Films are just a medium.

If you have an Idea which you want to express to someone else

you can either talk about it or write a book or make a film or write a blog. The mediums
might be different but it is the primarily compelling desire to share your ideas with
someone else which motivates.

Then there is a difference between wanting to express and wanting to communicate.

Expression is a pure art form as it just projects an idea in a spontaneous and instinctive
burst of creativity without having any motivation or an agenda and thereby there are
chances that it can connect greatly to the receiver or can go completely over the head. It
also can impress, irritate, offend, bore or completely be misunderstood depending upon
the receiver’s sensibility, intelligence, background knowledge, state of mind and above
all their own individual emotional journeys in their various experiences in life. On the
other hand for the filmmaker too, the idea originates in his mind from the same factors
mentioned above, with one primary difference that his own might be vastly different than
those of the receivers, and in many cases the filmmaker would not take that into
consideration, sometimes intentionally and many times overlooking it. Films by the
virtue of their place have to be commercial art as various people’s time, money, effort
and expectations are involved, and the filmmaker has to be responsible for the same.

Often I hear this question that “how come a filmmaker does not realize how bad a film he
is making”. The truth is that the filmmaker will be the last to know how the film is
shaping up or shaped up. Many people don’t realize that a film is a collection of a series
of decisions taken over a long period of time and each one of those decisions will be
influenced by factors which are dominant that particular day. Factors will be as varied as
the frame of your mind, what films seem to working, the reactions to each idea of your
from people you are surrounded by etc. So by the time you finish the film and edit, it is
highly likely you have completely forgotten the original intention and objective. When I
see a film made by anybody including mine, more than the film I like to study the state of
mind of the filmmaker at the time he made it and what could have been the original
intentions behind it.

Many have criticized me for being highly callous in the making of my magnum opus
AAG. The Truth is that I have never been more careful and passionate than in the making
of any film of mine more than AAG although they have been employed in wrong
direction. I think the most careless I have been so far is in the making of SATYA. I did
not have a Script or One Line Order with me on the day of the shoot. That is not to say
that is what it takes to make a good film. It is pretty more complex than that.

In the life of a man like Sarkar there are bound to be so many incidents which will give
raise to new complex situations. For me the Sarkar films are about framing and
showcasing the aura of power. I employed each and every aspect of the various
techniques of the film medium whether it is the music or dialogue or cinematography for
one and only one purpose-- that is to capture the intensity in the actors eyes, through
which we see a world of high drama be it politics, treachery, revenge, passion, courage,
love and above all relationships. Sarkar Raj is much bigger than Sarkar in scale mainly
because the issues and character conflicts it deals with are much more complex and
intriguing than in the 1st Part.

I pushed the upper limits of technique in every which way to make each frame and sound
to vibrate with power. But no technique is of any value unless it is backed by
performances.

I have always believed that there is no greater cinematic visual than an actor performing
in a tight close-up. The faces of the three Bachchans in Sarkar Raj are the ultimate
testimony of that.

Films are primarily made on character conflicts and the issues it deals with. The
background just gives it a dimension. For example the story of COMPANY could have
been set in a Corporate set-up with the outcome of conflicts just coming to individual
beings fired from their jobs instead of being literally fired upon. The underworld
background just gives it a sharp edge to make it more hard-hitting. Having said that I
must also confess that normal, civilized, nice family people bore me to death.

In 1997, according to police statistics there were 108 shootouts related to the underworld
and in 2006 there were just 5! It does not mean the underworld as we knew is almost
finished. It has just meta-morphed into something much more dangerous, and in some
instances it has become a conduit for terrorist networks. The reason why the terrorists
would require this kind of support is because mostly the terrorists would be from outside
and primarily motivated by ideology. They would require ground support, safe houses,
local intelligence, sea routes and land routes to get in arms and explosives and informants
in the Police department. Since the underworld is a criminal business organization it can
easily collude with the corrupt forces in the Police Department to which a terrorist cell
might not have an access to. And these the underworld would provide, for either financial
gain or in some cases sympathizing with the cause. The menace of this nexus has caused
a complex problem for the various policing agencies of the country like the R.A.W, I.B,
C.B, C.I.D, Crime Branch, Anti Terrorist Squad etc. for they can no longer afford to be
secretive and are forced to share their information with each other which results in
leakages for the simple reason that the more people know, the more are the chances of it
being leaked out.

