9 novembre 2012

Irrfan Khan: Khan rises in the West

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Irrfan Khan a Sudhish Kamath, pubblicata da The Hindu il 2 novembre 2012. Khan rises in the West:

'How are you enjoying your stint with Hollywood?
I have to restrain myself, resist the temptation because I keep getting all kinds of films from Hollywood. Because my survival is not based out of Hollywood. So this is a very privileged position for me. I do films sometimes for survival in India. I choose projects in Hollywood that are challenging... that have something new to offer to me. Whether it is The Namesake or In Treatment... If I have to define In Treatment, it was not TV, it was not theatre, it was not cinema... It was something else. I look for challenges and areas that I haven’t got a chance to explore with Hollywood.
So do you work with a different kind of remuneration with Hollywood to be able to do these roles?
Remuneration is not very lucrative for me. It’s not even one-fourth of what I get in India. Just because you see them making multi-million dollar films, it does not mean they will pay Irrfan Khan millions of dollars. The film business is run in a way that you get paid according to whatever your importance is. (...)
How has your understanding of cinema changed over the years?
When I came into cinema, I was mesmerised by a few actors and when I saw them, I thought they were experiencing something special. That’s what attracted me to films. Initially, it was more about fame. But later it changed. Fame is just an ego-massaging exercise. I’m fortunate to be in this line. I’m in a medium where I can connect with a person who doesn’t understand a single word of the language I speak. But he’s touched by my performance. I become a part of his emotional psyche. And that’s the kind of ability you have as an actor.
So Life Of Pi was one such experience?
No, that was my journey before Life Of Pi. The challenges in Life Of Pi were completely different, something I have never experienced as an actor. The film is dealing with complicated issues. Whoever wants to look at these issues would interpret them in their own way. It will entertain a child who is watching as much as it will entertain an intellectual person. This film will leave you with so many interpretations. And it cannot be achieved unless and until you are aware of it. You have to work towards it. That was the challenge.
What was the biggest take-home for you from Life Of Pi?
Watching Ang. The way he conducts himself, his personality... If you see him, it seems like he has just eliminated all the unnecessary things from his personality... you don’t see a kind of baggage that you would expect from one of the most important directors of our times. The way he’s passionate about his work, the way he is so concerned and very personal. He’s available to everybody and at the same time, also keeps to himself.
What kind of roles are you looking at doing here post Paan Singh Tomar here?
I am getting more or less the same kind of roles. I am looking at films that are different yet have the ability to make money. All things in this world are a product of contradictions. Like art and commerce. Even in life, there are two opposite forces that are colliding all the time in our universe. And something new emerges when they collide.
Are you excited and confident that films such as Paan Singh Tomar are getting recognised today?
I was confident even 10 to 12 years ago when I did Haasil. I knew people wanted to see something different. They wanted films where entertainment would be redefined. The entertainment industry cannot afford to keep repeating a formula. It needs to keep evolving and redefining itself. Am I pushing the boundaries? Is it good for cinema? Is it entertaining and engaging? Is it suited for cinema or better suited for a book or news? Is it smuggling the issues smartly enough without being in your face? These are things I look for when I choose films'.

Irrfan Khan: Everything has come to me late in my life

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Irrfan Khan a Garima Sharma, pubblicata da The Times of India il 24 ottobre 2012. Everything has come to me late in my life: Irrfan:

'In all honesty, with the international recognition that has come to you post Slumdog Millionaire, there must have been some point when success went to your head?
If success would have come early in life, it would have. But, everything came to me a little late. It’s a pattern with me - things always come late to me. When I was doing TV, I longed to do films. I was even ready to become a henchman. At that time, if I would’ve got the role of a villain, I would’ve wasted my life just playing villains. But, I think destiny is taking care of me, even if it is giving me things later in life, even if it is testing me. I have never been in a situation where success could go to my head.
Has Hollywood impacted your Bollywood prospects?
An actor looks for recognition. And when you do work like this, it creates a perception about you in the audience’s mind. That’s it. But, it gives me a choice to do stories which I would’ve never got here. I would’ve never got those directors and stories to explore here. I don’t want to find a formula for success and keep repeating that. (...)
You don’t get such work in Bollywood?
They don’t ask variety from you. I am just fortunate that I don’t need to, for my bread and butter, depend on Hollywood. For me, it’s a luxury. I choose films, which give me what I am looking for. That’s why I am not living in Hollywood. If I go and stay there, I would be shooting all year long. But I don’t want to do that. For me, as an actor, I need challenges where you can trust your director and take a plunge. It’s exactly like Pi, who has been thrown in this sea with these animals, and he doesn’t even know how to row a boat and he has to find his shore.
How important is Bollywood to you today?
It’s very important because that’s where I earn my living from. This industry is everything to me. When I dreamt of becoming an actor, I thought of being popular in India and not anywhere else.
Cliched as it gets, was the role of Pi the toughest of your career?
Yes. The contract just said they needed 10 days from me. But, you can’t ask them, ‘No, I have to prepare for two months or three months, so you pay me for that’. It was literally only 10 days of work, but it took me so many months of preparation. Ang was also exploring it with me, so initially he told me to find a French-Canadian-Indian accent. I kept trying for months, and it was really torturous, and finally he chose not to use that! But, it was an experience that I learnt a lot from. This is one of my most challenging roles, even though it may not be that much on screen. I did stuff earlier which was mostly for adult audiences. I want to now do films which are for children as well as grown-up audiences. I long to do films, which my children can also watch. Whenever my kids pick up my DVDs, be it The Namesake or Maqbool, they can’t watch those. (...)
It was said that you were unhappy with the way your role turned out in The Amazing Spiderman?
I never said that. Whoever spoke to me, I just said that the director told me what scenes they were eliminating and why they were eliminating, and I had no problem with that. I could understand why they were doing it. They did that even in Slumdog Millionaire, so I had no problem with it. I never said I was unhappy with the role.
After all your preparation, was it easy to understand your director Ang Lee’s vision?
What’s special about Ang is that when he dreams a film, it tries to go deep and find something from it. Relentlessly, he is trying to create something new in his project, to find some relevance in today’s time, and that’s what I call brave. He is a brave person. It’s like there is a playground he is exploring, which he is not very familiar with, but he will take the plunge. When you work with him, you feel like he is trying to pull out something new, something unexplored from the ground, something which people in today’s time can relate to. And yet, with this kind of a story, which is only about an Indian family, he retains all the complexities, and yet tries to give it an international connect. As far as vision goes, it cannot be a like a picture which I show to you and you can understand. He brought his world, I brought mine, I tried to relate to what he was saying and then I poured my entire being into the film. That’s where dynamism comes. That’s what Hollywood understands'.

