When the whole of the country and especially the southern region is ablaze with celebrations of the southern superstar Rajnikanth's blockbuster Endhiran, it should be really interesting to peek into the the brains of the creator - An interview with Director Shankar on Endhiran -The Robot... (a movie for which the teaser's were out by as early as 1996 through the movie Indian (Hindusthani) in the song 'tada' where Kamal Hassan as a Robot pets a Robot dog)
Me : Director Shankar, first of all congratulations on the movie, i think it will be really satisfying to you that response has been good - great from all quarters.
Shankar: Yes absolutely. Every creation is aimed at a critical analysis. Appreciation is always overwhelming. But what is indeed the most important feedback is the critical analysis. This really demonstrates how well the critic (an audience) has understood the film ... which indirectly throws light on how deep he/she has involved with the movie.
Me: Well thats certainly an encouraging answer.
Me: To begin with, Why Rajnikanth, why Ash and Why Rahman ?
Shankar: As i have already mentioned, this script is close to 10 years in hold, has been exchanged with various big artists starting with Padmashree Kamal Hassan ... until the last unsuccessful attempt at roping in SRK. But when things did not materialize, i took off some time on contemplating "what now". There is always the scope of pushing the movie to future and raking up another project instead. But the success of Sivaji and my previous movies had obviously helped me in conquering the trust of producers. Moreover, going round the country in confirming the artists, i also had to worry about someone else hooking onto the project before i cud start off. In fact, as it so happens, SRK is working on a Sci-fi himself. So i had decided that this better be the time i did the movie to whatever extent possible. For a long time i thought of roping in some big actors simply because the reach is huge. But then after the big guns of the bollywood industry like Hrithik and SRK and Aamir busy with other movies or uncomfortable with aspects of the movie .... i had to settle to think of a south indian superstar for the movie.
"Billa-2006" - a remake of the yesteryear Rajnikanth movie created a huge wave of slick entertainment in the south indian industry and i was then thinking about casting Ajith. But known for his debacles and consistently poor performance ... entrusting such a huge project on him i felt was silly. Then one day when i was holiday camping at Ooty it occured to me why not rope in Rajni Sir for this role. On the positive side, his commitment is independent of his age and his mass reach in unmatched. On the negative side though is that he shud have not accepted any other project and he shud be willing to stress hiimself at this age for a sufficiently long-shoot movie. But things clicked when we talked, and an initially hesitant Rajni Sir accepted the role trusting my opinion. As to Ash and Rahman its simple, this is a movie that will involve a huge budget. And hence to fully load the responsibility of carrying it over successfully on Rajni Sir is unfair. Moreover, as always Ash's prettiness and Rahman's name sells. Considering the fact that these are also two people who are best in their trade currently, they had to be my first option.
Me: Rumours i hear, inform that many top notch cinematographers declined the offer to work on Robot.
Shankar: Two things - the duration of the movie was expected to be atleast two years (which incidentally shot up to 3 years including pre-production and post-production). And it was not just roping in the big names, it was getting their consent for a committed work all throughout. Further, i generally prefer some of my cast and crew members to not sign in on other films while working on mine. Pretty much the way most top notch directors do in bollywood and hollywood so that the full concentration is on one work and the dates are not a problem for the shoot. Thus, many cinematographers like Ravi K Chandran , Neerav Shah didnt want to commit on to the project and i got the consent from Randy (Ratnavelu).
Me: When i entered the movie theatre, there were only 40 odd people (while i expected a huge crowd pomping and womping and enjoying the festive mood. Well thats more becos of some insensible marketing at Pheonix, Az for the premiere show. But when the movie ended, there was a standing ovation for more than a couple of minutes as the titles ran ... and i felt that i didnt really need the 'Rajni'- atmosphere to enjoy this movie. How did you manage to pull that off ?
Shankar: See, as i have repeatedly announced right from 2000, this movie did not need a star cast. Avatar didnt really need a star cast to pull it off. The script was tight and well thought of ( considering that i had revisited it with revisions three times at least before finalising on this one). The only reason why i wanted a star cast is because of the budget that the movie invests itself into. Star brand can make far more people come to the theatres. And this initial impetus really helps the directors. Once that is done, now it is easier for the directors since all they have to do is to have a good script that the audience will appreciate to make them feel happy about watching the movie. All this said and done, i have always had my own way of approaching movies. If you look at my earlier movies, none of them have a powerful or mass-pulling introduction scene. It is always simple and straight. In fact, Mudhalvan, which was first offered to Rajni sir also had no real introduction hype as such. U wud wonder what about Sivaji then, well thats what peer pressure can sometimes do ... the producers AVM didnt want to take a risk of not having an intro song and intro scene and punch dialogues. And in fact thats y it was added as a last minute addition, just a few months before the movie release. But in this one, i was rock solid on the script and at no point i wanted to make changes. And hence wat u get to see is a movie devoid of typical Rajni gimmicks and mannerisms.
