This is not about rolling credits, or standing credits or jumping credits or swimming credits. This is about due credit in an appropriate manner. The fact is some of the most memorable films we have grown up with have been adapted from books. They would not be there if the book hadn’t been there. This business of 2.5 per cent or 10 per cent or 20 per cent based on a book or loosely based does not make any sense at all. It is a chicken and egg question where the answer is obvious which came first. A film is either based on a book or it isn’t. There is no in between. 3 Idiots is certainly based on Chetan Bhagat’s book. There is no doubt in anybody’s mind about that. About the publicity bit: people generally want publicity for a piece of work they have produced. (In fact, the more the better). Those who reproduce it in any form have to acknowledge the parentage. Chetan couldn’t, for example have said: “You know, my book has sold enough already. So, you guys can be really stingy with the credit where I am concerned. I am a cult figure already, you see?” Now the makers of the film are saying there are 30 departures from the book and have put it up in a website, and have gone on Youtube to defend themselves. My point is whether there are 30 departures or 130 departures or even 1030 points of departure from the book, it is still based on the book. There is also a larger issue here that is easy to overlook: You cannot clamber on to a soapbox and claim to be making a movie with a moral and social message and somehow be less than acceptably ethical when it comes to an issue like giving due credit in an appropriate manner. That is cheap. But that it is the culture we are used to so far. You shortchange authors, rip off movies from one language and make it in another language and pass it off as your own. You rip off songs and music from other artistes and pass it off as your own. How many examples have we seen of this already? Correct me if I am wrong but did I see enough credit given to Chris Nolan or his brother when I saw the other film in which Aamir Khan appeared — Gajini?
Some of the finest movies that I have seen have been books and when they were made into films they created some of the finest directors. All of them acknowledged the authors upfront and with due honesty if not humility. Take Day of the Jackal. How much of the book is there in the film? Take Godfather. Mario Puzo himself didn’t think much of his book. Francis Ford Coppola who was approached to make the film read the book and considered it trashy. He didn’t want to make the film. But he wanted the money. Everybody accepts that Coppola improved upon the book. The departures only strengthen the film. Or take Peter Benchley. Like Chetan Bhagat, he too is no Shakespeare. Like Chetan Bhagat’s Five Point Someone, Jaws was his first book too, a first novel about a fish with teeth. Benchley thought: Who cared about that? How would Hollywood train a great white, anyway?
When Steven Spielberg turned it into a monstrous success his opus at that time was slim: Duel (1971) and Sugarland Express (1974). The first thing he did was throw out Benchley’s screenplay and had the plot rewritten completely. He gave Quint (the character Robert Shaw plays) a context that was not in the book. He did away with two subplots that Benchley had worked into the book, a mafia angle and the cuckolding of the police chief (played by Roy Scheider) and completely changed the characters, sweetening them, dumbing down the sexual angles, underplaying the violence and gore that Benchley obviously relished. When Orca goes down and one of the three main characters manage to shove an oxygen cylinder in the mouth of the giant mechanical shark and shoot it making the shark explode to smithereens, Benchley was appalled. He objected, saying, “Steven, it couldn’t happen that way. It is not possible.” It was the anguish of an author watching his work morph before his very eyes. Spielberg replied: “I don’t really care.” But the larger point remains: It is still based on Peter Benchley’s book. It is still Mario Puzo’s Godfather. Coppola does not have any problems acknowledging that. One story line in 3 Idiots is shot in blue à la Steven Soderbergh (Traffic, 2000); there are moving photographs in an album à la Harry Potter… If Chetan Bhagat feels his pockets have been somehow picked it is easy to see why. Certainly, aal izz not well. I daresay the book is more adult than the sophomoronic behaviour of our forty something going on nineteen actor, producer and director put together.
LINK
Chapter 26: Meeting Daddy
ReplyDeleteAlok’s interview and Ryan’s research internship
Have to agree that Hirani and Abhijat Joshi do a much better job of writing and fleshing out the interview scene and the actors rock it too. We do learn in the book that Hari wanted to be a writer, so here Hirani makes Farhan talk to his Dad about his dream internship with a wild-life photographer.
Chapter 27: Five Point Someone
Cherian realises how the Education system is flawed in a dream sequence. The boys pass out of IIT and the narrator post a letter to Ryan’s parents for funding his project.
The posting of the letter in the film happens with Farhan. Ryan can’t take favours from anyone because he’s the hero of the film and hence, posts Farhan’s letter and makes his dream come true.
* * *
Well, so almost all of Five Point Someone but for a chapter has found its way into 3 Idiots in one form or the other. And just for that reason alone, Chetan Bhagat ought to have got a story credit right upfront. Coming up with a parallel narrative of what happens 10 years ago alone does not change the entire story, however interesting or entertaining the twists are.
But seriously, imagine the suspension of disbelief and the convenience of co-incidences that Hirani and Joshi in that parallel original narrative that has nothing to do with the book. I mean what are the chances that the girl is getting married the same day as the day of the bet and the day Ranchoddass’s father died and the time Silencer/Chatur has to meet Phunsukh Wangdu and his lost classmate with whom he’s had a bet turns out to be Wangdu?
