MERE APNE (1971): A Movie about What went Wrong with India

Stills from MERE APNE (1971) starring Meena Kumari, Vinod Khanna, Shatrughan Sinha, Yogita bali & Danny Dengzongpa

Independent India of the fifties was a nation of opportunity and hope. The sixties saw it settling down, and then burdened with two wars and successive droughts. The seventies began with expanding cities unable to provide jobs to a new generation of youngsters. Born in the cities after 1947, this generation was very different from the India that was largely left behind in the villages. It aspired for the moon, but was left high and dry after devoting a childhood and adolescence to formal education. It was their restlessness, more than anything else that marked the India of seventies.

It was also this restlessness, which echoed in MERE APNE (1971), a movie that documented virtually everything that was going wrong with India. In the form of an old widow, it made apparent how the ageing rural India saw the new urban India lacking the finesse as well as the essence of its civilization. In the form of an old widower, who failed to help his sons settle down, it saw the first degree migrants wondering what went wrong in their approach, and in the form of the unemployed youngsters, it brought out the frustration and anger of a young India, which suffered from its problems, but neither knew how to solve it, nor had the means to do so. 

But MERE APNE was much more than the policy challenges that were facing India. Its main focus was on relationships. It highlighted how a profit maximizing approach of the market was beginning to kill the social relationships that had always been the hallmark of Indian civilization. It showed how compassion nurtured relationships in India, even beyond the family, and how it could heal even the deepest of wounds filled with hate. In a way, MERE APNE gave us a glimpse about everything that was going wrong with India.

MERE APNE (1971) saw Meena Kumari in the unusual role of an old widow

Before her death, Meena Kumari blessed Bollywood with two great movies very different from each other. The more famous of them is PAKEEZAH (1972), the story of a young and beautiful courtesan, which had been in the making for two decades and is the movie with which the legacy of Meena Kumari is associated. The other was a movie in which Meena Kumari played the role of an old widow. This movie was MERE APNE, released in 1971, with a bunch of youngsters and a director, whose only credit to fame before it was the lyrics that he had written for three movies. His name was Gulzar. The movie, many still feel, did not have a story, and yet, there are others who would be willing to consider it as one of the best ever movies of Bollywood!

The Plot

The movie begins with Arun (Ramesh Deo) coming to visit Anandi (Meena Kumari), an old widow, who lives all alone in her village. Arun, who is a distant relative, convinces her to come with him to the city, where he lives with his working wife, Lata (Sumita Sanyal) and a small child. Once Anandi joins them, she is made to take care of the child, and gradually comes to realize that she has been brought as a domestic help. There, Anandi is surprised to see the rude and indifferent ways of the cities that lack compassion for fellow human beings.

BASANT (1942): Madhubala’s Debut Movie was a Simple Story of a Simple India

Stills from BASANT (1942)

“Talkies” or the movies with sound and dialogues began to be made in India in the early thirties. The movies of this period had an experimental character, as it was a field that was highly unexplored till then, and all those engaged in it, were learning and refining their skills. It also meant a lot of enthusiasm for creativity, and gave rise to many great Bollywood personalities. 

Comparatively, the period of early forties saw movies in a more settled mode. It is difficult to say whether it was because certain skills had been acquired by then that curtailed the enthusiasm for further experimentation or whether a certain degree of fatigue had sent in the more established film makers, leading to a bit of stagnation. It does not mean that the quality of movies made in forties was going down. It simply means that compared to the aggressive experiments of the thirties as evident from AMAR JYOTI (1936), DEVDAS (1936),  ACHHUT KANYA (1936), DUNIYA NA MAANE (1937), STREET SINGER (1938), DHARTI MATA (1938), PUKAR (1939) and AADMI (1939) the movies of the forties were well within the parameters that had become the norm by that time. Of course, there were exceptions like NEECHA NAGAR (1946), but it was only after 1947 that Hindi movies moved to the next phase of their evolution. 

BASANT (1942) is a typical movie of the forties, which is remembered today largely as a debut movie of Madhubala. It presents many interesting facets of India of that time, including how the life of an Indian was deeply embedded in the family and  was considered far more important than vocation or money. It also enables us to look at the changing values of Indian society during the last hundred years.

Mumtaz Shanti & Ulhas in BASANT (1942)

The Plot 

The story of BASANT revolves around Uma (Mumtaz Shanti). She is a poor and homeless young woman, who lives with her younger brother, Babul (Suresh) and works as a domestic help to earn their subsistence. One day, Babul comes across a theatre seeking performers and approaches it for work, but is rejected. On advice from Dilip (Mumtaz Ali), one of the theatre actors, he and Uma decide to meet its proprietor, Janaki Prasad (P. F. Pithawala). There they meet his younger brother, Nirmal (Ulhas) who supports them and on Janaki Parasad’s initial refusal to listen to them, makes them stand and sing outside his residence. Janaki Babu is impressed by their singing, and employs them. 

