THE ROLE OF CINEMA IN REPRESENTING POLITICS

GROUP:16

INTRODUCTION:
The mainstream film has consistently epitomized this strain between workmanship, legislative
issues, and trade. Emotional authenticity or creative dream turned into the predominant types of
artistic story, springing from a narrative motivation to investigate the world or a desire to escape
from its stifling presence - yet consistent with the basic to draw in as huge a crowd of people as
could be expected. Showing us how the world gave individuals thoughts with regards to how it very
well may be better; however philosophical control of crowd reaction has never been far away. In this
non-spot of infotainment and individualized delight chasing, films with an educational political
substance make us restless: by giving us the other attempting to cross the boundary into the Good
Life or the summed up bedlam and savagery of the disappointed. Governmental issues have gotten
unfashionable and lawmakers are respected, best-case scenario, with sceptical lack of concern: but
there stays an appetite in numerous individuals to go past the fictions of the interceded world and
face gives that solitary educated legislative issues can resolve.

Perhaps the most remarkable medium where the visual components and political message
collaborate is film. Movies in India not simply mirror the social, social, and imaginative customs yet
additionally address novel practices of political turn of events. The depiction of governmental issues
and society can be perceived in the endeavours made by chiefs to utilize their film or work as a
"means" to change society. In the endeavour to achieve a change, films perform capacities that may
serve a specific political interest. Over the long haul, the proceeded with the depiction of this
political interest turns out to be molded to the point that the movies, under the clothing of teaching
the general public, may turn advocate in nature. Also, this advocate approach gets antagonistic due
to the 'power' which goes with the way of talking, which will in general choose how the general
public will be kept up. Political film today implies a film, which puts itself rather than another person;
shows the distance among words, sounds, pictures, developments, and feelings by change style.

On the off chance that the philosophical heading of Hindi film of the nineteen-fifties and sixties
mirrored the socio-political direction of the Nehruvian time, it was basically giving a connection
between film and the course of country building. Its uniqueness lay in its firm establishment in the
predominant socio-social setting and ethos that mirrored the expectations and yearnings of a
developing India liberated from the desolates of British expansionism. After the happiness of
Nehruvian communism passed on, its inventive hunt to create and extend the skylines that not just
satisfy individuals' stylish necessities and goals yet additionally reflect verifiable advancement and
improvement lost bearing in the murkiness of prompt business concerns. It denoted a time of good
disarray and political confusion. There consistently has been a deficiency of Hindi movies that take
up delicate political topics as their topic.
MOVIE:
HINDI- HAZARON KHWAHISHEIN AISI

The film illuminates one of the particular struggle drove by the progressives but in a sarcastic
manner. A property manager's child assaults a 'low' position lady; the furious town blockades the
landowner's home with the progressives starting to lead the pack in getting sorted out the dissent.
The Dalits who might not have even set out to raise their finger prior are presently standing up and
testing the property manager's authority. This itself features the accomplishment of the Naxalite
Movement in engaging the Dalit masses. The conclusion of this scene prompts a surprising turn. The
second the loathed landowner endures a respiratory failure, the irate Dalits experience a shift in
perspective and surge forward to save his life. Unmistakably, the progressives misevaluated the
current ground real factors and hold of primitive philosophy in the personalities of the majority.
They at long last stand detached, baffled, and befuddled. The ramifications – the progressives
appear to be sentimental people who in their energy overestimate the progressive capability of the
emotional powers and along these lines neglect to get a handle on the specificities of a progressive
circumstance.

