Celeb Chat

The many faces of Dalip Tahil

He switches media like a playboy changing cars. One night he’s on stage doing Evita, hitting the highest note on the musical scale with a pro’s proficiency. The next morning he’s on the sets of a typical Bambaiyya potboiler playing Bindu’s husband (Pyar Koi Khel Nahin), Deepti Bhatnagar’s father (Mann), Aftab’s pop (Mast) or Anupam Kher’s evil business partner (Kaho Naa... Pyaar Hai). The next day he’s at the television studio anchoring a new episode for the film analysis show, Picture This. How does Dalip Tahil do all this? The man of varied talents speaks out like never before

Picture This seems to be your first foray into television in a long time. What gives?

Well, I’ve done Buniyaad many years ago. Since then I’ve been a little sceptical about doing soap operas. But Picture This is a totally different ballgame.

You analyse trends in Hindi cinema on Picture This. Are you a major movie buff?

I enjoy watching movies. But I’ve to confess I’m not much into the history of cinema. So Picture This is an educational process. It’s interesting to know about all the genres in Hindi cinema and how they affected the viewers’ lives. We’ve done themes like after-life and double roles, which were very well-received.

I know a lot of viewers enjoy watching you more than the film footage in Picture This. Haven’t you become bigger than the show?

I know the danger is always there. But I certainly hope I don’t become more important than the programme. I hope the programme has its own value independent of my presence. What I’m trying to do is, get the viewers interested in cinema history. It’s very dangerous to think that the host overpowers the show.

That’s because you have a certain presence.

Thank you. I can’t play it down. I’m what I’m. I just have do my job to the best of my abilities. Initially the programme was meant to have much more of me. I then decided there should be a balance between me and the material on cinema. It’s a tricky equation. I feel we don’t have enough time to really go deep into the subject. As soon as we start getting people’s attentions it’s time to sign off. I’m all for five or six episodes devoted to each genre of Hindi cinema. The general consensus is, there should be more matter on each subject.

Your career has been quite electric, hasn’t it?

It certainly has (laughs). I started in theatre doing Evita. From Evita I guess a move to cinema was inevitable. Since I was a professional actor, I had to explore both mediums. There are theatre actors who hold jobs in ads during the day while they moonlight as actors on the stage, a really admirable career strategy. But I didn’t want to be in theatre part-time. I wanted to be a full-time actor.

But does theatre pay?

I supplemented my income, doing voice-overs and modelling. But that’s not something I enjoyed doing. All I really wanted to be was an actor. The natural progression was from theatre to movies. If variety was what I wanted, that’s where I was gonna get it.

But what variety have you been able to secure? Look at your role in Mann. It was atrocious.

(Laughs) I was quite amazed with myself for doing it. It was just two scenes. I must confess I did it because of my old association with Indra Kumar. Indu very frankly told me there wasn’t much of a role for me. But he wanted me to do it. I agreed. I agree with you when you say there isn’t much variety in the Hindi cinema. But whatever there is, it’s still more substantial than the other mediums open to an actor like me.

What about Evita? Didn’t you immortalise yourself in theatre doing it?

Thank you. It’s a wonderful compliment. Recently I also did Man Of La Mancha on stage. You’re right. There’s variety in theatre, too.

So you’re admitting you did cinema for the glamour and money?

I’m not denying that glamour and money are important. But it’s not just these. I’ve have done a variety of roles.

But most of the time you play the pampered heroine’s pampering papa.

You’re right. But I try to interpret the father’s roles in my own way. Going beyond the stereotyped filmi father, I’ve tried to make the character different in every film. But it’s not always possible. Directors in the mainstream Hindi cinema have rigid ideas, and you tend to be typecast.

As an experienced stage actor was it difficult for you to adjust to the haphazard workings of the film industry?

I didn’t have any overt bad experiences. I got into films quite easily. I’ve made sure that I’m considered for the best character roles on offer. It’s taken time. There’s a lot more I can and want to do. But then I always have theatre to satisfy me as an actor. There aren’t too many hugely inspiring roles being written in Hindi cinema. After doing films for twelve years I feel the need to return to theatre more than ever before. Now I know I can’t do without the stage. I can’t be doing only films.

