One of the first releases of the New Year, Bhai - Vyakti Ki Valli , directed by Mahesh Manjrekar is the first Marathi film to release in two parts: the first instalment on January 4 and the second, on February 8. The biopic is based on the life of one of Maharashtra’s most loved and celebrated writers, satirists and humorists who was also an actor, composer, singer and orator –Purshottam Laxman Deshpande aka Pu. La. The film stars Sagar Deshmukh in the lead role with Irawati Harshe playing his wife Sunita Deshpande. The Hindu spoke to Manjrekar on the eve of the film’s release.
Was the biopic of Pu.La.on your mind for long?
No. In fact it was not too long ago. I got introduced to Marathi literature much later [in life] because I studied in a convent. I didn’t have Marathi as a language in school. My second language was French. I was far away from Marathi literature, theatre, arts, everything. I was a late entrant to it. I didn’t know a name in Marathi. Vijay Tendulkar and P. L. Deshpande were introduced to me later. Once I got out of school, I was slowly drawn towards theatre. I started my own theatre company. To be an actor, I had to learn Marathi. I used to always grudge why there are so many alphabets in Marathi. I used to be confused. I had no choice but to learn the language. Slowly, I started reading. Pu. La. was one of the first I heard and enjoyed.
I didn’t have to read him because there were so many videos available of all his performances. He had written a book called Vyakti Ani Valli , about all the characters he had met in life. It was a fascinating study of human nature through different characters. I did it as a play five years back. I played one of the roles as well. I used to be in the wings watching every character and I used to be fascinated. How did he write such stuff? Then I realised that he must have met them but named them differently [in the book]. That set the ball rolling. I felt I should present these characters. But then there had been attempts earlier to present them. One day, I happened to read his wife’s [Sunita Deshpande] autobiography. That’s when I realised that this man was such an interesting character. I wanted to know more about the man. He was like a fakir (saint, ascetic). I felt that I had to tell his story. He himself hadn’t written an autobiography. Someone has written about him only recently.
When did you start on the film?
October-November last year. From [Deshpande’s book] I could identify scenes which could be good [on screen]. I called my favourite writer whose first reaction was ‘I don’t see a biopic in him’. That was the best thing to happen. It was because he challenged my beliefs I wanted to prove the guy wrong. Otherwise, the film would not have been written the way it has been. I don’t read myself. I have these wonderful guys — Ganesh Martari and Amol Parchure — who read all his books. When I saw those books with so many markers I almost died. Then we read all those incidents and collected them to write the screenplay. We wrote it in two days. We had a lot of material but realised that we couldn’t edit anything out of it. It would have been injustice to the man. We needed to show the man through all the aspects of his life. While shooting itself, we decided to make it in two parts. The film is not a sequel. It is one story told in two parts. I felt it needed to be told in four hours. Seeing it in one go would have become too tedious for the audience. Now people are used to seeing 1.5 to two-hour films.
Will the gap of a month between the two parts interfere with continuity?
I could have released the second part within a week but then the first would have also been playing. I didn’t want to go more than two months because I didn’t want people to forget what they had seen. And there will also be a probability of the first part also running in theatres [after a month]. People who really want to go again and connect would be able to see both parts in one day.
It’s quite a risk…
There is a risk but I have faith in people. Connect will not be a problem. It’s not a suspense film. It’s about the second phase of his life.
What is it about his life that lends itself so well for a film?
There is no scandal, no drama [in his life]. I think that’s what challenged me to do the film. If you see the film, it’s like reading a book. I have not tried to dramatise it at all. He was so unpredictable; the unpredictability works. He might be doing a film and leave it and do a professor’s job in Belgaum. Then suddenly he thinks of going to Delhi and becomes the director of Doordarshan. Then he can’t take pressure of being dictated to. He was a selfless man. When someone becomes such a big personality then subconsciously or consciously he starts building a wall around him. He was always approachable. Always a middle-class man, throughout his life. He didn’t let wealth or fame affect him. He believed in giving away everything. He was too passionate about everything in life. I didn’t need to dramatise; there are moments that give you goosebumps.
Traditionally, one associates biopics with central characters who come with flair and flourish.In way you are reinventing a certain aspect of the biopic?
I wanted it to be seen as though you were reading a book. I didn’t want to jump pages. The whole fakiri (asceticism) [aspect] interested me. He did what he felt was right at that moment. The only people who were affected or hurt were his near ones — wife, mother, father. They were living the passion, expecting to understand it. His wife put her own passion on the backburner.
Is it him through her point of view, if you are drawing from her book?
No. That was my trigger point. Otherwise we did a lot more research. We have presented it [his life] as it is. Their love story was also so understated. Out of the blue, he asks if they can get married.
Is it her story as well?
Her story will require another film. She is such an interesting character. She had a huge house in Ratnagiri but lived alone in Mumbai. A woman rents her house there, little knowing where her next penny is going to come from. Her story is fascinating, more dramatic.
Did you ever feel intimidated or challenged in making the film?
It was intimidating. I know there will be people there with daggers drawn. One small mistake and they will be ready to rip me apart. There are his relatives who will see it with a magnifying glass. But I don’t think they will find a single thing to complain about. I have been very honest to what I read about him. As much as they are in awe of him and respect him, I am as well. There is nothing to get offended.
What about the release beyond Maharashtra?
We have a huge release planned overseas. For the first time, a Marathi film will be released simultaneously in most parts of the world. London, US, Australia there is a lot of Marathi population. But we are also showing in Holland, Germany, Dubai, Abu Dhabi… People know about Rabindranath Tagore outside Bengal but it’s not the same for Pu.La. We have not been able to present him to the world and this film will do that. Hyderabad, Delhi, Gujarat are good markets but am asking them to release in Kolkata as well. He loved Bengali language. He wanted to read Tagore but not in translation. He wanted to read him in original. So he went to Kolkata, learnt Bengali.
Do you think the‘fakiri’of Pu.La, as you put it, could have a larger message for the world?
The film gave me a lot of satisfaction while doing it but I am also little changed person for having done it. We are always running after material comforts. We are trying to make provisions for our children’s children also. Here is one man who gave away everything. We are still caught up not just about tomorrow but next year as well. If we get one roti for our children we try and get 100 a day while he gave away half the roti to someone who would not have had one roti in 100 days. This film has made me a little sensitive to many things.
