Shyam Benegal, one of India's finest contributors to the Parallel Cinema, or Indian New Wave movement, was born on the 14th of December 1934 in Secunderabad in what was then British India.

Having developed a great interest in filmmaking from a very young age, Benegal began working on the script of what would eventually become his first feature film, Ankur, in 1963.

The Indian New Wave was initially almost exclusively dominated by Bengali filmmakers such as Satyajit Ray, Ritwik Ghatak and Mrinal Sen who were inarguably masters of the medium. These films were characterised by their attempts to eschew most of the trends which had by then been associated with mainstream Indian cinema. Filmmakers of this movement strived to create a new form of storytelling that relied on and exhibited a close fidelity to realism, humanism and also depicted the social and political circumstances of the periods or places that these films were set in.

With the arrival of Shyam Benegal's Ankur in 1974, the New Wave took a bold turn towards achieving a wider Indian audience, while at the same time stayed faithful to its non-mainstream principles. Benegal effectively brought to the notice of the Indian public the various social calamities and evils that were prevalent in his native state of Andhra Pradesh.

Ankur was followed by Nishant in 1975. Both these films depicted the oppression and sexual exploitation of peasants and the general rural population by zamindars, or landlords, in rural Andhra Pradesh, whilst being centred on the experiences and impediments of a woman (played in both films by Shabana Azmi)who becomes a direct victim of these social injustices.

In both Ankur and Nishant, Benegal creates his own archetype of a protagonist and antagonist, although the real lines of differentiation between the two become blurred as the film progresses.

The characters who are shown to be negative in the beginning eventually display a softer, more considerate and sensible side to them, while the more respectable and admirable characters progressively lose the empathy of the viewer.

This is demonstrated evidently by the character of Chhote Sarkar in Ankur, played by Anant Nag, who is initially seen as a very righteous, sincere and sympathetic landlord, who shows visible romantic feelings for his maid and completely lacks any qualities of a womanizer, as opposed to his own father, but later in the film turns out to enjoy the company of his new wife, ignoring and feigning disinterest in the woman he loved earlier.

It is also displayed by Shabana Azmi's Sushila, a married woman, who is abducted and gang-raped by a zamindar and his brothers in Nishant. While she sharply laments her fate at first, she eventually begins to embrace and even enjoy her status in the zamindar's family as a concubine of one of his brothers.

In both these films, the explicitly dubious and sinful characters are depicted as womanizers and misogynists, or at least sexists. They are also usually men of power and high social standing, who happen to believe in the caste system as well. These are indicators of Benegal's strong support for the emancipation of women in rural India and his lack of trust and belief in absolute authority and irrational caste barriers in Indian society.

Visually, all of Benegal's films from the 1970s are similar in style and tone, owing to the close relationship Benegal maintained with his cinematographer, Govind Nihalani. They usually open with a sequence exploring a certain rural tradition or belief before beginning with the actual story. This is notable in both Ankur and Nishant; the former starts with a temple procession where a young woman prays for her fertility, while the latter begins with the confusion and chaos surrounding the theft of the local temple's jewels. It is interesting to note how the identity of the supposed thief in Nishant is revealed through a bizarre religious ritual which is endemic to rural Andhra Pradesh.

Both films also extensively explore the rural landscape of the state. Farms and large tracts of land are shown with workers toiling under the hot sun. In Ankur, at the very beginning of the film, the procession moves through a highly rocky setting, typical of Andhrite villages in the Deccan plateau region.

Benegal's films from this period are characterized by their outstanding usage of long, static shots which isolate a particular moment or incident in a character's day. They also inadvertently add to the casual pacing of these films, a salient trait of his early work. 

He also employs the use of "transitional barriers" in both films. For example, in Nishant the priest walks past a pillar in the interior of his temple, before emerging from behind it and promptly discovering the theft of the temple jewels. In Ankur, Chhote Sarkar walks toward his maid Lakshmi's hut and is, for a brief moment, covered by a palm tree which is in frame. In the next few shots, it is revealed that Lakshmi has finally started to reciprocate his feelings toward her, which serves as a crucial plot point in the film.       

Folk songs sung by peasants are also heard in both films, although its use is more prolific in Nishant.

Although both films can be closely associated with the portrayal of sexual exploitation of women and the general lack of moral excellence in the rural upper classes of Andhra Pradesh, there are certain notable differences.

In Ankur, the setting of the film is never openly revealed and is instead hinted at by certain dialogues which are spoken in Telugu. There is also one other instance where Lakshmi explains to Chhote Sarkar that a particular bird is called "Vedlapitta", which is clearly a Telugu name. Apart from this, though, there are very few references to the geographical setting of the film and its subject.

