Key to a better cine magazine
Ten long years have gone by since the banning of the Sinhala film
Purahanda Kaluwara by Prasanna Vithanage. This was as pointed out during
the particular period was due to the social and political
susceptibilities that prevailed during the time. The film could now be
shown to the public though most of the local viewers may have seen it
screened to particular groups. The reason for laying down the point is
to show that this has become the focal attention of the newly published
cine periodical titled 14.
The periodical, presumably a significant publication, is edited by
Anoma Rajakaruna who is known to the Sinhala reader as an experienced
cine editor and a cine writer. She has exhibited from time to time her
skill as a cine critic.
For me the opening comment in 14 which is a commentary on aspects of
state, art and censorship throws much light on some of the salient
issues not only relevant to the topic of cinematography but also to
other relevant fields of art. She pinpoints the relevance of article 14
of the country’s constitution, which leaves a margin for a freer
expression at a freer gathering of all aspects of human experiences with
emphasis on the cine-scene. She provides examples from various
countries.
The learned article written by the Mass Communication lecturer at the
Kelaniya University Wijayananda Rupasinghe, is elaborated to a level of
sensitive discussion. Some vital socio-historic and cultural issues
pertaining to the subject of censorship are brought up.
 The article is intended to lay bare to the reader the need for the
protection of expression as well as the grasping the strengths and
limitation of communication once again aiming visual arts. This is a
worthy attempt. On the contrary, the composed-minded essay cum comment
type of tirade written by Deepthi Gooneratne shows the bankruptcy of
communicative thinking as regards visuals.
It’s more of an individual comment than a critical analysis of the
medium. When writings of the calibre reach the hands of the editors, an
extra carefulness has to be adhered. Perhaps unknowingly the muddled
thinking could add more danger and disaster than any good for a
periodical.
I felt that some of the refreshing comments have been embedded in the
dialogue that ensued between two cine artistes Iranganie Serasinghe and
Kaushalya Fernando. This piece comes in a dialogue feature titled ‘Face
to Face’. Quite a number of factors pertaining to the making of
memorable films are discussed. One significant factor is the need for a
better actor training. Then comes the understanding of ‘film
understanding’.
Similarly three makers of short films are made to air their view on
their creative process as well as the cine background which challenges
their creations. The three are Chaturika Nimala Chandra, Lahiru
Smarasinghe and Tisara Imbulana.
All of them have shown their short films at home and abroad. The
consensus of opinion is that there should be a starting point and the
best starting point is the exposure to short filmmaking, despite the
various material discomforts.
‘Article 14’ carries quite a number of interview-type of features
with cine artistes at home and abroad. They include stalwarts such as Dr
Lester James Peries, Asoka Handagama and Prasanna Vithanage.
The information as regards film festivals are well recorded. As
cinematography had become not only a talking point, as it used to be,
but a subject taught at the university level, this type of periodical
surely serves a purpose. The researchers need certain background
information. One plus point of the periodcal is the neat array of the
selection of photographs and the layout. This is one main factor
forgotten in today’s journalism especially in the subject-centred
periodicals.
As we know intimately it is not an easy task to obtain specified
articles for a journal of this calibre. But the editor Anoma Rjaakaruna
has boldly shouldered the task.
[email protected]
|
