Is Mrinal Sen lacklustre? And 410 films?

I was a probationer during the ‘‘Golden Age’’ of the International Film Festival of India, the 70s, when masters of the stature of Satyajit Ray and Elia Kazan graced the festival. Even then, the press was ruthless in its assessment of the festival. They described the festival as ‘‘lacklustre’’ then, as they do now. What is lacklustre? Is the presence of filmmakers of the stature of Mrinal Sen, Shaji Karun and Carla Camurati not important to a festival? Someone is being unfair.

We got films, nearly 410 in all, despite competition from festivals abroad. Over 80 foreign delegates attended the festival. Is that lacklustre? The Directorate of Film Festivals was focussed. Our objective was to showcase the best of Indian cinema and promote it throughout the year for moviegoers and show them world cinema. There are young filmmakers in the country who need the festival and the Panorama allows them to get an entry to festivals held abroad. And we do it at the Government’s expense. As for ‘Cinema of The World’, we consciously chose the 10 best films we wanted our viewers to see. People may criticise the films but we have always maintained that it’s like a feast. You have to pick and choose.

I must admit that acquiring films is a difficult business as they come for a hefty price that is beyond the control of even the filmmaker. In fact, from the next year, we are proposing a screening fee to acquire films from distributors.

(As told to Anuradha Raman)