Evolution of Nepali Cinema: From Shankar to Chopendra

Nepali film industry, popularly known by portmanteau of Kathmandu as Kollywood is one of the rising movie production hub. The inception of cinematic development inside homeland marked after the production of Nepali language movie “Aama”. So from that point of time to now, the industry have tries to offer varieties of movies to meet the taste of diverse audiences. Following different demand of audience, there has been a changing trend in the representation and subject matter of Nepali cinema through the years. The way movies were made in late 90s is completely different from the way it is done in the recent days, especially after 2008, if traced the precise trend.

However, after the wake of new storyline in Nepal cinema, today’s generation has built a kind of tendency to negatively criticize subject matter of old movies by comparing it with recent one. I have often seen many so-called intellectuals using the term ‘Hey’ in derogative way to mock legendary Nepali actor Rajesh Hamal and at the same time praising new debut Mukul Bhusal for his role of Chopendra in 2019 released movie “Bulbul”. Given the political scenario and social context of Nepal (feudal, autocracy,) then people used to seek someone who could express their inner outrage, that’s where Rajesh Hamal‘s character and dialogues comes in. The storyline of movies like 1997 released “Shankar” was reality of Nepali society; the angry young man characteristic and loud dialogues were demand of that time. And beside this, the audience used to love such stories. Similarly, now in changed political and national scenario, peoples are able to release their collective outrage and they no longer need someone to speak their voice. That’s why we have different storylines and characterization like Chopendra, who features mousy personality and offers dominant space for female counterpart to drive the plot

Just consider a hypothetical scenario, what if the movies like Loot were made at that time? Would Nepali society have accepted it easily like today? Today we are just looking at one side of the coin that many of earlier Nepali cinemas were of low standard but tend to miss another side that is even the then audience of Nepali cinema were not qualified enough to accept the movies like of today’s time.

The main reason why there has been shift in content and the characterization of leads in last decade is because the targeted audience has changed. During late 90s the targeted audience were from village background with communal vibes and movies were made so that they could relate themselves with the characters. As the society evolved to different lifestyle, the plot of Nepali movies began to adapt new social frames in presentation, resulting change in storyline and characterization. And todays movies are getting international recognition and awards not just because of its quality rather the wake of globalization and easy international platform has also played much greater role in their popularity.

Before making negative comment about the movies and acting of legendary actors like Rajesh Hamal in today’s time, we need to understand that he was not just an actor rather he was a phenomena or we can say the institution itself who indirectly contributed the production of many Nepali movies in course of pursing his career. During 90s there were many production crews who would make movie only under condition if they get chance to hire and feature Rajesh Hamal as angry young man lead.

However, this decade witnessed paradigm shift in stature of Nepali cinema as small budget and content-driven films are outweighing movies with celebrated stars. In recent year we can see the interest of people tilting towards well-crafted movies with parallel groups of talented actors. From Bipin Karki to Khagendra Lamichhane, from Buddhi Tamang to Reshma Gurung, from Aruna karki to Prakash Ghimire, these actors feels like familiar faces around us who adds more realistic touch in movies. Gone are the days when led actor’s stardom used to drive the movie. Nowadays Nepali movie industry is thriving without any mega star like Rajesh Hamal and the work of crew are more preferred in the story. Owing to this context we can claim that Nepali cinema is slowly evolving to better version of modern theatre production.

While talking about movie analysis, presentism- the tendency to interpret past movies in presents terms- besets Nepalese understanding of movie. To cite one example, during my childhood days I remember how me along with my friends used to enjoy the fight scene of Indian TV series ‘Shakti- man’ but today whenever we watch back same episodes in YouTube, the animations and screenplay seems like shit. That’s because today we are habituated to 3d-4d movies with more advance progress on characterization and direction. Lately, same phenomena are dominant among Nepali movie audience and critics. On one hand there are groups of viewer who just appreciate the development of Nepali cinema and on other had we have equally active group of commenters who keep on condemning old Nepali cinemas and actors by comparing it with today’s cinematic presentation and audience reach. The movies and stars celebrated today will also meet same fate in future when Nepali cinema will evolves to next level. Amid that future context, the new generation will surly mock the storyline and characterization of today’s movie celebrities. It would be wrong to judge the value of movie in term of audience reach, because given today’s easy access to abundance of theatres, online bookings and entertainment centric lifestyle, it’s obvious that there will be more audience in hall. Otherwise, what about those few chunk of late 90s movie loving teens who used save money by escaping school tiffins and walk miles to city just for watching movies like ‘Shankar’? Can we find such passionate audience for any of the kollywood movies produced in today’s time?

Thus, instead of passing judgement about the artistic ability of earlier actors in social media, today’s generation should try to ignore logical fallacies and have more liberal perspective towards the development of film sector. They should understand than even the Hollywood and Bollywood industries too have passed through same phase before reaching the zenith where they belong today.