Akshay Kumar-starrer Samrat Prithviraj, which chronicles the life of legendary warrior king Prithviraj Chauhan, hit the theatres this week and has already been made tax-free in BJP-ruled Uttar Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh and Uttarakhand.
Special screenings of the movie, directed by noted writer-filmmaker Dr Chandraparaksh Dwivedi, have been held, including for Union Home Minister Amit Shah and Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath. A Yash Raj Films production, the movie, which also marks the acting debut of Miss World 2017 Manushi Chhillar, has been released in Hindi, Tamil and Telugu.
In an exclusive interview to News18, actor Akshay Kumar and director Chandraparaksh Dwivedi said the movie was an attempt on their part to bring to light the valour and sacrifices of an unsung hero. Denying any political undertones to the project, Kumar said the movie was about “culture and not religion”. He said learning about the Hindu empire is as important for Indians as knowing about the British and Mughal empires.
Dwivedi added that he had taken up historical projects during the Congress rule as well and said he was not “waiting for the BJP to come to power” to make a movie on Prithviraj Chauhan.
Edited excerpts:
Akshay Kumar, when you posted the Samrat Prithviraj trailer on Instagram, you said it’s a “battle between truth and respect”. Are you of the opinion that Prithviraj Chauhan’s truth has not been told and the respect he should have been given has not been accorded to him?
Akshay Kumar: It is not that I have been asking about that. It is just that when I heard the script for the first time from him (Dr Chandraprakash Dwivedi), I just was thinking that I don’t know this. We just had a little bit knowledge about it. So when he told me the story, I was taken aback.
Oh, we didn’t know about it. There are so many aspects about Samrat Prithviraj Chauhan and not only him, but also Rana Pratap, Maharaj Shivaji. I didn’t know about them. I asked doctor sahab (Dwivedi) that have you studied this. He said ‘Akshay, for 18 years, I have been with this script and writing about it’. I am not anybody talk about it, but he is. He knows about it and that’s what made me say that.
So why Samrat Prithviraj because Akshay Kumar has been associated with masala films and movies with a message. Pad Man, Toilet-Ek Prem Katha. And you have now delved into a new terrain of period drama and history.
Akshay Kumar: This is not a new terrain. I have already done that. I have done Kesari. That was also a historical film and I have done many other films like that. So this is not a new terrain for me. It just happened. If it were Maharana Pratap, I would have done that too. If I would have loved the script, I would have done it.
Akshay, interestingly in your previous interview, you have said that history books have not given him his due…
Akshay Kumar: Yes, they haven’t written about him in detail.
So after that interview, a lot of trolling and criticism came your way.
Akshay Kumar: You only mention the trolling but people said nice things about it too.
You still stand by your words and statement?
Akshay Kumar: It is the fact. He (Dwivedi) can talk about it… I was talking to my son. He asked me about my next film. I said: ‘Samrat Prithviraj’. He asked me who that is. I said: ‘Beta, you must have studied in your history books’. He said: ‘No, we haven’t studied about him. We have studied about the British empire, about the Mughal empire. I don’t remember it, but something or the other is there a little bit’.
We should know about the Mughal empire. We should know about the British empire. I am just talking about enhancing this also, just a little bit. That’s all.
And if people are creating this controversy… I haven’t said anything controversial. All I am saying is that we should inform people about him. There is nothing wrong in saying that.
So, all you are saying is that there should be a balance in terms of history?
Akshay Kumar: Absolutely! There should be a balance.
But historians are saying that history should be left to them…
Akshay Kumar: So, we shouldn’t teach our kids anything?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: Here we have a difference of opinion. Yes, I definitely agree that history should be left to historians, but the historians have different views. Why does it always happen that one section of views or one view is always projected. For example, I read a book and a series was also made based on that book – The Discovery of India.
In that, one of India’s biggest political thinkers, who is known to us as Vishnugupta or Kautilya, was called a “Brahmin fox”. Now ask the people of India who have studied economics, would you call Chanakya or Kautilya or Vishnugupta a “Brahmin fox” or an intellectual giant of India? Who has created this myth?
