Visualizzazione post con etichetta V INTERVISTE. Mostra tutti i post
Visualizzazione post con etichetta V INTERVISTE. Mostra tutti i post

19 gennaio 2025

Cinema Italian Style

Dal 27 al 29 settembre 2024 si è svolta a Mumbai la rassegna Cinema Italian Style - Celebrating Tornatore and the Masters of Italian Cinema, organizzata dall'Istituto Italiano di Cultura di Mumbai in collaborazione con l'ente indiano Film Heritage Foundation e con l'Istituto Europeo di Design. Giuseppe Tornatore, nella sua prima visita in India, ha partecipato alla manifestazione in qualità di ospite d'onore, presenziando alla proiezione delle sue pellicole al Regal Cinema nonché ad altri eventi, fra cui un seminario con gli studenti di cinema. Area del sito di Film Heritage Foundation dedicata alla rassegna e video ufficiale. Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa dal regista italiano a Anushka Halve, pubblicata da The Hollywood Reporter India il primo ottobre 2024: Italian filmmaker Giuseppe Tornatore talks about how to love cinema.



Giuseppe Tornatore, Mumbai

27 ottobre 2023

Mumbai Film Festival 2023

L'edizione 2023 del Mumbai Film Festival si svolge dal 27 ottobre al 5 novembre. Nel corso della cerimonia d'apertura, Priyanka Chopra consegnerà a Luca Guadagnino il premio Excellence in Cinema (International). Marco Müller presenzierà all'evento. Il 29 ottobre Guadagnino terrà un seminario aperto al pubblico, in compagnia di Anupama Chopra. A seguire, un evento organizzato in suo onore dalla Tiger Baby, la casa di produzione di proprietà di Zoya Akhtar e Reema Kagti. 

RASSEGNA STAMPA/VIDEO (aggiornata al 6 novembre 2023)

Video ufficiale

Bellocchio, Rohrwacher e Sollima portano il nostro cinema in India, Cristiana Allievi, Sette, 23 ottobre 2023. Intervista concessa da Anupama Chopra:
'Quest’anno l’impronta italiana sarà forte. A festeggiare 20 anni di vita del festival nella capitale del cinema di Bollywood saranno tre grandi come Marco Bellocchio, Alice Rohrwacher e Stefano Sollima, e non solo: a far parte dello staff di selezione sono due noti professionisti del nostro cinema [Marco Müller e Paolo Bertolini]. (...) 
«In India tutti i cinefili conoscono il cinema di Antonioni, Rossellini, Fellini. E pensando alla generazione successiva, siamo molto legati a Bellocchio, Luca Guadagnino, Nanni Moretti... Il nostro pubblico non ci avrebbe mai perdonato l’assenza di questi registi, quest’anno soprattutto quella di Marco Bellocchio». (...)
Cosa rappresenta un Oscar per il cinema indiano?
«Gli Oscar sono fantastici, (...) ci piace capire come l’Occidente guarda ai nostri film. Ma abbiamo un pubblico enorme e non abbiamo bisogno di conferme, quello che è importante, con vittorie come quella di RRR, è che apre le porte a un’intera industria: in molti iniziano a dire “non sapevo che i film indiani potessero essere così divertenti...”».'


'A showreel of Guadagnino’s work - I Am LoveCall Me By Your Name, and the upcoming Challengers, starring Zendaya - was played before Chopra Jonas presented him with a trophy, praising his filmography for its “stunning portrayal of deeply human relationships - the nature of love, identity, and the cinema of desire.” Guadagnino noted from the stage that he was visiting India for the very first time - he had spent the afternoon sightseeing around Mumbai with former Venice and Rome film festival head Marco Müller, also on hand for the event - while hinting that he already felt inspired to try to make a film in the country. “So many arresting images already have come to me,” he said, adding, “I like nuance and I like to see what happens when people interact in a space, so hopefully one day I will be able to achieve that here”.'

27 ottobre 2023

Luca Guadagnino to be Celebrated at Mumbai Event, Naman Ramachandran, Variety, 28 ottobre 2023: 
'Festival director Anupama Chopra said: “Luca Guadagnino’s oeuvre is extraordinary. As we felicitate him with Jio MAMI Excellence in Cinema Award this year, we’re delighted to host a celebration along with Tiger Baby in his honor. The gathering is a chance for the South Asian talent to engage with him.” (...) The Tiger Baby team said: “We are so delighted to celebrate Luca Guadagnino. We are huge fans of his work and we aren’t the only ones. There are many filmmakers like us in the industry who will get a now have the opportunity to interact with him and let him know that he will always welcomed at Jio MAMI and in India”.'


- Video Filmmaking Masterclass with Luca Guadagnino, Film Companion, primo novembre 2023.

- Nel sito LaScimmiaPensa, il 6 novembre 2023 Carlo Rinaldi riporta alcune dichiarazioni di Guadagnino raccolte da The Hindu: ''Interrogato sul fatto se il cinema indiano abbia influenzato le sue opere, (...) ha risposto: “Guardo molti grandi film, ma la mia formazione nel cinema indiano è quasi classica. Conosco i grandi capolavori e amo alcuni dei film contemporanei. Ma in termini di influenza, se c’è, è probabile che sia inconscia”. Sceglie La moglie sola [Charulata] (...) di Satyajit Ray (...) come uno dei suoi preferiti e lo definisce così: “È uno dei grandi ritratti della solitudine e delle emozioni femminili. È bellissimo”.'


Marco Müller

17 novembre 2022

Janhvi Kapoor: Casa Vogue India novembre 2022

La copertina del numero di novembre 2022 di Casa Vogue India è dedicata a Janhvi Kapoor. Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa dall'attrice a Sadaf Shaikh e pubblicata ieri nel sito della testata. Janhvi Kapoor’s home in Chennai is a living monument to Sridevi’s memory
'She smiles indulgently at one of the photos featuring her parents cosied up together on a gondola ride in Venice. “Mum went to Italy to shop for furniture for this home, and some Italian guy hit on her. She was travelling with a friend, and was shell-shocked and exclaimed, “How dare he talk to me?” As a joke, her friend told dad [Boney Kapoor], who got so flustered, he left Khushi and me behind in Mumbai to fly to Italy to be with her. They ended up having a little honeymoon there'.

8 maggio 2022

Anurag Kashyap on Gangs of Wasseypur, a decade later

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Anurag Kashyap a Uday Bhatia, pubblicata ieri da Mint. Anurag Kashyap on Gangs of Wasseypur, a decade later

'What was the run-up to Cannes like?
In my head I was not even looking at Cannes. (...) Marco Müller literally forced me to show him Wasseypur. I was surprised they liked it.
Did it screen as one film at Cannes?
It was screened together. I remember I was very nervous when the film was playing. I just sat outside for five hours, drinking. I didn’t think this is the kind of movie that plays at festivals. (...) The reception was crazy. They showed the movies back-to-back, with just a 10-minute break, but everyone stayed. There was total madness. The actors were getting stopped on the street. We were dancing late into the night.
Is the film more personal than it might appear at first? You shot a lot of it in your childhood town.
It is a very personal interpretation of the real story. We could not shoot in Wasseypur. The budget was very controlled. The only way I could maximise everything was to go back to where I grew up. I used all my father’s goodwill he had accumulated over the years to make the film. People opened their houses because of my dad, and because of them feeling I am one from amongst them who’s now making movies. I shot in the house I grew up in. The house where Richa Chadha gives birth is where my brother was born. The imagery is from my childhood: the mountain I used to sit on, the mines, Tashkent Colony. The powerhouses my father worked on are there in the film. The sequence with the first fridge, the way the family sits together, the way the singer adopts male and female voices - those things I grew up with. (...) I was very affected by a six-hour movie called The Best Of Youth (2003), which chronicled the history of Italy. I thought, this is an opportunity to tell the political history of Bihar. We shot a lot of material that we later took out - I got carried away with the politics of the land and the history of the mines. (...) I was averse to making a gangster film. After Satya (1998) and Black Friday (2004), I thought, what is left to be told? But I found these gangsters to be very funny and childish. (...)
It marked a decisive shift for the genre. The gangster film largely moved out of Mumbai after this.
I was very excited about making what I thought would be a commercial hit. I was genuinely not thinking about anything else. I just wanted to tell a very north Indian story, with north Indian humour. We wrote the first film before shooting; the second was written while shooting the first. UTV [Motion Pictures] backed out three days before the shoot. We were there with little money and little time. We couldn’t have gone and just come back. When you are working with a controlled budget, you come back with a finished film, otherwise it will never get made. (...)
Would you have made it with bigger stars if you could?
No. That’s the reason UTV didn’t work out, because they wanted bigger stars. They had talked to some. What happens with a bigger star is you have to have a definite story, a heroic ending - and you can’t have them play an idiot. Everyone comes with a sense of entitlement. It wouldn’t have been the same. I was so fixed on Nawazuddin [Siddiqui] and Huma Qureshi. I didn’t see anyone else but Nawaz. On the first day of shooting, there was a massive problem because he decided to play Faizal like a gangster. I had to stop shooting. Nawaz and I went back to the hotel and had green tea and a long discussion. I said, this man knows he’s a gangster, he doesn’t have to act like one. (...)
Is there anything you would re-do?
Just the climax, with blood pouring out of Ramadhir’s body... oh god. When I watch it, I want to kill myself.
Was it always planned as two films?
At one point it was almost a three-parter. Then [Vikramaditya] Motwane cut it down. (...) He took the soundtrack of The Dark Knight (2008) and cut the montages to that (Motwane remembers editing to the score of the 2009 film Moon).
It’s altogether rare today to find a Hindi film like this, where all the primary characters are Muslim.
Yeah. I don’t think you could make a Wasseypur today. (...) (The censors) did not cut anything in Wasseypur. Only one sequence where Danish knifes a man in the eye, they asked to mute the sound because it was too gruesome. Kudos to (censor board head) Pankaja Thakur, who said, this film is an authentic representation and it will not be cut. (...)
What effect do you think ‘Wasseypur’ has had on Hindi cinema in these 10 years?
I don’t know if it’s a positive or negative effect. There’s so much north Indian gangster stuff now - a lot of it is nowhere close to how it is (in real life). Unfortunately, what people borrowed from Wasseypur is abuses. (...)
If you made ‘Wasseypur’ today, would it be a series?
Definitely. I like the long format, and there was much more story to be told. There are a lot of my movies I would have done as series if OTT had existed then.
A decade later, how do you regard the film?
I know why I made the film but I don’t understand why people go crazy about it. (...) I don’t think any of the actors except Manoj Bajpayee got paid, it was made for such a low cost. It did not stay at the box office, it was pushed out by a Salman Khan movie. (...) People keep expecting me to make the same film. It has derailed me in a way. Everything I do is compared to that. It confuses me, because I do not want to make another gangster movie'.


