Often, films employing characters with disabilities are met with polarized opinions. There’s a huge section of our population that loves some of these films for their ability to make you cry at the suffering and the struggle of the disabled to survive in a cruel world. And there are a few like me who scream: “Stop that blatant emotional manipulation. Disability is not something you use to milk the audience for sympathy.”
Yet, nothing’s changed if we are to go by recent releases – Sanjay Leela Bhansali’s ‘Guzaarish’ or Mysskin’s tribute to Takeshi Kitano, ‘Nandalala’. These are both films I hated.
In Guzaarish, the protagonist is a quadriplegic who now pleads with the judge to be allowed to die, because even if the court is willing to come home for the hearing, his support system literally needs to carry his wheelchair down the stairs.
It’s easy to see why THAT fictional character wants to die – because the person who wrote him for screen did not bequeath him or anyone who is part of his world the basic intelligence of installing a disability ramp in his lavish two-floored mansion for 14 years or considered the possibility of him shifting to a smaller home closer to a hospital.
Worse, the character’s only and biggest argument to be allowed to die is to compare such existence with being locked in a box. As metaphoric as it may be, that’s a dangerous thought to put into any quadriplegic’s head, especially when there are so many options available today to improve the quality of life. Any filmmaker who suggests that death is the only way out, just to make you shed a tear for a stupid uni-dimensional character he has written, needs therapy.
Nandalala is far worse. It pretends to celebrate disability but reinforces every stereotype associated with the mentally ill. To understand how twisted Nandalala is, one has to watch the original – Takeshi Kitano’s Kikujiro.
Kikujiro is the story about a boy who goes in search of his mother and he’s accompanied by an eccentric gambler played by Kitano himself.
During their road trip, the child and the child at heart encounter many colourful characters who make their journey memorable, despite the setbacks they face in their quest. It’s a bitter-sweet film that suggests that life sends you angels in different forms when you need them.
Mysskin retains almost the same storyline in his tribute film but replaces the eccentric gambler with a mentally-ill film stereotype, the kind that indulges in exaggerated violent behaviour. If Kikujiro sublimely hints that there’s insanity in all of us, Nandalala suggests that the insane are human too. Oh really?
Mysskin’s Kikujiro escapes from an institution, gets violent and beats a driver bloody when called “Mental.” He later breaks beer bottles on the head of a rash driver for the sake of infusing comedy into the narrative. And if such manipulation of stereotypes wasn’t enough, Mysskin makes every other character the duo meet on their way disabled and struggling in one way or the other, choosing to dwell on their sorry state instead of their spirit.
For instance, there’s a guide who turns out to have a walking disability and the man hops around using a piece of wood as his crutch. Just when you are about to salute Mysskin for finally showing us a man with spirit, the filmmaker makes sure he collapses of exhaustion and cries. If that does not get you moist-eyed, how about getting some bad guys to attack him with a sickle, break his stick and cut his real leg? Yes!
Mysskin, unfortunately, picks all the wrong ingredients from the success of his action film ‘Anjathey’ to manipulate the audience into feeling sorry for the disabled.
In Anjathey, a character called Kuruvi, is actually played by an actor with disability of the limb. His one arm is significantly shorter than the other. We are made to feel sorry for this character all through and towards the end, Kuruvi is made to sport a T-shirt with a dove on it. The accompanying text on the tee says Peace. Poor Kuruvi gets shot. Cue in the tears. Close-up of Kuruvi’s little arm flapping like a wing. Cue in a sad background score. And, death!
While many in the hall were moved to tears, I am horrified at such gross, callous manipulation of disability.
What Bhansali or Mysskin or even Bala (in Sethu or Naan Kadavul) do not seem to understand is that it is high time disability is treated with dignity and sensitivity. It is time to shift characters from institutions that alienate the disabled further and move them into homes of a more inclusive society. That’s the first step to alleviate suffering.
“We are only depicting reality” is no excuse to reinforce stereotypes. And even if you choose to show only the truly suffering, please do not press that trigger for tears by firing from their shoulders. If you are capable, how about doing that without involving those who are suffering because of their disabilities. They do not want your pity and don’t you dare go around collecting tears as alms on their behalf.