Second, who calls Chhatrapati Shivaji a “pahadi chooha”? Is it acceptable? Isn’t there another narrative on him that we presented to the audience? Isn’t he one of India’s legendary leaders who envisioned ‘Hindu swarajya‘?
I know that there are a lot of books based on him, but what has he been called in those books? Now, I’ll come to Akbar The Great. Akbar was a child of India. He was born on this land. He is just as much an Indian as I am and I am not ashamed to say it. But who gave him the name ‘Akbar The Great’? I will tell you, it was Vincent Smith. And ever since Vincent called him ‘Akbar The Great’, the whole world started calling him that. What should I call Rana? A great warrior? A great rebel? What should I call him?
So is this movie an attempt at retelling history?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: The biggest thing is that for the past 20-25 years, people were afraid to discuss history. And the reason behind their fear was that these films are expensive to make and there are certain rules and protocols to follow. We face problems when it comes to the certification of the film. Now we are in a time where we can watch our history without any restrictions. That is why, not only me, but other people are also trying to make historical films and present the other point of view in front of the audience.
And when that point of view is presented, some people think that historians aren’t the only ones who have the freedom of expression with restraint. I don’t believe that historians in this country are only from one section. There are many more and research doesn’t stop at one place. It is an ongoing process. After some time, there are new facts that are presented and those new facts should be presented to the people.
Akshay Kumar: If you look at Twitter… the film was released today and a lot of people are talking about how they didn’t know that he had done so much. A lot of people are talking about ‘Chaar Baas, Chaubees Gajj‘. Now, that is not in the film, but instead of that, there is something else in the film. So there are a lot of point of views to it and that is good. People should know about it. This is not about religion, it is about culture.
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: I will build on this. There are two things. Prithviraj Raso is known as the first ‘Mahakaal‘ of Hindi literature. We cannot fit the scale of that poem in a two-hour film, but there have always been questions on the epic of that poem. There is a section of society that has fully rejected it and said that it is fiction. And there is also a section of the society which believes that it is history.
I will put both of these opinions aside, and say that it is a poem. And if I say that I am making a film based on this poem, then can I call it a historic story or not? Should it be acceptable or not? Now the second point is ‘Chaar Baas, Chaubees Gajj‘. It is not mentioned in any edition of Prithviraj Raso. A writer asked a question based on it that where did it come from but they couldn’t find the answer.
Recently, Dr Narasingh, who is from Maharashtra, wrote a ‘nimansa‘ on ‘Chaar Baas, Chaubees Gajj’ and even said that the word ‘gajj‘ is not from Prithviraj’s era. It came around during the era of Sikander Lodhi and during Akbar’s reign it turned into ‘illahi gajj‘. All I am trying to say is that there are multiple perspectives when it comes to history. In the Indian civilisation, there is ‘Chaar Baas, Chaubees Gajj‘. I am not disputing it. It is there in the Indian civilisation, but I have told the people what is there in the Raso.
Dr Dwivedi, you have made a show on Chanakya. You have a legendary status in terms of your storytelling. I just want to know, is this authentic history? Whether it is your version or some other version, is it an authentic historical film?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: I will put it this way. Whatever is in India’s public opinion and is in the shastras and folklores, I have made the film based on that. You can say that there is a lot of people’s interpretation attached to it, but you cannot say that it is not historic. What I am trying to say is that I cannot make the film with everyone’s version. I will have to pick some versions and scrap some versions.
So the version that you are talking about is your version based on popular history. That version has to be brought out in these times?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: Yes.
Why in these times? Because you have been working on this script for years and you waited for Akshay to approve and agree to play the role of Prithviraj Chauhan…
Akshay Kumar: It is not like that. He went to someone else for this film as well. He said that when you want to make a historical film, it requires a lot of money to make. because there are war sequences in the film, there are horses, elephants, VFX. And he approached someone, but it did not work out. We met before the pandemic. I still remember when I was working on Sooryavanshi. He sat with me in Hyderabad and then we started talking about it and I started loving it.