In the theatre, Uma becomes the leading actress, and is strongly envied by the other actress, Meena (Pramila) and her father (Jagannath) who feel threatened by her success. Nirmal is highly averse to Meena’s advances towards him, but develops a strong liking for Uma. They confess their love for each other, and plan to get married. Nirmal does not want Uma to work in theatre, and they decide that once Nirmal gets a job, Uma will stop working. However, Nirmal is unable to find a job, and Meena and her father, out of envy for Uma, suggest to Nirmal that Janaki Babu is himself interested in marrying her. Nirmal can’t wait anymore and opts for an immediate marriage and Uma leaves theatre. Soon they have a daughter, but Nirmal still cannot find work. He is also unwilling to accept any help from his elder brother or let Uma work. As a result, they face severe financial constraints. When their Landlord threatens to evict them from the rented house, Uma is forced to sell her last valuable possession, and after paying rent, hands the rest of the money to Nirmal, who has come across a job opening in Lahore and needs to go there urgently. 

Nirmal does not return for a long time, and Uma is left penniless with no money to take care of her daughter. Dilip brings money from Janaki Das and also an invitation to work in theatre. Though Uma refuses it initially, she is finally convinced by Babul and Dilip to do so for the sake of her daughter, and goes to theatre. In the meanwhile, Nirmal returns and is angered to know that Uma has joined theatre. When he goes there, he is again misled by Meena and her father, who suggest a relationship between Uma and Janaki Das. Angered by this, he takes his daughter and leaves for Kolkata where he has got a job. On her return, Uma is stunned by the absence of her daughter, and the fact that Nirmal has taken her away without even talking to her. 

Janaki Das and Dilip try to look for Nirmal, but are unable to trace him. Eight years pass. Uma continues to work for theatre and relentlessly, they keep searching for Nirmal and her daughter, by taking the theatre group to different cities, and in the process, reach Kolkata. Meanwhile her daughter, Manju (Madhubala with the name of Baby Mumtaz) has grown up. Nirmal is now well placed, and takes good care of Manju, who also sings for radio. She sings the same song that Uma had sung in front of the house of Janaki Das when she first met Nirmal. Uma hears it on radio and they are able to trace Nirmal. When she goes there, Nirmal convinces her that due to her association with theatre, her return to their lives can be detrimental for the future of Manju, and lets her meet their daughter only once and that too if she would not reveal her true identity to her. Uma, who is heartbroken, agrees and after meeting Manju, leaves with her doll. Dilip, who had come to accompany Uma, tries to convince Nirmal, but Uma, who is somewhat disoriented by all this has an accident on the road and returns. She thinks of committing suicide, before the climax scene sets in. 

A Simple Movie in a Different India that Used to Exist Once 

BASANT is well made movie by the standards of forties, although it was not one of the top box office hits of 1942, when it was released. This is understandable given the simplicity of its plot and the absence of any major attractions that could make it a top hit. Its cast did not consist of big stars of the time. It was Mumtaz Shanti’s first movie and actually helped in her rise to stardom later, with KISMET (1943). Ulhas never rose to the status of top Bollywood stars, in spite of a long career and recognition as a strong actor. Mumtaz Ali, father of Mehmood, has a limited role in this movie, but leaves a good impression. It is hardly surprising that the movie is remembered today as the debut movie of Madhubala, who as Baby Mumtaz, was the third Mumtaz of the movie after Mumtaz Shanti and Mumtaz Ali. It may not be possible to find another movie wherein three out of six important characters were played by actors that were named Mumtaz! 

A striking characteristic of this movie is its simplicity. The whole of the movie is shot indoors, indicating its low budget character, but the well directed scenes do not let you realize this fact easily. Its most interesting aspect is the society of those times and how it compares with today. In 1940s, association with theatre and dancing on stage was not looked upon with favor by the conservative society and the attitude of Nirmal that resents his wife dancing in front of the audience to entertain them seems natural for those times. Of course, such an attitude would be open to ridicule today as highly unreasonable. In only seventy five years, we have seen our society change its values to such an extent that if same is extrapolated over a few centuries, it becomes clear how unstable our social values can be. 

