At the recent edition of the Toronto International Film Festival (TIFF), the Mehta siblings — Deepa and Dilip — both showcased their latest efforts. Deepa had Anatomy of Violence and her brother screened Mostly Sunny . “[ Anatomy of Violence ] is a portrayal of the minds of the rapists, and I’ve done a feature documentary on someone who’s objectified as a potential cause for rape,” Dilip said at the TIFF conference a few months back. “Here’s a sister-brother duo, we’re doing the flip sides of the same coin.” He went on to state that he was looking forward to seeing the effect the films would have on people since it would help deal with the issue of rape in India far more effectively.
This writer had the chance to evaluate Dilip’s statement when both films were showcased at the recently held Jio MAMI 18th Mumbai Film Festival with Star. Unfortunately, as noble as their efforts might have been, the Mehtas’ thoughts haven’t translated very well onto the screen.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Amidst
Dilip’s supposed impetus to make the film — to analyse whether porn is directly correlated to the rise in sexual assault in the country — barely comes into focus. Except for one segment, Mostly Sunny focuses merely on the actor’s widespread acceptance in India, despite her (gasp) vulgar past, and her incredible business acumen. When she’s asked the million-dollar question, Leone disagrees, predictably and resolutely, with the claim that porn correlates to an increase in rape.
Then there’s Deepa’s effort,
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
The film starts off introducing each of the six perpetrators, with the adult actors portraying their child counterparts. Jarring as it is to see grown men act juvenile, it’s even harder to watch them transform into the criminals they eventually become. This is not because of how brutal or raw the film’s depiction is, but because in the end, the fiction fails to evoke a real emotion from the viewer. All the criminals are portrayed as victims of violence — either sexual, physical or emotional — in their own right. But what good does it do to tell us this without offering any psychological and social context, and profundity? Then there’s the question of why the film would go so far as to include scenes such as those showing the piety of one of the accused, who washes and prays over the bus in which the incident occurred. After all, it may not have ever happened, and it seems like a stretch to humanise a criminal and emotionally manipulate an audience (an international one most likely).
Furthermore, it’s uncomfortable to watch an accomplished filmmaker like Deepa make an amateur film like Anatomy of a Violence, which forgets its form and suddenly breaks the fourth wall in one scene. In another, additional camera people are easily observed filming different angles of a shot.
Their efforts may have been sincere enough, but in the end both the Mehtas fail: while one goes far too tangential , another doesn’t go far enough. The films bring us nowhere close to understanding why human beings do the heinous things they do.