Best Sinhala Cinema production "Nidhanaya" ( Threasure ) Analysis

Japanese Film maker Nagisa Osima once states that Film makers create the world of their imagination through the world they touch, with their mind and senses. They are able to match and compose the thematic environment which is wanted by the creation they build and represent the human complexities hidden deep down under the world of reality. Understanding this complexity Dr. Lester James Peris one of the greatest icon of the Sri Lankan cinema takes a different approach to his contribution to the film industry in 1970.“Nidanaya” is based on an original short story by GB Senanayake the journalist, poet and writer who went blind in the latter stages of his life. Peries apparently paid 10,000 rupees for rights to the story which was actually the most worth treasure of Sri Lankan cinema the greatest investment of Lankan Cinema.

In his own words Lester says that “my most controversial film is „Nidhanaya‟, which received a very positive reception at the Venice Film Festival. The most accurate critics highlighted that, despite its setting in 1911, this film holds a strong social and political value in denouncing the system. The character is trapped between two cultures: The western /British one and his culture of origin- he is lost between two worlds. Unable to adapt to either one or the other, he absorbs the worse elements of two cultures; the society change and he goes insane”.

Nidhanaya is a film about both the decay of the prevalent social order and the disintegration of an individual. It is a dark moody film and is shot in a style evocative of the term “film noir”. It is in a way different from most of the films directed by Lester James Peris. Let us briefly look into the cinema of Lester James Peries.

Lester James Peries is an “auteur” as defined by the French critic and director Francois Truffaut and associated with the French new wave films and the French cinematic journal “Cahiers du Cinema”. Lester‟s early training as a documentary film maker as well as his penchant for creative literature was reflected in his films. According to Regi Siriwardena the twin hallmarks of Lester‟s futuristic film making approach were his stylistic “construction of narrative” and ability to “capture and project actualities in a realistic manner”. Lester‟s films described as the cinema of contemplation capture emotions and moods vividly on screen. His was the language of silence. Complex relationship, poignant moods, tense undercurrents etc. are portrayed in futuristic style that is simple and comprehensible.

 Lester‟s films do not have a very overt political content. The political message if any is quite subtle. He himself says:

“All my themes are about Sri Lankan family. I use the family as a microcosm through which the problems of a larger world are reflected. I understand my limitations and work within this. To me the battles within the family are more important and far more intense than anything”.

Lester‟s interest to do a film based on the short story came as a result of Bendict Dompegama‟s idea. Lester‟s first idea was to do three short films based on following short stories.”Upasakamma” of Martin Wickramasinghe, “Nidhanaya” and “Bicycle” of Gunadasa Amarasekara. But the idea changed. He may have attracted by the structure, deep thematic touch and the environment which was depicted in “Nidhanya”. Therefore “Nidhanaya” based on dark tale by G.B.Senanayake became a milestone film that people even abroad, admire the most, and albeit it is atypical of Lester James Peris‟s customary family dramas.

The story revolves around a psychotic killer yet is an underlines serious political study on the degradation of a class of society. The psychological complexity of the mind is depicted which plays in between Id, Ego and Superego as Sigmund Freud defines in his psycho analytic approach to the explanation of the human mind. Central character is in a clash between his greediness, love, wealth and state of sensual feelings as a lay person. The conscious and unconscious are in a regular clash within „Willie‟. The secrets, sacredness, dreams, desires and gothetic intentions of him are picturesque.

 “මේ ලෘතාන්තය මෙම ේ පටන්ගත යුතුදැයි මම ම ොදනිමි. පසුගිය ො඼ය තුළ සිදුවු හැම මදයක්ම ඒ සිදුවු අනුපිළිමලළින් මම සිහිපත් ෙරමි.එමහත් ඒ සිදුවිම මා මතෙයට ැ මගන්මන් එලන් ො඼ රටාලෙට අනුල ම ොමේ.එය එම඼ ම ඔබට වි ්තර ෙළමහොත් එය අගක් මු඼ක් ැති න්මදඩවිල්඼ක් යැයි ඔබ සිතනු ඇත.ඔබ කුමක් සිතුලත් මට ඉන් ඇති ළු඼ය කුමක්ද? මා උත් හ ෙරන්මන් ඔබට ෙතන්දරයක් කීමට ම ොමේ. මා සිත අරක්ගත් බරකින් නිදහ ් විමටයි.ඉන්පසු මා දැන් සිටි ොමරමේ ලහ඼මේ පරා඼යෙ ගැටග ා ඇති ඼ණුමේ දිවිමතොර ෙර ගනිමි”.

Here “Nidhanaya” starts. It is a counter point of a complex narrative context. A combination of reality and a gothic desires of a human. Therefore the film reveals the very true nature of a man, who became cruel to do a crime, but still cannot be totally recognized an a black character.

In Sunil Mihidukula‟s book „Lester and Lankan cinema‟ he states that Tissa Abeysekara took 8 months to write the adapted play to the screen. In addition to the short story the characters like Juwanis, The servant, Wille‟s sister -in- law Dulsi ,Julias, Doctor are added in the film. The long run disease of Wille, The peacock in the cage of “wallawwa”, The incident of losing the knife and the Iren‟s alone journey to her home, The construction of bridge and the „totu pola‟, historical portal of king‟s scene, mental hallucinations of dead father and the flash backs, warm reunion with „Irene‟, although they lacks matrimonial or sexual connections are new adaptations. The film gives a new interpretation to these. In the short story till the last movement „Irene‟ is unaware of the journey to the forest, while in the film, she knows it from the beginning but does not know that she is going to be the victim.

As Mihidukula states Lester doesn‟t use a shooting script but uses things he finds from the place of shooting. The more meaningful symbols which are being used are things collected from the place of shooting “The “wallawwa” of Fedric Obeysekara at Rajagiriya. Eg.Peacock, hen and the knife.

Willie living in an aristocratic mansion faces financial decline as his contractor business is a failure. He stands to lose the mansion he dwells in and is reluctant to let it go. Being superstitious he believes in an Ola leaf prediction which says a treasure would be in his hands if a virgin woman with four particular birthmarks is sacrificed atop a particular rock. Willie comes across such a women in Irene played by Malani Fonseka. He marries her but does not consummate the marriage as he wants her to retain her virginity. Willie falls ill and is nurse back to health by the loving wife. Nevertheless Abeynayake goes ahead with his original plan kills his devoted wife at the opportune time and location because of his need and greed for the “Nidhanaya” or treasure. Actually he does get a treasure in his good and devoted wife but does not realize it and is prepared to sacrifice the living treasure to gain material treasure. His hopes are dashed when the predicate treasure does not appear. He returns disillusioned and commits suicide.

The film is structured as a narrative with Willie Abeynayake prior to his intended suicide writing in his diary explaining the chain of events in his life that leads to his taking his own life. The story then is related in a series of flashbacks and voiceovers. Finally Willie hangs himself to death.

As stated above in the story of the film Wille takes a great attempt to find the woman. But out of nowhere unexpectedly he meets herself at „totupola‟ where it is different from the short stories when it says that he met her in a train. In the film it is given that „Irene‟ remains a virgin in order to participate in a religious debt of „Wille‟. The very next of their marriage, Irene comes near the peacock‟s cage. „Wille‟ follows her.

“බ඼ාමග .අත්දාන් එපා. ඼ ් තා වු ාට හරිම පුරුයි. අවුරුදු මදෙක් වුත් එෙ එෙට ක෕ඩුමේ හිටපු ගැණු තාල කිසිත් ොරණයක් ැතිල දල ක් මෙොට඼ා මැරුලා. බැලු බැල්මට මෙොයිතරේ අ඼ංොර මතක්ද? මේ ලමේ කුරිරු ලැඩක් ෙරයි කිය඼ හිතන්ලත් බැහැ. මමො රාමේ නියම ්භාලය තිමබන්මන් ඌමේ ඼ ් පිල්ල඼ ම මේ. ඌමේ මු ඼ ෙටහමේ.ඒ ාදයට යින්මේ බිත්තර පුපුර ලාලු”.

This is the symbol which runs throughout the play, It is much more effective and the content of the film is brighten through this symbol. The ominous sound of peacock is heard twice in the film once when „Willie‟ is with a knife in his breakfast and other is when „Juwanis‟ the servant appears in front of „Irene‟ with a killed hen. The two are used as auditory images symbolically. The scene of „Willie‟s sickness takes a considerable time in the film. The viewers are exposed to his unusual sickness and unrevealed details of his brother. This sickness became an incident of building up of a warm union of the partners. It grows a warm affection, and love towards Irene.

But the pride and the financial instability which haunt in his mind time to time became more powerful than his love. The hallucination scenes depict his conflict nature of the mind. He was led by his Ego centric mind. The thought of killing „Irene‟ and finding the treasure which popped up time to time in his mind make him uneasy and make the only possible remedy for the crisis prevailed. The treasure was only known by the person called „Gurunnanse‟ but in the short story we do not come across such character. „Willie‟ is a firm believer of gods and myths as it is depicted in the film. The argument with the white man and the rejection of perching Dharma instead perform god rituals at the construction of bridge.

"Willie‟ who comes back to “Wallawwa” after the murder, which is the starting point of the film states

 “ මමය කියල ඔබ මා ගැ කුමක් සිතුලත් ඉන් මට ඇති ළු඼ය කුමක්ද? මා සිතැඟි මම ම ො ඟලා ඔබට මහළි ෙමළමි.එමහත් මේ මමොමහොමත් මා සිත අරක්ගත් මහා දුෙඳුරින් බිඳක් මහෝ ඔබටත් මපමන් ේ මා පත ැ සුේ එපමණයි”

These words Shock the audience instead of judging Willie as a murder but makes a doubtful state in mind. This quality of the film makes it more unique and powerful as a cinematic work. Apart from the storyline, direction and the concept, all the other sub components of the film can be placed in a great place. The acting, Camera, Music and Art direction becomes specific in it.

Nidhanaya is the eighth feature film made by Lester James Peries. It is in black and white and 108minutes long. Gamini and MalaniFonseka play the lead roles and about 75% of the scenes revolve around the pair. Gamini plays Willie Abeynayake a superstitious scion of a rich family facing financial ruin. Malani plays Irene his trusting, devoted wife. Sinhala Cinema‟s foremost actor duo play their parts to perfection in Nidhanaya.

KL Coranelis Appuhamy and JRL Fernando act as Willie Abeynayake‟s elder brother and father respectively while Shanthi Lekha acts as Malini‟s mother. Other actors are Saman Bokalawala, Francis Perera as Juwanis, Trilicia Gunawardene as Dulcie, Thilakasiri Fernando as Diyonis, Kumarasignhe Appuhamy as Gurunanse, MapaGunaratne as the doctor, Thalatha Gunasekara as the Nanny and Barry Whittington as the Government Agent.

Willie Abeynayake is one of the finest roles acted by Gamini mFonseka in his mercurial movie career.

The cinematography is by MS Anandan who used Ilford film instead of Kodak to bring out in sharp contrast the black and whites. “Nidhanaya” is supposedly the only Sinhala film to be shot entirely in Il ford film. Premasiri Kemadasa does the music score the highlight of which is a Western waltz composed by the music maestro. The waltz is danced by Gamini and Malani with seven costume changes. The bulk of the shooting was done at an archaic mansion in Rajagiriya that had antique furniture and peacocks as pets in a cage. The house itself can be perceived as a pivotal character in the film around which the story is woven. In later years Lester‟s “Wekande Walauwa” also featured a mansion by the lake as a central feature.

The shooting of the film took over seven months as both Gamini and Malani being busy film stars could be available for only five days each month for Nidhanaya. Usually Lester shoots his films at a stretch without breaks but here it was not possible. Despite the breaks the continuity was maintained with great intensity by both Gamini and Malani who complemented each other.

Some of the great sequences in Nidhanaya relate to the thespian prowess of both. In the waltz sequence both had to enact the dancing steps in natural slow motion as there was no second camera available to shoot in slow motion. So both coached by Keerthi Sri Karunaratne practiced the steps and then danced for the camera in exaggerated slow movements. This was a feat that required perfect coordination and both Fonsekas rose to the occasion and did themselves proud.

Another scene where Malani excelled was when Gamini suddenly slaps her and berates her. Malani acts startled and upset perfectly. What really happened was that Lester and Gamini did not reveal how the scene was going to be shot to Malani. She did not know that Gamini was going to hit and shout at her. So when it did happen she was naturally shocked and surprised. The result was a superb piece of “natural” acting.

Lester and Gamini tried a similar ruse in another scene. This was the one where Gamini was to have an epileptic fit. Gamini himself had doubts whether he could act out that scene well. So at the right time Gamini suddenly started having an epileptic fit. Since only Lester knew beforehand the other actors and technicians were all taken aback at the sight. The actors lost their cue. The cameraman dropped the camera. As a result the entire scene had to be filmed again but Gamini was now assured he could pull it off.

Another bizarre happening was the birthmarks phenomenon. According to G.B Senanayake‟s story the virgin woman to be sacrificed was to have four birthmarks. In an unbelievable coincidence Malani Fonseka had the identical birthmarks in the exact places. When told of this G.B Senanayake refused to believe it. Later he felt the birthmarks by his fingers and shed his disbelief. The story was then reworked into a film script by Tissa Abeysekara who won an OCIC award for best screenplay for “Nidhanaya”.

“Nidhanaya” made later in 1970 was entered for the 1972 Venice International Film Festival where the film won the Silver Lion of St. Mark award. It also received a certificate as one of the outstanding films of the year at the London Film Festival. “Nidhanaya” was also included in the global list of 100 best films to be ever made that was compiled by the Cinematheque Institute of France to mark the World Film Centenary. It also won the award at Sri Lanka‟s Golden Jubilee of Independence for being the best Sinhala movie in fifty years. It has also won critical acclaim as one of the ten top Asian films for all time.

Nidhanaya has been compared by some to “Jalsaghar” by Satyajit Ray which is about the last days of a Zamindar or landlord in rural Bengal. The film made in 1958 illustrates the decaying collapse of the old order. Nidhanaya does likewise though Peries was not inspired in this instance by Jalsaghar.

It is a fact that India‟s greatest film maker Satyajit Ray considered Lester to be of the same mould as him and once referred to the Sri Lankan as his “closest relative East of the Suez.” In spite of the creative affinity between the two, Peries was not influenced by Ray when he made his first film “Rekhawa”. Regi Siriwardene told this writer once that Lester had not seen “PatharPanchali” or “ApuSansar” when he first made “Rekhawa. Nidhanaya was selected as a great work of filmic art that needed to be preserved for posterity as a part of world film heritage.

Therefore “Nidhanaya” proves that there is no any other “Treasure” to Lankan cinema than Lester‟s “Nidhanaya” with well brought flavor of Abeysekara‟s screen play from Senanyake‟s short story “Nidhanaya”.