10 febbraio 2022

Sundance Film Festival 2022

L'edizione 2022 del Sundance Film Festival si è svolta dal 20 al 30 gennaio. In cartellone All that breathes di Shaunak Sen, opera che si è aggiudicata il World Documentary Grand Jury Prize. Il 3 febbraio 2022 Film Companion ha pubblicato una lunga intervista concessa dal regista a Sankhayan Ghosh, nella quale Sen, fra l'altro, dichiara: 'I’m deeply interested in the styles of (...) Gianfranco Rosi a lot in terms of how he shoots human, and Roberto Minervini in terms of how he comes out as a kind of hybrid between nonfiction and controlled spaces'. Shaunak Sen on his Oscar-nominated documentary All that breathes.

Aggiornamenti del 26 marzo 2023: All that breathes, in seguito proiettato fuori concorso a Cannes (clicca qui) e a Roma, è entrato nella cinquina dei titoli candidati all'Oscar senza purtroppo aggiudicarsi l'ambita statuetta.
Vedi anche:
- The triumph and tragedy of the Indian documentary, Rahul Desai, Film Companion, 19 febbraio 2022;

24 novembre 2021

Andrea Guerra, il compositore di musiche per il cinema dei due mondi

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa dal compositore Andrea Guerra a Lisa Bernardini, pubblicata da La Voce di New York il 22 novembre 2021. Andrea Guerra, il compositore di musiche per il cinema dei due mondi:

'Nel 2015/16 ti sei dedicato alla scrittura della musica per il film indiano Fan. (...) Quali sono le principali caratteristiche del cinema firmato da registi stranieri rispetto a quello fatto da registi italiani, secondo te?
C’è una mutazione in corso nel cinema indiano. La trasformazione - da musical con danze al vero e proprio cinema di immagini - sta prendendo piede, così anche il ruolo della musica sta cambiando. È una mutazione dolorosa per noi occidentali; è rimasta ad esempio la struttura a “quadri” tipica per mettere in scena le coreografie e che è una eredità narrativa interiorizzata. Il concetto di bellezza e riuscita dello spettacolo in India prevede che si attraversino tutte le fasi narrative. Dramma, situazioni grottesche, commedia, amore, thriller, situazioni patetiche: ciò proviene dalla loro storia letteraria e religiosa. Un film indiano deve contenere tutto questo. Le canzoni e le danze si prestano perfettamente a questi cambi repentini, anzi: li magnificano; questa mutazione verso un cinema più tradizionale invece deve adattare un racconto più identitario e unico, che può smarrire l’intensità nelle singole emotività.'

15 giugno 2021

Suketu Mehta: Questa terra è la nostra terra

È in vendita nelle librerie italiane Questa terra è la nostra terra. Manifesto di un migrante, di Suketu Mehta, pubblicato da Einaudi. Nella presentazione si legge: 

'Le migrazioni sono una costante della storia umana. E oggi piú che mai, perché le conseguenze del colonialismo, delle guerre, del cambiamento climatico hanno reso la vita impossibile nei loro Paesi d’origine a milioni di persone. Siamo un pianeta in movimento e Suketu Mehta, con la chiarezza e la passione che l’hanno reso celebre, ci racconta perché questa è la cosa migliore che potesse capitarci. (...) Partendo dalla sua esperienza personale - lo scrittore è emigrato ragazzo da Bombay a New York con la sua famiglia -, Mehta fa il giro del mondo per delineare il quadro della situazione in Occidente: dalla frontiera tra Messico e Stati Uniti, alla recinzione che separa il Marocco da Melilla, alle politiche islamofobe di molti governi europei, il sentimento prevalente è la paura. Perché le storie di chi ogni giorno lavora e lotta duramente per conquistare diritti che dovrebbero essere scontati sono offuscate dai discorsi altisonanti pieni di retorica populista. E allora tutti a difendersi, chiudersi, respingere invece di accogliere. È un errore, e Mehta lo racconta in questo vero e proprio manifesto a favore dell’immigrazione: non si può che trarre vantaggio dall’apertura, dall’accoglienza, dallo scambio. Appassionato, intenso, tenero, pieno di storie e personaggi memorabili, Questa terra è la nostra terra è una lucida lettura del presente, e un incoraggiamento a cambiare il futuro'.

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa dallo scrittore a Nandini Nair, pubblicata da Open il 15 agosto 2019. Suketu Mehta: From America with Love and Anger:

'In 1977, a 14-year-old Suketu Mehta moved to the US with his parents and two sisters. In Bombay, he left behind his closest friends. To them he would write letters, not of the aching loneliness or isolation he felt at the all-boys’ Catholic high school in Queens, New York. He did not tell them that a bully had christened him ‘Mouse’, and would trip him in the hallways. He did not mention the time when his family found hate painted across their car. Instead, he would share with his friends pages from comic books, which were available in the US, and were coveted back in India. Speaking on the phone from New York, he says, “The stories immigrants send back home is, ‘Look, we’ve gone to America, this is the dream.’ But it is actually not. It is a very emotionally fraught kind of storytelling.” As an immigrant, even a teenage Mehta knew that the stories one shares with those one has left behind, are stories of success, anecdotes of joy, to prove that the move to the new land has, indeed, been a successful one. The role of stories, those which we tell ourselves, those we recount to our family, and those which politicians tell us, play a pivotal role in Mehta’s most recent book This Land is Our Land. An Immigrant’s Manifesto. (...) He writes, ‘The first thing that a new migrant sends to his family back home isn’t money; it’s a story.’ It could be about the first snowfall, or the first sight of Brooklyn bridge or the first taste of a hotdog.

But if stories bind, they can also sever. And of late, they’ve been used as tools to create discord and divisions. Mehta writes, ‘Stories have power, much more power than cold numbers. That’s why Trump won the election; that’s why Modi and (...) Orbán (...) and the Philippines’ Rodrigo Duterte won power. A populist is, above all, a gifted storyteller, and the recent elections across the world illustrate the power of populism: a false narrative, a horror story about the other, well told.’ It is these false narratives that Mehta redresses in his book. He says, “The debate around migration is a contest of storytelling.” He believes that all “these populists” - whether it is Trump on television, or Bal Thackeray at Shivaji Park - know how to tell a story, how to build a brand, and they do it adeptly, through lies. The only way those false stories can be fought is “by telling a true story better.” And that is the job of journalists and writers. “Why are all these people demonising writers and journalists,” he asks, “it is because they are truth tellers. (...) I felt I had to write this book now. The US 2020 election will be won or lost on the basis of immigration. It is the single most pressing issue for Americans. (...) I felt it almost like a calling. I did this because I felt angry. This book was born out of rage. Because of the staggering global hypocrisy built around migration.” 

