History revisited

Merely re-releasing an old classic like Garm Hava under PVRs Directors Rare Section is not enough. The restored film should be given a proper time slot, wherein people would go and watch it. Proper publicity and hype should also be generated to create an awareness amongst the movie-goer. What happens is that in India all our efforts are half-baked. A national movement needs to be created, involving the entire film industry, government and the common man.
The trend of restoring old classics is slowly catching on, but this should be considered more as a necessity and undertaken on a massive scale. I strongly believe that, what is lost we need to find, what is there we need to restore and what we create we need to preserve.
Although I am happy that Garm Hava has been restored and re-released, I am equally concerned about whether they have preserved and retained the original material. You cannot take away the memories of people who have worked on the film and who had seen it when it was first released. I am also against colourisation of old classics. I was very unhappy when they used colour technology and re-released Pakeezah. We have to respect the original creation of the film-maker. I also consider the remake of Ramesh Sippy’s Sholay in 3D as a very bad idea.
One must remember that a film is a living organic element and not a dead piece of celluloid. Films reflect who we are and our culture. There is a timeless quality that makes a film a unique piece of art. Sometimes when the film is released, you may not find any value to it. For instance, Fearless Nadia which was called a C-grade, stunt film, is now considered a classic. When we go to the museum, we rave about a piece of stone belonging to the Harappa civilisation, but what about films? We are part and parcel of it, so hum logon ko toh preserve karo.
Garm Hava is a very rare film that dealt with the issue of partition. Had this film not survived, then you can imagine that there would be nothing left of that era. It is so important for this generation to know about our history. But, the reason to the lukewarm response to Garm Hava’s release was the lack of publicity. The attitude, I believe was that, ‘we have restored the film, released it, now you see it’. In England, on the other hand, when nine films of Alfred Hitchcock were restored, they decided to do it on a large scale, involving the industry and public at large, giving credit to all those who had donated money for its restoration and release. The films were showcased not only in theatres around London and England, but also at public places like the Convent Garden, etc. We too could do a similar thing and screen these classics at places like Ballard Pier or Kala Ghoda festival to reach out to a larger audience, and thereby create a movement that also involves the young generation.
While, it has become easier to make films with digital technology and preserve them, the fact is that it is a quick but temporary solution. I call this the digital dilemma. A film shot on digital technology has a shelf life of 15 years, but after that it needs to be preserved and restored, with the advanced technology available at that time.
Deepak Cinema, I think, is doing a commendable job at re-releasing old classics. As an institution, they can further the cause and help young film-makers to showcase their work, and also become a hub for showing restored films.
I strongly believe that cinema is an art form that needs to be preserved for posterity and should become a part of the film industry’s DNA.

As told to Farida Khanzada