Writer/actor/director/producer connection !
We read daily that so and so filmmaker insisted that he does not go for stars but he signs the actors who fit in his story. Writers say that sometimes they write by keeping a certain actor in mind. Does it give enough freedom for them to develop the character then? As a certain actor may have limitations as far as his acting ability is concerned. His mannersims may be associated with his acting. Even great actors are not away from this mannerism factor. We can presume in advance how they would react to the coming scene or part of the on going scene.
Satyajit Ray mostly ’s name is established as the most accomplished Indian filmmaker worldwide. He worked with Pt Ravi Shankar in Apu Trilogy but later started composing his own music. He wrote his own stories and even if he borrowed stories from others like Tagore and Premchand he wrote screenplay himself. It was good for him that Tagore and Premchand were not alive when he made films on their novels or stories otherwise it could have been a conflict between him and author. Genius people normally dont work together and dont go well with each other. Otherwise Ray did not need to jump in to the shoes of music composer because maybe he found it difficult to dictate terms to Pt Ravi Shankar as he could do with a normal music composer. So it is not true that genius Directors always need best things for their films. They need things which can follow their orders as per their need. Ray had been meeting with Dilip Kumar for many years but he never offered to make a film with an actor of such a high calibre. Raj Kapur offered S. Ray to direct a film for his RK banner but Ray did not go for this offer. Though he worked with Jaya Bhaduri, Simi Grewal and Sharmila Tagore , hindi film actresses, for his bangali films and when he made Hindi film Shatranj ke khiladi he took shelter in Sanjeev Kumar and Saeed Jafree and both were not art films actors in traditional sense. He said to Amitabh Bachchan that he saw his films but he never tried to use his acting skills rather he used only his voice in the commentary in Shatranj ke Khiladi. For Sadgati, a Tele film, Sadgati, he took Om Puri , Smita Patil and Mohan Agashe in lead roles. Ray worked less with Uttam kumar and more with Rabi Ghosh, Saumitra Chaterjee and Anil Chaterjee. It cant be said about Uttam Kumar that he was actor of less calibre than other regular actors of Ray’s films.
Only Gulzar can be seen as an exception here. He took Jeetendra and Hema Malini as lead actors in so many of his films and at that time both the actors were not treated as serius or good actors of great capabilities. Their performances in Gulzar’s Films are up to the standard which were required by the roles offered to them. Gulzar could work with commercial actors like Vinod Khanna , Shatrughan Sinha and Sanjeev Kumar with equal ease and took best out of them. It is unfortunate that Gulzar never could finish his films with Dharmendra and Amitabh Bachchan otherwise we would have been rich with two more great films. We never find Gulzar with such sayings where director tries to create a difference between actors and actors and tries to impose a false fear of popular actors.
Another such example is of Hrishikesh Mukherjee, who worked with an ease with many super stars. He directed Ashok Kumar, Raj Kapoor, Dilip Kumar, Dev Anand, Balraj Sahniand Rajesh Khanna , Amitabh, Dharmendra and Shatrughan Sinha . He equally handled Amol Palekar in some of his great films. He walked ahead so nicely with Rekha in 80s.
Shyam Benegal might have worked with Shabana and other art films gang but he used Shashi Kapoor, Rekha quite nicely in Junoon and Kalyug
(though Shashi was the producer also of these two films). Amol Palekar directed commercial actors like Sonali Bendre, Rani Mukharjee, Sunil Shetty and Sharukh Khan etc.
What we get from the sayings of directors and producers that they will sign only those actors who fit in their stories? Is it really true? Dont they prefer comfort zone than the acting capabilities of the actors? For example RGV, he is often quoted saying that he prefers certain kind of actors. It looks that it is not the ability factor of an actor but it is more related with the comfort in the mind of director while dealing with actors. Directors want full control and when they sign big names then they always have fear of clash of egos.
