FILMOGRAPHIES AND INDEX: The biographical section of this volume addresses only some aspects of the film-making process: directors, actors, composers, scenarists and lyric writers, alongside brief entries on most of the major film studios, genres and art movements. Due to lack of space and the complexities involved, we were unable to include entries for producers, cinematographers, set designers, art directors, editors, choreographers, sound specialists, and so on. Filmographies have been provided for directors, actors and composers only, and for the second edition have been extended to 1995. The filmographies, which have been listed by title and year of production (or release or censorship; often we could not be sure whether there was a difference), have to be checked against the Index for fuller information about individual titles. The Index lists titles alphabetically, providing the name of the director, the language and the year of production (release or censorship). A major effort has been made to provide also alternative and English titles whenever this seemed relevant, for example, commonly used translations and those used for other than local releases. Because of the extreme difficulties involved in the romanisation of Indian languages, readers may well experience problems locating a particular title (see below under ‘spelling’).
The Index, and several individual filmographies, have been compiled largely from the following sources:
1. B.V. Dharap’s Indian Film annuals. Dharap’s original project of compiling the entire record of the Central Board of Film Certification under the aegis of the National Film Archive of India, is now unevenly available in five different sets:
1920–33: India’s silent cinema, unpublished (available at the NFAI). This problematic volume lists titles by the year in which they were censored. This means that all films made before 1920 (the year from which Censor Board records were maintained) had to be separately dated. Virchand Dharamsey’s new filmography, in Paolo Cherchi Usai/Suresh Chabria (eds.) Light of Asia (1994), published after our last edition, constitutes a major advance of scholarship on this period, and its definitive listings.
1931–50: In four volumes, unpublished (available at the NFAI).
1972–78: Published annually as Indian Films by Motion Picture Enterprises, Pune.
1979–82: Unpublished but lodged at the NFAI.
1983–85: Three volumes published by NFAI.
This material represents the only publicly available record of the CBFC and is by and large the best filmographic source for the years covered. The periods 1920–50, 1972–85 are referred to as the Dharap Years.
2. To cover the gaps in Dharap’s work, we have used the following sources: Assamese cinema: T.M. Ramachandran (ed.), 70 Years of Indian Cinema (1985: Assamese Cinema section) for the period 1935–83; Pradip Acharya and Bobbeeta Sharma provided us with information for the subsequent years.
Bengali cinema: ‘Filmography of Bengali Cinema (1897–1981)’ in B. Jha (ed.), Indian Motion Picture Almanac (1986). Rathish Saha compiled the years 1984–90 for us. For the period 1942–52, Jha inexplicably eliminates all credits except the director’s name. These have been collated with Kalish Mukhopadhyay’s history (1962) until 1948, and for 1949–50 by the Dharap years. Actor and composer credits for the years 1951–52 and 1982 have been compiled from reviews and publicity material. The update to 1995 is from Tapan Roy (ed.) Shattatar Basharer Bangla Chhabi, Calcutta: Bapi Prakashan, 1996 (Bengali).
Bhojpuri cinema: 1962–92 was compiled by M.D. Soni for this book, collated with listings in Har Mandir Singh (ed.), Hindi Film Geet Kosh, vols 1–4 (Hindi) and thereafter from the records of DataKino.
Gujarati cinema: Manilal Gala and Amrit Gangar (eds), Gujarati Chalachitron: 1982 Na Aare (1982, Gujarati) provide information for 1932–82; thereafter we relied on Harish Raghuvanshi (ed.), Gujarati Film Geet Kosh (Surat, 1995, Gujarati).
Hindi cinema: We consulted the pioneering work of Firoze Rangoonwala (ed.), Indian Filmography, Silent and Hindi Film: 1897–1969 (1970) and its updated version, Rajendra Ojha (ed.), 75 Glorious Years of Indian Cinema: 1913–1988 (1988). For 1988–90, we used annual listings by Film Information (Bombay). This information was collated with Har Mandir Singh (ed.), Hindi Film Geet Kosh, vols 1–4, and Bishwanath Chatterjee (ed.), Hindi Film Geet Kosh, vol. 5. We also consulted annual listings by Filmfare (Bombay) 1953–71.
Kannada cinema: 1934–84 is covered in Vijaya et. al. (eds), Kannada Vakchitra Suvarna Mahotsava 1934–1984 Smarana Sanchike (1984, Kannada), updated (1985–91) from the records of the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce, Bangalore (Golden Jubilee Souvenir 1995).