My Reactions to reactions....
Posted on June 2, 2008
Can you give me your email id? I want to bring to your notice important socio-political
issues.
Ans: Socio-political issues are not important to me.
1. Sometimes you don’t stick to your words.
Ans: Actually most times I don’t.
2. Was it your idea to change Shiva’s climax and end scenes? They didn’t work at all.
Ans: Yes and the obvious reason for that is I thought they will work better.
3. I find RAAT path breaking.
Ans: I find it boring.
4. If you don’t have light moments such as of Tanisha’s character in Sarkar Raj the film
will make people drowsy.
Ans: I find light moments drowsy.
5. Did you watch Good Shepherd?
Ans: No.
6. I hope you will make Fountainhead one day.
Ans: It’s my dream.
7. What state of mind were you when you were making junkies like AAG?
Ans: Drugged with arrogance.
8. Please make commercially successful films.
Ans: Thanks for the advice. It didn’t occur to me.
9. Why are you so fascinated by dark themes? Even your blog has a dark background.
Ans: Well.
10. If you like Mario Puzo’s Godfather novel more than the film, why did you dedicate
SARKAR to Coppola?
Ans: You are bang on right. That was downright stupid. Thanks for pointing it out.
11. You have to screen the new directors you work with.
Ans: If I knew how to screen good directors so that they can make good films, why
would I myself be making bad films?
12. Your films like AAG, Nishabd scared me and I don’t want to watch your films
anymore.
Ans: Thanks
13. Be more hardworking. Ideas can’t solve problems. Proper execution can. Give your
best as its still in you. Push your boundaries and you will fly again.
Ans: I think you have talent for advising and also maybe poetry.
14. If you see your film before releasing you will definitely know what you have made.
Ans: A film Idea primarily comes out of a certain emotional state of mind. So by the time
you go through the entire process, scripting, constructing scenes, editing etc it’s not
possible to emote with the finished product the way you felt it the first time. At best you
can listen carefully to people to who you show it for the first time before release. But if
they chose to lie to you or are scared to tell you the truth, as so often it happens, you have
had it.
15. Einstein said that if someone tells that have not made a mistake then they have never
tried anything new in life. You will face challenges when you tread new paths.
Ans: To start with I never consciously have this thought of tying something new or to
take up as a challenge to tread different paths. At best I am like a child in a candy store
excited to try anything and everything whatever catches my fancy at that time depending
on my mood and state of mind. Whatever good or bad comes out of this is completely by
accident and not out of intention.
16. Aishwarya’s character is inspired from Dagny Taggart in Atlas Shrugged.
Ans: NO.
17. A study on you would be incomplete without AAG.
Ans: Ahhhhh! You are telling me! The greatest education I have ever had in my life with
regards to cinema, my life and my self is due to AAG and its aftermath. I must have had
one million twenty seven lakh thirty thousand and twenty three advises, and criticisms
not including the ones I deduced myself. Now you can see how much more richer I am.
Want any charity?
18. You should have a provision in your blog for short films from budding filmmakers.
Ans: Yes.
19. You are retarded. You talk crap in News Channels. You might become the next Tim
Sebastian.
Ans: I am, I do. I don’t know who he is.
20. You need to go back to Aamir Khan for one more blockbuster.
Ans: That’s a fantastically fabulous advice. I am amazed I didn’t think of it.
21. Your emotional scenes are half-baked and not well-executed.
Ans: Quite a few people feel the same as you. It could be because I have a subconscious
dislike towards people who cannot control their emotions. For me emotional displays are
more vulgar than wealth displays. I like to see only strength in my characters, so even
when they are in a highly vulnerable situation I still want to see them strong. Its probably
this which results in the scenes not working for people like you. But then I only do what I
want to do.
22. You have the nerve to test it whereas others play safe.
Ans: I am like a guy on the beach who suddenly sees this island in the distance and is
gripped by a sudden intense desire to reach there. So I jump in even though I am not a
swimmer, with this basic assumption that at best I will learn to swim and at worst I will
drown. But I hate to stay put on the beach worrying about sharks and storms. I can’t
really claim that I play safe because I don’t really care about the dangers. I know that
sounds stupid, but that’s me.
23. Your beauty is that you accept your flops.
Ans: Not accepting your film as a flop and standing by it is like telling a joke to someone
and when he does not laugh to claim that he does not have a sense of humour. The
intention of telling the joke to him in the first place is to make him laugh like the
intention of making and releasing a film is for the people to like it. Standing by a film is
also like you proposing to a girl and when she rejects you, you tell yourself that “I love
myself, so what if she doesn’t”
1. Shouldn’t we make films which can make an impact on the world?
Ans: Hello, you are talking to the maker of AAG and also I believe in making films such
as what I want to see.
2. I don’t think you’ve made any bad films, some of them just didn’t work.
Ans: Films should only be made with an intention of making them work. Good and bad
are very subjective.
3. Are the subtle sense of humour scenes in your films your ideas?
Ans: All ideas in my films whether they are good, bad or ugly, are mine.
4. How do you see RGV doing 10 years from now?
Ans: I don’t think beyond today.
5. Howard Roark did not dislike anyone. He was just indifferent.
Ans: Indifference is worse than dislike.
6. Shiva was an incomplete film. The 2nd half is with me.
Ans: Make it yourself.
7. AAG is my favourite film.
Ans: Can you please send your picture so that I can frame it and keep it at home.
P.S: Don’t tell anybody but AAG is my favorite film too.
8. Your penchant to contradict yourself is becoming predictable.
Ans: The only exciting thing about life is contradictions and I also have outgrown the
anger of Nigga disi adugu.
9. It was always me “I trusted you” I took time and watched your movie, how can I blame
you.
Ans: Ahhhh! Wisdom at last.
10. I had fallen in love with Sridevi after watching Kshnam Kshnam.
Ans: I made that movie because I was in love with her.
11. I am in no comments after reading your blog just background music.
Ans: I love you for this.
12. In one shot in Bhoot after the car leaves the basement the shot changes with the sound
of a dolby click.
Ans: That was not a dolby click. It is the igniter sound which Urmila uses on the gas
stove. Anyway as long as you felt the impact it does not matter. The psychology of that
shot is that the audience would be used to the fact that the shot will be cut after the car
left the frame. But the fact that it lingers on automatically puts them into a heightened
tension thereby making them anticipate something terrible will happen and that’s why
even an ordinary click sound will scare them. Similarly one more example of this is when
Urmila comes down into the hall to go into the kitchen for a glass of water. In a wide-
angle shot I show the audience that there is no one in the living room. If the camera
follows behind her they will be half expecting something to jump on her from of the
frame. But the fact they can see the whole room their eyes will be darting all over to see
if anyone is hiding somewhere. Meanwhile Urmila takes her time to drink water and
comes back. As she goes up the stairs I cut to top angle where the audience can see
behind her. Now as the audience can’t see anything in the back and from Urmila’s
expression they can see that there is nothing in the front, they slowly relax as she comes
close to the camera into out focus distance thereby expecting the shot to be cut. But as
she crosses the camera we reveal Manjeet under the stairs making them jump out of the
seat.
13. I don’t know if Govinda Govinda theme suited the film Sarkar. Originally it was from
your Telugu film.
Ans: Yes. Since I loved that track in the Telugu film and that film flopped I was adamant
on tying to ram it down people’s throats once again and I gave a logic to myself that
Sarkar is like Lord Krishna which justified the Govinda word. Nobody else got that but as
of now it’s the most identifiable sound byte from the Sarkar films. My case rests.
14. How does Sarkar make a living?
Ans: He didn’t tell me.
15. What do you feel when you look at your movies that are 6-7 years old?
Ans: That they are 6-7 years old.
1. Do you want to be a maverick filmmaker or a business man?
Ans: Neither. I just want to be what I want to be.
2. A. What does Mani Ratnam think of your cinema?
B. What do you think of his cinema?
Ans: A. Nothing
B. Nothing
3. Give me an advice how to become a successful director
Ans: The only advice I will give you is not to ask advice.
4. Are you selfish? Is selfishness a sin? Are you an atheist?
Ans: Yes I am. Nothing is a sin as long as you are not consciously hurting others. Yes I
am an atheist.
5. Was Nisha Kothari just a professional decision or something else?
Ans: You can go ahead and imagine what ever entertains you.
6. You forgot your main goal and got interested in the object rather than the subject.
Ans: English please!
7. You should go back to being a student and start from Satya again.
Ans: Come here and lead the way, teacher!
8. Stand firmly on your decision for dedicating Sarkar to Copolla.
Ans: I can’t because I have got wobbly feet. Jokes apart I agree with the observation
made. I made a mistake that I didn’t dedicate it to Puzo because only I know what I have
learnt from the novel.
9. My take on why you find it difficult to make good films.
Ans: Don’t think so much. Life is not that serious.