The social conservatism of the forties as seen in this movie also reminds us of the importance that was placed on the family. Uma readily gives up theatre to get a family, in spite of Nirmal’s unemployment. This reminds us of several leading ladies of Bollywood, who gave up a successful career in Bollywood for the sake of family in the twentieth century. Some of them did that at the prime of their careers. It is difficult to say how possible that eventuality would be today, in a different society, where marriage itself is not considered stable and permanent anymore.

Baby Mumtaz who was later known as Madhubala, with Mumtaz Shanti in BASANT (1942), her debut movie

The ease with which Uma agrees to give up her daughter is unlikely to be a part of a movie today, where couples are more than likely to end up in courts over child custody disputes. But, such happenings were not uncommon in the movies as well as popular literature of the time. The story of ARADHANA (1969), a milestone movie that launched Rajesh Khanna to stardom also revolves around a mother who gives up her rights and identity for the sake of her child’s future. Of course, these are all fictional stories and characters, but they do tell us something about the social values and aspirations, even if the realities may not always match with them. Parents still care for their children today, but the extent to which they would sacrifice their own existence for them may not be the same anymore. 

Epilogue 

Madhubala was certainly one of the most beautiful ladies of Hindi Cinema, and her screen presence as a child in this movie is as charming as one would expect from an actor that remains alive in our memory more than half a century after her death. 

This review of her debut movie from the ‘Prism of Bollywood’ is a tribute to her lasting legacy.

MADHUBALA : Her beautiful legacy is still alive!

DHARAVI (1992): Indian Aspirations Trivialized and Crushed as Informal Economy

Congested Urban Agglomerations are of two kinds. Those belonging to a rich affluent class, which are considered cities proper, and those inhabited by the underprivileged and often resourceless migrant workers, which are called slums. Such slums have been a part of most cities at some point of time or the other, and have gradually disappeared as incomes rose and populations stabilized. Unfortunately, nothing of the sort has happened in Dharavi, the largest slum in Asia, spread over 500 acres, with a population of around a million people, and a density of over 800,000 persons per square mile.

DAMINI (1993): The Perennial Dilemma between Moral Duties and Personal Loyalties

DAMINI (1993) Starring Rishi Kapoor, Meenakshi Sheshadri, Sunny Deol & Amrish Puri

It is not very common for a mainstream Bollywood movie to highlight several important social issues in a realistic manner and at the same time retain its box office appeal. DAMINI, a 1993 movie directed by Raj Kumar Santoshi achieved this extra ordinary distinction with a story that involved love, a gruesome crime, a respectable family, a lady unable to suppress her conscience, a husband torn between his wife and family, and a courtroom drama that many can identify with. In the process, it raises an issue that has occupied central stage in Indian literature since several thousand years and the final answer to which continues to remain elusive. 

It raises the dilemma that most of us face at some point of time in our life, the choice between our moral duties on one hand and the duties towards our personal loyalties to someone on the other. It is the same question that was faced by Bhishma, Krishna and Karna in the epic story of Mahabharata. But, DAMINI raises other issues too. The plight of poor domestic maids faced with exploitation in households that they desperately cling on in search of livelihood, the dichotomy of standards that differentiate privileged from the unprivileged and the problems faced by those lacking adequate resources in the face of manipulation of criminal trials inside and outside the courtroom. Every one of these issues remains as relevant today as it was a quarter of a century back when this movie was released.

Meenakshi Sheshadri in DAMINI (1993): Arguably her Best Performance

1993 gave us a number of movies that can be considered a milestone for different reasons. These include Govinda and Chunkey Pandey’s AANKHEIN, Sharukh Khan’s BAAZIGAR, and Sanjay Dutt’s KHALNAYAK. One of those hits was DAMINI (1993), a movie that is difficult to forget. In many ways, it was an atypical movie, which threw two unexpected stars, Meenakshi Sheshadri and Sunny Deol, and can be arguably considered the best movie, even though both have illustrious careers and have given bigger box office hits.

GRIHA PRAVESH (1979): A Movie that Highlighted Marital Decay in Urban India

A Critical movie Directed by Basu Bhattacharya on Marital Decay as a Reason for Breaking Families

Griha Pravesh is a 1979 Hindi movie directed by Basu Bhattacharya, highlighting the plight of contemporary urban nuclear families, which often begin to struggle once the monotony of husband wife relationship and its consequent indifferences take hold. Devoid of the strength of bonds that could hold a couple together in a joint family in a conservative rural society, urban nuclear families face a decay that they must overcome with proactive efforts, and when such efforts are not there, even the great Indian family may fell apart.

