From the Tarkovsky of our times

And, let me just refrain myself from hiding an original work under the name of already established, by saying that there is no similarity, but reminiscences.

The concept of a figuratively living 'idea' is not so absurd, it is rather a poetic device that the writer-director explores in a visual medium. Unlike the mysterious, dark and trance inducing psychological thriller Capital I, this second feature film by Amartya Bhattacharyya is a celebration of art, dreams, emotions, ideas - all that a creative mind cherishes, in an open and lush green picturesque setting with music that uplifts or tickles playfully. Though strikingly different in many aspects, the two works seem to complement each other. The various shades in the spectrum of work of the maker cannot be understood, only with either.

In a place called wonderland, idea is born, we are unsure how it was conceived in the first place, however, we see the idea alive - playing with kids, resting, smiling, but never saying a word, throughout the film.

Building from a picturesque village background, the chemistry of the lazy man and his wife is a minimalist love affair. In fact, all characters are established, not by words but by action, as Kurosawa also preferred. The silence of the lazy man while his wife is nagging, the kindness of the madman by his affection for animal and the unpredictability of idea (who can play with kids and slap too). Few characters were established by narration unnecessarily and maybe before it was time. The pattern of breaking stereotype conversations are spread all over the work and craftily used. When the poet is talking to his aspiration, Shree, the words never leave their mouth but are audible to us.

In a fantastical land of imagination, every element is personified be it fate, dream or realisation - taking it in a distinct path from Bergman's Seventh Seal, as the metaphorical conversations, even if it is about death, has some breeziness attached to it. However, there is no sense of urgency for the viewer to be inwardly invested in them, a thing I also mentioned about 'Capital I'. Perhaps it has to do with the imposed objectivity of the film by periodically switching contexts so that the audience does not fall into subjective viewing.

Like poetic devices used in poetry, metaphorical visuals and situations serve the purpose here. A teacher is realistically interacting with an empty classroom, the madman being assured that time is always the same, could be a few examples. Setting the context and delivering enormous content to ponder on only in the first quarter of the film, it gets on a loop for the audience to absorb more until the continuity breaks.

The film struggles to be as captivating on its subplots, as the actors could not hold on to the characters. To support this, consider Capital I where the subplots (e.g. the artist and his pimp) are made much more intense by some engrossing theatrics displayed by the actors.

However, there is one unique addition to this film and worth praising, the madman, who brings back the film to the viewer with his depth of character and with a strong sense of purpose to catch the sun. The end is near. The fate of a blasphemer is always decided.

And the idea, is lost in between these complexities of one human psyche for you to be found.

Go, find 'The Lost Idea'.