10. I recommended to someone Ram Gopal Varma ka blog
Ans: Superb. I love the title.
11. I am looking forward to know the stories behind the films you made.
Ans: And I am looking forward to tell them.
12. You are like Howard Roark
Ans: Yes and No. I am not as sincere and as committed as him but then I have much
more fun than him. So no complaints!
13. Where do you find your strength?
Ans: In my will to be what I am.
14. Creativity is all about hiding your sources -- Einstein. Comment?
Ans: Greatness is about revealing them.
15. Even people who have not seen Aag have bad opinion of it.
Ans: When somebody told me that so many people didn’t like Aag. I said I don’t agree
because so many people have not seen Aag. If they did then it will register as box office
collections which would have made it a hit. Come on now. Answer that smarties!
16. I have seen moments of pure cinematic brilliance in Aag
Ans: With great pride I think the same.
17. Does a director make a film or his body of films makes a director.
Ans: I agree with the latter because in a body of work his personality will come through.
18. Which film has turned out to be closest to your conception?
Ans: None because by the time I finish it I am a different person from the time I
conceived it.
19. Should a director adopt scripts of market potential?
Ans: it’s just a fallacy that anyone can know a market requirement
20. What is the production worthiness of a particular script?
Ans: My opinion if I were to produce and your opinion if you were to produce.
21. I believe that you can make a better comedy film than anyone
Ans: What did you think Aag was?
22. I could recollect omen II listening to the tracks of Sarkar Raj.
Ans: Yes I copied it from there. I saw Omen II seven times in Vijaywada, Leela Mahal
just to listen to the title track.
23. Is the scene of Sarkar borrowing money from Chandra from Godfather?
Ans: It’s a Maharashtrian tradition.
24. Its painful to read your blog with the black background
Ans: Am changing it.
25. Do you plan shot divisions?
Ans: No I do it instinctively on locations.
26. Your films have the same kind of photography.
Ans: That’s my style.
27. You should use green tone blah blah blah...you should use blah blah blah... do not
blah blah blah... why don’t you blah blah blah... I want you to blah blah blah...
Ans: I do what I want to do and I see what I want to see and I hear what I want to hear. If
it’s a problem for you don’t watch my films.
28. Why don’t you let the sarcasm be and talk more about film making?
Ans: Will try.
29. Please keep kicking these critics
Ans: my intention is just to give my view point.
30. I hope you will discuss your mistakes
Ans: that’s the main thing I want to do in here for the simple reason that you can learn
from your mistakes and grow, provided that you truly realized the mistakes in your head.
31. Mine and my friend’s friendship started due to our common love for Kshana
kshanam.
Ans: I feel very uncomfortable whenever anybody praises me for Kshana kshanam as
I copied it mainly from the premises of three films called ..Foul Play....Romancing The
Stone.. and the third I can’t remember. In hindsight I feel I did a pretty bad job at it. The
only freshness if there was any is my personal and professional obsession for Sridevi. I
was zapped with her in Mr. India and I desired to present her better than that. There were
a couple of things I will share with you on the making of that film. There is a scene of
Venkatesh and Sridevi running in the forest chased by the cops, led by Ramireddy in
which in one particular shot a monkey is busy nibbling on a tree hears a sound and
sharply turns. The camera zooms back for its close up and sharply pans to the left to catch
Venkatesh and Sridevi running. Many people wondered how I took that shot. Heres how I
did that. We were shooting in Mudumalai forest and there were these monkies on the
trees looking at the busy shooting crew when I got an idea. I placed Venkatesh and
Sridevi at a certain place and gave them instructions what to do. I asked the cameraman
to zoom in to the close up of a monkey and I told the crew to be completely silent and
still. After a while since nothing was happening the monkey lost interest in us and
resumed nibbling. Then on my cue the whole crew shouted at the same time in unison.
The monkey got startled and sharply turned on that action the cameraman zoomed back
and panned just in time to catch them both running and the shot was canned. Another
interesting episode was when Venkatesh and Sridevi were crossing a bridge Sridevi
asks him “Why is there a bridge in the forest?” and he replied “how should I know?” This
is actually a conversation which happened between me and my assistant director. When
I saw the bridge in that forest I found it visually very interesting and I conceived that
scene keeping the bridge in mind. My assistant asked me but why should there be a
suddenly a bridge in the forest? I replied how should I know but it is there, to which he
said you and me know but how will the audience know it. So I said then let’s put it in the
scene so what we spoke is what Venkatesh and Sridevi spoke. I reasoned out with him
that if we think the audience will question about something we should let one of the
characters in the film also question about it which would then make it right. But the
real reason is that I wanted that bridge scene anyhow. Also one of my favorite examples
of how you can create drama through editing is in the above mentioned chase in the
forest. I start from a mid close up of Venkatesh and Sridevi running towards the camera
they look back to see if anyone is following them and as Sridevi turns back she looks at
something on the ground screams and both fall from the frame we start wondering what
has happened then I cut to see Ramireddy and cops looking around. We further wonder
where they disappeared. Now we suddenly see both of them against a mud wall crouched.
Now we know they are safe but still wonder what that falling from the frame was about.
Then Sridevi sees something stifles a shout. Venkatesh reacts to that and reaches out
towards the camera and I cut to a top angle to see Ramireddy in the foreground standing
at the edge of a pit and a hand reaching out in the ditch to retrieve Sridevi’s floating
handbag. The audiences then realize that they fell in a ditch in the first shot. This is a
classic case of manipulating the audiences mind with dramatic editing technique. If in the
beginning itself when they drop out of the frame, if I showed them falling into the ditch
the whole sequence will look very informative. But by revealing it bit by bit I was
making the audiences imagination race.
32. Between Sarkar and Sakrar Raj I liked Sarkar Raj better
Ans: Me too
33. In Sarkar Raj I feel like I have seen Anti-Fidel documentary of an American
propaganda. I am really confused.
Ans: There is no need to be confused. I love America and what it propagates. I am a huge
follower of Ayn Rand’s philosophy. It’s another matter that I don’t practice it.
34. That was a different RGV. That was a different time.
Ans: Yes I change everyday and sometimes in a single day. That’s because I get bored
very easily and mostly with myself.
35. You are making films for public not critics.
Ans: I don’t differentiate. Anyone whether he is a employed by a paper or a TV channel
or a guy I meet on the road who has something to say about the film is a critic. If I feel
like it and I think he merits an answer I will reply.
36. Majority of the audience have poor taste.
Ans: What you are actually saying is that only you have great taste. First of all I think it is
wrong to think that the audience as a single entity. They are all particular individuals
coming from various different backgrounds, sensibilities, state of minds and with their
own emotional baggage etc.. the factors which could influence their reaction over a
certain film would be highly variable, innumerable and not completely fathomable.
That’s all the more reason that I do a film for myself and hope there will be enough
people out there who will relate to it. Sometime they do. Many times they don’t.
37. I kept my two month old son at home and went to see your movie
Ans: I too like movies better than I like kids.
38. Is it true that the cameraman was running and breathing to make the scene more
intense in the Shiva chase?
Ans: Hello! How can anybody run without breathing? We posted the breathing sound of
Sudhakar on the shot which might have given you that feeling. Also the camera didn’t go
through the leaf. I made the lens just hit it to give a cutting point.
39. I would like to know what happened between you and your critics?
Ans: Criticism
40. What happened to Shabari?
Ans: It is ready and would be released by September
41. Why do you bother to reply to critics?
Ans: I want to reply to anybody who bothers me.
42. We are getting a lot of entertainment from your thought process.
Ans: Thanks!
43. Please don’t forget my friend Celeste.
Ans: How can I forget anybody who liked Aag?
44. You should have showed what happened instead of Sarkar just narrating to
Aishwariya.
Ans: I believe that it would have made it very informative instead I believe that to see the
surprise and shock on Ashwariya’s face was more emotionally engaging for me.
45. The glimpse of humanity when Shankar knows that his wife is pregnant is too brief to
know what he must be like
Ans: He is like what he is like.
46. I don’t know how to play cricket but I can have an opinion on how Dravid or
Ganguly should lead the team.
Ans: Yes you are right but Dravid and Ganguly also can have an opinion of your opinion
as at least they know how to play cricket better than you do.
47. Carry on man! Keep reminding us we are alive! Screw what we think.
Ans: Thanks a ton man. This is the greatest piece of advice I have ever received and I
mean it from my heart.
48. One must think what was the state of mind when the director was making the film
Ans: I will elaborate on this vastly later on. It’s a very special and important observation.
49. Background score was a lift from Omen II. It’s evil.
