Film director fights shy of making teledrama

E.M.G. Edirisinghe

Vision of the director often eludes the vision of the script. Fortunately, I did not have to face that eventuality. I had to work within a restricted budget based on a loan. That was a big challenge to me to complete the work within that range of funds. My work was facilitated by the script being my own. My real conflict was at the script level itself.

I myself was a witness to the terror unleashed by the insurgents in 1989. I was immensely moved by the agony the villagers suffered. I had to accommodate my feelings within a very low budget. I succeeded in conquering every challenge and obstacle I had to confront with, said award winning director Sudath Devapriya in an interview with the Artscope. Excerpts:

Question: You have been honoured with awards for the best director and the best script. This is a rare honour for a young film-maker like you. What are your comments?

Answer: I am first a believer, and then an artist. The awards were rewarded for my dedication to Udu Gam Yamaya inspired by my commitment to spiritual accomplishments.

However, for a director to work on his own script is both a pleasure and a pride. Even when I was in the secondary school I had the propensity to write. Later, when I worked as an assistant to Tissa Abeysekera, I

 learned the art of writing a script for a film.

Period of terror

Q: When you were making the film, were there moments of conflict between Sudath Devapriya the director and Sudath Devapriya the script-writer?

A: Vision of the director often eludes the vision of the script. Fortunately, I did not have to face that eventuality. I had to work within a restricted budget based on a loan.

That was a big challenge to me to complete the work within that range of funds. My work was facilitated by the script being my own. My real conflict was at the script level itself. I myself was a witness to the terror unleashed by the insurgents in 1989.

I was immensely moved by the agony the villagers suffered. I had to accommodate my feelings within a very low budget. I succeeded in conquering every challenge and obstacle I had to confront with.

Q: What made you to select this particular theme and that particular physical environment for your film?

A: It is my own observations in the South during that period of terror. It shocked me beyond comprehension and my emotional response to it kept on repeatedly disturbing. The impact was so intense that I came out with Udu Gam Yamaya.

Q: When did you decide to enter the cinema as a director?

A: My childhood ambition was to be an actor. After viewing Delovak Athara I began to emulate Tony Ranasinghe who turned out to be my celluloid hero. I followed his acting style upto his Nuwan Renu. In the meantime, I got an opportunity to join the Rupavahini through the good offices of Henry Jayasena.

There, I was able to develop an interest in directing television production. Besides, I was mad on movies. Tissa Abeysekera who I first met at a lecture, encouraged me to study film art in depth. I watched him directing Viragaya with great interest. Each movie-goer has a different rhythm within which constitutes the factor that makes viewing movies a joy for him.

Director's vision

Q: It is said that cinema is a director's art and drama is an actor's art. What is your opinion about this saying?

A: Stage and television are a collective art. Director's vision is hardly reflected in full in those productions. As each presentation on stage is a new production, its success depends on the performance on the day by its artists and technicians while the director becomes a concerned spectator.

He may later improve it on the basis of the new experiences he has gathered. On the other hand, television too, imposes restrictions on the director. As he caters to a family audience at home, he has no liberty to portray terror, violence, sex or child abuse as he likes. In fact, in theatre and television, the director has to share his vision with the artists and technicians. But such limitations on a film-maker is at its minimum.

Q: Today we witness the young film-makers taking to cinema while the veteran film-makers are distancing themselves from cinema. What is the reason for this development?

A: Even if the film-makers of the past are fading away from the active production scene, the experience they have passed on to the hands of younger generation of film-makers, form the foundation upon which they have risen to the heights they are today.

How can anyone be a Sinhala film director today without having seen Nidhanaya, Viragaya, Para Dige, Tunman Handiya, Dadayama etc. However, with the intrusion of open economy in the eighties our social and cultural life pattern changed dramatically and the film-makers found investments hard to come on their way.

The young film-makers saw an opening with this change in the market, and applied themselves to fill the gap. They however, lack the mental stability of their mentors and predessors.

