FILMFARE OCT 1997 - SRK INTERVIEWS

Home Top Ad

Responsive Ads Here

Post Top Ad

Responsive Ads Here

Tuesday 3 August 2021

FILMFARE OCT 1997

No Limits – Breaking the rules of conversation with Shah Rukh Khan

Jitesh Pillai

There is a method to the madness. Chaos reigns. A pack of producers gather in his make-up room. His designer, in a fit of over-zealousness, shows him 20 pairs of tracksuits to look at. The actor lights his millionth cigarette, blows out a puff of silvery smoke and turns up the charm. Recently, Shah Rukh Khan's smooth charisma and dimples stunned us in Yes Boss and Pardes. When I meet him, I am greeted with a two-day stubble on his chin and uncombed hair, a crumpled shirttail hanging from his jeans. SRK is your average Smokin' Joe.

Or almost. Because once the camera is rolling, he moves with a manic energy, diving headfirst into his dialogue. I'm on the sets of Duplicates and he's flirting with Juhi Chawla and Sonali Bendre, purely for the camera. A conversation with SRK is always full of surprise. Opinions flow. Today is no different. SRK is upset that a tabloid has written rubbish about him. They didn't check, they were as irresponsible as a drunken doctor in his clinic. A diatribe against tabloid journalism follows. A shot calls. The crowd of press people around disperses into the studio night.

After what seems like an eternity, SRK is back. Firing one gag after another. The pathological performer is back. Willing to please. It's almost as if the outburst against the writing kin never happened. I tease him. I ask him if he is more enthralled by the media or vice versa, given the alarming frequency with which he appears on TV and in newspapers.

Shah Rukh laughs, "I think the media is Shah-oriented. No, seriously, since my BBC interview, I think the national press has realised the fact that stars are perhaps not so stupid after all. I actually resent that. The establishment press in particular has such a fashionable attitude towards films and film stars. But they are impressed when someone speaks in high-flown English. They become interviewable. And yet despite this snide attitude towards Hindi films, they need stars to quote or interview. Why this double standard?"

Shah Rukh also lashes out at the media's insistence on the link between the underworld and showbiz, recalling instances where newspaper barons and editors have been as obsequious as possible when dealing with anti-social elements - to the extent of addressing playmakers and murderers as "sirs" and "jis".


SRK further points out, "And we actors are treated like dirt. Even buying a property becomes a horrific crime. As actors, we entertain lakhs of people. Considering the fact that the government earns crores of rupees from the entertainment industry, I think we are treated shabbily."

The argument continues when we talk about the tragedy of Lady Diana... hunted to death by paparazzi. But is our media as merciless? Don't our celebrities have it relatively easier?

SRK goes on a rampage, "Okay, as long as nobody is monitoring my bowel movements. But given the chance, our media too can be pretty callous. Maybe they are not as driven as the foreign paparazzi, but that is because their counterparts in the Indian media do not have sophisticated bits like zoom lenses and hi-tech gadgets that can cross walls and distances. Look, we complain that we do not have sophisticated equipment and organised working conditions like in Hollywood, and that if we did, we would be top notch too... You say that the media here is less brutal. I absolutely disagree with that. Let there be three articles with politicians in bedroom scandals and a flood of similar articles will follow. There is just someone waiting to break the dam of depravity. I am sorry to say this, but I have had enough of media interference. Thanks, but no thanks."

He makes quick, abrupt movements with his hands. As always, his face is an open book. We turn to less grim (hopefully) topics. While shadows have been cast on his life by alleged threats to his life, the professional side has been more optimistic. Yes Boss evoked an encouraging response in the big cities and Pardes is proving to be better than just comme ci comme ca.


I tell him that Yes Boss is a technically cheap film and was saved by the performances of its lead actors; there was nothing special to report about it. When I ramble on about it, saying that Aziz Mirza's Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman is arguably a better film, SRK defensively replies, "Yes Boss is a better film than Raju... Yes, it is technically cheap because 11 cameramen worked on the film... whereas Raju... was shot only by Binod Pradhan. Yes Boss gave me breathing room for another year. It worked because the film has so many beautiful moments - mainly between Juhi and me. I modelled my character's awkwardness and innocence on director Aziz Mirza. He is so harmless. In fact, he is incapable of handling production troubles or even asserting his authority. He can never be a badmash like other filmwallahs. God willing, Yes Boss will feature prominently in a Shah Rukh Khan retrospective one day."

But would he list Pardes among his major achievements? And would he please enlighten me about the row with Subhash Ghai? To these questions, SRK replies bluntly, "Look, it is bad taste on my part to badmouth one of my own films or its director. I will always stand by Pardes, for better or for worse. Also, I am happy that it has been quite successful. But to be absolutely honest, I did not feel a part of Pardes. I take full responsibility for that too. Maybe I should have gone to Subhashji for script sessions. I did not. In general, I am much more committed with my directors, but I was not with Subhashji."

