Hansal Mehta: ‘Bollywood’s UTV moment needs to arrive; Art needs disruption, politics needs cleansing’

Filmmaker Hansal Mehta. (Photo via X)

There are films that evolve organically and leave a lasting impact. Ram Gopal Varma’s Satya (1998) and Hansal Mehta’s Shahid (2012) are two such examples. It won Mehta the National Award for Best Direction.

Speaking at the session on the ‘Relationship between an Actor and a Director’ along with Pratik Gandhi, at the recent 2nd Cinévesture International Film Festival, Chandigarh, Mehta talked about how organically Shahid’s making evolved, “We would discuss and shoot on the set. It was very free-flowing,” Rajkummar Rao, Mohd Zeeshan Ayyub, “all of us were playing with the dialogues, and with our lives also.” A lot was improvised on the set. “We have over-glamorised improvisation and underestimated the page/script,” Mehta quips, adding, “Lines/dialogues, if it’s not on paper, it’s not going to be on screen. What’s not written, the unspoken, is also in the script. You won’t write silences on paper but they are there, as an artist, you’ve to find it. It’s like a music notation, how two singers sing will be markedly different.”

Decades before true-crime docu series became a thing on the OTTs, Hansal Mehta has been at it, bringing true stories through fictional films to audiences. From Aligarh (2015) to Omerta (2017) and The Buckingham Murders (2023), Mehta’s range has been wide. He is known to keep introducing new faces and talents to the industry. Mehta is, perhaps, the most fearless and vocal filmmakers in Bollywood today who doesn’t shy away from calling a spade a spade. A lot of the personal gets channelled into his films. After Dil Pe Mat Le Yaar!! (2000) released, a line from the censor-cleared film sent Shiv Sena workers storming into his office to assault him, blacken his face and force him to apologise to a crowd of 10,000. That real-life incident and humiliation, of being attacked by “cowards”, eventually gave Mehta the courage to keep making films and freeze the hurt and humiliation on screen in Shahid (2012), the film that, he says, is closest to his heart and keeps reminding him the purpose of what he’s doing.

In that vein, he has launched a production company True Story Films, along with producer Sahil Saigal and with investments from industry figures Vinod Bhanushali and Parag Sanghvi. It has a Rs 5 billion slate, including a Hindi adaptation of a Sri Lankan hit, the Sinhala film Tentigo by Ilango Ram, which was recently adapted into Telugu as Pedha and Tamil as Perusu. Mehta is also co-producing an independent film Hanere di Panchi by Shashank Walia, that will throw light on a Punjabi Dalit and queer story.

Excerpts from an interview:

Khana Khazana (1993) spawned many cooking shows on Indian screens. For the first time, perhaps, Indians saw a man cooking in the kitchen on national television. Have you thought of making Khana Khazana 2?

No. Khana Khazana 2 happens at my home. (Laughs.) See, that show was sheer conviction. They rejected Sanjeev Kapoor initially. They did not want him. Neither did I audition him nor did I select him. I just shot with him. I did not take approval from the channel. It was my naivety in those days that I couldn’t understand the process of approval. I thought Sanjeev’s good, so let’s just shoot with Sanjeev. The channel saw it, they freaked out and exclaimed: who’s this! And that tells you a lot. From ’93 to now, sometimes, they go horribly wrong in their choices. Ultimately, what happened was that Sanjeev had to be instated as the chef on the show. And the show ran for 22 years. It’s a historic show. Sanjeev Kapoor became the brand that he is. And they were not ready to believe initially.

What’s your favourite dish?

I’ve been advised to go on a diet. But for me, home-cooked food, the Gujarati khatti-meethi dal, aloo ki sabzi and phulka roti with ghee, that’s my favourite.

You produced Q’s Garbage (2018)?

I was credited as one of producers. I actually gave him money when he needed to complete the film. It actually sold to Netflix for a decent price, I think.

Tell us about the Punjabi independent film Hanere di Panchi (Birds in the Darkness), which foregrounds Dalit and queer characters and subject, that you are co-producing along with Mauli Singh (Adh Chanani Raat), who’s also acting in it.

It’s made by a very talented bunch of people. The director, (FTII graduate) Shashank Walia is somebody who holds immense prowess. I saw a little bit (three scenes) of the film and I was stunned just with the visual poetry that is there with the narrative that he’s trying to create. It’s a unique voice and I’m happy to lend my voice and put in some money where you see somebody’s work that you admire. You don’t get a chance to be part of such exquisite art.

A working still from Hanere di Panchi.

What’s your vision with your new company True Story Films. You were already making ‘true stories’ so to speak, so, what was the need for a production house?

