Bollywood

A Guidebook to Popular Hindi Cinema

Tejaswini Ganti

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781136849299
• Edition: 2
• Topic: Media & Performing Arts
• Subtopic: Film History & Criticism

'Bollywood' is the dominant global term to refer to the prolific Hindi language film industry in Bombay (renamed Mumbai in 1995). Characterised by music, dance routines, melodrama, lavish production values and an emphasis on stars and spectacle, Bollywood films have met with box-office success and enthusiastic audiences from India to West Africa to Russia, and throughout the English-speaking world.

In Bollywood, anthropologist and film scholar Tejaswini Ganti provides a guide to the cultural, social and political significance of Hindi cinema, outlining the history and structure of the Bombay film industry, and the development of popular Hindi filmmaking since the 1930s. Providing information and commentary on the key players in Bollywood, including directors and stars, as well as material from current filmmakers themselves, the areas covered in Bollywood include:

• history of Indian cinema
• narrative style, main themes, and key genres of Hindi cinema

• 
  
  

• significant films, directors and stars

• 
  
  

• production and distribution of Bollywood films

• 
  
  

• interviews with actors, directors and screenwriters.

• 
  
  

1

INTRODUCTION

“Okay, five-six-seven-eight!” a woman shouted into a microphone and blew a whistle to signal to the sound-engineer on the other side of the room. As soon as the music began, a man in a white chef’s uniform started dancing and juggling vegetables, while long-legged waitresses in black T-shirts, miniskirts, and white aprons passed behind him. Once the song started, the man began to mouth the words so perfectly that he appeared to be singing it himself. Men crouching toward the ground slowly pushed a trolley with the cameraman and movie camera toward the performer. With a sound of the whistle, and a “Cut it!” the music stopped, as did the action. The woman went over to the man in the chef’s outfit and demonstrated a few dance steps. After watching her, the man mimicked her exact movements. “Okay, one more rehearsal, and then we’ll do a take.” The woman blew the whistle and the whole sequence started all over again.¹

The above scene is not the shooting of a television commercial or a music video in New York or Los Angeles, but the shooting of a song sequence for a Hindi film in Bombay, better known as a “Bollywood” film. From Baz Luhrmann to Andrew Lloyd Webber, from Channel 4 to Turner Classic Movies, from Macy’s to Selfridge’s, from the Oscars to Cannes, from Philips to Verizon,² the Western world has “discovered” Bollywood, a filmmaking tradition that has been entertaining millions of viewers around the globe for decades. The word “Bollywood,” derived by combining Bombay with Hollywood, has even entered the English lexicon. The Oxford English Dictionary has had an entry for the term since 2001.

Figure 1.2 Abhishek Bachchan and Rani Mukherji in Bunty aur Babli. Image courtesy of the Kobal Collection.

WHAT IS BOLLYWOOD?

“Bollywood” – a tongue-in-cheek term created by the English-language press in India in the late 1970s – has now become the dominant global term to refer to the prolific and box-office oriented Hindi language film industry located in Bombay (renamed Mumbai in 1995).³ The Bombay film industry is aesthetically and culturally distinct from Hollywood, but as prolific and ubiquitous in its production and circulation of narratives and images. As the dominant media institution within India, the Bombay film industry plays an important role in constructing and defining dichotomies like “traditional/modern,” “global/local,” “Western/Eastern” and categories such as “culture,” “nation,” and “Indian” (Ganti 2000).

The most frequent factual error perpetuated by the international and Indian press is that the Bombay film industry produces 800–1000 films a year. The Bombay industry actually produces about 150–200 films a year. Feature films are produced in approximately 20 languages in India and there are multiple film industries whose total output makes India the largest feature film producing country in the world. The cities of Madras and Hyderabad are home to the Tamil and Telugu language film industries which are as, or more prolific than, the Bombay industry in terms of the number of films made per year.

