‘Anger comes from a sense of righteousness, when you believe that you are right.’

Ram Gopal Varma returns to the marquee with the subject he’s most fascinated with: Mumbai’s underworld.

His new film D Company is based on fugitive gangster Dawood Ibrahim — read more about that here — and though the release has been postponed due to the rising COVID numbers, the film-maker hasn’t stopped in his tracks.

He is probably among the busiest film folk in the business, announcing new films even in the pandemic.

Even as he confirms that he is making the provocatively titled Kidnapping Of Katrina Kaif , he tells Ronjita Kulkarni/ Rediff.com , “I love making all kinds of cinema with the exception of…’

Read on to know how that sentence ends!

The titles of your recent films are very provocative like Kidnapping Of Katrina Kaif … are you really making a film on her?

Yes, that is a work in progress. It hasn’t started yet.

We have an idea of films that we want to make, and we register them. Then the news leaks out to the media.

We will make that film for sure.

It is about four fans of Katrina, who have this lopsided idea of trying to kidnap her.

Katrina is not in the film.

These four small town boys want to travel to Mumbai and kidnap her.

You have been making so many movies lately. But it has been more than a decade since we last saw your magic on screen. Why do you think your films aren’t working? Satya and Shiva isn’t there anymore?

As a film-maker, I make whatever excites me. How people take it is not in my control.

But the cost to make it and the time spent in making it, I always get the required returns.

No film-maker wants to make a film that doesn’t become magic.

But that’s not in my hands.

I always say that hit films are accidents.

Do you have any regrets?

No.

Not even Ram Gopal Varma Ki Aag ?

I have never regretted anything in my life, not only films but also personal decisions.

That’s part of the whole experience.

If I can’t own up to something that didn’t work, I can’t own up to something that worked either.

I can’t say I’m proud of Satya , but regret Aag .

That’s not correct.

Both are my decisions.

What makes you so outspoken on social media?

The whole point of social media is to say what you feel, and you’ve got a tool to reach out to as many people as you can.

It’s about what you are expressing and how you are expressing it — what kind of language you are using, what tone you are using, whether it makes an impact or not.

Are you trying to be provocative?

Definitely!

What is the point of social media if you don’t want to be provocative?

What makes Ram Gopal Varma angry?

Nothing makes me angry.

Anger comes from a sense of righteousness, when you believe that you are right.

If I believe I am right and someone else is wrong, I am being judgmental. Because of that, I don’t get upset with anyone.

What makes you sad?

Nothing.

I am so busy working on something and making something that when the film is over, it goes out of my head.

That’s where my work is concerned.

On a personal level, I don’t have family connections. I don’t have friends.

So I don’t ever feel sad.

Doesn’t it get lonely?

I love being alone.

I have shifted my base to Goa. My office is there now.

The location and the atmosphere are much more versatile for the kind of films I make.

In Bombay, I had reached a saturation point.

But I shoot all over, in Bombay, Hyderabad or wherever the film requires.

How do you look back at your career? What’s the biggest lesson that you have learnt?

I don’t believe that you can learn lessons.

Even if you try to analyse the mistakes you have done, you will make fresh mistakes.

The decisions you have made are from another time period, different circumstances.

I don’t think of yesterday and I don’t want to waste my time thinking of tomorrow.

I live this present moment and I live it with great relish.

Even though Shiva was my debut, I was aware of how films were made because I used to hang around film sets and I befriended film people.

Shiva broke the rules of editing and cinematography.

That’s because I had a specific vision of how I wanted to see something through the camera.

Till today, people say my camera angles are very different.

They may call them weird or intimidating or imposing but it is my personality — for good or bad — that reflects in my work, and it happened right from my first film.

How do you look back at the films you have made?

A film is like a series of decisions taken over a long period of time.

The way I think of my film is very different from the way a person who watches it.

I very rarely watch my films once it is released, but when I do, I start thinking of why I put that dialogue or that shot…I get into a very critical mode.

I can’t enjoy the film for the film’s sake anymore.

I enjoyed some films that did not work at the box office because I know the material that I had.

I look at my films as scenes, shots, dialogues, moments.

Which are your best moments?

Like in Satya , when the music director ( Neeraj Vora ) is talking on the phone, and a van drives past and shoots, and his window gets a hole.

I enjoyed shooting the songs in Rangeela .

Aamir’s character was based on someone I knew from my engineering college, named Ramesh. The way he used to dress and all that.

I always had a fascination for Hollywood musicals like The Sound Of Music and The West Side Story, so it was like an ode to that era.

Technically, it was straight story telling with nothing larger than life.

I love psychological thrillers, and that’s what Kaun was.

