Patil with this movie. The movie was a modern adaptation of ‘Ramayana’ and showed the brutal feudal system of rural India oppressing the poor and miserable section of the village. It portrayed the helplessness of an honest and humble man who has to literally crawl and beg for justice in a dynasty ruled by ‘Ravanas’.
Liberation is highly desired and largely deprived. In 1977 he came out with a brilliantly carved story of a Marathi actress titled ‘Bhumika’ inspired by the book ‘Sangtye Alka’ by Hansa Wadkar and starred Smita Patil in the first major lead role of her career. The film was an excellent portrayal of the complexity of a female mind in a society which drags her in different directions bruising her sexuality and individuality. I must add that Bhumika is one of those rare movies of Indian cinema which has managed to break certain barriers while narrating a controversial and complicated story based on the sexuality and life of Indian woman.
Mahabharata is an everlasting war and a never ending struggle. Nobody could have come out with such an intelligent adaptation of the world’s largest epic ‘Mahabharata’ other than Shyam Benegal who made a multi starrer movie titled ‘Kalyug’ in 1981 with Rekha, Raj Babbar, Shashi Kapoor, Amrish Puri and Anant Nag in lead roles. Kalyug was followed by ‘Arohan’ and ‘Mandi’ in subsequent years.Brothels provide a breathing space to the sexually discontented members of a society which pompously considers marriage an everlasting spiritual and hallowed bonding between two individuals destined to be made for each other. ‘Mandi’ starring Shabana Azmi, Smita Patil, Neena Gupta, Soni Razdan, Ila Arun, Ratna Pathak, Naseerudin shah, Om Puri, Pankaj Kapur, Amrish Puri, Kulbhushan Kharbanda and other geniuses of Indian cinema was a hard hitting satire on the fundamental social, political and cultural inadequacies of our society.
Our present and future are incomplete without the past and howsoever we may try to get away with it, we are ordained to revisit it someday in our lives. It was Benegal’s 1985 venture ‘Trikal’ (Past, Present, Future), again a multi starrer and a striking illustration of the tradition and chores of a soon-to-be-drifted-away Portuguese family settled in Goa.
Following years Benegal got busy with some of the famous television series of his career namely ‘Yatra’, ‘Katha Sagar’ and ‘Bharat Ek Khoj’. Dreams form a momentous and indispensable ingredient in the lives of middle class people and keep them moving ahead in their hopeless and barren existence as human beings. This was the concept of his next important work based on Dharamvir Bharti’s famous novel ‘Suraj Ka Satvan Ghoda’ in 1993 starring Rajat Kapur, Rajeshwari Sachdev, Neena Gupta and Pallavi Joshi in lead roles. The highly experienced cast and talented production team managed to cook up a rich tapestry of semi-dream-like experiences of a young man, entering into adulthood with a creatively written rich and unusual screenplay. In 1994 he came up with a novel project about a loud, vivacious, opinionated and funny, partition stricken woman, ‘Mammo’ with Farida Jalal in lead role. The movie written by Khalid Mohamed was a brilliant take on the mindset of an adolescent boy growing amidst the financial inadequacies of his family and his complex bonding with his old mother and eccentric aunt. ‘Sardari Begum’ directed in 1996 was a story of a popular singer and courtesan killed by a stone thrown by an agitated person starring ‘Kiron Kher’ in title role. ‘The Making of Mahatma’, ‘Samar’, ‘Hari Bhari’ and ‘Zubeida’ were his other noteworthy projects in coming years. In 2005 he directed a biography of Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose starring Sachin Khedekar in title role.
