Munni Badnam Hui Darling Tere Leeye

Sometime back I got chatting with an ex-colleague who thought that the recent hit number "munni badnam hui darling tere leeye" was a rather cheap number.

Of course I did not agree with her rather 'grotesque' description of what I think is a good fun song.

The reason for not agreeing with her was very simple. Anyone who was growing up during the late eighties and the early nineties, and is familiar with the kind of songs Bollywood produced during that period, will definitely vouch for the fact that "munni badnam hui" is a rather tame number in comparison to the kind of stuff that was produced back then.

So here is a list of what I think are the famous double meaning and raunchy songs that the Hindi film industry has managed to produce over the years, and the multiplex generation has never heard of. Of course this is not a complete list, so please feel free to add to it.

It all started with the pelvic thrusts of Madhuri Dixit in choli ke peeche kya hai. Now don't ask me what Neena Gupta was doing in that number. But this Anand Bakshi song, sung by Alka Yagnik and Ila Arun had the front benchers absolutely in raptures.

Immediately after this Varsha Usgaonkar tried to match Madhuri Dixit pelvic thrust for pelvic thrust in the rather more direct "choli ke andar kya hai." Of course, the song did not get anywhere, one Varsha was no Madhuri and two it was a tad more direct with lines like "choli ke andar tabahi hai tabahi tabahi", leaving nothing to imagination.

Mithun "Ooty" Charkborthy soon latched onto the trend and starred in the mega hit "chadh gaya upar re attarya pe loutan kabootar re", more famous as "gutur gutur". Govinda and Karishma Kapoor really cashed in on this market. Govinda even went to the extent of singing "mere pant bhi sexy meri shirt bhi sexy...". The censors let this one go, but would have none of "sexy sexy sexy mujhe log bole" starring Karishma, which was eventually toned down to "baby baby baby mujhe log bole". Of course the movie Khuddar (which also starred Govinda) tanked.

But nothing matched the brilliance they achieved together in "sarkaye lo khatiya jaada lage" from the movie Raja Babu. I remember watching the movie at Sujata Cinema in Ranchi. The crowd which had come to watch the first day first show was in fact disappointed. This is not what they expected from the David Dhawan-Govinda combination on a roll with a string of hits in the early nineties.

And that was till the last song of the movie "Sarkaaye leeyo khatiya jaada lage", started. Sujata had never been so loud. Every time, Karishma Kapoor lifted her red lungi to expose, the crowd simply went berserk. Miss Kapoor during those days was climbing the popularity charts and was willing to expose, if the script so demanded.

Of course such brilliance and titillation had never been achieved before nor would be achieved after this.

David Dhawan tried repeating it with Rishi Kapoor and Juhi Chawla in Eena Meena Deeka with the song "saiyyan ke saath maddaiya main bada aaye rajjeyya main". The movie also had another song called "towel main bahar jaogi to hulla mach jayega". Both the songs did not work. Well Rishi Kapoor was no Govinda and Juhi no Karishma.

Dhawan tried this again with Anil Kapoor and Juhi Chawla in Andaz. It had two songs. One was main maal gaadi tu dhakka laga dhakka laga bhai dhakka laga and the other was khada hai khada hai khada hai, dar pe tere aashik khada hai khol khol khol, darwaza khol. Both the songs were cleared by the censor board, but the stunt did not work for Dhawan and the movie flopped. Guess by this time, people had already started to tire with such songs.

Ajay Devgan tried to mix cricket with a double meaning song. "Kal saiyyan ne aisi bowling kari, ek over bhi main khel payi nahi, chouthe hi gend mein out huyi, paanchava gend main jhel payi nahi" was a song in the movie 1994 release Vijaypath. Well the Intermediate Science Classes at St Xavier's College were empty the day the movie released, everyone having gone to watch the song at Sandhya Cinema. Much to their disappointment the censor board did not let the song go and had it cut from the movie L. So that was that.

Akshay Kumar and Mamta Kulkarni had their share of fun with "bholi bhali ladki khol de re dil kipyar waali khidki" and "bharo......maangh meri bharo" in the super hit Sabse Bada Khiladi (which was in fact written by Hindi pulp fiction writer Ved Prakash Sharma).

Mithun Chakraborthy sitting in Ooty could not afford to lose the race. So he sang "Mirchi re mirchi kamal kar gayee, dhoti ko phadke rumaal kar gayee"

Govinda and Shilpa Shetty together sang LML Baba LML Baba where LML stood for Lets Make Love Baby for the movie Hathkhadi. It need not be said the song was a huge hit. When Shilpa Shetty was asked why did she agree to star in this song? She said something to the extent of "I earlier starred in this movie called Aao Pyar Karen, which when translated into English means Lets Make Love." Now you know why they say that some people should just keep their mouth shut.

And then there were songs like "Din Mein Leti Hain Raat Ko Leti Hain" and "Daloonga Daloonga" from the movie Amanat.

Of course the entire double meaning song industry picked up after "choli ke peeche kya hai" became a huge hit in 1993. But there were some good double meaning songs that hit the market even before that.

Take the 1991 movie Lakshman Rekha. It had a song called "Kya number hai, kya gaadi hai, kya bumper hai kya body hai, aage se dekho, peeche se dekho, upar se dekho, neeche se dekho, kahin se dekho ji...hai kya baat hai...uff kya baat hai..." Now talk about being subtle.

Or take Subhash Ghai's 1982 movie Vidhata which had a song called "saat saheliyan khadi khadi fariyad sunaye ghadi ghadi." Now in the face of it there is no double meaning.

But of course when you get into the detail like "ek saheli ka miyan tha dakiya, raat bhar mohe sone na de, thappu lagaye ghadi ghadi," it leaves nothing to imagination.

So in comparison to all these songs "munni badnaam hui" is rather sedate and harmless. And wait till you hear a few Bhojpuri songs. As Avijit Ghosh writes in his recent book Cinema Bhojpuri "In Pyaar Ka Bandhan, singer Rekha Rao croons to the lyrics of Vinay Bihari, 'Tani lahe lahe dheere dheere dala kamsin ba dukhala raja ji' (Put it in slowly, darling, I am very young, it hurts'), while on screen Sambhavna Seth dances to the tune and as she gyrates, a launda(a man dressed as a woman) tries to slip bangles into her arms. That is double-entendre at its best."

In fact Bhojpuri movies have a tradition of double meaning songs. As Ghosh writes "In the family drama Ganga Se Nata Ba Hamaar (1991) well-known music director Ravindra Jain not only provided the score, but also penned the lyrics for a couple of songs. In one of them he wrote, 'kahin nimbua to kahin be anaar sajni, nimbua bechari kisi ginti main na aaye, yeh zamana hai anaron ka beemar sajni'('There is a lemon at one place and a pomegranate in other. Nobody spares a second thought for the poor lemon, this is the age where everybody is mad about pomegranates'). It is obvious the composer-lyricist is not talking about the different sizes of fruit."

Or take this song from Bambai Ke Laila Chhapra Ke Chhaila "mamla garam ba, kahe ke saram ba, loha garam ba, chala da na hathoda' ('Everything is hot. Why are you shy? The iron is hot. Why don't you just bang, the hammer?')."

Oh, and how about the recent song "babu rao mast hai" from Once Upon A Time in Mumbai. What can get more double meaning than that? I rest my case. In comparison to all the songs listed above "munni badnaam hui" is as good as a bhajan.

Dabaang team launches exclusive merchandise of the film

Remember how Aamir Khan promoted Ghajini with that unique haircut and 3 Idiots with the 3 Idiots custom-made tees. Arbaaz Khan, the producer of Dabangg, has in collaboration with PVR cinemas pan India recently launched the limited exclusive merchandise of Dabangg at PVR cinemas. The merchandise includes sunglasses, watches and t-shirts.

The Dabaang team - Salman Khan, Sonakshi Sinha and Arbaaz Khan - launched the merchandise in Delhi on August 29. If you're all set to buy it, behold! The film merchandise will be available for purchase only from September 10. Can't wait? Well as Arbaaz tweeted, "The merchandising is being used primarily as a promotional activity. Will make it available on Dabangg website if demand exceeds. Cheers."

So do wait for Dabangg's release to get your hands around the limited exclusive merchandise of the film.

"Salman Khan has brilliant taste for music" - Wajid

They say that the only thing that gives you a high without getting stoned is music. They also say that it is the Indian music that won us an Oscar and not an individual. It is music, they say, which is the only thing imported by the West from Bollywood. They do things that cannot exist unless there's an audience as a participant. It's easy to fall into their music, whether you're hearing it along with the film or simply spinning it on your iPod. They weave an aural tapestry coloured with lush orchestral passages, moments of rural rustiness, darkness, and an ethereal, entrancing haze seen and heard in scenic locations on the big screen. It's as much of a gorgeous head-trip as the film itself is. Their songs are immersive and India's superstar Salman Khan has danced on most of them. Moreover, they want audiences to participate in their film Dabangg and its music directly. And you'll remember them always when you're on 'Aksa beach', when you're proposing for marriage, when you're wanted by your male mates for street dancing or if you're desperately seeking for a new partner. They are the ones who don't make music...they weave it. Please put your hands together because they are special, because they are Sajid and Wajid. Brothers who've given us undisputed songs since their first big break when they shook hands with Salman Khan and Arbaaz Khan in Pyar Kiya To Darna Kya. Twelve years have passed....today, they are brothers in arms. UK's Harrow Observer columnist and Bollywood Hungama's London correspondent talks to Wajid on their wacky wilderness in the wild Bollywood.