Conversely, in Nishant, the film begins with an open hint about its location, with the "In a feudal state..." title; Andhra Pradesh was one of the few states where the Zamindari system continued for a long time even after its abolishment post Indian independence. It is then gradually revealed through various cultural references, including Telugu conversations, clothing and most importantly, folk songs which are excellently used in the background at various instances throughout the film, that it is set in the said state.

This was perhaps an open criticism of Andhra Pradesh's regrettable past by the filmmaker, who chose to be bolder and more outspoken about the state's historical shortcomings after the subtle, veiled references he made in his first film.

By the 1980s, Shyam Benegal began to receive financial backing from Shashi Kapoor, who was undoubtedly a superstar of the mainstream "Bollywood" film factory. While this was not necessarily a factor that restricted Benegal's ability to continue exploring his own idiosyncratic methods of storytelling, or his ability to maintain a work ethic which was independent of Bollywood's capitalistic, crowd pleasing practices, the influence of a more profit oriented patron can be clearly observed in his films which were produced during this period.

In his 1981 star vehicle Kalyug, which starred Shashi Kapoor, Rekha and Anant Nag among other big names, there is an obvious shift toward more commercial, mainstream trends, although the film in itself, more or less, remains faithful to Benegal's Parallel Cinema roots.

Unlike Ankur or Nishant, or any of his other features from the 1970s like Manthan, Kalyug is set in the highly urban environment of Bombay, and tells the story of two groups of belligerent cousins set against the backdrop of an intense business rivalry.  

Kalyug is a loose adaptation of the Mahabharata epic, with Shashi Kapoor playing the role of Karan Singh, a modern version of the character Karna. The decision to adapt such a well known story in itself seems immensely conformist, with the sentiments and tastes of the larger audience kept in mind.

While the grand story it derives inspiration from is known for is realistic portrayal of human beings as individuals with a great deal of ambiguity in their moral standards, Kalyug is rather conventional in the depiction of its protagonist and antagonist. Eventually, like in Benegal's earlier films, they do change as people, but the transformation is understood as inevitable owing to the adverse circumstances they are forced to tackle. This particular aspect is vastly, magnificently more complex in his earlier films.

The film notably marks the beginning of Benegal's gradual deviation from New Wave Cinema norms, moving towards the Bollywood mainstream. The film even features song sequences and is recognisably more dramatic in nature as compared to his first few films.

The camera work in Kalyug is also visibly conventional or classical, as it contains some of the best known, commonly used compositions and movements found in mainstream Indian cinema. This can be seen as a deliberate move to avoid over-experimentalism and also as an audience pleasing tactic from Govind Nihalani (who was still Benegal's cinematographer) since the film was being financed by a large studio and hence was perhaps contractually obligated to be more conventional in nature.

By the time he made Sardari Begum in 1996, Benegal had significantly moved away from the traits of the Parallel Cinema movement. This can be partially linked to the decline of the movement itself in the early 1990s, and partially to the autonomy Benegal had in casting experienced, established artists in his films owing to his widespread recognition.

Still, one can observe Benegal's signature themes of female empowerment and sexual politics in the deeply patriarchal Indian society, although it is studied in a more superficial and widely digestible manner as opposed to his more daring work of the 1970s. There are seldom any actual depictions of the cruelty and oppression endured by the titular character because of her religious background and what she eventually pursues, albeit a few verbal references to such incidents. The film also mildly criticises the hypocrisy and double standards of political parties, although once again in a very subtle and minimal manner.

The film features a spectacular soundtrack comprising of mostly Hindustani classical music, composed by Vanraj Bhatia. There are multiple song sequences with proper choreography, leading us to believe if Benegal had by then abandoned, what he liked to call it, his Alternate Cinema roots.

Sanjay Dharankar's cinematography in the film utilizes a number of motifs which had earlier been employed by Nihalani in a very different way. For example, the same "barriers" which signified transitions in Ankur and Nishant are now used in Sardari Begum to display opposing views within the same frame. It is also used to differentiate between the old and the new, the traditional and the modern etc.  

Sardari Begum is by no means a weak film, but it was definitely produced in a more marketable and profit gaining method than much of Benegal's earlier works.

While Shyam Benegal continues to direct films to this day, he has moved away considerably from his alternate roots. At the same time, it would be unwise to say that he does not retain some of his unique methods of storytelling and consistently continues to make intriguing films which offer an unencumbered commentary of socio-political circumstances in India.