The disabled deserve dignity of life and, at least, once in a while, a film like Nagesh Kukunoor’s ‘Iqbal’ or Radha Mohan’s ‘Mozhi’ that captures their spirit to live against the odds. The way we treat them, the way we look at them – in life and on film – is one of those odds we can help them fight.
Respect them and be respected. Unless you have a filmmaking-related disability.
Can we stop the pity-party?
Posted In: Archives
Applause applause, Sudhish!
I completely share your views and sincerely applaud you for publicly and blatantly critiquing movies/directors that depict disability in poor light under the guise of ‘art’. I seriously doubt if these directors feel or empathize towards the disabled/specially-challenged. All they do is watch a handful of “World Cinema” DVDs, get so-called “inspired”, and then pay “tributes” (read copy) so they too can be called “arty”, “auteurs”, etc. More often then not, like you described, they don’t even retain the spirit of the original movie and end-up making a mess of it with their local ingredients/stereotypes.
I am not against people/filmmakers watching different types/genres of cinema. Please do. Get inspired. But let that inspiration act as a thought provoking spark that takes you to another dimension that gives birth to their originality or their inner-vision. Kamal sir’s Virumandi for instance. If I am not mistaken, the thought behind the movie was Kurosawa’s Roshomon. But just the “thought”, not the story, screenplay, characters, setting, etc. It was Kamal’s perspective on the “what constitutes truth?” dilemma depicted in Roshomon. Not a blind scene-by-scene rip-off of Roshomon.
Looking forward to more such articles/posts from you Sudhish.
To take Nandala/Mysskin seriously to debate a point is a bad decision, derails whatsoever your conviction in the stance…
and say what, ironcally, i did fell a tear or two when watching mozhi , where in I only had a inexplicable/helpless (including a heavy heart/mind) feel after watching NK ..
i would like to know if you had proof that people generously used their kerchiefs while watching NK..just curious as to where do these presumptions of wanting tears or even shedding tears even start…
Oh we use paper napkins where I live. there were people around me in tears when the beggars were shown.
Great read. I completely agree with whatever you said. I hated Naan Kadavul and although I still think Nandalala was beautifully crafted, it was quite an abuse of stereotypes. The characters they encounter on their path are so poorly developed that you’ve got to show a flashback for the audience to understand them. Even the part where the guy had to come back to put his mom in a mental hospital, quite stupid. They just had to portray the retarded lead in a heroic sense. It required HIM to come back to get his mom in a mental hospital. Is this out on paper?
Wonderful article. I share exactly the same thoughts, which got triggered the moment I watched Guzaarish. I am yet to watch Nandalala , so no comments. But yes, this forced exertion of disabled people living life king size and all that blah is like clamouring for that seat next to the good film-makers who made good films with heart. When Bhansali made Khamishi, i could see some sincerity in it because the film’s story was not about disability but about the daily lives of 2 such people. But then, when he made Black, I couldnt appreciate the false pretence of “hey i also can and want to make those great art films”. It is this forced attempt that is not working. When Maniratnam made Anjali, it worked, but when he shows Vidya Balan mouthing “Live life kingsize”, sitting in a wheel-chair, unnecessarily when the film (Guru) doesnt alter much with it or without it, it just doesnt work. Every film-maker wants to be ‘someone’ – he admires. Whats the point! People are losing their self-identity and self-expression that comes naturally. or perhaps it no longer comes so.
Loved the article and agreed with most of it. But what on Earth did you mean by including Bala with the likes of Sanjay Leela Bhansali? In Sethu, the dude portrayed the horrendous “treatment facilities” we have in our country. And I doubt it was intended to make you weep. Neither was it a callous manipulation of disability Sometimes people need to have their eyes pried open with a crowbar in order to really see the issues that plague our society and he did just that with dollops of humour, grace, and dignity. And did mention masterful storytelling?
Naan Kadavul was a different kettle of fish and had its share of annoying moments. But in Bala’s hands the material makes for riveting viewing. Bala at his most morbid trounces the likes of Sanjay Leela Bhansali. So its criminal to lump his movies together with Guzaarish and Nandalala.