Me: Ok, now lets go into specific sections of the movie. 'Speed 1THz and Memory 1Zettabyte'
Shankar: If i understand your question rite, u are inquiring of the content of scientific dialogues in the movie. Well its a Robot, and i cannot just have it do un-imaginable things and claim that it is the greatest Robot of all times. Whether it be the Raga identification or the Fibanocci series or the Achilles Paradox, i feel a great sense of gratitude to writer Sujatha. Only he has such a vast sense of knowledge in so much depth that those ideas cud be incorporated. In fact, the 'Rangusky' mosquito scene is in total dedication to him.
Me: There have been some really brilliant scenes in the movie:- i) the "Chellatha " scene ii) " Is there someone called God" iii) "Black sheep" iv) " Saving the naked girl from fire " and many others. But yet such a reckless and careless twist in the plot ? A Scientist who is utterly careless about waste disposal ? Now that being the turning point of the movie is really hard to digest !
Shankar: See you shud understand one thing. Andro-humanoids are imaginative beings in the sense, to the extent that i know we dont have thinking Robots as yet. Now as to how a thinking robot wud behave is totally imaginative. Robot is the total opposite of a human in the sense, it takes decisions based on facts, we take decisions based on our bias (which may be right or wrong) amongst many other such differences. When a character that is in between these two is potrayed its really tough to draw a line as to what the logistics defining the character wud be. In the particular scene that u are talking about, ur apprehension is about how Dr Vasi cuts the body of the robot and literally throws it without making sure it is technically 'dead'. There are two ways i wud like to justify this. Whether a scientist or not, mistakes happen, and emotions take over man (which is what makes us imperfect) and when we lose control of ourselves we end up not being normal enuf to decide on the best possible solution to a problem (like how students who get tensed in an exam tend to perform poorly than those who are relaxed). And this is exactly what i hav already showcased in an earlier scene when the Robot first gets angry. When the reverse synthetic feelings were fed to the robot and it doesnt seem to understand/reciprocate, Dr Vasi gets angry. Though at that point the attention is towards Sana who identifies that the robot starts to feel ... whats hidden is that the emotional hang over that Dr Vasi was in at that juncture was only disrupted by Sana's observation or else, typically u cud expect Dr Vasi to have gotten mad at the robot and into one such angry interactions. Moreover, even in the initial parts of the story, like the 'saving the girl child' scene, Dr Vasi does get upset although the intensity grows slowly and steadily. So given Dr Vasi's nature of getting angry and emotional it is not surprising that he cud hav ended up losing sense of what he was doing.
A second argument that i cud probably provide u is something more subtle. History has it that, the greatest of greats have fallen flat, at the height of their talents, because of under-estimating their opponents. It is very much a human tendency to overlook the capability of something that he/she believes is not as capable. Take Ilayaraja for example. Rahman worked with him and during that time, Raja never really felt challenged by the kid. Thats y he never tried oppressing or suppressing the kid from leaving the group when he wanted to. But as time wud have it, he wud be the one to dethrone the Raja empire. In our case, Dr Vasi created the Robot and although he knows that it is capable of doing what 100 men of the best calibre in each activity can do, it is supposedly his pet. So he believes that it will do only what the master says. A gross under-estimation considering the fact that he has fed emotions to the machine which thus allows it to think by itself. Moreover, a machine is more powerful and capable than man in everything other than thinking. And when that also is added, the machine outdoes man in every possible activity. Dr Vasi under-estimated the potential of this robot because he feels he hasnt done anything bad to 'it' and Chitti is still 'it' rather than 'him'.
Me: Well, thats an interesting point of view. But what about the three Rajni characters. The Chitti characters were well sketched and well executed. But Dr Vasi looked pathetic, least heroism that one could have expected from Rajni. Although fans seemed to be overshadowed by Chitti to think about Vasi, i am not.
