|
ದೃಶ್ಯಕ್ಕೊಂದು ನುಡಿಗಟ್ಟು |
ಸಂವಾದ ಡಾಟ್ ಕಾಂನ ಕಿರುಚಿತ್ರಗಳು ಒಂದು ಕಥಾನಕ
So what I have concentrated on is building up the story leading up to them in each case (based as you will see on the various hints you gave), on creating a female character (which you indicated you wanted) and a parallel plot (rather than a subplot) involving her. In the process I have added a bit of sex, drugs and rock and roll (or at any rate, some action, some sex, some drama, some opportunities for music), which you may of course find in bad taste or inappropriate, but which I have tried to make dovetail with the main thrust of the story - which remains the encounters between the two men. To kick off, I wanted something that would make the spectators look up a bit and give some sort of introduction to the characters and themes in a way that at first the audience won’t (and shouldn’t) understand. I worked here on two suggestions you made. One) that the dark character (let us call him for convenience) was epileptic and that he had gone off leaving his business in the hands of a (probably fairly dishonest) manager and two) that the fair character had (for some unknown reason) left Mumbai to come and work in Bangalore. The idea for why the fashion photographer had to leave Mumbai (because of a false rape accusation) came to me no doubt because the Dominique Strauss-Kahn affair (and its implications) have been much on my mind. And that idea in turn sparked off the idea for the female character and the parallel plot. I also have the Hindi film Dev D in the back of my mind (and perhaps inevitably to some extent Fashion). But you may well not like either idea. One purpose of the opening scenes is also to have some bustle and business (which are nevertheless not too difficult or expensive to do). The majority of the film is going to concentrate on just two characters (solitary or meeting) in wide open spaces, which can become a little monotonous. Here, even if the scenes are short, I want to deliberately start with some noise and bustle and commotion. Scene 1. This is wherever our “dark hero” has his factory or business. The scenes open with him having a violent and dramatic epileptic fit. At first it seems as though he is quite alone, far from anywhere, then gradually we see people, dots at first, converging on him from all sides, excited, jabbering away etc. These are the workers from the factory. We eventually see him carrying the body of the man back to wherever. We should get some sense of the “manager” (who presumably is taking command of events) but otherwise nothing. The audience has no idea until we meet the “dark hero” later in the mall what this is all about. (You talked of filming in Hedgodu. This could I think be done there, perhaps using the premises and staff of Charaka there, but it would have I think to be disguised as something else. In my mind’s eye I see the site as something more industrial – brick-making plant, something of that sort. And I see the area around, where he has his fit, as flat and deserted.) Scene 2. Cut to Mumbai. I don’t think there is any need to evoke Mumbai very specifically in any way but obviously people should be talking hinglish not kannada and it should be clear that it is Mumbai. But it could in practice be shot anywhere. Rapid succession of scenes showing the progression of the “rape accusation”. We should catch a glimpse of the supposed “rape victim” and of the place where the supposed rape took place (these will be important later in the film). We need to be absolutely clear that the rape accusation is false and is proved false, that he comes out of it without a stain on his name. But we should also be aware that he is changed by the experience; from being out-going, sociable, a bit of a womaniser he has become self-protective, slightly paranoid (the compulsive “washing” comes from this episode). But again the main effect should be of bustle, confusion, excitement. A reflection visually of the previous scene with the “dark hero”. Setting principally in the fashion parades and their offices (which have to look recognisably different from the later Bangalore ones), on steps of buildings (with photographers pressing for information), perhaps in court, perhaps in a police station. But all these scenes should be minimal – a rapid succession. Little dialogue necessary. Ending with a quiet scene (at the station?) where the man is talking with a friend (also his lawyer perhaps who one has seen at his side in earlier shots? perhaps a woman lawyer?), explaining his decision to move to Bangalore. 20 mins Scene 3 Bangalore and Who Knows Where? Scenes 3, 5 and 9 form a sequence and are essentially purely cinematographic, if cinematography can ever be pure. It seems to me that in a film about two characters who are both photographers (each in their manner) it is impossible not to show their photography. One could of course show their photographs as such (which would not be very interesting and would require photographic expertise) or one can show their “photographing”. Since you are interested in the idea of a continually panning, moving camera, it seems clear that one should go for the second. How to do it? My notion of the three sequences is that they should be a process (somewhat analogous to the two superimposed “rape” scenes - “fair” and “dark” - in the parallel plot. below Scene 6). In this first sequence the “fair” should predominate and the “dark” simply be a puzzling intrusion. In later sequences there should be a gradual increase in the “dark” but also an increasing intermixing of the two, a superimposition of the one upon the other (and vice versa) - as in the rape scene(s). In the first sequence the “fair” and the “dark” are therefore not at all symmetrical. Nither in quantity nor in nature. The camera is also following to some extent the life of the “fair hero” in the fashion-world of