KATHMANDU: Tulsi Ghimire is the director who made popular, successful films like Chino, Lahure, Kusume Rumal, and Balidaan in a cinematic journey spanning over four decades, films that set the standards of the Nepali film industry. He has directed 23 films, and Ghimire’s plan is to retire from directing films once this number reaches 25. Ghimire, who was born in Kalimpong, India, learned the craft of filmmaking in Mumbai which is also in India, and made his workplace the country of his maternal lineage, Nepal, is currently producing his 24th film, Pahad. Ashim Timalsina of Nepal News interviewed Ghimire, who stands at the confluence of Nepal and India, on topics including the two countries’ film industries and the trend of contemporary Nepali cinema:

How is the relationship between Nepal and India, which is explained by calling it a ‘Roti-Beti Ko Samabandha’ (a colloquial and culturally significant term used to describe the deep and multifaceted ties between India and Nepal) and a long-lived relationship, reflected in the film industries of the two countries?

In the past, when we went to India and mentioned we belong to Nepali film, we would get a discount of 20-25 percent on the production cost. They showed a lot of respect. Many Nepali films including Bansur, Lahure, Mashaal, were made in India. After these films were shown in Nepal, Nepali audiences learned a lot about Indian film making style.

As for the rest, their films are shown here, and our films are shown there. Nepali artists receive a lot of affection in India. Indian artists are naturally loved in Nepal. For example, the late Dev Anand loved Nepal very much; it was his favorite place.

On the other hand, there are many Nepali-style songs in Indian films as well. For example, when Ranjit Gazmer a famous musician and music director went with a madal (a traditional Nepali drum), and music director and singer R.D. Burman made that his signature.

There is a commercial aspect to this relationship too. Nepal is also a good market for Hindi films. However, Nepali films have not been able to do well in India, which is our own weakness. It is our failure to approach them. If we, like them, can display Nepali films in India by catching hold of local distributors, we could earn at least INR 20 million to INR 40 million. That would help increase the investment in films, and quality films could also be made. We have missed out on that one.

When talking about showing Nepali films in India, are we aiming to show them to Indians or to Nepali-speaking people there?

Just showing them to Nepali-speaking people there is enough. Wherever Nepali films are shown, be it Kalimpong, Darjeeling, Sikkim, or Assam, Nepali-speaking people and their friends will come and watch them anyway in good numbers.

In Nepal, a nationalistic film is instantly understood as anti-India. Similarly, cinematic presentations that infringe upon our sovereignty are occasionally seen in Indian films. Why does this happen?

I watched one or two Nepali films recently. They were completely anti-Indian. Similarly, some Indian films portrayed Nepalis negatively. But when this happened, there was more opposition from India than from Nepal. The Nepali film industry itself should protest if Indian films misrepresent Nepal. We need to pay attention to this. One country should not make films that affect the sovereignty of another country.

The government, the Film Development Board, Nepal, and the Indian Embassy should also think about strengthening Nepal-India relations. Let’s make good films and encourage them. India and Nepal have greatly helped each other; if films are made on this subject, the relationship between the two countries will naturally improve.

How can the Nepali film industry protest Hindi cinema that infringes upon our sovereignty?

A film from any country that challenges Nepal’s existence should not be allowed to be screened here at all. Even if it is screened, the Film Development Board of Nepal should directly protest to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), India. They should ask, ‘How did you pass a film that damages the relationship between the two countries?’ Unfortunately, no one speaks up about this. I cannot do it by myself. An individual producer cannot do it alone either. An institution must speak on such a sensitive issue, and that institution is the Film Development Board.

However, there are also films that correctly portray the Nepal-India relationship, like Uunchai. Many such Indian films contain a positive portrayal of Nepal. Such films strengthen the relationship between the two countries.

Indian films have a strong influence in Nepal. It looks like a kind of ‘one-way traffic’. In contrast to Hindi films, Nepali films perform poorly even in the domestic market. Why is this happening?

First, we must focus on the standard of our films. We have not been able to stand in the international market. A while ago, Prem Geet 3 was dubbed in Hindi and screened in India. This means that if we can publicize that a Nepali film is strong, then Nepali films can occasionally be screened in the Indian market as well. The movie Prem Geet 3 was screened in India through individual effort. The government did not send it. The Film Development Board should promote Nepali films in India by saying, “This is our best film, screen it there” and send it. For this to happen, the Board must have strong leadership.

There is another aspect to this. Most people in Nepal speak and understand Hindi. Conversely, many Indians do not understand Nepali. This also creates a challenge for screening Nepali films in India.

Ideas carried by Indian movies also become a subject of debate in Nepal sometimes. For example, films like ‘The Kerala Story’ and ‘The Kashmir Files’ were accused of expressing the views of the Indian establishment and propagating Hindutva in Nepal. How justified do you think it is to allow such films to be screened in Nepal?

