top of page

By:

Sreejit Datta

25 November 2024 at 4:34:47 am

Why India Can’t Get Its Epics Right on Screen

A still from Peter Brook's 'The Mahabharata' (1989) Every time Hollywood drops a blockbuster movie based on one of the foundational epics of the West, a collective groan seems to arise from a significant section of Indian cinephiles and the Indian audience at large: If they can do it, why can’t we? Yugo Sako’s brilliant Ramayana, the Legend of Prince Rama (1993) Be it Wolfgang Petersen’s Troy (2004), Uberto Pasolini’s The Return (2024), or Christopher Nolan’s latest Odyssey (2026), we’ve...

Why India Can’t Get Its Epics Right on Screen

A still from Peter Brook's 'The Mahabharata' (1989) Every time Hollywood drops a blockbuster movie based on one of the foundational epics of the West, a collective groan seems to arise from a significant section of Indian cinephiles and the Indian audience at large: If they can do it, why can’t we? Yugo Sako’s brilliant Ramayana, the Legend of Prince Rama (1993) Be it Wolfgang Petersen’s Troy (2004), Uberto Pasolini’s The Return (2024), or Christopher Nolan’s latest Odyssey (2026), we’ve repeatedly heard echoes of this Indian grievance over recent decades as Hollywood kept producing a steady stream of epic adaptations. To make matters worse, foreign filmmakers also worked on timeless Indian epics, creating some highly memorable films and plays, whose artistic brilliance (if not so much their commercial success) far outweighs that of the Indian attempts to recreate the Ramayana and the Mahabharata for big and small screens. Yugo Sako’s animated film Ramayana: The Legend of Prince Rama (1993) and Peter Brook’s Mahabharata (1989), adapted for both stage and screen, are well-loved productions that continue to be watched and discussed with fondness and enthusiasm by many Indians. Though both these deeply moving adaptations were made with crucial technical help from renowned Indian collaborators, the major artistic vision and creative drive came primarily from non-Indians. On the Indian side, we have had several popular adaptations of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata for cinema and television, but unfortunately none of them can be said to have equalled the artistic vigour and sincerity of a Sako or a Brook. Perhaps Shyam Benegal’s Kalyug (1981), a brilliant contemporised take on the Mahabharata, could be counted as a happy exception to this scenario, but Benegal transposed the story and the characters of the great itihasa epic from the Dwapara Age of yore to the all-too-familiar humdrum setting of today’s high Kali Age. It’s interesting to note that the late Vanraj Bhatia, the celebrated composer who created the iconic music for Kalyug, also gave Ramayana: the Legend of Prince Rama its highly popular film score and music. Among Indian creators, the courage to produce adaptations of ancient Indian epics while keeping their times, space, scale and dramatis personae more or less intact has been displayed by Ramanand Sagar, B.R. Chopra and their creative successors for the small screen alone. However, even they haven’t always remained true to the older texts of Valmiki and Vyasa, often allowing themselves the freedom to borrow elements from later retellings, such as Goswami Tulsidas’s or Krittibas Ojha’s popular and revered works. In comparison, Indian cinema adaptations of the epics have been less ambitious. In fact, they’ve sometimes ended up as mere caricatures of the exalted classics. Adipurush (2023) is a particularly illustrative case in point. In recent months, a brand-new movie based on the Ramayana has been announced amid much fanfare, with its first instalment due in the latter part of 2026. Sadly, the upcoming movie’s VFX-heavy official trailer has drawn a lot of flak from the Indian audience for its artificial-looking scenes and eyebrow-raising leading cast. Many disappointed admirers took to social media to express their dismay, making the matter trend for days on platforms such as X. Epic Challenge Naturally, questions arise: Why can’t today’s Indian filmmakers and creators make a satisfying and stirring modern-media adaptation of these timeless, beloved Indian classics? Are they lagging behind their Western counterparts due to technological or creative shortcomings? Do they lack imagination, training, skills – or what is it that’s really holding them back? To my mind, the problem lies primarily with two Indian realities: a) the poor quality of general education in Indian schools, and b) the modern Indian proclivity to take offence at the drop of a hat, especially in matters of religion and culture. It must be kept in mind that, unlike the foundational epics of the Western world, both Ramayana and Mahabharata are still part of a major living tradition, namely, the Hindu tradition. The Hindu tradition has somehow managed to keep the itihasa epics alive in religion and culture alike, especially in India but also in several parts of the world where Hindu communities flourished. Therefore, unlike Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey vis-à-vis the contemporary Western culture, Ramayana and Mahabharata form a major part of India’s contemporary religious-cultural imagination. On the other hand, the Indian education system in particular, and the Indian state in general, have tried their best to keep academic and creative engagements with these epics at arm’s length from the Indian people, on the pretext of upholding the secular nature of the Republic. This has resulted in Indians, especially younger generations, harbouring a rather poor level of acquaintance with the actual contents and styles of the texts of Valmiki and Vyasa, or of their retellers, for that matter. A couple of generations ago, the work of acquainting the Indian kid with these texts was mainly carried out at home, at the knees of grandparents and parents. This is no longer the case, except in a negligible number of Indian homes. Consequently, most kids in post-independence India grew up without direct exposure to the lore of Rama, Sita and the Pandavas as Valmiki, Vyasa, Tulsidas, Krittibas Ojha or Kamban have sung them. This has naturally left Indian kids with an imagination largely uncoloured by the grand visions, hardships, character traits and awe-inspiring acts of the epic heroes and heroines. Some would call such an imagination stunted, and others who are less forthright would describe it as simply disconnected from the Indian civilisation’s grand narrative. This gets reflected, inter alia, in the Indian film industry. Stories having the scale and profundity of Ramayana and Mahabharata are rather difficult to handle for these generations of Indians. From them, one can hardly expect in-depth, sincere creative engagement with these epic narratives – let alone any originality in handling the material – due to systemic disconnect. It is really difficult to pick up the epics at a later stage in one’s life and still engage with them at a deeper level of emotional, moral, cultural or symbolic significance. For the younger generations, these epics supply no archetypes. Therefore, at such later stages, a great deal of dedication and motivation becomes necessary to unpack the multiple layers of their meaning. Few can be expected to devote such amounts of time and energy at an advanced stage in their professional career – even in the creative professions. Cultural Nuances The other factor is the rather modern Indian proclivity to take offence at contemporary adaptations and retellings of stories carrying religious, cultural or historical significance. No matter how sincerely and carefully a storyteller, writer or director may try to recreate the magic of ancient Indian epics for the screen, no matter how aware and sensitive they may be about the cultural nuances of these stories in the Indian context, they will likely end up offending the religious/cultural sensibilities of some group or the other. Even Yugo Sako’s Ramayana adaptation had to face it. This situation makes it tremendously difficult for anyone to touch these stories, and even when someone dares to, they face a lot of pressure to conform to popular expectations and/or group-specific demands in the making of the adaptation. Most succumb to these pressures, compromising their original creative visions, if ever they had one. It is mainly for these reasons, and not technological backwardness or even creative lack as such, that the making of modern-media adaptations of ancient Indian epics is an excessively difficult task in India. One still hopes, however, that someday Indian filmmakers would rise above these unfavourable background conditions and present us with a highly refined, inspiring film adaptation of the Ramayana and the Mahabharata. If that does happen, it would be an artistic feat of great measure despite the present depressing and adverse conditions. Of course, a more robust solution would be to improve the prevailing background conditions themselves, resolving which would amount to a real service rendered to the world of Indian cinema and art. More than anything else, it would be a national service. (The writer is a Kolkata-based educator, writer, researcher and musician. Views personal.)

