What makes Nollywood
tick?
• Fallout of film critics Workshop at Ijebu-Ode
By
SOLA BALOGUN
Friday, July 14,
2006
 |
Jim
Iyke and Eucharia Anunobi in Baby Boy
Pix:Sun
Nwes Publishing
|
| |
Nothing, indeed, could be more fascinating to the Nigerian
film critic as to have the opportunity of discussing Nollywood.
As a popular phenomenon which came in the early 1990s to replace
the otherwise thriving celluloid culture in the Nigerian entertainment
industry, Nollywood which made its debut with Living in Bondage
has since grown tremendously to churn out thousands of movies
aside providing jobs for several millions of Nigerians.
At the just concluded Nigerian segment of the Federation of
the International Film Critics’ workshop held at Gateway
Hotels, Ijebu-Ode, Ogun State, the home video sub- sector
came under scrutiny, even as critics drawn from Ghana, France
and Nigeria agreed on several factors that could make Nollywood
operators (including other African film makers) attain high
standards.
Tagged, Nigerian Home Video, the session, coordinated by Muritala
Sule, president of FIPRESCI Nigeria, attracted comments from
virtually all critics in attendance.
Sule, on his part, recalled the buoyant and flourishing entertainment
culture that preceded Nollywood, noting that artistes of the
film making format such as Hubert Ogunde, Ola Balogun, Ladi
Ladebo, Ade Afolayan and Moses Olaiya actually worked to project
the image of the country through their works. In other words,
these film makers saw film as an art, unlike the Nollywood
operators who concentrate more on the entertainment/commercial
aspect of the movies. Sule ,however, regretted how some international
audiences see the wrong sides of Nigeria through Nollywood
movies, adding nevertheless that the incursion of the home
video has created interaction between the story teller and
the audience.
For Shaibu Husseini of The Guardian, most Nollywood producers
tap their materials from the wave of societal frivolities
and tragedies.
He added that some of the producers often exploit titles or
acts earlier used by their colleagues to determine their story
lines or commercial viability of their movies. But Jahman
Anikulapo, Editor Guardian on Sunday, differed on this assertion,
stressing that whatever Nollywood operators must have done
is a direct reflection of societal realities. Anikulapo cited
the parallel revolution in the proliferation of movies and
the rising number of Pentecostal churches, observing that
movies and churches have come to serve the needs of a people
hunted by their social milieu.
For Tunde Oladunjoye, executive director of Centre for Media
Education and Networking, the deficiency in research and documentation
may have robbed off on the film industry in terms of quality
of raw materials and finished products. He cited the popularity
of Hubert Ogunde’s films in far away Republic of Benin
as an indication that quality films would remain evergreen
and marketable. However, the fact that many of Ogunde’s
films have lost their visual and technical qualities calls
for a new format of preservation and presentation.
The duo of Rudolf Asunda and Rita Safowaa (Ghana) spoke on
genres and star syndrome respectively. While Asunda blamed
low quality movies on producers’ failure to explore
diverse genres such as documentation, children, wildlife and
animation films, Safowaa observed that most African movie
producers tend to overuse certain acts who are considered
marketable to the audience. In this process, producers usually
have actors and actresses who are considered famous in mind,
before embarking on the production of their movies.
While Sola Balogun of Daily Sun traced mediocrity
in Nollywood to lack of proper training (as obtained informally
in the days of Ogunde, Duro Ladipo, Ade Afolayan, Ola Balogun
and Eddie Ugboma), Onoshe Nwabuikwu of ThisDay noted that
most Nollywood movies succeed not because of good quality
but because audiences can easily identify with their social
realities through the contents of the movies.
Speaking on tabulation as a major element of the cinema worldwide,
Olivier Barlet, facilitator of the workshop who flew in from
France explained that the film/movie industry of any nation
usually reflect the trend of its socio-economic and political
development. He, therefore, urged film critics to take note
of tabulation (elements of horror, bizarre scences,fear and
witchcraft) and its roles in films, adding that it won’t
be out of place for the film critic to raise questions or
make comments on new forms and styles of presentation adopted
by the film makers.
On the whole, participants agreed that script writers actually
function as psychologists, hence whatever the audience sees
in the movies is a direct reflection of how the society is
or evolves.
Most importantly, it was agreed by participants that film
critics should always try to identify good films/movies and
help educate the audience about them (irrespective of their
commercial viability or otherwise). Also they should not condemn
films on the basis of content, technical input or plot structure,
rather, they should highlight issues which could make the
film relevant or appealing to the audience, and at the same
time, raise questions on the areas they consider grey or ambiguous.
|