When people ridicule that Sanjay Datt works mostly with Mahesh Manjrekar, Sanjay Gupta etc and Karan Johar always makes films with SRK only then it is not justified. Because AK also has this notion in his mind that KK is the actor who can do justice with the story written by him. When he plans “No Smoking” then also he stands with John Abraham because John supported him with this script while others had either rejected it or took too much time to decide. It is again not a matter that only John can play that role, it has less to do with acting skill of John and more to do with AK’s emotions toward John in this particular case. When Vishal and Kumar Mangat suggested name of Saif Ali Khan then it was because of their tuning with Saif these days. Though considering the past, Saif is better actor than John but then who knows, what DCH,Hum Tum, EHT and Omkara did for Saif, No Smoking does the same for John.John has just started and a whole horizon is there before him to cover.
Govind Nihalani worked with Amitabh Bachchan in Dev. Truth seems like this also that they also wish to work with commercially successful actors but this fear stops them that they might not have dictated these popular actors as they wish. Now it is again true that an Amitabh Bachchan can do Don and MQS etc along with Black and Dev and Saudagar etc but many art films actors may not do a sleek and stylish film like Don. So limitations are attached with art film’s actors also.
A writer, director, producer should be open to all kind of actors to make good cinema.
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
you are not far from truth RK..and its not just with the actor its with all the key members of the crew ..i prefer to work with the same team..we started together..we evolved together..and some dropped out because they had bigger openings..there is more understanding of eachother so less stress..it becomes pleasure more than work..
excellent analysis RK …
However …its very much like the west …
U want to see Tom cruise, Trovolota, Clint eastwood, Micheal douglas, Samuel Jackson doing more or less the same kind of roles ….
And u have the other ‘versatile’ actors like dustin hoffman, Nicholas cage, Brando, Al pacino who did all kinds of roles ….
Perhaps the audience’s expectations also has a say in it …
to be honest, i would not want to see my favorite actors/directors working with my non-favorite actors/directors, respectively. cos i want to see best artists working together.
it’s like this, you guys would not prefer to see Henry or Ronalidhino playing in lowest football league, would you?
i am a bit skeptical about Anurag-ji working with John Abhram and Priyanka Chopra. i would have much preferred if he had worked with non-stars. that’s my opinion.
also there are directors who would prefer to just work with actors(no big names) cos they would want people to see the film cos of him/her, not big names acting in it.
let’s face it.. if filmmakers really looked at true acting talent, then zayed, fardeen, mohit, emraan, esha, nisha kothari (list goes on) etc. would be out of jobs! so these filmmakers continue to take these fools on the basis of having “known” names in their project, not realizing that given a good script and choosing the talent that’s “right” for the project might just be the right way to go.
it’s unfortunate that the directors sometimes have to go along with the producer’s choice bc that’s where the money’s coming from. thankfully, anurag doesn’t seem to have fallen in that trap.. otherwise he would’ve said ok to saif being in the film when vishal and kumar suggested him. i think the compromise (not sacrifice) with taking john over kaykay will definitely pay off in the long run. i’m definitely skeptical about priyanka, but john’s a good choice, especially since this is the perfect time for him to experiment.
i would not think they would be out of job. they would have got a job in Ekta Kapoor’s serials ;)
anyway, the thing with Jonh’s acting is that it’s stiff and mono. for example, like bipasha was in Corporate. so let’s hope he works on his acting rather than look for this particular film.
Basically, whether one is doing only one function or is multitalented, one has to have passion for what one is doing- all problems then are surmountable because a majority of working hours are spent well- Make your passion your profession
RK,
“Though he borrowed actors from Hindi films like Jaya Bhaduri, Simi Grewal and Sharmila Tagore for his bangali films”
Ray didn’t quite borrow Jaya B and Sharmila T. Both were Bangla girls whose first films each were their Ray films and both were in their teens at that point. Only much later did they move to Bollywood.
