Subhash K Jha Catches The Big B In An Uncharacteristically Outspoken Mood.

Last week you saw Sanjay Bhansali's Saawariya. What did you think of your Black director's efforts this time?
Saawariya was poetry on celluloid. An exquisitely presented Broadway-styled musical set within Indian sentiments.

It boldly defied the routine format of escapist commercial fare .... a malaise that all our films have come to be so doggedly accused of. It's daring and original and with such a high quotient of aesthetics, beauty and form!

Why do you think it was panned by a section of critics?
It quite unwittingly got caught in media hyperbole – the strength, might and penetrative influence of which formed viewers' opinion before they had barely stepped out to see the film.

But the two young stars were a breath of fresh air. Ranbir is spontaneous, original and so free of given encumbrances. For my Black director and the conductor of this exquisite symphony, I shall repeat what I wrote to him after seeing the film.

He's a genius, will always remain a genius. Ever brilliant. Often misunderstood.

You were a part a small part of the other Diwali release Om Shanti Om. What did you think of the film's efforts to satirize the Hindi mainstream cinema of the 1970s, an era that largely belonged to you?
Shah Rukh called me to Om Shanti Om's trial a few days before the release. It was great fun. A tongue -in –cheek satire constructed around the film industry, adrenaline- pumping, young, a Magic- Mountain joy- ride.

I told Shah Rukh I was apprehensive about the audience catching on to the subtle digs on the film fraternity and its happenings. But post- release, it has worked and washed away all apprehensions.

And Deepika Padukone?
Deepika was statuesque regal and endearing. Shah Rukh was competent as always. But I keep telling him, he was best in Swades and in portions of Kabhi Alvidaa Na Kehna.

The depiction of the 70's was carefully researched and the ambience played to the galleries u The sarcasm and humour very 2007. That's how this generation communicates, it was bound to catch their fancy.

As for the 1970s belonging to me, eras never belong to any actor or star. Cinema does.

Aamir Khan has made some harsh comments on Black, saying the film is insensitive and manipulative.
Aamir is a free individual in a free society. He has the freedom to express his opinions. I cannot understand why he finds the film 'insensitive and manipulative'.

All story- telling, at times, tends to touch areas which are 'sensitive'. They could have been done to achieve dramatic impact, emotional expression or effective endings. Remember, we as film makers, dwell almost unabashedly on that unwritten mantra of bringing poetic justice in our stories.

That has been the most remarkable quality inhabiting the reason behind the popularity of Indian Cinema. Indeed any popular cinema. It becomes imperative therefore for certain aberrations in justice and human sensitivities to occur, before a resolution can be introduced to end the proceedings.

Please continue.
You see,we need to finish the film at some point of time, hopefully within 3 hours and to demonstrate at the end of it, that poetic justice was indeed delivered.

Else we would be waiting for a lifetime, or several lifetimes for it to occur.It's required therefore, to put in the insensivity to restore sensitivity. We've to put in the violence to show its presence and then to overcome it to show its futility.

Would the Ramayan be the same without Ravan? We repeatedly, year after year, burn the effigy of Ravan during Ramlila to stress the victory of good over evil. It would not happen if there was no evil in the world.

I believe it was the insensivity of certain portions of the film Black which were necessary in making it such a sensitive film.

What about Aamir's opinion that Black was manipulative?
'Manipulative' ...hmmm... the clever and sometimes devious means of controlling or influencing people, is also an accepted ingredient in a film. We need the attention of the audience towards the product.

We need to sufficiently influence them in order for them to remain attracted to the product till the last. If not for a lifetime, at least for the duration of the film. So in a sense, every film is manipulative.

If you know within the first few minutes of a film the villainous nature of a character, why wait till the climax, a few hours away, to straighten him out?

But a screenplay is built to envelope a beginning, a middle and an end, in order to have a respectable story. It is an existing form, acknowledged the world over through centuries of exhaustive writing.

Aamir seems unhappy with this traditional way of establishing character and narrative mood.
If Aamir is unhappy with this, let him demonstrate otherwise. I would be keen and anxious to educate myself on any prospective change that he might introduce to cinema.

With due respect, all the films that he features in and that I have had the great pleasure in watching, have all adhered to the very qualities that he dislikes in Black.

From using the distinct handicap, or to be politically correct, challenged condition, of a crippled human in his cricket team in Lagaan, to the 'sensitivities' of a blind girl in Fanaa.

Has Aamir expressed his misgivings about Black to you?
In a private meeting after the release of Black Aamir had told me of his reservations on the film. He had not liked it. He had issues, he said. He told me the film did not work for him because he disagreed with the voice over of Rani as soon as the film started.

The argument being, if the girl is deaf, dumb and blind how can she have a voice-over ! I have to date not been able to understand that remark. Maybe you can.

He has also called the performances in Black "over-the-top". I'd presume that includes your towering performance. I cannot comment whether my performance was towering or not, but Aamir may be right on the other – maybe the performances did go 'over the top' of his head !