Post by Thoithoi O'Cottage on May 27, 2014 16:42:59 GMT 5.5
From a discussion on Manipuri Film Festival group page (23 and 24 May 2014):
Thoithoi O'Cottage:
Thabal (Samarjit Naorem, Gyanand, 2013) was another Manipuri film I watched while at home. Nothing about this is new in the history of world cinema, but in Manipur nobody has done anything like this. This is absolutely new in Manipuri cinema.
What are the reasons for my claim? Despite some similarity with ancient Manipuri society (in fact some folk elements enrich the film), the world Gyanand (story and direction) and Samarjit (screenplay and direction) create in this film is absolutely fictional. This land has its own rules, morals. Gyanand, who is also the film’s make-up artist and costume designer, adds details to the film’s world with his sense of color and dressing. Whatever color visible within the frame (except those of Nature) is his artistic choice—of costumes, props, etc. Nothing is accidental in the film. Even the locations were a very painstaking choice. The costumes are his creation—nobody in the history of Manipur wore any of those dresses.
Cinematographer Imo Yumnam and editor Mohendro of KAMS have done good jobs.
There are directorial and set design weaknesses, and the story is not detailed, the characters are not properly developed, and these make the film weak, but not weaker than any other Manipuri films (except two—Mami Sami and Thoicha) since the birth of digital films in the state.
The film deserves a long study--the costume design, color, and film type. I will write.
The psychological position the female villain (played by Merina, screen name forgotten) occupies is not very well developed. She is one of the most complex characters I've ever come across in Manipuri cinema. The finest, most complex and most developed character ever in Manipuri cinema is Tayal of Mami Sami (Ningthouja Lancha, 2008). It would have been great if Gyanand and Samarjit developed their female villain's character.
Saw the trailer a few days ago, and it looked appealing but then again, isn't that what trailer's are supposed to do. Cannot say anything much until i watch the film. Yes, the costumes were stylish but a certain character's costume actually i thought didn't connect to the Manipuri way. Even if the film is a fiction and until it is a fantasy ( i first thought it was a period film and still in doubt having not seen the film nor the found the genre) , i believe the costumes should be true to it's period. But yes, it's a good effort by the team, we hope and want to see more of such films.Thoithoi O'Cottage:
Thoithoi O'Cottage:Thabal is not a period film either, oja Brajamani Laisom. It is not a fantasy film either. A fictional one, which does not have any rootings in reality or history. Gyanand is an artist, and his film is an art--good or bad, that is another thing, but his film does what art, as far as I understand it, should do. The function of the kind of art I like is not subservient to reality, but it creates a world of its own. Art which imitates reality and is determined much by reality is, to my view, art of a lower kind. (Yes, many would differ from me in this.)Gyanand has liberated himself from the trend of Manipur's social cinema which assumes an "educational responsibility", teaching the audience what we already know, such as corruption is rampant in our society (Danger, Ajit Ningthouja, 2014), there are a lot of gundas (Danger, Ajit Ningthouja, 2014), it is wrong for parents to forcibly marrying off their daughters without taking their own lives into account (Kunti, director name and year forgotten), and so on. Such films are quite didactic to my sensibility, and they don't appeal much.Thabal is NOT A GOOD FILM, but it is still "cinematically" and "artistically" better than "nearly" all Manipuri films. At the same time there are several, very many, EVEN VITAL cinematic errors and weaknesses in the film. The strengths of the film are primarily because of the general weaknesses of our cinema. These strengths, or rather the differences are in costume design, make-up, story/plot (it's completely fictional, meaning that it does not have any social responsibility--it's like horror films: you don't watch horror films to learn some ghost-fighting techniques to use in real life; in this sense horror movies are "pure art" if made consciously), etc.The editing and cinematograpy--they are cinematic in Thabal. I hate the general teleplay feel of our current cinema. Thabal is cinematic. Yes, a cinema should necessarily, basically be cinematic, and there should be no praise for its being cinematic, but when all others of our cinema are uncinematic, I feel like praising Thabal for being what it should be--cinematic. It is like praising a dog for being a dog, not a rabbit. Almost all of our dogs are rabbits.