Yes, Hirani says they have fulfilled the contract and given the writer the credit he was promised but does that really entitle him to claim ownership of the story?
The ‘Work for Hire’ is a generic clause that negates all contribution from the writer and transfers ownership of the idea to the producer and the work is treated as commissioned. Bhagat unwittingly signed a contract with this deadly clause that now leaves him helpless.
There’s what you can do legally and what you have to do morally. Especially, when you teach us moral science lessons film after film.
Hirani has fallen in my eyes. If this can happen to one of the most popular writers in the country, then imagine the plight of the lesser known.
First, it was Aamir taking over a writer’s film as a director. Yes, he did a fantastic job no doubt but there’s no denying the arm-twisting. Then, there was a case about a lesser known writer claiming that Lage Raho Munnabhai was inspired from a concept note he submitted of a film he wanted to make called Gandhi and The Kid.
Hirani and Co ought to learn from Vishal Bhardwaj who credited a rather unknown Cajetan Boy for just the idea of Kaminey right at the beginning of the film and even named a character after the screenwriter he met at a seminar.
We crib about lack of writers and scripts all the time. But if this is how we treat them, how can we expect writers to come up with original ideas and trust them to Bollywood?
Lucky for Bhagat, his novel is still available for us to compare and discover. God bless the rest.
P.S: I love 3 Idiots as a film, however manipulative it is emotionally and I think Hirani is an excellent filmmaker who knows his craft and despite its flaws. Also Abhijat Joshi and Hirani have put together a decent screenplay with some really well written moments but that’s not the point of this post. The point of the post is if Bhagat should have also been credited for the Story.
Chapter 13: One More Year Later
ReplyDeleteCherian begins to teach their class
“It’s the same Cherian crap. Treat humans like mindless machines”
Cherian’s lecture on efficiency and not wasting time is manifested through his routine in the film – shaving in seven and a half minutes, listening to the opera, wearing a shirt with Velcro to save time etc.
Chapter 14: Vodka
Getting caught drunk in class and Alok’s need to get a Maruti 800 as dowry for his sister’s wedding. Cherian to set the toughest paper
All these details have been loyally retained since the Director wants the students to fail. In the film, he swears that he will shave his moustache off even if one of the two get placed.
Chapter 15: Operation Pendulum
Plan to steal the papers from Cherian’s office using Neha’s keys
In the film, the heroine is only a willing accomplice to this plan and hands over the keys to the boys because the director insists that the boys can do no wrong. The Heroes are Holier Than Thou.
Chapter 16: Longest day of my life – 1
Neha’s brother’s suicide note. He killed himself after failing to get into the Institute 3 times.
We learn about this suicide note in the film through a wonderfully written dialogue. “He wanted to be a writer. All he could write was this suicide note.”
Chapter 17: Longest Day of my life - 2
The guys prepare to steal the paper against all odds
Chapter 18: Longest Day of my life – 3
The red wax seal and the phone call that got them busted
This happens almost exactly as described in the book.
Chapter 19: Longest Day of my life – 4
Busted, Dean slaps Ryan across the face, disciplinary action
A little dramatised for film, Virus attacks Ryan with an umbrella and insists they move out of college in pouring rain.
Chapter 20: Longest Day of my life – 5
Alok jumps from the Insti roof unable to take the pressure of being rusticated
This happens much earlier in the film after the Director makes Raju choose between his friends and his rustication.
Chapter 21: Longest Day of my life – 6
Alok in the hospital with his legs motionless, survives near death
Raju goes into a coma in the film and needs Bollywood style miracle to make it.
Chapter 22: Ryan Speaks
We learn how the narrator wanted to be an artist and of Ryan’s past
This has been adapted to the narrator wanting to be a wild-life photographer and the sub-plot involving Ryan’s past has been completely changed. We learn at halfway point in the film that Rancho was not even his real name. He was merely a proxy student for his rich master.
Chapter 23: Kaju Barfi:
The three get another chance to write and submit their projects
Omitted from the film except that we learn that Raju’s suspension was revoked when Rancho tells him during the coma.
Chapter 24: Will We Make it
Alok on crutches, the three finish their coursework and resubmit their projects.
Raju too is on crutches and comes back to the Institute as a new man.
Chapter 25: A Day of Letters
Cherian finally finds the letter his son’s suicide note and breaks down.
This happens rather awkwardly in the film since the screenwriters tamper with the narrative a little too much. One scene Kareena is handing out the suicide note to her Dad and the immediate next scene, she’s in hospital and the Father is unable to get the pregnant sister to the hospital. Every time there’s a departure from the book, the writers slap in a larger than life sequence that requires generous doses of willing suspension of disbelief. Like the delivery scene that follows.
I am still really confused by the work-for-hire clause. How can any such clause be applied retroactively? The work was done by Bhagat way before the contract.
ReplyDeleteGreat posts there Pardesi. No doubts the movie sounds very similar to the book, infact only difference seems like movie was way below the interestingness of the book.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow, the issue is dead and buried, but it must have taught enough to others to protect their creative work.