Benegal changed his filmmaking format in following years seeing commercial and parallel cinema merging into each other with the advent of new century. His last two movies ‘Welcome to Sajjanpur’ and ‘Well Done Abba’ were hilarious social satires on the corrupt and inept social and political system of our democratic set up with new age actors like Shreyas Talpade, Rajeshwari Sachdev, Divya Dutta, Ravi Kishan, Boman Irani and Minisha Lamba in lead roles. His latest works have seen him completely transforming as a filmmaker who still manages to amuse and surprise the audiences while keeping the promise of authentic and unconventional cinema alive. Besides devoting himself into directing full length feature films he has also made some of the very important documentaries including ‘ A child on the streets’, ‘Sinhasta’, ‘Why Export?’, ‘The Pulsating Giant’, ‘Tala and Rhythm’, ‘The Shruti and Graces of Indian Music’, ‘The Raag Imam Kalyan’, ‘Suhani Sadak’, ‘The Quiet Revolution’, ‘Epilepsy’, ‘Jawaharlal Nehru’, ‘Satyajit Ray’, ‘Sangathan’, ‘Vardan’, ‘Animal Reproduction and Artificial Insemination in Bovines’ and numerous others stressing the core social issues and forgotten art forms of our country. Shyam benegal is really the master, master of the unconventional.

Thursday, July 7, 2011


Recently I watched the cinema of Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez after a long time. And I watched it seriously, very seriously this time. I have always been a great fan of Tarantino and Rodriguez and have seen kill bill, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, Grindhouse, Sin City, Desperadeo many a times since I got into this rig. But never had I realized why have they always been like this and made such kind of movies. Their style of filmmaking is very unique and different. But it is also very crude and weird at the same time. These two filmmakers work on a genre of cinema which has never been exposed so religiously by any other filmmaker in the world ever. They are working on something which nobody is working on at the moment and that too on such a large scale. To put it simply, their cinema operates on ugly and crude reality of b-grade stuff which in refined language is called ‘pulp’ or ‘sleaze’. They have made billion dollar budgeted movies based on this ‘pulp’ with some of the very famous Hollywood actors and almost all of them have been a great success. But their success is not the point and matter of concern. What really amazes me is the fact that these two persons are so devoted and faithful to this genre that they have created some of the very great and brilliant cinema out of it. Tarantino once said, “I am not making movies for now, I am making them for forty years from now”. His statement seems to be making some sense for me today after so many years since he actually made it.

Pulp is the opium of masses. It has an importance of its own. Pulp is as important for the society as a whole as art is. And sooner we realize this fact, the better for us. No matter how sophisticated and articulated we try to become, more than 90 % of our everyday life is made up of this pulp. To connect to the pulp is like connecting to the reality. And despite being ugly and coarse, the reality is indeed beautiful. Very few Indian filmmakers have now realized the importance of sleaze in our society. It not only makes the cinema realistic but also gives a depth to it. It makes it universally acceptable and likeable without being pretentious. It kind of increases the holistic beauty and widens the scale of cinema. There is no specific reason to it but Indian filmmakers have always remained indifferent towards this facet of reality. They have always tried to wrap it with the sugarcoated layers without making an effort to expose it naked. It much explains the hypocrisy of Indian mind. One may find the cinema of Yash/Aditya Chopra and Karan Johar beautiful but nobody can say it is ‘real’. The reason is these filmmakers have always chosen to stay away from pulp because they are too afraid of it. This pulp is the reality we breathe in and this reality is the real horror. I regard Ram Gopal Verma as the first filmmaker who made a significant contribution to fill this void during 90s by infusing reality into celluloid with movies like Rangeela, Satya, Company, Bhoot and Sarkar. He used pulp to portray the dark and gruesome reality of the underworld mafia and the Indian society. He was then joined by various other filmmakers like Anurag kashyap, Vishal Bhardwaj, Dibaker Banerjee, Rajat Kapoor, Sudhir Mishra, Raj Kumar Hirani, Chandan Arora, Madhur Bhandarkar to name a few in the list. These filmmakers should be credited to have changed the pathetic show of Bollywood. They can be called the harbingers of neo-realism in Indian cinema. They have used the local pulp to blend realism and entertainment on celluloid. They all have a significant contribution for spicing up the box office collections and giving new life to Indian film industry.

