The Hindu Business Line : The Waiting

Should Aamir Khan have taken a four-year break from the silver screen in order to do just one film? Are such long breaks injurious to a star's appeal and popularity?

There are no queues at the Mumbai theatres screening Mangal Pandey: The Rising. As the audience emerges after a show, Mumbai cab driver, Majid Mohamad declares, "Aamir first class; picture bekar (useless)."

"We waited four years for this film," says another fan. "OK, this film flopped but Aamir should not take it easy, he should appear in more films. Otherwise, he will be forgotten."

The rare visibility of Aamir Khan has raised an interesting debate. No one denies he is among our best actors. But then, should he restrict himself to just one film in four years? If this continues, will he not lose out to rivals in the industry?

The view among the masses is clear. They want more of Aamir, at least one film a year. A group of girls studying journalism at a Mumbai college, jump at the chance to discuss Aamir rather than initiate a discussion on media ethics and investigative reporting. They agree Aamir is the best in business.

"He always worked in fewer films," declares one of the girls. "There was a gap of two years between Sarfarosh and Lagaan. Then Dil Chahta Hai was released after which he had to prepare himself for The Rising. Even before that, he had just one release a year."

Another girl chips in with, "We should not confuse quality with quantity. Aamir Khan has a captive audience, which is prepared to wait for him."

The students point out that for two years the actor faced serious personal problems and a role like that of Mangal Pandey required serious study and preparation. Even the growing of long hair and moustache needed time. "But he was in the news all the time," says another girl. "So much was written about The Rising to keep us interested in Aamir Khan."

The students are not bothered about the visibility factor. Shah Rukh Khan appears in more films, but is now typecast. Six Amitabh Bachchan films were released in 2004 but only one, Khakhee, made any impact.

Film writer and critic Phiroj Wadia agrees that visibility is important to a star. But it is more essential to stars like Hrithik Roshan or Abhishek Bachchan. "The industry and audiences know that Aamir does not favour acting in many films. They are prepared to wait for his films."

If an actor like Bobby Deol was not seen on the screen for a long time, everyone knew it was because he was not getting roles. But with actors like Aamir Khan and Ajay Devgan, it was different. Over the years, they had become choosy about their roles. But then, wasn't Aamir affected by the fact that Shah Rukh had at least one big-banner release every year and managed to walk away with most of the awards?

"For quite some time now, Aamir had been spurning such awards," says Wadia. "He accepted the national award for Lagaan and kept away from the rat race for film industry awards, which he feels are manipulated. Nor is he bothered with PR campaigns for his films."

According to producer-director Mahesh Bhatt, the film industry knows the value of Aamir Khan. "He can decide what roles to accept and what to reject. Aamir Khan is a shrewd showbiz personality, knows what he is doing and I don't think he is all that concerned with the visibility factor."

Leading film exhibitor and executive director of the Gaiety-Galaxy multiplex, Manoj Desai disagrees that Aamir Khan was `invisible' for a long time. The media reported in detail the progress of The Rising and in the interim, he was on TV in the popular commercials for Coke and Titan watches, he says.

The visibility factor seldom worried actors of the earlier generation. Evergreen hero Dev Anand points out that the top stars of his generation — Dilip Kumar, Raj Kapoor and himself — never bothered. "Some years, I had three or four releases," he says. "But Dilip Saab seldom worked in more than one film and that never affected his popularity. If Aamir wants to restrict his appearances to good films, why bother?"

Of course, every actor has his or her style of working. Top Hollywood stars never worked in more than one film at a time and restricted screen appearances to one or two films a year.

In a magazine interview, the late Gregory Peck explained, "A movie role, any movie role needed concentration, study. You can't do this if you worked for too many films at a time." Despite long careers, few of the top western actors crossed the century mark.

In Bollywood, there was always the temptation to grab as many roles as possible when the going was good. Actors like Jeetendra and Govinda worked three shifts, and signed more and more films but many of these were forgettable. Superstar Rajesh Khanna, during his heyday, also worked in several films at the same time. While his hit films appeared regularly, weak films like Mehboob ki Mehendi were delayed for years reportedly due to star tantrums.

"Sometimes, in the face of fierce competition, actors were tempted to sign more films than they could cope with," says Bhatt. Many of these did not appear on the screen or failed at the box-office. Ultimately, such flops did nothing good to their careers. The lesson? Forget the visibility factor and go for good films.

But Aamir Khan understands the feelings of his fans. That is why he has now decided to act in one film a year. Today, while Rang Basanti is ready for release, he is acting in one more film and also looking at suitable scripts. Thankfully, the four-year itches appear to be in the past for him.

Picture by M. Vedhan

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Making abortions safe

Green is the word

The Waiting

For the executive globetrotter

The queen's temple

Giving wings to dreams

`All my other work stems from feminism... '

It's a mag, mag, mag world