|
Which is better for
'Realism' Colour or Black and White?
“Realism” in films is generally synonymous with the harsh realities of life.
Nobody refers to other realistic elements like love, romance, beauty and optimism as
realism. The premonition of realism actually originates from a Marxist’s point of
view. In India, most of the movies made till the 90’s, whether that of the commercial
or of the new-wave/art categories, was heavily influenced by the Marxist ideology.
It all depends upon the film maker and the audience. Herman G. Weinberg stated that,
"The way a story is told is part of that story. You can tell
the same story badly or well; you can also tell it well enough or magnificently. It
depends on who is telling the story.” -- I add, “It
also depends on who is watching the story.” People who grew up in the era of
black and white news reels expect elements of tragedy, sports and politics to be in black
and white. At the same time, people who grew up in the world of colour television
appreciate the same elements in colour.
Taking myself as an example, In my earlier days I watched the world in black and white
news reels, then on black and white television. It was only some 10 years back I started
watching events across the world in colour. If this question had been asked to me earlier
I would have said black and white is better for realism, but, now I prefer colour. In my
life I have experienced a variety of situations. I have seen more dead bodies than others
can even imagine, all in colour. To me, blood is always red, never black. From the very
beginning I was always uncomfortable when I saw blood as black, in black and white movies.
My preference for realism will always be colour.
According to me, the question of colour vs. black and white is directly related to
technological and financial viability, definitely not artistic. Earlier masters of realism
made films in black and white because colour film was not developed or unavailable. In
India, it was purely financial. Because such projects were termed and dismissed as new
wave/art films by the crowd of India, they were commercially unviable. So, film makers had
no options but to use the heavily subsidised black and white stock, manufactured by the
then East German firm called ORWO.
In recent times this eternal question once again resurfaced because of the success of
“Schindler’s List.” The answer is anything but black and white. The notion
that the success is related to the black and white imagery is purely because of the hype
created for its release. This tragic episode in human civilisation would have succeeded
even in colour. The subject matter, highly stylised formalistic treatment, good screen
play, powerful performance, mise-en scene, Steven Spielberg’s persona and much hype
were some of the reason that made ‘Schindler’s List’ a success. Definitely
not black and white.
Colour is more suitable than black and white for realism. My definition of realism
includes good things in life too. And good things are pleasurable to watch in colour. Of
course I am sympathetic towards the underprivileged of this planet. My definition of the
underprivileged is restricted to people with mental illness, the rest are either lazy or
foolish. A Marxist will never accept this argument, but this is my point of view.
In the future people will be asking which format is suitable for realism. Regular or
Wide-screen? The world of HDTV will usher in a new meaning for realism. Extremities of
life will be in colour and wide-screen. After that, 3-D projected images might be suitable
for realism. This quest for developing new methods and techniques will never end, ever
changing the perception of realism.
|