Malayalam cinema: 1938–70 is covered in the Malayala Cinema Directory (1970, Malayalam), which gives film credits and synopses, and in ‘Malayalam Cinema from Vigathakumaran to Manjil Virinja Pookkal’ in the journal Nana (Special Issue, 1982), which provides film titles and directors up to 1980. Titles only are listed in M. Saraswathy (ed.), Malayala Cinema-Aranoottandu (1987, Malayalam) and in M.G. Radhakrishnan (ed.), Malayalam Cinema: 50 Years (1989). Actor and composer credits for the years 1971, 1981 and 1986 (for the latter two, titles as well) are compiled from the records of the Journal of the Film Chamber (Madras), and thereafter from the Journal of Kerala State Film Chamber of Commerce.
Marathi cinema: 1931–89 is covered in Vasant Sathe (ed.), Chitrasampada (1989, Marathi). Between 1989–1993 we used D.B. Samant (ed.) Marathi Chitrapat Samagra Suchi in Rupavani (Diwali special issue, 1993), and thereafter the records of DataKino, Bombay.
Oriya cinema: 1934–84 is in Kartick Kumar Ghosh (ed.), Oriya Chalachitrara Itihas (1984, Oriya). Information after 1986 was compiled by Samarendra Das.
Punjabi cinema: 1935–92 was compiled by B.R. Garg (unpublished).
Rajasthani cinema: 1942–92 is available in Murlidhar Soni (ed.), Rajasthani Film Geet Kosh (forthcoming) and in Jugal Parihar (ed.) Maruranjani: Rajasthani Film Mahotsav Smarika (1993, Hindi), and was thereafter provided by DataKino.
Tamil cinema: The only major Indian film industry whose filmography remains uncompiled. There is a list of Tamil titles from 1931 to 1985 in ‘Filmnews’ Anandan’s 1931 Mudal 1985 Varai Veliyana Padamgal (1985, Tamil), updated to 1990 in Randor Guy (ed.), History of Tamil Cinema (1991). This list has been collated with the monthly listings of the Journal of the Film Chamber (Madras) for the Index and directors’ filmographies, supported by reviews, advertising and publicity pamphlets. Filmographies were built from available listings, such as the Manimekalai series on Tamil directors and stars. Wherever such listings were not available and filmographies have been compiled especially for this project, including the Tamil work of non-Tamil biographical entries, these are likely to be less comprehensive. Listings for the years 1991–95 were compiled specially for this book by ‘Filmnews’ Anandan.
Telugu cinema: 1931–76 is covered in the Andhra Film Chamber Journal (December 1976, Telugu), and updated by K.N.T. Sastry for this book.
3. DOCUMENTARIES: Until the mid-70s when independent Indian documentary cinema came of age, the genre was monopolised by the Films Division. Amrit Gangar and Subhash Chheda’s computerised list and index updates with vital new information the Films Division Catalogue of Films: 1949–1972 edited by V.N. Gulavani. Information about independent documentaries was in most cases compiled from information provided by the film-makers themselves or from the annual Indian Panorama catalogues (1977–92).
4. For all FTII student films, the FTII Films 1964–1987 (1987) catalogue was used.
5. All-India quarterly listings of releases can be found in issues of Mangala Chandran (ed.), Cinema in India (April 1987-January/March 1990).
6. The above languages constitute all the major cinemas of India; minor cinemas such as Kashmiri, Tulu, Konkani, Haryanvi, Khasi and Maithili have been covered mainly through Dharap’s listings and reviews. Under current conditions, no claim towards exhaustiveness can be made for these languages.
7. For non-Indian film titles we relied mostly on Markku Salmi’s compilation published as the National Film Archive (London) Catalogue of Stills, Posters and Designs, London: British Film Institute, 1982.
BOLD: Items in bold in the text indicate that there is a specific entry on the title or name (or institution, etc.) elsewhere in the volume.
