Aamir Khan is one of the most prolific actors in the country, and through his films as a producer, he has proved to be a great strategist too. In a conversation with Swarup Chakraborty, he talks about the state of the film industry and explains his model to safeguard the interests of stakeholders in a film. Edited excerpts:
In the last couple of months we have seen a number of big budget films, like Kites and Raavan, flopping at the box office. How do you assess the situation?
I remember reading an interview of filmmaker Elia Kazan where he said since he talked so much about cinema, people perhaps thought that he probably knew all about film-making. People might question him if he knew it all then why he made those films that did not work and he replied that was the charm of film making. Sometimes we succeed, at times we don’t.
But in the case of big films the losses are in tens of crores, how does the film industry tackle it?
I can’t talk for others but as far as I am concerned, I keep two things in mind as I have a responsibility towards two sets of people: One is the audience who pays for the ticket, and second is the set of people who invest in my film. I want my audience to get the value for the money he has spent on the ticket and I want anyone who has invested in my film to earn something.
Is the high price at which distributors are buying films today a concern? Is that leading to losses in the industry?
The responsibility of making sure that the economics of a film is in control lies on the key talents, be it actors, director or producers. It is their responsibility that the film be financially feasible for everyone. Since the key talent is in a position to affect the feasibility, primarily through their own fees, that is their responsibility. For example, my films like Taare Zameen Par (TZP) and Jaane Tu yaa Jaane Naa (JTYJN) were not sold to any distributor, we could have sold them for a high fee but we did not and distributed the films ourselves. We took the risk that if the content is not good enough then we would take the hit. Even for our next film Peepli Live, which we have co-produced with UTV, we will distribute it.
The films from your banner, both past and forthcoming — TZP, JTYJN, Peepli Live, Delhi Belly, Dhobi Ghaat — are small-budget, of course you do not charge your fees for home productions and that helps. Is going small the profitable model?
I would not say so as each film has its own requirement and the economics of each film should make sense. So I might make a small film but its recovery potential may also be small. The point is you need to safeguard the project and the potential to earn from it should be higher than the investment. People who have invested in the film should not lose money because if they start losing money on an ongoing basis then it starts affecting the talent who is responsible for making the film. So for a healthy environment at large, the key talent should be aware of the fact that if people have invested in what he wanted to make (the film) they should not lose money.
If I have made a good enough film then I can share the profits in the back-end. I don’t load my fee on a film I take it as a percentage of the profits. If the film does well I earn more and vice-versa. That is the model I follow.
But a producer might not always be a distributor too, in that case how can you make sure that people do not lose money?
Take the case of 3idiots in which I was not the producer, I was only an actor. Vidhu Vinod Chopra produced the film. Vinod could have sold the film for a very high price but he did not.
The way the deal was structured with the distributor made sure that everyone’s interest was safeguarded. I feel that we should not structure deals based on what the highest possible business a film can do, I prefer structuring my deals based on the least that a film can earn. Under the circumstances that the minimum expected business is done, the upside is there for everyone to share.
(According to industry sources, Reliance Big Pictures bought 3idiots for Rs 50 crore and got a five per cent share of the revenues over its cost. The film has become the highest grosser in Indian cinema having done a business of over Rs 400 crore.)
Hollywood studios have entered the Indian film market but except Fox Star Studios’ investment in My Name is Khan, none of them have tasted success, how do you analyse the scenario?
I think India is a big and healthy market with space for lot of talents and production houses. Hollywood studios have been in the business of film-making for a long time and I believe they will come to India with a certain amount of knowledge and expertise to share. Even if their first film has not worked, it is not of much significance in the longer run.
However, there is a big question mark on the kind of content that these Hollywood studios have bought in the past. For example, how could Warner Bros pay a high price for a film like Chandni Chowk to China?
I think couple of years ago there was a bullish attitude in the market in general. Everyone was acting in a bullish manner and that is what I am saying that while doing a deal we should consider the worst possible scenario and not sell films thinking about the best possible case.
Has the downturn in the last two years brought prices to realistic levels?
I have not been so much in the market to say that with authority but I hope that it has happened.
There have been reports on you signing Danny Boyle’s film Bombay Velvet.
At present I am totally involved in the promotion and marketing of my home production Peepli Live and after the film releases on August 13, 2010, I will be going through the scripts that have been sent to me.
What is the plot of this film Peepli Live and where on earth is this place?
(Laughs) Peepli is a fictitious place in Mukhya Pradesh. Peepli is a very common name and it could be anywhere in India. The film is about rural life and the divide between urban and rural life which is only growing. It is about how as a society we are not paying enough attention to our villages. The film is a social satire and uses humour as a vehicle to highlight an issue and also talks about a number of elements, some of which are politics, administration, media and the civil society.
