Much ado about historicals

Movies that borrow a slice of history are now being picked on for distorting the truth - the latest case in point being Padmavati

No form of publicity is bad publicity, goes an adage which has stuck ever since the invention of cinema. When a film hits the front pages of a newspaper, sparks pro and anti debates, public curiosity is aroused - and how! - leading to buoyant ticket sales.
Inadvertently, then, the swelling detractors of Sanjay Leela Bhansali's Padmavati, due for release on December 1, have assured its success at the cash counters. The Supreme Court of India has declared that there will be no stay on the release of any film that's passed by the Central Board of Film Certification.
In an unusual move, the Censor Board chairman Prasoon Joshi has stated that the board respects the integrity and artistry of Bhansali, never mind the objections raised - to be regarded as individual opinions - even by one of its board members.
Political groups have been protesting over months, adding to the anxiety and financial losses suffered when a fire outbreak had gutted the sets of the extravagantly-mounted film in Kolhapur in March this year. Moreover, within a month, unruly local elements attacked Bhansali and his team at the Jaigarh Fort in Jaipur. The filmmaker was roughed up. The attackers claimed that he was filming objectionable scenes between the characters of Rani Padmavati and Sultan Allauddin Khilji, being enacted by Deepika Padukone and Ranveer Singh. The film's team went on record to say that the allegations were patently false.
Reportedly, the legend of Padmavati is rooted in a centuries-old poem by Malik Muhammad Jayasi, and not in history. According to historian S. Irfan Habib, Rani Padmini is a legend originating in Jayasi's epic poem written in the 16th century. The debate whether the queen belongs to the realm of fact or fiction rages on.
Willy-nilly, Bhansali had incited the ire of self-appointed vigilantes also with his lavishly conceived and executed shows of pomp and pageantry, namely Goliyon Ki Raasleela: Ram Leela (2013) and Bajirao Mastani (2015). After much brouhaha and widespread publicity, both the super-budgeted films went on to become major hits. Indeed, Bajirao Mastani sprinted way ahead at the box office performance of Dilwale, starring Shah Rukh Khan and Kajol (that released around the same time).
Any film that has a basis in history appears to be asking for trouble. In a similar vein, Ashutosh Gowariker's Jodhaa Akbar (2008) was picked on for distorting chronicled facts. Banned in some states, the recreation of an era of the Mughal times managed a successful run overall. The opulent drama was released all over the world on DVD, and continues to be telecast on channels without any sort of ado.
The point that dramatic licence is inevitable in filmmaking cannot be sufficiently stressed. By contrast, a film of yore which narrated the story of, say, the Queen of Jhansi (Jhansi Ki Rani, 1953), who fought against the colonial Raj, is remembered as India's first technicolour endeavour. Directed by the stalwart Sohrab Modi, the eponymous role was played by his real-life wife Mehtab.
The legend of the 16th century Queen of Malwa, who was married to Sultan Baz Bahadur, was retold on the screen in Rani Rupmati (1957) unopposed. The historical film Tipu Sultan (1959), depicting the tumultuous times of the 18th century ruler of Mysore, was released without a glitch. And Samrat Prithviraj Chauhan (1959), a take on the valour of the 12th-century king, was released without a murmur.
Similarly, Taj Mahal (1963), based on Shah Jahan's monumental love for Mumtaz, had a smooth run. Needless to recall, Mughal-e-Azam (1960) ­- depicting the doomed romance between Prince Salim and Anarkali, believed by many to be an imaginary courtesan - is regarded as one of Indian cinema's foremost classics to date.
Perhaps the first intervention on the dramatisation of a historical figure was registered for Sanjay Khan's TV series The Sword Tipu Sultan (1990). Protests were organised by political groups and a petition was filed against its telecast. Subsequently, the Supreme Court gave the serial the go-ahead - the condition being a pre-credit acknowledgement that the work was a piece of fiction. Even while it was gaining popularity, a fire broke out on its sets in Mysore. The death toll was as high as 62 people. Sanjay Khan, who was burned grievously, had to spend 13 months in hospital.
To come back to the here and now, one sincerely hopes that the uproar against Padmavati is quelled. Let's watch cinema, not protests.
wknd@khaleejtimes.com