What really happend…

Bollycomics

Despite an overromanticized head swirling with cardamom and elephants and Indo-Saracenic doodads, only two experiences in India were less interesting than I was expecting: the Taj Mahal (I’ll explain that one later) and going to the movies. There are such tempting descriptions about what it’s like to be in a theater in India, how it’s boisterous and unruly, how people talk and sing and dance, how it’s acceptable to yell at the screen. I got nothing like that.

movie posters in Kolkata, July 2006

Maybe I went to the wrong movies or to the wrong theaters: Fanaa at the Plaza in Delhi and Krrish at Fun Republic (which is a very bad name for a movie theater, by the way) in Ahmedabad (’cause you can’t even see Fanaa in Ahmedabad, of course).

Our showing of Fanaa had a tiny audience - only a handful of people in addition to my group of four American teachers and our fearless tour manager and film nut Rajan. Yes, I saw Fanaa with an Indian tour guide from Delhi - he promises he is not a terrorist. And most of the people there were in seats behind us, so if there was any excitement, I totally missed it, even though I was looking for it. The loudest and most prolific talker in the theater was in fact one of my colleagues, who was entranced by Kajol spinning into the Ashokan pillar wheel but otherwise wouldn’t sit still and pay attention. A few mobile phones went off here and there, and some kids ran up and down the aisles, but nothing major. I’ve seen that at home.

The theater for Krrish was much livelier, not a packed house but respectably crowded, and our group of twelve arrived late and confusedly, stumbling over people to get to our assigned seats (we don’t have these in the US, at least not in any theater I’ve been to) in the dark and trying really hard not to spill popcorn. Never let it be said that a disorganized group of American travelers who don’t speak the local language didn’t bring it on the rowdiness. Lots of general chitchat - well, to be fair, it could have been nonstop witty comments, I have no idea - and lots of mobile phones going off. So basically, like the first one, but moreso.

So where was the roar of the crowd, the democratic critiquing, the naach-gaana-along I had been so happily anticipating? I have a few theories about the lack of…of…spirit demonstrated by my fellow movie-goers. These are just theories, of course, and anyone who wants to tell me how silly they are is welcome to do so.

Maybe behavior depends on the type of movie. Maybe Fanaa and Krrish aren’t in-the-aisles kinds of movies. You’d think I’d have an opinion on this, but since I don’t know Hindi and didn’t see these with subtitles, I don’t think I’m in a good place to comment on what they’re really about or how they play out. I would have guessed that Kajol alone would have been enough to bring certain people to their feet, but no. And I know I always dance along with Hrithik at home; I was in the middle of a row or I might have in Ahmedabad too. Maybe Fanaa had been out long enough that people’s excitement had worn off; maybe they danced and yelled during their first viewing(s) and were just coming back to pick up nuances. Maybe Delhi and Ahmedabad aren’t participatory towns - are people are beaten down by the weariness of daily national govermental inefficiencies in one and the iron filmy fist of the state government on movies in the other? Maybe Priyanka was so boring that anyone who wanted to hoot and whistle at her realized how unattractive that character actually was. Or maybe mobile phones have taken over this aspect of daily life too - if you’re yelling at the screen, you won’t hear that all-important call from your roommate about bringing home some ice cream (yet another problem that could be solved by setting phones to vibrate, but never mind).

What is clear is that I need to do more evidence-gathering and first-hand observation. Mumbaikars, anyone want to host the foreign press and show me what your city’s made of? I thought so.