Chandigarh: His onscreen maybe that of a ‘rapist’, but yesteryear Bollywood actor Ranjeet, who is best known for being the bad guy of the Hindi film industry, says that he had “always been a shy person”.
After nearly five decades in Bollywood, actor-villain Ranjeet says that he was always a self-made man.
“I am completing 50 years in the film industry. I have lived life on my own terms. I did not have a godfather. Despite the image (of a baddie), I have never been involved in any controversy all these years. I can say that I have lived very gracefully,” Ranjeet told reporters in an interview here.
Having done various roles in over 500 films, in practically every Indian language, Ranjeet says that work for him is paramount.
“Work is work for me. I can do any work in the field of acting. Be it films, television or theatre, I am willing to do anything,” he said.
Born in Punjab’s Jandiala Guru town near Amritsar and named Gopal Bedi by his orthodox Sikh family, Ranjeet had never worked to get into films.
“When I was young, I used to play football for at least six hours daily. I used to be the goalkeeper and everyone used to call me ‘Goalie’. That name has remained with me since then. I was selected for the Indian Air Force but had to leave it during training.”
He happened to be in Bombay (now Mumbai) once and was attending a party where a producer asked him if he would be interested in films. “I immediately said yes and my film career started,” Ranjeet said, adding that the first role he was offered never saw the light of the day as the film was never made.
Ranjeet, who studied in Delhi’s Hindu College for some time, got into the film industry in 1966-67, playing the role of Rekha’s brother in the movie “Saawan Bhado”.
He was given the screen name ‘Ranjeet’ by superstar Sunil Dutt with whom he did “Reshma aur Shera” in 1968. He started doing villainous roles from his third film ‘Sharmelee’ with Shashi Kapoor and Rakhee.
“I have done over 500 films in all languages, except Malayalam and Assamese. But I have seen just about eight or 10 films in these five decades. I had never got any formal training in acting,” he said.
Having successfully created a name for himself in negative roles, Ranjeet says that he has learnt to live with his image of a villain and a rapist.
“My family, which was very orthodox, threw me out of the house when they learnt that I had raped the heroine in the film (Sharmelee). For some time, I had to stop signing films. I had to convince the family that I was only acting,” Ranjeet recalled.
“I am still a very shy person. I am a vegetarian and hardly drink,” he said.
Ranjeet feels that the days of the ‘iconic’ villains – the likes of K N Singh, Pran, Prem Chopra, Amjad Khan, Gulshan Grover, Amrish Puri and Shakti Kapoor are over.
“The Indian film audience still waits for the thrill of the entry of the villain. However, now the lines have changed. A lot of heroes are also doing anti-hero and negative characters,” he said.
On the lighter side, though, Ranjeet says that roles of regular villains have also shrunk with the size of the clothes of actresses. “It is no longer the same. Things have changed,” he says with a laugh.
There are voices that the OTT content should come under CBFC certification. It is reported that at the CBFC, while the films from big makers are cleared out of turn so that they can meet their scheduled release dates, makers of smaller films have to wait a long time for that kind favour from the censors?
When a fad invades India, it does so in hordes. May it be mobile manufacturers, car makers, and so on and so forth. But, now, we have a line-up of streaming content providers. They enjoy an open, unhindered run on your small screens.
Usually, the films with family entertainment, RomComs or mildly plausible action films work (Salman Khan types). The religious and saas bahu family themes have been hijacked by television channels. Presently, though suddenly, we are now into this genre called nationalism/patriotism and biopics. But, that market is flooded and all future announcements for forthcoming films seem to be on patriotism and biopics! Not long before the law of diminishing returns takes over.
In fact, this week’s release, Romeo Akbar Walter, may prove to be an indicator to that considering the lukewarm reception the film has got. The thing is, those people who want to watch these films, they are mainly available in cinema halls. These films would not be as much fun on a small smartphone/tablet screen, also known as Over The Top (OTT).
The content providers seem to have decided to capture the attention as well as the initial eyeballs through a nonconventional way; providing content which is not available on cinema screens. That is to majorly deliver content that is morbid, gory, semi pornographic, drugs and all those things that are repulsive to a normal entertainment seeker and the family audience. Now this is the content designed for personal viewing with no one else watching over your shoulder!
