Bollywood - they are all copy cats, aren't they?

The other day we discovered http://www.bollycat.com, which purportedly "catalogues plagiarism and forgotten inspirations in the Indian movie industry". Ok, perhaps a commendable objective if you think of the number of times you have started watching a Hindi flick and suddenly gone "I have seen this somewhere...oh yeah its that Meg Ryan movie where she...damn can't remember the name". Now you are sorted, make your way to bollycat.com, movies are alphabetically listed by Indian titles that have "ripped off" Hollywood storylines or you can check which Indian movie is a "blatant copy" of a given Hollywood film. Maybe that's all that interests you about this blog and now that you have got your information fix, time to move on, eh? Wait....

I used to have a bone or two to pick with most Bollywood producers, directors, actors and assorted personnel - there didn't seem to be a single brain cell dedicated to original thinking and creativity among them. And not to mention the staple diet of rehashed songs, scores and beats that most music directors breakfast,lunch and dine on (incidentally I noticed a new phenomenon - recycling one's own work - listen to Jatin-Lalit's Chand Sifarish or Chanda Chamke from Fanaa and then play Yaara Yaara from Hum Tum - uncanny).

But only till recently, when I asked myself a seemingly simple question - how is this different from retelling a story or reciting a song heard elsewhere. I know you are going to throw the rule book on intellectual property in my face, but indulge me for a little bit here. I don't think the good people who contribute to bollycat.com are as concerned about the IP rights of Hollywood houses as they are indignant about having been taken for granted and deceived of a couple of hours' entertainment and mystery.

To go back to my simple question - haven't we, as individuals, at some time or the other heard a story somewhere and narrated it elsewhere. We have retold jokes, we have sung movie songs and perhaps parodied them by creating our own lyrics. Sure, we haven't profited from such innocuous activity but that is hardly the point, or is it? For the sake of clarity, I am going to ignore the profit jealousy possibility here and assume that you are ticked off with Bollywood for not inventing their own stuff. If a Bollywood story does closely (ok completely) mirror a Hollywood storyline, it still is a retelling. Its a re-enactment, not unlike the ramshackle stagings of Ramlilas in small town India, with passages from the Ramayana conveniently adapted to present day nation moving songs. Or jagraata (jaagaran - all night Holy parties for the uninitiated) songs, with cunning religious and pious lyrics set to all manners of Bolly songs, that the hired crooners would belt out one after the other? They are all at it and good for them. The point of movie making is to tell a story, doesn't have to be original - just interesting. The point of creating a song is to lift the spirit - again it doesn't have to be original - just fun. And besides, I don't remember people having an issue with the remaking of a Tamil/Telugu/Bangla/what have you language film in Hindi or the other way round. Or don't I know about www.allindianmoviemakersarecheats.com yet??

Beyond all this, if this retelling of a story or the rendition of a song spreads ideas across the world, isn't that a good thing? Indian movies are seen all over the world, and I don't mean the UK and US only. I am talking European gypsies and Ethiopian children and our Afghan neighbours here. Bollywood movie producers are doing a great service to global integration (national integration was achieved a long time ago) by shooting movies in London and showing them to kids in the Phillipines. Hollywood does the same when it remakes a Norwegian film into an Insomnia. But then we call that an adaptation, don't we? Why is it not accused of plagiarism when it converts a stage production into movies like Chicago or The Producers etc. Why is it that we think that movies based on books (Lord of the Rings anyone?) are such fantastic pieces of art, when there is not an original idea except stage production and perhaps some decent music and costumes in there? Because they own the rights to the book/material? Do you really want to rest your argument on that one legged table?

This is what Bollywood is about - they are good story tellers, and they reserve the right to tell a story , any story as they see fit. If it means narrating something verbatim to keep the flow, so be it. If you have a problem with that, air it, by all means, shout it out as loud as you can. But don't take this moral high ground, this holier than thou attitude where you feel compelled to catalogue perceived deficiencies in others. Almost makes me think that you are one of those who feels compelled to prove to anyone who cares to listen that the "West is indeed the best - after all we can't even make our own movies."