National Awards are widely regarded as one of the most prestigious honors in Indian cinema, valued for their integrity, lack of commercial flamboyance, and support for alternative, parallel, and small-budget yet impactful films across various languages and regions of the country. The National Award is a badge of honor for the filmography of any actor. Compared to other award ceremonies, National Awards are largely considered more authentic and unbiased, as these awards are selected by a jury of esteemed people.
Over the years, National Awards have diversified with many new awards introduced over some time. However, the diversification of the awards has also led to controversies regarding the awards and their adherence to unbiased selection. Time and again concerns were raised regarding the selection of artists for the National Awards, particularly in the case of films like “Rudaali” (1992), “Daman” (2000), Hum Tum” (2004), “The Kashmir Files” (2021), etc., and artists like Kirron Kher, Saif Ali Khan, Amitabh Bachchan, Ajay Devgn, Raveena Tandon, etc.
Particularly, over the past few years, these concerns have been accentuated by the political overtones that have seemed to dictate the awards. The question has been raised as to whether the National Film Awards have become a source of political gratification where the worth of the artist is equated with his political affiliation.
Particularly important in this scenario is the Dada Saheb Phalke Award, which is considered to be the most prestigious film award in India, and the highest honour a film artist can strive for. If we look at the past few years, artists like Rajinikanth, Asha Parekh and now Mithun Chakraborty have been bestowed with the award, which has raised the question of the integrity of the awards as well as the integrity of the jury who select these awards. None of the above three artists are known for making path-breaking cinema and neither of these artists are known for exemplary acting prowess.
Mithun Chakraborty has shown his acting skills in multiple films, which reflects his skilled artistry, but his filmography is marred by hundreds of B-grade vulgar, offensive, and pathetic films. Currently, he is paying back his Dada Saheb Phalke Award by making communal statements in political rallies in favor of the current political regime. Since the BJP regime has come to power, the quality of the artists who have won the DadaSaheb Phalke Award has gone down significantly. Artists like Manoj Kumar, who was a poster boy of patriotic films in India, but was hardly known for his acting skills, nor had many acclaimed movies to his credit, was awarded in 2015. It is interesting to note that since the new regime has come to power, only actors and actresses have won the DadaSaheb Phalke Award in all years, except in 2016, when filmmaker K. Vishwanath was awarded.
In all the other years we see, Shashi Kapoor, Manoj Kumar, Amitabh Bachchan, Vinod Khanna, Asha Parekh, Rajinikanth, Waheeda Rahman and now Mithun Chakraborty being awarded. Some of the above-mentioned artists never ever won any national award in their career, and many of them never went beyond the massy masala cinema in their filmography. The question is legit- What are the criteria for awarding such prestigious awards? Are we rewarding the quality of cinema or the longevity of careers and the quantity of output? Have we forgotten other aspects of filmmaking that also need to be recognized? Actors like Asha Parekh, despite a long career, lack significant recognition in terms of major awards or acclaimed films. Her filmography includes only one National Award-winning film and her tenure as Censor Board Chairman was marked by numerous controversies over film censorship. Yet, she was chosen over contemporaries with far greater achievements.
Surprisingly, accomplished artists like Savitri, Shobana, Late Nutan, Late Meena Kumari, Shabana Azmi, Late Smita Patil, Tabu, and Suchitra Sen were never considered for the award, and a relatively mediocre artist like Asha Parekh was awarded the DadaSaheb Phalke Award. Giving her the DadaSaheb Phalke Award is as blasphemous as giving the National and Padma Shri awards to Raveena Tandon and Saif Ali Khan. Let’s now talk about the acting honors of the National Awards in the past few years.
The controversies surrounding the National Film Awards have ranged from the outright outrageous—such as Saif Ali Khan winning for the rom-com “Hum Tum,” a film even the actor reportedly doesn’t regard highly, or Raveena Tandon receiving an award for the poorly received “Daman”—to the contested, like MGR winning for the masala film “Rickshawkaran” in 1971, or Amitabh Bachchan winning for “Agneepath” and “Piku.” There have also been allegations of manipulation, such as claims of political intervention by BJP leader McMohan to secure Raveena Tandon’s award, or accusations against Prakash Jha, director of “Gangaajal” and a jury member, for influencing Ajay Devgn’s win for “Gangaajal.”In the past few years, however, the correlation between awardees of the National Film Awards and their political affiliation is too stark to be ignored.
In hushed tones, we find criticism of such distribution of awards, as the BJP hardcore supporter and current MP Kangana Ranaut winning the National Award for “Tanu Weds Manu Returns” above Swara Bhaskar for a far better film “Nil Battey Sannata,” who is the political enemy of the ruling regime. It is not surprising that an artist like Manoj Joshi received the National Award and the Padma Shri Award in consecutive years.
Not only Joshi is known as a hardline supporter of the BJP regime, but an old review of his popular play Chanakya suggests that the then CM of Gujarat, Narendra Modi was very impressed by his play and watched it thrice in the auditorium. Akshay Kumar winning the National Award for Best Actor for an abysmal movie like “Rustom” was one of the earliest signs of how National Awards will be bestowed in the coming years, and things have gone downhill since then.
“The Kashmir Files” winning the National Award for Best Film on National Integration can well be described as “irony of epic proportions” and divisive films like “72 Hoorain” winning the National Award emphasize the intent of the government to supervise the awards. Even beyond the political discourse, there were clearly questionable choices in the National award in the past few years, with over-the-top masala films or outright mediocre films winning major awards. A historically inaccurate film like “Tanhaji” won the top honors in the National Awards. Allu Arjun received the Best Actor National Award for a mainstream masala like “Pushpa: The Rise” which even though good, was not an award-winning performance.
In fact, I was expecting Vicky Kaushal to win for “Sardar Uddham Singh,” the same year Allu Arjun got his award. It was a brilliant piece of cinema and Vicky’s performance was sensitive yet effective. It goes beyond me what criteria are used to give away such awards. Is it a blatant acceptance of the fact that the National Awards are becoming unabashedly partisan? Just to rub the fact on our faces, Raveena Tandon has been awarded the coveted Padma Shri for her contributions to Indian cinema, which includes only 9 hits out of a total 62 films she has acted in, and despite not being active in films since the last 2 decades. Awards are being distributed as rewards for loyalty towards the regime.
Kriti Sanon winning for “Mimi” raises more questions about the awards. One of the unwritten rules of the National Awards is that remakes are generally not considered for National Awards as the original films have always been nominated for the award. “Mimi” was a remake of a National Award Winning Marathi film. Kriti did give a brilliant performance in “Mimi” but how can the same story get nominated again apart from technical categories? So it was a surprise to see Kriti and Pankaj Tripathi win national awards for “Mimi.”
It is difficult to say whether this problem has any significant solution. Can a regime change lead to a change in this pattern? Maybe, maybe not. One thing is for sure, such practices in the film industry have only hampered the spirit and integrity of the awards and are responsible for the fall of a fair and ethical film fraternity. One must raise their voice against the ethical blunder committed by certain people who have kept their vested interests above the spirit of cinema that we are supposed to celebrate through these awards.