Movies like The Kashmir Files shows the wounds of Indians. It shows their pain and suffering. Now, if this issue creates a problem for Nepal, it should have been banned. That is the job of Nepal’s censor board. But I wonder what was the Film Development Board is doing?

Nevertheless, The Kashmir Files and The Kerala Story are films made after years of research and hard work. They do not think about whether it hurts Nepal. They make their own history. If this is a problem for Nepal, the censor board itself should be accountable.

The matter is clear: Indian films that hurt Nepal should not be screened in Nepal, and Nepali films that hurt India should not be screened in India either. However, if we have a history of being wronged by any Indian, we should not refrain from making films based on that fact.

Won’t it hurt the sentiments of Indians even if Nepalis make films based on facts?

It will hurt, of course. They might not allow it to be screened, but that kind of story is what we have faced always, isn’t it? Similarly, if Indian films affect us, we should not allow them to be screened. If a film affects Nepal-India relations and is banned in Nepal, the matter must be conveyed to the Indian government and the concerned bodies.

While you emphasize the need for an active censor board, there is also a growing call for its abolition, isn’t there?

The censor board is necessary. But the Censor Board should have sensible people.

During the time of films like ‘Satya Harishchandra’ or ‘Aama’ and later ‘Maitighar’, most of the technicians were Indian. In this context, how much did the Indian or expatriate Nepali perspective reflect in the Nepali movies of that time?

The first Nepali language film, Satya Harishchandra, was made in India. But it was the then King of Nepal who financed it. About INR 30,000 was needed when making Satya Harishchandra. When King Mahendra went to India, the production team met him and said, “Your Majesty, we are making a Nepali movie and we are short on funds of INR 30,000.” The King then asked what the total budget was. The production team replied, INR 50,000. The King then gave INR 51,000, saying, “Go and finish the film”.

That is to say, the film was made in India, but the money was from the then King of Nepal.

I came to Nepal at one point to give my teacher ‘Guru Dakshina’ which is an ancient Hindu tradition of offering a grateful gift or payment to a guru (teacher) by a student, usually upon the successful completion of their studies, in appreciation for the knowledge and guidance they received. Which was 10 films. At that time, I did not think about the Nepal-India relationship. I came with the intention of making 10 Art-house films. Because, even then, it was not possible to make Nepali films while living in India, and it is still not possible now. The movie Dakshina was my 10th film. Later, everyone started showing affection, so where would I go leaving this place?

Tulsi Ghimire. Photo courtesy: Krishpa Shrestha

You brought up the topic of then King Mahendra. One accusation is that the then-expatriate Nepalis were knowingly or unknowingly used in King Mahendra’s nationalism of ‘one language, one dress’ during the making of films. Superficially, the society shown in Nepali films of that time seemed homogeneous. What is your view on this?

This is an absolutely baseless thing. We respect art and culture, so we respect King Mahendra. However, we never got to see King Mahendra.

Regarding the accusation that those who came from India did not show the Terai-Madhesh in Nepali films, what I think is that I did not even know that Nepalis could be pilots or doctors. Having been born and raised in India, I saw people of other castes as doctors, engineers, and pilots. Here, seeing all Nepalis, my chest swelled with pride. In films, we only include what we see and experience.

In the film Lahure, there are characters who are bread sellers and chickpea sellers. They were not put there as Terai characters; they were included as characters I saw around me. I did not think that I must include the Terai, the Hills, or the Himalayas. I did not even have political knowledge when making Balidan. Madan Krishna Shrestha and Hari Bansha Acharya greatly helped me by saying, “It will be like this, Tulsi brother”. That was the foundation of my horizon of knowledge. Therefore, there may have been some limitations in filmmaking.

Nobody told Prakash Thapa to come with King Mahendra’s nationalistic mindset and do this. B.S. Thapa made Maitighar. No one told him to do this. No one called us and told us to do this. We came to make Wholesome cinema films. We wanted to earn money, and since Pure cinematic films give money, we felt, why bother with anything else?

For example, I included a Tharu community character in a film. But I do not know Tharu culture. I do not even know how Maghi is celebrated. In that case, it is difficult for me to make a film based on the Tharu community. For this reason, I feel that people from the concerned communities should enter the film industry to show their culture. Now, cultural films must be made. The government should also support films based on culture.

The craze for Nepali stars is thin in the Terai, where more than half of the country’s population resides. If you look at the squares, streets, and even salons there, posters of Indian artists are pasted. Why is our artist, our film industry, so alien to one region of our own country?

This depends on the artists themselves. It depends on how the artists connect with the audience. Rajinikanth, Akshay Kumar, Salman Khan, Shah Rukh Khan, and Kamal Haasan did not become legends just like that. They also connected with the audience through philanthropic work.

