Just a minute with: Ram Gopal Varma

RELATED NEWS DTH rev to match cable biz income in 4-6 quarters: Zee Ent Animation, gaming firms take virtual route to success Expect roasting, Gervais warns Golden Globe stars

Ram Gopal Varma hasn't had it easy in the last few years. A string of unsuccessful films, coupled with the controversy over the director's visit to the Taj Mahal hotel just after the Mumbai attacks, ensured him a place in the limelight.

This time though, Varma is turning the spotlight on those who put him on the spot. In his new film "Rann", the filmmaker explores the highly competitive world of television news reporting in India, focusing on the pitfalls of rating points and the need to grab eyeballs.

Varma spoke to Reuters about his take on the Indian media, how it has changed over the years and whether he regrets visiting the Taj Mahal hotel.

Q: Does making films on sensitive topics like the media or politics involve some kind of tightrope walking, so that you make sure you are being fair?

A: "I have an affinity for hard-hitting films. And any film which has a subject like this needs to take a hard look at it, which is the whole point of making a film anyway.

"With a subject like the media, it is something that pervades our day-to-day lives to such an extent. From the time you get up it is on and you are being told what is happening, what you should feel about it, what you should think about. It is a subject of a serious matter, and has to be dealt in that manner."

Q: How have you dealt with the media in the film?

A: "I have shown it the way it is. The media is not a singular entity. I have taken feelers from what I have seen on TV. It is talking about certain aspects in the media which is based on real events. It is not a comment on the media as a whole."

Q: How do you perceive the news media in India as it is today?

A: "I get entertained, I get shocked, I get amazed and sometimes I find it ridiculous, it all depends on what kind of news is presented to me and in what form."

Q: What shocks you the most?

A: "How they manage to make a big deal of nothing. One of my favourite examples is when they manage to get footage of Dawood Ibrahim and say 'you can see Dawood Ibrahim walking'. They will do a ten-minute build-up of that. But I never thought that Dawood was lame. But they manage to get footage of him somewhere and do a half-hour special on that.

"It amazes me that we work so hard, for more than a year, and even then we cannot hold the attention of the audience for two hours, but these guys can pull out a screenplay out of nothing.

"Also, sometimes there is so much insensitivity with which they can ridicule people - whether it is politicians or film stars. They bring so much discomfort and embarrassment and yet they seem to do it with enjoyment, rather than just putting it the way it is. It is like a group of hounds attacking someone. That is shocking.

"There are trials by media, where they may not be saying anything directly but they will put into your head that the person is guilty."

Q: What has changed about the media and the way you deal with them in the years since you first became a part of the industry?

A: "It's just the pace of everything. I honestly believe that the biggest enemy of the TV channels is the remote control and they know it. There is desperation to hold your attention, so that desperation will obviously make them want to make the news as sensational as possible. That is where the race is. I have also changed the way I deal with the media because you need to adapt to that changing pace.

"Because of the easy access, hundreds of journalists have easy access to me everyday, so in such a situation you do become a little impatient with the media."

Q: What about when you are the subject of a trial by media, like what happened at the Taj?

A: "This is what the media does all the time -- because talking badly about someone is more entertaining. It's human nature. Trying to be informative and unbiased doesn't work. That is part and parcel of what we have to face."

Q: Did it hurt?

A: "No, because I have been in this industry for long enough to know they do it all the time. In case of Taj, I can understand because of the kind of situation that was prevailing at the time and there was so much speculation, that even though it was overblown, it was understandable."

Q: Do you regret going there now?

A: "No, because I know I haven't done anything wrong. But I can understand why the media imagined the things it did, because the first two days me and Riteish didn't counter it, so there was a lack of information. But I know in my heart that that is not why I went there.

"At the time it was too complicated. Without checking all the facts, I didn't want to talk to the press, that's all."

Q: There has been talk that that incident triggered off 'Rann'…

A: "That is absolutely untrue. In fact "Rann" was scripted and ready months ago. In fact I was discussing Riteish's look in the film, and that's when we went there."

Q: How has the media reacted to the film?

A: "I think that there is curiosity and some of them feel that it is my revenge for what happened but that is not true. They may have made up their mind that it is an anti-media film, so perhaps that may lead to some defensiveness."

Q: How do you engage the media to promote a film about the media?

A: "The media is a reporting agency. It reports news of anything they perceive to be of interest, so they will come back to it, just like a criminal returns to the scene of the crime."