Festival Internazionale del Film di Roma 2012

L'edizione 2012 del Festival Internazionale del Film di Roma si svolge dal 9 al 17 novembre. Unico lungometraggio indiano in cartellone: Tasher Desh di Q (alias Qaushik Mukherjee), in concorso nella sezione CINEMAXXI.

Aggiornamento del 21 novembre 2012: vi segnalo di seguito alcune recensioni.
- CineClandestino: 'Tasher Desh irrompe (...) con la deflagrante potenza distruttrice di un ordigno nucleare: (...) il film di Q è una delle materializzazioni possibili dell'idea stessa di kermesse propugnata da Marco Müller, quella che vede il festival come un luogo che accorpi nella stessa anima ricerca e intrattenimento, sperimentazione visiva e racconto popolare, innovazione e classicità. (...) La classe registica di Q, in grado di lavorare sulle geometrie della messa in scena e su un utilizzo quanto mai fertile e creativo della scenografia (la natura dello Sri Lanka, dove il film è stato girato, si mescola alla perfezione con la particolare ricreazione dello spazio voluta dal regista), si abbandona fin dall'incipit in bianco e nero (...) a una furibonda apocalisse visiva. Il montaggio sincopato, la narrazione ellittica e sconnessa, la recitazione urlata, le inquadrature sghembe fanno di The Land of Cards un elogio della frenesia e del caos che evidenzia, prima ancora che lo faccia il testo in sé e per sé, l'anima profondamente libertaria e antifascista del film. Una scheggia impazzita che attraversa la prassi cinematografica missando al proprio interno la cultura occidentale e quella indiana. (...) Q pone la firma in calce a un'opera orgogliosamente post-punk, in cui anche il colore è utilizzato in modo eversivo (...) e un incontro di ping pong dalla brevissima durata può essere risolto registicamente con otto inquadrature diverse. Spiazzante ed esaltante allo stesso tempo, The Land of Cards rammenta a coloro che ne avessero smarrito la memoria quanto il cinema possa essere rivoluzionario nell'utilizzo stesso delle tecniche e degli stili'.
- CineFatti: 'Tasher Desh è un capolavoro di rara bellezza e raffinatezza (...): Q può diventare il regista simbolo del cinema del XXI secolo, con le sue idee, con la sua fusione di stili e con i brividi di grande cinematografia classica inseriti in un vortice d’innovazione. (...) Sono uomini e donne, attori eccezionali che recitano come fossero in un'opera di teatro contemporaneo. È la regia di Q a rendere tutto diverso, movimentato, emozione pura, Cinema. (...) Gioia per uno dei film migliori visti fino ad oggi qui al Festival Internazionale del Film di Roma, il migliore della sezione CinemaXXI in cui concorre. Duro da sopportare, difficile da digerire in molti momenti, ma le vere sfide vengono dai lavori difficili se si ha voglia di capirli e viverli per quello che vogliono essere. Momenti di puro cinema, cinema del futuro, quello che vorremmo vedere prevalere, simbolo del nuovo che tanto farebbe bisogno al mondo intero, perché si deve capire che le barriere vanno abbattute e spazio va lasciato alle nuove possibilità e ricerche'.
Area del profilo Facebook di Q dedicata alle fotografie scattate a Roma.