Shankar: See, how many scientists have u noticed in real life who can beat up a body builder ? For that matter how many of them are normal in social activities like dancing or interacting with public and many other such stuff ? Scientists ... atleast those who look at it more than just a profession ..... are really passionate about their research. In fact the term 'scientist' itself was supposed to have been coined to tag all those who study and research fundamental logic behind why things are as they are, in the same league as a pianist, a violinist, a paintist, or more generally an 'artist' . Now all these characters, when they are really passionate lose the normal behavorial instincts. Dr Vasi is one such person, just another scientist who is a normal guy passionate about research. He is not a robinhood hero. U can think of it similar to 'Chandru' in the movie Indian. Here its much more elegant. A scientist who really doesnt have any other option other than kicking mud on the face of a rowdy to elope with his girlfriend, so much so frustrating to her that she admits - to have had Chitti in that situation wud have been great. That is Dr Vasi. Imagine how senseless it wud be if he acknowledges to a crowd of distinguished dignitaries in a conference that the robot is ... blah blah .... 100 times are capable as humans in everything ..... etc etc ... and then he kicks the robot and it falls down totally fractured! Dr Vasi is a character designed to be underplayed and the very fact as u admit that the normal movie goer and the Rajni fanatic didnt really remember or worry about Vasi in comparison to the robot is the ultimate applause the Rajni sir and the character can get.
Me: Technically the movie has put India on the world map. Srinivasulu, the supervisor of the VFX team who has collaborated with u on several of ur previous projects admits that the only reason u fetched the Stan Winston or any of the other non-indian artists and engineers was because the script demanded that justification and that such technology was unavailable and people with expertise on such technology were also unavailable here.
Shankar: Dot... none of my previous movies , except Indian has really involved any substantial contribution for VFX from non-indian technicians. I have always stressed that we are not short of creativity or talent here. Its only the budget and facility. Since this movie required certain facilities that we did not have, we approached others outside our country.
Me: The comedy track in the movie i felt was inconsistent. Did Santhanam and Karunas necessarily have to be involved ?
Shankar: See different directors have different ideologies with which they approach a movie. My approach is as follows - if i feel that the movie has a wide range of audience to cater to, my scenes, whether they be comedy or sentiment or action ... the whole movie as such is cooked up in such a proportion that theres something for every movie goer. This along with a good gripping story line is generally what i ensure before a script is on floors for shooting. In this movie, if u actually notice, everything other than the Robot itself is insignificant. Or to put it in other words, the Robot is the fulcrum. Comedy, romance, sentiment, anger, action, and everything that has been a part of the story is totally centred around Chitti. The romance that Dr Vasi pursues is so structured that when Chitti is involved it makes a good convergence. And so with the comedy scenes. As i have told earlier in this interview itself, this story doesnt demand any starcast and any one outstanding performer. Which is also why i didnt want to go with a Vivek or a Vadivelu. But then, a lab without assistants wud look too empty and to give a flavour to the lab, geeky assistants are just fillers. Hence i needed characters who are totally side-kicks and are just involved in giving the scene more than its due. Comedy wasnt aimed to be heavy. In fact one tv reporter while interviewing me asked about the opening scene, where the Robot kicks both these guys. Let me tell you that it wasnt a comedy scene intended. Or rather to rephrase it, not for the grown up audience. The face expression that Santhanam and Karunas give shud have rung a bell to u that it is for the younger kids. For us the elders, the dialogue by Karunas is really what we shud be looking for - " If this is how the Robot kicks and plays with us rite at this initial stage, like does a baby inside the womb of the mother, i cant imagine how it will trouble us when it is fully ready". Well as said and done, theres no clear cut mark that one can put as to what wud go overboard and what is too less ... but as long as u dont feel them spoiling the mood of the overall scenario, i think their casting is justified.
Me: :) .. there have been some trademark Shankar's touch in the movie. One of them as u have just said is that dialogue by Karunas. Do u think, understanding those characteristic moves that each movie will consist of, idiosyncratic of each director really differentiates someone who watches the movie for fun from the others ?
Shankar: If i say that they are all the same to me, i am lying. Definitely it gives immense pleasure when people note small and subtle things in movies and report them to u. They are happy to note those intricacies and as a creator i am happy that they have noted! Otherwise the art of movie making wud become mundane.
Me: If everything is not spoon feeding, then y a straight forward story and narrative style ?
Shankar: Non-linear narrative is exciting as both to create and appreciate. But let us not forget that our target audience is not the western audience used to such high end story visualisation. In fact there are some fantastic directors in our country who can weave such wonderful subtle and non-linear stories. But how many of such movies have u witnessed being box office hits ? The sensibility is always the biggest question and since i try to cater to as wide an audience as possible, i try to have subtler issues and ideas put in a different manner.
