When 11 women made a film together: ‘No weeping, no sad songs in the background’

Mast Mahila Mandali is a 72-minute documentary made by 11 women. It explores identity, ambition, desire and happiness through conversations and everyday scenes. Its central difference is authorship: the women portrayed are also filmmakers and directors.

Shilpi Gulati supervised ten first-time filmmakers from Mumbai’s M East municipal ward. Her workshop paired the women for interviews and began with two prompts: “Who were you?” and “Who are you today?” Their questions developed into personal conversations, such as Gauri discussing her former name and wish to join the Army.

The film therefore moves beyond a standard development documentary about sanitation. It shows women working, doing household chores and spending time together. Their laughter, tears and regrets shape the story. The documentary was scheduled for the Dharamshala International Film Festival, where its collective process could challenge familiar ideas about who documents women’s lives.

The film has 11 directing credits, making its leadership unusually collective. Shilpi Gulati was the experienced filmmaker and academic who supervised the project. The other ten women were first-time filmmakers. They were not simply subjects placed in front of her camera.

Gulati designed and taught a filmmaking workshop before sharing the director’s credit. Each participant interviewed the woman she was partnered with. The process used two broad prompts: “Who were you?” and “Who are you today?” The women then developed their own questions and shaped the conversations.

This division gave the group both training and creative responsibility. Gulati brought documentary knowledge and guidance, while the ten participants supplied their relationships, experiences and viewpoints. The result treats filmmaking as collaboration rather than a one-way act of observation. It also helped the women make a film that reflected how they wanted to be seen, not merely how an outsider might portray them.

The ten first-time filmmakers were Anjum Shaikh, Darshana Mayekar, Gauri Rane, Kavita Ghuge, Kavite Khomne, Nazneen Siddiqui, Rohini Kadam, Rehana Shaikh, Sheetal Navle and Vaishale Mane. Shilpi Gulati was their co-director and supervisor.

They were working-class residents of neighbourhoods in Mumbai’s M East municipal ward. The women were associated with CORO India’s Right to Pee campaign. Gulati described them as resilient, hard-working leaders already active in their communities. Their existing relationships and community work gave the filmmaking exercise a strong base.

This background matters because the film does not present them as passive recipients of help. They had experience speaking about community concerns and participating in local leadership. The workshop added filmmaking skills and creative control. Their social position remains part of the film’s context, but their conversations also address desire, ambition, friendship and happiness, widening the picture beyond hardship.

CORO India had worked in Maharashtra for 38 years and produced Mast Mahila Mandali. In early 2024, Supriya Jan contacted Shilpi Gulati about making a film on CORO’s Right to Pee campaign, which addresses sanitation issues in the city. Gulati initially imagined a conventional development-sector film.

Jan proposed something different: the women associated with the campaign should co-direct it. Gulati agreed to teach them filmmaking first, rejecting a tokenistic exercise. Her workshop focused on artistic exploration rather than documenting toilets. Pairs interviewed each other using questions about who they were before and who they are today.

That process redirected the film toward identity, ambition, desire and happiness. The campaign supplied the relationships and participants, but the women’s questions shaped the final subject. The documentary now shows their work, chores, friendships, laughter, tears and regrets. Its origin in sanitation activism remains important, yet its method allowed the film to become a broader account of self-representation.

A documentary’s message changes when its subjects become makers. They can influence the questions, images and emphasis instead of being reduced to evidence for someone else’s argument. In Mast Mahila Mandali, the women help decide how their lives should be represented.

The process was practical. Gulati trained ten women, paired them for interviews and gave them broad prompts about their past and present selves. The participants developed the questions further. Nazneen also rejected a film about “poor, weeping women” with a sad song. That response directly shaped the project’s perspective.

The final film presents women working, doing chores and spending time together. Men are discussed but not actually seen, which Gulati calls a powerful statement. The result foregrounds women’s voices and relationships rather than an outsider’s explanation. It does not erase hardship; it shows how they live despite challenges. Shared authorship therefore becomes part of the documentary’s meaning.

Mast Mahila Mandali avoids a miserabilist portrait of women facing hardship. It does not build its message around poverty, tears or a sad soundtrack. Instead, the women wanted a film about how they live despite challenges. Their ordinary lives and inner worlds become central.

The documentary assembles scenes of work, household chores and time spent together. One woman says adjustment is an art only women know. Another dances while cooking. A third says husbands need not exist, while boyfriends are welcome. These moments combine humour, desire and social observation with tears and regrets.

The alternative comes from changing who controls representation. The women filmed and interviewed one another, while Gulati supervised the process. Their participation allowed the film to refuse an outsider gaze and keep its focus on women. It still acknowledges difficulty, but does not make suffering the whole story. The result is a joyous and revelatory documentary about self-image and recognition.

Questions of artistic authority matter because documentaries shape how people are understood. If outsiders control the camera and final story, the people portrayed may be seen only through someone else’s assumptions. Mast Mahila Mandali asks whether working-class women can be recognized as artists, not only represented as subjects.

Gulati made this issue concrete when she said shared director’s credit should involve people who knew how to make a film. She offered training first because she did not want a tokenistic exercise. The workshop let each woman interview a partner, develop questions and contribute to the film’s structure.

This approach changes both process and representation. The women could reject a sad story about poor women and create a film about living despite challenges. Their authorship supports a fuller picture of work, friendship, desire and ambition. It also shows that empowerment is not simply being included on camera. It includes learning the craft, making creative choices and receiving recognition for the work.