The principal half of the film considers the bigger political talk, the last half moves center to
investigate the complicated tangled relationship of the three heroes amidst the honing of social
inconsistencies prompting the announcement of Emergency. For the striving masses, it brought
another round of constraint and extremist fear. Through themes and imagery, the film uncovered
the nauseating presentation of sycophancy around the decision faction. The ascent of a savage
lawmaker in Sanjay Gandhi, who transformed the gathering into primitive theocracy’, mirrors the
general degeneration of popularity based' establishments. The communist veil is helpfully dropped
by the Socialist factions to account for an unscrupulous union with the decision gathering to share
the riches of influence. The traditional shift of the Indian state turns into really apparent. No dispute
is endured, political advantage and sycophancies of the greatest request are remunerated. The
coercive method embraced by the public authority to execute family arranging plans goes under
analysis in the film. Crisis additionally denoted the introduction of the ascent of powerbrokers whose
inescapable stranglehold has procured an air of decency in the present governmental issues. The
development of Vikram as a force specialist is indicative of the sickness that has undermined the
body politic in our contemporary society. Having created associations with a top head of the decision
party Vikram presently gives orders.

Also, it was he who goes all out to save Siddharth and Geeta in their hour of peril. The defining
moment of the film comes when Siddharth comes to realize that police is wanting to execute him in
a fake experience'. With death looking straight at him, Siddharth laughs out loud, he argues to the
specialist to advise his dad about his whereabouts. His kindred companions at long last salvage him.
The solid soul of working-class self-conservation improves of him making him end up crushed and
unsettled. He, at last, relinquishes the progressive way. Hence the intemperate child gets back to the
fatherly hug of class society. The general depiction of progressives in the film causes them to seem a
lot of left adventurists who are inadequate and vulnerable to oppose state fear or to detail a
technique to counter its surge. In any case, what the film, at last, appears to propose is that the
emancipatory project notwithstanding an almighty state is a difficulty. The early progressive
excitement and good faith that appeared in the film is overwhelmed by a sensation of gloom and
latency, the compassion with the standards of progressives supplanted by the compassion of the
destined spirits who attempted to affect. While changing the world is critically on the plan what we
need is a motivating legend who can overcome the harshest condition and enlightens the way of
upset and not a saint who eventually joins the positions of crushed saints.

TAMIL- SHIVAJI: THE BOSS

Sivaji: The Boss is all about a software engineer who comes to India to serve the nation and invest in
nation's welfare. A few corrupt officials and politicians try to stop him while he tries to do good for
the poor. Sivaji returns from the US to invest his money here for good causes. But seeing his rising
popularity, the politicians cheat him and steal all of his property, just leaving him with 1 rupee
(Indian currency). Sivaji takes this as a challenge and with that one rupee he plans & executes his
ideas, so smartly, that he manages to earn more than he lost. He uses all this money to set the
system right with his only goal being - to bring out all the black money from corrupted politicians
and join INDIA in the developed countries list.

Indian politics has always been the hot topic for India as a country. It is known to be as one of the
most corrupted politics in the world with maximum holes. This gives a huge impact on the making of
a political film. As the plot of the film shows, the politicians in the film are shown to be corrupted
and do not want the progress of the country but only themselves. When Sivaji tries to raise his voice
and use his money for the poor people, he gets attacked. Not just this film but every political film
made in the Hindi film industry such as Sarkar, Nayak, Vikram Vedha, etc. all show politicians to be
very corrupted. Sivaji being a fictional film, it could easily show of the main hero of her film wins in
the end by killing the ain politician and helping the poor. But the reality of this is that the ones who
raise their voice are always pressurised which is also shown in some films.

The role of cinema in politics is such that it helps the people to see the reality of the politics in India
and do it through making films inspired by true events. “Sarkar” on the other hand was a film in
which Mr. Amitabh Bachchan’s character was inspired by Mr. Bal Thackeray’s life, and showed how
much power and position he had. Another film which was an official biopic on Mr. Bal Thackeray’s
life was “Thackeray” in which Mr. Nawazuddin Siddiqui played his role. That film showed how Bal
Thackeray as a powerful person was made and how he changed the Indian politics in a huge way.

There are several films made or inspired by true events about the underworld in India and on the
gangsters that used to control the politics. Movies such as Daddy, Shootout at Wadala, Shootout at
Lokhandwala, Company, Black Friday, Nayakan, etc. were all based on real life gangsters and their
own stories in which Indian politics played a huge role. At one point in the history of Indian politics,
politics was controlled by the underworld by keeping the politicians in fear and misusing their
power.Films can majorly change on how the people of our country view their government. The
Indian government does not have a good image on the people as such and this is the same thing that
is shown in the films that are based on politics. It is a vice versa game as the makes of a film might
not have a good image of the government and make a film that does not show Indian politics in a
good way, and some people who think neutrally might change their opinion AFTER viewing the film.
In this way cinema and majorly affect the minds of the viewers and alter their opinions on the
politics.