This Land is our Land is an excellent example of crystallised rage. This is not the rage of spit and bluster, that leaves the recipient of it annoyed, but unmoved. Instead it is a rage borne from moral clarity and fostered by the truth. It is a rage that has been harnessed into adamant arguments, and which only the wilfully blind and selectively deaf can choose to ignore. Mehta comes to the issue of migration from personal experience, but through the stories of others, and in-depth research on the topic, he proves that we are all migrants. The fear of immigrants is stoked only by politicians to earn votes, make money, and to vilify the ‘other’. “Trump calls migrants robbers or rapists, I call them ordinary heroes,” Mehta says. (...) In this book, Mehta underscores that the great animating force of migration is that most human and innate of desires - to do better for one’s family, to provide for one’s children, and to toil towards a future that is brighter than the present.

An ‘Immigrant's Manifesto’ is an apt title for the book because it is as much an exploration of migration, as it is a proclamation. This Land is Our Land is a public declaration of the belief and aims of all immigrants. It is a manifesto, which in no uncertain terms declares, ‘I claim the right to the United States, for myself and my children and my uncles and cousins, by manifest destiny. This land is your land, this land is our land, it belongs to you and me. It’s our country now. We will not reassure anybody about their racist fears about our deportment; we’re not letting the bastards take it back. It is our America now.’ Mehta stakes a claim to America, as he believes all immigrants can lay ownership to the richer world, because of the past workings of colonialism and the present machinations of capitalism and climate change. Migrants from poorer parts have a right to settle into richer parts, and that right is essentially restitutionary. (...) For Mehta the restitutionary nature of immigration can be simply explained by - we are here, because you were there. Mehta adds, “The British ran India not as civilising endeavour. But to make England rich.”

While the US can choose to obfuscate and declare that they don’t owe anything to India, since they were a colony themselves, they need to be held accountable for the ruin they are unleashing upon the planet today. While the US military alone is a bigger polluter than 140 countries combined, the “US has walked away from the Paris Accord and will do nothing about climate change,” says Mehta. “Indians are suffering, and will continue to suffer, at enormous rates,” he adds, “because the developed countries, built up their economies, with fossil fuels.” Climate change of today has replaced the colonialism of the last century, as we will continue to see the rich countries get richer, and the poor countries get poorer. Mehta believes that the catastrophic effects of climate change, when entire countries get submerged, will unleash the kind of human migration that history has yet to witness. “You ain’t seen nothing yet, when it comes to movement,” he says, and even over a trans-Atlantic phone line I can hear his assertion in all capitals.

It is little surprise that Mehta’s book has been met by a range of reactions. (...) He notes how one reviewer on Amazon said he should be ‘skinned alive’ and must return to his ‘turd-world country,’ while someone else tweeted, ‘This cockroach needs sent back to whatever shit hole he crawled out of.’ But for Mehta what is interesting and meaningful is the appreciation he has received from people like him. He says, “I have been getting all these letters from Indian Americans, saying that my book has really made them stop apologising, for moving. People who came here in the ’60s, they are professionals, they are expected to be really grateful to America for letting them in. My book points out that this country would fall apart without immigration.” Now is not the time for the Indian American community to merely enjoy its economic success, instead they need to contribute to the public sphere, possibly join politics and “claim our place in the country,” he asserts.

According to Mehta, everyone benefits from migration. For the refugees, it might make the difference between life and death. For the recipient country, it will bring young and enterprising migrants who having left home and embarked on an arduous journey will work hard and honestly. The immigrants will send back money to their homes, and the remittances will benefit the countries that they’ve left behind. As Mehta writes, ‘They will make their new countries richer, in all senses of the word. The immigrant armada that is coming to your shores is actually a rescue fleet.’ Mehta might have written This Land is Our Land from anger, but it is ultimately “an angry book with a happy ending”. And the happy ending is that immigration benefits everybody. Mehta adds, “The end of the book is also a renewal of my faith in America.” He loves America because it is one country made up of all other countries'.

29 gennaio 2021

Q & Ray

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa dal regista Q a Sankhayan Ghosh, pubblicata da Film Companion il 23 gennaio 2021. Q & Ray:

'It's scary to talk to Q - you don't know when you might rub him the wrong way. Besides, is there anything he likes? (...) Or is there anyone who likes his films? Even though 'like' is hardly a word you use when you talk about Q, whose works are designed to make you uncomfortable. (...) This power to offend extends beyond Q's cinema, to his views, one of which is his utter dislike for Satyajit Ray. (...) Now in a twist stranger than meta-fiction, Q is playing Ray. In (...) Abhijaan, a film about the life and work of Soumitra Chatterjee, Ray's favourite leading man, (...) we see Q as Ray, letting his future Apu know that he is too tall to be in Aparajito. He is wearing white pajama-punjabi - something Ray would often wear, and Q never - holding a cigarette and striking that pose as a framed photograph of Tagore hangs in the background. Has there been a more seamless merging of icon and iconoclast? (...) Q (...) lives in Goa, where he's (...) part of the alternative scene. (...) 

Your dislike for Ray is well-known. What's really interesting is that now you are playing Ray, in what must be the first time anybody is playing him on screen.
Well, the first person who told me about the resemblance was Rituparno Ghosh. And it was a very lively chat that we'd had after that, (...) about the resemblance and the general perceptions about image, since we were both image makers. He was also very interested in alternative image making, because, obviously, he is a precursor of all this. So while for instance I never liked Rituparno Ghosh's films, I am sure he didn't like mine. He was very clear at the beginning of the meeting that we are not going to talk about that. And then we proceeded to having a very nice chat.

I would've liked to be a fly on the wall during that chat.
It was a really insane chat because we were (...) hanging out in gay bars in Munich and stuff like that. It was a really cool chat. (...) Like everyone else, I grew up with Satyajit Ray and one of the key things I like about him is his calligraphy. I mean, as a designer I feel he did a lot of work that is far beyond his cinema. That's my perspective. My dislike or my problem is with his films. And he would have the same for mine. Because we are coming from totally different spaces in terms of filmmaking, or making visual narrative. (...) There was an occasion 4-5 years back when someone else had asked me to play Ray in a movie. That movie never got made. But I was in character for a month. And I took that quite seriously. These kind of opportunities are very interesting because you're thinking of image and what it could do. Alternative thoughts, or alternatives. They had some look tests and stuff. Few people who were also on that team got in the production team of the new film as well. And this was something that might have prompted them to think of me. (...)

Were you able to put your dislike aside while playing the character?
Yeah yeah, absolutely. Because then I am an actor (...) not Q the director. When I'm rapping I'm not Q the director. (...) Now I'm Satyajit Ray. An actor has a great advantage that they can hop characters like that. Performers have the best job actually and I'm always trying to, like an imposter, get in and do something - with music, with acting, whenever I can. For instance I've done a fairly major character in a Bejoy Nambiar film, (...) as a villain who was beating up Dulquer Salmaan. Because Bejoy knew I could do some shit like that. But no casting director will cast me, obviously, because they don't know me. Everyone assumes I have a certain kind of character based on a public persona, whatever that might be. (Laughs). And that's constantly being manipulated by me. 

What was your approach to playing Ray? Did you pick up mannerisms and body language and style of smoking and things like that?
Totally. Because it was a period piece, a biopic, I had to. I got myself into that mode. Because otherwise we are extreme polar opposites in terms of how we speak, hold ourselves, and it was a different time. So people used to behave different physically. So that was great fun. I love that process, that I can be someone else.

What are the things you picked up from Ray's persona?
One of the major problems was cigarettes, because I don't smoke cigarettes. So I was continuously smoking and smokers are different people. They hold their hands very differently. When you smoke joints you don't do that. So that and the fact that I would be in those costumes for a long time and trying to be comfortable even in the jangia (underwear). (...)

What's the kind of material you looked into?
I didn't have to, thankfully, watch all his films. I had to watch films made on him. And whatever footage I could get. I surrounded myself with those images. That's the kind of route I took, not the emotional part. The thing was to place the sense of humour, because he had a keen sense of humour. (...)

Is this you trying to be more open? Would you have done it 10 years ago?
Yeah yeah. (...) I don't think the point is that. I am anti his films, and that time, and how that time influences us right now as Bengalis. And is limiting us severely. That's what I dislike. (...) Satyajit Ray (...) is a bourgeoise upper class filmmaker. My politics doesn't allow me to appreciate his films. (...)

Do you not find anything to appreciate in his films?
Films take up a long time. You have to give it 2-3 hours of your life. I would rather watch something made by somebody I like'.