The target viewer is the youth and the purpose is to change their taste and preferences. Indian, Spanish, Mexican, all the content that I scanned through had gore, sex, and all that as common as well as the dominant factors. While providing such content, there are also some decent features but not enough yet.
But, how long can this trend last? There was an era when Malayalam films with a lot of titillation and suggestive sex were dubbed in Hindi language and, for the interior audience, interpolation was a regular practice as explicit sex scenes from porn films were added. They worked for a while but faded soon.
So, the issue is, while the Central Board Of Film Certification (CBFC) makes all kinds of demands from a feature film producer before his/her film is approved for public exhibition, this morbid mobile OTT streaming goes unchecked! The CBFC, in fact, has become the moral guardian of the Indian moviegoer; one to check on its ethics and morals!
Pahlaj Nihalani, the recent past Chairman of the CBFC, asked to delete a kissing scene from a Bond film from some 15 seconds to six seconds. Isn’t that ridiculous considering that Nihalani in real life can’t finish a sentence without adding a couple of BCs and MCs no matter if women or kids are around! Is it possible that a single panel member of the examining committee of CBFC, who watches films to rate them, has never watched an illicit porn film? And, to think that these people think a film is kosher only for six seconds, not 15! Do this politically connected panel members really qualify to sit in judgement over what the people should watch? That has been an eternal debate.
The CBFC does not work on precedents. Does not matter that a number of films, Hollywood as well as Indian with lengthier kissing scenes, have been passed with UA certificate! There is no consistency in policy. As is the wont of Indians, a seat of authority robs them of logic. It is a high to be able to judge others, especially when in an official position. As a rule, this lot found fault with every film presented for clearing. For example, the examining committee suggested 14 cuts to a children-oriented film, Mr India, in 1980. I can quote numerous such examples.
But, the issue is about parity. That is to say, while almost all other mediums are free of a watchdog, why are films censored? Why not OTT content? Come to think of it, what does the ‘power’ that the CBFC panel members and the Chairman
amount to when a motely mob negates their certification and blocks a film? Padmaavat, Manikarnika and so many other examples.
Coming back to streaming content and films, how come the film, PM Narendra Modi, is denied even the courtesy of a screening for the examining committee yet while the streaming episodes on the same subject, Modi, are already on people’s mobiles? So, how is the CBFC and Censor Certificate relevant anymore when a biopic on a person is blocked indefinitely while the same subject OTT platform, Modi: Journey Of A Common Man, produced by Eros Now, has already started streaming?
There are voices that the OTT content should come under CBFC certification. It is reported that at the CBFC, while the films from big makers are cleared out of turn so that they can meet their scheduled release dates, makers of smaller films have to wait a long time for that kind favour from the censors? In that case, suppose OTT content had to pass through censors, what would be the scene? Would it be the Amazon and Netflix that will get priority or a score of others who apply? After all, big shots get priority! Imagine the chaos that can follow. A 30-minute episode can end up
being chopped off to 15 minutes and the second episode of a series may appear weeks after the previous one!
Also, considering every other so-called group or organization or a community can ignore CBFC clearance and block a film’s release, the Board means nothing. And, this despite the highest court order ages back that the CBFC is the ultimate authority on cinema content! Something needs to be set right in the Cinematograph Act. To start with, the word Digital Content, should be made part of the Act.
@The Box Office
*The latest release, a highly promoted film, Junglee, just about manages to stay afloat. With a meagre opening day collections of three crore, it managed a face-saving weekend of around 13 crore. The film had a tapering effect at the box office with the start of the new week and closed its first week with a total of over 19 crore.
*The other release of the week, Salman Khan’s production, Notebook, failed to make its mark. With an opening weekend of Rs 2.3 crore, it had a low opening week figures of Rs four crore.
*Akshay Kumar carries Kesari on his popularity though a regional subject with a limited appeal, it collects Rs 19 crore for its second weekend and Rs 30 crore for its second week taking its two week tally to Rs 135 crore.
*Badla has collected Rs 5.3 crore in its fourth week to take its four week total to Rs 79.3 crore. (IANS)