Dibaker Banerjee is the Tarantino of Indian cinema. He has used pulp very extensively in all his movies to such an extent that our world appears pornographic at certain level. Dibaker uses pulp to expose the nasty land mafia and the disconcerting problem of land in the overpopulated north India in his directorial debut ‘Khosla ka Ghosla’. He also exposes the frightened face of middle class man who is scared of approaching police, law and politics to fix his own personal matter. Dibaker takes us further to the crowded, corrupt and obscure streets of Delhi cluttered with naked electrical wires and patched broken houses impoverished with unfulfilled dreams of starving middle class society in his wholesome entertainer ‘Oye, lucky lucky oye!’ He takes us inside to narrate a story of a funny Sikh family and portrays the rampant promiscuity, father son hostility, marital discord, domestic violence, greed, disgruntled adolescence of teenagers and the crippled social structure of our society. In this chaos, a discontented Sikh boy develops an inferiority complex which carries on throughout his life and makes a thief out of him. He also exposes the filth muddled inside the minds of urban middle class people who try hard enough to be sophisticated cultured English speakers but end up just being a laughing stock for others. In this movie, he shows how a young, polite, homely adolescent greeting card girl talks and behaves with her customers. He shows how a sleazy, flamboyant dancer from a backward community of Delhi who performs in extravagant, loud north Indian marriages and functions in front of a crowd of arrogant and snobbish so called rich lads, behaves and expresses herself in real world. Dibaker is the master of this genre. He understands the nuances of cinema. He uses pulp to represent the hollowness festering and breeding in our societies. He used it further in his experimental masterpiece ‘Love Sex aur Dhoka’. He narrated three different stories in the movie based on the themes of its main title named squalidly as ‘Church Gate ki Chudail’, Paap ki Dukaan’ and ‘Badnaam Shohrat’ respectively. He uses a documentary style to portray the unbridled pornography and worthlessness proliferating in our society in the form of false, bloated high society pride leading to honour killings, spurious relationships ending up in deceit and shame, tricky but the only road to success in the world of glamour and the well planned grubby media strategies to shock and scare the audiences. He explains metaphorically how the camera has become the god of this precarious and ill structured world. Vishal bhardwaj uses pulp to bring authenticity in his script and screenplay. ‘Beedi jalai le’ not only brought him his first big box office success with ‘Omkara’ but it also added enormously to the splendor of the movie. This very sleazy item number explains the ethnicity and culture of the region in which the tragedy of omkara takes place. And also the local slangs used confidently and boldly in the movie help it explain further. Similarly ‘Dhan te nan’ and ‘Raat ke dhaai baje’ added raunchiness to ‘Kaminey’ and made it a success. Furthermore, the exquisite detailing in exploring the subtleties and traditions of Gorakhpur made ‘Ishqiya’ a modern classic. Anurag Kashyap uses pulp to create a cult for his cinema. In his unique style of filmmaking, he uses sexuality to portray the complex mindset of modern Indian female in one of the most anticipated movies of my generation ‘Dev-d’. ‘Emotional Atyachaar’ has become synonymous with the modern times' brief relationships based on love and romance. He also uses pulp to represent the rugged and brutal royalty of Rajasthan in his political satire ‘Gulal’. Sudhir