I had a friend named Babu. He took me and my other friend to Chennai because he had to finish editing a Madrasi film quickly. On the third day of editing, he said “I’ll go to the temple and come back in a while”. I said, “I’ll also want to go to the temple, brother”. When I asked if it was a Swaminarayan Temple or something else, he said it was Rajinikanth’s temple. I was surprised.

Oh, Rajinikanth’s temple. There was a statue of Rajinikanth. People were performing aarti (a ritual of worship) in front of his statue. At that time, locals would say, “We don’t know if the God wearing a dhoti and carrying bows exists or not. We haven’t even seen him. This one (Rajinikanth) is God for us”.

This is the image of Indian artists. Looking at the image of our artists, I feel ashamed to call myself a person from the film industry. Again, all this is also connected to the economic aspect. Where would our artists bring so much money from if they had to donate Rs 1 million to someone?

The film industries of Nepal and India have many common artists and technicians, including Sunil Thapa, Danny Denzongpa, Manisha Koirala, Mala Sinha, Binod Pradhan, Ranjit Gazmer, and yourself. Despite having so many common artists in the two countries, why has our film industry not been able to develop?

The biggest weakness here is the budget. For example, the money that Indian films give to Manisha Koirala can be used to make three of our films. Talking about Binod Pradhan, how can we give him the rate of Indian films? We just ask him to come by, saying we will give him some money for coming and going.

If you ask Danny Sahab to do a good role in a Nepali film, he says, “Schedule it for this day and don’t keep me for more than 10 days”. He does not do this for money. He does it for Nepali film. And it is out of goodwill towards Nepal.

Manisha Koirala’s role in Heeramandi was widely praised recently. If you ask her to do a similar role, she will come too. The point is that we have to prepare the platform. For this, the business community must invest in film production.

All the common artists are ready to help. But along with the budget, the person who invites them must have directorial maturity. They must be able to confidently say, “I want this type of performance” to them. Unfortunately, we are proud of the common artists, but we have not been able to utilize them by inviting them to Nepal.

Has the Indian film industry not helped us, or is their help not visible?

The Indian film industry tried to help us a lot, but we ourselves did not know how to take it.

When Sultan Ahmed (Indian film director) came to Nepal, he asked how the Nepali film industry could be helped. When he was told that 20-22 films are made per year, and it costs Rs 3 million to Rs 3.5 million to make one film, he said, “films that do not contain hatred against any country, religion, or caste, and where children are not exploited. Let’s give Rs 2 million to 20 positive films every year”.

This was not government-level support. It was the support that was supposed to come from the Indian Motion Picture Producers’ Association.

After this, we called a discussion. When I informed the participants that Sultan Sahab had said so and so, one of the participants even said, “Why do we need the money of that dhoti (a long loincloth garment worn by men in Indian sub-continent)-wearer?’ What can I say when the person who offers help is willing, but the recipients are unable to accept it?

Tulsi Ghimire. Photo courtesy: Krishpa Shrestha

Let’s talk a little about the trend in the Nepali film sector. The accusation that Nepali films followed the Bollywood formula, like a copy-paste of Bollywood, has been around for a long time. Now, the trend of following has extended from India to other countries, hasn’t it?

Yes. Some are following the Tamil film formula. Some are following the French, some the Iranian, and some the Korean film formula. Now, let’s stop following and make our own.

What does your own look like?

The movie Dakshina is my own. Simarekha is my own. Balidan is my own. Kusume Rumal is also our own. The fact that I added a little bit of Milan to it is a different matter. Films like Paral Ko Aago, Basudev, Loot, and Jaari are also our own. The most original is Rajamati. If films are made in these styles, they will be successful. They will also be appreciated outside Nepal. Films that include our pain and happiness, what makes us sad, and what makes us happy, are my own films.

While talking about making our own films and showing our own culture, such original films are not commercially successful, are they?

We must make our own films, but we must consider what kind of films our audience is used to watching when it comes to the pace of the film.

The storyline must be our own, but the technical aspect and presentation must include what is popular. Our main target is frequent cinema theater goers. We must consider what kind of films they watch. Superficially, the presentation of Hindi cinema has become ingrained in the Nepali audience.

When you say that art and entertainment have not been able to go hand in hand in our films, are you referring to the presentation?

Yes. This is an aspect that must go hand in hand. If a Nepali Art-house films film is made well, it will be a hit. If it is connected with literature, it will be 100% successful. This is the most promising aspect of Nepali cinema.

But the film ‘Basudev’ did not do well, did it though?

The movie Basudev did not do well for a different reason. But it received great appreciation in Nepal and India. The reason it was not commercially successful was because its print was not good. Otherwise, it is a good film.