"Dabangg music is as whacky as its script"
Dabangg music goes to show that Sajid and Wajid are capable of surprising the audiences again and again. The surprise element is very important in your work. Dabangg is a very rural subject in terms of its music. We were confident that we would do something as wacky as the script. Munni was already recorded before but who knows, we could've come up with 'Munni' or better than that. But what's important is the fact that the song is working for the film.

"We love our journey with the 'Khan' brothers"
Salman Khan always brings out the best in us. He is our brother and we love him like anything. It's a blessing in disguise that we've been working with the superstar of our country where he is being loved all over the world. Our first film with him was Pyaar Kiya Toh Darna Kya where we had cut the first theatrical trailer for the film and worked on the song 'Teri Jawani Badi Mast Mast Hain' which was filmed on Arbaaz Khan. Now Dabangg is again with Salman and Arbaaz. We love our journey with the 'Khan' brothers.

"Background score of Dabangg is 'todu'"
We haven't done the background score for Dabangg but our musician Sandeep Shirodkar is doing it. He has done the programming and most of the arrangement we do. We do all the themes and original soundtracks. The background score of Dabangg has shaped up just like the look of the film: 'todu' as we say in our slang.

"Background score scene in India is improving"
Background score in India isn't given much importance as much as they do in Hollywood. But now-a-days, background score has improved a lot in our films. The problem is that only big banner films concentrate on background score. Background is very interesting if done properly because it can make or break your film. We've done background score for Welcome. Background should bring out the elements of that particular character and more importantly, the flavour of the film.

"The amount of money Hollywood puts in songs and scores is equivalent to the budget of our films"
In India, our forte is Indian classical and all. That's our upbringing. We are learning and we are fast learners too. The amount of money Hollywood puts in songs and background score is equivalent to the budget of our films. The intelligence which they use in their films is far better than us because they are sincere and their filmmaking is like an institute. When you see their visuals, you get stunned, shocked, and speechless. There is a certain kind of truthfulness in their work. Music is the only thing that has reached the West from Bollywood. No actor or a director has got an Oscar. It's the music that has got the Oscar. Music is the purest form of creativity.

"We would like to work with all big production houses"
Yes, there is a group created even in music now. Many production houses want to work with their favourite music directors. There's nothing wrong in that but if the same production houses wants to work with us, they need to approach us without spoiling relations with their current ones. I would love to work with Karan Johar too and prove many people wrong. Sajid- Wajid wants to work with everyone. 'Tere Mast Mast Do Nain' won't sound like a Pritam song and that's what we are good at. It will only sound like our song because that's our trademark. All the rest of our talented music directors also have their trademark.

"Vishal & Shekhar are the only ones who experiment with their music" In my eyes, I'd consider R.D Burman as a maestro, Kishore Kumar as versatile, Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy as brilliant, Amit Trivedi as a learner and Vishal Shekhar as the new age sound. Out of all the above, and I'm not disrespecting any of the superb music directors of our industry, Vishal and Shekhar have taken their music to another level. They have their own style but also surprise you a lot. 'Aankhon Mein Teri Ajab Si' from Om Shanti Om was a brilliant composition but when you hear a different song from the same film 'Jag Suna Suna Laage', you feel their passion for music and where they can take it to. But people like Illayaraj, AR Rahman, Pancham-da, Kishore-da should not be even compared to us current lot. Those were and some are trendsetters. "We composed the title track of Dabangg even before hearing the full script" When Abhinav narrated us the script along with Arbaaz, we loved it. Dabangg's title track was made in front of Arbaaz and Abhinav. Before he completed the narration, we came up with the track. We made the song on just a mere character sketch of Salman. But imagine a debutant director like Abhinav and his film becoming a movement. Man, he can't be blessed better. He is born noble. People like Abhinav Kashyap and many others are always accepted with open heart in the 'Khan' family. Those who don't get quick opportunities in life need to meet the 'Khan' brothers. Abhinav is lucky. "Munni is a Jatin-Lalit song and not a Lalit song" The more I say about Lalit ji is less. But I don't want to address him as Lalit. I would say Jatin-Lalit because my heart cries when I see their split up. When the names of two brothers are taken together, you feel blessed and happy. 'Munni' is a Jatin-Lalit song and not a Lalit song. It's a great song which is helping our film. 'Munni' song is mesmerizing.

Dabangg

Dabangg has all sort-of filmy ancestory associate with it. Of course there is the one and only non-stop, non-sense creator Salman Khan in the lead with brother Arbaaz Khan and sister-in-law Mallaika Arora Khan producing the film and playing bit roles. Dabangg is also the launch pad for khaamosh Shatrughna Sinha's daughter Sonakshi Sinha and Anurag Kashyap's brother Abhinav Kashyap.

The sound of a Kashyap-Khan rings a weird bell. But we live in a strange world. What is disturbing though is a combination of bits of information doing the rounds -

Influences of my brother's style of filmmaking are definitely there since we have worked together in 1995. There will be overlapping sensibilities, but the subject of this film (Dabangg) is very different from the kind of subjects Anurag chooses for his films.

The same article goes on to quote Abhinav Kashyap -

We work in a democratic set up… everyone throws in their ideas. Yes, we did change certain things in the film, but everything was not dictated by Salman. We all sat together and brainstormed and decided to mould the vision of the script a little bit. It was a collective process

So, we actually have a Anurag Kashyap-Salman Khan influence on the film. I have no clue whether that'll make 'a best of both worlds' film or a broth that is spoilt by the proverbial too many cooks.

But the balance of course is tilted towards Khan -

once we made up our minds that we are going to make a commercial pot-boiler, we thought of going the whole unapologetic way, the Salman Khan way

And you sure have the target audience, the 'Salman Fan Club' drooling -

Bollywood Hungama - First Look promo of Arbaaz Khan Production's Dabangg gets over leaving you gasping for breath and panting for more.

Blogger Papa Bear - Dabangg, for me, has one of the best Hindi movie trailers of all time.

Passion for Cinema - The movie does not promise to be a path breaker or an achievement beyond excellence. It's an entertainer meant to rigor our senses and connect with the audience. Let it be so!

While it looks like Salman Khan fans are going to have a blast, lesser mortals like us cannot complain about not being warned if the director says -

I don't know who said that but I read somewhere that 'Cliché is a cliché because it works'. Dabangg will work. There is a reason why such films do well

And the actor is absolutely clear about his skills as a performer -

I can get caught for anything, but not acting. I’m on screen just the way I am in real life. I’ve never played any characters. When you’re acting, you’re basically taking a character from somewhere. With me, it’s like Jo line aya hai, jaisa bolne ka hai, waise bolo, khatam karo. Aage bhado. (Read the line and move on) I’m not one of those who comes on the set and says ‘Give me half an hour, I want to get into character

...

I think multiplex audiences have money and are more conscious of what people will say if they clap and whistle. That’s it. We are trying to change that in Dabangg, get them off their high horses and make them scream and shout

Anyway, the party has started well -

Milliblog - Two listenable tracks is a lot for this soundtrack!

Apun ka choice - Music directors have done full justice to the album and to Salman’s character

Yahoo! - has mass appeal

Bollywood Hungama - something in store for mass as well as class

Sudeep Shukla - Some might find [sic] is too cheesy with all those lyrics and some might see it more loud

Megzone - Just waiting to catch a glimpse at Malaika’s jhatkas and matkas

The curious appeal of Salman Khan- Pritish Nandy

After years, the promos of a film have really excited me and I'm dying to watch it, first day, first show. No, I have no idea if the film is good or bad. In all probability, it will be awful. Two recent films in this genre were ghastly, though they made lots of money in the box office. And one of them, being a Aamir Khan film, assumed iconic proportions and got the star the moniker of being a matchless marketing whiz, particularly because he stole the thunder from under Shah Rukh's nose. While Shah Rukh was doing his usual number for Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi, Aamir came in from behind with his buzz cut ushers in the theatres announcing the arrival of a thunderous blockbuster two weeks later. The whole focus shifted overnight from Surinder Sahni to Sanjay Singhania. Both films were as ordinary as they come. But Aamir's went on to become a huge hit, announcing the arrival of a new genre in Bollywood: the Tamil bloodfest.