Bangalore, where he has successfully re-established himself, telling his story, while the camera is only glimpsing the activities of the “dark hero” who remains entirely unknown to the audience (apart from the epileptic attack at the very beginning of the film). Some parts of the sequence are therefore depicting the life of the “fair hero”. Here he might be seen with colleagues, with models etc although I tend myself to prefer the idea that he should, as much as possible, BE THE CAMERA even for these scenes, that he should be heard but not seen and those talking to him should be seen from his (and the camera’s) point of view. The most important thing that needs to be established in these scenes is his social diffidence (particularly – an for obvious reasons – with regard to the girls), a withdrawn aspect to his camera, the compulsive washing. [I am not dogmatic about this idea of the character as camera, because it is also necessary to some extent that the audience gets to know the character and for this it may be necessary to show him. Although this can be done without showing him. I am a great admirer of the film Lady in the Lake where the central character – the detective Philip Marlowe played by Robert Montgomery - is the camera throuhgout and is never seen (except once in a mirror). For instance the “compulsive washing” would be more effectively shown through his eyes – looking downs at his hands and the water – than from a more objective angle]. In those parts of the sequence that are concerned with the photographing activities of the two men, THEY SHOULD NEVER BE SEEN. It should be as though the film-camera is regarding the same scenes from over their shoulder. They are identifiable and distinguishable in three different ways. 1) obviously the places where they are and the things they are photographing 2) their glimpsed hands – “dark” and “fair”. Dramatic effects to make connections can be used here. For instance, the dark man might wipe his mouth and leave a trail of scum on his hand, visible to the camera. The fair man notices he has scum on his hand, drops everything to go and wash. And so on and so on. Not to overdo, clearly, but there as a possibility. 3) their photographic equipment. Here there is a slight problem that thought needs to be given to. AFTER the scene in the mall, we know about their equipment and the TRIPOD and the MONOPOD (I like this idea very much) will become central emblems but they have to be provided for this first sequence with some sort of predecessors of the tripod and monopod, which should still represent their different characters and approaches and should be, as it were, the logical predecessors of the two pieces of equipment we later see them buying together. 4) music. One has to avoid caricature and the music would have to be handled very, very carefully (again in later sequences there has to be a process of overlap, mixing, synthesis, superimposition as with the cinematography). But clearly the two men are represented by different forms of music. The “dark” man’s music shall we say is folksy, eccentric – something a bit jogi-ish. My reference for this kind of music is V Shantaram who I think used it brilliantly in his films. Guru Dutt too to some extent. The “fair” man’s music is I suppose something plasticky and A R Rehman-ish (Mozart of Madras! hrmph!). This interests me personally much less. But clearly the two “themes” have to be to some extent compatible, mixable, fusible. 20 mins Scene 4 Scene in the Shopping Mall This I leave to you. You have a detailed idea of what you want. 20 mins Scene 5 Bangalore and Who Knows Where? This is the second of the “photographing” sequences. The audience now knows much more what it’s all about. They have figured out the connection with the epileptic fit at the beginning, they recognise the two men easily, especially with the tripod and monopod now present. They understand the differences between them. They probably think they know everything about the film at this point which is why we introduce the parallel plot in a moment and take them off in a completely different direction (which turns out however not to be so different as all that even if its connection with the main story is – and should remain – uncertain and problematic). The division now between fair and dark sections can be more symmetrical in both ways. We are still basically following the story of the fashion photographer (coming up perhaps to some important fashion parade) but we might now have biographical glimpses too of the dark hero (to establish a bit more about his business perhaps in the hands of a now quite evidently cheating manger). But the main emphasis is still the process of photographing itself, the camera panning and sweeping over the shoulders of each man. But of course now the two are converging, elements of the dark man’s photography entering the photography of the fair man (strange dissonant images entering his fashion photography) and perhaps also (why not?) the reverse, elements of the fashion photography obtruding anomalously into the dark man’s photography. The same mixing of course takes place between the music associated with each man. We should also see something of the “alms-asking” element that has been introduced in the mall-scene (although this should not be too underlined but very lightly done, incidental). We should also see the fair man asking for things (he is not “begging” but he is in some sense coming out of his shell) and being mildly surprised that he has done so. The camera could also be a bit “knowing”, breaking slightly from a realistic frame by having each man, for instance, look behind them (as though they were aware of the presence of the other) although of course they are in reality in quite different places. One could here also follow up the idea (from the mall scene) that the black man always throws away his photographs. The fair man is increasingly dissatisfied with his photographs (all no doubt neatly arranged and docketed on his computer), might decide uncharacteristically to delete photographs (even perhaps an orgy of deleting of past files). The black man might by contrast decide to preserve a photograph (one single one)....... 