/> Audiences in Mumbai have found Shiva to be excessively clichéd and violent.

I always knew it was going to get extremely bad reviews. I knew critics would see it as a routine hero-villain film. I'm not really surprised by the severe backlash. But it's doing superb business in UP, Bihar, Punjab, Bangalore, Nizam, Andhra Pradesh—even better than my Sarkar. It's weak in Mumbai and Delhi. The people in Pune love it while just miles away in Mumbai they don't think much of it. I don't know why. Audiences responses can be so contradictory! In Mumbai Mirror one opinion says Mohit Ahlawat shouldn't be given any more chances, while another guy says he's the next Amitabh Bachchan.

The story is clichéd only because it takes on the timeless theme of an honest cop taking on a corrupt system. It was always my intention to make an unrealistic khaki-coloured actioner. Some people are enjoying it as an entertaining anti-establishment film. Others who thought the fights were too realistic have rejected it. Strangely top cops in Bihar and Mumbai have loved the film. People running the system find Shiva realistic whereas non-establishment guys find it unrealistic. Sure the theme is predictable. But I don't think the execution is predictable.

Shiva is too violent to be enjoyed by families.

To establish how ruthless the anti-social elements are I had to show the violence. The audience had to feel the brutality of the characters to appreciate the heroism of the protagonist. In any case a filmmaker can't please everyone. I don't consciously think of which section of the audience would like what I'm doing. Besides, all cop films are violent.

My next two films Darling and Nishabd aren't violent. Darling is a difficult to classify. There's a ghost but it isn't supernatural film. It's a very stange and probably my most original film. So for those who think Shiva is unoriginal I hope Darling serves its purpose. All my films so far are taken from somewhere or the other. Sarkar may not resemble The Godfather. But the truth is, if I hadn't seen Coppola's film I would't have made Sarkar.

Shiva seems like a violent homage to Govind Nihalani's Ardh Satya.

Definitely. When I made my first Shiva many years ago I changed the police backdrop in Ardh Satya to a college camous. Now I've taken Shiva back to the police force. This is more a remake of Ardh Satya. But whereas Ardh Satya excited the intellect my Shiva is made to excite primeval instincts. The villains like Kutney and Bappu hark back to the characters from the 1970s.

You made Shiva to re-launch your protégé Mohit Ahlawat.

I made it to experience the old-fashioned action genre where you feel every punch. I wanted to feel the visceral thrill. Mohit's character isn't the archetypal Angry Young Man. But because of his calm face the punch seems far more powerful. I feel an actor is like real estate. You've to have the vision to pinpoint the land and then develop it. An actor can have thirteen flops and then become an overnight superstar. The same guys who wrote off Rakeysh Mehra after Aks think he's the best after Rang De Basanti. Why can't people stop being so negative about Mohit? We're working together in Sholay again.

Bappu is modeled on gangster turned politician Arun Gawle. Why are you constantly cannibalizing real-life figures?

Bappu isn't modeled on Arun Gawle beyond some referential similarities. When people saw Company they said it was based on the rivalry between two underworld dons. And they thought Sarkar was Bal Thackeray's story. I use these characters and their lives as only as sub-texts. Realistic cinema cannot come out of thin air.

Audiences find it hard to accept Nisha Kothari as a committed journalist.

In Bollywood actors do all kind of roles. The effectuality of the actor depends on the way he /she is presented. And contrary to what some critics say Nisha's voice isn't dubbed. This is a free country. Everyone has an opinion.The basic tendency in every humanbeing is to say and hear bad rather than good things. It sounds far more spicy to say Ramu has made a f...k-all film. This is truer than within the industry than anywhere else. They hate the thought of anyone making a successful film. But I feel cinema is like a bookstore. P,G.Wodehouse and James Hadley Chase have to co-exist. No one author or book can satisfy everybody. The secret is to know how many copies to put out. Likewise the audience connects with a film on various levels and for various reasons. Timing is important to the release of a film.

The same supporting cast occurs in all your films?

Why just me? Karan Johar, Mahesh Bhatt, David Dhawan they all like to work with the same supporting cast. When an actor like Zakir Husain builds an image in a particular genre of my cinema it's easy to identify him instantly in the plot as a villain. I don't think the audience gets tired of seeing the same supporting cast.