Anand Surapur: From Channel V's Udham Singh and Quick Gun Murugan to Rautu Ka Raaz starring Nawazuddin Siddiqui and beyond

Cast and crew of Rautu Ka Raaz directed by Anand Surapur, at IFFI Goa. (Image via Instagram)

Anand Surapur's latest directorial venture 'Rautu ka Raaz' released on Zee5 on June 28 this year. Soon after, the movie's lead actor Nawazuddin Siddiqui agreed to do another film with Surapur. "We have known each other for about 20 years... I'd read some two-three stories for him at the same time. They are all around the same theme... he has agreed to do a second film from that set," Surapur says over the phone.

Looking back at Surapur's work, he's done music videos, ad films, and people of a certain vintage will also remember his 'Udham Singh' shorts (before shorts was a thing) and 'Quick Gun Murugan' for Channel V. While less quirky than Udham Singh or Murugan, 'Rautu Ka Raaz' has its own brand of desi humour and pahadi suspense.

In a phone interview from Mumbai, Surapur spoke about his journey so far, and what it means to be a director in an age of big studios and OTT platforms. Edited excerpts:

How was it working with Nawazuddin Siddiqui? Have you known each other long?

Almost 20 years. At that time he was not, he was about to do 'Talaash', and Anurag (Kashyap) also was talking about him. So I had met him, and then we remained in touch on and off. We've always been wanting to do something (together) for a while, but nothing worked out (till 'Rautu Ka Raaz').

So what is your next feature with Nawazuddin Siddiqui about?

Uttarakhand is famous for its fairies - pari's, chudails, horror, a lot of bhoot banglas and all that. So this time we thought let us explore this theme which is horror. The supernatural more than horror, really.

It's still a thriller, a murder mystery, but there's a supernatural aspect to it?

Correct. Because in the hills and mountains, there are many stories around ghosts and goblins and fairies and angels and all of that. And there are many myths and many legends like that there. You talk to any villager, and he will tell you about pari's. There is a place called pari ka tibba (fairy hill) - if you go there, the pari's will take you away. Apparently, youngsters come and wait for them (the fairies). And this has been going on for hundreds of years. So this film is based on this myth.

But what happens when you do (a film about) the supernatural, there are those horror images and sound effects - you know how it's done - but there is also a sense of everyday life. We don't have those sound effects, and we don't have those images. If somebody's going into a bhoot bangla at night, then that feeling itself is in us to get us scared more than anything else. So we are doing that kind of exploration and observations on life.

Can you tell us a little bit about your journey in making content for TV and movies? 

I started off doing promos for Channel V... I did all those Udham Singh promos. These are all my directorial ventures. I've been a director from the start... Because Udham Singh was so popular, people hired me to direct ads - I have done more than 500 commercials - for Pepsi, Coke, (the new) Hamara Bajaj.

Any cola ads that we might have seen on TV?

You've seen those Thums Up commercials with Akshay Kumar. Then I've worked on Kamasutra, Hyundai (commercials), Pepsi with Fardeen Khan and Rahul Khanna. Surf Excel...

You've seen "Samne Yeh Kaun Aaya", the music video?

Yes.

I directed that.

Have you see "Kya Surat Hai"? I've directed that. Rabbi Shergill's "Bulla Ki Jaana..." "Teri Deewani" by Kailash Kher...

So, a whole bunch of ads, music videos, before you started doing movies?

When I got into features, I did 'Fakir of Venice' with Farhan (Akhtar). Earlier in Channel V Shashanka Ghosh had directed a promo called 'Quick Gun Murugan'. That movie, the whole of Channel V (India) got involved.

Tell us a little bit about your film influences. How and when did you decide to become a director?

I was studying in the US in 1990. I went for my undergrad, to study electrical engineering. I quit electrical engineering and then went to NYU. I finished NYU and then I came back.

Did you study film at NYU?

Yeah. So then I came back. If you see my videos, my stuff is more Indian. Then I got a job in Channel V. And I started directing videos.

What do you want your legacy as a director to be? What kinds of films do you want to be known for?

If you've seen my films - that is exactly what I want to do. They're like odd stories set in like almost in the minutiae of life and kind of dark comedies or black comedies about life. If you've seen Quick Gun, it's extremely fun. Fakir is more philosophical, spiritual. So are my videos. It's all Indian cinema, which is what I am good at - it's my comfort zone.

Tell me about the ecosystem in which you are making movies today: What does it mean to be a Bollywood director at a time when star power doesn't guarantee a hit? And what does it even mean to produce a hit at this point?

What happens is that now because of OTTs and because of social media, it's very tough to gauge a film's success... You cannot quantify the success on OTT platforms because they don't give you the numbers because of their policies and such. Whereas a theatrical release is your best bet to know whether a film has worked or not, because that gives you like real cash and collections are there - some people hide the collections, but mota-mota (broadly) you still get a sense.