The movie, which was third in a series of movies made by the Basu Bhattacharya and his team, was in many ways ahead of its time. The message in it was somewhat similar to the first two, ANUBHAV (1971) and AVISHKAR (1973), and so was the cast, with Sanjeev Kumar pairing Tanuja in the first of them and Sharmila Tagore joining Rajesh Khanna in the second. GIRHA PRAVESH saw a return of Sanjeev Kumar, with Sharmila Tagore in one of her last appearances as the leading lady in a Bollywood movie. The development of this movie by Basu Bhattacharya and Gulzar tells us something that Indian society was not ready to listen back in 1979. Ironically, its message is even more relevant today!

GRIHA PRAVESH (1979) was directed by Basu Bhattacharya, but also involved Gulzar is also seen in this scene from the movie, where he is his original self trying to explain a song, and by it the theme of this movie.

Families are the glue that hold our society together. It is true that it is our modern social institutions of market and state that have helped create the luxuries which we enjoy today in daily life. One of them maximizes our economic welfare, while the other sustains our individual political rights and empowerment. However, neither of them facilitates the core social bonds on which our civilizations were sustained and survived for several thousand years. On the contrary, by substituting the needs of a family with individual empowerment and market driven gratifications, modern urban life can significantly weaken the strength and significance of family bonds.

Back in seventies, the marital decay was still beginning to unfold, which makes this movie and the sophistication and nuances with which it approaches the subject nothing less than fascinating. Unfortunately, its subject was one which was considered taboo in those times, and so none of these movies, though appreciated by critics for their artistic valuation, could achieve the traction that was required to generate an open and broad discussion within its audience.

ANOKHA PYAAR (1948): Why were there No Villains in Indian Society?

Add caption

A typical plot of a popular movie, irrespective of the language in which it is made, has a hero and a villain. This is perhaps the greatest difference between a popular movie plot and real life. In the world that we live, everyone has his own mills to grind, and with the exception of criminal elements, the exploitation of one by another is incidental to the imperfections of society. What we term destiny, is generally a set of circumstances beyond the control of anyone in particular, and can either be pleasant or unfortunate.
In a way, the movies of the time reflect this maturity of the society. In the 1940s, when India earned its independence on one hand and suffered the unexpected trauma and suffering of partition on the other, the movies were still brimming with positive overtones of a generation that was hopeful, confident, hard working and even innovative, but had not yet lost the compassion and selflessness of a civilization that was called India. ANOKHA PYAAR (1948), a simple movie based on a triangular love story, has all these elements.

Nargis & Nalini Jaywant in the 1948 Hindi Movie, ANOKHA PYAR, a tale of traingular love, also starring Dilip Kumar

ANOKHA PYAAR is a 1948 Hindi movie starring Dilip Kumar, Nargis and Nalini Jaywant. It is essentially a simple story of triangular love with an interesting dynamic of class division thrown in between. Like most movies of the period between 1947 and 1950, while the country was in the process of establishing itself as a new independent nation and the society was adopting to this new notion of freedom from colonial exploitation, the Hindi movie industry, which was still not called Bollywood, was also taking major strides. The social milieu that provides the background is also simple, and yet, it provides several insights about the people of those times, what they aspired for and how they dealt with the day to day challenges.

KANOON (1960): Movie that Exposed Vulnerabilities of Judicial Process

Ashok Kumar-Rajendra Kumar starrer shows what can go wrong in the Court

Conceptually, modern judicial process in criminal matters is supposed to be an objective, impersonal evaluation of an accusation of crime based on evidence brought to the notice of the Court. This excessive reliance on evidence, and in particular the testimony of a witness can often be a source of errors that can destroy a life, even a family. The 1960 movie KANOON (meaning law) highlights this weakness. Unfortunately, what was true in 1960 continues to be true even today, with few lessons learnt, and even fewer implemented.

A Courtroom scene in 'KANOON' (1960) : The Judge in a Murder trail gets accused of Murder during the trial by the ex-Public Prosecutor, who resigns to defend the accused

The Context

Movies, like literature present fictional stories against backgrounds that are often as real as any documentary can be. Thus, a story of a innocent villager can document the ills of the society and the story of a school teacher can highlight the problems with the education system. However, KANOON, a 1960 movie starring Ashok Kumar, Rajendra Kumar and Nanda is centered on the subject of law and judicial process. Kanoon means law. Unlike other movies, where social realities get document rather unintentionally, this is a movie that begins with a scene focused on aberrations of law, and ends with a monologue by a judge accused and discharged of murder, highlighting its limitations. In between, of course, there is a suspense thriller that nicely evolves and keeps you interested until the climax.