As a journalist, I learnt how to read between the lines, and as student of cinema I had learnt how to read between the frames. Maybe thats the reason, I came up with this idea that Pop Art is the apt synonym for Bollywood film maker Farah's Khan's canvas on Celluloid.I am not saying Farah Khan is the new age Andy Warhol. But she is a Pop artist in her own league.
Pop Art, has its wild supporters and its harsh critics galore. With Farah Khan's films, though, the critics seem to be slightly in a higher proportion. The choreographer's move from the dancefloor, to the director's chair, and from superb dance numbers to somewhat loud and kitschy films, has been the source of many rounds of criticisms. But did we all realise that be it Main Hoon Naa, or Om Shanti Om, or the latest Tees Maar Khan, its her ode to pop art which just shines through. Was that a conscious decision to introduce pop art through her films, or am I reading too much? Well, that can surely be a bone of contention.
For the uninitiated what is POP ART? Its a precursor to Post Modern Art, but all this sounds quite wordy, does it not. Here comes our favorite encyclopedia to the quick rescue. Wikipedia defines Pop Art as an art movement that emerged in the mid 1950s in Britain and in the late 1950s in the United States. Pop art challenged tradition by asserting that an artist's use of the mass-produced visual commodities of popular culture is contiguous with the perspective of fine art.Pop art employs aspects of mass culture, such as advertising, comic books and mundane cultural objects. Pop art is aimed to employ images of popular as opposed to elitist culture in art, emphasizing the banal or kitschy elements of any given culture, most often through the use of irony. Now this definition should already bring forth certain similarities, does it not? Or is my assumption about the Pop Art connect so dry? Now to deconstruct and debunk:
KITSCH, thats the word which comes to mind when one starts soaking in the frames of Khan's reels. And she has ensured that she has maintained that trend in all her films so far. Pop art highlights often the kitschy elements of any popular culture. Ms Khan does seem to be doing just that, if one decides to read between her frames. The 1970s and 1980s were known for the over the top Bollywood films. The larger than life characters, the exaggerated sequences, were staple. And a quick look at Farah's platter just shows the uncanny similarity. Om Shanti Om, Main Hoon Naa and Tees Maar Khan are quity kitschy for that matter. Many complain of stupidity, many complain of loudness, but do we all miss maybe the conscious effort to highlight her films as an expression of Bollywood Pop art of Bollywood kitsch. Her films borrow heavily from all the exaggerations which were earlier a part of Bollywood. Think of the songs from TMK, and Main Hoon Naa and their picturizations. Now think of maybe a song from the film Himmatwala, for instance. How about a Jeetendra jumping around with his leading lady in tow, in a beach adorned with several dozens of dancers,and not to miss the oh so loud colors. The similiarites between the films shines through when we try to think. So basically in her ode to pop art, Farah has surely borrowed from a once popular phase of B town's own productions. 
Its not just the songs which scream about the similarity of Kitschy Bollywood. Its her entire MISE- EN- SCENE, which screams KITSCH. Mise - en -scene refers to everything that appears before the camera and its arrangement—composition, sets, props, actors, costumes, and lighting. The uber colorful clothes of the protagonist in Tees Maar Khan, the overtly oldish style of Ram Prasad Sharma, or Sushmita Sen's chiffon sarees, or Amrita Rao's grungy avatar, in MHN's college saga, or the lifestyle of of Om Kapoor, in OSO. Everything seems to be over the top. Farah has carried forward this notion of being over the top, in her characters, sets, costumes, frames, in all three of her films. Its a thread of conitinuity which passes seamlessly. And Pop Art is often criticised for being over the top.
Now who remembers the sequence from Main Hoon Naaa where Shah Rukh Khan tries to dodge the saliva from his professor in a Matrix like avatar. We laughed our hearts out at the stupidity of naminga rickshaw "Dhanno." Or the mere introduction of the Mohabbat Man character in the film within the film in Om Shanti Om. How about the Ismail Koyla connect in Tees Maar Khan where the offenders teeth shine through like in an award winning chewing gum ad? How about Master India the thief in TMK, and why not any other thief? Bollywood scriptwriters could have come up with any other thief? Pop art is known to borrow imagery from advertisements,comic books, and popular music. Isnt Farah doing just that. She is consciously borrowing from popular culture, borrowing from images already well known to us, to create a text of her style of filmmaking. If you watch the films carefully, then many more such elements will come forth, how and where she has borrowed from, to form her canvas on celluloid. Matrix or Superman, Sholay or Chewing Gums, the connect is there for you and me to notice. 
So next time we decide to write off any film maker as making absolutely meaningless films, maybe we should delve a bit deeper, and read between the frames.
No comments