[welcome to the ultimate indian film community]

Link

April 30, 2008

It’s not everyday one gets to have a long chat with Mani Ratnam. But when one does, it’s always interesting. The director discussed his movies and much more with Maria Giovanna.

How did the concept for Nayagan come to you?

I had done it as an outline for a different producer. It was just an idea, I didn’t go beyond it. Later, when the opportunity came, I drew up in a full script. It’s loosely based on a real-life character based in Mumbai (Varadarajan Mudaliar).

Have you ever met him?

Yes, I have.

After the film was made?

No, before the film was done. I was doing research in Mumbai. We scouted locations, and when I came back, he was here, in Chennai. So he called me. He had heard that somebody was trying to do a story. He was a little apprehensive. We had to go meet.

What was his reaction?

Actually, it was very strange. We showed the film to him because Kamal Haasan [Images] knew him. He came to watch the film but he had his security with him. He said they were his friends. I didn’t want to listen to any ‘yes’ or ‘no’, I just wanted to get the film done.

He saw it the day before it was released, and he told me a strange thing at the end of the film. He said that he was not that nice a person like what was shown in the film. But he said, ‘It’s good that you’re saying that somebody can be that good.’ It was his way of saying it is okay.The song that’s repeated in the film is quite sad. How do you incorporate music in a film? Do you hear a song, then decide that it doesn’t feel right or if it’s good but can be changed to a certain degree. How do you work?

It works like it does with every other technician. You know your story and you’ve got to get what you can, what you feel is right, there’s no logic to some things, just instinct. I told the music director, Ilaiyaaraja, the outline of the film. This was the first composition he did. When I finished the narration, the first tune he did was this theme song and it just came out right on. Sometimes, you know, you hear the first few phrases and you know it sounds right.

Are you very musical yourself?

I think it’s just instinct. Probably if I knew more music, I’d be in trouble. I don’t know what’s not right, so I just say ‘No, shall we try something else?’ You just have to take them in a different direction. I’m a listener more than anything else.

Why did you choose Shah Rukh Khan [Images] for Dil Se?It was just a feeling. I hadn’t seen too many of his films before. You feel that you want somebody who would be a common man, who would represent All India Radio, which is the voice of the ordinary citizen, and still be able to carry the film on his shoulders. I needed somebody who would take us across the line. It was a difficult subject, it was the 50th year of Indian Independence but there are corners which still have darker areas. We tried to cover it and this film was trying to explore into the gray thing. And we wanted this happy mood to control that side of it. So he somewhere represented that kind of mood.

When you were picturing the film in your head, were you seeing it always with him in the role?

Not really. I don’t think you see it 100 percent with a particular actor in mind. To be honest, I was working on another script with him, the Tamil film, Alai Payuthey. It was done in Hindi by my friend and assistant, Shaad Ali, as Saathiya [Images] later. So I was working on that script with Shah Rukh, and I told him the outline, which is just a simple city-based love story. But the script didn’t fall fully into place so we moved to something else. So I was thinking of Shah Rukh for Aley Payuthey, and I ended up doing it with totally new people.

There’s a scene in Dil Se where he’s talking to Manisha Koirala [Images] in the sound studio, and the door keeps swinging and the light keeps coming on and off. Who do you give credit to for that scene? Was it in your mind?

The scene was meant to take place in a lift — you have moments of privacy and moments of invasion. But when we went for the shoot the day before, the place didn’t have an elevator. So we just converted that threshold into another threshold that was a song studio and a doorway, and there were people moving in and out, they’d be caught in the threshold of the thing and then we added both sound and light, which would come and go. You’d hear bits of music and it would get shut off totally. You’d hear silence but see light and then it goes away. It was a kind of private moment in a public space.

Was that the first time you ever filmed in Ladakh?

Yes.

Had you been there previously?

Yeah.

When you were there, did you say ‘I’d love to shoot here some day’?