And back to your theme, I’d like to know what the creative person does when the person they had in mind declines to work with them!
Ramanand:
Factually its right that except Simi, both Sharmila and Jaya were introduced by Ray in Bangali cinema when they were in their teens, only Simi was taken in Aranyer Din Ratri in late 60s. Thanks for this correction.
Re. second question :
Certainly an alternative will be searched when person kept in mind decline to work with the creative person. But main point is the overused line said by filmmakers(mostly art film directors)that they dont go for stars and take those actors who fit in their story. This is not right and is just a camouflage perhaps to give themselve a kind of false mental rationalization. As its discussed and Anurag confirmed that basicallky its comfort zone with the people. It looks ideal and nice to think that two talented people should work together to give a better product but in reality its not easy. Thats why we dont see Dilip Kumar doing Guru Datt’s Pyasa, Dev Anand and Dilip Kumar both declined Raj Kapur’s Sangam. Raj Kapur never made a film with Amitabh though he was very much active when Amitabh was seeing his best days in hindi films and he was not doing only action films but comedy and social drama also.
Anurag:
Thanks for bringing this reality. I recall two art films, AdhaarShila and Saath Saath where young people start together with same dream of making big respecively in films and print media but later everybody goes their own way. Its certainly a nice way to work with a team where people understand each other. Initially it gives strength to have like minded group and people learn together and slowly everybody develops different skill and cherish different dreams and thats why we get lot of talented people ina field. Direction is one such area where perhaps everybody in cine Industry will be chershing to direct atleast one movie in his lifetime.
Kartik:
Its not like this that we want to see Cruise, travolta. eastwood, douglas etc playing same role again and again but its other way round that they provide us same thing again and again. If in same market Al Pacino, Brando, Dustin Hoffman, Nicolas cage etc can bring out different shades than eastwood etc could also have done the same. Its their own choice to play same kind of roles again and again.
Perhaps its limitations in acting ability of actors which stop them to search variety. Its personal inherent nature also. Some are happy in doing same things, some do different things and some do different things with better skills.
HG, Hiren and Striker:
Its said by several film makers that film is basically a Director’s medium. It depends on his vision what kind of product he wish to bring out and its the final overall product which matters rather than the acting of only one actor because then it can happen that the actor is praised for his acting but film is useless, e.g Mela of Aamir Khan, he is not les than Rangila here as far as his comedy skill is concerned but thats the only USP of the Mela. Like few of Amitabh Bachchan’s films in 80s, they have only one thing, Amitabh’s good acting only. Film as a complete package is diffent thing and that makes them classic. Like Mughal-i-Azam, Sholay, Mother India, Ganga Jamuna, etc. Their different departments are so strong and every actor’s performance is up to the standard required by the plot of these films that they intrude deeply in our mind. Here Directors took care of every department concerned with film making rather than to take resort only of acting skill of one or two actors. If Director is good and have clear vision then we can be sure that we will get good end product. As in article I used Gulzar and Hrikesh Mukherjee’s example. Gulzar used Jeetendra in different format and extract out sensitive part of his. He used Sunil Shetty in Hu Tu Tu in unconventional way. He gave direction to otherwise going astray Tabu in Maachis and Hu Tu Tu and that initiated Tabu in to the meaningful acting area.
Director is the ultimate master in filmmaking, writer can write good scenes and story but its director who depicts how to film those scenes so that they leave deep impact.
I am not sure if Javed Akhtar had written scene in Mashaal (where Dilip Kumar is trying to get help while Wahida Rehman is dying on the road) with same intensity as Yash Chopra had picturised it and Dilip Kumar had acted in. His pathos, crying and rebel against the cruelty of world is brought together in that little scene. Thats a text book performance minus the camera work and editing and mixing of shots at some places especially where he is shown running towards Wahida lying on road.
Satyajit Ray worked with Bengali super star Uttam Kumar in Nayak and Chiriyakhana.