Remembering Prashant Bhargava
5 Questions With Filmmaker Prashant Bhargava on the 10th Anniversary Of PATANG (THE KITE)
Kinophilia remembers Chicago filmmaker Prashant Bhargava on the ten year anniversary of his feature-length debut, PATANG (The Kite). This interview was originally conducted in 2012 with critic Jack Hanley- Mr. Bhargava passed away in 2015.
PATANG (THE KITE) is a rhythmically haunting and gorgeously crafted poetic glimpse into the intimate intertwining stories of six people set against the frenetic backdrop of India’s largest kite festival in the ancient city of Ahmedabad. Employing a lush cinematic perspective and naturalistic narrative form, first-time director Prashant Bhargava weaves an intimate portrait of a city and its inhabitants forced to contemplate their complicated pasts and uncertain futures. The result is hypnotic, exuberant, mesmerizing, and beautiful. We sit down with the director for 5 Questions.
Your film is a brilliant example of the observational cinematic tradition; the naturalistic style and camera interaction evoke the sensibilities of Malick and Cassavetes. Who proved to be your greatest cinematic influences stylistically?
I really like the Dardenne Brothers as an influence. Also Terrance Malick, Wong Kai Wai, Lynne Ramsay (and her first feature RATCATCHER)- the films that have a great deal of naturalism and allow people to live onscreen; the ones that feel like life is actually unfolding in front of you and the camera itself takes on a very interpretive feel- as if it is an actor itself.
Your stylized shooting technique in general- and the cinematography of PATANG in particular- evokes a rare warmth and richness which was described by one critic as “India through Instagram”. How did your background as a Chicago graffiti street artist help construct your visual style?
I began doing street graffiti in Chicago when I was twelve years old, and later, before I delved into filmmaking, I studied computer science and motion graphics, so visual art naturally plays a very big part in how I make my films. Although ironically, in some ways, I took the visual language of the film for granted- and what I mean by that was my objective in making this film was to preserve the natural beauty of the environment as it was, and to document people in actions as they were truly living it- but to do that effectively required a lot of demands on the way in which you film it. If you were trying to shoot on the crowded streets of India without drawing attention to yourself, then you were limited on the size of your camera; if you want actors free from the constraints of blocking, then you use natural lighting and film during “magic hour”- in fact, as you dance through the streets with your camera you notice a thousand stories unfolding all around you, so to preserve all of this we used hand-held cameras, long lenses, and natural light which all greatly colored the visual styles.
You’ve worn the hats of motion designer, commercial director, editor, short filmmaker…tell me about the transitions and artistic logistics jumping from crafting promotional pieces for HBO’s The Wire to making your first feature film.
(Laughing) There was never a quick transition, but a gradual one. On one hand, if I was making a promo for The Wire or Rome, I would really submerse myself in what was happening in that scene in relation to the story, and, in retrospect, was already approaching it from the perspective of a director. But, of course, within a commercial context, there is really only a certain amount of creative depth to go to (laughing). What allowed me to make that transition was that I eventually got burned out- I was seeing myself all over HBO, but not as my “own”- so I went to the Actors Studio and did theatrical direction and acting classes and it was being there that allowed me to get in touch with the more “human” element of personal film making- the techniques were often similar, but it required opening up as an artist in a different way, and that was a huge transition for me.
You hail from the south side of Chicago, but your first-generation Indian heritage obviously involved the straddling of simultaneous cultural constructions. Now that Indian film is (thankfully) gaining an audience in the United States, as someone who has experienced both cultures, what do you consider to be the greatest misconception about Indian cinema by Americans?
I can put it like this- I feel alone in the middle right now (laughing). There are three or four constructions- you have the Bollywood expectations; you have the “Slumdog-exoticism”; you have the wave of Western films shooting there now providing a certain perspective; you have the “European sensibility” approach to Indian filmmaking; and you now have Independent Indian cinema. What makes me uneasy is that I don’t find myself a part of any of those movements. In regards to the American perspective, you have what happens to any culture when it is explored for the first time- whether it was BOYZ N THE HOOD or the first exposure to the films of Latin America or Korean cinema: it exposes the rich and vibrant things not often seen or experienced in Western cultures. However, it is simultaneously susceptible to Western sensationalism and objectification- I mean, (in SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE) you are focused on catching the guy who burns out the kid’s eyes. As for me, I take an approach similar to an Ozu perspective with the belief that the mundane can be equally compelling and beautiful, and that such beauty can be found in the everyday silence between two people and the everyday conflicts that we share…so while the sensationalism and exoticism may draw notice, I would hope that one day in the future Indian film can be perceived as something that brings our cultures together based on shared experiences.
PATANG manages to blend both actors and non-actors with a seamless narrative rhythm. How did you accomplish this?
We actually used over 90% non-actors for this film. My process was to visit one to three months every year to the old parts of the city of Ahmedabad and it took me a few years to really understand how life works there. We spent time ensuring that everyone was eventually comfortable with us, with each other, and ultimately being in front of the camera- but in terms of the locals who had never acted before, it was mostly just pure instinct. In the first two or three years when I was doing the research, whenever I had a camera within a hundred feet of the someone it still would still greatly affect them- but by the time of the last year of shooting, most of the vendors, the policemen, the people- they were all a part of my team. However, they were never fully immersed in the film making process- I only allowed 3 out of the 40 to actually read the script and I never referred to it on set. What proved magical to me was how the mere presence of a “non-actor” actually helps an actor NOT to act. A great example of this magic is the genuine on-screen reaction of Bobby (played by Aakash Maheriya) in an intimate moment with the more worldly Priya- not only is this the first kiss for his character, it was his first kiss in real life.
Kinophilia is the official site of film critic Jack Hanley, host of the Crested Butte Film Festival; One-half of Blindspotting: A Film Discovery Podcast www.jackhanley.me
