'Angry Young Men': A documentary that entertains but doesn’t elucidate

Even those well acquainted are likely to go through a range of emotions— from tearing up to getting goosebumps. The documentary shines in moments, like when Jaya Bachchan refers to Salim-Javed as “brats," or when Honey Irani, Akhtar’s ex-wife, mentions his affinity for writing dialogue for negative characters. 

She also recalls how she sometimes found them arrogant, which she believes ultimately affected their judgement of film scripts. Akhtar himself shares a poignant memory from his early struggles: “I stay in five-star hotels [now]... They bring out so much food, and I always wonder where this food was on the days I had nothing to eat." 

Also read: ‘Angry Young Men’ review: A soft-hearted tribute and a missed opportunity

However, for film buffs like me, the documentary feels unsatisfying, as it lacks fresh insights and doesn’t delve deeply into their collaborative work.

While it touches on the idea of the ‘angry young man’ that they pioneered, it doesn’t go into specifics such as when and where the idea first emerged. Now, every era has its own zeitgeist—or the spirit of those times—and tapping it for a cultural product can assure success. 

As Cass Sunstein writes in How To Become Famous, to become successful, “some people… need to get attached, to the… mood of the nation." Salim-Javed did that with their angry young man. 

As the actor Sharat Saxena recalls: “It was the 70s… The anger and the fire that burned inside this hero was the same fire that raged within every young man." This is where the documentary peaks on this concept and then moves on. However, Akhtar offers this disclaimer: “We were unaware of all this while writing."

A nice segue could have explained how the term ‘angry young man’ emerged. In its plural form, it originally referred to a group of British writers and playwrights such as Kingsley Amis and John Osborne, whose writing of the 1950s reflected their disillusionment with traditional British society.

Another key aspect which the documentary touches on but doesn’t fully explore is the inspiration behind some of Salim-Javed’s films. Take Deewar, a clever reworking of Mother India and Gunga Jumna. 

Taking a primarily rural storyline and setting it in the port and underworld of Mumbai was a terrific idea. How did it come about? No details are provided. Similarly, Kala Patthar features a lead character inspired by Joseph Conrad’s novel Lord Jim.

Or take Salim-Javed’s biggest hit, Sholay. The broad plotline is borrowed from Akira Kurosawa’s Seven Samurai. The scene where the family of Inspector Thakur Baldev Singh is killed by the dacoit Gabbar Singh is inspired from Sergio Leone’s Once Upon a Time In the West. The famous water tank scene was borrowed from The Secret of Santa Vittoria, and the coin-toss scenes from Garden of Evil.

Also read: Manifestation: Exploring the rise of the alternative healing culture

Further, as Anupama Chopra writes in Sholay: The Making of a Classic: “Raj Khosla’s 1971 hit, Mera Gaon Mera Desh, the story of a one-armed man who reforms a petty criminal and uses him to protect their village against dacoits, loomed like a ghost in the background… The Bimal Roy classic, Madhumati, has a scene in which a boastful servant is caught by his master, much like what happens with Soorma Bhopali." 

Even the dialogues in the scene where Jai talks to Mausiji and asks for Basanti’s hand for his friend Veeru were copied from the Pakistani novelist Ibn-e-Safi’s 1955 novel, Khaufnak Imarat.

Of course, it took great skill to weave all this into a coherent film. Also, this material was available to other writers but they didn’t write a Sholay. As Khan puts it: “Originality is the art of concealing the source." 

Also, there is a difference between inspiration and plagiarism. For instance, Mahesh Bhatt’s Dil Hai Ki Manta Nahi was a scene-by-scene lift of It Happened One Night; even the dialogues written by Sharad Joshi were translations. 

Sholay, though, was inspired but not plagiarised. That said, while we shouldn’t judge the moral standards of 50 years ago by today’s norms, such scripting would be unlikely in today’s era of stringent copyright laws.

On why the duo split in the early 1980s, the documentary suggests their relationship had simply run its course. However, it could have been more engaging if it had explored whether Salim-Javed became overly reliant on their ‘angry young man’ trope. 

As the zeitgeist began shifting in the 1980s, cinema needed to evolve. Naturally, this isn’t an exact science, and hindsight always makes us sound wiser.

Finally, the documentary has little to say about their individual careers as film script writers, which weren’t very successful. Was it because they worked very well as a team, with Khan coming up with the storyline, both working together on the screenplay, and then Akhtar writing the dialogue?

Also read: Stree 2: Financial frights and delights—Key money insights from your favorite horror comedy

Angry Young Men left me, a film buff, a bit disappointed. Yet, much like Salim-Javed’s movies, it was entertaining, with the best bits coming from Honey Irani. But what is Hrithik Roshan doing in this documentary, mouthing dialogue that someone else probably wrote for him?