Freak Show : A Flip Through The

Parodies Of Cinema
Cinephiles, the most intriguing yet beguiling creatures of all, discover and formulate
intimacy in the catchpenny front rows of the theatres, inhaling the ruminations of
artisans, the odes of whom sprinkle in the form of ample-tender rays that originate
from a cordial gloom where the projectionist dissipates. It is in these front seats, do
we witness both classic and duds, amassing moments from celluloid, only to
ruminate upon them in the times to come, forming critiques in the mind of ours,
finally spawning words that can belong to the either class: praise or censure.
Commemorate those moments when you sat in the darkness of the cinematic
arena, your popcorns snubbed aside, your fist clenched tightly upon the arm of the
familiar coral seat, as you witnessed Drew Barrymore scurrying helplessly through
her own house, whacking down any object that comes in her way, only to attune her
stumbling self, as she tries arduously to escape the murderous intentions of the
masked serial killer 'Ghostface'. While your heart was beating expeditiously, your
adrenaline trailed towards its apex, as conclusively the terrified Barrymore falls
prey to the carcinogenic stab construed by the serial killers knife. The film was Wes
Cravens Scream (1996) and such was its commencing sequence. Thus imagine the
entire film that yet again glamorized the term slasher-flick. For cinema lovers, it
was a prerequisite change of flavor brought about by artists who were conversant
with the much desired penchant of the populous that revolved around callous
bloodbath. Warmly accepting Scream, audience molded into admirers under the
influence of the praise they imparted for Cravens cinematic piece.
Four years later, a director comes forth with a directorial venture entitled Scary
Movie that too circles around the murderous expeditions of the serial killer
Ghostface. The Keenan Ivory Wayanss rendition not only possessed the qualitative
provenance of Cravens thriller but also derived inspiration from other illustrious
cinematic works of diverse genres such as The Sixth Sense, The Usual Suspects, The
Matrix et cetera. The characterization of Wayanss film can be further elaborated in
terms of a particular aspect that was perhaps its crest. Slapstick humor. Wayans
compiled and carefully assembled the signature moments of films that inspired him,
transpiring a cinematic piece that was coated with wisecrack humor brought to life
by whimsical characters who were guided by an absurd plot. Although the viewers
were devoid of clenched fists and accelerated heartbeats throughout the film yet
laughter induced bellyache constantly accompanied them as sequence after
sequence flipped from the films inception to the end. The humor lacked wit yet
was playfully lovable, thus computing guffawing as an inescapable phenomenon.

Many critics and patrons of cinematic art would discover utmost pleasure in
criticizing such a piece of work that has evolved through the tampering of much
acclaimed creations. But if the execution is carried out bon fide, in good faith,
accomplishing the film makers coveted objectives, then whats the harm? Yet
again, as if guided by some bizarre form of insight, praise it is.
Blatantly disregard all the primitive definitions of parody films and the lingering
notion of deprecation that trails along with them. Rather, lets accept parodies as a
filmmakers sarcastic yet saucy take on an extant form of cinema. An embodiment
of satires that are overly ludicrous in nature. Often are we blessed with the
contingency of experiencing the aberrant paradox of one form of cinema
challenging other, that too in such a blunt yet candid manner. To witness such
strident challenges, one could always opt for some classics that merrily dominate
the freak show of parodies. With Charlie Sheen spoofing off Top Gun and Rambo
with the aid of his brazen mimicry in the much acclaimed Hot Shots (1991) and its
sequel Hot Shots! Part Deux (1993); with Dracula: Dead And Loving it (1995)
initially being viciously panned down by critics yet gathering a cult following in the
times to come owing to the humane virtues of the approving populous; with Mike
Myers flagrantly eroding the luster gathered by the James Bond franchise over the
years by portraying the character of an extremely geek spy who is way ahead
potent than bond when it comes to detonating the bad guys and lascivious
mademoiselles alike, in parodies such as Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me
(1999) and Austin Powers In Goldmember (2002); with Scary Movie (2000)
spawning four back to back sequels in the years to come fundamentally spoofing
anything that came in its way; with Stephen Chow delivering the rather acclaimed
martial arts sensation that trolled on the edge of some serious kung-fu affair; with
all these anomaly absurd works that have matured out of sheer immaturity in the
recent years, one could definitely vouch for a few laughs and a sense of blemished
cinematic satisfaction.
But an uncompromising fact designating the presence of that significant line, that
isolates a chef d'oeuvre from a fiasco, is incessant. In the freak show of parodies
too, there exists a discerning factor that infuses a mandatory contrast between
parodies that make one laugh and parodies that irritate. The travesty lies in the
evidence that the horde of vexatious denizens is much preponderant in the
dominion of parodies, thus what most parodies successfully end up doing is over
passing the unholy line, transitioning beyond the asinine, annoying the viewers,
irritating them to such a bothersome extent that somewhere in their subconscious
mind, the flair to enjoy a parody dies, rather getting replaced by a blasphemous
perspective of the genre in context. Satirical cinematic pieces such as Meet The
Spartans (2008), Superhero Movie (2008), Disaster Movie (2008) et cetera are
foolproof examples of hideously ugly parodies that one should stay away from.
They are like parodies of the parody world and for a cinema enthusiast it cant get
dreadful than that.

Parodies in our dear old Bollywood? The answer to this sarcastic rhetorical question
is a farce in itself. According to film critic Anupama Chopra, Bollywood is an industry
where scriptwriters sashay around ceremoniously donning the crown of cool
copycats. The industry has no qualms regarding plagiarism and such writers
flourish, for what they do is cook Hollywood Meals in Indian Spice. The irony is
that the Indian populous gratefully accepts whats served to them. For if the
essential chutzpah is present in the cinema thats being served to them by amateur
chefs, they are present in the theatre devouring it. Thus, most of the time, such
thievery results in the production of a quite muddled form of cinema that reeks of
the dearth of originality and innovation; thereby such cinematic pieces are parodies
themselves, in a truthfully vague manner.
Like, action, adventure, art, drama, noir et cetera, parody too is a film genre
of its own; it makes the viewers go whoop by pinning a moustache to the face of
Monalisa. As long as the execution of the process is decent and noble, with the end
product being delivered in good faith, parody films should be accepted graciously
with open arms rather than being frowned upon, for every now and then, people fall
short of nitty-gritty sensible logic in order to become slaves to a few cordial laughs.
Fin.