20 mins Scene 6 Bangalore. The Rape So now the audience is pleased with itself. It has understood everything. So now we shake them up a bit. Continuing the story in Bangalore (it is not much of a story and it doesn’t really matter what it is. The little incidents surrounding the life of a fashion studio in the run-up to a show. Essentially this is work for a dialoguist and since the film will be in Kannada this I cannot do. There should however be some humour in the scenes. A film without humour is a dead film. Given the scene to come, it might centre around the hero’s diffidence about women. Attempts by girls to seduce him, by friends to pair him off, that sort of thing. But again it should all be lightly done, incidental, largely visual, if possible FUNNY). I am a great believer in entrapping the audience, in encouraging and then defeating their expectations, so everything in this scene is intended to wrong-foot them visually, emotionally and morally. But first of all I want to lull them into a sense of false security. So things begin as though it is yet another of the photographing sequences (the audience thinks it now knows exactly what to expect) and the tone is light even comic. A central moment (and the moment when the “photographing sequence” should abruptly drop – both the fair and the dark men can show an awareness of the moment) - is where the fair man’s eye/camera is panning across a line of girls – glamorous, knowing, models, tall and inviting – for his eye (and camera) to arrive at nothing and have to descend (simply because the girl is short in fact). [This is what I mean by “comic” here, a sort of Buster Keatonish “silent film” effect]. This girl is shorter and darker (not as much as a contrast as between our black and fair protagonists but definitely darker, a cheerful chocolate colour, let us say). She is completely without the knowing look of the models (we do not know why she is there, perhaps by some kind of accident, somebody’s relative.......). No simpering, no posing. She has a charming, open smile, all bright white teeth. Why his eye (and camera) alight on her who knows? something to do with the transition already working in him? something to do with his meeting in the mall with the “dark” man? But anyway this moment is going to completely get under his guard, “turn round” (a French word I cannot think of a good English translation for) his diffidence and lead him to......disaster. That of course the audience does not know and will not know until the disaster is (almost literally and physically) upon them. Wre have now left the photographing sequencing to tell what seems to be a romantic story and the tone should remain light, comic, preferably largely silent, performed as it were in mime or as though we are watching the scenes with the sound turned off (or obscured by ambient sound). But we are aware of a romantic encounter that will end up (it doesn’t matter whether we know why or how) with the man alone in a room with the girl, both seemingly in high spirits. At this point we poke the audience hard in the eye. The man is going to rape the girl. But what is actually happening is more complicated still. The man is actually having some kind of nervous breakdown. What he is doing is superimposing on the “real” scene with the girl in Bangalore the “remembered” scene of the fake-rape that took place in Mumbai. What the man is seeing is the dark girl giving him the come-on (just as the “fair” girl in Mumbai did); what is actually happening is that the dark girl is saying “no” (or rather indicating “no”) and that he is ignoring it and raping her. So what we have is one scene (in his imagination) superimposed on another. Now the audience is not going to know that all at once. What at first they see (or think they see) is just a happy continuation of the “romance” they have already been seeing (or think they have been seeing) developing in mime. With some jarring notes. There is a Quentin Tarantino film (I forget the title – it ends up as a very silly story of vampires) where at one point the psychopathic Tarantino character is watching an innocent young girl with her family. But as he watches her she makes completely uncharacteristic sexual suggestions to him. This is clearly actually happening in his own head but on the screen of course it is the same innocent young girl whom the audience sees talking in this very provocative, libertine adult fashion. Now what I am after here is something of the same effect (although more subtle and less obvious). The innocent “dark” girl talking in the voice and manner of the knowing, calculating “fair” seductress of the Mumbai fake-rape. Which is what the man is hearing (and seeing) in his head. And then gradually as the scene proceeds, the audience comes to understand, from visual clue to clue, what is actually going on. A very difficult and complex scene for actors and cameraman but quite possible, I believe. [A careful blow-by-blow scenario for the scene would have to be prepared. What in practice might have to be done is that the same scene would have to be filmed (not necessarily in its entirety) four times. Once with man and fair girl (the fake-rape), one with man and dark girl (the real rape), a third time with man and fair girl (enacting the real rape), and a fourth time with man and dark girl (enacting the fake rape). With a few stray images that mix the versions (the wrong shoe, the wrong ring on the wrong hand and so on) to act as further clues. Then everything would be down to clever editing].