Without showing any violence, it was all in the mind. It was constant tension between those people.

I love making all kinds of cinema with the exception of romcoms.

So we will never see Ram Gopal Varma making a romcom?

No way.

‘There is nothing in Headley’s testimony. Where is he saying anything? He says, ‘I don’t know, I don’t know.’ He says ‘I overheard somebody’s speech.’ Is this evidence? This is double hearsay.’

‘Is this evidence? What kind of game are you playing? Is this Kaun Banega Crorepati or evidence?’

‘If this (the Ishrat Jahan encounter) investigation is really carried out further, it points to the heart of the BJP’s political leadership. And therefore they want you to distract you and say terrorist, terrorist.’

D avid Headley, an accused in the 26/11 attacks, in his testimony to a Mumbai court on Thursday, February 11, claimed that Ishrat Jahan was a Lashkar-e-Tayiba terrorist.

Ishrat, who lived in Mumbra near Mumbai, was killed along with three others in 2004 in Ahmedabad by the Gujarat police in an alleged encounter. The Gujarat government, then headed by chief minister Narendra Modi, has all along maintained that she and the others killed with her were terrorists.

Vrinda Grover is the lawyer for Ishrat’s family. Grover, below, left , spoke to Syed Firdaus Ashraf/ Rediff.com about Headley’s testimony.

How do you see David Headley’s testimony in court on Thursday?

There is nothing in the testimony. Where is he saying anything? He says, ‘I don’t know, I don’t know.’ He says ‘I overheard somebody’s speech.’ Is this evidence? This is double hearsay.

He still does not give any name. He is then given multiple choice questions to answer and then he answers. This is not evidence under Indian law.

But the BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) appears thrilled about Headley’s testimony against Ishrat Jahan.

Because if this ( the Ishrat Jahan encounter ) investigation is really carried out further, it points to the heart of the BJP’s political leadership. And therefore they want to distract you and say ‘terrorist, terrorist’.

Ajmal Kasab was a known terrorist, we gave him a trial and we did not shoot him dead. Why does the BJP run scared of this case?

So is Ishrat Jahan innocent or not? After Headley’s testimony, many Indians will believe Ishrat Jahan was a terrorist, isn’t it?

Headley does not know. He says, ‘I don’t know, I overheard some people talking about somebody’, he still doesn’t name her. Please look at the questions put up by the public prosecutor and the answers given by Headley.

The BJP has always been misleading the nation. What can I say?

How is the Ishrat Jahan case related to the 26/11 case?

Ishrat Jahan was killed in June 2004, whereas the 26/11 attacks occurred four years and five months later, on November 26, 2008.

That is a very pertinent question. The reason will be explained if you look at who the public prosecutor was — Ujjwal Nikam who was recently awarded the Padma Shri. It has nothing to do with 26/11.

Why was these questions posed today? It has only to do with politics. It has got nothing to do with India’s national security.

So you think what happened on Thursday was a political drama?

I think the prosecutor should answer this. What he has got on record is still not evidence, and only political mileage can be got out of it.

Why can’t we trust Headley? He has turned an approver in the 26/11 case.

Because Headley is not saying anything and before you ask me all this, why don’t you read all what happened in court today?

I will, but why don’t you explain briefly for our readers what happened in court today?

Headley is saying, ‘I don’t know.’ Then he is asked ( by the public prosecutor ), do you know about a botched-up operation? He then says I heard Zaki-ur Rehman Lakhvi and Muzammil Bhatt ( the 26/11 accused ) talk about something and he says ‘but I don’t know where this happened.’

He then says there was some botched-up operation and some female member was killed, but I cannot recall the place.

Then David Headley is given a multiple choice question by the prosecutor. He says, ‘I will give you three names, was it one of them? Nusrat Begum, Mumtaz or Ishrat Jahan.’ Then Headley says Ishrat Jahan.

Is this evidence? What kind of game are you playing? Is this Kaun Banega Crorepati or evidence?

This is the nature of questioning that has happened in court. Headley was asked do you know that the LeT has a female suicide member, Headley says no.

This is all in the court’s transcript that I am reading. Then he is asked, ‘Do you know the name of the female suicide member of LeT’ and he says, ‘I do not know.’ And then he is given three names. The man is saying, ‘I don’t know’!

What have the courts so far ruled in the Ishrat Jahan encounter case?

The courts are not proceeding in the trial ever since the government changed. I don’t know why that happens, but it does. There are charge-sheets pending against Gujarat police officers and the Intelligence Bureau.

Has the trial in the Ishrat Jahan encounter case come to a halt?

The trial has not started. The accused are 11 Gujarat police officers and four Intelligence Bureau men.