Yeah, I think I’ve always seen pictures, one has heard, people have gone there and come back. When I did Roja [Images], I’d gone to Ladakh. I’d gone with the same cameraman, Santosh Shivan. It’s a stunning place, though this was in fact a liberty that we took. Ladakh is not really geographically the place where the story is set, you know. But we took the border, any border state would represent the same kind of atmosphere here in India, whether it’s in the Northeast or in Punjab, you know borders were still areas which were not yet fully concentrated on by the government. They’re not vote banks so we don’t pay too much attention, so we took a liberty to push it to that.

Was it difficult shooting in Ladakh?

We started the film there. It was not that difficult.

It was difficult because you had to get used to the altitude. So we had to give everybody a 48-hour break-in period to get acclimatised. And with people like Shah Rukh and Santosh, I mean, this guy smokes all the time. You wonder where he gets his oxygen from.

How did the concept come to you for Kannathil Muthamittal?See, this is like a backyard/frontyard, whichever way you look at it. It’s been happening here for 20 years. We had been seeing it from a distance on a day-to-day basis. There was a time that it was in the newspapers everyday. A lot of Tamil literature and poetry have come out of Sri Lanka [Images] during these 20 years or so. So it’s always been there. Once we had that story, which came out in an article in Time magazine, it was about an adopted child but not in Sri Lanka. But the emotions are the same and it gave us the vehicle to get into Sri Lanka through that.

The English translations of the lyrics of the father’s and mother’s versions of the title song, to me, seem exceedingly beautiful. Is that your sense of the Tamil also?

I think it’s also because it is to do with this strange bond between the Tamils here and the Tamils there. I think language bonds them, sometimes it’s not logical, it’s an emotional thing. So the lyricist, Vairamuthu, is someone bound very strongly in that sense, so this gave him an opportunity to express it, to cry somebody else’s agony. It was his, we just did the tune and he came back after four hours with this written down. Normally the music director, lyricist and I work as a team. We all have inputs. But this was one of those things that just fell into place. He’s probably one of the best lyricists India has at this point in time.

How did the choice of Simran [Images] for the mother’s role happen?

To be honest, she was supposed to do the Preity Zinta [Images] role in Dil Se. We did a test with her too. But she was a big star in the South and the dates didn’t fall into place. She was doing glamorous roles but she was ready to try something different — to be a mother of two, to play an emotional role. So, sometimes it’s good to cast against the grain. The character comes through beyond the person, otherwise if you cast someone who is used to doing that role, somehow it gets lost.

Why did you choose Abhishek Bachchan [Images] for the role of Lallan in Yuva [Images]?

Like I told you, sometimes it’s good to cast against the grain.

Up until then, he had not had a very good run of films.

Not just that, he was doing all these goody-goody roles. It was an experiment, which could have fallen flat. Both if us took the risk, you know. But when it works out, it comes out really fresh. He had to work hard. It’s very different from his background and his upbringing — we had to work hard to get the language, body language, to get a feel of it.

Why did you set the story in Kolkata?

The thing is, it has students and it has politics. The only two places in the North that has the awareness in the metros are Delhi and Kolkata, where both the student movement and the political awareness are very strong. Mumbai doesn’t have that. And everybody shoots in Mumbai.

With Guru, the shot where Aishwarya [Images] and Abhishek are separated by the tram just before she returns to her family’s home, had you originally planned to shoot it that way, or had that evolved during filming?

It’s a shot we almost took out. It’s really easy to write that. It’s a clich�. So it’s very tempting. But we kept it (laughs). We kept it because the song was next, so it kind of placed them together. I’m still conscious of that shot. It looks easy and convenient (laughs).

Can you talk about working with cinematographer Rajiv Menon on this film?

I’ve worked with him on the film Bombay before. He’s a friend. I have been very lucky. I’ve had cinematographers who are not just interested in cinematography, they’re interested in the film, the performances, the story-telling… They’ve all been like that, and that’s a huge advantage. The Director of Photography is your closest bouncing board. You bounce a new way of staging a scene, a new dialogue, and he’s your judge, watching through the camera. And you trust his judgment. So to me, it really is a collaborative thing.

He’s a great guy to work with, he’s constantly learning and exploring. He comes from a different background in the sense that he’s into commercials. He does that a lot, so it brings in a certain other discipline that we are not used to. I think the crossing is quite frequent these days but initially, it brings in new thoughts into mainstream filmmaking.