At first the audience thinks it is watching the culmination of a romance, a straightforward sex scene (except for a jarring note – the girl not sounding as they would expect). Then they begin to understand that there are two different scenes, the ne in the man’s head and the one in reality. Then they begin to understand that the scene in the man’s head is related to the Mumbai rape. Then finally they understand (hardly earlier than the man himself) what is actually going on.
Both scenes are in a sense rapes (and neither in a sense rapes). In the first the girl has encouraged the man to have sex with her with the intention of accusing him of rape (motive? revenge of some sort. Money? This might be known from the opening sequence but is not important). [I have not really given any thought to how he clears hiimself of thi rape charge. Very tricky. It will be very interesting to see how DSK’s lawyers prove he was “trapped” if they can and as he almost certainly was].
The second is very really a rape but the man could be said not to know what he is doing. One irony (visual, physical, emotional, moral) is that in the first fake-rape, the girl becomes more active, encouraging violence, laying the basis for the later rape-claim, which in turn tends to further excite the man while in the real rape, the girl becomes utterly passive – as women often sensibly do in such situations, ruining the man’s enjoyment but also to avoid being hurt more. This I suggest could all be shown mainly through the movement of the legs (and I would be tempted also to play at a certain symbolic geometry with the camera – legs as tripods and monopods). Note in the fake-rape, it is the girl’s violence (perhaps she starts to scream and he has to try and gag her with his hand, which she then bites) that ends the matter (he realises something is not right) while in the real-rape, it is the equally girl’s passivity that finally brings him out of his fit (again he realises something is not right). Note also, whether or not the rape is effectively consummated in either scene is in itself of no importance, one way or the other.
The physical ironies in the act itself are a reflection of an irony in the aftermath. The fake-rape of course results in an accusation of rape (which was always it intention); the real rape (as we shall see) results in no accusation, hardly any reproach. The reasons for this we never know and I am no better placed than anyone else to say what they are but in my view the woman feels sorry for the man. She does not so much see violence and desire in him as pain and distress. In which, she is probably entirely correct.....
Although the intended effect is to unhinge, one thing needs to be absolutely clear. Screen rapes are customarily of two sorts, extremely violent and unpleasant or a rape that is not a rape, where the woman begins to respond as though she actually wanted to be raped. Both types correspond I suspect to different male fantasies (although it is true that women do have such fantasies too). This rape is neither of these things. It is not particularly violent (in both cases for different reasons the man thinks he is having sex with consent) but on the other hand it has to be absolutely clear that the dark girl is in reality not in any way consenting, that she responds in no way at all to the man. [It would be easy in the cutting to mix things so as to allow the opposite impression to be given but this should be carefully avoided].
20 mins
Scene 7 The Epileptic Fit
Rather predictable, this, but sometimes the audience needs to be proved right in their expectations (it is good for their morale). Cut to a far-off scene (the ghatts in Varanasi would be nice) where the dark man is in the throes of a particularly severe epileptic fit. Whether it needs to be specified or not I don’t really know but this is his “last” fit. Another fit and he is a dead man. Scene of some drama and bustle again, to break the monotony. But, in contrast to the previous scene of the fit (opening of film), here there is a certain sense of awe and dread, almost as though the fit were a ritual. The crowd of people around almost in slow motion, camera-wise perhaps out of focus (as seen by the man).