But somewhere, public opinion will be built against Ishrat Jahan after Headley’s testimony, isn’t it?

That is exactly what the BJP wants to do. Where is the evidence? The media has to show the public that this testimony is unreliable.

You are directly accusing the BJP. But we are depending on Headley’s testimony to convict Abu Jundal, the other accused in the 26/11 attacks. If we can trust Headley there, why cannot we trust him in the Ishrat Jahan case?

Correct, I agree. You can trust him if he says so. What is a witness? A witness knows something that has happened, something in front of him or which he has directly heard or which he has done.

What is Headley saying? He is saying I heard two other men talking about something. Is this evidence?

Look at all his evidence in the 26/11 case, he is saying he knows who in the ISI ( Inter Services Intelligence ) was doing what.

That is what I am trying to impress upon you. Please understand you are a journalist, you cannot be swayed by the BJP machinery.

I understand, but since we are depending on Headley’s testimony to convict Abu Jundal, then why…

( interrupts ) Correct, because Headley knew what Jundal has done. Headley does not know anything about ( Ishrat Jahan ).

Were you surprised to hear Headley speaking about Ishrat Jahan?

Not at all. I had been waiting for it. I am surprised it did not come out on the first day.

You knew this would come out?

Of course. The BJP has been saying it for the last four years.

“As artists, I believe we have a duty to preserve what we create,” Amitabh Bachchan said, speaking on Friday at the awards ceremony organized by the International Federation of Film Archives (FIAF) — a conglomerate of film archives from around the world.

“Our work represents a lifetime of passion and devotion to our craft. We need to ensure that we preserve this legacy in memory of all those who came before us and in recognition of the moving image as an art form and a visual document of humankind,” Bachchan said at the event which was livestreamed simultaneously from Mumbai, Brussels and Lausanne.

Different tributes to the Indian actor’s contribution to the preservation of the country’s cinematic heritage were made during ceremony, including through video messages from Hollywood directors Christopher Nolan and Martin Scorsese , both past winners of the FIAF award.

Scorsese, the first recipient of the award in 2001, lauded Amitabh Bachchan’s cinematic career spanning five decades and counting over 200 film appearances: “He’s a celebrated actor who has put considerable weight and reputation behind the cause of film preservation.”

Amitabh Bachchan’s legacy

The legendary Bollywood actor was born in 1942 to renowned Hindi poet Harivansh Rai Bachchan and his Sikh wife, Teji Bachchan.

Bachchan, or “Big B,” as his fans call him, began his acting career in 1969. Following different appearances in Hindi movies, his breakthrough came with the film Zanjeer (The Chain) in 1975, where he played the role of an honest police officer who clashes with the boss of a criminal gang.

That role, along with performances in subsequent movies including Deewar (The Wall, 1975), in which he portrayed a man disillusioned by the idealism of an honest life, resonated with the masses in socialist India and earned him the epithet of “the angry young man.”

‘Naseeb’ (Fate), from 1981, is another film that cemented the reputation of ‘the angry young man’

Through Sholay (Embers) , a 1975 western-style film about two crooks who escape prison, he gained cult status in India.

In the 1990s, Bachchan also became hugely popular in Afghanistan by starring in Khuda Gawah (God is the witness), in the lead role of an Afghan tribal chief.

He also featured in the Hollywood movie The Great Gatsby alongside Leonardo DiCaprio and has been the host of Kaun Banega Crorepati, the Indian edition of Who Wants to be a Millionaire.

He is among the richest actors in the world, with his net worth estimated at $400 million (€337 million).

Beyond India and Afghanistan, he is extremely popular in in the Middle East, especially in the UAE and Egypt.

A taxi driver has decorated his car with photos Bachchan in Afghanistan, where the actor is also popular

South Asia’s endangered film heritage

India has not been very good at preserving its films, according to Shivendra Singh Dungarpur, the founder of the Mumbai-based Film Heritage Foundation, which nominated Bachchan for the FIAF award. “By 1950, India had lost almost 70% of its films, and of the 1,338 silent films made in India, just about 29 survived, many only in fragments,” he said.

The Indian actor was nominated for his advocacy efforts to preserve Indian cinema and related memorabilia, as well the celluloid prints of the films he produced and acted in, the FIAF said in a press release prior to the ceremony.

The International Federation of Film Archives (FIAF), of which India’s Film Heritage Foundation is an affiliate, is a Brussels-based organization.

It was founded in 1938 in Paris by the Cinematheque Francaise, the British Film Institute, the Museum of Modern Art Film Library and the Reichsarchiv in Germany, which was incidentally one of the world’s first film databases, established under Hitler and Nazi propaganda minister Joseph Goebbels , who was also among the initiators of the creation of the federation.