You’ve worked with Prakash Raj [Images] several times. How long have you known him? What is he like to work with?

He did a small role for me in Bombay. He did Iruvar. That’s about two people, so he had a substantial role in it. I think he won the National Award for it. He works very hard if you want him to.

Bookmark and Share

  1. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    While I certainly prefer A/E to Yuva (for the reasons of casting and “evenness” that Q addresses) nothing in either film hits the level of Abhishek Bachchan’s performance and Kashyap’s dialogue-writing in those scenes. Devgan was dreadful, and his storyline I still believe could be neatly cut out and the film could, should and would have been better had Ratnam leaned on his superb ability to deal in dualities – here represented by the polar opposites in Abhishek Bachchan and Vivek Oberoi’s characters (those actors’ subtext were far more interesting to me than any other “pair” in the film). It’s as if the trio dynamic threw Ratnam off and resulted in a rather ungainly structure. It’s a hypothetical, but one I believe very strongly in given the precedent set by Ratnam’s own filmography.

    And while I can see why someone might not particularly be a fan of KM, to dislike it so virulently leaves me a bit perplexed. It’s melodramatic for sure – but, like most fine mainstream Indian films, it earns its melodrama through characters that Ratnam obviously has very deep feeling for, and who he maps out with loving detail and well-observed character traits. What’s especially mesmerizing from a cinematic sense of this is that great, uninterrupted tracking shot at the beginning, as Amudha narrates, and the camera travels through the family’s household, catching all the characters in a brief, unexplained interlude (particularly provocative is that angry, cleverly politicized outburst Madhavan has here with the men who come to him for help – the dialog’s just great) that tells us just enough without explaining them away. One really has a sense of this family, their daily lives, their personalities and their place within the universe of their own household and that of the world outside. It’s one of my single favorite moments in any Ratnam film, and shows why he’s such a singular filmmaker in this industry – he more often than not shows us, rather than tells us his story – the kind of move that many filmmakers, even very fine ones, have still not quite grasped.

  2. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    And I say that about the Lallan performance while being a fan of Madhavan’s work in the Tamil counterpart. Madhavan was hardly more nuanced to me though, (in fact he was more loud, came off more pronounced than Abhishek) and, to his credit, the writing in the Tamil version was just not quite up to par when compared to Kashyap’s awesome work in the Abhishek portions in Yuva.

  3. Aarohi

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Goodfella: Very well said on KM. Your thoughts on the tracking shot make me want to watch KM again.

    On a related note: KM must be the most underrated, underappreciated ARR/Mani score.

  4. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Aarohi, I couldn’t agree more about the KM soundtrack. I think it’s never fully been given its due, I have a great affinity for nearly every track here and was recently talking to Q about how truly special “Vellai Pookal” is in particular.

  5. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Goodfella: superb set of thoughts here, and I applaud your reference to the tracking shot.

    Re: ” he more often than not shows us, rather than tells us his story”

    Gets to the essence of what is Mani Rathnam’s cinema (this also leads to some negative reactions, because an audience can “project” onto the film in a way that is less possible if someone is “telling” it “what it’s all about”). On a related note I would mention Mani’s great economy (which goes hand in hand with your point). Consider the scene you mentioned, specifically the Madhavan outburst (also a later one on the bus when a guy insists on offering him his seat): Rathnam does in a few minutes here what would take another director half a movie to get at (Dombivli Fast, and, presumably, Evano Ozhuvan)…

  6. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    On the “trio”: Rathnam’s penchant for “duos” is obviously well-known, but there is a recurring “trio” motif as well at times — typically in this schema the “third” is the outsider, the stranger, as it were. Thus in Kannathil Muthamittal Amudha is the eldest of Madhavan’s three children, except she is adopted and literally the “outsider” (having come from Sri Lanka) [Note that Amudha too has three surviving parents -- Maddy, Simran, and Nandita Das]. In Yuva and Aayutha Ezhuthu Lallan/Inba are the “outsiders” (by film’s end the other two are literally allies). In Thalapathi the trio motif is weak, but Arvind Swamy is in one sense the outsider, but given that he’s a brother to Rajni, Mammmoothy might be the outsider (although this doesn’t have any particular consequence in the film). Even in Guru, Gurukant is himself the “outsider” to the duo of Nanaji and Shyam Saxena. Of course in both Kannathil Muthamittal and Thalapathi the “outsider” is simultaneously an insider, an intimate even (Rajni is the long-lost son; Amudha is very much part of Maddy’s and Simran’s family; conversely the “real” mother Nandita Das is literally an outsider in Kannathil Muthamittal).