Well…Not that I’m a Bhansali fanboy but don’t you think that comment is a bit too irreverent (in a bad way)? Criminal? Are you serious?
Sudhish : As a previous comment said, while the points you make hold considerable water, the choice of films used to illustrate the point leaves a lot to be desired. Haven’t seen Nandhalala yet (watching it today evening at the Pune International Film Fest) but I do have some misgivings about the use of Guzaarish here.
For me, Guzaarish wasn’t as much about the Euthanasia angle as it was about the relationships and emotional equations in the film. If one takes Ethan’s disability as a given and doesn’t bother too much about the whats and whys, the film makes for a compelling portrayal of his relationships with Sofia, Devyani, his mother, Dr.Naik etc. But yes, I do agree that the depiction of Ethan’s paraplegia was manipulative to quite an extent.
By the way, have you seen Amol Palekar’s Dhoosar (Marathi)? Such a refreshing change from the cliched depictions of disability we get to see in our films. I suggest a watch at the earliest if you haven’t seen it yet.
I wrote this post the week after Nandalala released. Guzaarish released a week before that. Didn’t get a chance to put it up before.
Sudhish – It is a very interesting point of view and I will admit that I didn’t quite see the manipulative nature of the depiction of the disabled character in Anjathey. I saw Guzaarish in fast forward mode in 15 mins. Nandhalala.. never wanted to watch. Your have a valid point but on the flip side films are also a reflection of the reality isn’t it?
To take an analogy, a movie based on caste issues will most probably show the underprivileged in a manner that invokes pity. In many cases that is also the reality. Should that depiction be considered as manipulative / pity-invoking or a reflection of reality?
I couldn’t agree more with Sudhish. To show “challenged” people in such a negative light is a shame. Film makers like Sanjay Leela Bhansali have to realize that one of the greatest living human minds (physicist and cosmologist Prof. Stephen Hawking) is a person on a wheelchair, almost completely paralyzed and uses a voice synthesizer to speak. Fortunately, instead of ending his life, he is cracking the mysteries of the origins of life itself! These film makers are just creating these characters for getting sympathetic votes, much like the character who uses disability to run a begging racket in “naan kadavul”. We surely need more films like “Mozhi”.
“What Bhansali or Mysskin or even Bala (in Sethu or Naan Kadavul) do not seem to understand is that it is high time disability is treated with dignity and sensitivity. It is time to shift characters from institutions that alienate the disabled further and move them into homes of a more inclusive society. That’s the first step to alleviate suffering.”
A Friday journalist and matinée abortionist claims to readily understand what Bala doesn’t?!
The irony in India is that you need to be professionally trained and educated and have relevant experience of years to do get a job that lets you review films these days. No such education is required for filmmakers. So yes, Anonymous son of an anonymous father, I do know claim to understand more.
Hahahahahahaha!
Why so serious!! its only characters rite!!nothing wrong in showcasing flaws even the physical ones.I reckon its the directors take on his perception , guess we dont need to get so absorbed.
Btw wats ur take on Rain man.
Right on the money.
I happened to see planes trains and automobiles, one of my dad’s favorite films. anbe sivam a movie inspired from planes trains and automobiles has madhavan playing the role of steve martin while kamal plays the role of john candy. to be truthful it was agonizing to see john candy’s role being corroded by kamal, yes kamal did a brilliant job, in planes trains but john candy never had any scars, nor was he a cripple. the guy was a loner, obese, talkative and totally boring, the kinda guy you can instantly feel sorry for. but in anbe sivam kamal needed scars and a gruesome accident to make you feel sorry and to connect to the character. the scars and the accident no doubt was required for the film but kamal hassan could have delivered this message in many different ways, but hes picked the most pity seeking way.
Good Sudhish I like your Thoughts. While you speak about Bala Mysskin etc you have ignored Kamal.For ages he plays around disability characters- 16 Vayadhinle , Raja Paaravai, Guna, Anbe Sivam & lot more. Like of Bala & Mysskin are viewed lesser than any Kamal’s movie. I expected least a comment on his type of movie making.