Ans: Yes it is a lift like most of my ideas. There they used the Gregorian chants in a
certain context which makes it sound evil. So this feeling of evilness comes from
association and not because by themselves they are evil.
50. Shooter scene is a lift from Malayam film August One. I felt few more lifting I can’t
place.
Ans: I haven’t seen or heard of that film. If I did and I liked it I would have lifted it. By
the way each and every film of mine are lifts, not necessarily only from Hollywood,
foreign, regional films but also from novels and stories I read, or incidents I heard form
someone. Articles read in newspapers, magazine etc, scenes and situations I have been in
or observed etc.. etc. We are all born with a blank mind and whatever comes in comes
from somewhere.
51. Shankar looks like an emotional fool when he opens his heart to a girl from America
whom he met yesterday?
Ans: May be he has a weakness for worldly beauties.
52. The scene where the villains ask each other in Sarkar Raj “kya Karen?” is brilliant.
Ans: I lifted that scene form the movie Jungle Book where the vultures discuss what to do
sitting on a branch.
53. I hope you can create Uma Thurman in Bollywood
Ans: I don’t like Uma Thurman
54. Celeste is your biggest fan and she is a beautiful Italian damsel.
Ans: I am on my way to the airport.
55. Can you create space for uploading my stories to you?
Ans: I have enough stories in me. You keep yours for yourself.
56. The critics will target you big time.
Ans: Let me confess a dark secret of mine. I am a masochist, I love being ridiculed,
criticized and bitched about. AAAAAHHH!
1. You could have explored the connect between the janata and the Nagres more and
shown their compassion for Shankar’s death?
Ans: If you noticed I have always treated the people who idolize Sarkar very
ambiguously. They are almost ghostly in their demeanour. Case in point is when Sarkar
gets arrested in Sarkar-I. Instead of them shouting slogans and abusing the police, there is
a strange unnatural deathly stillness about them. I copied this from a scene in ..The Final
Conflict.. the 3rd in the series of ..The Omen.. where when Damien (the son of Satan)
addresses a crowd they have a very similar body language. That’s because one would
know what kind of people would worship Satan. Taking a leaf from this I thought given
the unusual nature of a leader like Subhash Nagre it’s safer to keep them at a distance and
leave it to the imagination of the audience.
2. What was running in your mind while making Nishabd.
Ans: Nishabd.
3. People / media criticize you because of their expectations from you.
Ans: Any criticism made by anybody is only for the express purpose of entertaining
themselves and others.
4. Why did you make Madhyanam Hatya? Please don’t say because I wanted to make
it.
Ans: Thanks for making me feel predictable. But that’s the only reason and it’s the same
reason for all my films.
5. I have heard lot about the hardships you went through before making your first film.
Ans: Not true. I always have had a ball in my life ever since I can remember. Difficulties
and hardships are a state of mind. If you truly believe and understand that you are
nothing, but just one more person among the millions of people out there and also
understand that none of them owe you anything, you will come to terms with the fact that
you cannot and should not depend on anybody or anything and the onus is on you to
make it in life. Let’s say you desire to go from your town to another town and en-route it
starts raining. Someone tells you that the road might be flooding ahead. Now you have a
choice to turn back or somehow get a ride in a car or continue driving taking the risk of
may be getting stuck or even dying as long as your objective is to reach the other town.
But one thing you should not do is to blame the rain or get angry with it or pray to it or
plead with it. The rain is the difficulties and the town I wanted to reach is making my first
film and I enjoyed and got enriched by my journey each and every minute of it.
6. In Shiva, was Chinna hitting the pole shot, thought at scripting stage or did it happen
during the shoot?
Ans: Actually I copied that from a scene in Balu Mahendra’s film ..Sadma.. (Moondrum
Pirai in Tamil) starring Kamal Hassan and Sridevi. In the climax Sridevi is in the train
which is moving towards us in the right of the frame and Kamal is running in the left of
the frame towards us desperate to see Sridevi. So the audience’s eyes are caught in
between Kamal and the train just in case Sridevi will come out, so they miss the entry of
pole from the left till they see Kamal suddenly hit it. I reversed this in Shiva. I established
Chinna being chased by the goons. In that particular shot he is running towards the
camera. I deliberately kept space to the left and as Chinna looks back to the left of the
frame behind him to see if the goons are following it draws the attention of the audience
to the same and they miss the poles entry from the right of the frame till he hits it.
Because they are in the emotional state of Chinna the suddenness of it creates an impact
as if they themselves have been hit. As per your question whether I thought of it in the
script or it happened at the shoot you should address this to Mr. Balu Mahendra. As you
know now I copied it from him. Incidentally Sudhakar hitting the rock scene is from
Mansoor Khan’s ..Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak.. which more or less has the same
psychology.
7. I heard you are remaking Aag. Why would you want to remake your own film?
Ans: Who else would do it? A flop one at that? I am basically like the spider in that
Kings story where he learns from it never to give up.
8. Enough of mafia, horror and thrillers! Make some responsible movies that can bring in
change in all of us.
Ans: Ok Sir
9. I did not understand your answer on why you are so fascistic in your decisions. Can
you explain it for this KG student of filmmaking?
Ans: Wait till you grow up.
10. With every movie you have an incredible story to tell. Just that in a few of them the
execution strays.
Ans: Well that’s the story of my life. Most of them I would say!
11. How did you have money to produce a big budget movie like Rangeela after your
failing in Telugu.
Ans; It’s a big misconception people have that to make a film you need money. It is your
story idea and your convincing power which will generate money and anything else
required. The primary and only concern for stars or investors is about making fame and
profit from the people who will come to see it and they make a decision of investing the
capital on the strength of your idea and your potential at least by the standards of their
vision and everything else will follow. I would like to sum it up as this that nothing is
more cheaper in financial terms and more powerful than an idea.
12. Was your first film Shiva inspired from ..Arjun..?
Ans: Yes. It was also taken from Ardh Satya, Kaal Chakra and Mackanna’s Gold. The
climax fight on the terrace between Nagarjuna and Shiva was a total rip-off from
Mackenna’s Gold cliff fight between Gregory Peck and Omar Shariff.
13. How does the main culprit in Sarkar Raj communicate with the rest of the gang?
Ans: Ask Sarkar.
14. Why are you answering so rudely?
Ans: I thought I was being funny.
15. Do you think the interval scene in Sarkar raj would have worked without the “A.C on
karo” line?
Ans: My problem there was I had to give some logic to why the bomb got triggered off
when it did. You see the car for a long time in the background and if I didn’t have that
line it would have given rise to unnecessary doubts.
16. If one movie after one more fails will you still enjoy support?
Ans: I think you still have not got the point. You need to understand the word “fail”.
Without knowing the cost price and sale price you can’t arrive at an understanding of
that. Also in case a Director makes films which loose money for all concerned one after
the other you still have to take into consideration the aspect that the industry needs at
least 120 films per year to cater to the theatres. Considering that no Director can make
more than 2 films a year that too a rarity. You still need 60 Directors to do the job. Then
it boils down to your list of choices. Try and think of Directors whose films you would
like to watch. I doubt you can think of more than 15. Even if you did not like my last 5
films it’s still possible if you come as a Producer that my name might still crop up
somewhere in the top 10 to 12 names. So in other words if the industry were to make
films only with Directors you like, 80% of theatres will close down. The bottom line is
that there will always be work for a worker.
17. Where do you get inspiration to make comedies like Money and Anaganaga Oka
Roju?
Ans: Life! I believe that life is actually a comedy which pretends to be a tragedy.
18. I would like to see your take on inter-culture romance and marriages.
Ans: I don’t believe in all 3 whether inter or not.
19. You see the crockery before you buy it and buy it only if you liked it unlike a movie
where you have to see it to know if it is good. That’s where reviews and trade analyses
matter.
Ans: It’s a given fact that no two people will have the same sensibilities and tastes and
state of minds and intelligence levels which would be the principal parameters which will
influence your appreciation of a film. But on the other hand it goes without saying that if
you think someone else can judge for you and he will have the same taste and sensibility
as you whether that’s your friend or your wife or a critic or your servant, you are
welcome to go ahead and make that choice for yourself. Also like any product like a car
or a cell-phone or anything else you see on an Ad or hear about it or you trust the
company that manufactured it only when you experience it will you truly know whether
you like it or not. So all I am saying is that any creative work can be only an interaction
between the individual viewer and the maker.