While I like musicals, I don't like Bollywood type of songs in films (even in Lancha's Mami Sami), but in the absence of better exemplary clips (and the official trailer failing to convey the film feel of the film), the following song clip shows the feel of Thabal:
), the following song clip shows the feel of Thabal:In this I have to clarify that I have to watch Mayanglambam Rajkidsun Meetei's films closely--The Lake, and Amamba Sayon. I've casually watched The Lake, and its feel was cinematic. That's also completely fictional, but I have to watch it again, and also Amamba Sayon before I claim anything historically in relation with Thabal for the last time.The place of Thabal in Manipuri cinema is historical, meaning that it would not have occupied this place if our cinema has already reached an advanced stage. Honestly, our cinema is just beginning. I do not put much credit on what are regarded as our celluloid classics--Matamgi Manipur, Ishanou, Imagi Ningthem, etc. These are honestly poor films in my view, but they are our classics because we do not have better ones. Even Ningthouja Lancha's Mami Sami is weak on many cinematic grounds. It has a good, problematic plot/story, and Lancha made it with the required technical knowledge and "some" cinematic aesthetic sense (he is clearly better than every one of our other filmmakers, living and dead). At least there is the lack of stylistic uniformity (not to mention others) in Mami Sami clearly obvious a film-intelligent viewer. However, I should say Mami Sami has inaugurated a new era of Manipuri cinema, though nothing has happened after this inauguration six years ago. No good film has happened after that.Again, the place of Thabal in Manipuri cinema is historical. The film shows Gyanand and Samarjit do not have a cinematic training/education--there is no visual narrative in Thabal. Filmmakers excellent in their trade tell their story visually. Thabal tells the story through dialogue, and therefore, the story is fast (though the film's quite long run-time), and it does not have details.I may be wrong, but it seems to me that Gyanand the costume designer and make-up artist took to filmmaking/film production after he is dissatisfied with working in other's films, in which his creativity was curtailed and circumcised. Working in others' film projects, he must not have been able to make the full use of his creativity, and it must have downed on him that only making his own film would give his creativity a free rein.Visual storytelling is the soul of the cinema. In this the visual shows what happens and gives most of the information. Without visual storytelling, a filmmaker has to depend on verbal storytelling.Here is one example of visual storytelling. In Lawless (John Hillcoat, 2012), cutting from a talk scene of a sheriff and Special Agent Charlie Rakes (Guy Pearce), Jack Bondurant, the youngest of the Bondurant brothers, cut the picture of another sheriff (Gary Oldman) out of a newspaper. In this shot, we do not know who is cutting the picture, because the action is shown in close-up.The next shot (medium long) shows who is cutting the picture--Jack Bondurant. But the purpose of this shot is more than showing who is cutting the picture, it also covers a large portion of Jack's room, mostly and particularly the wall which is full of newspaper clippings. This shot shows that Jack's cutting the picture this time is not the only time--he has done it so much that his clippings fill the wall. When a person has done something particular repeatedly for a long time, that something becomes part of his character, his personality. This shot shows Jack's personality. Nobody in the film says anything about Jack's newspaper clipping, only this shot does, and this shot adds details or texture or a further dimension to his character developed in other ways. This is visual storytelling.The following frames are from a scene in Sin City (Robert Rodriguez, Frank Miller, Quentin Tarantino, 2005). This part of the scene does not have much dialogue. The head mercenary, Manute orders Becky (a young prostitute) killed, when he has with her help kidnapped Gail (the leader of the group of prostitutes in Old Town). Manute demands the head of Jackie Boy, killed by Miho (a martial art expert) for harassing Becky, and whose body was thrown in a morass by Dwight, who followed Jackie, Shellie's ex-boyfriend, for harassing her, now his girl-friend. The man who steps forward to finish Becky is pierced by Miho's (a martial art expert) arrow, the shaft of which carries a note from Dwight wrapped around it. The note proposes a trade-off between Jackie's head and Gail. The mercenary group backs out for the trade-off.When the group flows out of the building, a half-dozen men are seen within the frame lying dead pierced with long shafts of arrows, visually telling that Miho has done the shooting for quite a while, finishing off those standing guard over the building. A quiet strategy, enabling Dwight and the group of prostitutes (perched on building tops) to destroy the mercenary group easily.Without Miho shooting the man who steps forward to finish Becky, the arrow-pierced bodies lying dead would not be meaningful but rather confusing. Without the arrow-pierced bodies, Miho shooting the man would be flat, and the scene would not have the depth it has with both the shooting and the dead bodies. What has been visually narrated in this part of the scene is not to be replaced by verbal narration.