Scene 8 Bangalore. The Aftermath and departure.
Return to the scene of the rape. The girl remains naked on the floor (as naked as an Indian context allows), absolutely motionless, her lips set, her face a mask. These scenes should be slow and silent, giving the audience plenty of time to have their own (wrong) ideas about what the two people are thinking. The man is perhaps in a crouch, rocking backwards and forwards, holding his legs or holding his head. Traumatised? Gone crazy? Then pulls himself together, looks around. Is he thinking of killing the girl (perhaps his eye rest on something with which he could easily strangle her)? Is he thinking of paying her off, buying her silence (perhaps he goes through his pockets as though searching for money)? He goes to the wash-basin (does he wash himself frantically or does he do a double-take and decide not to wash himself at all?). Anyway he eventually leaves the room without a word said.
I would be inclined if there was time to follow the man (or again the man as camera) through the deserted night streets. Until he arrives home, enters his flat, and collapses onto his bed fully dressed and sleeps.....and wakes the next morning.
Here again we follow him as he prepares himself to go out. Perhaps we follow the girl too as she gets up and washes herself and dresses (my inclination would be to make the scene detailed and clinical – the process of cleaning the face and body after unwanted sex resembling the process of cleaning the face and body of a man who has just had an epileptic fit, perhaps also linking the ritual of cleansing with the cleansing of the body in the Ganges at Varanasi).
Anyway as the man makes his way to her house, we still don’t know what his intentions are. But he seems to have an intention. There is something purposeful now about his movement. He has presumably decided on some course of action. Does he want to explain and apologise? Or does he just want to prevent the girl from complaining? He is clearly concerned. Is he wretched with guilt? Or just worried about the possible scandal?
As he approaches her flat (or hotel room or whatever it is), he perhaps imagines the worst. Flashback scenes to the police or to the photographers in Mumbai [although my tendency would to be to play surreal trick here and have him imagine the police coming for him (or the photographers thronging him) not in Mumbai nor in Banagore but, completely unaccountably, on the ghatts in Varanasi. To have the dark girl shouting “he raped me” and pointing to a man in a dock in court who is....the dark man with his monopod]. Anyway he shakes it off. There is no reception committee outside the house, he enters, knocks. Come in.
The very short scene that follows should again hopefully defeat all expectations. Whatever his purpose, whatever he has prepared to say or to do, he never gets a chance. The young woman takes over. She is the adult (maternal); he the child. She doesn’t want to talk about “last night”. She isn’t going to go to the police, if that’s what he is worried about. She doesn’t particularly want to see him again but if he wishes them to be friends – emphatically just friends – then he knows where he can contact her. I am not too happy with this formulation. It needs to be something of this sort but there might be some better form of words possible. He mutters something about going away for a while. She takes little notice. He has been dismissed. He shuffles out.
This is the end of the film as far as the girl is concerned. At no time afterwards should there be any flashback to her, suggesting some sort or romantic promise or someone waiting “at home” (such as one would probably get in some crappy Hollywood film).
20 mins
Scene 9 En route for Himalayas
This is the final scene in the sequence of photographing pan and scan scenes but here you pretty well know what you want, because this is the process of the “baring” of the fair man so that he ends up as a naked beggar. But it should also follow the logic of the earlier sequences in terms of the fusion of the two imaginative and visual worlds of the two protagonists.
One small thing that needs to be dealt with in this section is the resolution (or semi-resolution or non-resolution) of the parallel plot. Nothing sentimental, nothing offering any promise of future romance or anything of that kind. Just perhaps his writing a letter on a scrap of paper that he finds or begs-and-borrows (writing with a bit of charcoal?) a note to say that he does want to be friends (or whatever, depending on the final formulation of her earlier words to him) and then finding someone willing to send the message or say they will send the message (whether or not they do or they will actually send the message could be left in doubt).
20 mins
Scene 10 Himalayas. Final Meeting.
This again you know how you want so I leave alone. The ending should remain as you envisaged it (no real resolution, absolutely no further return to the parallel plot.)