So, the title True Story is just a tribute to all the true stories that have got me to where I am today. It’s almost a hat-tip to Shahid, Aligarh, Scam 92. So, when we were contemplating a name for the company, we wanted to call it True Stories but you won’t get that exact name with the registrar of companies, so, we decided on True Story Films.

There’s a slate that we are actively creating right now. The company’s vision is very clear. We want to foster and nurture good stories, good writers, good directors. Allow them an environment where they can create something that will have a lasting legacy and also be fairly successful for all of us. The guiding force is not necessarily numbers. The numbers will follow. The first objective is to tell those stories.

How do you define success?

I’ve seen more failure than success. But I can give an example. We had a screening of Shahid three weeks ago in Mumbai and we had a packed house, the number of requests to watch the film were 10 times those of who could actually watch the film that day, and it got a standing ovation. It was crazy. And, for me, that is my earning. That is its lasting legacy.

What about re-releasing your films?

Re-releasing is a process. There are too many stakeholders at play. I don’t know if I’ll be able to re-release anything. But it tells you that the films have a lasting legacy. A legacy beyond the weekend. My idea is that the success has to go way beyond the weekend.  The fragile Friday has to be overcome by the long-lasting legacy.

You’ve said Bollywood is not dead. There’s a pause now and a reset is happening. Big stars and their exorbitant fees have weighed heavy on the industry. Does the system need a cleansing?

Bollywood is not at all dead. Cleansing is required in politics, you need disruption in art. Everybody who is working today needs to disrupt in the form of the kind of stories you tell, the kind of people you work with, in the way you release films. The entire sector has to come together to believe in storytelling as an artistic endeavour, as an endeavour to engage with the audience. Newer stories can also engage. Disruption cannot come from one person, from just the artist. The system has to participate in that disruption. If I make a film at a ridiculous budget, price it accordingly. Give it to the public at that price point. If I have sacrificed something to bring it down to that cost, I think we should pass on that benefit to the audience and grow the audience beyond the conventional cinema audience.

You tweeted about giving a chance to non-tentpole actors like Adarsh Gourav, who got to work in a film after eight years, in Superboys of Malegaon. It’s a good story but it underperformed.

It tells you about the audiences who cry for good films but don’t go watch it when they are made. It deserved more and the film will get its due in the long run. What is important is that films are made within a budget that is recoverable. That makes failure less hurtful. When you get into a business such as filmmaking, failure is a given, success is an anomaly. When success comes, be happy. But you have to be prepared for failure. How much does it really affect all the stakeholders? Reduce that. Minimise risk.

How do you mitigate risk for a producer when you are making a project?

By controlling the budget. By making it in a cost that would otherwise seem difficult to achieve.

Hansal Mehta (left) and Pratik Gandhi at their session on actor-director relationship at the 2nd Cinevesture International Film Festival, Chandigarh.

Pratik Gandhi, too, spoke at the session about why it makes financial sense to give new actors a chance.

Pratik, Rahul Bhat, Zahan (Kapoor), Gagan Dev Riar, the way Applause [Entertainment] has backed talent and made a success out of it. This is proof of concept that this can work. But you’ll have to keep doing it over and over again. Not that one film flopped and you declared that the actor doesn’t work. Big stars who are given repeated chances, how many times they too fail. Look at their success percentage. They sink you. Now, if you take a smaller risk, the loss will be smaller too but the profit can be multifold.

Biggest risk on an actor you’ve taken? 

Karishma Tanna, because she was coming from television.

Financially, what has been your biggest regret?

Financially, it’s always Simran, because we lost so much money on it. It cost more than it should have and pushed me back by a few years. And the bigger regret is that I could have made a much superior film. I had the ability. But we did not back that ability.

Was the monetary loss greater than that of Dil Pe Mat Le Yaar?

Comparatively, both had the same loss. But on Dil Pe Matle Yaar, the injury lasted longer. Whereas on Simran, fortunately, I recovered quickly.

Do box-office figures matter?

I believe that to judge a film by its collections is vulgar. It’s vulgarity. Releasing box-office numbers is instant gratification. And those paid to report them do it in a one-dimensional, sensationalised manner. Now, the new thing is reporting advance booking, the frenzy has gone pre-Friday. You reduce films to some trivial numbers.

Isn’t ticket pricing a problem that’s driving people away from the theatres to the OTTs?

I definitely think so. See, every time they have this Rs 99 world cinema day, suddenly the footfalls increase. Theatres are house full. We have to just keep making sure that we are able to provide an experience to the audience.