India waits to lasso diamantaire Mehul Choksi

Mumbai: India rubbed its hands gleefully as the Belgium Police honoured its request to arrest the absconder diamantaire Mehul Chinubhai Choksi – more than seven years after he, along with his nephew Nirav Deepak Modi - allegedly duped the Punjab National Bank of nearly Rs. 13,800-crores.

 

The scam involving the ‘Mehul Mama-Nirav Bhanja’ erupted in Jan 2018, after the PNB lodged a complaint with the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI).

 

By then the kin, along with many of their family members, winked and slipped out of the country, leaving a rattled India rubbing its palms in disappointment.

 

A political-cum-financial storm raged, embarrassing the Bharatiya Janata Party government of Prime Minister Narendra Modi a year before the Lok Sabha elections.

 

Multiple agencies launched a multi-pronged probe into what became the biggest banking scam in the past quarter century – and almost four times bigger than the stock market-cum-banking fraud the late Big Bull Harshad Mehta had inflicted on the Indian economy 33 years ago (in April 1992) – when it was just opening up.

 

In Belgium

According to official reports, Choksi was living with his Belgium citizen-wife Preeti in Antwerp, a global diamond hub, presumably for the past 18 months on a ‘residency permit’ acquired through questionable means, for medical reasons.

 

Earlier, he shot to the headers (June 2021) while being taken in a wheelchair to a court by the Dominican Republic's Police on charges of sneaking into the small country in the Caribbean Sea, North America.

 

Interestingly, as the Antigua & Barbuda government initiated the process to cancel his citizenship acquired through an investor visa, Choksi had suddenly gone ‘missing’ till he surfaced in the Dominican Republic.

 

The April 2025 action by Belgium followed a request by India’s CBI and the financial frauds specialist Enforcement Directorate (ED) to nab Choksi as the InterPol had revoked his Red Corner Notice in 2023.