The impact of cinema on politics has been there for a while now and there are films on politics
coming out very often. There is a lot to talk and show about politics which can be shown through
films in a very clear way, where people can get an idea of how things inside politics work and how
the politics on their country is working. Some might take it in a fictional way and forget it as a film,
but some really try to understand the reason behind the making of such a film and try to research
and change their opinions as per what they have seen.
 FRENCH- AQUARIUS (2016)

Aquarius is a 2016 Brazilian–French drama film written and directed by Kleber Mendonça Filho and
starring Sonia Braga as Clara, the last resident of Aquarius building, who refuses to sell her
apartment to a construction company that intends to replace it with a new edifice.

The signs read messages such as "Brazil is not a democracy anymore", "Sauvez la démocratie
brésilienne" ("Save Brazilian democracy"), and "Dilma, vamos resistir com você" ("Dilma, we will
resist with you"). Immediate internet response followed, with supporters of Dilma's impeachment
suggesting boycotting the film. Among these, the right-wing columnist Reinaldo Azevedo wrote that
"it is the duty of people of good will to boycott this film".

The film generated uproar in Brazil due to its political connotations, especially because it was
released at the apex of the country's political crisis. The film's cast and crew actively positioned itself
against what they considered to be a coup d'état(which is the removal and seizure of a government
and its powers. Typically, it is an illegal, unconstitutional seizure of power by a political faction, the
military, or a dictator) in Brazil, showing protest signs at Cannes.

Aquarius has generated widespread controversies in Brazil and abroad. The film's political tone and
its time of release have prompted public outcry, both of support and of criticism.

Dilma Rousseff was elected President in 2010, and after

Dilma’s second victory a heated panic sparked among the neoliberal and US-aligned opposition. The
fourth consecutive election of a President affiliated to the centre-left PT (Partido dos Trabalhadores)
was bad news for the opposition, among other reasons because it suggested that PT founder Luís
Inácio Lula da Silva could return in 2018.

Lula had been President between 2003 and 2010 and, when he left office, his approval ratings hit 90
per cent, making him the most popular leader in Brazilian history. This threat of continuity suggested
that the opposition could be out of federal office for a generation. They immediately rejected the
outcome of the vote. No credible complaints could be made, but no matter; it was resolved that
Dilma Rousseff would be overthrown by any means necessary.

The judicial coup against President Dilma Rousseff is the culmination of the deepest political crisis in
Brazil for 50 years.

Initially, the Ministry of Justice of Brazil gave Aquarius an 18 years old rating, attributed to sexual
content and scenes of drug use. However, the criteria used to support the rating were challenged on
the grounds that Brazil was the only country in which Aquarius had been, or was going to be,
distributed to give the film such a rating, and that other more graphic films in Brazil had received less
restrictive ratings. Protest ensued and, at the day of the film's premiere, the Ministry reduced the
rating to 16 years old.

And in the artistic universe, the film “Aquarius“ proved too much for Brazil to handle. After winning
prizes at several film festivals including Amsterdam and Sydney, “Aquarius” was seen as the one film
to beat at the Oscars.

But the Brazilian government’s Oscar committee rejected the nation’s candidate for Best Foreign
Language Film, blurring the line between art and politics. Was it political retaliation? The film does
explore the class and racial divide, unleashing a clash between leftists and conservatives
commentators.

ENGLISH
GROUP MEMBERS AND THEIR WORK:

TVISHA BHATTACHARYA- INTRODUCTION, HAZARON KHWAHISHEIN AISI

MOHAMMAD ZISHAN DILAWAR KAPDI- AQUARIUS

JAGIESH VASWANI- SIVAJI: THE BOSS

VANSH-