An Enemy of the People

Doctor Soumitra Chatterjee has been tracking the source of an epidemic and has concluded, after laboratory reports, that that water in the local temple has been polluted and causing the outbreak. Yet there are strong forces opposing him, not only the reigious conservatives, but business interests who see that temple as a souce of tourism and revenue. Even his brother is ranged against him, and more than willing to destroy him rather than close down the temple to fix the problem.

Satyajit Ray;s movie is based on Ibsen's 1882, and sticks mainly to the original's concerns, despite some changes made for its Indian setting. Ray's handling and ending is a little more standardized that the play, but it remains a powerful piece.

(1989) Ganashatru (In Bengali with English subtitles) DRAMA

Adapted from the play by Henrik Ibsen music, co-written and directed by Satyajit Ray that centers on a situation of a doctor, Ashok Gupta (Soumitra Chattopadhyay) who is waiting for test results of a water from a holy temple after it was concluded the patient of his may have died from. And while he is waiting he also calls up a newspaper friend, Haridas Bagchi (Dipankar Dey) of his to wait for him at his house. And while Ashok's wife, Maya Gupta (Ruma Guhathakurta) is entertaining her guest by serving him pastry and tea, Haridas Ashok's younger brother, Nishith Gupta (Dhritiman Chattopadhya) shows up he happens to be municipal chairman of the city of Chandipur. We then meet Ranen Haldar (Bhishma Guhathakurta) who happens to be a student as well as an inspired writer. Ranen also happens to be fiance of the Gupta's daughter, Ranu who works as a teacher. And by the time Ashok shows up , he is then informs him that the water from the holy site may be contaminated. Ashok then clashes with his younger brother over this since he is the municipal chairman before he clashes with his best friend, Haridas over the posting out the story for the residents to know about.

Upon watching it, is reminiscent of another movie also based on a play called "The Big Knife" made in 1955 and the movie "Rope" in which the entire story itself is confined to just a few areas or limited areas and space. For "The Big Knife" the entire movie is limited to just the living room of the house, in this one it is limited to the Gupta's family home the newspaper office and some of it on stage where the debate was being at. I think I fell asleep upon watching "The Big Knife" and with "Rope" not so much because it was supposed to be filmed all on one long take, this one is quite good but too much dialogue the movie gets better when the debate or arguing happens between the newspaper editor the municipal chairman butting heads with the doctor.

"Ganashatru" is certainly one of the best movies of Satyajit Ray, though not one of his most popular ones. The story is set up in a small town of India and is brutally realistic. The film depicts the superstitions and ignorance one might find in an Indian town (or for that matter in any Indian City). The main characters are brilliantly portrayed by Soumitra Chatterjee, Dipankar Dey, Subhendu Chatterjee and Dhritiman. The reason this movie has not had any popularity is mainly because of the blind religious superstitions that lives amongst most of us and has blinded us in seeing the truth.

A must watch, if one believes that film makers have a duty towards educating the society.

A public health hazard threatens the lives of an entire city, but when a doctor discovers the truth about its cause, a politician fears that disclosing it will hurt tourism and the local economy. Moreover, in contradiction to science, religious leaders believe that the town will be protected without taking any action, relying on superstitious beliefs. The health issue thus becomes politicized, the heart of this drama, and the one who is trying to tell people the truth is branded an "enemy of the people" by those not acting in the community's best interest. It's brother against brother, when everyone should be working together to prevent an epidemic. The politician distorts the truth in a fiery speech to a crowd, playing on their anger and ignorance, and manipulates others into speaking against him as well.

Satyajit Ray saw in Ibsen's 1882 play truths that applied to India over a century later, and it's easy to see the parallels to the events in America and other nationalist countries over the past couple years, which are really quite striking. That's something that could have really resonated with me, but the trouble is, the film is too lethargic to really enjoy. Most of its scenes are indoors, dialogue-heavy, and repetitive. There is just not enough meat on the bones of this story, and the characters are flat. It has its heart in the right place, and imagining people in the current public eye as the characters in the film provided some level of enjoyment, so for those things it was worth seeing, even if it did fall a little short.

Even after 63 years of independence India is still in the strong grip of religious superstition and many medieval prejudices. The caste system runs deep in the society and often determines person's identity. Daily newspapers run a dedicated section on astrology, alternate medicines like Homeopathy gets millions of dollars in government funding, the Nation is more opinionated on religious issues than on real issue like poverty and education and all these happens under the active support and promotion from the educated urban middle class contrary to what many would like to believe, the illiterate rural masses. The movie is a slap on the face of such so-called educated and a stark warning what could happen if religious sentiments of the people is misused or abused to achieve personal goals, a fact India would so painfully be facing within just 2 years after the release of the movie. Ray could see what is coming, and like all true artist for whom his work is more than just art and in reality a medium of communication has tried to fulfill his duties to make the people aware of what he saw was coming.

It is not one of "those" art films, in fact there is very little art into it. Ray was very fragile while shooting his last 3 films, so most of the shots are indoor and very archaic and to the point. Despite his illness he attempted this movie to tell his fellow citizen what grave danger the Nation is facing, there one can see the other side of Ray almost as a social reformer.

Unlike many others however, Ray delivered the message in a way that should hurt nobody, even though Ray himself was an atheist. The movie brings forth the eternal conflict between hard scientific fact and the opposing religious doctrine. In the movie the young generation ultimately favors science and this optimism about India that Ray has envisioned is the best part of the movie, indeed the most touching part.

The screenplay is very simple and banal yet appropriate and I can't imagine it can be made any better without tipping off the scale. Dhritiman excels Soumitra but that's my opinion. The advantage of working with known and trusted crew of such stalwarts is that it takes away a lot of hardship from an exhausted director without compromising any on the quality!