Talk:Parallel cinema

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Cinema Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force (assessed as Mid-importance). Film: Indian This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

Many hold the mistaken view that Monsoon Wedding is an Indian film while Mira Nair herself made it clear that it is an American film for all intents and puposes, as is The Namesake. She describes them as American films about India.

The image in the section "Expansion" of Kamal Haasan is good but not as representative. The section discusses mainly Hindi art films, and I think one such image should be added, preferably of one of Shyam Benegal's films starring Shabana Azmi or Smita Patil, because it represents best Indian art cinema of that time. Opinions? Shahid • ^Talk2me 15:49, 23 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

I disagree with your opinion on Monsoon Wedding. Simply because it was an international co-production, that does not make it a non-Indian film. If that was the case, then Mira Nair's earlier Salaam Bombay would also not qualify as an Indian film, but the very fact that it was India's entry for the Oscars makes it an Indian film. The same goes for other Mira Mair films produced in India (and co-produced by Indian companies), including Monsoon Wedding. Also, could you cite any sources where she refers to it as an exclusively American film? Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 20:12, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

As for the "Expansion" section, I agree we need an image on Hindi parallel cinema, but we also need one on Malayalam cinema too since a paragraph is dedicated to it in that section. The only image (not including cover art) I could find for Hindi art cinema at the time is for Bhumika, while the only one I found for Malayalam cinema is for Mathilukal. Which images would you suggest we add? Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 20:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

There's nothing to diagree with. I actually don't have any opinion. I go according to facts only. Yes, Salaam Bombay was an Indian film, it was made and produced in India, hence it's an Indian film. It's not a really valid comparison after all because it's an old film made a long time ago, when Mira was not a Hollywood filmmakers. She is now known as an India-born Hollywood filmmaker. Monsoon Wedding is another story. You should not compare films made by one filmmaker. I can also cite such films as Vanity Fair, The Namesake and the forthcoming Amelia which are clearly not Indian films. Monsoon Wedding is still somehow confusing as it deals with an Indian world completely, starring only Indian actors, but it's an American production. It's like now saying that Slumdog is an Indian film because it's in Hindi and talks about Indian people.

The source is Mira Nair's appearance on Koffee With Karan. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:04, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Oh I think I got it wrong. I think she was talking about The Namesake. In any case, it's not an independent film, so it does not really belong tothe parallel cinema article. I will check the interview. Shahid • ^Talk2me 21:10, 6 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

That's not a valid comparison. Monsoon Wedding is an Indian production, produced by Indian production companies (alongside several American and European companies). Slumdog Millionaire is an entirely British production, produced entirely by British production companies. The same goes for Mira Nair's later Hollywood films like Vanity Fair, which were produced by American companies. You can check it up on IMDb if you are uncertain which countries they were produced by. The only one that is debateable is The Namesake, which is an American-Indian co-production, but is considered an American film. Regards, Jagged 85 (talk) 18:44, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Having checked the show again, they actually discussed The Namesake as being an "out and out Amercian film, having been produced by fox". But still, Monsoon will never qualify as an entirely Indian film, and it's far from being a parallel cinema film. It's a realistic film, but it's a very big commercial production. It's not an art film.

PS: IMDb is not a good source, btw. They often get the country wrong and add countries which are part of location in such big co-productions. Monsoon is more American than Indian. Only the executive producers and distributors are Indian, not the main ones. Anyway, as I said, it does not qualify in this article in any case. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:01, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

The number of images used should be fairly restricted. Four images would suffice. One image still looks unnecessary, but let it be for now. I think it's a great representation: Satyajit Ray, Shyam Benegal, Mani Ratnam, Aparna Sen. Shahid • ^Talk2me 19:09, 7 June 2009 (UTC)Reply

Who was the fool who considered SLUMDOG as an example of parallel cinema? It is a pure masala film. It can't get more commercial than it is.

==Nayagan? Who was the fool who considered Nayagan as an art film. It has starts, song, dance, tamasha, everything. It may be a good movie but definately it is a commercial one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.182.165.75 (talk) 15:57, 27 December 2009 (UTC)Reply

Hello All, I am a little intrigued, shouldn't we add Basu Chatterjee too? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balsumeet (talk • contribs) 04:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Hello All, I am a little intrigued, shouldn't we add Basu Chatterjee too? And shouldn't the term parallel cinema be kept a little sacro-sanct. I mean we have all the "New Age" multi-plex titles here, from Vastaav to "Shootout at Lokhundwala", "Joggers' Park" and all. Parallel Cinema??? I would rather say, this is still mass cinema, only focused on a different audience now, the urban, "shell out a couple of hundred" for a movie crowd. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Balsumeet (talk • contribs) 05:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)Reply

Even though not the most famed internationally, do you not think works of Muzzafar Ali deserve a mention in this field?? there is no denying the classical touch of Umrao Jaan or his realistic Gaman being some of the best off beat masterpieces in indian cinema. The second mention i'd like to make is my personal favorite and i'm sure someday to be known as the Legendary Vishal Bharadwaj who has broken down the barriers of art and commercial cinema and given a new high to off beat works with involvement of some major major commercial players. I think Omkara has made Saif ali khan a legend after his portrayal of Langda Tyagi, only Vishal Bharadwaj can get such performances extracted from a not so fantastic actor, but a well known star to give his career a new high. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ejivani (talk • contribs) 13:40, 27 August 2012 (UTC)Reply

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Parallel Cinema. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090307010006/http://dearcinema.com:80/review-do-bigha-zamin-bimal-roy/ to http://dearcinema.com/review-do-bigha-zamin-bimal-roy

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 18:19, 16 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Concerns have been raised previously about AI-generated content in part of this article. This is a procedural talk page section to discuss it. There is no need to ping me in response. Read WP:AISIGNS for more information for why this is tagged. Rationale stated: text added December 2024 here, note WP:AISIGNS - superficial analyses, vocab distro typical of 2023-24 LLM text, etc Gnomingstuff (talk) 07:55, 18 May 2026 (UTC)Reply