However, Hindi films, though comprising approximately 20 percent of total production, are the ones that circulate nationally and internationally, dominate the discourse about Indian cinema, and are regarded as the standard or archetype to follow or oppose. Outside of India, the category “popular Indian cinema” tends to denote Hindi films produced in Bombay. The distinctive features of popular Hindi cinema – song-dance, melodrama, lavish production values, emphasis upon stars and spectacle – are common to films made in the south Indian industries as well. Thus, “Bollywood” has become a shorthand reference not only to a specific industry, but also to a specific style of filmmaking within the industry, which is aggressively oriented toward box-office success and broad audience appeal.

Cinema in India encompasses a great deal more diversity and has a longer history than the Bombay film industry. Even as a British colony, India was the third largest producer of films in the world.⁴ This book will not attempt to introduce “Indian cinema,” but focus on Hindi cinema produced in post-independence India. World War II and independence from Britain in 1947, ushered in social, economic, and political changes that also changed the nature of filmmaking. The antecedents for the contemporary Bombay film industry emerge from this era.

STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION OF BOOK

This book introduces popular Hindi cinema and the Bombay film industry and its production practices to readers who wish to understand the form, history, and socio-cultural context of this filmmaking tradition. Written from the point of view of an anthropologist rather than a film critic, this book does not undertake qualitative judgments. Much of the book is based on fieldwork in Bombay, observing the filmmaking process, carrying out interviews with filmmakers, and having long discussions about Hindi cinema with a variety of informants within and outside the film industry. Rather than listing the “best” or “greatest” films, actors, or directors, the book tries to discuss significant developments in Hindi filmmaking from the point of view of the Bombay film industry, mainstream Indian press, and film audiences.

This introductory chapter provides the context and history with which to understand the remainder of the book. It presents a brief history of filmmaking in India from its origins, through the silent, early talkie, and studio eras until World War II. It then outlines the Indian state’s attitudes toward cinema and its historically ambivalent relationship with the Hindi film industry, which is important for understanding the broader context of film production. Finally, the chapter goes on to discuss Hindi filmmaking since India’s independence from British rule in 1947.

Chapter 2 describes the structure of the Hindi film industry and its production and distribution practices and details the changes that have been occurring in the political economy of filmmaking since the mid-2000s. The chapter also includes an in-depth treatment of the most distinctive feature of popular Indian cinema – the ubiquitous song and dance sequences. It describes the production process of film songs, their narrative functions, and their economic importance within the film industry.

Chapters 3 and 4 are about the narrative structure, central themes, and significant genres of popular Hindi cinema. Chapter 3 discusses some of the main themes of Hindi cinema and the way they are represented through key conflicts that structure the narrative. Chapter 4 addresses the seeming lack of genres in Hindi cinema that frequently bewilder and perplex uninitiated viewers. It discusses how genre operates within the film industry and describes some of the genres specific to popular filmmaking. Both chapters draw on the examples of specific films to illustrate their points and in this manner, readers will be introduced to some of the significant films in the history of Hindi cinema.

Chapter 5 presents excerpts from interviews conducted by the author with a variety of members from the Hindi film industry. The excerpts pertain to the topics raised in the previous sections so that readers have an opportunity to learn about filmmakers’ perspectives on these issues. They are divided into statements about the form and style of Hindi cinema, the characteristics of the Hindi film industry, and the relationship between Hindi cinema and Indian society.

At the end of the book are sections entitled, “Significant films of popular Hindi cinema,” “Significant filmmakers of the Hindi film industry,” and “Suggestions for further reading,” which are intended as aids for those readers who want to undertake a more in-depth study of Hindi cinema. The information in these sections provides a list of some significant films and directors of the post-independence Hindi film industry, as well as suggestions for further reading, as Hindi cinema has become a very rich field of study for scholars.