  7. satyam

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Goodfella opining on Rathnam has always been for me one of the treats of visiting NG.. of course it’s not only Rathnam.. anything Goodfella opines on is always interesting and enlightening.. great to see lengthy comments from him after a while..

  8. satyam

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    And Goodfella has now prompted Qalandar to engage more thoroughly here as well.. I am sitting back and just taking it in..

  9. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Well, this conversation features a number of elements that give food for thought (Rathnam, fine acting, sporadic discussion of Rahman, and of course a certain NGite puzzlingly named after a Scorsese film)…

  10. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    …though I suppose that’s better than a NGite named after one-third of a mess of a Raj Kapoor film!

  11. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    For the longest time I didn’t “get” the Kannathil Muthamittal album. It certainly wasn’t bad but it didn’t do much for me (barring the title track of course, which I have always considered a masterpiece of tone — the moment when the female vocals begin (“Puru (?) deivam tanda poove…”) is pitch perfect). That has changed over the last few weeks, as something prompted me to have “Vellai Pookkal” in my office while I’d be working — this is another song with marvelous “tone”, something in between a song and ambient music; I’d “misread” this as “pop-py” type song initioally… Signore is a more conventionally “pop”-type deal, but it is marvelously catchy.

  12. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Interesting note on the trio factor, Q, although to the extent in Guru (like Nayagan’s Velu) is an outsider in just about every sense, that triad structure is a bit less viable in my eyes.

    In any case, the structure (and I just don’t mean in a character sense) Ratnam builds in Yuva/AE is quite unlike any other film in his career. The only other time I can think of him playing with time in a similar sense (not counting the the giant leaps taken in Iruvar, Guru and Nayagan) is in MR’s great flashback and the splicing of present and past scenes in Alaipayuthey. The “tripling” may exist elsewhere, but not quite in the same, (pronounced) way as it does in Yuva/AE. The doubling, on the other hand (Manisha and Preity in Dil Se…, the two brothers in Agni Natchithiram, the two suitors in MR, of course the climactic doubling of Iruvar, even the duality within Ratnam’s own history between the likes of AP and MR) is, as you rightly pointed out, obviously more well-known.

    Satyam: Talking about Ratnam is easy because he gives one so much to discuss! It’s hard to find lengthy responses to some of the stuff that comes out these days. Suffice it to say that I won’t be writing essays on Krazzy 4 anytime soon.

  13. beld o beld

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Is that joker q ;-) from mera naam joker

  14. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Goodfella: no argument on the trio structure: far less resonant than Mani’s duos, and it is a bit of a mess in Yuva/Aayutha Ezhuthu (or the problematic is highlighted because the films are so self-consciously tripartite). In general I guess I would say that the “duos” are almost a Mani schema, whereas the trios don’t rise above the level of motif. Where the trio does try to become a schema is in Yuva/Aayutha Ezhuthu…

  15. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    And two other Kannathil tracks deserve special mention: Vidai Kodu’s moving, dirge-like yet (paradoxically) inspiring sound is a significant achievement on Rahman’s part for sure. Sundari I don’t especially like, but it’s stop-start movement, its “frenetic” quality, captures childhood chaos superbly.

  16. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Perhaps I should consider a name change Q…Iruvar or perhaps Anandam is fitting, methinks.

  17. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Just don’t do “Jaadoo”…

  18. satyam

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Goodfella: I find your point about Rathnam deviating from his usual structures of duality and really venturing into the ‘third’ for ironically a double film interesting. The latter has never been part of his thinking.

    On another note and getting back to Sandy’s point I think that ‘melodramatic’ has a become a bad word in contemporary dictionaries when it needn’t be one. There is after all an ‘honorable’ tradition of melodrama in cinema.