RGV Review of Reviews

Posted on June 9, 2008
If the point of a review is to critically analyze someone else’s work and to possibly
inform/educate or psyche the viewer why to or why not to watch a particular film, I think
it’s only fair that the filmmaker too should give his reaction to what the reviewer
commented upon.

The fact that the film releases and a group of critics out there with their only qualification
being that they are employed by some newspaper or a TV channel say whatever they
want to about the film without the Director getting a chance to give his point of view to,
thankfully has come to end with the technology available now that enables one to reach
the concerned audience directly.

A film is a statement of an individual. It’s fair enough that there will be people out there
who agree or disagree or not interested or fascinated depending upon that particular
individual’s sensibility, intelligence, background, etc. But why should one individual try
to influence them just because they are tagged as critics. What is their qualification? Is it
their quality of bitchiness or expertise in rhyming or knowledge of cinema?

Khalid Mohammed has made such horrendous films like Fiza, Tehzeeb, Silsilay etc. If he
or anybody thinks otherwise, the whole industry knows how many actors and investors
are queuing up in front of his house fighting each other to get his films made. Even I
made big flops and precisely because of that I don’t become judgmental on someone
else’s work. But what amazes me is that Khalid without an iota of guilt sits in judgment
on other’s films week after week. I would really like him to look at his own films before
he starts reviewing anyone else’s film.

Madam Deepa Gahlot has been going around with scripts to be made as films for years
and most Producers get turned off in the first 10 minutes when she starts narrating and
that’s the reason they never got made. To my knowledge maybe a film or two would have
been made with her story is the last 15 years or so and both must have been super flops
since no one has ever heard of them (in case anybody remembers or knows please let me
know). She too is a resident expert of how films should be made. Incidentally she gave a
very bad review to SATYA.

Raja something of rediff.com is an aspiring director who literally hounds film Producers
who refuse to touch him. These are just a few examples of the kind of critics we have.
Others I will come to later on. The critics have a tendency to be bitchy to ridicule, to
make sweeping statement to camouflage their ignorance of cinema with profound
sounding lines and the reader for want of an opposing view might get taken in. So as long
as the critic or anyone else has a right to review I think I have a right to review the
reviews. So read on my review of reviews of SARKAR RAJ in my blog.

I exactly know what the reactions of the critics are going to be. They will write as nasty
and as bitchy articles as possible in their capacity and influence whatever they might have
with the management of their concerned outfits. But I will answer them too in my blog.
You readers have a ring-side seat and watch.
Khalid Mohammed’s comments on his SARKAR RAJ review:
1. When someone talks out loud before a portrait of the dead, you know you are in
trouble.
Ans: Why? Incidentally are you aware that the majority likes the last 15 minutes and
most especially because of that scene.
2. A hired assassin wears woolen gloves.
Ans: Why can’t he?
3. Abhishek mistakes inflexibility, a dour gaze and dark business suit for intensity.
Ans; Can you please name 3 intense performances in Hindi cinema in the last 3 years of
who you think was better than Abhishek?
4. Aishwarya for a tough Rebecca Mark sheds too many crocodile tears.
Ans: Who told you that she is playing Rebecca Mark? And in which scene did she shed
crocodile tears?
5. Varma goes to the underworld as always.
Ans: Where is the underworld in the film?
6. Extolling such a Plants benefits is naive and irresponsible.
Ans: How?
7. Victor Banerjee could do with more expensive suits.
Ans: Since when have you become a costume designer?
8. A beardo from Gujarat sings, ..gapuchi gapuchi gam gam...
Ans: Gujaratis don’t sing or what?
9. A prayer ceremony in the memory of Brando is suggested.
Ans: If that is a comment on Amitji’s acting prowess I would dare you to get just one
more person from the millions who loved both the Sarkar’s to second you on this. Not
that you will listen but since you are so free with your advices, let me also advice you not
to fire off guns from on the shoulders of Hindustan Times review column to settle your
personal scores.

Deepa Gahlot’s comments:

1. One would like to see RGV grow out of his boyish preoccupation with power and
violence.
Ans: Since when are power and violence a boy’s domain?
2. Only a juvenile person will admire a man who has no moral compass.
Ans: Nobody asked anybody to admire anyone. The film tells the story of one such man
and in the same film there are others who don’t believe in him.
3. RGV didn’t bother to take an informed stand.
Ans: What is the informed stand?
4. Slimy flunky Hassan Qazi.
Ans: He was meant to be slimy.
5. He just lets Shankar to be right and turns him into a visionary.
Ans: Same answer as to question no.2.
6. A singing Industrialist abruptly shifts the plant to Gujarat as if these multi-billion
projects are a game of monopoly.
Ans: He doesn’t shift but he wants to shift and not with his singing either, and trust me
Madam, all things in life are a game of monopoly. It’s only the scales which differ.
7. Varma badly needs to reinvent himself.
Ans: I would be thankful if you can impart your knowledge of how to do it to both me
and the other readers of this

Gaurav Malini .. indiatimes movies:

1. While adhering to the original he also sets up repetitiveness in the screenplay, shot
execution, the villains.. quartet etc.
Ans: That’s the point. The intention was to follow the tradition of what Sarkar was about.
Rajeev Masand:
1. Excessive talk seldom makes for exciting viewing.
Ans: Which talk was excessive? Can you quote any line or lines which you didn’t think
were necessary?
2. Sarkar Raj doesn’t have a premise as engaging as the first part.
Ans: I would very much like you to write down the premise of the first one and also the
second one for readers to compare.
3. Aishwarya is restrained and stays within character for most part.
Where in other parts did she jump around?

www.telegraphindia.com:
1. Anita is hardly repelled by Shankar..s confession of his brother..s murder.
Ans: If you noticed the scene starts half way of Shankar finishing the story which means
that he has narrated the entire story of Sarkar. So if the audience of Sarkar ..Part 1 were
not repelled why should she be?
2. He reduces the Deputy CM into a caricature.
Ans: If you have never seen a caricaturish politician you must be living on Mars.
3. Varma gives short shift to the language of cinema and the visual plot.
Ans: I would very much like to be educated by you about these two terms.