5 mins
Timings incidentally are entirely approximate. I have not much idea in truth how long things would take. They are just there as a rough guide.
PS There are things in this that are difficult to do but nothing that is I think necessarily very expensive or that necessarily requires anything in the way of special equipment. I have tried to keep any cinematographic cleverness always in the general conception (the man as camera, the camera over the shoulder) or in the editing (superimposition), never in the form of “effects” which work badly in low-budget films. Note also that apart from the scene in the mall, the film as conceived here is almost completely silent.
I’ve no idea what you will feel about it, but, since, for now at any rate, it is unpaid work, I shall not agonise too much over it. You are welcome to use any ideas you want, leave anything you don’t like, come back to me over anything you would like me to rework. Alin your hands.
Best wishes
David Bond
|
|
ಸಂವಾದ ಡಾಟ್ ಕಾಂ ಪರವಾಗಿ ಕಿರುಚಿತ್ರಗಳ ಚಟುವಟಿಕೆ ವ್ಯಾಪಕವಾಗಿ ನಡೆಯುತ್ತಿರುವಂತೆಯೇ ಅನೇಕರು ಒಂದೆಡೆ ಸೇರುವ ಸೂಚನೆ ಗಾಢವಾಗುತ್ತಿದೆ. ಕಿರುಚಿತ್ರವೊಂದರ ಚಿತ್ರೀಕರಣಕ್ಕೆ ಲೊಕೇಷನ್(ಸ್ಥಳ)ಗಳನ್ನು ಈಗಾಗಲೇ ಪಶ್ಚಿಮಘಟ್ಟದ ಸ್ಥಳಗಳಿಗೆ ಭೇಟಿ ನೀಡಿ ಚಿತ್ರೀಕರಣಕ್ಕೆ ಆಯ್ಕೆ ಮಾಡಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಪ್ರಧಾನ ಪಾತ್ರಗಳಿಗೆ ಸಾಕಷ್ಟು ಜನ ಆಸಕ್ತಿ ತೋರಿದ್ದು ಚಿತ್ರೀಕರಣ ಸೆಪ್ಟೆಂಬರ್ ವೇಳೆಗೆ ಆರಂಭವಾಗಿ ಅಕ್ಟೋಬರ್-ನವೆಂಬರ್ನಲ್ಲಿ ಪೂರ್ಣಗೊಳ್ಳಲಿದೆ. ವಾರಣಾಸಿ ಮತ್ತು ಹಿಮಾಲಯದಲ್ಲಿ ಕ್ಲಿಷ್ಟಕರ ಹವಾಮಾನದಲ್ಲಿ ಚಿತ್ರೀಕರಣ ಮಾಡುವ ಉದ್ದೇಶವೂ ಇದೆ. ಶೇಖರಪೂರ್ಣರ ಕಥೆಗೆ ಭಾರತೀಯ ಚಲನಚಿತ್ರಗಳಲ್ಲಿ ಅಪಾರ ಆಸಕ್ತಿ ಹೊಂದಿರುವ ಡೇವಿಡ್ ಬಾಂಡ್ ಪ್ರತಿಕ್ರಿಯಿಸಿ ಕಥಾನಕದ ನಿರೂಪಣೆಯನ್ನು ಒದಗಿಸಿದ್ದಾರೆ. ಡೇವಿಡ್ ಬಾಂಡರ ಆಂಗ್ಲದಲ್ಲಿರುವ ಪೂರ್ಣ ಪಠ್ಯವನ್ನು ದಾಖಲೆಗಾಗಿ ಇಲ್ಲಿ ಒದಗಿಸಲಾಗಿದೆ. ಈ ಪ್ರಾಜೆಕ್ಟ್ನಲ್ಲಿ ಆಸಕ್ತಿ ಇರುವವರು ಸಂಪರ್ಕಿಸಬಹುದು. ಸಂಪರ್ಕಿಸುವವರ ವಿಳಾಸ, ದೂರವಾಣಿ ಸಂಖ್ಯೆ ಇತ್ಯಾದಿಯೊಂದಿಗೆ ಅಭ್ಯರ್ಥಿಗಳ ಆಸಕ್ತಿಯ ವಿವರಗಳನ್ನೂ ನೀಡಬೇಕಾಗಿ ವಿನಂತಿ.