<p><em>By Babu Subramanian</em></p>.<p>In V K Cherian’s book ‘Celluloid to Digital: India’s Film Society Movement’ (2024), the Suchitra Film Society of Bengaluru stands out as one of the survivors that weathered the tides of tectonic changes over the decades. Many others haven’t been as fortunate, facing closure or irregular screenings. The author expands on his 2016 work, ‘India’s Film Society Movement: The Journey and its Impact’, by exploring the pandemic’s repercussions. This comprehensive edition delves into the movement’s history spanning seven decades, providing intricate details and intriguing anecdotes. A recurring theme throughout the book explores how the film society movement has grappled with technological advancements, the transition from the socialist era, and the decline of government patronage.</p>.<p>The author’s starting point was the book edited by Suchitra co-founder H N Narahari Rao titled ‘The Film Society Movement in India’ (2009). Cherian set out to uncover the story behind the articles in Rao’s work such as the one on the British film critic Marie Seton. Beyond the landmark success of Satyajit Ray’s ‘Pather Panchali’ (1955), the role of Seton emerged as a significant factor in the formation of Federation of Film Societies of India (FFSI). </p>.<p>FFSI is part of an art-house cinema ecosystem nurtured by Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi. The author describes how Nehru, as part of his nation-building efforts, strategically established institutions across various cultural domains, including cinema. FFSI itself enjoyed government patronage, receiving grants to support its activities. Notably, renowned filmmakers like Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, and Mrinal Sen emerged from the Calcutta Film Society which was formed by Ray, Chidananda Das Gupta and others in 1947. Additionally, acclaimed filmmakers such as Adoor Gopalakrishnan and Girish Kasaravalli received their training at the Film and Television Institute of India. A number of art filmmakers secured loans from the Film Finance Corporation (now National Film Development Corporation). Their films garnered national awards bestowed by the Government of India and found a place in the Indian Panorama section at the International Film Festival of India (IFFI). The National Film Archive of India was formed for film preservation. The cinema of social realism thrived and received recognition within this interconnected web of institutions, although a few art filmmakers were outside such a cinema.</p>.<p>The Suchitra Film Society garners acclaim for its sustainable cultural complex. But the book misses the significant initiative of the Bangalore Film Society — the publication of the ‘Deep Focus’ journal. In general, critical appreciation within film societies often lacked rigour, with many members primarily joining to watch uncensored films. Nevertheless, the book highlights the pivotal role of journals in bridging this gap, exemplified by ‘The Indian Film Quarterly’, a publication by the Calcutta Film Society. </p>.Worth a lac.<p>The author chronicles the challenges posed by technological shifts to film societies from 16mm/35mm film to the digital era. The easy availability of online movies eroded film societies’ core purpose — providing alternative cinema access. During the pandemic, online platforms like YouTube and OTT services transformed living rooms and smartphones into personal cinemas, shifting the social experience to individual immersion. This trend impacted most film societies nationwide. The author spotlights Talking Films Online (TFO), a pandemic-era brainchild of academics Gita Viswanath and Nikhila H S, as an example of a digital film society. TFO announces films for members to view independently, followed by a Saturday evening discussion via Zoom, transcending geographical limitations. Their online presence extends to a blog featuring cinema articles to foster a sense of community, they plan annual conferences. Recognising the aspirations of film enthusiasts – many now seek not just appreciation but creation — TFO also hosts a Smartphone Short Film Competition. These initiatives solidify TFO as a compelling model although indie theatres are still needed for community viewing of art-house films. </p>.<p>The book highlights the gradual erosion of the art-house cinema ecosystem of which film societies are a vital part. However, the author finds glimmers of hope in the rise of campus film societies and pandemic-era digital groups. A tighter edit would have further strengthened the work, but it serves as a useful resource for understanding the film society movement’s history. While established societies like Suchitra can persevere, others must chart their future, and the book provides valuable perspectives.</p>.<p>‘Celluloid to Digital : India’s Film Society Movement’, Atlantic, Rs 1,101<br></p>.<p><em>(The author is a well-known film critic and writer)</em></p>
