Lasyapriya Sundaram (BOMBAY TIMES; October 19, 2018)

Filmmaker Vipul Amrutlal Shah is back in the director’s chair after a gap of eight years, with the Arjun Kapoor and Parineeti Chopra-starrer Namaste England. He says that the film addresses the patriarchy that exists in our society and speaks about how every girl has the fundamental right to make her own choices. In a candid chat with BT, he also discussed how the process of filmmaking has evolved in the past decade. Excerpts...

Given its title,is Namaste England a companion film to Namastey London (2007)?
On one hand, Namastey London was a film that made a comment about the difference between India and the West, and on the other, it was also the story of a girl whose dreams were suppressed by her parents. They get her married to a boy she doesn’t like and rebels against that. Namaste England, too, is about a girl and her dreams. She wants to live a middle-class life, but wants to be able to make her own decisions. She wants freedom, which has been denied to her because of the social structure. When she faces challenges, she decides to go to London, thinking that will give her the freedom she craves for. The film talks about how every girl has the fundamental right to make decisions about her own life.

Both men and women are endorsers as well as victims of patriarchy. How do you think you can convey this complex idea within the framework of a commercial Hindi film?
The audience is extremely sensitive and they understand nuances. They might not be able to articulate it, but they feel the emotion. As a filmmaker, when you are portraying the problems girls face in our country, I can’t give a permanent solution. What I can do is show the problem and suggest a path which could be taken. Every girl’s problem is different, so, there can’t be one common solution. While women don’t have the right to work in some families, in others, they have to work because the family needs the additional income. Even in some modern families, women dancing at parties are frowned upon. They are told, ‘Hamare khandaan ki ek reputation hai’. But there are different rules for men and if they dance, the reputation of the family is not at stake. I have seen this happening in front of me. The man can wear whatever he wants, but the woman has to drape a sari and wear a particular kind of jewellery. This is a result of the patriarchal mind-set that exists in our society and it is about suppression of women. Even in an apparently modern and evolved society, girls don’t have the freedom they deserve.

The last film you directed was Action Replayy, which was eight years back. What made you take a sabbatical from direction for such a long time?
I have been working constantly for the past 25 years, without taking a break. When Action Replayy didn’t do well, I wanted to reinvent myself as a writer, director and producer. The digital age was upon us and filmmaking was also evolving with people shooting on their mobile phones. I realised that cinema was going through a paradigm shift and I had to adapt to the changes. The films that I was backing as a producer were taking up my time. It was an exciting journey for me to observe the manner in which storytelling and characterisation was evolving in cinema. I hope, all that I have observed and imbibed has been reflected in Namaste England. I hope that the eightyear break from direction has helped me mature as a director.

Your films, Aankhen(2002) and Waqt: The Race Against Time (2005) featured Amitabh Bachchan. But you haven’t teamed up with him since…
I have told him many times that I can’t see him doing roles, which aren’t incredible. I have been looking for material which will do justice to him, but unfortunately, I haven’t been able to do so. When I worked with him, I was a fanboy and even today, I am just a fan. Earlier, if I thought of an idea, I would send him a message even in the middle of the night. However, I don’t do that anymore, because I feel it’s wrong to disturb him. I can’t thank Amitabh Bachchan, Akshay Kumar and Paresh Rawal enough for agreeing to do my first film as a director. I was a television director and in those days, the film industry didn’t have that kind of faith in people like us who were making a smooth transition to film direction. All these actors are responsible for my transition into cinema as a director and I will be indebted to them emotionally.

You have also donned the producer’s hat since 2008. How do you think filmmaking, from the point of view of a producer, has evolved over the last decade?
Change can sometimes be seen as disruption. When studios invested in films, people felt that as corporates what will they know about filmmaking? But today, can we imagine the industry without the studios? They put a lot of systems in place. There is no black money in the film industry, thanks to the studios. In fact, they have put a stop to cash dealings and all transactions are through cheques. Their risk appetite is amazing. There are also independent producers operating simultaneously along with the big studios. Producers like working as partners and their collaborations have helped the industry immensely.