Nayandeep Rakshit (DNA; February 5, 2018)

Whether it’s Cheeni Kum, Paa or Ki & Ka, R Balki has opted for unconventional subjects, which haven’t been attempted in Bollywood before. Continuing the tradition, his next directorial, Pad Man, deals with a topic — menstrual hygiene — that’s considered a taboo in the society. This is also the ad filmmaker-turned-director’s first biopic, a genre which, he admits, he isn’t too comfortable with. He tells After Hrs why he readily took up Pad Man and how he would do a masala film, only if it’s done his way...

When you were making Pad Man, were you apprehensive that people would take offence to it, since the film talks about menstruation?
No. I never thought about it. An objection to this film would be an objection to women. It’s as fundamental as that. But I’m so touched by the effort that our government, as well as that of other countries, are making to create awareness about menstrual hygiene. It’s a universal issue.

Here, sanitary pads are considered an object of luxury and not a necessity in villages, whereas, in a few countries, condoms are distributed for free. Do you think that will change?
It will. Cinema is a powerful medium. When people say that, ‘Pad Man is coming’, they are telling a word, which they never said before. But ask those same people to request for a sanitary napkin at a store and they’ll start whispering. I also believe that there is a huge problem of affordability. A lot of women who want it, can’t afford it. There is lack of awareness, too. People don’t understand that pads are more hygienic. It’s supposed to protect you from diseases that a cloth cannot because despite washing it repeatedly, there will still be germs. So, the basic purpose of sanitary napkins is misunderstood. It’s not a lifestyle choice, it’s a necessity. It’s a luxury today in a lot of people’s houses only because it’s been made out to be a luxury.

How did Pad Man happen?
I was approached to make this film. Twinkle Khanna had interacted with Arunachalam Muruganantham earlier as she wanted to write a book. Akshay Kumar and she (Twinkle Khanna) met me and I thought it was a great opportunity. I normally don’t like making a biopic because I get scared thinking whether I’ll be able to do justice to that person. At the same time, I knew the opportunity to make a film like this would never come again. I said yes in 24 hours! Then, it was funny. Twinkle went on to write her book and I went on to write my film. Finally, we arrived at two different interpretations of one man, his life being the common thing. We both finished at the same time as well. So he’s got two people writing for him. It was a natural story waiting to be told. I needed to make sure those emotions came across really well because eventually, it’s a love story.

You have a certain sensibility and treatment in your films. Do you think that prompted Akshay and Twinkle to approach you?
The cast wasn’t in place at that time. Even Akshay wasn’t sure. But he just asked me, ‘Do you want me to do the film? I don’t have a problem not doing it’. I felt that you could see the character in him completely. Pad Man is probably my most mainstream film because all my movies have largely been urban-centric. Of course, the tonality and the way I write doesn’t change but the genre and setting of this emotional love story is so far-reaching than anything else that I’ve done. It’s because of the nature of the story. It’s funny that something that people consider a taboo subject is actually my most mainstream subject ever.

But it’s commendable for a superstar like Akshay to do Pad Man...
Yes, it’s brave that he’s making such choices. Last year, I loved two films —The State vs Jolly LLB 2 and Toilet - Ek Prem Katha, both of which starred him. He has a great reach today and he can do any kind of movies. Akshay has got an absolute new tone in his films now. I’m so happy to have him play my leading man because when you watch Pad Man, you’ll know why he’s perfect for it.

As a director, is it difficult to find novel ideas?
I just try and see what I haven’t thought of before. I also watch a lot of films. I think there is a certain zone and tone that every director has. I know enough to say that. If you’re doing something that’s not original, then there’s no point in doing it. Yes, the subjects might have been dealt with somewhere else. But I should not know. That’s my only condition before starting a film. If I know it and I’m asked to do it, then there’s a problem.

Do you critique your own films?
I have done such s**t. I try and forget my movies as fast as possible, in fact, just a day after the release. I loathe my films. It’s not just one scene or two scenes. I cannot stand my own work.

Why?
When you are making a film, you go through so many emotions and by the time it opens in cinemas, you’re sick of it. You lose emotions, not objectivity. The sentiments with which you write a movie are non-existent by the time you release it. I’m quite disconnected that way.

Have you ever thought of breaking the norm and doing something completely different?
This is something totally different. I don’t want to do something out of my sensibility because then, it won’t be me. I don’t need to prove anything to anybody that I cannot do this. Even if I do a masala film, it will be with my style and sensibilities. It can’t be made with Manmohan Desai’s sensibilities because I’m not him.

So are you saying you’re averse to that kind of cinema?
No. What you know is what you do. I do only things which I know I can do. For example, I love Welcome. I roared with laughter while watching it. What madness! Even Rowdy Rathore is one of my favourite movies. Putting such calibrated nonsense is an art and if a film bores me, it’s boring regardless of what people think. There are interesting and boring movies. You only do the ones that you can.