Subhash K Jha:
1. Sarkar is about the lacerated life of a Thackeray like family with the concept of spatial
harmony acquiring a surrealistic meaninglessness because of the disembodied camera
movements.
Ans: Does it mean that if the camera movement were embodied (whatever that means??!)
it will become meaningful reality?
2. In Sarkar he observed, studied and pondered.
Ans: What did I observe, study and ponder?
3. He drags the uneasy relationship between Subhas Nagre and his kicking, screaming
and wailing son into an arena of heightened scenes no exacerbated emotions.
Ans: I am impressed with your English. I would be more impressed if I understood what
it means.
4. Character’s bark orders and scream grievances.
Ans: Can you explain any scene and situation where they are not supposed to do and also
that what they should have done instead?
5. The camera stops only long enough to capture the 3 protagonists in tight evocative
close-ups rationalizing the presence of Bollywood..s first familys startling transformation
into Varma’s ..thirst.. family.
Ans: I announce a reward if anyone can tell me what the meaning of this is. Yes, I am not
as educated as Mr.Jha is and neither do I have the time to sit with a Thesaurus book or go
online to find words as complex as possible to sound as intelligent as possible.
Mr.Jha it will help you greatly if you yourself in your head think of the meaning of what
you are writing. Just picking up words from the Thesaurus book or on the internet will
not make sense unless how you use them makes sense.
6. The films frames scream for attention.
Ans: Yes, that is the intention. So what’s your problem.
7. The women are either on silent mode or bumped off quickly.
Ans: Should they blabber? Who should have been bumped off instead?
8. Sarkar and its sequels are essentially emotional father son stories.
Ans: Oh really? We didn’t realize that.
10. The emotions when they come in Sarkar Raj converge entirely on Aishwarya’s divine
face as she becomes towards the end the recipient and beacon for all the pent up
resentment, anger, anguish and misery that the Nagre family has encountered.
Ans: I give up and I hate the Thesaurus for giving multiple options to Jha for word usage
and I hate it even more for not teaching him how to use it in a meaningful and
understandable way.
12. In two hours of play time there is not one humorous moment.
Ans: Did the promos indicate that? Why don..t you watch the rerun of the umpteen
comedies which are out there if that..s what you want.
13. What sort of mind would script such abject tragedy for a man who lost his first son in
Sarkar and now his only surviving son.
Ans: That’s the whole point of the film..s theme, my friend.
14. Prabhavalkar is a bizarre representation of Gandhism in these troubled times when
fathers kill daughters and ministers go to prison.
Ans: Whatever that means.
15. Amit Roy..s cinematography and Sunil Nigvekar..s art are a raga pf rusty browns.
Ans: You want it to be blue or what?
Incidentally Mr.Jha has given 2.. Stars to TASHAN and 2 Stars to Sarkar Raj.

Raja Sen .. Rediff.com:

1. A well-lit and overdone follow-up to an over-rated original.
Ans: Over-rated by whom? By the people who loved it?
2. Sickeningly yellow beams of light filter in.
Ans: Just now you said well-lit.
3. Whole film seems like a desperate series of finely composed frames.
Ans: Desperate and finely???
4. Characters don..t talk but deliver dialogues.
Ans: Dialogue is not talking?
5. Literally there..s just a line or two of quirky humour relief.
Ans: You expected to see a comedy?
6. This is a massala bang bang mafia movie.
Ans: Where is the mafia in it?
7. Its attempt is to stay on a constant high.
Ans: Yes. What is wrong with that?
8. Sarkar turns school masterly as he tutors Ash in the art of war?
Ans: Where? What? How?

Posted in www.meetyou.com:
1. Twists in the climax should be accepted just because Sarkar says so.
Ans: Yes that is because he knows better than you.
2. A part from Sarkar I would like to see other characters motivations.
Ans: Remember that a film can have only a limited time and also it..s a story from
Sarkar..s point of view.
3. Central Character is not consistent.
Ans: Where did he stray?
4. Abhishek..s quiet demeanor goes with sudden bursts of anger.
Ans: Without reason where?
5. It..s amazing how deglamorized Aishwarya looks?
Ans: Does that mean good or bad?

Johnson Thomas .. DNA:

1. Consists mainly of sparse frames, diffused lighting and unending close-ups.
Ans: Would like you to understand first what diffused lighting means and also please tell
which close-ups you think were not necessary?
2. All characters have deep seated roots in darkness.
Ans: It is meant to be a dark film.

Aishwarya..s Response to a question asked on My Blog

Posted on June 13, 2008
Question: Shankar looks like an emotional fool when he opens his heart to a girl from
America whom he met yesterday?
Ans: May be he has a weakness for worldly beauties.

Comments from Aishwarya Rai Bachchan on above question:

"When you have two people ..confide.. in each other, it..s such a personal experience, it
underlines a deep connection between the two on various levels and makes this obvious
to the observer. Here the audience. Given the realistic space in which the characters
express themselves which is very much clear in the language of the film (Realistic in
acting, dialogue, camera etc.) we chose CONFIDING IN as hugely intimate an
experience to convey this deep connection, rather than ..fans blowing hair and clothes,
background aalaaps or song, round trolley movements, or rain out of nowhere and
waltzing etc.. to convey this. It..s all in the Eyes of the Characters and in the intense
intimacy of confiding!!! That..s SARKAR RAJ!"

Some more thoughts on criticism.

Posted on June 16, 2008
Since I am not a net savvy guy and only just now entered this world I made a startling
discovery. I have never read reviews beyond 3 to 4 Mumbai based newspapers ever and I
thought that was it. On the net there are literally hundreds of reviews. When I went
through them I was amazed at so many diverse points of views both in liking and
disliking the film. Many of them have been much more intelligently written than the so-
called names attached to popular newspapers. I am not talking about praise or criticism
here; it..s just about their analytical power.

Everyone has a mind and every mind has an opinion and every opinion-maker strongly
believes that he is right and the whole world is wrong, not realizing that probably each of
all those other millions of minds will be thinking the same. I think this is the most
beautiful part of life.. that each of us creates a world of our own in our heads and when
we seriously listen to another person it..s almost like visiting another world. When I read
a nasty review or a glowing review many a times I get struck by how differently they
viewed it from how I intended it. The philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said ..there are no
facts only interpretations... I think this is very true of cinema.

In all my good, bad and ugly films I keep getting stumped when people who meet me
over the years tell me the reasons why they liked something and why they didn..t, as in
more often what I did not intend is what they took from the film. I saw ..Ardhsatya..
seven times. When I happened to meet Govind Nihalani years later and discussed the film
with him, I was shocked to realize that what reasons he made it for was not what I liked it
for. He made it for the father-son relationship and I saw it for Rama Shetty and for my
curiosity of what happened inside a police station. I didn..t have the heart to tell him that I
always used to fast-forward the father-son scenes. But yes, there would be probably many
others who would connect to that part of the film and the proof of that is the existence of
Mr. Govind Nihalini himself. The fact that he thought like that is proof that there will be
people who think like him.

In my growing years I was greatly influenced by Mr. Shyam Benegal..s Ankur, Nishant,
Kalyug etc.. Company is actually a rehash of Kalyug. Instead of politics in the Corporate
world I dealt with politics in the underworld. But I very heavily borrowed from Kalyug.
In my few interactions with him I have realized that he is an exceptionally knowledgeable
and well-read and would understand the subject matter so well. So as a result he has a
tendency to tell the story almost from a top angle whereas me I do it from a low angle. I
like to be intimidated and awed by the characters and situations I am dealing in with a
child-like fascination.

Coming back to the point of opinions now thanks to the net anyone can literally access
anyone..s opinion across the globe. What more can a filmmaker ask for? People ask me
whether I know what the audience wants. Let me tell you an observation I made on a
recent visit to a DVD library near my house on Yaari road. I went to pick up a film, spent
about 20 minutes in the store. While I was doing that various customers were coming in.
9 out of 10 of them were picking up films which for the life of me can..t imagine why
anybody would want to see. So if my disconnect right under my nose on the street where
I live in is so off the mark, on what basis can I even begin to think I know the audience of
the country.

Let..s say there are 1500 titles in the store. If any of us spend one full day I doubt we will
be able to decide more than 200 films what we have seen or what we want to see. Then
what are the other 1300 films doing there? The fact that they have been made and put on
the shelves is proof enough of the existence of the people who would watch them too.

Dhoom 2 is the biggest hit of last year. It reportedly collected 20 Crores in Maharashtra.
On an average price of 100 rupees a ticket, 20 lakh people saw Dhoom 2. For a film like
that I guess half of them would be repeat audience. So my question is if 10 lakh people in
a population of 6 crores of Maharashtra can make the years biggest hit then what are the
rest of 5 crores 90lakh people doing? Do they watch films or no? Is it the same people
that watch Tare Zameen Par and Welcome or are they different? Anyways the point I am
trying to make here is that you can..t generalize audience and as long as you can..t do that
why think of the audience and delude yourself.