  19. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    I don’t have much of an issue if someone doesn’t care for melodrama, but for all the melodrama in Kannathil Muthamittal, it seems far LESS melodramatic to me than most Hindi or Tamil films (than almost all commercial Hindi/Tamil films). It’s significantly less melodramatic than many Rathnam films too. I don’t see how Chak De India, Taare Zameen Par, Rang de Basanti, Swades, are LESS melodramatic than it.

  20. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    I know I’m in the minority here. My problem with Aayidha Ezhuthu/Yuva is the rather facile manner in which the film is structured, as the interconnected stories of three young men — supposingly representing three different faces of the youth of contemporary India. Beyond the literalist sense, there’s not actually much to chew on about such a structuring. The lack of a thematic “relevance” to the structure was underwhelming for me.
    That said, the writing is simply brilliant in many parts — especially the Lallan/Inba story, of course. Lallan/Inba story is easily the best thing about the film for me, and the way that character/story seems to be “abandoned” to quite an extent fittingly puts forth my main problem. The naive idealism the film seems to “embrace” towards the end.

  21. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Satyam – that’s right. It’s frankly pretty amazing to me that anyone can find fault with melodrama while being a fan of Indian cinema at all! It’s sort of like being a Scorsese fan while being against movie violence.

  22. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    And a great discussion here, folks. So much for not having much to chew on!

    >>”and his storyline I still believe could be neatly cut out and the film could, should and would have been better had Ratnam leaned on his superb ability to deal in dualities – here represented by the polar opposites in Abhishek Bachchan and Vivek Oberoi’s characters (those actors’ subtext were far more interesting to me than any other “pair” in the film). It’s as if the trio dynamic threw Ratnam off and resulted in a rather ungainly structure.”

    Goodfella,
    One interesting point. (I’m not sure if you’re aware of this. So, am making a note of it.) Mani said (in one of those pre-Guru style interviews at the time of Yuva’ release) that he started with the character of Michael, and that he was the “pivot of the film.” This is the interview where he mentioned that he always had Surya in mind for that role.

  23. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Interesting zero, thanks — I certainly didn’t know that, but it makes sense (at least it does where Aayutha Ezhuthu is concerned)…

  24. goodfella

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Zero – I think I recall that interview, and thanks for making that point. It’s interesting to me how the pivot here is the most symbolic (and thereby least interesting) character. Surya is definitely far more successful here than Devgan in projecting charisma and intelligence, but there’s something too clean cut and correct about the Michael character for my taste.

    Also, Zero, if you’re in the minority there, let me join in and say that I’m also not the biggest fan of Ratnam’s structure here. It’s largely that there’s very little intertwining of storylines going on, and we sort of have to sit through one after another. Part of the problem is that in addition to being the most interesting story, the Lallan/Inba stuff is the first one in line, and thereby Ratnam loses his best stuff too early on…

  25. jayshah

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    ‘It’s largely that there’s very little intertwining of storylines going on, and we sort of have to sit through one after another. Part of the problem is that in addition to being the most interesting story, the Lallan/Inba stuff is the first one in line, and thereby Ratnam loses his best stuff too early on…’

    Yes my problem with Yuva. In fact the film for me is only interesting for the Lallan/Inba track and by playing this card first, the rest of the movie didn’t live up to the interest of the first 45mins or so.

  26. chipguy

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Fascinating discussion.
    While I love KM, I think there is quite a bit of excess in this movie. I found both the flashback and the Sri Lanka sequences longer than necessary- seemed quite unlike Ratnam to let things continue to drag on like that. It was Simran’s performance that made the movie for me and carried it through those long sequences as well…

  27. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

    Qalandar,
    Yes, and I also wanted to point out how this “premise” (of Michael being the central figure) duly offsets the other two characters, and even abandons Lallan/Inba towards the film’s denouement. In the wake of such an overtly positivist/triumphalist ending (the last piece of dialogue from Bharathiraja/Om Puri which forms the crux of Iruvar comes off as an almost apologetic addition here), the whole concept of examining the dynamics of a “conflict” between three different faces of youth cuts off as just superficial.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Performance Optimization WordPress Plugins by W3 EDGE