Danny Denzongpa: ’70s and ’80s were the worst time for the Hindi film industry

Dashing, poised, and full of vigour, veteran actor Danny Denzongpa amazes you with his love and in-depth knowledge of Indian cinema. In a career spanning more than four-and-a-half decades, he played several villainous parts, and made the bad look good on-screen. His most memorable roles include that of the suave gang lord Kancha Cheena in the original Agneepath (1990) and the mobster Katiya in Ghatak (1996). Outside Bollywood, Danny starred in the hit Bengali thriller Lalkuthi (1978), now considered a classic of sorts. In recent years, he has acted in films such as Enthiran / Robot (2010), Baby (2015) and Naam Shabana (2017).

Now, Danny plays the titular role in the upcoming film Bioscopewala, an adaptation of Rabindranath Tagore’s short story Kabuliwala, and the trailer has received huge praise. In a freewheeling interview, the 70-year-old actor talks about what made him take on the project, which was “originally to be done by Amitabh Bachchan”, his views on the film industry, today’s Bollywood, and how things have changed over the years.

Despite continuously working, people say you’re making a comeback. How do you feel?

Yes, I haven’t given any interviews in the past six years, but there’s nothing like a comeback. I’ve done very few films because I wanted to choose the right scripts; otherwise, whatever fans I have, I will lose them also (laughs).

You play a young man and an old man in Bioscopewala. Was it challenging to experiment with your looks?

It was actually fun. The unit [members] of this film, all of them are half my age and from FTII (the Film and Television Institute of India, Pune) mostly — the director, the sound guy, cameraman, they are all my juniors and colleagues. So, it was like a picnic working on the film. Also, the film Kabuliwala (1961) is one of my favourites, starring (the late) Balraj Sahniji. I was in school when I saw it and cried a lot, so it created a fantastic impact.

After Enthiran / Robot (2010), you read about 40 scripts, but didn’t like any. Why?

I’ve been working for 46 years now, and very often, these new directors and producers somewhere get stuck with the image. They want to repeat the same thing, and want me to play a role similar to what I’ve already done in the past. That gets very monotonous, and I get so fed up. So, I want something different.

Danny Denzongpa has acted in over 190 Hindi films in his career spanning 46 years.

How tough or easy it was to position yourself when you started off in the early 1970s?

It was difficult. That time, people were mostly making family films and I didn’t fit in any of them. I could play either the servant or a waiter in a Chinese restaurant or a gatekeeper. But luckily, I got a break with Gulzarji in his first directorial film, Mere Apne (1971) — it had students from different parts of the country, and he gave me a small part. The movie did well and that’s how I got established and was accepted as the guy who could act.

You made a villain look good on-screen. Do you feel that modern-day baddies are doing an equally good job?

Whenever an actor of a different generation comes, they can interpret the same plot in a different way. I think, young actors are doing very well. The only thing is that the kind of villains we used to have in our times, they were very prominent parts after the hero, but people don’t create that kind of characters anymore.

However, I feel that in the history of Indian cinema, the ’70s and ’80s were the worst time for the Hindi film industry, when we were in the movies, right at the top. The scripts were so conventional and we were doing WWF kind of movies (with highly choreographed, almost unreal fight sequences, as one sees in show wrestling). Strangely, they did very well with the audience; maybe they wanted that kind of potboilers.

Danny Denzongpa in a still from the film Mera Shikar (1988).

What makes you call it the worst phase?

Suddenly, action films took the forefront and it was mainly influenced by the West. Even the story and screenplay were so conventional, so loud. I feel the best time was in the ’50s and early ’60s, when beautiful films like Do Aankhen Barah Haath (1957), Bandini (1963), Jagte Raho (1956), Do Bigha Zamin (1953), and Kabuliwala were made. During the late ’60s, enemy-oriented films were made in South India, and that became successful, or we had typical saas-bahu type of films — emotional and melodramatic.

By the time we came to our times, the ’70s, it was absolutely bonkers. Koi achhi picture banayi hi nahi humne (We didn’t make a single good film). Those few people, who tried to make good films, they just couldn’t compete with the potboilers. Somewhere, we were lucky that the audiences accepted and made us into stars.

Did things change during the ’90s and later? Do you feel they’re better now?

Technically, so much has changed. You don’t need reels now; everything is digital. You don’t need those lights and reflectors where actors can’t open their eyes (because of the glare). I remember, once I was shooting and there was a back light kept behind me. By the time I finished my lines, my hair was burning and it curled up. Nowadays, you can expose and shoot in any light. Things have become easier.

And what about the quality of cinema — has that improved?

Nothing works until and unless you’ve been accepted by the audience. People today accept films that are different. That’s why smaller and beautiful films are being made and are doing so well. Even movie-making, screenplay writing, storytelling has become better. Casting also matters and actors today are natural and fantastic. So, there’s a lot of improvement.

Interact with Monika Rawal Kukreja at Twitter/@monikarawal