Its success quickened the release of another bloodfest, this time with Telugu origins: Wanted. You can't get cheesier than Wanted. It's possibly the worst movie you have seen, shoddily scripted, badly crafted, crudely put together: an astonishing display of plywood machismo. But even that couldn't stop it from becoming a huge blockbuster simply because Salman Superbrat swaggered through the film with his trademark cheekiness, doing nothing, just being himself. That made the movie. If, like me, you watch movies not at their premiere, or on TV, but in a typical old fashioned theatre, not even in a multiplex, you will figure why Salman works. His every strut is greeted with wolf whistles and cat calls. His every line of cheeky dialogue is loudly chanted by his fans and some of them, who are watching the film for the umpteenth time, anticipate his lines by screaming them out a split second before they are spoken on screen. This is clearly one star whose fans don't want him to act. They want him to strut through the film, doing nothing more than delivering cheesy lines of dialogue and beating up guys beefier than him. And, O yes, they reserve the maximum applause for that one moment in a film when he takes his shirt off, either for the mother of a fight or a chalu song. In both, Salman has exactly the same slightly funny, slightly exasperated expression as if to say: Why the hell am I doing this shit?

Aamir's the opposite. He's intense to a fault. Every role appears to be a matter of life and death for him. He has to get it just right. His films too are exactly the opposite of Salman's. They are so carefully crafted that every emotion, every feeling is wrung out of every scene. Often even the manipulation shows. Most times he gets away with it simply because he's Aamir and can do no wrong. His producers too have taken on Shah Rukh at the numbers game. Huge full page ads declare box office figures that keep spiralling till the pundits finally throw up their hands in exasperation. Akshay Kumar's producers too briefly joined this numbers game but are now slightly subdued with Akshay having signed on a few duds. But Akshay remains chilled. He knows he has an innate goofy charm that can survive all the tacky screenplays he cheerfully sleepwalks through.

Funnily, barring Salman, the others are looking less and less like stars today. They are beginning to look like businessmen. Shah Rukh has even hit the cover of a business magazine and is sounding, behaving more like a producer than a star. So is Aamir. What they don't realise is that popular fan bases are not built on the imagery of businessmen or producers. The common man does not admire a bania. The villain in most films of my growing up years was the village mahajan or the city slicker in a white shark skin suit sitting with his bottle of Vat 69. India may have changed. Money is no longer a bad word but the man on the street still admires a hero, not a wealthy man. The iconic hero of Bollywood was for over two decades the Angry Young Man who fought the entire might of the system and brought it tumbling down.

This brings me back to Chulbul Pandey. I am sure Dabangg will be whatever. But what the heck, I love movies where a cracked hero walks through an equally cracked screenplay doing the weirdest, whackiest things, and no one does that better than Salman. Will I ever make a film like that? Unlikely. Will I recommend a film like that? Not over my dead body. Will I go to a sweaty, stinking theatre to watch it, surrounded by screaming, whistling, hysteric Salman fans? Yes, I will. That's the movie watching experience I pay for. It reminds me of my adolescence. It reminds of the time when movies were movies and heroes could do anything and get away with it.

Sholay, the Beginning

Hindi cinema’s biggest blockbuster officially completes 35 years this 15 August, but it was actually born in 1973 in a small room. Screenplay writer Salim Khan remembers how Sholay was conceived.

When Javed [Akhtar] and I wrote Ramesh Sippy’s Andaaz and Seeta Aur Geeta, we weren’t partners. We worked on it as part of the Sippy story department’s team and received a salary of Rs 750. We had to fight for credit, and when we didn’t get it for Seeta Aur Geeta, we left the Sippys. Writers had no izzat (respect) those days. I still remember how posters of Zanjeer didn’t have our names. So we hired a man with a jeep and got him to paint Salim-Javed in stencil font on all theZanjeer posters from Juhu to Opera House. The man probably was a few drinks down, so he painted Salim-Javed on Pran’s face or Amitabh’s [Bachchan] hands!

After six months, we again got in touch with GP Sippy and [son] Ramesh, but now as the writing team of Salim-Javed. We had two narrations for them. One was the four-line idea of Sholay and the other the complete script of Majboor. GP Sippysaab wanted to make a film with a large canvas. When he heard Majboor, he said, “Filmchalegi (it will work), but there’s no sense in making this in 70 mm and with stereophonic sound.”

We said, “If that’s what you have in mind, listen to Sholay.” Most of Sholay was inspired by Magnificent Seven and also Dirty Dozen, The Five Man Army, Once Upon A Time In The West—a lot of Westerns. Ramesh was more attracted by the fact that Majboor was a complete script with dialogues. But Sippysaab said no. AfterAndaaz and Seeta Aur Geeta, the company was doing well; he wanted to take that risk. We demanded credit and Ramesh agreed. We then sold Majboor’s script to Premji; it was our first script that sold for Rs 2 lakh and Ravi Tandon went on to direct that movie. For Sholay, we were paid Rs 1.5 lakh.

It took us a month to write Sholay in a small room laid with white mattresses that served as the Sippy story-writing room at their Khar office. The dialogues then took us about one-and-a-half months. Javed and I worked at it, while Ramesh Sippy, Satish Bhatnagar and Narendra Bedi pitched in. Once we were done, we all felt we had a blockbuster. In Hollywood, a script is called a ‘property’. In Sholay’s case, we felt we had a huge ‘property’. We now had to have a great cast.

A good screenplay writer always visualises the movie, so we always had people in mind for the characters. For Thakur Baldev Singh’s role, I approached Dilip Kumar. I had also narrated Zanjeer to Dilipsaab in Bandra Gymkhana, but he had turned that down too. Dilipsaab felt the Sholay role had limitations. He wanted to perform comedy and emotion, and he felt this was a straitjacketed role. I met Dilipsaab about eight days ago. When we were chatting, I asked him, “Which films do you wish you had not let go of?” He replied, “Baiju Bawra, Pyaasa, Zanjeer and Sholay.”

When we approached Sanjeev Kumar, he wanted to do Gabbar’s role. He tried to convince us by messing up his hair, staining his teeth and doing some mannerisms. But we felt he had the audience’s sympathy through roles he’d done before; Gabbar had to be completely hateful. We were in search of a newcomer for Gabbar. We had Prem Nathji in mind, but he had a reputation for being difficult. One day, when I was walking along Bandra Bandstand, I bumped into Amjad Khan. I had acted with his father Jayant in a film, so I knew Amjad, who had done the part of a black slave in K Asif’s Love and God. I told him I’d suggest his name; if he got chosen, his career would be set. Amjad did his screen test and was selected because Danny Denzongpa (the other choice) didn’t get back to the Sippys in time.

Sholay was a title I suggested right at the start, but we also toyed with Angaarey. The names of Sholay’s characters came from real life. I had two college friends in Indore, Veeru and Jai. Veerandar Singh Bias was the son of a jagirdar at Khajrana Kothi—he died just six months ago. Jai Singh Rao Kalevar died four years ago. He had worked in a company in Mumbai, then grew vegetables at a farm in Thane. They were my drinking buddies. Jai used to grumble that I never gave him royalty, but inside, he was pleased. Thakur Baldev Singh’s name came from my father-in-law [Salma’s father], who was probably Mumbai’s oldest practising dentist at 80 years. He was very happy I’d made him famous the world over with Sholay.

The strangest dialogues in Sholay became popular—it was so unfair (laughs). ‘Arre O Sambha! Kitne aadmi thhe?’ ‘Poore pachaas hazaar’… these were not really dialogues. I particularly liked the speech that Thakur gives when he finds out his family is dead. It’s also well-known today that the scene where Jai speaks about Veeru to Basanti’s mother was taken from the real-life incident where I recommended Javed to Honey Irani’s mother.

Once the shoot started, Javed and I visited the sets to make changes; there weren’t many, though. I suppose the most challenging parts were the action sequences, wonderfully created by foreign technicians Jim (Allen) and Gerry (Crampton). Dwarka Divecha captured it all brilliantly. After he died, there was a vacuum in that department. Ramesh Sippy put together such a team. Sholay became a cult film because all of us were so excited and at the peak of our careers.

When Sholay released, for four weeks, the trade papers went on about how it was a flop. Yet, we were confident. As Salim-Javed, we took out a personal, full-page advertisement in trade papers saying Sholay would do business of Rs 1 crore per territory. Of course, we were mistaken. It did business of much more. It didn’t work at first because the first show was at 9:30 am and the last at 2 am—the timings were odd. Once that changed, it ran for five years in Minerva.

After Sholay, we were in great demand as writers. Everyone came to us and we increased our price until we were paid more than even actresses. Salim-Javed was the first choice and they thought our success was fool-proof. Yet, Sholay can never be attempted again. I’ve seen so many spoofs, caricatures and even suffered through Ram Gopal Varma Ki Aag (laughs). Yet, I have nothing against interpretations; we ourselves took inspiration from Hollywood films.

I had a personal relationship with most of those who worked on Sholay, like Sanjeev Kumar and Amjad Khan. I still occasionally talk with Dharmendra. But I have no relationship with Amitabh Bachchan. He goes about crediting Dharmendra for having recommended him to the Sippys when even Dharmendra has denied that. The truth is that I kept a trial of Zanjeer for the Sippy family so they could see what Amitabh was made of. I introduced him to Prakash Mehra and Manmohan Desai. The ‘Angry Young Man’ was my discovery—my father was a policeman for 32 years and the character was created from material I got from that. You should give credit where it is due. I’m willing to sit down and sort it out with Amitabh, but he doesn’t even see the problem, so I have no desire to keep in touch.