I’ve done some international projects like The Deceivers and Bombay Blues. I must admit that there’s some amount of tardiness in cinema everywhere, in between shots, and so on. But yes, there’s a lot more of that in Hindi cinema. Initially I found that every frustrating. Nowadays there’s much more discipline on Hindi film sets. I’ve worked with stars like Shah Rukh and Aamir Khan. They definitely value time. To tell you the truth I’ve hardly ever had the misfortune of working with undisciplined stars. Initially I worked with Amitabh Bachchan and Shashi Kapoor. They were vastly disciplined stars. Of course I’ve been a victim of unpunctuality. But it hasn’t been a chronic problem. I spend my free time on the sets reading or rehearsing my scenes. I guess I’m a patient man (laughs).

You also cut an album of pop songs a few years ago. What brought that on?

It was something I was encouraged to do by others. I had no clue as to what to do in the album. Then the music company insisted on Indi-pop. After doing the album I realised I should confine my singing to the stage. My voice is suited to singing in staged musicals. I’m not cut out for Indi-pop. Though it didn’t do too badly, I was quite frankly not too happy with the album. That wasn’t me. I’m not a pop singer.

Do you see yourself predominantly as a theatre actor?

I see myself as an actor. It’s a privilege to be working in all three mediums -- cinema, television and theatre. Though I started on stage and my roots are in theatre I like to be known as an actor for all ‘reasons’. I’m glad I returned to theatre to do Man Of La Mancha. I was feeling a vacuum within myself. It was my first stage appearance in 12 years. When I got on stage I realised how much I had been missing it.

You’ve worked with two generations of theatre and film actors. Does this place you in an advantageous position?

Oh yeah. Sharon Prabhakar and I have revived our Evita on stage. There’s a whole new set of dancers, actors and technicians working with us. But the play remains unchanged. I’d say the film industry has gone through more changes than theatre. For instance I think the new generation of film heroes are more disciplined. Nobody wants to keep others waiting. As for the talent, the new generation of film actors is very talented. It’s up to the directors to extract the best out of them.

Have you had to face the camera with actors who know nothing about acting?

Yes, and it is frustrating. I may know a little more about acting than the other person. But then even I started as a newcomer. If back then my seniors had got upset with me I’d have felt demoralised. So I always think back to my own beginnings when I’m with a newcomer. I wasn’t suddenly blessed with a divine force. It took me time to grow as an actor. When my co-star can’t get it right I just keep quiet. If I feel frustrated about the situation I remind myself, ‘Hey this was you many years ago’.

Were you as bad as some of the newcomers?

Well, I don’t think I was. But there were always the tentative moments. I remember how supportive Amitabh Bachchan was in Shakti. I was playing a drunkard. I wasn’t getting the timing quite right. Amitabh took me aside and gave me a pep talk. That was it! I got it right. I never forgot that incident. If one of my co-stars needs assistance I always offer to help. Let’s not forget, it takes all sorts to make showbiz. None of us can afford to sit in judgement on other peoples’ talents and capabilities.

Did you mind playing the villain?

Not really. The second most important part for the male in our movies is the antagonist’s. I enjoy playing the antagonist. I feel it’s vital to the film’s plot.

Have movies been financially rewarding?

Yeah, cinema has, without a doubt, afforded me a very good living standard.

Your voice is your USP, isn’t it?

You think so? It does offer a good opening for an actor. It helps to get the audiences’ attention. If you have a good voice people are interested in hearing what you’ve to say (laughs)). A good voice is definetely a plus point for any actor.

I must tell you when I first visited Mumbai you nearly knocked me down with your car.

What! Was I driving it? My God! Please believe me, it wasn’t intentional. The next time I’ll probably knock you down for writing badly about me (laughs).

You can knock me down if you like. But I still think you were atrocious in Mann.

(Laughs). I’m glad you told me. It gives me a fair idea of what not to do in future. I shouldn’t compromise in the selection of parts. People look at me and say, ‘If you’re half-way intelligent why do you do something like this?’

Does your son want to be an actor, too?

I think he’s dead keen on being a cricketer. He’s most welcome to become a cricketer if he likes. I can’t see him doing anything else. He’s a cricket fiend. I was quite a sportsman myself.

Subhash K Jha