8 luglio 2020

Fahadh Faasil: Make your directors fall in love with you

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa dal talentuosissimo Fahadh Faasil ad Anupama Chopra e a Baradwaj Rangan, pubblicata ieri da Film Companion. Make your directors fall in love with you; you'll never run out of content: Fahadh Faasil:

'AC: It has taken us eight months to get you here.
I think it's because I feel incomplete about my films. I don't know when the right time to talk about them is. I usually talk about them only after a year when I have actually realised what I tried to do and what I achieved. When we start shooting I think, 'Is this how it is supposed to be?', 'Is this right?' or 'Is this how it is in the script?'. And after release, I'm thinking 'Did I get it right?' I always go through that cycle in my head for all my films and that's why I'm always absent from promotions.

AC: You just shot See you soon with Mahesh Narayanan. And you mentioned that this is not a feature film and it is kind of an experiment. 
I met Mahesh 10 years ago when I moved to Kochi. When we eventually decided to do Take off, we knew it wasn't the first film we wanted to do together. But I had to be there for him. That is how Take off, and then Malik happened and then we decided to do an even bigger film and then the lockdown happened. Then, he came up with this idea that we can eventually redesign a film on the editing table. He said he needed three actors who need not be together, it could happen over phone and video and things like that. I thought it was crazy but I did a test shoot for a day and told him to capture the portions with the other actors. (...) When he came back with a rough edit, I knew I wanted to be part of the film. I told him to not worry about the theatrical release or money and to just shoot it.

BR: When Irrfan Khan passed away, you wrote a deeply moving note where you said 'I owe my acting career to him. I don't think I would have come this far in my career had I not picked up that DVD and watched that film'. Which DVD was it and what time in your life were you in when you watched that film and how did it help your acting?
It's a film directed by Naseeruddin Shah called Yun Hota Toh Kya Hota. I saw it in 2005 and it was my third year in America. That was the first time I saw Irrfan on screen and he didn't look like an actor to me. I couldn't stop looking at him, even when other actors came on screen. He looked so graceful. I kept looking at his feet to check whether his feet were on the floor, he seemed to be always floating. No one has made that kind of an impression on me. (...)

AC: In the few interviews you have given, you've mentioned that you don't prep for a role. What is the Fahadh Faasil process? (...)
I think my prep is to costantly interact with my writer and director and DOP on the sets. I never finish my films on schedule because, for me, the filming process takes a lot of time. (...) The prep I do is that I keep interacting. I never stop questioning. (...) I might have a one-liner. Most of the time, we have the climax. We know this is how we want to conclude (...) and that changes like five days into the shoot. I think the drive to shoot is to achieve what we initially thought or the fire we had for the initial idea. So, once we capture that, then that's when things start growing. It's difficult but it is very interesting and I love it. (...) I rarely walk in to sets prepared. The moment I have to prepare, I think I will collapse. When I work in Tamil, the biggest problem is that I don't think in Tamil. I go there and read the script and then translate it into my language and then learn the lines. That process is not easy for me. I want to do a Tamil or Hindi film and speak in Malayalam (laughs).

AC: Is it true that when you shot Take off with Parvathy, you asked her how her character's signature would be? How does a detail like that affect what you are doing? (...)
What fascinated me was that after she read the script, she was talking like Sameera, thinking like Sameera, and we were on sets and I was not able to get it right. So, I tried talking to her and at that time she was fiddling with a pen and then I told her to just sign Sameera, and the way she signed was very vulnerable. (...) Something about it looked vulnerable to me and that is where I picked it from. (...) These are actually very small things that nobody really notices. (...)

AC: Is it true that you take two days to get into character and you request your director to reshoot the first two days later?
Yeah. My first two days are exercise. I never get them right. (...) All my films we have actually gone back and shot the first two days. (...)

AC: Is acting stressful for you or do you find joy in it? And, how do you deal with films that don't do well?
I believe I have become a better human being once I started acting and started taking it seriously, because that is when I started thinking about others. When a film goes wrong, what actually goes wrong is your thought process and what you have been thinking for the last two or three years. (...) That is very difficult to accept for me. I actually get into a defensive mode and I try to explain, 'This is what I tried'. (...) Because I was wrong, the film went wrong and I usually accept that. But that phase is very difficult for me. I usually take time to come out of it. I come out of it when I find something else to be excited about.

BR: [Thiagarajan] Kumararaja said that you knew only three Tamil words and he was completely amazed that you did the dubbing for the film with all emotions intact. He spoke about it as if he had almost sighted a UFO. How do you do that, especially in a language you don't know?
I have to give it to Kumar. I was very sceptical about it. I wanted to do a film with Kumar, but I wanted it to be in Malayalam, to be honest. I actually went to Kumar five years ago, even before he started thinking about Super Deluxe, and told him 'Let's do a film in Malayalam', and I got him all the way to Kochi, but it didn't work out and he went back to Chennai. Then, he called me for Super Deluxe. I was very sceptical, because if you do this film with a person who can think and speak in Tamil, you can do wonders with the character, so I kept pushing him to do it with another actor, but he was adamant and kept saying that it was just language. One thing I realised when I was doing the film is that I started speaking in Tamil. If I spend time there, I'll get used to the language, that is what I realised. The thing about Tamil is that it is a very beautiful language and to learn it by rote is very easy. It's like learning a song. (...)

AC: Which role took the most out of you?
All the roles. (...) It is amazing to get people to react to your emotions or smile at you. And I discovered this much later in my life. I was not ready to be an actor or anything, and I am a person who tasted success much too late in my career and once I tasted it, the entire connection became very beautiful. So, for me, it is very important to feel for the character and the story. I need to believe that this is something that could happen or that has happened and I need to feel the connection to that story or plot.

BR: Your father launched you, things didn't work out, you took a break of eight years and came back. What was your frame of mind at that point?
After my first film didn't do well and I decided to go to the US, I had this conversation with my father. My father introduced Mohanlal. So when I spoke to him, he told me that I have an acting rhythm and that if I was actually planning to take up acting, I should do it in a way that it is happening from my stomach and not from my brain, and that was a very interesting advice. It is about how you see things and how you want to see things. So, I want to feel for the character and then emote. (...) I turned 19 during the shoot. To be honest, if that film had worked, I don't think I would have come this far. I would have been a star for 10 years and then I don't know what would have happened. Because the film didn't work, at least I am trying to be an actor, and that makes a huge difference.

AC: Fahadh, I loved the fact that Nazriya [Nazim, moglie di Fahadh] proposed to you on the sets of Bangalore Days. Please tell us that story.
Yeah, there is another side to it, but okay (laughs). It was new for me to see a girl that wasn't excited about meeting Fahadh Faasil. I had to do things to get her attention and I think I fell in love with that. I would walk into sets and the first thing I would want to see is if she was looking at me. So, I took initiative but she asked me out because she knew that I didn't have the guts to ask her. The two good things that I did after coming into cinema is getting married to an actress and starting a production house. (...)

AC: Now that you have gone to Tamil, would you be interested in Hindi, perhaps?
For me, the fact that my Malayalam films are watched in Mumbai, and that I get these messages and beautiful calls from people in the same industry is itself a big thing. (...) None of my films are made into any other language, because they are very rooted. My cinema is here. I would love to interact with Meghna Gulzar and Zoya Akhtar. There are so many brilliant directors that I'd love to work with, and there are so many films that are so good. If you ask me, Piku was the best film to have released in the last decade. I absolutely love it, the performances and the way it is made. (...)

BR: Speaking of Kumararaja, did he actually make you do 200 takes?
That's his average. With me, it has gone to 500-550 shots and what is interesting is I know I would have done around 60-65 takes for him and he would come and say that 'In the 17th take the look was perfect but in the 12th take, I liked the rendering, but as a whole I liked the 35th take'.'

16 giugno 2020

Anurag Kashyap talks about his fight with KJo, meeting with SRK

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Anurag Kashyap a Mayank Shekhar, pubblicata lo scorso 12 giugno da Mid-Day. Il testo include il video dell'intervista integrale. Anurag Kashyap talks about his fight with KJo, meeting with SRK:

'The first time ever that filmmaker Imtiaz Ali saw what a portfolio looked like (...) was that of an actor called Anurag Kashyap. Back then, Ali was in college in Delhi, helping out a local TV serial crew, when Kashyap approached him with his portfolio. "It was 1992. (...) I had just discovered theatre, and was told that you need to get pictures clicked, if you want work. I did, after collecting Rs 3000, which was a big sum then. And I started doing a lot of acting on stage, and I did some films. (...) Also, (...) Imtiaz (...) was my co-star. (...) We don't talk about it. Imtiaz will kill me. (...) The good thing about being a bad actor is you know how to extract great performances," Kashyap tells me later. Which in his case, I'm told, notoriously involves hardly ever saying "action" or "cut" on set. Often, no lines for actors to mug up, let alone extensive rehearsals, before shoot. It's a process only the best can survive. Ali, of course, played the '93 Bombay bomb blast accused Yakub Memon in Kashyap's first release, Black Friday 2007. He played a bigger role in his life, if you consider that Kashyap used to shack up at Ali's place while the latter was doing a post-grad course at Mumbai's Xavier Institute of Communications XIC.