So, what are the metrics to judge a film?

The metrics are your experience. Individual experience. How that becomes a collective experience. That is important. It’s more artistic than meets the eye. Ultimately, the metrics are for each on a case-to-case basis. Like in any business, what is the return on investment that the project is deriving? And that has to be independent. It cannot be just from one source. The sources of income, of monetisation are multiple on films. But who talks about the other sources? Nobody. Like your digital sales, satellite, music, licencing. There are so many multiple avenues from which films recover money. Nobody talks about them because these need research and so they only go to the box office.

Isn’t that an industry problem?

No. I don’t owe my numbers to anyone. I don’t need to tell you how much I’m earning. I need to make you enjoy my film.

Shahid and Scam: 92 are two pivotal moments in your career trajectory, it changed the game for you. At your lowest, say, when Dil Pe Mat Le Yaar!! (2000) didn’t do well, did you ever feel like giving up?

No. The only time I felt like giving up was when I made Woodstock Villa (2008). I felt that, maybe, I don’t know what I’m doing. I needed to find a direction for myself. I needed to find myself. See, what happens with failure, any kind of big loss leads to difficulty in what you do next. Commercial success are mere words to cover up for your basic inadequacy as an artist. Commercial success, money…these are trappings. Those will follow. What’s important is your integrity, discipline, focus and your ability to push yourself.

Like you have, each time, especially since Shahid (2012) and Aligarh (2015), both of which tells a sensitive story. Was it difficult for you to find producers and investors for them?

It wasn’t difficult, actually. That’s what I keep saying, people like UTV [Spotboy] who backed Shahid and Eros [International] who backed Aligarh, we need more people like that. From Lagaan, Khosla Ka Ghosla!, Rang De Basanti, Udaan, Ship of Theseus, Shahid, The Lunchbox, Dangal, they (UTV Motion Pictures, in the 2000s) really championed all kinds of films. They were the champions. That moment has to arrive again.

Like Ronnie (Screwvala), Sameer (Nair of Applause Entertainment) has managed to achieve that level of disruption, on the web/OTTs, with Scam, with Black Warrant. You know, Scam made me… Otherwise, it was unimaginable. Nobody wanted to touch the script. I had read the book and I had been pitching it to producers for a film for years. No platform wanted to take it. And then, Sameer offered it to me. He took the chance on Pratik (Gandhi). If he did not, I would not have taken that chance. Art needs patrons.

Good cinema is happening now as well. All We Imagine as Light came last year. I am not one who likes to crib. Everybody has a unique solution to a problem, only if you are interested in finding a solution. If you’re just interested in crying about the problem, you will only have problems.

With Scam, do you think you have cracked a code? Scam 3 [Scam 2010: The Subrata Roy Saga] is on its way now. Because franchises do well — Marvel has built an industry of it — is that a strategy you are aiming at?

I hope so [to have cracked a code], but there’s no strategy. We still struggle to find stories, to write them, to make them. There’s a lot of work that goes into it. It (Scam) is definitely a successful franchise and a successful franchise is a responsibility for us. It’s a big responsibility to constantly service it and to make it better than the previous time. While it’s not a challenge in real life because there are way too many scamsters, but it’s very difficult to find characters who you can write.

Maddock Films, too, has built a horror comedy universe but they couldn’t have anticipated the kind of business Stree 2 did (Rs 600 crore domestic earning). Franchises are succesful, even if sequels may not be.  

Formula doesn’t matter. Stree 2 was a good film. If it was a bad film, it wouldn’t have worked. The director and the writer, their contribution is what matters. Yes, it’s a franchise. But, ultimately, it’s the hard work done by Amar (Kaushik, director), Niren (Bhatt, writer), Rajkummar (Rao), Shraddha (Kapoor), all of them.

Why did you want to make a series on Mahatma Gandhi? What does Gandhi mean to you? 

It’s a bit premature, I don’t think it’s the time yet for me to speak about Gandhi right now. As for Gandhi’s ideology, I cannot talk about it in a single line. It’s very complicated.

When is Gandhi coming out?

We don’t know yet.

What do you have to say to films which end up stoking violence in response? Where lies an artist’s social responsibility?

Films cannot incite violence. I don’t think films have that ability or that much power. Films can provoke thought, but cannot influence your actions that directly. An artist’s social responsibility is his social responsibility as a person, your values as a human being, that reflects in your work culture, your work ethic and the stories that you tell.

What’s next besides Scam 2010 and Gandhi?

An action film, an outrageous comedy, a slasher film, an unusual love story, a zombie film, and an adaptation with Saif Ali Khan that I’ll direct.