David Dhawan uses the term audience, Maniratnam uses, Sanjay Leela Bhansali uses; I
use the term audience, like-wise various directors of various different styles and
sensibilities. But how can those audiences be the same? The truth is that we all directors
do what we as individuals like and tell ourselves that this is what the audience wants.

Film in the truest sense of the word is an expression of ones own personality. A
filmmaker is not a primary artist in the sense of the word. The actor is acting, the writer is
writing, the music director is composing etc.. etc.. but all these primary works are being
processed in the directors mind to create a coherent whole, at least in his mind. So he
might not be able to compose the music but we only get to hear what he likes to hear. We
only get to see characters such as what he would like to show us, likewise all the other
departments.

You go to a clothes store and you might not like many shirts but you will find something
you like. The ones you don..t like are all bought by somebody else or the other. So I think
at best for both, for the manufacturer which is the filmmaker and the retailer which is the
theatre and the consumer which is the ticket buying audience, the one-to-one interaction
and reaction are just about the only truth. Everything else is a matter of commerce.

My reactions to reactions:
1. Leave something for the audience to decipher?
Ans:- You missed the point.
2. Since when did Anita suddenly become family?
Ans: Since I decided.
3. We didn..t know who exactly the central character is among the two Nagres.
Ans: My answer was intended for the reviewer who thought there was one.
4. Beg to differ, sire.
Ans: Okay dokey!
5. Always your Eklavya.
Ans: I am impressed with your observations.
6. You never revealed the benefits of the plant in Sarkar Raj.
Ans: The film is not about the benefits. It..s about the interplay of various characters
having their own motivations and agendas in the making of the plant.
7. Why are you so fascist in your decisions?
Ans: I get a kingly kick.
8. I would say that RGV is not bettering himself.
Ans: That..s because I am already the best. Ha Ha! Just joking! On a serious note may be
I am not. Ha Ha! Joking again!
9. Why did you leave out Tarun Adrarsh? Just because he gave a good review?
Ans: It..s not about good or bad. It..s about where I wish to make my point.
10. I think you like praise. You just have inferiority complex.
Ans: Okay dokey!
11. Love the 3 to 5 minutes single shot scene in Deyyam. Any insights into that!
Ans: I forgot.
12. You are being harsh when you say you copy.
Ans: I copy with joy and pride.
Hits & Flops
Posted on June 20, 2008
Basically I believe that hits and flops are emotional terms, without any comprehensive
meaning. I say this because film in a true sense is a one-to-one experience between the
filmmaker and each individual viewer. A film is made because the filmmaker has a story
which he desires to tell and film business is about carrying the film effectively to as many
viewers as possible and in the process to make money out of it. There is the hardware
which is the hundreds of theatres in existence and hundreds still being built cross the
country and they need software to play.

And then there are thousands making a livelihood .. actors, technicians, producers,
distributors, suppliers, etc, etc, and thats why its called an industry. Now the industry
needs to fill in the theatres to make ends meet and it doesn’t care as much about the
quality of the film as it cares about the turnover. Quality is there only from the
filmmakers’ perspective and the individual viewer’s perspective as it is a very subjective
word. You can’t generalize it because each individual is very specific in his taste,
sensibility, and intelligence, etc.

We keep hearing that 90 % of films are flops and nobody even attempts to understand
what it really means. How can any industry run if it is losing money 90 % of the time? In
reality this is how it happens. Lets say a producer spends 10 Crores in making a movie
which goes in payments to various artistes, technicians, suppliers etc. Then lets say
somebody buys it for 12 Crores. The buyer further retails it to various others lets say for a
sum total of 13 Crores and the film finally collects 15 crore. Now this would be a case of
the film making money for everyone involved. Lets say now the producer spent 16 Crore
but it was bought only for 12 crore because the sale price never depends on the cost price.
It depends on the producers. compulsion to sell to safeguard himself and the buyer’s
perception and vision of its street value with the consumer. In the above case for the
producer it is a flop but for the buyer it is a hit. This is as per the financial part of it.
Coming to the creative part Darr is a super hit for Shahrukh and a super flop for Sunny
Deol as far as their star branding is concerned.

In the year Satya released, a Salman Khan starrer ..Bandhan.. directed by Murli Mohan
rao which released around the same time collected much more than Satya. But is it
because they liked it better than Satya or is it because many more went to see Bandhan
because of Salman’s pull? So the fact that there are more collections necessarily does not
mean people liked it more. It only means that more people saw it. For instance Satya
when it released was taken off from the theatres on the 2nd or 3rd day in parts of UP,
Rajasthan for lack of audience. So it was registered as a super flop in those areas. But a
year later when I went to those areas for some other work everybody recognized me as
the director of Satya. How does that happen? Its simply because when it was released
nobody heard about it and did not go to see. By the time they heard about it, it was taken
off the theatres. So they must have finally seen it on video or cable. Today I doubt that
you can find a single individual who will say that he liked Bandhan more than Satya but
the collections at that time told a very different tale.
Now coming to the individual’s point of view at best I will try to describe it in an
example. Suppose you go to a crockery store to buy a dinner set. You will check out the
various designs available and pick the one you like the best. You will never ask the
salesman if its a hit or flop and neither will you ask a critic to review it. Anyone with a
mind of his own will do the same with a movie. This was best illustrated by Abhishek
Bachchan recently. When he was planning to see a movie I told him that many didn’t like
it and he said he would like to make his own opinion.

Often you will hear about a film’s opening in terms of percentage. Lets say a film opens
in 10 theatres having a capacity of 200 seats each. On the first screening if all shows are
full it will register as 100% opening meaning 2000 people saw it. But if the distributor
opens it in 20 theatres and it registers 50% opening then it is considered below the mark.
But the bottom line is that still 2000 people saw. Fair enough that the additional theatres
will incur extra theatre rentals and print costs but that decision will always be with the
distributor of the concerned circuit on his perception and vision of how many people will
watch it and has nothing to do with the filmmaker but eventually it is the filmmaker’s
branding which will suffer on account of ignorance and of a decision made by someone
else.

To sum it up strictly from a filmmaker’s perspective I would define a hit and flop in
terms of what the film cost to the producer and how much he could recover on the first
immediate sale. Any further trading of it is strictly subject to various individuals
decisions of how and how not to market it which cannot be controlled by the filmmaker.

If a book is written by Ayn Rand and a wholesaler or retailer tries to sell it to a Mills and
Boon reading audience, he is bound to be unsuccessful. And I really don’t think Ayn
Rand could be blamed for the failure and the same thing goes in reversal of trying to sell
a Mills and Boon’s book to an Ayn Rand reader.

From his sensibility a filmmaker will make a film which some love, some hate and some
ridicule on an individual level which is perfectly all right. But to expect the filmmaker
and the actors to be responsible on print deployment decisions to occupancy percentages
to box-office figures etc, is absolutely unfair because they will be truly ignorant and
unaware of that side of films, namely the film business, as it cannot and will not be ever
in the purview of creative people.

MAKING OF ..AAG.
Posted on June 21, 2008
BAHUT LAMBI KAHANI HAI YEH
The idea of wanting to do something with Sholay came approximately around five to six
years ago. One day I got a call from Sasha Sippy saying that his grandfather Mr. G. P.
Sippy wants to meet me. As he is a respected man by all, as well as the producer of
Sholay and a senior in the fraternity, I went all the way to town to meet him.

