Viewers yet to stomach a good documentary

Documentaries have always been a poor cousin of mainstream films. It is only when a major event is depicted with skill and verve, as Michael Moore did with Fahrenheit 9/11 to depict the American political response to the 9/11 attack, that a documentary can rival a feature film. As such occasions are rare cinema halls are reluctant to screen documentaries unless the fame of one of them begins to spread by word of mouth. Even then, the disadvantage of such films being essentially niche products makes the theatre owners wary. The usually heavy political overtone of documentaries also makes them unsuitable for the Indian cinema-goer who looks for entertainment.

It is possible that the success of Faiza Ahmed Khan’s Supermen of Malegaon will mark the beginning of a new chapter for documentaries. The fact that the film had a tough four-year journey from inception to the multiplexes is testimony to the need for a maker of a documentary to be virtually a political person who is driven by passion for the craft and is willing to endure physical and financial hardship. In the case of the Supermen of Malegaon, even after winning the best documentary award at the Asian Film Festival in Rome in 2008 and several other prizes, it remained largely invisible to Indian viewers. What is more, the fact that several producers asked Khan to turn her documentary into a feature film typified the mind of the Indian viewer.

The travails of the Supermen of Malegaon are not unique. Among the documentaries that have reached a wider audience are Anand Patwardhan’s War and Peace, Madhusree Dutta’s Seven Islands and a Metro, and Miriam Chandy Menacherry’s The Rat Race. As their titles suggest, these are films for the thinking person and not ones that enable a viewer to relax. So, their appeal will always remain limited.