 

Mama and Bhanja

‘Mama’ Choksi is the founder-owner of Gitanjali Group while ‘bhanja’ Nirav’s Firestar plus other companies – and the duo, with some PNB officials hand-in-glove – conspired to make a ‘mamu’ of not only PNB, but other banks, as it subsequently tumbled out.

 

After making a quiet exit, Choksi was detected living in the verdant Antigua & Barbuda Isles (West Indies), then attempted entry to the Dominican Republic, was sent back to Antigua & Barbuda and then went to Belgium where he was nabbed on Sunday.

 

Similarly, Modi was found sauntering on the streets of London and nabbed in March 2019. He remains in jail there since India's extradition is still pending.

 

However, India is keeping its fingers crossed that it may finally lay hands on Choksi, bring him to India and face trial in the PNB scam, though it may take time.

 

Born in Mumbai (1959) and educated in Gujarat, Choksi, 66, and wife Preeti have three children.

 

The Rs. 13,800-crore PNB scam

In the modus operandi revealed after India’s second-largest PSU bank PNB admitted it was scammed, Choksi and Modi used fraudulent Letters of Undertaking (LoU) to get overseas credits or loans from Indian banks.

 

The PNB first informed the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) of the fraud and then lodged a criminal complaint with the CBI in Jan. 2018, plus another CBI complaint in Feb, that led to a FIR against Modi and Choksi and their companies.

 

The ED entered the scene to probe the allegations of money-laundering through the LoUs – which they allegedly misused to avail short-term business finances from foreign branches of Indian banks.

 

The probe said that the duo were availing the LoUs from the PNB’s Brady House Branch from March 2011, and over the next six-seven years, managed to get a whopping 1,200-plus LoUs like a breeze with the help of some friendly bankers within.

 

Post-scam, the gold-diamond companies Gitanjali Group and Firestone Group with multiple operations in India and abroad have largely wound up, while some personal assets of the mama-bhanja have been auctioned to recover a part of the dues.

 

ED's plea to declare Choksi fugitive stuck for seven years

Even as absconding diamantaire Mehul Choksi, a key accused in the Punjab National Bank loan fraud case, has been arrested in Belgium, the ED's plea to declare him a fugitive economic offender has been pending before a court in Mumbai for nearly seven years.


Choksi, 65, and his nephew diamantaire Nirav Modi are the prime accused in the Rs 13,000 crore PNB bank loan fraud case. Choksi was arrested in Belgium following an extradition request by Indian probe agencies, official sources said on Monday.


The Enforcement Directorate had filed the application in July 2018, seeking to declare Choksi an FEO and confiscate his assets under provisions of the Fugitive Economic Offenders Act.


However, the matter has witnessed repeated delays owing to a barrage of applications filed by the accused in the PMLA court and the Bombay High Court alleging procedural lapses in the Enforcement Directorate's plea.


"The court is kept busy with frivolous applications, and hearing on our application to declare him (Choksi) an FEO has been adjourned for the past seven years,” an ED officer had said after the hearing was once again deferred this February.


"The court should have continued the hearing and taken a decision on the future course of action once the application was moved," the officer had said.

He had urged the court to take note of the repeated filing of similar applications and to not entertain them.


Choksi's lawyer had informed the court that the accused was undergoing treatment for suspected cancer in Belgium and intended to file an application in connection with his health.


Under the FEO Act, an individual can be declared a Fugitive Economic Offender if a warrant has been issued against him for an offence involving Rs 100 crore or more and he has left India while refusing to return. Once declared an FEO, the person's property can be confiscated by the investigating agency.


Choksi had challenged the ED's application in the Bombay High Court, alleging that the agency "had not followed proper procedure before filing the application and, hence, it stands vitiated".


However, in September 2023, the High Court dismissed his plea, ruling that the ED had adhered to the prescribed format under the FEO Act. It also vacated a stay on the special court's proceedings.


Despite this, the hearing on declaring Choksi FEO could not commence, with Choksi continuing to file applications before the special court through his lawyers.


While most of these pleas have been dismissed, a few remain pending. His latest attempt to stall proceedings through a plea to recall the notice issued on the ED's FEO application was rejected in December 2023.


According to ED officials, Choksi left India under suspicious circumstances in early January 2018.


Shifting stance

Choksi's counsel has argued that the ED kept shifting its stance on the material grounds for declaring him an FEO and that the suspension of his Indian passport made it impossible for him to return for investigation.

The court, however, rejected this argument, stating that the notice was issued based on accurate information and not based on "wrong facts or mistaken assumptions".


ED claimed the accused left the country under suspicious circumstances in the first week of January 2018.


Nirav Modi has already been declared as an FEO by the special court. He has been lodged in jail in London since 2019.

Comments

bottom of page