On OTT, I would say that out of the 1000 content pieces released across the platform, maybe five or 10 pieces stand out, that that's really worked. But the rest of the stuff is not really accepted. So it's difficult to gauge whether it's a hit or not.

And about your rights as a director, what is the scenario? Does the channel now own your movie? Do you have copyright? Are you even looking for that kind of right over the film after its release?

Most of the films that I've produced before - I produced Fakir, Quick Gun Murugan, then a film called Frozen - for these movies, we own the rights. But if the studio produces it, they automatically own the rights.

Nowadays because the studio system is such that it depends, if you're really a big guy, then you can negotiate the rights. If you are a mid-level guy who is looking to make content, you might say just give me the money, you take the rights. So there are different kinds. It depends; it's not the same for everyone.

What about the longevity of the content? What people are reporting in the West is that films / series are either taken up by an OTT channel or produced originally by an OTT channel, but then they are taken off because there are licensing fees, etcetera, that are owed to the people that made the film. However, those people are no longer able to show that content elsewhere because they don't have the rights anymore. Are we moving towards an ecosystem where that is likely to happen with Indian any producer?

Any producer, even if I was a producer, I will not give the rights away, because in India how it works is, if I've put in the money, then it belongs to me. With the studio system and with this new OTT system, it's actually changed a little bit, not to that extent - unless you're a big guy, and can negotiate, the studio owns the rights. We always have a struggle with the studio - it's never-ending.

Speaking of the ecosystem, are you seeing a little bit more organization coming into the entertainment space as well?

There is definitely some organization that has happened in the last 10-12 years. Now, where it is headed or how it will shape up in future, nobody knows. As far as my understanding goes, when I open an Amazon (Prime Video) or a Netflix, there are 1000s of choices, I am confused what to see. So, beyond a point, if the content is not being consumed, then what will all the directors and the CDs do? Only if the content is consumed and it is to the market and it gives you a return, then only there us a future, right? It does happen that you make something, and it doesn't work. Then you say paisa khatam ho gaya, ab kucch nahi kar sakte kyunki apna paisa wapis nahi aaya (It does happen that sometimes you can't recover the money you put into creating a work, and then when you run out of money, you can't produce more content). Studios can do it, because they have the cash flow whereas producers who are putting in their own money and bring in directors, then that is a fight.

Exactly. Big production houses have deep pockets, and they can subsidize some flops with the success of one big show.

That's how the market works - it works on 20 percent success. If you make 10 films and two of them are hits, then you are set. But you need to have those 10 as part of your catalogue. You can't just make one or two and then expect (great success). If you're lucky and they work, you're set for life. But if you're not lucky, you have to do 10-12 films to get that money back. Only those with deep pockets can survive this kind of system.

Many big production houses now also have their own directors whom they work with, whether they're making series or films. Dharma, Excel Entertainment, Applause, have a select bunch of directors. Is that something that you're seeing more of, or is it just in specific pockets? And does that make it harder for newcomers to get into the space?

It's all very relative. It depends on who's the director and who the production house is. The information changes with every person. Many people might deal with me differently, but with the guy who's just starting off or coming from 11-15 years, they'll have a completely different approach. One policy will not apply to everyone.

With this broadening of the ecosystem, is there also division of which audience are you addressing with your content?

Exactly. It's almost like advertising, who are you targeting, who is your audience. Everything has become more compartmentalized and it's become more focused. Like even in advertising, earlier we used to put on TV, right - (the thinking was) whoever watches it, watches it. But now shaving ads are targeted only to me. So everything has changed like that and it has become compartmentalised. But I don't know where it's going to lead, because the dynamics of current Internet and current social media, everything has become quicker, so I don't know where it's going to be. So that takes a very observant, very involved productions

You mentioned you like to make odd stories that are a little hatke. Do you have a mental image of who your audience is and where they sit?

If you see my work, it is odd, but people like this because they can relate to it. I look for the oddity in the relatability... I don't go for completely odd. My observation in everyday life is like it's odd, but it's everyday life, but it's odd.

My audience, I feel, is everybody, any Indian guy, who can relate to the situation. People might say it's slow-moving, it's fast-moving, it builds, but when they connect with it, they get it. I try watching behaviour, but you and me we watch the same behavior, right? But maybe I'm a little more observant and when I show it to you, you say ahh! correct, it's like that.

Are you looking at, for example, the most obvious division from box office parlance: content for the metro audience or for the single screens, etc. Is that something that's been carried forward into the OTT world or is that also redundant at this point?

No, for me, I've never done that. Even in advertising. You just look at the story and then try to expand it so that everybody fits in. It's the other way around: rather than inside out, we're outside in.

Is watching movies something that you do in your free time?

No. I do watch movies, but I am not that weekend movie-watcher. I'll sit with a few people and watch on OTT.