DATES: Indian sources (like many sources throughout the world) often do not specify which date is being used: the year when production was completed, when the director’s cut was completed, when the film passed the Censor Board, when it was first screened to the trade or to the press or when it was first released to the public. Dates in Indian sources tend to be either the production date, the Censor Board date or the release date. We have given priority to the production date (when known); our second priority was the Censor Board date. When neither of these was available to us, we have relied on the release date. In most mainstream productions, these dates fall fairly closely together. However, there can be significant differences for independent productions which may have received a delayed release, remain unreleased or even refused a Censor Board certificate (and therefore unrepresented in listings by industry sources). There are also several instances of productions being certified by the Censor Board several years after they were made. Dharap’s compilations usually provide the censor year, while, for instance, Jha’s Almanac in Bengal, Rangoonwala and Ojha or Film Information refer to release dates. We have attempted on all occasions (especially in entries on individual films) to provide dates closest to the completion of the first release print. However, the absence of reliable information on every title in the Index has prevented any uniform principle on dating, and we have adhered to the records listed above except in instances where more reliable information to the contrary was available.
FILMS: The editors have endeavoured to provide individual entries on the most ‘important’ films in India’s rich and varied film history; by ‘important’ we mean Indian films which have made a significant contribution to the development of Indian cinema from a number of points of view: economic, technological, aesthetic, intellectual, political and sociological (not necessarily in that order). Inevitably, many films which could legitimately have claimed an entry have been omitted, primarily because of lack of space. Other reasons for omissions include: the unavailability of the prints, which meant we were not able to check whether a particular film warranted inclusion or not; absence of relevant commentaries suggesting that a particular film needed to be included; the editorial decision to end the film section in 1990, later extended to 1992 in view of the time required to compile this reference work; the editorial decision to concentrate on ‘typical’ items representative of an artist’s work or of a genre rather than making vain attempts, in the light of space restrictions, to include all of an artist’s good and significant work, and so on. The films have been organised according to their date and, within the production years, in alphabetical order.
GAUGE: The gauge used is hardly ever recorded in any Indian filmographies and has therefore been omitted. Wherever possible, ‘scope’, has been used to indicate Cinema Scope-type formats.
GENERAL ENTRIES: In the Dictionary section of this book, the reader will find a number of entries referring to art movements (the Indian People’s Theatre Association, the Kallol Group, the Progressive Artists Group, the Progressive Writers Association, the Navya Movement and others), techniques and art genres (Company School Painting, Photography, Sangeet Natak, Stage Backdrops, Pat Painting, Parsee Theatre and others), traditions (Art Schools, Music Schools) and political issues (Naxalite, Swadeshi). To some extent, these entries reflect the historical approach taken by the editors. Other items could have been added, such as Modernism, Reform Literature, various styles of poetry which have left their trace on film lyrics, and many others. Shortage of space and the need to concentrate on people, studios and films meant that we were able to include only a few such entries. Those selected for inclusion are intended to give readers a glimpse of the range of issues that must be taken into consideration when addressing Indian cinemas, as we attempt to make clear via elaborate cross-references to other, more directly ‘cinematic’ entries. While supplying basic information about such ‘general’ matters, we also intended signalling the need for cinema to be seen as a specific discursive form inextricably intertwined with a wide and complex network of industrial, institutional and cultural histories.
GENRES: A great deal more work needs to be done on the problems of defining, analysing and periodising genres in Indian cinema. Given that many films deliberately combine, as in a menu, elements from what in the West would be regarded as different genres (comedy, thriller, horror, action, musical and so on), we have attempted to provide a rough outline of the main Indian genres in the full knowledge that any such attempt must at this stage be rudimentary and impressionistic. The genre entries will be found in the alphabetically arranged Dictionary section of the Encyclopaedia. There are entries for: All-India Film, Historicals, Melodrama, Mythologicals, New Indian Cinema, Saint Films and Social. The ‘devotional’ is in some respects a cross between the Saint Film and the Mythological, often closer to the former than to the latter. The ‘Stunt Film’ is a self-explanatory subcategory of the internationally known ‘Action Film’. Neither of these two genres have been given separate treatment in this book.
HINDI-URDU: The indication ‘Hindi-Urdu’ in the credits is meant to suggest that we are dealing with a Hindi film making extensive use of Urdu, usually for the lyrics.
