REALITY AND fiction are not strangers to each other. Neither does art celebrate its aesthetics for the sake of celebration. After having seen "Mumbai Meri Jaan" and "A Wednesday", I am beginning to feel a new sense of admiration for Hindi cinema. Bollywood (a derogatory term used for Hindi cinema) seems to have struck a chord with unusual combo of cinematic brilliance and societal consciousness once more. How sporadically it happens in our cinema but it is highly propitious now to celebrate, in not so celebratory times, these social documentaries in the garb of mainstream cinema. My intent is not to review the films per se but to make an effort to explore the place and scope of a timely voice in a violence ridden world. Does this voice strike a chord with very people whose anxieties it caters to? I believe, yes.

Both films deal with terrorism in contrasting ways. While one is about effusion of common man in the wake of state complacency and ineptitude, emphasising that so called resilience our leaders talk about is more a matter of compulsion rather than that of a choice; other reflects on the aftereffects of terrorism on the psyche of people through the unfolding of events of one week in the lives of five main protagonists following a terrorist strike. Both films use July 11, Mumbai local train blasts as the backdrops to weave their stories. While "A Wednesday" uses thrill and twists to make its point, "Mumbai Meri Jaan" is a drama offering us a peek into terror struck Mumbai and its residents.

I confess, the very poignancy of the subject of both films has, to a great deal, helped shape them. But if it were not for impeccable direction, tight screenplay, fine editing and high standards of acting, both films wouldn’t have reached the heights of art of cinema as they did. The art of cinema is best placed to engage with an audience when it comes to mutual conversation. More poor, downtrodden and immoderate the country is more it is required. Iranian cinema fills this lacuna in Iran as French new wave did in France in late 50s and early 60s.

"A Wednesday" is a hard hitting film with swift pace wherein debutant director warns the flawed system to either get right or face an uncivilised society. It is for the first time in Indian cinema that such an unusual take has been tried on the often done subject of terrorism. The film presents a brave face when it impugns the intelligence of terrorists, which are referred to as "cockroach" in the film and reminds the system of its duties and responsibilities. At the same time, the film doesn’t forget to cast a doubt over our intelligence system as well. A person with no name sets out to release four terrorists on the strength of a call made to Mumbai police commissioner, in which he warns him to either concede or see Mumbai burning. Police commissioner is left with no other choice but to relent only to meet an unexpected and shocking event of his entire career. The film ends on a reflection note voicing the silent but vociferous feelings of a contented and limited man on the street, in the office, in the public transport and in his cocoon.

Whenever I happen to see the blood stained patches of land on television, the scary aftermaths of dastardly acts, the voice of the film once again begins to ring in my ears. "This is not acceptable", says the "person with no name" in "A Wednesday". He also says, "A bomb strike is not just a bomb strike, it is a question terrorists pose to the Indian state. Their question is ‘we will keep killing you like this, what can you do?’ Why does it take years for our state to even find who the real culprit is, let alone punish them?"

Another film "Mumbai Meri Jaan" portrays the helplessness of the common man left alone and destitute to survive on his own. There is no one to help him get out of this bloody whirlpool. A venal but phlegmatic police man on the brink of retirement offers the nuggets of wisdom, which have assumed a new importance altogether especially in the light of recent routine bombings. An unemployed youth who sees every single Muslim responsible for every incident of terrorism finds his thinking flawed and baseless. A media reporter, more interested in cashing in on the teary and distressed faces than serving the true cause of journalism finds her own self, after she becomes the victim of blasts, on the receiving side of the very channel she used to work. She is a potential television rating points (TRP) enhancing ‘story’ now. A multinational company executive, diehard patriotic, begins to contemplate all those he had outrightly rejected after having a tryst with terrorist strike from close quarters. A downtrodden coffee-vendor, humiliated for being poor, takes revenge on a city by making hoax calls to police. Every single aspect of the film is a trenchant blow to our thinking that normalcy lies in closing eyes not in waking up to reality.

How sad is that our politicians don’t consider them, in the least, "servants" of the state, they don’t have an iota of respect for the common man and they see themselves as patrons of the state. To be told truth, a wider and deep chasm exists between politicians and common man, which superficially may still be invisible. May be that’s why in Nishikant Kamat’s brilliant film, we don’t get to see a single politician even in the backdrop of as serious an incident as bomb blasts. This drastic reality leaves the victims of bomb strikes not only alone and feeble to come to terms with a spooky reality but also with the capriciousness of the circumstances they are living in. They don’t have another choice but to board the train again and go to market again with a smile on their faces, which often is mistaken for their smugness with the way system is working. I don’t know how many politicians get really disturbed by these turn of events but we witnessed certain politicians raising their hackles when the Gujarat police claimed to have nabbed architects of Gujarat bomb blasts.

"Mumbai Meri Jaan" may have been about Mumbai, but it could have been any other city. Film begins with residents busy living their lives and ends with same residents trying to cope with the changes that are not the making of the times but of certain individuals, whom our system finds too powerful to rein in. Though it is stark and sometimes appears sad even, but the message of the film is clear, our representatives are missing and busy with their lives and we are condemned to live a life in the shadows of terror.

These two films are the product of the times we live in. Both hold us a mirror to the hideous realties, which are right there before our face waiting to be mended. For that to happen, our politicians, who wield authority, will have to realise that safety of the lives and the property of their subjects are of paramount importance. Besides that we all too can play an important role by being conscious of our duties. Neither can we afford a used-to attitude towards either natural catastrophes or manmade gory scenes, nor we can put on a façade of resilience every time. Scepticism prevails.