'Madhuri became our only choice'

The comeback film of the decade is just a few hours away, with India preparing to welcome Madhuri Dixit [Images] in Aaja Nachle.

Screenwriter Jaideep Sahni, already the toast of Bollywood because of Chak De India, is all set to spring another unique story upon us.

Raja Sen threw Jaideep half-a-dozen questions, discussing writing, characters and Madhuri. Excerpts:

After Khosla Ka Ghosla [Images], you're back with what looks like another ensemble comedy with extreme, occasionally eccentric, warmly likeable characters. Tell us a little more about Aaja Nachle.

Aaja Nachle is a film about a woman trying to bring dance and music in a town where nobody sees any value in such things any more. So there are her and the townsfolk, with the story unfolding between the two. It's based on a story by Adi, [Aditya Chopra [Images], producer] and I felt it was a very nice opportunity for me to create and play around with some really interesting characters. And then we were very fortunate to get some of the finest actors in Hindi films to play the parts, besides Madhuri herself.

While writing the film, was it a conscious decision to make it Dia-centric? It's Madhuri's comeback film, and so there must likely have been the preset need to make the film one revolving around her...

No, actually there wasn't really any specific plan to make a film around her or anything, and she was very occupied with her life in Denver anyway. But when Adi shared his story idea with [director] Anil Mehta and me, and followed up within a few days with another idea of Madhuri playing Dia in the story, it really excited us all and she pretty much became our only choice.

We were lucky that when we shared it with her, she thought so too and took the time out to do this film. So though the story was initially conceived without her in mind, the screenplay, dialogues and lyrics were written with the knowledge that she would be playing the protagonist.

As a writer, do you write roles for actors? As in, do you have actors in mind while writing their parts? When you do write like that -- for whatever reason-- is that easier because you can visualise the end product more clearly, or harder, because it limits what you think the character can or cannot do?

I feel it's better in most cases to write keeping characters in mind and not actors, because if the characters are not interesting enough or are poor copies of the actors themselves, even the actors can't do much with them. Besides, I feel it's very unfair to actors, and shows a lack of faith in their talent -- I don't think it's a nice thing to do to your actor friends!

However, sometimes when you do get to know at some point during writing that an actor of a certain calibre is going to be playing a big part, as in the case of Aja Nachle, it does in a strange way give you the courage to try out things and go for creating moments which you otherwise might not have tried, so in a way it can be somewhat liberating too.

But in general, I think it's a very complex thing to try creating or modifying scenes to fit actors' images -- being too calculative about such things can distort the story and make it go out of control -- and we avoided doing too many calculations. We were fortunate that there already were good resonances between the subject and the story, the character and the actor, and we decided to leave it at that, rather than getting calculative to the point of abusing it.

With films like Aaja Nachle -- which clearly look like family-friendly feel-good movies from the very outset -- do you try to, like you did in Bunty Aur Babli [Images], go back to grass-roots and tell a deeper story beneath the surface? What is the new film really trying to say?

I guess we earn our living by telling stories and making songs, but wherever there is a chance to reflect something about what's happening around us in our society, it makes the experience much more worthwhile. There is no guarantee that it will happen in each film, scene or song, and there's no point in force-fitting it because then it doesn't work for anybody, least of all the audience.

We have tried to make Aaja Nachle primarily a fun and entertaining film built around dance and music and not overload it with things extraneous to the story itself, but there are some feelings lurking under the surface of the story itself, which we hoping the audience might feel along with us.

Peripheral characters and their subplots always find prominence in your scripts. Is it difficult stringing different characters and their own stories alongside the main story? Do they always have to have a thematic compatibility with the lead story?

I find it the most difficult thing to do.

There are always tough and draining decisions when you are dealing with multiple characters, their graphs and things that you are trying to convey through them, and they sap the juice out of you at both the writing and the editing stages. There are often sacrifices to be made -- many times things which you truly love-- but you have to do what is right for the film in your judgment at that point of time.

You just hope that you're making the right calls, and that your brain is working right at that time. I like doing it, but feel I have a lot more to learn in that direction.

Finally, what do you ideally want people to take away from Aaja Nachle?

I'd rather wait and see what they take away, besides hopefully a really nice time and a very enjoyable film watching experience.