There Sasha Sippy mentioned that they are interested in making a sequel to Sholay. He
also had a storyline already worked out in his mind. As per his story after the song of
..Mehbooba. Gabber Singh sleeps with Helen, she bears the son of Gabbar Singh who
was to become known as Junior Gabbar.

The big problem with the sequel of Sholay was that some of the cast or some of the
characters have died. One of the main characters Jai died, and in reality Sanjeev Kumar
and Amjad Khan passed away. Therefore one has to make do with the remaining
characters and cast and possibly creating new characters.

Helen’s son wants to take revenge for his father Gabbar Singh who was behind bars
because of Jai and Veeru. Veeru and Basanti keep coming to Ramgad village now and
then to meet Jayaji’s character Radha who is still residing in the village. They are
kidnapped by junior Gabber. Then both Veeru and Basanti’s sons come to the rescue.
This was the basic plot line he had in his mind.

In the above plot he wanted me to create a character for Jackie Chan. I first thought he
meant some local actor named Jackie Chan till I realized that he was talking about the
Honk Kong superstar. Sasha Sippy’s Jackie Chan brainwave was due to the influence
of ..Rush Hour where an American and an Asian actor together gave a big hit. I found the
whole thing so bizarre and I declined it and came out laughing. Little did I realize that the
last laugh will be on me..!

KYA SOCHA? KYA NIKLA?

Anyways cutting again to the flashback, on my way back from Sasha Sippy’s meeting a
thought occurred to me what if the story of Sholay was set in contemporary times in a
city. That felt interesting and I bounced it off to some people around me and all of them
thought that it was a superb idea.

Then just for the heck of it, I started doing changes as simple as instead of ..Kitne admi
the. Gabbar should say ..Kitne... I thought if Sanjeev Kumar doesn’t have hands so how
could he have shaved everyday? So let’s have Thakur with a beard. So I basically went
on this trip of literally having interpretations of shots and dialogues and scenes, and
completely forgot the basic emotional aspect of the film.

So when I was talking about each of the shots and scenes, people around me were
praising and getting affected so much with whatever I said, I started thinking may be over
the years Sholay has completely broken up into audio visual bytes. You still remember
lines from it, made characters from it, made cartoons out of it and so it is kind of
fragmented into parts and you don’t look at it as a whole film experience and that’s how I
think it became at least in my mind.

The people around me also went into that mindset primarily psyched by me. I know it
sounds stupid, it sounds stupid to me too. So I can understand how others feel about it. I
made a few people sit and started talking about for example Amitabh Bachchan’s
character. In Babban’s introduction, I told them he will be drunk with power, hence a
laidback stance. And he will have a characteristic laughter which will sound like a cough.
Everybody around me thought it was a fantastic interpretation.
Now when the film released one particular gentleman told me Gabbar looks like he has
fever as he is coughing in his introduction scene in the film. Now if one looks at it from
that point of view, yes it sounds like he has fever. So everything what I thought so
seriously went seriously wrong.

One day when I was sitting with 4 to 5 people, this commercial poster designer came
with the poster of how Gabbar should look. My first instinct was ..why would any city
dweller wear such clothes.. because my idea still at that point of time was to make it very
realistic but the people around me said it was fantastic.

When I said that it didn’t look real, the designer said ..In the old Sholay Gabbar was a
normal guy and over the years he has become a legend. So Gabbar should not look
realistic, he should look very stylized and very fantasy oriented. They all said he was
perfectly right. Now the point is that they didn’t know what I had in my mind. They were
reacting to a still image but just under the influence of that particular moment of so many
people seemingly so excited about it, I thought that may be I was missing on something.
Maybe he is right in what he meant by legend, so I thought let me just not get stuck to my
original thought and I should be flexible.

Then I took it over and showed it to Mr Bachchan and he also said it was fantastic. But
Mr. Bachchan also didn’t know what I was doing. He also was just reacting to a still
image. He took it for granted, a professional that he is, that I know what I am doing. And
he has developed so much of trust in me as a director post Sarkar, he thought I must be
having some reason behind why I would evocate such a look. The fact that Amitabh
Bachchan also thought it was fantastic and people around also found it fantastic I took it
for granted that may be this was the right one.

Then keeping a reference to that I started changing the look of each of the characters and
situations, what kind of a place he will stay in etc. So I went into the technical aspect of
trying to match up to this design which somebody gave and I got completely carried
away after that.

So everything I was trying to match to that and it obviously can’t because the scenes and
the characters and emotions were at loggerheads. So I started manipulating it or psyching
myself and whoever was there. So now each of the actors, when I spoke to whether Ajay
Devgan or Sushmita Sen or Mohanlal or Mr. Bachchan or Nisha Kothari or Prashant Raj,
all of them were completely convinced primarily because of the analysis I was giving. So
they were also not able to look at the film in totality. Also by that time the hype of the
film was so much that I was making Sholay, it was almost impossible for me to detach
and re-look at it in totality.

To complicate this whole thing, another thing that happened was that initially the lawyers
told me that there is no problem the way you are interpreting it, you don’t need to take
rights. After I started, they said you can’t do this and you have to change this character,
you cannot have these many scenes in a sequence, so I constantly started changing scenes
and characters. It is very dangerous to start changing scenes once you start the film
because you don’t know which and where what is going to be affected in the final cut.

ISKE PEECHE BHI EK KAHANI HAI

I could not get the title Sholay. I said like Ram Gopal Varma’s Sarkar or Sanjay Leela
Bhansali’s Devdas, so let us call it Ram Gopal Varma Ke Sholay. What is the big deal?
Then by the time it came for release, the court gave an order not to use the word Sholay.
So I had no choice but to change, but I wanted a sound which has got a meaning like
sholay. This is how the word Aag came in, so the publicity guys just took the name
Sholay out and put Aag in. So that’s how Ram Gopal Varma ki Sholay became Ram
Gopal Varma ki Aag. So in one sentence everything whatever could go wrong, went
wrong with Aag.

But all these are still minor things in comparison to the most dangerous thing that any
filmmaker can be subjected to. Its to be surrounded with people who will not tell him the
truth or lie to him. Not necessarily by intention to harm him but it could be just to please
him or are scared of him or psyched by him or in cases they take it for granted that the
filmmaker knows what he is doing.

Also it came as a shock to me that most people in the age group of 12 to 30 haven’t seen
Sholay. They have seen parts of it or at least their knowledge of it was a vague memory.
So they couldn’t make head or tail of the film and people who remember the original
Sholay didn’t like the intrusion of these new characters and a new way of telling the
story. So to all of them Aag looked like a ridiculous collage of scenes going nowhere.

To sum it up thinking of ..kitne admi the.. to ..kitne.. as my interpretation.. the

tremendous reaction that I got from various concerned people was the first nail in the
coffin. Second is this publicity designer getting that poster of Babban’s look and me
getting carried away again, third is the court cases and fourth is the way I was changing
everything and having as ridiculous a title as ..Ram Gopal Varma Ki Aag.. completely
prepared the ground for the disaster.

YAAD RAKHOONGA
When people ask me if I got hurt by the brickbats, I was not because I learnt a lot from
the experience both in terms of the making and its aftermath and I truly believe that today
I am a better human being and director because of Aag, but yes I feel terribly guilty
because I made so many people, actors, technicians, investors party to a blunder I
committed. They put in their time, money, hard work and trusted my vision and suffered
for no fault of theirs.
-Ramgopal Varma
P.S: This piece I wrote is just a trailer of how ..Aag.. happened. In future blogs I would
get into many more details of the same from time to time.