Cinema and propaganda seminars

There is apparently no direct connection between cinema and seminars. The word 'seminar' with its origin in Latin word "Seminarium" meaning 'seed plot', has been associated with academia.

In general, seminar is a mode of academic instruction at a university or at an institute of higher studies. The focus of such seminars is on a specific topic and the participants are expected to play an active role in the discussion. Seminar leaders or instructors make presentations on a given subject or deliver a lecture on the subject which is often followed by a Q and A session.

However, over the years, the term Seminar has assumed different connotations especially in the field of commerce where increasingly the term seminar is used to describe commercial events; Seminars on subjects like 'Investments in stock market'. In such seminars, the participants, perhaps, prospective investors are given detailed instructions on the investment opportunities in the stock market and the corresponding risk factors associated with long term and short term investments.

Although seminars are conducted by schools of cinema at diverse universities on the technicalities of film making, genres of films and the art of film making in general, seminar has not been used as a propaganda tool. From the early days of Sinhala cinema, perhaps, the most used propaganda tool was flyers and posters in addition to larger than life cutouts of the films which were prominently displayed in the city of Colombo.

On close examination, it is evident that over the years, posters and distributing literature of films have grown as a separate art form with its own grandeur. Apart from giving publicity to films, the film literature reveals the language of the day and physical and intrinsic quality of the materials. For instance, early distributing material bears the overarching Indian influence on Sri Lankan cinema. The language used for early pamphlets was also coarse and bereft of effective colloquial idiom.

In the latter part of the 1980s, in addition to printed distributing materials, radio programme featuring upcoming films were aired. A special feature of such programmes was to serialise the plot together with playing songs from the film while announcing the cinemas that showed the film.

Though these radio programmes were effective before the introduction of television to Sri Lanka, they rendered little or no use in the face of the formidable challenge offered by the new medium.

Subsequently, however, film producers used attractive trailers in the television in addition to them being shown in cinemas in order to educate viewers on upcoming films. Measures such as exploiting the popular feature programme on television make use of opinion leaders to comment on the film (for or against) were adapted by film makers and directors. Another strategy was to use catchy phrases in order to create a false image of the film-maker in the eyes of the public as crusader or else as someone who is absolutely against the establishment, dominant ethos of the time.

Exploiting societal issues such as sexually transmitting diseases in general and HIV/AIDs in particular and themes such as abortion, corruption and prostitution, as an embellishment rather than the crux of the film would in the long run, ensure 'controversial tag' not only on the film but also on the film maker. However, the harsh reality is that most of the so called 'controversial 'films have little or nothing to do with on-going heated up debates if there are any , but are mere publicity gimmicks to hoodwink the masses. Additional benefits that a film maker would reap from the inclusion of such embellishments in the film are that he would be able to nominate the film for a plethora of film festivals and would even get awards. Representing international film festivals, on the other hand, ensures a healthy response at local cinemas.

Modern day formula films

Although the age of formula films in Sinhala cinema is over, the contemporary trends suggest the emergence of a new generation of formula films and formula film makers. Unlike in the early days of Sinhala cinema, the modern day formula films are hardly distinguishable at superficial level. The formula seems to be more subtle and centred around controversial issues such as war and peace (often film makers even of a certain reputation has are non-committal in their depiction of the conflict and thereby grossly failed to portray a realistic picture either of war or peace), HIV/AIDS, or prostitution.

One of the predominant characteristics of this new generation of 'controversial 'filmmaker of one school and their creations is, perhaps, the negative perception of Sri Lanka that they sought to create in the minds of the audience. In a way they, consciously or unconsciously, contributed to perpetuate prototype Western perceptions of Asian in general and Sri Lanka in particular. It seems, however, that these filmmakers have registered in their minds the award winning formulae which would not only earn them a name among international film festival circuit but also much-needed foreign exchange purportedly from diverse funds and grants. For these film makers, awards would generate publicity in Sri Lanka for their creations while, strangely, they have earned the profit of the film in advance thanks to foreign funds and grants. In the above instance, awards have been served as a prime propaganda tool for the films.

Seminar as a propaganda tool

The objective of a film review is to educate the public on the pros and cons of an upcoming film rather than eulogising a creation. Though zero objectivity may not be possible in a review, it is important to strike a balance between the facts and the fiction and to examine whether the filmmaker has been successful in dealing with the subject at hand.

Unfortunately, with cronyism spreading its tentacles among the reviewers, film reviews have been reduced to mere propaganda tools. Some filmmakers who have befriended a group of ill-informed so-called reviewers, have been able to exploit the friendship and the gross ignorance on the part of the reviewers to project their creations as masterpieces in cinema. Some of the films, purportedly depicting historical personalities and some others dedicated to children though absolute failures in terms of cinema have been hailed as masterpieces and epic films. Sadly, this has not only made those so-called film critics a laughing stock but also brought film criticism in general into disrepute.

The latest trend in this on-going propaganda culture is 'Seminar' on films. These Seminars, though they assume independent status, are organised by filmmakers and producers themselves with the prime objective of praising their creations to the moon and projecting them as masterpieces. In fact, some of the films which have been subject of such 'seminars' are gross cinematic failures, epic blunders and at times, disgrace to the original fiction writer whose work has been turned into cinema. Most of the highly eulogised such creations are, in fact, distortions of historical personalities and legends on one instance and gems of literature on the other instance. The panelists at these seminars often happen to be the same personalities, bankrupt academics who hunt publicity and ill-informed critics.