Guzaarish is take from a film called Who’s life is it any way (1981) Acted very well by Richard Dreyfuss. The movie was to the point & I am sure Guzaarish would be overdoes of sympathy fortified
BTB I like the way you write
Wishes
vasanth
At d outset, I would like to say that I’m one of your fans and you’ve been the reason for me to doggedly persist with one newspaper just to read your reviews on friday. My dad has finally managed to switch dailies though.
I agree with some of the previous comments made that the wrong movies have been chosen for highlighting your views. The crippled villager in nandhalala should be seen in context with the crippled doctor who attends to him and how will power and perseverance can nullify your physical handicap.I find this portrayal much better than exploiting the situation with a long drawn out motivational song involving blind musicians, as shown by one director in another tamil movie. Mysskin’s character is not violent but emotionally unstable. He gets angry like a kid does n throws a tantrum, which appears violent because of his physical maturity. I feel after guna, mysskin’s character is d only non-uni-dimensional mentally challenged character. Far from a stereotype.No comments on guzaarish as I haven seen it. But the promos lead me to guess its somewhat inspired by The Sea Inside. I would also like to raise serious objection to the critique on naan kadavul. Bala neednt have to go to such great difficult length just for some tears. You will find all the physically handicapped characters in nk have turned out some stunning performances and try to remain cheerful within the bleak unforgiving circumstances. Far from a stereotype. There are other stereotypes in cinema, like the newfound craze of filmmakers to make madurai based movies. Like how 90% of filmi politicians and police are crooked. Like how all of rajini’s films before enthiran and after annamalai showcase a rag-to-riches story. Like how almost all movies invariably have a love story. Like how every other movie has a shameless remix of a glorious yesteryear song.Like how the success of a movie is determined by the success of its songs and a comedy track, however irrelevant it might be. I would love it if we could wage a war against these more crippling stereotypes and cheap tricks to make quick bucks rather than against sincere efforts by filmmakers to engage audiences emotionally.audiences these days do not engage that easily with a movie, much less shed a tear. And if a director does tat without making it cheesy, I’ll welcome it.bala and mysskin I feel are the future of tamil cinema given their bold story and excellent screenplay. Plus, given the school they’ve come from, I’m sure they’ve got much loftier ideals than to gain pity for their protagonists.
“The disabled deserve dignity of life and, at least, once in a while, a film like Nagesh Kukunoor’s ‘Iqbal’ or Radha Mohan’s ‘Mozhi’ that captures their spirit to live against the odds” – I agree with this statement made by you. But you have to also accept the fact that people / characters like that of Jyothika’s in Mozhi is just one side of the coin. I have not seen Iqbal, but the character in Mozhi had her grandmother to look after her and was well-educated to live for herself. So, anyone would obviously want her to fight against all odds and be very spirited towards life. But not all disabled are so lucky. If one wants to see only the rosy side of the story, then so be it. I personally see Bala or Myskin’s depiction on disabled as the other side of the coin. Without any elders to care for and look after us, God knows what we would have grown into. When this is the case with physically abled, how do you expect a disabled child and an orphan to fight against all odds right from its birth? Yet, it was shown with such brilliance by Bala in NK. It had so many disabled beggers both old and young.. yet the way they looked at life and their spirit to fight against all odds was aptly depicted by Bala. I believe you know that he used real beggers. The spirit of a person to view the positive side of life and move on, inspite of being in such mercy-less situations (such as the beggers in NK) is far more commendable than a person who inspite of being disabled is still blessed with job, money, status, family etc (Jo in Mozhi). Moreover, in none of the previous posts I have noticed anyone talking about the academy award winning movie Slumdog Millionaire’s take on children portrayed as orphans and the way they are made to be disabled. Sure, it did create sympathy and I have seen people cry at few instances during the movie (remember “dharshan dho ghanshyam”). Well, can we say Danny Boyle has also used sympathy to woo his audience? As we only keep talking / blogging from our cabins without looking at the darker reality of our society, I believe we should atleast appreciate few souls who open our eyes to the other side of the society which surely is not for the sympathy factor. All said, I admit that I am against all those who use disablity for a creating a cheap sympathy wave. But lets please not compare those directors with the likes of Bala.
Yes, i agree with the point you’re trying to make…Disabled people HATE it when others feel sorry for them