Mishra used it in his recent works ‘Yeh Saali Zindagi’ and ‘Tera Kya Hoga Johnny’ to portray the complex materialism creeping in our society. Raj Kumar Hirani has used it as a hit formula in all his movies right from ‘Munna Bhai MBBS’ to ‘3 idiots’ to expose the politics and mafia behind the education system of our country. There is another very devoted team of actors and filmmakers who are running a successful parallel cinema in this world of commercialization. It includes talents like Rajat Kapoor, Saurabh Shukla, Ranvir Shourey, Vinay Pathak, Vijay Raaz, Konkana Sen, Naseerudin Shah, Om Puri etc who have made some very interesting and hard hitting movies in recent times and also made them popular among multiplex audiences seeking for instant entertainment. They have used the element of pulp to explore the life style of urban sophisticated societies. Their movies like Raghu Romeo, Mixed Doubles, Mithya, Bheja fry, Raat Gayi Baat Gayi, Phas gaye re Obama, The president is coming etc have established new standards in the genre of comedy and satire. There are some more people on the list who have recently come up with shocking and amazing stuff using this pulp. Shimit Amin’s ‘Rocket Singh’, Navdeep Singh’s ‘Manorama six feet under’, Sanjay Khanduri’s ‘Ek Chalis ki Last Local’, Habib Faisal’s ‘Do Dooni Chaar’, Manish Jha’s ‘Band Baaja Baraat’, Raja Menon’s ‘Baarah Aana’, and Anusha Rizvi’s ‘Peepli Live’ are some other interesting projects worth watching and admiring. These people have understood the importance of pulp in our society and cinema. International filmmakers like Deepa Mehta and Mira nair have always used pulp in a very subtle way in their movies. Mira Nair’s ‘Monsoon Wedding’ has an interesting sub-plot of a sleazy love story between a beautiful seductive maid of the house and a hilarious, loud mouthed, dim witted laborer. Deepa Mehta in her controversial movie ‘Fire’ shows a sexually starved servant of the house masturbating and fantasizing about the two leading ladies of the house.Pulp is a genre which should be explored more and more to create better possibilities and prospects on celluloid. It has given a creative space to writers, lyricists and filmmakers to expose the reality hidden behind the garb of hypocrisy for such a long time. Some filmmakers like Sanjay Leela Bhansali, Suraj Barjatiya and Karan Johar still choose to stay from it for a reason specific to their own style of filmmaking. In 80s and early 90s, pulp was used in an awful way to make sleazy comedies, thrillers and dramas. It was a period of great depression in Indian cinema. It was a period when Indian film industry suffered huge financial losses and also the popularity of Indian movies in international market shattered critically. Subhash Ghai and Yash Chopra did their best to recover those losses but their style of filmmaking started fading away by the end of 90s. If there had not been any Ram Gopal Verma, Indian cinema would have continued losing its charm and vitality or it would have completely collapsed in the beginning of new century. So pulp proved as a savior for Indian movies. Indian cinema is reaching new heights and establishing better standards every day. Hordes of young and genius filmmakers have appeared in this beautiful world of creativity. They have realized need of the hour and have devoted themselves in creating a sensible and realistic cinema. Few structures have already been destroyed. And some more will be destroyed in times to come. If pulp is the body, art is the soul. So pulp is something required to be delved in for understanding the anatomy of our society and reaching out to its soul. And both of them are required to create something which we call ‘cinema’.