This is also how Kashyap first met his key associate, Vikramaditya Motwane. (...) "I couldn't get into XIC, and was living in Imtiaz's room. Aarti Bajaj, my first wife and permanent editor for both mine and Imtiaz's films, was a year junior. Vikramaditya Motwane was Aarti's classmate. That's how we knew each other. But we really became friends during the shoot of [Deepa Mehta's] Water. Vikram was an assistant, and I was writing dialogues. The shoot got stalled [due to protests], and we spent a lot of time in Benares. Thereafter, I kept meeting him because he was first assistant director AD to Vishal Bhardwaj in his first film called Barf, before Maqbool - that never got made. (...) That was sometime around 2000. Vikram was one of the sound designers on Paanch. And because I was scared of shooting songs, and he had been Sanjay Leela Bhansali's assistant, I asked him to direct the songs. He had two credits in the film - sound designer, and director of songs. It was a first for many people - Bosco-Caesar as choreographer, (...) Aarti Bajaj as editor. Abbas Tyrewala was the lyricist in the film and Vishal Bhardwaj did the music. Both of them, Vikram, I and others, used to hang out together."

"Then, there was Sriram Raghavan (...) and a whole lot of others - part of another gang. Even Tigmanshu Dhulia, Irrfan and others were all close to my brother [Abhinav]. That was the third gang. I was the centre-point, everywhere. And then I had another friends' circle, with (...) Zoya Akhtar and the lot. When I wrote a script, I had way too many boards to bounce off. And that's what we did! I was a huge fan of Sriram Raghavan's Raman Raghav [a docu-drama on a serial killer that Kashyap remade in 2016]. (...) Then a strange thing happened, with a script I wrote officially, for the first time (...) - with Kamal Swaroop Om Dar-B-Dar as director. For that film, I found an actor I was a fan of from Delhi stage, called Manoj Bajpayee. I put the film together. But it never happened. Nobody was showing faith in Manoj. He was going through a hard time and doing Ram Gopal Varma's Daud, which is when Ramuji said he wanted to make a film [Satya] with Manoj. And asked if he knew of a writer for it. Without having seen any of my written works, Manoj took me to Ram Gopal Varma." (...)

But that he's also a liberal raconteur: "Oh, one of my favourite stories is about Mahesh Bhatt. He happened to me, right before Ram Gopal Varma. He got me to write films. And Mukesh Bhatt [his brother, and producer] was very miserly with money. I was struggling for rent. Pooja Bhatt was the nicest and kindest; I would tell her to talk to her dad. Then I just walked up to [Mahesh] Bhatt saab once and said that I'd rather be a carpenter than work in his office. With his brother [Mukesh] around, he didn't say a word. When I was leaving, he came down, said, - Don't ever change. - And he put Rs 10,000 in my hand. That was big money in 1994-1995." Years later, at a post-screening event in a film festival abroad, Kashyap was narrating the first part of the story above. He heard a voice from the audience. (...) "Bhatt saab was sitting in the crowd. I got so emotional. I have had funny incidents like these." (...) "There was a time when Mukul Anand was making Trimurti 1995. I wanted to work with him as an assistant. I would call his house land-line. Every call was a rupee gone. And he was always busy. Third time I said, - (...) [This is producer Subhash Ghai, tell him not to show up on the sets from tomorrow], - and hung up. Now when somebody trolls me on social media, I just remember my time!" 

There is then the moment he randomly landed up at Shah Rukh Khan's bungalow Mannat he mistakenly calls it Jannat on Bandstand: "I was hungry and I walked into his house, using our college connection [both went to Hansraj in Delhi]. I remember him feeding me. He only knew how to make omelette." And then, there are the more famous spats: (...) "Karan Johar gave an interview calling me a psychopath. Till then we had not met. I called him a fat kid, who still thinks he is in school. (...) I also said something about Anil Kapoor in the interview that became a headline. But people always knew I was childlike." (...) He's gone to the extent of rescuing actor Rajpal Yadav from Andheri railway station, since he was returning to his hometown, having given up. That's when, Kashyap says, he first met the nondescript Nawazuddin Siddiqui, standing next to Yadav. (...) Scorsese, (...) after having watched GoW, invited him to be on the jury of the Marrakech film festival. Before Scorsese walked in, Kashyap was smoking outside with the Oscar winning Italian director Paolo Sorrentino, without knowing it was Sorrentino! Both were nervously puffing away. (...) Or this other time, Kashyap was in the same room as Francis Ford Coppola, "Sophia Coppola, his daughter, was with him. He is old. I kept staring at him for so long that he made me sit on his lap and said, now talk to me!".'

16 maggio 2020

Zoya Akhtar: Everybody in my family has a National Award except me

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Zoya Akhtar a Mayank Shekhar, pubblicata ieri da Mid-Day. Zoya Akhtar: Everybody in my family has a National Award except me:

'Little is known about her life up until her rather belated directorial debut at 36-plus, with Luck By Chance (2009), although she'd been working as a film professional for around 18 years before that. Very little worth knowing, Zoya casually reckons, jogging back to age 19, when she started interning for a copy-writer's job at a creative agency - simultaneously reading sociology at Bombay's St. Xavier's College. "I remember watching Salaam Bombay! (1988), being madly in love, and going: I want to direct. And I don't know what I'm going to make. Because Hindi films were not my scene then. Out of the blue, when I was about 21, I got a job with Mira Nair on [the sets of] Kamasutra (1996)." You can find her in a cameo appearance as one of the Kamasutra girls, "an extra part," as she puts it, because ADs are frequently expected to fill-in or add to the human backdrop on shoots. Of all her past associates, Mira as director appears to have left a strong impression on Zoya: "Mira is just special, you can see that. When she is talking to you, you are the only person in the world. She makes people feel special. She knows everybody on a crew by name. I love that about her. And I love her aesthetics."

Post Kamasutra, Zoya recalls, "I started working mainly on American projects that came to India. Went to NYU [New York University] for a diploma [in filmmaking]. Stayed back in New York. Got a job, thanks to Ismail Merchant, in a small, cool, indie film called Side Streets, directed by Tony Gerber." She returned to Bombay as a freelance, professional AD, of which there were only four in all of Bollywood, who did a lot of foreign films and Indian work: "Reema [Kagti], [director] Apoorva Lakhia, and me. Then Kiran Rao came in." Zoya's credits during this phase include Mahesh Mathai's Bhopal Express (1999) and Dev Benegal's Split Wide Open (1999). She chose to specialise in the casting department, because there, "you get to direct actors, with a script," and that's what she ever wanted to learn/master anyway. She was the casting director on Farhan [Akhtar]'s first film Dil Chahta Hai (DCH, 2001), and thereafter Armaan (2003), her mother Honey's directorial debut. Okay did she personally pick/cast that balloon-lover boyfriend in Dil Chahta Hai? "Oh that's actually Hassan, a childhood friend of Farhan. But we handpicked everyone, so to speak. There are very interesting cameos. Kiran Rao is one of the girlfriends in Goa. She'd come to do all the extras' casting for the film's Goa leg!"

Between freelance AD-ing, Zoya had been ideating all along for her debut feature. It's mildly ironic that while so cued into casting, she was unable to kick off her first film for want of a lead actor, for almost a decade that she'd been ready to direct. And the one she eventually cast for the lead role, in her directorial debut (Luck By Chance, 2009) was her brother, Farhan, who'd been around all along! "You cannot cast someone, unless they are ready. And feel that they want to do this. It took Farhan a while to get there - that he wants to act, and that he is a really good actor." While practically the entire Bollywood A-list came down for cameos in Luck By Chance, including both Shah Rukh Khan and Aamir Khan (guessing, for the first time in the same film, although not in the same frame), Farhan was the seventh star to read/consider/hear the script. Hrithik Roshan played the second lead. "Luck By Chance is a book that I am going to write one day, about how that film got made," Zoya sighs. Can't wait. It'd be quite a telling tinsel-town tale, given that nobody in Bombay does it. And Zoya is perfectly positioned to - not just as the quintessential insider, but as someone who can surprise you with her adorably random zaniness, on occasion. Recently at an interview she called herself the love-child of directors Karan Johar and Anurag Kashyap. What does that mean? "That I am halfway between Indie and commercial, you know." (...)

And while her films primarily deal with real, human, often raw emotions, there is this carefree cattiness that inevitably slips in too. It's only fair that we dig into a couple of stories behind some stellar, surprising choices she's made so far. For example, why/how/when did a ladies' bag, called Bagwati, bag a proper part in the breezy masterpiece Zindagi Na Milegi Dobara? "That comes from Reema and a close friend of ours, Shai Heredia, who's an academic, award-winning documentary filmmaker, and hysterically funny. She and Reema were on a road trip, and they kept talking to Shai's bag. Think they were just tripping! We just put it into Zindagi." It was Zoya's second film, with Farhan and Hrithik back on her frame, but in a much wider canvas, although the script started out in her head as a small, cathartic, road movie, about three boys in a car - for all the road trips she's taken in her life. Over time, of course, the script "developed a life of its own".