I don’t live in the past glory of Sholay or Deewar. I may have played marbles or sat on a tree as a child, but if you still see me sitting on a tree, you’d say, “Salim Khan paagal ho gaye (has gone mad).” I wouldn’t change a thing of Sholay, just like you wouldn’t tamper with a winning side in cricket.

"Dabangg isn't just a movie, it's become a movement" - Salman Khan

The first shock of looking at Salman Khan is that he is no way closer to his character Chulbul Pandey in his upcoming film Dabangg. It's only when you hear him talk that his many dimensions come to the forefront. Its five minutes into our conversation and Khan knocks me off with his dare-devil answers. No, he ain't a pro-wrestler with a torso that looks as if it's been inflated with an air pump. Oh no. But he does sport his famous silver turquoise bracelet on his arm; his hair side parted like we see in many of his films and his full sleeve black shirt showing off his shiny cufflinks which all goes to say that today, the actor looks dangerously demure. But then, he's also Salman Khan, although it takes another five minutes before I accept that this must be true. Even then, this realisation comes only because I know Salman is the leading man in the film and that Chulbul Pandey is, indisputably, the leading man too. So where's the pretty boy with the sardonic smile? He's gone from being the up-and-coming young talent, talked of in the same breath as Amitabh Bachchan, to being a Bollywood hell-raiser tooling around town in his black SUV with a fully paid-up entourage wearing gold chains, to the actor who threw it all away when it came to his personal relationships. But why do we care today for a man who has been there done that? Why do we care about a man who is forty plus and still has attitude and style which gives birth to lethal acting prowess? There is one good reason - Salman Khan. UK's Harrow Observer columnist and Bollywood Hungama's London correspondent gets the concession of meeting the actor, who has inspired hundreds, advised thousands, loved millions but respected only one thing: his acting. And when Dabangg releases, you just won't regret the fondness and fascination for a man who has taken all the above in his stride. Salman Khan, you're unstoppable.

"Chulbul is totally unpredictable"
Why would I want to be a part of anything similar to Wanted? It's strange when the media questions me about Dabangg being the sequel to Wanted. I couldn't understand the character when I first started playing it. I couldn't understand how one could get into emotion and from emotion get into comedy and from comedy get into action. It was a different role compared to any of my previous roles. Once I started playing the character, I think it was a lot of fun because Chulbul was totally unpredictable.

"Chulbul is different because of the moustache"
I knew that people in UP-Bihar keep moustaches to look rougher, tougher, and more mature. For them it's the symbol of 'mardangi' (manhood). I had just come out of Veer with a clean shaven look with long hair. I saw that people on the sets too had moustaches and I thought that all my life, I've had a clean shaven look. I tried to sport the moustache but wasn't too convinced. That's when Sonakshi Sinha and Vinod Khanna told me that the moustache looked good on me and different. It suited the character. As soon as I finished my first shot, I decided not to take the moustache off. It's a strange thing but the moustache does lift the way a character is written. Chulbul is different because of the moustache.

"I believe I'm the true Robinhood"
In the film, my character believes that he is the true Robinhood of that locality where he lives. He steals from the rich and gives to the poor. He is still funny but tough too. He is mad but not insane. He is like Robinhood but an Indian one (laughs).

"There is no difference between my fans and me"
I am no different from my fans because my fans and friends are not my 'chamchas' or 'yes men'. They tell me straight out if they don't like anything about my trailer or my role or anything about me in the film. But the fact that they got excited seeing the promo was the signal for me that Chulbul was going to be a hit. I also showed the promo to everyone in my house and they all loved it. Even when Veer released with a great promo but didn't find its good luck at the box office because of many people who didn't listen. But Dabangg is bang on.

"Sonakshi has the penchant of being perfect"
Action not backed with romance is meaningless. That's where Sonakshi Sinha comes in Dabangg. She is looking gorgeous in the film. I know Sonakshi's family very well. We are old friends and I know her potential. She will go a very long way after Dabangg. A lot of people look very good in a saree. Sridevi looks gorgeous, Shilpa Shetty looks beautiful in a saree, Katrina looks amazing in a saree, Sushmita Sen looks superb too in a saree. I think not many actresses look sexy in a saree and Sonakshi does look like one. You also need to know that the audiences haven't seen her before. So the first look of Sonakshi was always going to be a winner all the way.

"I have learnt the word called 'enthusiasm' from Sonakshi"
I used to have a lot of fervour, passion and enthusiasm in me while I was Sonakshi's age. Today, unfortunately, I lack it. So when I see someone so enthusiastic working with me, I don't compete with that co-star. I compete with enthusiasm. Perhaps that's the reason why you see me so involved and energetic in Dabangg.

"It's not difficult for Abhinav to come out from the comparisons with Anurag"
Abhinav Kashyap is a really good guy. I think he writes very well. He knows that whole backdrop. He has worked on small screen. He doesn't waste time and money and he has had the script of Dabangg for the longest time and has worked really hard on it. We were fortunate that the 'Khan Brothers' picked up the script of Dabangg before anybody else could. After what Abhinav has done, I think people will stop comparing him to his brother Anurag.

"Arbaaz makes me proud"
It's not just about Arbaaz. Be it anybody, when the producers put in money, they put in their life into the project. They need to recover the money and keep track of all the accounts. Arbaaz has over the years learnt the trait from Sohail and many others with whom he has worked. Today I can say that I am really proud of him. Earlier, the stakes were not that high but now-a-days the stakes are very high and everybody is more bang on and agile on scripts, timing of the release, how much the film will recover and what kind of opening the film will take. Arbaaz has got all that sorted.

"I will show Dabangg to my celebrity friends"
Marketing has gone to another level all together. In the papers you see which actor has showcased his film to his celebrity friends. Why not? If it helps the film and if it helps spread the good word about the film, why won't I show it. I am planning to show Dabangg to few of my celebrity friends. I remember the last time I showed Kyun Ki to Aamir Khan and he said that he didn't like it because he found that the film was very depressing. I too felt the same way. That's what I like. I like honesty and not all the friends coming up to me and saying 'Yes, we loved the film'. I didn't think Tere Naam would work but it did. So you never know what fate has in store for you on Friday.

"Tere Naam sequel can be made or not depends on Satish Kaushik"
Tere Naam for me was the easiest thing to do. If you travel to small towns, that's how they behave. I behaved like that in the second half. The second half was a complete loser. Even when I was publicising Tere Naam, I told people not to get inspired by my character in the second half because today, people take your performance home and behave accordingly. They try to. I told my fans that if one girl goes away from your life, another one can replace her. It's not that difficult. I think Tere Naam sequel needs to be tighter and it all depends on Satish Kaushik whether he wants to make it or not.

"Twitter has given me a new stage to perform"
I tweet when I have something to tweet. But when I am not doing anything, I follow my fans on twitter. Most of the tweets I do are without taking the names of the people who've tweeted me. I do not tweet for the fun of it. I follow my fans and try to reply them. I also like posting some pictures on twitter and that's the only thing I do. Twitter has given me a new stage to perform and I am really happy. I can say today that Dabangg isn't just a movie; it's turned into a movement.

Salman is the last chicken curry hero

Last week we almost decided that Salman Khan would be the next Lounge cover. Hell, I even saw Veer—one of those rare Salman movies I just couldn’t bring myself to watch when it was released earlier this year.

It seemed like the perfect time to revisit the appeal of Bollywood’s craziest Khan. One film company head says that though, currently, Shah Rukh gets the best advance booking followed by Aamir, and then Salman, Dabangg—the latter’s new film that releases on 10 September—could change the rules. In trade lingo, the “pre-release buzz” for Dabangg is tremendous. Add that to the fact that Salman will host television’s biggest show, Bigg Boss. More importantly, there’s no disputing the fact that Salman Khan is Bollywood’s last “Bollywood” superstar, if you know what I mean.

Shah Rukh is too busy making sensitive movies/going sci-fi; Aamir spends all his time tweaking our box-office psyche and training us how to be better movie watchers. But Salman is comfort food (think chicken curry, not dal-rice since he doesn’t understand the word vegetarian)—he embodies the psychedelic, pelvic-obsessed industry we grew up with, and not the multiplex maze it currently is. Those of you who worry about the overnight death of single-screen cinema and dancing in the aisles can surely understand the importance of Salman Khan?

Salman could end up being the last macho-masala super-entertainer of our times. Original bad boy Sanjay Dutt is now quite unwatchable; we seem mostly bored of poor Akshay Kumar’s brand of loud cinema; and Hrithik Roshan has always been too good-looking for Hindi cinema. But discount the eyebags/country-of-one accent and Salman looks/sounds better every year. At 45, as he confessed on NDTV during a visit to navy air station INS Hansa, he finds the way women react to him as he grows older a “little scary”. “There was a time when women had the hots for me but now it’s reducing,” he said. I’m sure he was joking.