Plight of cinema

Q: Except in America, cinema as an industry has failed an every other country including the biggest producer of films, India. Within this setup how do you assess the plight of cinema in our country?

A: Films do not run because they do not answer the taste of the general audience. This poses the question should we give the people what they ask for or should we give what they should be given.

All works of art that have survived in history, are a reflection of what the creator wished to express. Lovers of art embraced and enjoyed them both sensitively and aesthetically. The filmmaker when making a film does not think whether it appeals to a broader spectrum of filmgoers or not.

What appeals to them one can hardly predict. For example, Cleopatra with Elizabeth Taylor in the lead role was a commercial flop whereas Sound of Music released in the same year with lesser known artists was a tremendous success. For the people to enjoy movies they must have a peaceful social environment.

Q: Within this adverse commercial background, what do you think should be the responsibility of a film director?

A: A film director is sensitive like a butterfly or is with a rock-hard mind or like an army soldier in the battle field.

For example, Akira Kurosava had a military grip which was reflected in his films too. Ingmar Bergman on the other hand, sensitive as well as violent sometimes appeared to be a terror on the set. In short, a director is a benevolent dictator. As for me, I can be benevolent but not a dictator. Selective audiences

Q: Cinema is on the decline as a medium of entertainment. Any reasons for it, as you see?

A: Today several streams provide entertainment, such as television, radio, musical shows, dramas, website, movies can no longer dominate the entertainment scene as they did in the past. In the past, we went to 'see a film', but today we go to see a 'particular film' because unlike then today we are selective.

Q: Today, teledramas are more popular than films. Don't you think of making a teledrama and if not, why?

A: My ground of consecration in arts was the stage with Nuba Vitharak Thalaelalui followed by Vikurthi, Kusa Pabawathi etc. Then I stepped into the television medium.

But, neither I did have nor I do have an idea to do a teledrama. It is a tedious job, a torture and mental agony. The television artists have to adopt themselves to natural sound and lighting within the environment. I think for any performing art it should be the other way round.

Q: Who is your most favourite film director in world cinema?

A: Sathyajith Ray. He is a master in portraying folk life. His creations are pure poetry and encapsulate life's rhythm with sympathetic sensitivity. His heart-beat is heard in every visual frame which the filmgoer too, hears and feels enabling him to read what lies behind and beyond the visual. This rhythm is clearly evident in his monumental work Pathar Panchali.

Q: Who is your favourite film director in Sri Lanka?

A: Lester James Peries and Tissa Abeysekera. Lester's Nidhanaya and Tissa's Viragaya are indelibly inscribed in my mind. I am enamoured by the art and rhythm I find in them.

Audience taste

Q: What steps do you think we should take to salvage the Sinhala cinema from the situation into which it is sunk today?

A: Firstly, we must elevate the audience taste. Film is a transaction between the director and the filmgoer. For cinema to survive as an industry it has to attain commercial success as well. Our social environment must be made stable and pleasant to see and enjoy a movie. The film directors must be proficient in its langauge and grammar.

For that they must receive a comprehensive training in a recognised institute for film art. Without which different styles of making films cannot be learned. The movies we make must be those which suit our audience. Then comes the question. 'Is cinema only for the local audience and not for the world audience,' Cinema should, however, have a universal appeal whether it is for the local audience or the international audience.

Q: It is reported in the press that you who won the award for the best director in 2006 have not seen a single film during that year. Can you explain as to how it happened?

A: I love the visual media. Yet, I love my faith more. It fulfils my spiritual needs which go beyond my worldly life. Cinema comes next to my spiritual pursuits, and I missed those films.

Q: What are your plans for the future as a film director?

A: I am exhausted now. I had to do a marathon run to promote my film in the market. Presently, I am not in the right frame of mind either to write a script or to direct a film.

..................................

<< Artscope Main Page