The film she co-wrote after was Reema's Talaash. It's a supernatural thriller that, by the way, was based on a true story, that happened to her! "You have to stop. I am going to be the crazy lady that goes on interviews and says all this shit. I know it sounds really crazy, and I don't want to be propagating this nonsense. But, I had a strange experience on Haji Ali, while a bunch of us were driving back from a nightclub. We thought we had hit a naked woman in the middle of the road. Everybody was freaking out. This is something I told Reema about, and where Talaash came from. I am not going to repeat this story, ever again!"

Okay how about the dog called Pluto, who's the narrator/POV of Dil Dhadakne Do; where does he come from? "From my super-smart, intelligent beagle Zen, who passed away last year. You can find him on my Insta page, Zen Akhtar. Zen would look at us as though he is watching National Geographic - that we are the animals, and he is like, 'What are they doing?' That's Pluto. Even the way the film is shot [as a result] is observational - there are no close ups, only 'wides'." After a preview screening for Aamir Khan and his wife, Kiran Rao, both of whom Zoya makes it a point to get a feedback from before her film's final cut, she asked Aamir if he'd like to voice the dog: "He was, like, after these many years, you have offered me the voice of a dog? I said, please do it. He was, like, yeah, totally! And he just came [on-board], like a sweetheart. It was great!"
Is there anything she'd like to change about Dil Dhadakne Do? "I think the title. Would have been nicer [if it had] a little more gravitas." How about the climax (that was rather OTT, compared to the rest of the film's tone)? "I actually liked the climax (of the mom, dad, sister jumping off the ship, with lifeboats to chase down brother/Ranveer Singh's character). The whole metaphor of the trip is that you can't get rid of anyone. Family is what you are stuck with. You can't just walk out the door. Eventually, when shit hits the fan, they are the only ones who will pull you up too. So when everyone tells me, I don't like the climax; I am like, cool, so what would you do? Till now nobody has given me a better ending. If there is one, I'd be like, damn!"

What did upset Zoya even before the release of Dil Dhadakne Do though was people taking the piss out of the picture for it being centred on lives of the super-privileged - intended also as a barb against movies that Zoya had directed thus far. "Firstly I don't think it was criticism. There is nothing for me to take home from it. It is like somebody seeing a trailer of Gully Boy and saying, oh, this is about poor people. And I made Made in Heaven, along with Gully Boy. And that is about very rich people! I was being interviewed by this woman wearing diamonds and solitaires, and she was telling me, it [the film] is about rich people. I was, like: Would it bother you, if your husband has an affair? Why? But you have solitaires on, it shouldn't bother you! What does it even mean?"
Before Gully Boy - set in a Mumbai slum and the city's underground rap scene - released, it got roundly compared to the American ghetto, hip-hop biopic, 8 Miles. Did that bother her? "The two people I spoke to [to base the film on their lives] are living here. You can talk to them. So, no, I didn't get into it. It bothered me, when they compared Zindagi to Hangover [producer Ritesh Sidhwani had to respond to Warner Bros]. Now, I think that's what they do."

Inspirations from dogs and spirits apart, what makes Zoya's filmmaking process special - given what we've managed to gauge so far - is she is capable of working backwards. Where she must know end, before she locks her script. Which isn't true for many filmmakers, who often arrive at the conclusion, as they navigate the story or characters' journeys: "I have to set a goal. That goal may change. But I when I set off, I have to know where I am taking the film. Otherwise I meander. I need a direction I am shooting at, you know!" The other thing is her complete clarity on the point she's trying to make - so much so that she can distill each film into a single line, which is different from a log-line that describes a plot: "Of course Gully Boy is about a Muslim kid from Dharavi, who expresses himself through rap. It is a rags-to-riches, coming-of-age story. You can pin it down in any log line. But at the core of it, the film is about class. Luck By Chance is really about self-esteem. Zindagi is about living, seizing the day. Dil Dhadakne Do is a film about projection - who we actually are, and what we tend to project. It is what lenses the film, creates the base".'

16 aprile 2020

Amitav Ghosh: "E adesso in India sprechiamo come qui da voi"

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Amitav Ghosh a Edoardo Vigna, pubblicata dal Corriere della Sera il 30 marzo 2020. Amitav Ghosh: «E adesso in India sprechiamo come qui da voi»:

'Ora l’acqua alta non c’è più, e nessuno sembra interessato al problema per trovare una soluzione strutturale. Passata l’ansia, ci si gira dall’altra parte... Forse è umano, ed è un po’ ciò che succede con la crisi climatica. (...) Venezia, in particolare, dovrà accettare di convivere con l’acqua alta e le sue drammatiche conseguenze a lungo termine?
«Non è vero che nessuno parla dell’acqua alta, qui a Venezia. L’altra sera ero a cena in una trattoria, nel sestriere del Castello, e il proprietario mi ha portato a vedere fin dove è arrivata l’acqua a novembre. Per lui, e per tanti altri, è stata una catastrofe, anche dal punto di vista economico. Ma Venezia purtroppo, rappresenta in modo più ampio ciò che chiamo il “derangement”, lo sconvolgimento, il disordine del nostro tempo».

Cosa intende?
«Tutti sappiamo che questa città è una delle vittime potenziali del riscaldamento globale, se non riusciremo a fermarlo. Allo stesso tempo Venezia attira e vuole sempre più turisti, che rappresentano business e lavoro, e permette a gigantesche navi da crociera di arrivare fin nel cuore della città - cosa che considero terrificante per i danni che provoca alla laguna e all’intero ecosistema. Tutto ciò per me va al di là dell’immaginazione. Gli ecosistemi sono fragilissimi, e noi ormai lo sappiamo bene, eppure sembriamo non tenerne conto. Venezia cattura il “derangement” del nostro tempo anche in questo senso. Stavo poi passeggiando vicino alla basilica di Santa Maria della Salute, che è di fatto il più grande memoriale di una catastrofe che esista al mondo...».

Un ex voto alla Madonna eretto nel Seicento dai veneziani per la liberazione dalla peste che aveva decimato la popolazione nel 1630-31...
«Esatto. E pensavo: nessuno mai ha ipotizzato un ex voto contro l’acqua alta. Non siamo neppure capaci di realizzare quale tipo di disastro sta avvenendo al pianeta e a tutti noi. E una delle ragioni per cui accade è che nessuno può attribuirlo a un’entità superiore esterna a noi, a una astratta “Natura”. Siamo noi che lo stiamo causando, noi che lo stiamo facendo a noi stessi».

Lei ha scritto che gli alberi, come altri esseri non umani, parlano. Se la Terra potesse farlo, cosa ci direbbe? (...)
«La Terra ci sta già parlando, e in modo chiaro. Non è solo l’acqua alta, penso agli uragani, ai tornado... Voi dovreste saperlo più di altri. L’Italia è uno dei Paesi più colpiti al mondo dalla crisi climatica. Il vostro ecosistema è estremamente fragile. Guardi la Sicilia: uno degli effetti dei ribaltamenti climatici è che il deserto del Sahara si sta espandendo verso Nord, e forme di siccità colpiscono la vostra isola. L’acqua manca ormai anche nelle città, in più momenti durante la settimana. Ma nessuno ne parla: forse la Sicilia e i suoi problemi sono finiti ai margini del discorso pubblico italiano ed europeo. (...) È avvenuto di nuovo nel 2018 e nel 2019. Penso ai recenti incendi in Australia. In Italia è accaduto lo stesso: sono stato da poco in Puglia, a Lecce ho visto la distruzione degli ulivi per la Xylella. So che non è effetto diretto del climate change, ma in realtà c’è un collegamento. (...) Con l’Illuminismo abbiamo cominciato a pensare alle risorse del pianeta come a cose che usiamo e controlliamo. Oggi è chiaro che non controlliamo noi i combustibili fossili, sono loro che ci controllano: così profondamente connessi con la nostra vita ci manipolano. Nella storia, nella mitologia greca come in quella indiana, l’umanità ha sempre temuto il “drago sotto terra”: ecco cosa sono gli idrocarburi. E quando si sveglia il drago... Da questo deriva il caos in cui ci troviamo».

Lei ha distinto un approccio alle catastrofi climatiche “occidentale” e uno “orientale”.
«Sì, all’inizio del secolo scorso, c’era una differenza sostanziale nell’uso delle risorse naturali, nella gestione dell’economia, nel modo di affrontare i cataclismi. Un esempio per tutti: Gandhi si opponeva strenuamente all’economia industriale. Ma oggi quella distinzione non c’è più. Chi va in India, in Cina o in Estremo Oriente vede l’assoluta convergenza verso il consumismo e lo sfruttamento delle risorse come sono concepiti in Occidente. Il vostro pensiero è dominante in ogni senso. Questo è ciò che più di ogni cosa mi disturba».