MULTILINGUALS: In its most precise form, a bilingual or a trilingual was the kind of film made in the 1930s in the studio era, when different but identical takes were made of every shot in different languages, often with different leading stars but identical technical crew and music. The classic example would be V. Shantaram’s Kunku (Marathi)/Duniyu Na Mane (Hindi), 1937. However, it becomes extremely difficult to distinguish multilinguals in this original sense from dubbed versions, remakes, reissues or, in some cases, the same film listed with different titles, presented as separate versions in different languages. In this respect, Har Mandir Singh’s work has substantially contained the problem in Hindi film, but it remains in most other languages. Wherever we found clear evidence that a title referred to a dubbed version, the secondary version has been dropped from the Index. When titles are divided by /, they are usually multilinguals in which each version counts as an original version. In all other instances, other versions are listed as ‘aka’ (‘also known as’). Nevertheless, it will take years of scholarly work to establish definitive data in this respect. In some filmographies, a title may be followed, in brackets, by an indication of the language. This is to avoid confusion when films with identical titles were made in the same year in different languages.
PLOT SYNOPSES: Readers will notice very quickly that the plot outlines provided are extremely compressed, especially when we remember that most Indian films take many detours and mobilise multiple plot-lines in any given narrative. There may be two or three main plot-lines accompanied by a comedy plot and interspersed with song sequences which may or may not advance or impact upon any of the other plots, each of them intersecting with the others in ways not always easily integrated into a single, linear account of events. We have opted for an outline of the overall shape of the story, privileging a few narrative knots which we consider more important at this stage of Indian film scholarship. Such a procedure is risky, invites argument and should not be mistaken for an attempt to ‘fix’ what the film is about.
RUNNING TIMES: Are based on footage recorded by the censors. Sources for footage include Dharap’s compilations; the Madras Film Diary (1957) for South Indian films 1951–56, thereafter the monthly and annual listings of the Journal of the Film Chamber (Madras); the Journal of the Kerala Film Chamber (Cochin) for post-1970 Malayalam films; the annual listings of 80s and 90s North Indian films in Film Information (Bombay); the collections of censorship data in the National Film Archive of India, and the prints struck from original negatives in the NFAI’s holdings. Wherever these have not been available, the footage recorded on the Censor Certificate of available prints has been used. In instances where films with running times noticeably different from the original censored length have been in common circulation, these have been separately indicated in brackets. In several titles produced especially during WW2, Dharap’s running times are either missing or have been given in round figures: in these cases, we have indicated that the running time is an approximate figure. For silent films, we have provided only the footage to allow for variable projection speeds.
SPELLING: As indicated earlier, spelling problems have proved intractable. Given the general lack of standardisation in transliterations of Indian languages into English, as well as the extensive linguistic variations of languages like Tamil (e.g. the syllable ‘zh’) and Bengali (the syllable ‘o’) and complicated syllables like ‘chch’, the decision to include an all-India Index presented problems which a listing by language would have only partially overcome. In the end, we felt that an alphabetical Index would be of greater benefit to international users. Since most film-publicity outlets provide their own, often eccentric, transliterations, several films are already well known by a particular ‘graphic image’. These titles have generally been retained, except where idiosyncratic diversions (e.g. Ramesh Sippy’s recent Akayla, 1991) have forced a re-spelling in the more conventional form (Akela, aka Akayla). However, certain common proper nouns have been standardised for all languages, such as Seeta (not Sita or Seetha), Gauri (not Gowri), Ganga (not Gunga). In general, following the practice of popular film literature, ‘common-sense’ solutions have been used rather than any rigidly standardised notation, with extensive uses of the ‘aka’ and ‘see’ wherever alphabetical discrepancies are likely to cause serious difficulties in finding the title. In some cases, all we can suggest is that the reader make an imaginative effort and check other possible romanised spellings. For instance, the ‘u’ sound may be rendered as ‘u’ or as ‘oo’; often ‘a’ and ‘u’ are used for the same sound, as in Ganga Jumna or Gunga Jumna; the sequence ‘eni’ at the beginning of a word may be rendered as ‘ini’; a double ‘aa’ may appear as a single ‘a’, ‘g’ as ‘k’, and so on.
SQUARE BRACKETS: Around a letter or a word in a quote designate the omission of a portion of the text or the interpolation of text not in the original; elsewhere, their use is self-explanatory.
Finally, we should like to repeat that we would be extremely grateful if readers could send us their corrections together with an indication of their evidence. Only continuous collective scholarship can hope to establish a more solid basis for further work in chronicling the immensely rich but still grievously under-documented and under-analysed Indian cinemas.
Ashish Rajadhyaksha and Paul Willemen