ORIGINS AND GROWTH OF CINEMA IN INDIA: 1896–1947⁵

Early cinema

Cinema in India has a history that is relatively coterminous with filmmaking in the West. This is due to the existence of a technological, aesthetic, creative, and entrepreneurial infrastructure that allowed for the easy incorporation of motion pictures into Indian life and society. The most immediate antecedent to motion picture technology was photography. Photography was first used in India in 1840, a few months after its development had been announced in Europe and was taken up with willingness by amateurs, aspiring professionals, individuals with “scientific” agendas and within 20 years, by the colonial state. Many Indians started studios in the mid-1850s in cities like Bombay and Calcutta, and 20–30 years later, hundreds of photo studios had sprung up all over the country.

Motion picture technology was introduced in the subcontinent on July 7, 1896, when Marius Sestier, a representative of the Paris-based Lumière brothers, presented the first cinematographe show at the Watson’s Hotel in Bombay, a few months after its premier showing in Paris. The show was advertised in the Times of India newspaper as “The marvel of the century; the wonder of the world” and only Europeans attended the first screening since the hotel barred entry to Indians. This screening was part of a global moment, where audiences in Africa, Asia, Australia, Europe, North and South America witnessed moving pictures within months of its first demonstration in Paris on December 28, 1895. For example, on the day of the screening in Bombay, another Lumière representative screened the cinematographe in St. Petersburg. On July 14, shows open to Indians began at the Novelty Theatre in Bombay. The invention was enthusiastically received by Indian photographers who purchased cameras and started filming shorts that were shown in tents, playgrounds, and public halls in Bombay, Calcutta, and Madras.

In addition to being the site of the first screenings of motion pictures in India, Bombay was also the site of one of the first films made in India – a wrestling match shot in the city’s Hanging Gardens.⁶ Bombay’s development into the center of film production in India is integrally connected to its history as a colonial city and based on its position as the main center of commerce and manufacturing in British India. Bombay was not an indigenous city, but established by the British East India Company in the seventeenth century as a gateway for commerce and trade (Dwivedi and Mehrotra 1995).⁷ Bombay served as an entry point for the exploitation of the Indian mainland, and the point through which resources were transferred to Britain. Bombay’s connections to the world market determined the influx of certain groups – merchants, artisans, laborers – to the city, as well as the education of a class of clerks and petty officials – leading to the cultural, linguistic, religious, and regional diversity that became the hallmark of the city (Patel and Thorner 1995). By the mid-nineteenth century, textile mills were established, marking a new phase in Bombay’s life, as an industrial center.

The economic base of Bombay allowed for film technology to take root and flourish as capital from other industrial and commercial activity flowed into filmmaking. In addition to having the necessary capital base for filmmaking, Bombay possessed the creative infrastructure as it was also the center of Parsi Theater, a commercial theater movement originating in the mid-nineteenth century sponsored by the Parsi traders who were the dominant business community in the Bombay Presidency. Parsis practice the ancient religion of Zoroastrianism and migrated to western India – what today would be considered the state of Gujarat – from Persia over a millennium ago.⁸ Parsis were traditionally involved in shipping and shipbuilding, and accrued a great deal of wealth by the early nineteenth century. By the mid-nineteenth century, they diversified into banking and established the Bombay Chamber of Commerce. Parsis played a crucial role in the economic and cultural development of Bombay.

The Parsi theater groups provided the initial pool of performers and writers as nearly all of them switched to film. With its assimilation of diverse influences – Shakespeare, Persian lyric poetry, Indian folk traditions, and Sanskrit drama; an operatic structure integrating songs into the narrative; dominant genres being the historical, mythological, and romantic melodrama; and use of the Urdu language, Parsi Theater was the immediate aesthetic and cultural antecedent of popular Hindi cinema (Garga 1996; Rajadhyaksha and Willemen 1999). In fact Parsi capital supported the film industry in India until the 1930s and had a significant role to play in the early film distribution infrastructure and three major silent and sound studios: Imperial Film, Minerva Movietone, and Wadia Movietone.