Aggiornamenti del 23 agosto 2013 - A partire da oggi, Tasher Desh viene finalmente distribuito in alcune aree in India in sale selezionate. Nell'intervista concessa da Q a Box Office India, pubblicata il 17 agosto 2013, si legge:
'The film travelled to the Rome Film Festival. How was it received there?
I was very happy with the response there. It was screened in a section called Cinema 21 and that was brilliant since I was in competition with people who I have looked up to all my life. My life was made that day. More importantly, I was happy knowing that critics were watching those films, which were not really cinema but playing with form. They were not looking for narrative, so I was overwhelmed. 90 per cent of them liked my film and equated it with an art installation project with lines and music. The narrative was always a problem so I was criticised there. But everybody who loved it also hated the fact the narrative was not joined'.
Vi segnalo anche la recensione di Raja Sen (giudizio 3,5), pubblicata oggi da Rediff, recensione che, nella versione integrale, include inaspettatamente più di un riferimento a David Bowie:

'The thing about building a house of cards - indeed, a country of cards - is that its very existence is rooted in caprice. With Tasher Desh, radical filmmaker Q takes on Rabindranath Tagore’s play and interprets a familiar text with much vim and great style, and yet the fact that the end results are uneven - and uneven they certainly are - seems as much an inevitability as a matter of choice. Discordance was always, well, on the cards. (...) This is a bizarre film, one that unapologetically meanders through most of its first hour, giving us a hint of its characters while soaking us in a psychedelic cauldron of ennui. It’s the same one Q’s protagonists sip from. On one hand is a bespectacled writer who wants to mount a production of Tasher Desh, but is overwhelmed by the relentlessness of the world around him. He escapes into the pages, where we meet the play’s hero, a restless Prince weary of his luxurious cage. And as the story flip-flops between these two, the teller and the doer, the film’s visuals take over our heads. (...) The surreal, madcap imagery is captivating, and many an image remains lodged in my head. Even a few that I found tiresome at the time. A primary reason for the tenacity of these strong, strange images - an Oracle with David Bowie cheekbones, a toddler prince with a sword larger than himself, clockwork squirrels going around in circles - is how violently they’re juxtaposed, not just against each other in immediate contrast, but along with the music. The soundtrack takes the songs from Tagore’s original musical and keeps the lyrics the same, and while the music is edgy and eclectic and defiantly modern, it is the classic lyrical heft that propels the film’s narrative. The filmmakers have done an artful job of subtitling these words, often sacrificing literality for inferred meaning, which helps greatly in grasping the film. This happens with dialogue too, when characters repeat the same lines and words over and over but the subtitles ascribe different meanings, or emphasise different parts of the translated line. (...) Clearly influenced by Lewis Carroll, Tagore conjured up a fascistic nation of people dressing up as playing cards, giving his musical its name. Q revels in this opportunity for structured mayhem, and his uniformed card soldiers (who come this close to actual goose-stepping) are a work of art, with their faces painted white and a tiny logo, of the suit they belong to, on their lips. The effect is striking - more Terry Gilliam than Tim Burton, thankfully - and with this highly theatrical approach, the film takes on a comic-book appearance. The colours pop, the subtitles are more stylised, and the cards yell out Bengali chopped into staccato syllables. “Progress?” is translated as “égobo?” but screamed “É!”, “Go!” and “Bo!”. (...) The Prince and his friend, cornered by gun-toting cards for having the temerity to laugh, come up with a delicious origin story and begin to sow seeds of revolution by appealing to the card-women. Good move, that. Suggestions of liberty from the outsiders intrigue the women in the ranks, and soon there is a full-blown sexual revolution. And here it is that the film becomes a highly erotic one, throbbing with abstract yet earthy sensuality. (...) Meanwhile, over on the other side of reality, the Writer too is grappling with matters of sexual urgency. “If it’s a riot you want...”, promises a queen ominously, her Bangla obfuscated and rendered exotic by a strange accent. There is a mighty mish-mash of tongues and nationalities amid the cards, hidden by white paint. It is a clever trick, in a film where the cast is mostly impressive. Rii Sen is a striking heroine, Tillotama Shome is evocative as the Prince’s mother, and all the cards get it very right indeed. Anubrata Basu (the hero of Q’s last film, Gandu) is well-suited to the part of the friend, even pulling off a Che Guevara look quite deftly in one scene, and Soumyak Kanti De Biswas is highly compelling as the Prince, especially when he looks fourth-wall-searingly through the camera. Tagore’s 1932 play is a remarkably progressive one, and Q’s adaptation starts off slow and visceral and then - after they land on the island halfway through the film - changes gears to become a racy, lucid, sexy adventure. This gamble doesn’t entirely pay off - the first half has several boring stretches; the film exasperatingly ends just when it hits its most enjoyable stride - but the film is staggeringly original, and far too much of it stays back in the head. To haunt and to enchant. The music plays a huge part, and the critical decision to use Tagore’s original songs - with Q singing on many of the tracks - is one that makes this effort magical, even when it misfires. But who’s to say any of the misfires were unintentional? Tasher Desh is more experience than film, more blank verse than story, and more poetry than anything else'.

Vedi anche:


Q - Roma, 2012

Q - Roma, 2012