He gets full marks for the ability to swagger comfortably in what is certainly Bollywood’s tightest collection of jeans. Add his other staples—leather jacket, sunglasses hooked into the neck of his jacket on the rare occasion he takes them off his nose, bandanna, boots, clunky leather belt—and nobody does biker chic like Salman.

Also ReadPriya Ramani Blogs

He may not dance but he’s got all the moves. He flirted exquisitely with all the women who appeared on his television debut 10 Ka Dum—the supposedly sexy/worldly Mallika Sherawat sounded positively gauche when they bantered. And 5ft 8 inches is not short by Indian standards, ladies.

Enough has been written about his chest. It was bound to play an important part in the climax of Veer where Salman got a screenplay credit too. Hero takes a bullet in the heart, strips his armour to die, then recovers enough to win a battle bare-chested before collapsing. “I’ll be back again,” he announces before he dies, waxed chest in full view.

Which other hero does the 1980s-style entry any more? Which other hero can still excite audiences with a bizarre rinse, repeat punchline? Remember Wanted’s Ek baar jo maine commitment kar di, uske baad to main khud ki bhi nahi sunta or Veer’s Jahan se bhi pakadta hun, paanchser gosht nikalta hun. Dabangg’s one-liner will apparently be: kamaal karte ho Pandeyji.

So what if there’s never any continuity in the way Salman Khan looks through a film? Now you see hair, now you don’t. That’s part of his charm. So what if his dance directors tell him to do whatever it is he wants in the songs (usually, he opts to remove his shirt or flex his biceps but once in a while he might come up with the killer towel dance or the belt jiggle). In the last two decades, only Prabhu Deva has managed to squeeze some structured dance out of him.

Eventually we decided to keep the Salman cover story on hold, even though there’s a little bit of him in every Hindi film goer. Like the other two Khans, Salman is an important part of our pop history. We remember him doing bare-but-hairy-chested push-ups wearing jeans and high heeled shoes. We remember him playing a passionate saxophone without moving his fingers even once. And that was 1989. He gets full marks for history too.

Sonakshi Sinha - Here she comes!

Presence. You can smell it, see it, taste it but you can't manufacture 'it'. It is the make or break of any star. Intangible, yet impossible to succeed without it. Talent, looks, pedigree and even luck are rendered meaningless if you haven't got it. If you do, the rest can be acquired along the way. Who has it, who doesn't? Does it run in the family? Can you work towards it? How do you get it? I don't know. But when someone's got it, you can see them coming from a mile.

Sonakshi Sinha, the sassiest star kid in sight oozes it in abundance. She's young, beautiful, brash, pedigreed and exudes confidence. I've known her as a plump teenager and even back then with the all the extra puppy fat she was always full of fearlessness, or as she likes to say these days - Dabangg. All this mettle bordering on presumption would have been overbearing if it didn't come with the right dose of naivety. The Sinha family is traditional with old world values and Sonakshi has found cause enough to revel rather than rebel against the over protective nature of her folks and brothers.

If her Shotgun father frowns and furrows at her leaving the house in shorts, she smiles, gives him a peck on the cheek and rushes out before he can catch her. Yet she blushes and won't answer when asked if she's ever had a boyfriend. "My father will kill me...actually he'll kill you...he'll throw you off the couch." Luckily, I know her father doesn't actually have a shotgun. Besides he's openly admitted that his darling daughter is the only one who can make him dance around her little finger.

Going by the glimpses we've caught of her in the trailers and the fact that she convinced the angry Khan to sport the comic moustache, it's not just her dad she's got dancing to her tune. Don't go reading more into that. I know this girl and the tight hold her mother has on her - a link up, especially with the newly single Sallu is out of the question. But the question will be asked and a lot worse will be assumed. Is this something little Miss Sinha is prepared for? That's when pedigree helps, "...I've seen it all my life with my Dad... from the time we started watching TV and reading we were not protected from the link ups and rumours any more... we learnt to ignore them and it didn't affect us."

The industry has sat up and taken notice. They await the girl who seems to have it all and flaunts it. A girl who's in no hurry to sign her next film because she knows her fate (unlike her brother Luv's) will not be decided at the box office. She has that ethereal something that filmmakers and audience run after. It can't be pinned only felt.

To feel her presence tune into Headlines Today this Saturday 28th August at 7.30pm and Sunday at 12.30pm. Tell me if I'm right?

Posted by Koel Purie Rinchet

"Salman enjoyed every bit of Chulbul and took it to another level" - Arbaaz Khan

It's the moment any journalist would avoid. Interviewing the producer of a film while the Censors are watching it to give their certification. Arbaaz Khan sends me a text message to call him at an unusual timing. It was 4.30pm. An unexpected text puts me in frenzy. I call him at 4.38 for the interview and off he goes in a flash on the other end. His voice sounds rapacious when he talks about his brother Salman Khan, his interest in Dabangg sounds obsessive, when he talks about his wife Malaika Arora Khan, he sounds unperturbed but then again, when I talk about his father Salim Khan he jumps back putting you in a scratchy situation. In short, Arbaaz Khan is like an eagle. He knows his job and hits you at the right time at the right place without you knowing its consequences. The result is obvious - The day he announced Dabangg, other biggies got unnerved and changed their release dates and made way for the Salman starrer. All the above defines a word called 'Producer'. In the words of Bob Weinstein, Hollywood's most famous producer, "Don't let your fear paralyze you. Prepare yourself not only technically but also emotionally." UK's Harrow Observer columnist and Bollywood Hungama's London correspondent talks to the first time producer Arbaaz Khan who can't wait to unleash his creation - The fearless Dabangg.

Da 'bang' of Dabangg

The first promo is a culmination of a lot of things. It's not just a very well cut promo. It's got a lot to do with the look of the film, the characters, the dialogues, production values. When there is a need for a film like Dabangg, you know nothing can stop it. People have been watching a lot of multiplex, frothy, new age cinema. Good. But here comes a rustic, rooted and the typical masala film of the 1990s where the hero is going to bash up all the baddies. There was a special intent to cut such a promo.God has been kind and I love this overwhelming response. The day the first promo came out; a tidal wave has been created.

I knew that the forty minute narration had a big potential. Abhinav was also looking for a producer and I gave him an offer which he couldn't refuse

Backing Dabangg

Production was always at the back of my mind. It was something that I wanted to embark on. So when Abhinav Kashyap came with an offer, Dabangg became a catalyst and made me want to start my production house with it. I liked what Abhinav had narrated to me when he came up with the raw stage of just the idea. But I knew that the forty minute narration had a big potential. He was also looking for a producer and I gave him an offer which he couldn't refuse (laughs). I told him to relax and watch how Dabangg creates a bang which he would not have even seen thought of.

Salman 'Chulbul' Khan

Salman is always different in each of his films. He has grown in all his films in spite of few of his films doing not so good. There are films in which you are very good because you are a trained actor. But not all roles you do fit like a glove. No. Actors do a role for many reasons. Personal, friendly, professional, business, etc. And then there are roles like Chulbul Pandey where actors say that this is it, the role of a lifetime. A role which excites them, a role in which they can sink their teeth in, a role which they were waiting for. Salman did just that. He got so submerged into the role, the result is out for you to see. Salman enjoyed every bit of Chulbul and took it to another level.

Salman enjoyed every bit of Chulbul and took it to another level

Sonakshi 'Sexy' Sinha

Sonakshi was completely Salman's choice for Dabangg. We could've gone and made this film with an established actress but we decided not to. Then the questions: What if we take a new girl? What are the positives if we take a new face? Will a new face have the looks, the talent, the appeal, etc. So when Salman met Sonakshi at Amrita Arora's sangeet, he came up to me and said, "We've got the new girl". I asked him, "Who?" and he replied, "Sonakshi." I was stunned. I wanted to start the next day itself. Sonakshi is a dear family friend of ours since many years and then being Shatrughan Sinha's daughter just doubles it up. She did have some training learning the dialect and all but she was a thorough professional from day one. She is brilliant.

Malaika 'Munni' Arora Khan

Yes, Munni is a hit, isn't she? (Laughs). Thanks to me too because I have a hand too in her selection. Every song she does, she takes my feedback. If the song is not good, even if a big star does it, it will go unheard. It's not that she is dancing with SRK or somebody else. Why a song does well? I personally believe even if Malaika was not there in 'Munni' number, it would still have been a hit. Choreography, Salman's entry and Malaika took the song to another level but the overall credit has to go to the music director.

Sonakshi was a thorough professional from day one. She is brilliant.

Sohail 'contribution' Khan

Yes, Sohail has given a lot of inputs in Dabangg. Sohail was very much involved in this film. He wasn't so much involved creatively. But cinema isn't alone about creativity. It is about the business too. There is administration aspect too without which you cannot make a movie. Sohail's entire support for Dabangg came from his expertise in business, in getting things organised. I garnered support from him.