Subhash Ghai has gone on record saying that Shah Rukh tends to dominate his directors. Point this out to him and Shah Rukh chuckles. "Check this out with all my directors. I am more than involved in my films. I set myself on fire; I jump off a two-storey building. I put my life on the line. None of my directors has ever complained about me interfering. In fact, every one of them wants me back, without exception. I have always worked with strong directors, not yes-men and chamchas. Ask Rakesh Roshan, Rajeev Mehra, Mani Ratnam, Mansoor Khan or Yash Chopra if I have ever dominated them," he says, rolling his eyes. "When you think about it, maybe I should have dominated Subhashji. In any case, my role would not have turned out the way it did. Ha! Ha! Ha!"


Will he do Subhash Ghai's Shikhar? The buzz is that the film is as good as shelved. SRK doesn't mince his words and says, "My deal with Subhashji was to do two films. I fulfilled that with Trimurti and Pardes. Now I don't have a hint of Shikhar. If he wants me in the film, I am sure he will tell me about it and we will work out the details."

As he speaks, he grimaces and chews his lips. I ask him for more information about the whole acting thing. He sighs, "After five years, I have realised that it is important to work with educated directors. Lack of education rears its ugly head like a snake. At the moment, I am fortunate to be working with guys I am in tune with. I am sure that my films with Mani Ratnam and Mansoor Khan will, if nothing else, be thoroughly entertaining and engaging."

As is usual with him, he declaims in a fit of bluster, "I got burned in Koyla, played a chamcha in Yes Boss and was a glorified extra in Pardes. And I am part of a romantic triangle in Dil To Pagal Hai. The first three films have done good business. I get offers every day. So why worry? I read somewhere in a book by Deepak Chopra that the past is history and the future is a mystery. This very moment is a gift... and that is why it is called the present. So I want to go with the flow and have fun while it lasts."


He's been called back for another recording. As he dances to the choreographer's instructions, I can see that 'go for it' enthusiasm. That's perhaps the secret of his success. That ruthlessness of an 'elephant in a china shop'.

When he returns, I ask him what basic advice he would give to aspiring actors. He explains matter-of-factly, "Acting cannot be taught. There are no special workshops or acting schools like Lee Strasberg's here. There are no teachers like Uta Hagen or Sandy Meisner. In their schools, actors could learn discipline and self-control. Here, acting lessons mean lessons in dancing and horse riding. They only make you a dancer or a stuntman, not an actor. Personally, I always consider myself a showcase object. I have to attract the audience by hook or by crook, make them take me home with me. I can say with complete confidence that my films may have been disappointments on occasion, but as an actor I have never disappointed my audience."

The mobile buzzes. It's Madhuri Dixit. They are discussing their dubbing schedule for Dil To Pagal Hai. SRK teases her mercilessly. He hangs up and turns to me. "I love working with Madhuri Dixit and Juhi Chawla. They are such fine actresses and yet they are willing to learn. Even in the most straightforward scenes, there is a seriousness. I like their attitude to work. They are not indifferent. The same is true of Anil Kapoor. He is so honest and sincere in his work. Sometimes the efforts backfire. But at least he has his strong convictions. You know what? I wish I had met Madhuri and Juhi much, much earlier. I can't explain how lucky I feel working with them. They are huge stars but so balanced. Unlike other two-film wonders who misbehave, unpleasant brats who think they are doing producers a big favour by turning up on the sets."


Yet, in the wake of Anjaam and Koyla, the trade dubs his pairing with Madhuri Dixit with an oh no. "The trade and the media are extremely short-sighted to make such simplistic assumptions," he shoots back. "You can fault the films, but none of our performances were flawed, either in Koyla or Anjaam. What you guys call chemistry between hero and heroine is actually a good professional relationship. Madhuri and I have that understanding and timing, which shows on screen. Watch Dil To Pagal Hai and you will know what I mean. Even predictable reactions like she didn't look beautiful in Koyla are pointless. We both were meant to look like this. We didn't have many costume changes. If you ask me, we should have looked uglier. We only looked a bit filmi and chic during the Tanhai tanhai song. A true actor's job is to act, not look beautiful. After 12 years of looking beautiful in films like Tezaab, Beta, Hum Aapke Hain Koun…! etc., it was okay for Madhuri not to look so beautiful in Koyla.”

When there is an awkward 30-second pause in the conversation, SRK is quick to fill it with jokes and anecdotes. In a business that offers little valuable material for adult actors, he tries doggedly to avoid the trite. His wealth of reading material and film knowledge often comes to his aid.

As if on cue, he murmurs, "I read this wonderful quote from an actor who said, 'Experiences come in many forms - funny, good, sad, etc. Experiences are like a drop of color in the pure water of a pool.' Now, isn't that amazing?"

As the night progresses, he chats animatedly. I tell him that the legendary Humphrey Bogart once said, "You're not a star unless they can spell your name in Karachi." The master of the joke parries, "I can assure you, they can spell my name even there."

And he asks with a straight face, “By the way, who is Bogart?”

Post Bottom Ad

Responsive Ads Here

Pages