<p><em>By Babu Subramanian</em></p>.<p>In V K Cherian’s book ‘Celluloid to Digital: India’s Film Society Movement’ (2024), the Suchitra Film Society of Bengaluru stands out as one of the survivors that weathered the tides of tectonic changes over the decades. Many others haven’t been as fortunate, facing closure or irregular screenings. The author expands on his 2016 work, ‘India’s Film Society Movement: The Journey and its Impact’, by exploring the pandemic’s repercussions. This comprehensive edition delves into the movement’s history spanning seven decades, providing intricate details and intriguing anecdotes. A recurring theme throughout the book explores how the film society movement has grappled with technological advancements, the transition from the socialist era, and the decline of government patronage.</p>.<p>The author’s starting point was the book edited by Suchitra co-founder H N Narahari Rao titled ‘The Film Society Movement in India’ (2009). Cherian set out to uncover the story behind the articles in Rao’s work such as the one on the British film critic Marie Seton. Beyond the landmark success of Satyajit Ray’s ‘Pather Panchali’ (1955), the role of Seton emerged as a significant factor in the formation of Federation of Film Societies of India (FFSI). </p>.<p>FFSI is part of an art-house cinema ecosystem nurtured by Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi. The author describes how Nehru, as part of his nation-building efforts, strategically established institutions across various cultural domains, including cinema. FFSI itself enjoyed government patronage, receiving grants to support its activities. Notably, renowned filmmakers like Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak, and Mrinal Sen emerged from the Calcutta Film Society which was formed by Ray, Chidananda Das Gupta and others in 1947. Additionally, acclaimed filmmakers such as Adoor Gopalakrishnan and Girish Kasaravalli received their training at the Film and Television Institute of India. A number of art filmmakers secured loans from the Film Finance Corporation (now National Film Development Corporation). Their films garnered national awards bestowed by the Government of India and found a place in the Indian Panorama section at the International Film Festival of India (IFFI). The National Film Archive of India was formed for film preservation. The cinema of social realism thrived and received recognition within this interconnected web of institutions, although a few art filmmakers were outside such a cinema.</p>.<p>The Suchitra Film Society garners acclaim for its sustainable cultural complex. But the book misses the significant initiative of the Bangalore Film Society — the publication of the ‘Deep Focus’ journal. In general, critical appreciation within film societies often lacked rigour, with many members primarily joining to watch uncensored films. Nevertheless, the book highlights the pivotal role of journals in bridging this gap, exemplified by ‘The Indian Film Quarterly’, a publication by the Calcutta Film Society. </p>.Worth a lac.<p>The author chronicles the challenges posed by technological shifts to film societies from 16mm/35mm film to the digital era. The easy availability of online movies eroded film societies’ core purpose — providing alternative cinema access. During the pandemic, online platforms like YouTube and OTT services transformed living rooms and smartphones into personal cinemas, shifting the social experience to individual immersion. This trend impacted most film societies nationwide. The author spotlights Talking Films Online (TFO), a pandemic-era brainchild of academics Gita Viswanath and Nikhila H S, as an example of a digital film society. TFO announces films for members to view independently, followed by a Saturday evening discussion via Zoom, transcending geographical limitations. Their online presence extends to a blog featuring cinema articles to foster a sense of community, they plan annual conferences. Recognising the aspirations of film enthusiasts – many now seek not just appreciation but creation — TFO also hosts a Smartphone Short Film Competition. These initiatives solidify TFO as a compelling model although indie theatres are still needed for community viewing of art-house films. </p>.<p>The book highlights the gradual erosion of the art-house cinema ecosystem of which film societies are a vital part. However, the author finds glimmers of hope in the rise of campus film societies and pandemic-era digital groups. A tighter edit would have further strengthened the work, but it serves as a useful resource for understanding the film society movement’s history. While established societies like Suchitra can persevere, others must chart their future, and the book provides valuable perspectives.</p>.<p>‘Celluloid to Digital : India’s Film Society Movement’, Atlantic, Rs 1,101<br></p>.<p><em>(The author is a well-known film critic and writer)</em></p>