Arbaaz 'twitter' Khan

No, no, no. I am on twitter thanks to Mr. Salman Khan. Twitter should thank Salman too (laughs). I've had some great response from the networking sites. You have to use these sites to promote your film and what's wrong? I will do my films publicity to get the visibility and will go to any extent in doing so because my money is at stake. I am not apologetic and this isn't a promotional gimmick. You have to get people to see your film and Twitter is just a medium through which we are making sure it happens.

Salim 'writer' Khan

Only Salman has worked in the script written by my father so far. It was Patthar Ke Phool. My dad has not been completely involved with writing but he has either doctored it or given a suggestion. How much of that we take is our decision. My dad is now retired and we want him to enjoy his life. He has worked hard and has been at his peak while he was working with Javed Akhtar as Salim-Javed. Now all a father wants is his sons to progress and we are doing just that. My dad is not at a stage where he has to run around and please the people only because they want to write better. But you never know, may be in a near future Sohail and I might have a script which we'd want my dad to do.

Salman paints Mother Teresa's portrait to celebrate her 100th birth anniversary

That Salman is a great actor is anybody's guess. That Salman is a great human being, is something that all the recipients of his affection will vouch for, so much so that Salman also has a NGO dedicated to the same cause called as 'Being Human'.

But Salman being a great painter is something that is proven with each passing day. Yes, you heard it right. Even though he maybe the proverbial 'bad boy' of Bollywood, his paintings say something else! Salman's emotional side can quite clearly be visible from his paintings. Amongst the other 'testimonials', we bring you with yet another Masterpiece of a painting by Sallu. This time, Salman has painted the portrait of Mother Teresa, whose 100th birthday is being planned to be celebrated all over the world this year. As a token of his love and respect to the eternal Mother, Salman has painted this portrait, a picture of which he posted on twitter recently. Needles to say, it's a piece de resistance indeed!

No 'A' certificate for Dabangg

In the current market scenario when the maximum moolah for a film is generated in it's first week with more than half of it coming in the first three days itself, it is imperative that audience across different age groups and segments walk into theatres across the country in dozens. The makers of Dabangg are conscious of this fact and are sure that in order to get maximum footfalls, bringing in family audience is the key. No wonder, they are pushing for a 'Universal' certificate and are in no mood to settle for an 'Adults Only' certificate.

"We are very clear about that. Dabangg is a universal film and not targeted only for youth. There isn't anything at all in the film that would lead to an 'A' certificate", says Arbaaz Khan who is understandably protective about his debut production.

Ask him whether Censors would have any issues with the brutal and rustic action in the film and Arbaaz denies any such possibility.

"It is understandable for a film to get an 'A' certificate if it has blood all around with lot of gruesome and violent action. In case of Dabangg, there isn't anything remotely close to that. It is a fun masala entertainer and that's the way we have projected the film through promos as well", Arbaaz reasons.

However, the fact remains that Wanted was a fun film as well but it had received an 'A' certificate. It is a different matter though that the film still went on to be a super-hit at the box office even with a reduced audience base. Still, doesn't past reference make the producer in him wary, especially so because Dabangg is supposed to be carrying the 'cool action' quotient the same way forward as Wanted?

"God forbid, even if there is any particular shot that Censors may feel would qualify for adults only, I would fight for it, perhaps relent eventually but won't allow it come in the way for Dabangg to miss out on a 'U' certificate", Arbaaz responds quickly, "Of course, in my heart I don't think I would have to touch even a single shot. My film is for family audience. Also, it doesn't touch upon any sensitive issues. It doesn't have any vulgarity. Also, there isn't any foul language which is unbearable for audience to digest."

For someone who is attached to his film, Arbaaz understands that an 'A' certificate does affect a film's market eventually. "Today there is monitoring of people who step into theatres to watch a film. Dabangg is a film for single screens as well as multiplexes, A centres as well as B and C centres. It would appeal to all classes; it has to work everywhere. I want maximum number of people to watch Dabangg. Period."

Aamir Khan Unplugged

There are three paintings signed ‘Salman Khan’ on the walls of Aamir Khan’s study. One of them could pass off for Jesus; the other two are charcoal portraits of Aamir in his buzz cut from Ghajini.

Needless to add, Salman is a far superior painter than an actor. The quality of that art, unless outsourced, is nothing short of splendid.
We don’t find a similar Shah Rukh Khan touch at this quiet, quaint Pali Hill apartment, apart from a CD of SRK hit songs on a rack where other unused assortments are randomly stacked up.

Aamir has but a pup named Shah Rukh at his Panchgani farmhouse. We ask him how’s Shah Rukh (the pet) doing. No answer. You can say he’s doing fine, we suggest, in pure jest of course. No answer again. Aamir smiles, looks away. Jokes apart, it’s still quite something that almost in the same year, three actors, of somewhat different backgrounds but the same surname, made it to the big screen as leading men. Two decades later, no one’s quite convincingly displaced them from that big game, and they’re even top individual producers now. Even ribbings over their rivalries have remained roughly the same.

And they’ve all hit their mid-40s. One stays put as perhaps the most popular brandname (SRK); the other (Salman) periodically shocks the country with his following from the front benches of Middle India (Wanted).

Of the three, it’s Aamir alone who’s but consistently walked ahead at once with appreciation as performer, and audience as actor. This, combined with both critical acclaim and commercial success as producer. Or so suggests our survey across some of Mumbai’s tradesmiths, who letch at box office figures for a living. The numbers match their point.

Surely Aamir then knows a thing or two about the movies, and the movie business, that many others don’t. We sit for almost three hours, in his first full-length interview since 3 Idiots, to discuss exactly that: films, flops, and a funny business called Bollywood.

That many hits as actor and producer, certainly, there are things you know, even if intuitively, about what audiences expect from a film, that others don’t quite get.As a creative person, I can’t think like that, and would like to give my audiences much more credit. I feel, with cinema, if you’re skilled enough, and the material you have is striking enough, you can actually change the minds of viewers, in the way you tell the story alone. So, if a point is put forward in a very bold manner, a person might reject it; but when he sees it on the screen, that moment, and the flow with the film, may spellbind him, and you can manipulate him. I don’t mean manipulate as a bad word. Every film manipulates an audience: if it makes you cry, makes you laugh, it is manipulating you. And if we can do that well enough, I don’t think there’s any restriction on the filmmaker or the audience (on what can work, or not).

Have you still developed certain thumb rules; for instance, Shekhar Kapur suggests, a pure farce doesn’t work among Indian audiences?
In fact, I have picked up a host of taboo topics and they’ve all worked. Mughal-e-Azam was a big success, but for 30 years after that, people had been saying, period films don’t work. And sports films definitely don’t work. My film (Lagaan) was both a period film and a sports film, and it was a film with a dialect spoken in it – Avadhi. We were not wearing DKNY, and stuff like that. Around my second film as producer, Taare Zameen Par (TZP), the market and the industry in general said that films made on childcare and education don’t work. The third was of course more mainstream: Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na was a love story.

Any particular scene you’ve knocked out at the edit table, second-guessing the audience?
If a scene doesn’t work, it would be for creative reasons, not for reasons of taboo. Otherwise, I would’ve reacted to it at a script level. Often we’ve left out scenes, because the flow has dropped, the point has already been conveyed or because we don’t want to repeat ourselves….

You’ve practically grown up in Bollywood, and among producers.
Yes, my uncle (Nasir Hussain), and my father (Tahir Hussain) were both filmmakers.

What is it that you’ve learnt from experiences that you perhaps apply to yourself as producer: especially in terms of money that makes showbiz tick?
There are basic rules that I follow. I have no idea if they are any different from others. Rule number one is that I must be honest to what I’m setting out to do. Rule number two is that I have a responsibility towards my audiences. So when the audience pays Rs 50 or Rs 100 to watch my film, I want it to be paisa vasool. I want them to get their money’s worth. I take that on as a personal responsibility. And the third responsibility I have, which answers your question more directly, is no matter who I deal with, that person should make money off me. So if I’m an actor, and you’re a producer, I want to make sure that you earn money. If I’m producing a film, and I pass it on to you as distributor, I want to make sure you earn, and likewise. Nobody who comes in contact with me in the market should ever lose money. That’s my motto.

What do you mean by paisa vasool? For the audience?Well it’s very difficult to explain that.

Most people in the movie biz will suggest paisa vasool to mean the potpourri picture: action, songs, drama… All-in-one masala, as it were.
No, no, no, not that. Dus gaane hon (there should be 10 songs), 3 action scenes,” that’s not what I mean by paisa vasool at all. I just feel that since the audience trusts me by buying a ticket to watch my film; I shouldn’t let them down.

You mean they shouldn’t get bored.
The film should be engaging, entertaining, and it should offer them something beyond (just entertainment). The entertainment itself should be of a high quality, in terms of its writing, sensibility, execution…. I don’t leave any stone unturned to achieve that, because I see that as a personal responsibility. And from the market point of view, as I said, it doesn’t matter which period of cinema you look at: the ’50s, ’60s, ’90s, or you put me in the new millennium, I want to make sure whoever I work with, whoever I have business dealings with, earns off me. Just to give you an example, both TZP and Jaane Tu…, were very risky films on the face of it. One was a film on childcare and education; the other had an entirely new star-cast. I could have sold these films to somebody. But I released them myself (with PVR as partner and distributor), because I believed in them, and I knew if we took the risks ourselves, we wouldn’t pass on losses to anyone.

