Plagiarism, Redefined
Niharika, one of the regular followers of this blog, wrote to me confronting my views on Mani Ratnam and Co. She said Mani Ratnam actually 'did' a favour by bringing Amorres Perros to Andipatti. How else would people have known about such movies, is what she had to say.
Since many people with whom I hold this discussion seem to feel the same way, I thought it's time I clarified my stand. Here I go.
To begin with, for the uninitiated, Amorres Perros is the Latin American, Oscar nominated original of Ayudha Ezhuthu aka Yuva.
I have no problem in Mani Ratnam taking Amorres Perros to Andipatti provided he 'tells' them that Ayudha Ezhuthu 'is' Amorres Perros. He doesn't. The movie is still 'Written and Directed by Mani Ratnam'. Nobody knew 'Anbe Sivam' is 'Planes, Trains and Automobiles'. I didn't know till Siddharth told me. So what are we talking about taking things to Andipatti? It's like me grabbing your car, driving my girlfriend around and telling her that I bought it. It's not only stealing, it's a despicable behaviour.
Hollywood does the same but differently. They buy the rights, give the necessary credits and then use the idea. If Ju-on does well in Japan, it gets remade as 'The Grudge' directed by Takashi Shimishu! If Amorres Perros does well, the director is given a Hollywood film to do (21 Grams). When you buy the rights, you give credits to that person and hence the creator gets his money and the world recognizes him as the original brain. Such a practice creates a very health society where a lot of ideas and knowledge flourish.
Lots of ideas and knowledge flourish in Hollywood because they give that credit. A healthy society is where the original talent is recognized and respected. In such a society everyone aspires to creativity. In such an environment, actually both good and bad ideas thrive. But I'd say a scenario of good and bad original ideas are better than only good but stolen ideas. We always lead a second-hand life because as a society, we don't appreciate originality.
That's my point.
4 Comments:
ahahahahaha! ratnam made amores perros? i don't know whether to laugh or cry. next thing u know, he's making y tu mama tambien!
hahahahaha!
--swati
7 April 2005 at 10:44
hollywood can afford to pay blank checks to directors abroad and get the remake rights.while poor kamal hassan has sqandered all his wealth making experimental movies for an insensitive audience.so how do u think he can pay the makers of planes,trains and automobiles?but yes what mr.rathnam has done is unpardonable.anyway for all of u who have written off tamil cinema,i hope the soon to be released balu mahendra movie adu oru kana kalam proves u all wrong!
8 April 2005 at 06:44
I do agree with your views on this issue.
The original creator needs to be acknowledged whenever the derivative remains almost the same. but however, if the original is only used as an inspiration and the derivative differs from the original by more than 50 percent (again, this number varies for each person), then the derivatives doesnt need to credit the original authors.
what do you think about this ?
9 April 2005 at 04:34
That the point that if the derivative is 50% away from the original, we need not give credit is an interesting observation. But then, who's to decide 'how much' has been deviated?
This apart, there's another observation my friend had that says Planes, Trains and Automobiles is a stupid film and Anbe Sivam is a much better version. Perhaps it's true. But the point is If PTA had not happened, Kamal wouldn't have made Anbe Sivam or would have made it differently.
That's my point.
9 April 2005 at 09:55
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home