Ashutosh Gowariker. (DC)

Can a national icon become a prop in a fictional hero’s story? Prabhas’ Fauzi has triggered this debate after its teaser depicted Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose introducing the actor’s fictional character to Adolf Hitler during their historically documented meeting in Berlin on May 29, 1942.

The objection is not to portraying the meeting itself, but to the suggestion that Bose praises a fictional spy, effectively elevating the film’s hero through a scene involving a revered freedom fighter. Netaji’s grandnephew, Chandra Kumar Bose, has demanded that the makers withdraw the teaser, apologise and release a revised version. “Mixing fiction with history is a crime,” he said, objecting to what he considers a distortion of historical facts.

Salman Khan’s Maatrubhumi: May War Rest in Peace, originally titled Battle of Galwan, faces a different set of sensitivities. Directed by Apoorva Lakhia, the film draws on the 2020 clash between Indian and Chinese troops in the Galwan Valley. Its title change, reported revisions and official-clearance process have brought the challenges of depicting a recent military conflict into focus.

Both the films raise questions about the responsibilities that come with turning history into entertainment.

THE FREEDOM TO REINTERPRET

Filmmakers have always blended fact with fiction. Sanjay Leela Bhansali, whose Bajirao Mastani and Padmaavat reimagined historical settings, believes there is a clear distinction between interpretation and distortion. “Although K Asif’s Mughal-e-Azam portrayed real historical figures like Akbar and his wife Jodabai. There is no evidence of the Salim-Anarkali romance. Cinema gives you the freedom to reinterpret but not distort history,” he says.

Actor Sachin Khedekar, who played Bose in Shyam Benegal’s film, acknowledges that creative liberties are sometimes necessary. “Those liberties had to be taken to make the story flow well,” he says. But when real historical figures are made to endorse fictional characters, the line between dramatic invention and misleading representation becomes harder to ignore.

HISTORY, WITH A PURPOSE

Ashutosh Gowariker, whose Jodhaa Akbar attracted debate over its historical interpretation, believes stories about the past must connect with contemporary life. “I feel if today we make a story about the past, it must be correlated to the present. And Jodhaa-Akbar is as relevant to present times as arranged marriages,” he says.

For Ananth Mahadevan, who has directed several fact-based films, research is central to the process. His team, he says, takes care to preserve historical details while dramatising events. “Any distortion could mean disrespect to the subject at hand,” he says. He also cautions against dramatic embellishments designed simply to make a story more commercially appealing. “Our tendency to succumb to over-the-top dramatic tweaks for fear of losing out on an audience, has resulted in such controversial issues. True life stories demand honesty and that cannot be sidelined for popular indulgence.”

WHERE THE LINE LIES

Cinema must be free to reinterpret history, but that freedom comes with responsibility. The challenge is to dramatise the past without turning national icons into props or stripping real events of their context.

On connecting the past with the present“I feel if today we make a story about the past, it must be correlated to the present. And Jodhaa-Akbar is as relevant to present times as arranged marriages.”

— Ashutosh Gowariker

“Our tendency to succumb to over-the-top dramatic tweaks for fear of losing out on an audience, has resulted in such controversial issues. True life stories demand honesty and that cannot be sidelined for popular indulgence.”

— Ananth Mahadevan

Tags: