The Left's Obsession with "Amra Ekta Cinema Banabo" and Why It Misses the Mark

Imagine a film that takes over a decade to make, spans over 21 hours, and is hailed as a masterpiece by the art-house crowd. That's "Amra Ekta Cinema Banabo" for you, a Bangladeshi film directed by Ashraf Shishir. Released in 2019, this cinematic behemoth was shot in various locations across Bangladesh and claims to capture the socio-political landscape of the country. But let's be real, it's a film that the left loves to fawn over, while the rest of us are left scratching our heads.

First off, let's talk about the sheer length of this film. At 21 hours, it's not just a movie; it's a marathon. Who has the time or the patience to sit through something that long? The left might argue that it's a bold artistic statement, but to most people, it's just an exercise in endurance. It's as if the filmmakers are trying to test how much the audience can take before they give up. And let's not forget, the longer the film, the more opportunities for pretentious dialogue and drawn-out scenes that could have been cut.

The film's narrative is another point of contention. It's supposed to be a reflection of Bangladesh's socio-political issues, but it ends up being a convoluted mess. The left loves to champion films that tackle social issues, but "Amra Ekta Cinema Banabo" does so in a way that's neither engaging nor enlightening. It's like reading a 1,000-page book that could have been summarized in a single chapter. The film tries to cover too much ground, and in doing so, it loses its focus and impact.

Then there's the issue of accessibility. This film is not for the average moviegoer. It's an art-house film through and through, designed to appeal to a niche audience that revels in its obscurity. The left often criticizes mainstream films for being too commercial, but at least those films are accessible to a wide audience. "Amra Ekta Cinema Banabo" is the opposite; it's a film that prides itself on being inaccessible, and that's not something to celebrate.

The film's reception is also worth noting. While it has been praised in certain circles, it's not exactly a crowd-pleaser. The left might argue that it's a misunderstood masterpiece, but maybe it's just not that good. Sometimes, a film is obscure and unpopular because it simply doesn't resonate with people. Not every piece of art needs to be a deep, philosophical exploration of society. Sometimes, people just want to be entertained.

And let's not ignore the fact that the film's production took over a decade. In that time, countless other films have been made that are more impactful and relevant. The left might see this as a testament to the filmmaker's dedication, but it also raises questions about efficiency and purpose. If it takes that long to make a film, maybe it's time to reevaluate the project.

Finally, there's the question of why this film is being championed by the left. Is it because it aligns with their socio-political views? Is it because it's an underdog story of a film that defies mainstream conventions? Whatever the reason, it's clear that "Amra Ekta Cinema Banabo" is not the groundbreaking masterpiece it's made out to be. It's a film that tries too hard to be profound and ends up being pretentious.

In the end, "Amra Ekta Cinema Banabo" is a film that will continue to divide opinions. While the left may see it as a triumph of art and social commentary, others will see it as an overly long, inaccessible, and ultimately forgettable film. It's a reminder that not every piece of art needs to be a grand statement, and sometimes, less is more.