In the movie business, one keeps hearing about 90 per cent of films flopping in a year. How does an industry exist, let alone survive, at such preposterously claimed loss ratios?
A film is a flop because of its budget. A film does a business of Rs 40 crore but flops, because it took Rs 50 crore to make it. If the Rs 40 crore film had cost Rs 20 crore to make, it would be a hit. So, when I plan a project like TZP — I’m a fairly successful star, and I’m part of TZP — I can sell the film at Rs 50 crore. But that’s not a wise thing to do. I mustn’t forget what I’ve made my movie on. I must also look at the film’s budget. TZP cost me in the region of Rs 12 crore to make, and I’m quoting (the figure) from my memory. You could give or take a few. It could be 10; it could be 15.

How much did it make?
The gross business was almost Rs 100 crore; the net was about Rs 75 or 76 crore, and it did very well not only in India theatrically, but overseas as well. I didn’t sell the satellite (television rights) of the film until after it released. So, it wasn’t the sort of satellite sale that goes around in today’s environment: a lot of bidding happens, and prices go up. The film did its business at the box office, and then I negotiated with the channel, so they knew what they were buying, and they were happy to pay a certain price. So I’m saying, TZP was budgeted accordingly, and in that respect, it was a super duper hit. Because it made much more money than it cost us. And as a result, each one, down the chain, earned off it.

It’s eventually the theatre owner who takes the first hit from a flop film, isn’t it?
Well, I believe, even the corporates do now.

Because they buy films at such crazy prices?
Yes. Let’s say I sell a Rs 15 crore TZP at Rs 45 crore, because I can. Now I have taken Rs 30 crore home, but have left you (the buyer) with a risky film, all alone under the sun, to look after yourself. That’s not how business is done, or at least that’s how I feel. If my last film has done a business of Rs 100 crore doesn’t mean that every film of mine will do Rs 100 crore (worth business). The minimum that an Aamir film should do then is Rs 30 crore, let’s say, and that’s the way to look at it.

What’s the deal with every second film nowadays flashing on their posters, “Hit. Super Hit. Karara Hit…. Made Rs 100 crore, Rs 200 crore….”Such things never happened before. Surely there’s a lot more to those numbers than meets the eye.As I understand it, and this is my limited understanding, mind you: A lot of corporates that have come in to the business are public limited companies, with lots of(publicly traded) shares, and shareholders. I must warn you again that I don’t know a lot about shares. But if I lose Rs 5, Rs 10 or even Rs 20 crore on a film, and my share prices, instead of going down, go up, then in the overall picture, I end up earning more, even if it is only in my head (the earning is notional). My share prices go up, because the film was a hit. For my share value to remain high, all my movies have to be hits.

So, I have lost Rs 20 crore on a film, but I’ll give the audience an impression that it was a hit; create that perception, and the share values of my company don’t fall. I may have effectively lost Rs 20 crore, but if my share prices go up, I may earn Rs 200 crore. What is Rs 20 crore, so long as I can keep that perception? And I earn much more. This is how I believe it works.

Things are now quite the reverse of how they used to be with hit producers before, who’d show losses to duck the taxman instead.Well, the other thing is that when a corporate buys a film, they kind of, if it’s the right word, amortize it (write off their cost gradually) over, say, 20 years. Now this is something I don’t completely understand. For me, you spend Rs 10, and you make Rs 12 back, and you’ve made a profit of Rs 2. And if you haven’t made the Rs 2 back, you’ve lost money, and the film’s not successful. That’s how simple it is. I can’t quite (get myself to) believe in the virtual world.

For that, the budget of the film, and the minimum price it must attract are most important. Right now, I feel, we are not even being wise about our business decisions, by and large. If we were just being wise, and I know a particular film will do at least a business of Rs 10, I’d sell it for Rs 9, or Rs 10. The prevalent logic right now is centred on what’s the maximum that the film can make: Kam se kam mat bolo, zyada se zyada kitna karegi? (Quote the maximum possible returns, not the guaranteed minimum). Rs 100? Ok then, let’s sell the film for Rs 105!” You don’t know how the person buying (that film), will ever make money of it.

Is this understanding of yours, instinctive, or borne out of individual experiences?
It’s just common sense. I feel the corporates that have come in (to the business), have brought in a lot of great practices. But some of their negative practices relate to outbidding the other. They often put value to films beyond their actual worth. I don’t know whose films go at what prices, but I do know that this is what generally happens. That films are sold (keeping in mind the) highest amount they can (potentially) make. It sounds bizarre to me. If I were a buyer, I would never pick up (pictures) at such prices. How are we to share the winnings, in such an unsafe business?

Could this also be because it’s the shareholders’ money now, unlike the producers’ own, in the past?
That’s a very important point. You are absolutely right. Earlier, there was the individual producer who would borrow money from the market, or take advances from the distributor. That was his money to make the film. The more he spent, the more he had to return. And for sure, he had to return. If I’m a reliable or sincere producer, I may have lost on one film, but the market would still trust me, assuming I’ll make it up on the second film, and pay back what’s owed.

I’ve seen my father work since I was a kid. He used to be stressed, “Yaar, maine paise liye hain (I’ve borrowed money), I need to make a good movie, chalni chahiye (it should have a good run in the theatres), budgeted such, that I can return everyone’s money.A person who is running a corporate firm (could well go), “Abhi humko kisi ke paise waapas nahin karne (We don’t have to return anybody any money), you know.” I’m not making sweeping statements. I’m saying the possibility (of such an approach) is high. There are some very good and sensible people in the film business, who are part of the corporate set-up, and who are trying their best to do good work. But at the end of the day, (it’s different when) you are not the owner of the company, and you are handling someone else’s money.

At worst, you’ll get sacked from your current job.
Yeah, at worst.

You remember stories growing up, of producers, who lost everything on a movie? It seemed a common occurrence back then.
Yeah, my dad! My dad was, a number of times, in very poor financial situations. He was making a film called Locket that took eight years to complete. A lot of his money was locked up, and he couldn’t return it.

What happened then?
Then he got lucky (smiles). I remember Locket wasn’t getting released, people who had lent him money were asking for it, and the interests were rising. He had a lot of debt on him. So to move his cart forward, so to speak, he started a small film called Dulha Bikta Hai, with Raj Babbar and Anita Raj, and that became a big hit, which kind of pulled him out of the problem, but not entirely. And then Locket got released, and it did very well. So it was just luck that ultimately helped him out of the situation. But there are umpteen such examples of producers who have gone bankrupt as a result of flop films. And they couldn’t pay their money back.

We’re meeting for the first time since 3 Idiots, which, as a film, was a strong statement on education, let alone the system. No one quite touched upon the fact then that you yourself are a college dropout. You are still among the better read people around. What’s your personal take on education itself?
I feel education relates to what you wish to learn. And you can learn that in an organised manner, through formal education. So if I want to learn about, say, the Mughal period, I can go to a college and study it. But I can also read books on the subject, and learn on my own. Or I can ask a teacher to come over twice a week, and teach me. For me, the end-result is not a certificate that says, ‘This guy knows history’. For me, it’s the fact that I already know it.

Have you actually done that? Called tutors over?
Yes, I’m learning Marathi right now. There’s a tutor who comes home twice a week, to teach me, my wife Kiran, son Junaid and my daughter. We’re all learning Marathi. I read a lot generally, and history does interest me. At some point, I would like to find a (history) teacher as well.

What made you drop out of college?
Well, I dropped out, but I didn’t stop my education. I actually started my education when I dropped out of college (laughs). I dropped out because it was clear in my mind that I wanted to be in the filmmaking business. I wanted to learn filmmaking. I felt that I was wasting my time at a college, where I was learning commerce.

You could have gone to a film school.
I could have, that was one of my options, or I could have worked with someone. Which is what I did. I worked with my uncle (Nasir Hussain), spent four years, did two films — Manzil Manzil and Zabardast — and learnt a lot during that period. I was the AD (assistant director), so I was involved with everything, right from scheduling, on-set work, to editing and entire postproduction…
Back then, I also watched way more films than I do now. But I’ve always been much more of a reader than a filmgoer. So, to answer your question, I feel education is something that you can get from anywhere. And in fact, today, with the Internet, it’s even easier. How you wish to go about it, is completely up to you. And of course, you can go through the formal system of education, which I have no problems with either.

Most would go to schools, because it helps them find better jobs.
Not necessarily. Even today, if I don’t want a job, but I still want to learn history, I could join a course. One of the things I really want to learn is cooking. So either I could go to a cooking school, learn it, and get a certificate that states, I know cooking, or I could go to my mom, and learn from her. Which is what the film (3 Idiots) says. It says the learning side is more important than the formal side of marks, grades, certificates…

Do you also find the education system way too attuned towards how much money you can make from a certificate? So, an MBA from an IIM, a means, becomes an end in itself.
Yes, but I’m saying, even when you learn to make money, it’s really about what interests you. If I’m not mistaken, Dhirubhai (Ambani) was not very well educated, and no one knew how to make money better than him. If you are interested in business, you can learn that in ‘n’ number of ways; a business school is just one of them.