In concreto cosa significa?
«Quando ero un bambino, a Calcutta, mi è stato insegnato a non sprecare mai niente. Non potevo uscire da una stanza senza spegnere la luce o il ventilatore. Mai. Sarei stato punito! Era una cosa davvero importante. Ora non c’è niente più di questo. È tutto finito. Gli indiani sprecano proprio come fate voi in Occidente. Elettricità, acqua... tutto. Mi ricordo la prima volta che sono andato in America, 33 anni fa, vedevo tutte quelle macchine per strada, ognuna con una sola persona dentro. Allora, in India era impensabile: in ogni auto c’erano almeno tre, quattro persone! (...) Ingenuamente pensavo: l’India non sarà mai così! Ma se va in qualsiasi città indiana vedrà che sono diventate come quelle americane».

Cosa è accaduto?
«Di base, con la caduta del Muro di Berlino, c’è stato il trionfo del neoliberalismo. E l’ideologia ha pervaso e convertito tutto e tutti. Ha conquistato le menti. Mi correggo: in India come in Cina c’è una parte della popolazione, contadini e fattori, coloro che hanno a che fare con la terra, che ancora hanno un approccio diverso al mondo, e questo vale anche in Italia e altrove. Sono le élites globali che la pensano diversamente. “Il popolo di Davos”. (...) Sono stato invitato a Davos due volte, una quindicina d’anni fa. Ci sono andato soprattutto per curiosità. Mi sono reso conto che le élites del mondo vanno davvero lì per dare un’occhiata nel futuro, cercare di capire i problemi, e stringere mani, perpetuando il proprio ruolo di élite. Ma lì ho capito che davvero non comprendono la vera portata di questo problema. Lo dissi, la seconda volta che ci andai. Non mi invitarono più... (...) La gente che va lì, i supermanager, i tycoon, i primi ministri, hanno una e una sola religione: la “crescita. Non conoscono nulla all’infuori di questa».

E non esiste nessuna possibilità di mettere insieme “crescita” e “ambiente”? (...)
«Ci sono stati molti tentativi di costruire una “crescita green”, ma nessuno mi sembra convincente. L’idea della “decrescita” è più facile da rendere compatibile, ma non vedo come i politici possano prenderla in considerazione. (...) In India come in Italia, un politico che si presentasse a dire: abbiamo avuto tanto, ora accontentiamoci per il bene del Pianeta, verrebbe bocciato». (...)

In fondo, se è già difficile portare i temi ambientali anche solo al cuore della letteratura...
«Molti scrittori l’hanno fatto. Il vero problema è che i loro lavori non vengono considerati come letteratura. Vengono bollati come fantascienza, come un genere a parte, mai come narrativa seria».

Lei perché ha deciso di farlo?
«Non avevo un piano... Il libro è partito come di solito fanno i libri. Ho attinto a tante cose che non avevo mai considerato, la storia è arrivata».'

Kay Kay Menon: I come from the believable school of performances

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Kay Kay Menon a Priyanka Roy, pubblicata da The Telegraph il 31 marzo 2020. I come from the believable school of performances: Kay Kay Menon:

'Special OPS is unanimously being praised for its plot and performances, even being hailed as a landmark in the Indian web space. Are you hearing similar things?
I can’t really recall anything specific, simply because the response has been so huge and so overwhelming. To pinpoint one is very, very difficult (laughs). The quantity of accolades has been too much. Overall, I am very humbled by the response. We knew that we had made a good series, but this kind of a response was unexpected. It’s a very pleasant feeling.

Himmat Singh is a great character to play in the way he’s written, flawed yet upright and invested with so many layers. Was there a trigger point that made you certain that you wanted to do the part?
I think the trigger point was Neeraj (Pandey) coming up with a series like this. We have known each other for a long time now... 16 years. So when Neeraj told me that he was doing Special OPS and wanted me to play the lead, I had no qualms in saying ‘yes’. It’s more of a trust thing, you know. After that, of course, I read the script entirely. I began from the first episode and I simply couldn’t put down the script till I finished it. I realised that this was tremendous writing, a tremendous screenplay, and all we needed to do was to execute it well.

You have played shades of Himmat Singh in various other characters in your films. What was the biggest challenge of playing a man whose gut and intentions are scrutinised and doubted at every step?
I don’t look at parts as challenges... I categorise them as interesting and uninteresting. The thing is that I play people, I don’t play roles. No two individuals are the same, but two roles can end up being the same. So, say I play Mahesh the cop and Suresh the cop, I will play Mahesh and Suresh as people and not as cops. In Special OPS, I played Himmat Singh, who is, as a person, different from Rakesh Maria (the real-life Mumbai top cop that Kay Kay played in Anurag Kashyap’s Black Friday). The institutional values are perhaps the same, but the individuals are different. I look at roles as being very limited and, of course, limiting. There are perhaps only about 25,000 roles... lawyer, cop, doctor, terrorist... whereas the kinds of people out there are limitless. For me, Himmat Singh was a person who not only had to maintain a balance between his home and work, but his real character comes through in how he handles himself and his professional life during the inquiry. He had to put across his point without disrespecting his seniors who are conducting the inquiry and that, for me, was interesting because one stands the danger of becoming slightly heroic in nature and then losing it all. That balance was tenuous but interesting for me as an actor.

When you play a person, do your core values have to resonate with that of the man you play or as an actor, are you open to being every kind of man on screen, even if their values are different from yours?
No, I have to strongly believe in every character I play, even if he is an evil person. You cannot carry your personal ego or values into a character. I have to surrender my ego completely and be loyal to who I am playing. Only when you do that, then the person you play becomes believable for the audience... otherwise you end up faking it. If you think you are playing a villain, then you start playing a villain. I know that’s the trend, but that’s not how it’s meant to be done (laughs). That’s why I tell people that when I am playing a villain, then between ‘Action’ and ‘Cut’ don’t mess with me... because I don’t know how I will react! (Laughs) Kay Kay Menon doesn’t exist at that time, it’s only that man I am playing. Basically, I come from the believable school of performances. If you have to make things believable on screen, then you have to be that person... there is no alternative or shorthand to that. That also allows the actor in me to improvise because I am completely driven by the person I am playing. It’s not Kay Kay Menon being smart. (...)

You’ve been in the business for 25 years now. Would you say this is the most exciting time in the Indian creative space, given the wide variety of roles being written and the presence of different platforms to tell one’s story?
I think so. I come from the time where there were no such opportunities... there was no Internet and hence no digital platforms (smiles). I see the young actors of today being given so many opportunities, which we didn’t have when we started out. It feels good to see that. Now, if you are on social media, you can become a star... if you have some talent, that is (laughs). I am glad that opportunities have opened up for this generation, be it artistes, writers, singers, everybody. It’s a good time because it also ensures that the standards go up because there is competition. At the same time, there is also the danger of diluting the quality. It happened with Indian television. It started off as a wonderful medium, we spoilt it... completely! We have to be careful not to do that with the web.

Is there a difference in how you pick your roles now as opposed to how it was a few years ago?
The medium doesn’t bother me... as long as the camera is there, I am fine. Apart from that, it’s difficult to pinpoint how I choose what I choose. It’s about the moment, you know... you read something, you like it, you fall in love with it and you want to do it. It’s simply the feeling of, ‘Okay, this needs to be done’. There is no clause or rule that I follow, it’s an overall subjective feeling. It’s a lot like love, for example. It’s something that you get attracted to at that point of time and say, ‘Let’s give it a try’. And many a time, it fails also... it’s not a foolproof method. I have failed more often than not, but you need to go in with that intent and positivity. (...)

Your Twitter timeline is dominated by fans saying how much they want to see more of you on screen. Has less always been more for you?
That’s not been a conscious decision. People tend to think that I have a plethora of offers at every point of time and that I am being choosy. I am choosy, of course, but that ‘plethora’ doesn’t exist (laughs). Of what’s offered to me, I skim through and do what appeals to me. The offers are definitely not as much as people assume them to be. Sometimes, the industry works in strange ways, I really can’t comment on that. But within the limits of what’s offered to me, I sort of pick enough stuff'.