Me: But then, those not accustomed to analyzing in depth wrt each moviemaker, will under-estimate the movie ...
Shankar: Well one cant satisfy everyone in every aspect. If i had made this movie with Kamal Hassan, not 10% of the common public that are fans of Rajni and those of similar social strata wud have come to view this movie. But i cud hav gone into further depths of science and people will still buy it. So firstly, there are compromises that come with each part of movie including caste, crew, budget, time etc. Moreover, my story is generally layered in such a way that the person expecting a 'not too tough to digest' storyline gets satisfied and so do those who are used to watching movies of the likes of Spielberg and Nolan. They can identify nuances and intricacies that are characteristic of me hidden at various points. Which is also why some scenes (esp comedy) sometimes are more childish while some are better off. u wud surely not expect a 9 year old kid to understand what Goundamani and Senthil share in the office. On the other hand, when Senthil justifies to Manisha Koirala that the car is not his and has algae thrown on his face, this is straight and simple comedy not so much for us grown ups rather than for young kids.
Me: Does Shankar the director, ever feel thathe has been setting the trend for the highest budgets repeatedly and this inturn can hurt his image ?
Shankar: I sincerely hope it doesnt. My aim is not to make a movie with a bidget bigger than my previous venture each time. Its more of a co-incidence. Robot was supposed to be done 10 years ago , and had that been the case it wud hav broken the trend of the next venture being costlier than that. On the other hand, when producers approach me for movies, they dont want low budget ones from me. They insist that they hav a lot of other directors who can give them low budget movies. They want those big movies. In a way, these big movies put them on the cine floor with a giant leap and reach and hence they insist on such big bidget movies when it involves me as the director.
Me: Is this some kind of type-casting that u admit u are not able to get off ?? Is ur production company a sincere attempt to cast off this image ?
Shankar: Yes - to both. I wudnt say that someone will want me to make a movie worth 500 crores next. But 50-60 crores surely yes. It can be a genuine attempt by a procuder because today's multiplex concept basically ensures that a good opening can recoup the investment within a week of the release. And then considering that the movie fares decently well (as long as it is not a bomber) it wud surely ensure profits.
Me: The emotional quotient of this movie was slightly on the higher side. Any particular reason ?
Shankar: I dont really plan on these things. I cant say that 20 out of 30 scenes shud hav high emotional quotient. I hav a basic strategy as to what all i can involve, how long will the scene be roughly. and then i make an edit to bring it to roughly the time limit of the movie that i wud want it to be. Then each scene is given its due. Chitti's character is loveable. Which is also why u attach emotionally to the character in each sequence. Chitti saving the girl, but doing so without ensuring she had something to cover herself has an interesting dialogue that proceeds -
Vasi : "ava kitta thuni illa nu onakku theriyalaya ? atleast oru thuni vechi mooditu kootindu vandurukkalam la" ?
Chitti : "So what, enakkum than thuni illa".
Vasi - "ippo ava manam poche "
Chitti - " ana ava uyir irukke " ....
something like that ... which brings out a wonderful concept of how the robot understands the world and how humans understand. The final answer by Chitti is unassuming, but to us it does move us becos we relate to it as an innocent young boy who has saved a life. As chitti grows, we grow with it. When it initially comes full fledged, we dont visualise it as a 61 year old man with make up made look like 40. We look at it with awe and a motherly love. As the character grows, we relate to it like that of the growth of a child. This scene can be thought of equivalently of a young boy who is just entering his adolescence and doesnt really know the essential differences between a male and a female body. Make this relation with every scene of Chitti and u will get a totally new dimension of how lots of things that chitti does can be viewed. The first kiss that he gets after the exam .... like a typical kid ... he asks why Ash waters his cheeks. But later when the emotions are programmed, the reaction to the first kiss is typically what a guy in his adolescence wud feel if kissed the first time. The mosquito scene is Chitti's own way of showing his girlfriend that he can do whatever she asks for. And thus, u add an emotional quotient to almost each scene.
Me: Its really nice to know that u hav so much embedded within ur story. But to admit that i did not really think in these aspects, in fact in many of ur justifications that u hav provided earlier, makes me think, if the layering strategy that u utilize itself is the making u a victim.
