I have no hesitation in crowning an old acquaintance of mine as the most
cynical individual ever to walk upon planet earth. It was almost as he had
pessimism for breakfast, suspicion for lunch and skepticism for dinner.
For every public ‘scandal’ or 'controversy' he had a consistent retort
‘it’s a publicity stunt, you wait, there has to be a film or product on the
horizon. Trust me, man’. The gratuitous usage of the word ‘man’ was as annoying
as his perpetual cynicism.
Quite often this would lead to raucous arguments, I for one could not
subscribe to the theory that any publicity is good publicity. I could scarcely
fathom that any individual would allow his or her name to be sullied in the
most repulsive sludge merely to create a ripple of publicity to launch a
product.
“The public has a weak memory man, they forget the scandal in time and
there is a good chance that the product sells” he would pontificate with
certitude.
I wish I could inform you that my optimism about mankind was right and
he in his permanent state of incredulity was erroneous. Alas, the contrary
usually occurred. For every ‘scandalous controversy’ that appeared on the
forefront, there was almost always a product launch followed.
More than a decade later, a lot has changed. My opinion of mankind is
less favorable. I now find myself treating every occurrence in the media with
a healthy deal of skepticism, but also try to keep an open mind as I can
humanly muster.
So let's attempt to examine the latest controversy, that is about
Deepika Padukone’s visit to the JNU campus.
Her film Chhapaak is by no means the big bad ‘entertainer’
that everybody is queuing to watch. It is the story about the harrowing experience
of a young acid attack survivor. This is a niche film and everybody involved
probably have modest expectations from it.
Once upon a time a small black and white advert of an Amitabh Bachchan
film in the entertainment section of a newspaper was enough to get the public
crowding and quarreling outside the cinema for tickets.
In present times, we have numerous films releasing in cinemas every
week, also releasing that week is series and feature films on various streaming
platforms and there are myriad entertainment channels on television, often
broadcasting films released a few months ago at the cinema.
In this climate of a surfeit of choices to get any individual to step
out of their house and into the cinema hall is quite a feat. The first step to
cause this is to creating awareness about the film. How often have we heard
people say with dismay "When did that film release? I really wanted
to watch it. I wonder why they didn't publicize it?"
It is beyond any doubt to state that before Deepika’s visit, there were
a few news items about Chhapaak The trailer out and had gained favorable
notices, but the casual viewer was probably not even aware of the film.
It is a waste of time factually comprehend Deepika’s motives behind
visiting JNU. She will say it was out of humane compassion while others see may
see it as a more calculative move. What we can do it study the after-effects of
the visit.
People who opposed Deepika’s visit began trending boycott tags for the
film and the actress. There was also a sub-controversy about the name and religion of the acid attacker, once again it had its own hashtag.
Those who supported her began trending support tags. In
the end, 6 out of the top ten trends were about the film. As Oscar Wilde said
’There is only one thing in life worse than being talked about is not
being talked about.’
With social media becoming one of the biggest sources for news outlets,
every TV News channel carried news items and ‘debates’ about Deepika’s JNU
visit, as these news stories were broadcasted the trailer of the film was
played and photos of Deepika were shown in an endless loop. The debates had
their own hashtags. The newspapers also carried news items and columns.
In the end, casual social media users, television news viewers, and
newspaper consumers are aware of the existence of the film, which they probably
would not in the absence of this controversy.
We are living in times where the opening week of the film decides its
fate if a film fails over the weekend, multiplexes are quick to reduce shows on
the following Monday. Hence any attention for a film, a few days prior to its
release can be crucial in deciding its box office numbers.
Let’s examine the boycott versus support groups. There will be those
who will not watch the movie, no matter what. The irony wasn’t lost on anybody that anti Chhapaak hashtags posts played a vital role in creating awareness about the film.
On the other end of the spectrum, we have people who have sworn to watch
the film, perhaps multiple times, irrespective of its quality. Then there
are those who are politically agnostic or ill-informed but now aware of the
film. If even a small percentage of these lot decide to take that trip to
the cinema, the film may just recover its investment in the first week and that
may lead to a respectable second week.
A controversy such as this may have harmed big-budget 'entertainer' that needs to get as many as possible in the cinema in its opening week. But
for a film with a difficult theme, that probably never had a large audience in the first place, it doesn’t harm to augment the niche with a significant
fanatical audience.
Since we are living in times were Twitter followers matter, the star of
Chhapaak Deepika has gained 40k followed since the controversy.
If the film does succeed after all this, the producers and its
supporters will say ‘good cinema has triumphed’ irrespective of the 'odious'
detractors. Hopefully, they will thank the detractors for unwittingly
participating in the campaign to create awareness about the film. If the film
fails, irrespective of its content, the ‘haters’ can be blamed for bringing it
down and they can swiftly move on to the streaming platforms and film awards.
“I told you man” is what my perpetually cynical friend would have
proclaimed with certitude. I wonder if he would have been right?
Comments
Post a Comment