Satirically Speaking

He plays a cameo, but Akshay Kumar’s self- deprecating humour about himself was one of the highlights of the film. How was that developed?

I am very proud of the fact that Akshay’s character stands out. That’s one thing that everyone who has seen the film, has loved. In fact I have been told that his performance in the film is a milestone in his career. He really surprised everyone, and has done something out-of-the-box by taking potshots at himself. Even the few reviewers who criticised the film have praised his performance. His character was there initially in the film, but once I came on board, Tishu bhai (Tigmanshu Dhulia, the film’s writer), Akshay and me developed it together. Akshay contributed immensely, and it is he who came up with the idea of covering his drink in a coconut, how he would react when Lisa Haydon makes her entry; the stalker angle, etc. Self-deprecating humour is not generally seen in our films, but Akshay and I are on the same wavelength and similar kind of comedy zone. That’s how the character emerged and really shines.

The humour in your debut film Tere Bin Laden was very smart, off beat and satirical. But with The Shaukeens you have tried to enter the mainstream Bollywood space.

Even mainstream Bollywood is changing. I didn’t do this film with an ambition of getting into mainstream Bollywood, or because I wanted to work with bigger stars or anything. To do a film with three oldies going after a young girl was a challenge, and I wanted to see whether I could do it, especially because Tigmanshu was writing it and Akshay was acting in it. The film may have been in the mainstream zone in the publicity zone, but I have tried to retain my flavour in the film and have not tried to ape the conventional structure found in mainstream films. Like the way we tried to project Akshay’s character both realistically and hilariously. I took the film as a challenge and the results were positive.

There is a very thin line between vulgarity and aesthetics when you tackle a film like The Shaukeens. How do you make that demarcation as a writer?

That’s more of the director’s than a writer’s job because vulgarity is determined more by the treatment than the content. That’s why I made sure the film did not come across as crass. Even reviewers who had issues with the film did not call it crass. If your intention is not to titillate, but to entertain the audience then it will show in the film. You just have to work harder on the treatment and you will make a clean film.

Why a remake? Is it because there is a dearth of good scripts?

I have never been a big fan of remakes. My first film was a very original idea and even the sequel to Tere Bin Laden is original. In fact, I am a sucker for originality. We are calling The Shaukeens a remake, but as you must have seen, it is very different from the original in terms of its storyline and characterisation. Not a single scene or character is similar. Only the basic premise of three oldies after one girl is the same. People who have seen the original will find no grounds for comparison. I am a versatile director, but the only thing that I love is comedy. It’s not a genre, but a language for me. Comedy is not one genre—there are many sub genres to it. My first was a satire, the second is a farce and The Shaukeens is a coming-of-age comedy. That’s where my versatility lies. Also using real characters is becoming a unique characteristic associated with my style of film-making. The first had Osama, the second will have Obama and Osama and The Shaukeens has Akshay. I am not sure that it will continue, but these three films demanded that.