After all ‘pulp’ is what we all are made up of…


A mighty sea
It lives by the shore
Quietly I walk
Upon the sands
And spread my soul
Under the naked sky
I look around
As far as I could see
And I see a silent wave
From far far away
Emanating somewhere
From the caverns of
The burning sun
Dispersing and merging
Every minute
I sit there for hours
Resting and watching
The silent wave
Growing and
Making way
Towards me
I choose to run
But something keeps
Me grounded
And it comes
Like a demon
And engulfs me

Wednesday, July 6, 2011


‘Yeh duniya agar mil bhi jaaye to kya hai’, Guru Dutt sings it and he sings it loud to expose the poignant materialism of our society in his autobiographical ‘Pyaasa’. He pictures death as the only escape from the mounting depression. A woman dishonored and tormented all her life shoots her son who is an outlaw to save the honour of her village. This was ‘Mother India’ way back in 1960s. A mughal emperor orders the beloved of his son who is a gorgeous courtesan, to be buried in a wall and saves the honour of his dynasty. This was K Asif’s megalomaniac venture of 50s ‘Mughal-e-Azam’. Death was portrayed as a guard of honour for the community as a whole in both these movies. Satyajit Ray portrays the dismal face of Indian poverty in his legendary ‘Apu Trilogy’ where death has been shown just another facet of life which lives and breathes along with its protagonists. An ecstatic young man in the prime of his youth dies of intestinal carcinoma in Hrishikesh Mukherjee’s masterpiece ‘Anand’. And he leaves behind a following of people who love him because he challenges death without fear and rekindles their faith in life with his uncanny humor. Mukherjee calls it an inevitable part of life, a life which is nothing more than an agglomeration of various characters where everybody has been assigned a role to play. He carries the notion of death further in his another movie ‘Mili’ where a charming young girl full of life suffering from blood cancer flies abroad with her fiancé for advanced treatment. Her father keeps waiting and standing alone at the roof of his building as he watches the plane gaining heights taking his daughter to a place where death finds some cure. A final shot full of hope and life and the movie ends. We live and die of course but something remains even after death and it remains to stay forever. Raj Kapoor portrays it magnanimously in the biggest disaster of his career ‘Mera Naam Joker’ and his words resound in air when he sings ‘kal khel mein hum hon na hon, gardish mein tare rahenge sada’. Yash Chopra spices it up in ‘Deewar’ where a man who lost his father during childhood in a political warfare and has himself been a victim to the ills of society, achieves big and is killed in self-created circumstances by his younger brother. He portrays death as a necessary evil in the rigmarole of human existence. He also uses death in his experimental love stories ‘Silsila’ and ‘Lamhe’ where he brings it out as an unexpected accident and a lifelong jolt to the people left behind who keep suffering endlessly till they find a healing touch of love. Ramesh Sippy calls it a tragic affair born out of an act of abhorrence and vengeance in the biggest blockbuster of Indian cinema ‘Sholay’. Sometimes it is easier to die than to live a life without any hope and future. Mahesh Bhatt made a statement when he directed ‘Saraansh’ and showed two old parents making an attempt to end up their lives after the death of their only son. He proved that strength is required to live a dead and barren life than to really die. He also showed death as a unifying force in a much underrated work of his career ‘Kaash’ in which a divorced grieved couple decides to reunite after the death of their son to battle the haunting and loneliness of their lives together. He used the similar concept further in his autobiographical ‘Zakhm’ where the death of the mother acts as a unifying force between two brothers caught in a political combat. Govind Nihlani in 1983 represented death as a medium to break the ‘chakravyuha’ of life in his critically acclaimed ‘Ardhsatya’. Then arrived the showman Subhash Ghai, who created typical bollywood products in the dying 80s and 90s and used death as a device to boost up the box office in ‘Khalnayak’ and ‘Raam Lakhan’. He was absolutely clear in his mind when he directed these movies using old tested formulas that he didn’t want to make any statement out of it. Death is the ultimate level of eroticism as shown by Ketan Mehta in ‘Maya Memsaab’, an adaptation of Gustave Flaubert’s controversial novel ‘Madame Bovary’. A free-spirited promiscuous and seductive ‘Maya’ dispels into thin air in the final moments of the movie after she fails to find the true erotica of her life. On the other hand, Gulzar demonstrates death as the ultimate form of true love and devotion in his mythological ‘Meera’. Death is also the