Shankar: As i hav said earlier, entertainment is the single largest reason for maximum number of people to watch a movie. And then depending upon their exposure, social influence and various other factors, the audience has different capacities of appreciating and criticising finer details. And since i aim to not categorize myself into making movies for just one type of audience, i layer my films with different depths of nuances. But as u correctly mentioned, the plainest view is more like a one line story with events unfolding. It may be true and some people have informed me that, many a time, the overall entertainment quotient in my movie captures audiences' minds more than the subtleties. Well, i cant really help that by cutting down on the plaintive screenplay because not only am i risking the repeat audience from not warrantying a visit to the theater, but i also lose out on my primary ambition to satisfy every kind of person watching my film at least to some extent. I know for a fact and i strongly believe that this is the aim of every director. No director likes to be type casted to an audience of a particular sensibility. But certain other factors restrict the movie from really attracting a varied audience. I want my movies to be acknowledged and approached by people of varied taste. People with craze for songs, heroines, heroism, story, comedy, screenplay, dialogues, punch or watsoever. What this does is i also get the satisfaction of extracting the best out of each department of the movie making and thereby helping all those behind the scenes to reach out with their talents to the audience also.
Me: Well ... how does one justify then the climax of the film .... an electromagnet as the pinnacle of climax ? Dr Vasi seemed a feeble match to the towering villain in Chitti 2.0...
Shankar: See, as i have always insisted Dr Vasi is a normal guy, if he cant fight a single Robot which is equivalent of a hundred guys, how can he single handedly fight 1000s of such robots joined together as a single unit. Although typically a good masala flick wud hav a capable hero and an equally capable villain, this is not one of those regular masala flicks is it ? The only power that Rajni has is his brain. He can think better than the Robot, and after being outdone on several of his ideas, one of the most basic and fundamental things that went into building the Robot is what saves the city and him. Well its exactly the same logic that went into the careless disposal of the Robot but applied in reverse. There i gave a justification of how he makes a severe under-estimation of the Robot. Now its the reverse. And a small but subtle sub-moral .... how ever much it is capable, it is still a Robot , a machine. But u can ask me it is a thinking machine and how then can u compare it lesser than a human ... and the answer is .... humans have evolved over eras, the thinking robots are first of its kind just in this present time. So although Vasi has fed the robot with facts from various resources and books and hard disks .... man is capable of discretionary powers from times immemorial and that holds him higher than the Robot .... of course .... as long as he knows what he is doing. Vasi doesnt make the mistake of going overboard and under-estimating the Robot again. He is severely humbled (esp. after Bohra's death ... which is yet again a classis example of under-estimating a thinking Robot) ... and so now is very careful in each of his plans .... and after all its a machine so all it takes is a giant electromagnet. If u wud like to analyse it this way - Man , is troubled by his weakness - emotions .... Machine is troubled by its weakness - the material that makes the machine. And both individually cause the downfall of each other. The movie, as i have mentioned earlier, focuses on Chitti - the robot. Moreover, as u can see its vintage Rajni in his antoganist role .... so both together set tone for a screenplay that makes sure that Chitti is the only focus of attention.
Me: Thats enlightening. Seems like a lot to be commented and a lot more to be known ... but as a conclusion for this segment ... what can we interpret from " naan sindhikka aarambichitten (i have/had started to think)" ?
Shankar: :) i liked to end it that way more than anything else. After the Robot dismantles itself ... it wud be really annoying to have a joint family elegy in favour of the Robot (like in Varalaru) ... or any such thing. The movie was made with a particular standard of story telling and i wanted to end at a high note. The aim of the movie is to make people think. Think about everything they saw. think about what they feel was right or wrong about each thing that happened in the movie. Some may feel certain actions of Dr Vasi to have been right, some other may feel that to have been wrong or careless, some others confused for choice. But thts the whole point. One has to think. The Robot was able to 'think' and that made the difference. Well it ended up being a disaster ...or atleast thats how i wrote my script ... but well that helped us think and understand that we dont need Robots that can think (by we i mean the public in the movie ... as a reaction to chitti's horrendous activities in its latter life). No big jolts, no big drama and weeping, no nonsense in the end ... a simple and straightforward request to the Robot to dismantle itself.
Me: Thanks Shankar, for sparing ur time. U have certainly left me wanting to watch the movie once more before i bug u for some more clarifications and criticisms ... it gives me a great pleasure to end the conversation with a note that ur movie has officially grossed the maximum amount by any Indian movie beating even that of 3-Idiots. So people have given their verdict :)
Shankar: Thanks ... :) ..... its my pleasure too.
