 "The 1960s represent a very interesting time cinematically for Mumbai: Anurag Kashyap")
Anurag Kashyap's latest directorial venture, Raman Raghav 2.0, premiered recently at the 69th Cannes Film Festival, as part of the non-competitive Director's Fortnight. Starring Nawazuddin Siddiqui and Vicky Kaushal, the film has been inspired by the true story of a serial killer who had Bombay of the 1960s in the throes of terror. Kashyap speaks to Avantika Bhuyan about shooting the film guerrilla-style in flat 20 days and his extensive collection of crime novels
Earlier with Bombay Velvet and now with Raman Raghav 2.0 you have time and again explored the era of the 1960s. What is your fascination with that period?
That era has inspired a lot of classic films and novels. It was the time of Prohibition. The British Raj hangover was still there. It was the time of smuggling, old-style night clubs, serial killers, people who didn't know how to solve crime. To me, the period is very interesting cinematically as it represented the coming of age of a city.
The guy is a serial killer and homophobic - this at a time when homosexuality wasn't even talked about that much. He admitted to killing 41-plus people and was remorseless about it. I was curious about his choice of victims and weapon (an iron rod, shaped like the number '7'). I mean, this guy confessed to his killings because he decided he wanted to eat murgi or chicken. Unlike other serial killers, he followed no set pattern and didn't kill for a motive, but for random reasons. It was a character I wanted to explore.
But instead of a biopic, you have made a 2.0 version inspired by Raghav. Why is that?
Bombay Velvet didn't work and no one wanted to give me money to make another period film. Making a biopic would have cost a lot more money. It would have been another period film and the audiences might not have been able to relate to it. But I was very invested in the idea and wrote the film accordingly to fit the budget of Rs 3 crore to Rs 3.5 crore.
Also, you used several techniques of guerrilla film-making to shoot at actual locations in Mumbai. How did that come about?
I am used to having no money for making a film. So this is a process that I have developed over a period of time - how to maximise the money that you have. But it shouldn't look like a low-budget film. It should create a world, a mood. So I plan extensively. Raman Raghav 2.0 was shot in 20 days. A lot of stuff can't be shot if you are not shooting guerrilla-style.
Noir is a genre that you have come to be identified with. And yet, all your films are not uniformly dark, but explore various shades of darkness and are different in temperament. Does the audience understand that?
I no longer waste my time or energy on thinking about whether I have been typecast or not. I love reading about crime. Crime and Punishment and Manohar Kahaniyaan were some of my early forays into the genre. I have got every crime novel from across the world that has ever been translated into English. I get regular online updates about books in this genre. If a book comes out anywhere in the world, it will be with me in a week's time. Crime lends itself cinematically. The best visual directors from around the world such as Martin Scorsese are making crime films. These are also very socially realistic. The genre lends itself to talking about the politics and society at that time.
Earlier with Bombay Velvet and now with Raman Raghav 2.0 you have time and again explored the era of the 1960s. What is your fascination with that period?
That era has inspired a lot of classic films and novels. It was the time of Prohibition. The British Raj hangover was still there. It was the time of smuggling, old-style night clubs, serial killers, people who didn't know how to solve crime. To me, the period is very interesting cinematically as it represented the coming of age of a city.
Also Read
You have been wanting to make a film on Raman Raghav for a very long time. What's so striking about the character?
The guy is a serial killer and homophobic - this at a time when homosexuality wasn't even talked about that much. He admitted to killing 41-plus people and was remorseless about it. I was curious about his choice of victims and weapon (an iron rod, shaped like the number '7'). I mean, this guy confessed to his killings because he decided he wanted to eat murgi or chicken. Unlike other serial killers, he followed no set pattern and didn't kill for a motive, but for random reasons. It was a character I wanted to explore.
But instead of a biopic, you have made a 2.0 version inspired by Raghav. Why is that?
Bombay Velvet didn't work and no one wanted to give me money to make another period film. Making a biopic would have cost a lot more money. It would have been another period film and the audiences might not have been able to relate to it. But I was very invested in the idea and wrote the film accordingly to fit the budget of Rs 3 crore to Rs 3.5 crore.
Also, you used several techniques of guerrilla film-making to shoot at actual locations in Mumbai. How did that come about?
I am used to having no money for making a film. So this is a process that I have developed over a period of time - how to maximise the money that you have. But it shouldn't look like a low-budget film. It should create a world, a mood. So I plan extensively. Raman Raghav 2.0 was shot in 20 days. A lot of stuff can't be shot if you are not shooting guerrilla-style.
Noir is a genre that you have come to be identified with. And yet, all your films are not uniformly dark, but explore various shades of darkness and are different in temperament. Does the audience understand that?
I no longer waste my time or energy on thinking about whether I have been typecast or not. I love reading about crime. Crime and Punishment and Manohar Kahaniyaan were some of my early forays into the genre. I have got every crime novel from across the world that has ever been translated into English. I get regular online updates about books in this genre. If a book comes out anywhere in the world, it will be with me in a week's time. Crime lends itself cinematically. The best visual directors from around the world such as Martin Scorsese are making crime films. These are also very socially realistic. The genre lends itself to talking about the politics and society at that time.