final conclusion of extreme radicalism in this conventional and clichéd world as shown by Gulzar through one of his characters in ‘Ijaazat’. Sometimes situations arise and both the victim and the accused get trapped in a web to die their own deaths. And this is when large number of people are massacred and sacrificed. There are no apologies in this universal crisis of terrorism and underworld mafia. Gulzar knew it so he made ‘Maachis’ and ‘Hu Tu Tu’ in which he shows death as a global phenomenon born out of a politically mastered state of affairs. So was also said by Ram Gopal Verma through his distinctive approach of filmmaking in ‘Satya’ and ‘Company’. Both these directors show the horrifying face of death and the obvious fear associated with it in their own manner. Gulzar uses poetry and emotions while RGV uses brilliantly crafted dark and gruesome camera visuals to paint death on a common canvass. Sometimes death remains the only mode of salvation. A trigger-happy gangster groans in pain and begs her mother for renunciation. Nobody knew that this thing would come unexpectedly from somebody called Mahesh Manjrekar in his directorial debut ‘Vaastav’. It’s really a moment to watch a mother shooting her son in a movie of 90s almost fifty years after ‘Mother India’ although the scenarios have matured from honour killing to a plea for salvation. Karan Johar has gone beyond imagination and used death in almost every script of his life from ‘Kuchh Kuchh Hota Hai’ to ‘We Are a Family’. He brings it forcibly to create situations for love and romance and even tries to make a sad remake of ‘Anand’ by the name of ‘Kal Ho Na Ho’. Death can bring a change and it can give rise to a revolution too. Mehra uses this idea to change the corrupt face of Indian politics in his contemporary freedom struggle ‘Rang De Basanti’. An afraid, middle-class old man dreams about his own death and foresees his family members making a mockery at his funeral. Dibaker Banerjee sets the tone in the very first scene of his humorous directorial debut ‘Khosla Ka Ghosla’. He blends satire and realism to portray the fear of death in Indian middle class society. Vishal bhardwaj has been instrumental in using the tool of death every time through his own adaptations of Bard and Ruskin bond. He interprets death in a contemporary style to portray a harsh reality. He has used death to culminate emotions. If it’s jealousy in ‘Omkara’ then it’s greed for power in ‘Maqbool’ to conclude in death. But he goes beyond all possible realms when Suzanna uses death to search for her love in ‘Saat Khoon Maaf’. Sometimes death is required to find resonance with life, a thought beautifully depicted by Aniruddha Roy Chaudhary in his Bengali work ‘Anuranan’. Anurag kashyap calls it a ‘darshan’ in ‘Dev-D’ when the protagonist stumbles on seeing a car crashing in the wall leading to a violent end. He decides to put an end to a life of destitution and sympathy and goes onto accepting a concubine as his partner. Death has also been shown as the dark reality of metropolitan life and culture in Mira Nair’s official Oscar entry ‘Salaam Bombay’ and Kiran Rao’s ‘Dhobi Ghat’. In ‘Dhobi Ghat’ one of the female characters of the movie embraces death after she fails to blend into the congestion and tradition of the big city. A lot has been said about death and portrayed several times on celluloid. But nobody has done it like Sanjay Leela Bhansali. Death had never been painted so beautifully ever before as in ‘Devdas’. Paaro running all the way through the long, magnificent corridors of her big haveli to the entrance, with her white red bordered sari unfurling and waving behind in the air, to embrace terminally ill, drunk devdas taking his last breath and he finally collapses as the gate closes in front of their eyes. And for the first time on Indian cinema somebody celebrates death and accepts it with open arms as in ‘Guzaarish’. For the first time people are not mourning the occasion rather they are celebrating it with drinks and smiles. It has never been done before. And it will never be done so beautifully ever after like bhansali has done it in ‘Guzaarish’.
From Guru Dutt to Anurag Kashyap death has always remained a fantasy for Indian filmmakers. They have used death as a cinematic tool to represent emotions and generate circumstances. They have used it again and again to prove that life is beautiful so it should be treasured in all possible scenarios. They have also shown it singing, dancing and smiling on celluloid. Sometimes it’s a necessary evil and sometimes it’s the only escape. But we have also maintained that death should be considered a pause, not a full stop. The concept still continues to be used variously by our filmmakers. The search which began almost a hundred years ago in the form of cinema still persists and manages to engage the audiences with the time tested formula called ‘DEATH’.