Phalke and the silent era

One of the early pioneers in Indian cinema is Dhundiraj Govind Phalke (1870–1944), more commonly referred to as Dadasaheb Phalke, who has been bestowed the title “Father of Indian cinema” by the Indian state, the Bombay film industry, and the popular press.⁹ Phalke was interested in a variety of visual arts and technologies. His academic training was in fine art and architecture, but he also learned photography, photolithography, and ceramics. Before his career as a filmmaker, he worked as a portrait photographer, stage makeup man, magician, and as an assistant to a German illusionist. He started Phalke’s Art Printing and Engraving Works in 1908 and did photolithographic transfers of Ravi Varma’s oleographs, which are lithographic prints textured to resemble oil paintings. Varma was a very popular nineteenth century painter who greatly influenced the iconography and style of popular painting and early Indian cinema.

Phalke’s interest in film was sparked when he saw the Life of Christ in a Bombay theater in 1910. He wrote about his experience in the Marathi language journal, Navyug in December 1917.¹⁰ He described it as transformative.

While the life of Christ was rolling fast before my physical eyes I was mentally visualising the Gods, Shri Krishna, Shri Ramachandra, their Gokul and Ayodhya. I was gripped by a strange spell. I bought another ticket and saw the film again. This time I felt my imagination taking shape on the screen. Could this really happen? Could we, the sons of India, ever be able to see Indian images on the screen? The whole night passed in this mental agony.

(Phalke Dossier in Shoesmith 1988)

Phalke’s socio-political context was significantly shaped by anticolonial struggles against the British. Phalke himself had very nationalist intentions as evident by his concerns for an indigenous film industry. He made explicit the links between filmmaking, politics, and Indian statehood, asserting that “India was unfit to claim Home Rule” if filmmaking did not gain the support of Indian business and political leaders.

Phalke raised finance from a photographic equipment dealer with a short film, Birth of a Pea Plant, shooting one frame a day to show a plant growing. He then went to London in February 1912 to familiarize himself with film technology and acquire equipment. Upon his return that year, he established Phalke Films in Bombay for which he made five films. His initial capital came from a loan against his insurance policy and the company was staffed by his family and friends. In 1913 the company moved to Nashik, an ancient pilgrimage town 200 kilometers east of Bombay, for easier access to locations that Phalke thought were necessary for filmmaking such as rivers, mountains, and several famous shrines.

Phalke’s first film, Raja Harischandra [King Harischandra], commonly regarded as the first Indian feature film, made its debut in Bombay’s Coronation Cinematograph Theatre in 1913. While the play Pundalik was filmed in its entirety in 1912, it is usually not accorded the status of the first feature because it was a stage play rather than a production created specifically for the screen. Phalke’s film was advertised as “the first film of Indian manufacture,” and was based on a story from the epic poem, Mahabharata. The story of an honest king who loses his family and kingdom and undergoes severe trials and tribulations, Raja Harischandra was a success, running in Bombay for a month, when films normally at that time ran for less than a week. With his film, Phalke initiated an enduring and popular genre in Indian cinema known as “mythologicals,” which bring to life popular stories of Hindu gods and goddesses. During the early years of cinema in India, films were frequently based on well-known Hindu epics and myths, thus helping to make the experience of cinema familiar and less alien to audiences. While a few mythological films still get produced, it is a genre that has been flourishing on Indian television in a serialized format since 1987.

Phalke travelled to England again in 1914, to organize trade shows. When he returned to India with new equipment, he closed down Phalke films and set up Hindustan Cinema Films Company in 1918, which was the first purely indigenous film studio with corporate backing. While Phalke was its main filmmaker, there were at least six other directors who made films under its auspices. It was also the first studio to have its own distribution operation with offices in Bombay and Madras. The studio produced approximately 44 silent features, several shorts and one talkie. Though its last film in 1932 was post-synchronized for sound, the studio failed in 1933. Phalke died in 1944, penniless and forgotten. His contributions to cinema in India were only recognized decades after his death when the Dadasaheb Phalke Lifetime Achievement Awards were instituted in 1966 to honor pioneering accomplishments in cinema.

The increased profitability o...