Manoj Bajpayee: Professional life, even now, doesn't bother me much

Vi segnalo l'intervista concessa da Manoj Bajpayee a Mayank Shekhar, pubblicata da Mid-Day il 7 marzo 2020. Il testo include il video dell'intervista integrale. Manoj Bajpayee: Professional life, even now, doesn't bother me much:

'In a way, the journey of Bombay cinema's transition into millennial cool, late-90s/early-2000s onwards - what with even 'indies' beginning to merge with Bollywood mainstream - starts from a street in Delhi. It's officially named Sudhir Bose Marg, where colleges of Delhi University's (DU) North Campus are lined up one after another, on either side. If you survey this street late '80s onwards, you'd find Manoj Bajpayee enrolled in Ramjas College, fresh off a train from Bihar. Bajpayee says he also used to perform in plays at the next-door Hindu College. (...) When not representing university in cricket, Vishal Bhardwaj (from Meerut) would score music for those plays. "Rekha, Vishal's girlfriend [later his wife], was learning classical music." To the right of Shishir Bose Marg is Khalsa College, where Saurabh Shukla graduated from. To the left is Hansraj College, where Shah Rukh Khan was reading economics. Few years later, Imtiaz Ali (from Jamshedpur) founded Hindu College's dramatic society. At about the same time as Anurag Kashyap (originally from Benares), who was at Hansraj. "Oh there are just way too many people [to name]," Bajpayee trails off. (...)

The point for most of these DU students - who later made the move to Mumbai and cinema - wasn't quite to crack their final exam in history (Bajpayee), or zoology (Kashyap). It was firstly to gain access to the thriving theatre scene in the Capital. This is where Bajpayee co-founded the theatre company, Act One. It had, among others, Imtiaz Ali, (...) Piyush Mishra: "Shoojit Sircar used to design background music, and assist director. (...) Anubhav Sinha assisted [in direction], and was an important part of the circle." During the day Bajpayee trained under Barry John and his company Theatre Action Group (TAG), to secure a place in Delhi's National School of Drama - that ultimately rejected him four years in a row. It's at TAG that he first met Shah Rukh Khan: "No matter how talented we were, girls always flocked to Shah Rukh." Nothing's changed. "Shah Rukh (...) [era un] English theatre actor, (...) from privileged backgrounds in South Delhi," Bajpayee recalls. While everyone really made it on their own in Mumbai/Bollywood, with zero family connections, the one to scale the steepest climb is still likely to be Bajpayee. He was born into a farmer's family, with six siblings, raised in a village called Belwa in Bihar, bordering Nepal, where there wasn't even a local cinema, growing up. 

Besides, being Bihari meant a strong regional accent that he had to shed, in order to ready himself for multiple parts on stage/film: "If you're an actor, you can't be 'one type' in your real life - a Bihari, for instance. You should be able to play a Marathi, Punjabi... For many years, from my Hindi, many people couldn't figure out where I was from." What he worked on harder still is English. Which is just a language, yes, but it also denotes social access in India: "I always knew English is a tool to compete in this country; to fit in, and get your work done - even if I decide to work in the Hindi film industry. I didn't take it as a burden." It was quite common for Bihari students (nicknamed 'Harries') to land up in DU, to pursue courses in sciences and liberal arts, and take a shot at several entrance exams later - chiefly for the civil services. Bajpayee made sure he spent significantly more time with the few foreign students in his college, rather than the 'Harry gang': "The Kenyan/Nigerian guys would listen to my English, quietly, without judgment. Five hours of my day spent with them meant only speaking English, flat-out - gaining command/confidence over the language. Barry John, who took me under his wing, started giving me roles in English plays as well."

This interview is wholly in English. He's as fluent as it gets. This, he says, surprises his former flat-mates - a full-on 'English medium type' in particular, who'd make fun of him back in college. By the early '90s, having spent enough hours perfecting his diction, reading literature, watching plays, doing street theatre, exposing himself to arts and [alternate] cinema, what he calls the "best days of my life", Bajpayee began to 'belong' - to Delhi's intensely active stage scene. (...) This is the catchment area filmmaker Shekhar Kapur, along with his assistant and casting director Tigmanshu Dhulia, tapped into to cast for Bandit Queen (1994). Post its commercial success, the Bandit Queen 'alumni' pretty much migrated en masse to Mumbai. (...) "Seema Biswas got [the lead role with] Sanjay Leela Bhansali. (...) Saurabh Shukla in fact was the busiest..." And Bajpayee? Because his character Maan Singh in Bandit Queen didn't have many lines, despite strong screen presence, he remained relatively unnoticed. (...) What followed is four years of "no work, consequently no food," and life in a chawl. The primary talent he developed in these years, Bajpayee jokes, is an ability to time his entry into friends' homes - right at the moment when lunch was getting served; or a booze bottle was being cracked open! An important lesson that showbiz teaches most aspirants though, and something that Bajpayee appears to have imbibed as a personality trait, is the strength/perseverance to repeatedly face rejection, and calmly move on, before it breaks one's resolve/spirit. "I am basically dheeth [stubborn]," Bajpayee says more than once to describe himself. (...) 

The turning point in Bajpayee's career is obviously the iconic/immortalised 'Bhikhu Mhatre' from Ram Gopal Varma's Satya (1998). Varma, Bajpayee reckons, is the man who singularly altered the landscape of Lokhandwala, and indeed (mainstream) Hindi films. Varma was looking for writers for Satya. Bajpayee introduced him to Anurag Kashyap and Saurabh Shukla. Satya led to Varma's Kaun? (1999), also written by Kashyap, and a role that Bajpayee says he practically remodelled on the first day of shoot - turning Sameer Purnavale into a goofy bloke, rather than a serious fellow. Shool (1999), written by Kashyap as well, followed. Among Bajpayee's contributions to this lead part of a quiet cop, diametrically opposite to the boisterous Bhikhu, was the name Samar Pratap Singh. Samar was what Bajpayee wanted to officially change his own name to, but couldn't do paper-work for, before the release of Bandit Queen: "Everybody in Bihar is called Manoj." (...) Up until Chandraprakash Dwivedi's Pinjar (2003) that won Bajpayee his second National Award (first was for Satya), what you sense is an unlikely Bollywood star, on an enviable dream run, both at the box-office, and with critical acclaim. And then everything starts tumbling downhill thereafter - for seven frickin' years straight!

He had a fall-out with Varma, when the latter was at the top of his game: "I used to be angry, sensitive - not an easy person to deal with." Kashyap and he parted ways. He was going to both act in, and co-produce Kashyap's debut: "Anurag had mistakenly presumed that I wasn't interested in the role/film." He looks back at the fallow period, "Those weren't easy times. No work was coming [my way]. And whatever was, didn't match up to standards. Also, I was not keeping well." (...) Bajpayee's actual career graph effectively resembles a symmetrical ECG report, with extensive highs and lows, almost equally spaced out! He agrees, "I still call filmmakers for work, if I've enjoyed their recent film. The hardest part was to convince friends that I was still good enough. (...) When I reminisce [those times], I feel only I could've survived it. Because I don't take it to heart. The only thing that could break me is [upheaval on the] personal front. The professional life, even now, doesn't bother me much. Mumbai says it most beautifully, 'Yaar, load kyun leta hai [Why take stress?]'.

"TV crews that used to hound me started putting their cameras down, watching me enter events. I could hear the reporter, who wouldn't even lower his voice, instructing this to his crew. (...) And that happens with work. I was sure I was going to come back. But I needed a role. When I got Raajneeti, I knew this was it." (...) Raajneeti (2010), a major hit that Bajpayee, 51, admits resurrected his floundering résumé. (...) He earned matchless street-cred as Sardar Khan with Kashyap's masterpiece Gangs Of Wasseypur (2012). Kashyap and he are back to being friends. Of which he laughs, "Anurag is incredibly talented, but a loner. If you meet him for three days in a row, he starts hating you!" Further, his most challenging lead role in the current phase could well be as the Marathi, gay Professor Siras in Aligarh (2015): "A leading journalist had written about how actors' careers got ruined, once they played gay characters on screen. My career got made as a result." (...)

In 2019, Bajpayee stormed into mainstream web with Amazon Prime's smashing success, The Family Man, directed by Raj & DK, playing a spy Srikant Tiwari, who could be any other guy on a Mumbai street. As a basic brief, even that sounds a little lot like Bajpayee's breakout role in Satya: "Bhikhu Mhatre was the most real [gangster] that this country has ever seen on the big screen. He could be standing by a restaurant or a paan shop, and you wouldn't know he's a dreaded don. Which is true for people doing extraordinary things - they're extremely unassuming in day-to-day life. Srikant Tiwari has all the same elements, but we went a little further ahead in this realistic direction - he's even more casual, nervous, anxious [than Bhikhu]." If life/career must indeed be shaped into a circle, let's look at Bajpayee's last major film, Sonchiriya (2019) that (...) is set in the same time-frame and location (ravines of Chambal) as Bajpayee's debut, Bandit Queen. Like with his debut, Bajpayee appears as a quiet dacoit named Maan Singh. It's directed by Abhishek Chaubey (...) who, like his mentor (and Bajpayee's contemporary) Vishal Bhardwaj, went to Hindu College, from the same Sudhir Bose Marg in Delhi'.