You don’t particularly seem materialistic as a person though. This was the apartment (first floor, quiet corner of Pali Hill, Bandra) I came to in 2001. It doesn’t seem too different now, and surely you’ve made loads of money as producer and actor since. It’s a very non-starry existence in that sense, isn’t it?
(Laughs) I guess all of us have our priorities. And in the 20 years that I’ve been in the business, I think I could have made more money. But I wouldn’t have been able to make the films I have made. Or put differently, I wouldn’t have been able to work the way I enjoy working, which is not putting a restriction on my time. I’d never say, “Okay, I’ve got three months, here’s my money, here are your dates, and in three months, I’m out of here. I can’t work like that.”

But you’ve still made a lot…
I’ve made enough.

You could own a bungalow by the sea.
(Smiles) I couldn’t afford it.

People want to stand outside homes of film stars, wave at them. It’s hard enough to find your main gate.
Yeah, I’m a bit shy that way.

It’s interesting you mentioned that you heard Lagaan’s script (first film as producer), loved it, heard it again, loved it, heard it for the fourth time again… Much later, you went on to produce it. You’re not known to be easy to please with an idea. And you do think too much, don’t you?
I want to correct you here. Lagaan is probably the only time that I took four narrations before I decided to produce it. Usually, when I hear a script, at the end of the narration, I give a definite yes or no. If I like it, I’m on, on the basis of that narration alone. If I don’t like something, I’ll tell you immediately that I don’t.

Have you missed out on some scripts you may have heard, that later got turned into good films?
No, not so far.

Is there any movie you recall that was not as bad as narrated to you?
You know, I don’t watch too many films. So I don’t know if I can answer that accurately. But of the films that have been offered to me, I can’t think of a single script that I didn’t like, or turned down, and later felt, ‘Ah, I should’ve done that film’.

What are the major films that have been offered to you that turned out to be blockbusters, or even popular films?
One I can think of is Saajan (1991), starring Sanjay Dutt and Salman. That was offered to me. It went on to become a huge success. I don’t think it was my kind of film. If I’d done the film, I would have spoilt it. So I’m glad it was made with Sanju and Salman, and it was a big success.

Anything more recent?
No, I can’t remember.

Had, say, Omkara been offered to you?
I don’t remember it being offered to me.

Saif’s role in Omkara?
No, I don’t remember.

What would you call the lowest phase in your career?
That came soon after Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak. April, 1988, is when QSQT released, and from then on to June, ’90, when Dil released, will remain my lowest phase as a professional actor.

This is the point when you eventually went and met Mahesh Bhatt.
It was in the same period, yes. I was going through my lowest period, and he was at his peak. He had just done Naam (1986); before that, Arth (1982) and Saraansh (1984)…. And when he offered me a film, I was most relieved and thrilled. And then, I didn’t like the script.

I was in a huge dilemma, because he was someone who could have really helped me, just in terms of announcement, never mind when the film came out. Just that announcement (would’ve helped). But I didn’t want to compromise with what my heart said. It was a very tough call, and I had decided by then that unless I was totally happy with a film, I wouldn’t do it.

So for me, those two years were the biggest learning experiences. In a way, I’m glad I went through them, because I learnt my lessons the hard way, and I was really taught well. So, I said no to that film, and everyone around said I was making a huge mistake.

As a film buff, I think your lowest point may well be Akele Hum Akele Tum (1995). You were peaking as a popular actor. You had a director, your own cousin, in fine form, Mansoor Khan (QSQT, Jo Jeeta Wahi Sikander). And then you went ahead with a blatant, scene-by-scene rip-off (Kramer Vs Kramer). Even the main song was lifted from the Godfather background score. What made you do that?
I don’t think that was a low, professionally. I could have been wrong on a couple of levels as far as that film is concerned, but that’s a longer discussion. Firstly, I don’t feel remaking something that someone has done is, in any way, belittling the (original) work. If we’re doing Shakespeare today, just because I haven’t written that play, doesn’t mean I can’t perform it.

And creatively, neither Mansoor nor I — we both loved Kramer Vs Kramer — really sat down, and said okay, “How did they do that movie? Let’s do it the same way.” It was a subject we loved, so we wanted to experience it, and make it here. Some people may have problems with remakes, I don’t. (Pause). We did Ghajini again.

Was plagiarism much of an issue back then?
Whether then or now, I have one opinion on the subject — I think you should buy the rights. In the case of Akele Hum…, certainly we didn’t. Because at that time, no one had a clue about how to go about buying rights. Who should we check with? Are we supposed to call Dustin Hoffman? So, at that time, it was normal to just pick up a film and remake it. I would have great discomfort doing that now. Today, you can go on the Internet, find out whose film it is, and buy the rights. Apart from that, I have no problems in remaking films.

You’ve said before that as an actor, you go through a screening process of at least a year with a director, before you start on a film. What do you do in that year?
I do that only if it’s a new director, because the person hasn’t made a film before. And I have those three golden rules: There should be no creative compromise on a film; the audience shouldn’t be disappointed, because they are paying for the ticket; and no one should lose money. It takes me longer to keep the faith then. Because I’m not sure that this guy will pull it off. So I take my time to figure it out. What do I do? I spend time. I talk about life, intuitive things, just so I know this is the right guy.

Given this level of involvement, when do you eventually divorce yourself from the movie?
Divorce?

At what stage do you back off… At what stage is the film over (for you)?
Maybe a year after it releases (laughs). No, my emotional involvement doesn’t end with the film. It never ends. But my practical involvement really depends upon the director. And I do only one film at a time. So if the director Raju (Hirani) says, “Yaar, I’m going to check out a few locations; you want to come?” I’d be happy to.

I’m happy to be within the system: a soundboard, part of the director’s support (team). And that changes from director to director. Each has his own style of working. It depends on how the director wants to work. And I have said yes to him, which means I trust him; whatever way he chooses to work is entirely up to him.

Has there been a time when you have felt a director has seriously let you down?
(Laughs) I need to weigh this question from every angle. (Never-ending pause). Yes, that has happened.

Were images of those directors flashing in your mind right now?
(Laughs) Having said that,
I’d like to add that filmmaking is an extremely difficult process. Which is why, when I do a film that doesn’t turn out the way I hoped it would, what matters to me is the director’s intention. So, if you are working with me as director, and you have, in fact, tried your best, and you have still not succeeded, that’s fine. It happens to the best of us, and I’m okay with that.

How do things change when you’re just the producer, and not on the sets?
As producer, there are some key spots where I get very involved. For example, in fine-tuning the script, and by that, I mean, a story that I have already liked, which is why I’m doing it (the film) in the first place.
The second stage is finalising the casting, location, and the key crew. I think if you have the right location, and if you have cast the film well, then you are on a good wicket — on a very good wicket. The film looks real. Then I come in just before the shoot begins, because I believe in having workshops with actors and rehearsing.

I watch the cast perform the film before my eyes (like a staged play). I’m not there at the shoot. And if I’m happy with the first cut (edited film), I don’t need to sit on the final cut either. But if I’m not happy with the first cut, or if I have something to contribute, then, as producer, I step in again, finalising the final cut; and eventually the final copy, if there are issues with colour correction, gradation….
So there are five or six points in a film where I’m strongly present as producer, which is my job. And of course, finally, giving it a good release: promoting it, etc.

As a full-time back-room person now, do you feel actors (especially super-stars) walk away with all the adulation and attention, when a film involves so many people’s risks, talent and hard work?
And what about when the film flops? That’s the lay of the land. The face on the front gets all the flak as well. But as an actor, I have tried to explain that (unlike what) you all imagine; I don’t direct every film I act in. You’re the ones who insist on taking credit away from the director, for some reason.

That could be because some of those filmmakers turned in turkeys after working with you.
(No answer)

You seem to be the last Bollywood man standing, who is not on Twitter yet.
I’m very happy with my blog, and my Facebook (Khan goes by an assumed name on the social networking site).

But Twitter’s turning out to be quite a serious celeb marketing tool.
It’s a double-edged tool. With these kinds of platforms dishing out (information) at lightning speed, the chances of a film succeeding, if it’s not good, is almost zero. If it’s not good, then (these platforms immediately go), “Thapaak!” Nothing is left (unsaid). It is ‘mouth publicity’ at its best. So you can use it, but if you haven’t made a good film, there is no way (it can help you). If I haven’t made a film that people like, the news is out there in a second. Earlier, it took time for people to know that a film was not good. With communication through the Internet and so many news channels now, that’s instantaneous.

But you are not curious enough to explore this channel?
I’m already doing that with Facebook and my blog.

And that gets you into enough trouble anyway.
(Laughs)

How’s Shahrukh (your pet dog in Panchgani) doing?
(Laughs) Looks away.

You can say he’s doing well.
(Laughs) Points to the dictaphone. No answer.