Since you just talked about your son… You said that he doesn’t know about Prithviraj Chauhan or that you are playing him. Do you think kids need to be taught about Prithviraj Chahuan’s legendary side? That he was a fearless leader, that he had valour, that he was one of the greatest kings…
Akshay Kumar: Not only him, there are so many others. I am not biased about Prithviraj Chauhan. There are so many other fighters, so many great people in our culture. I just want to bring that to the front.
So is this reclamation of culture that that we are seeing in multiple facets?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: Yes, I have no hesitation in saying that we want to reclaim. And when I say we, I mean Bharat. Bharat, the time has come to reclaim our history.
Akshay Kumar: That’s exactly what it is. And we as India should bring this in front of our younger generation.
Why do you think it hasn’t been done till now?
Akshay Kumar: I have no idea. Even when I used to study, I had no idea about it. I knew more about the British empire than I did about our culture. See our culture is so old, if I am not mistaken, I think it is 5,000 years old. It starts way back, but in the history books, it is written till 300 years back which talks about the Mughal empire, the British empire. There is more.
Why do you think the historians did not, according to you, do justice to the cultural interpretation that Indian history deserved?
Akshay Kumar: We are not getting into why they didn’t do it. I am saying ‘what next?’. Maybe we can try and support it a little bit and make people read about our culture also. As I said earlier, it is good to know about the Mughal empire, it is good to know about the British empire. But we also want people to know about the Hindu empire.
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: I will give you an answer for this. A historian called the Vedas the poetry for shepherds. It is obvious that people got angry over it. And the people who knew about Sanskrit literature tried to tell people that there was a developed civilisation in India before any civilisation was developed. And this is one of the most or the most ancient literature and some people dared to call it poetry for shepherds.
But the way research was done on Vedic literature, now they call it the greatest. Look at the Upanishads, till it didn’t reach Europe, people didn’t know that India has such wisdom. In the Vedic-kaal, you can read about 20-26 female saints. On the global scale, women came into the picture after the 16th century. What I am trying to say is that from whose perspective did we look at India? We didn’t look at India from India’s eyes. The colonial masters that we had, they taught us their history. After that the British left but…
They taught us their version of history.
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: Not just their version of history, they left us with brown babus, who were Indian in body but British in thought. They kept teaching us. India’s political circumstances were different at the time so people didn’t challenge it. People were not ready for it. But now, things are changing. People have more sources and information so they are challenging it.
You asked a question that I waited for Prithviraj Chauhan. I was not waiting for BJP to come to power. I made Chanakya during Congress’s term. People opposed it too. The making of Pinjar started during BJP’s term and ended in Congress’s term and it received a national award in Congress’s term. The film that I fought for the most, Mohalla 80, for which I got a lot of backlash and I even went to court, that was during BJP’s term. So you cannot say that we accept everything that the government says.
Will we be seeing more epic dramas?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: Not only me, but many people will do it. They know that the country is ready to listen to these types of stories.
Akshay, this film has been released in Tamil and Telugu as well. This is also coming at a time when there is a language debate. I would also say that we have seen predictable response from south Indian politicians and actors. What is your opinion?
Akshay Kumar: We should not get into the debate of which language, what language. Everybody has their own mother tongue and it is important to them. For me, I think this debate is useless. I don’t even think about it.
Is this also an acknowledgement because this film has been released in two other languages besides Hindi? Southern cinema has had massive success. RRR, Pushpa, KGF, Bahubaali have had massive success at the box office.
Akshay Kumar: So?
So is there a realisation that Bollywood is playing catch up and southern cinema has almost overtaken Bollywood in terms of content and is also moving with changing times?
Akshay Kumar: I think Bollywood has its own ways and it is doing very well for itself. But I am glad that, as you call it, the southern cinema is doing well. But for me, it is all Indian cinema.
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: I would like to add a little to it, Marya. Prithviraj has been made in 1929. It has been made in Gujarati and you will be surprised to hear that it has been made in Tamil also in 1942.
Has it been made before in Hindi?
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: Yes, Prithvirajan was the name of the film. MG Ramachandran has also done a film on Prithviraj named Rani Sanyukta. Prithviraj has not been made a hero suddenly. NT Rama Rao and Nageshwar Rao have done a film on Chandragupta and Chanakya. You should check the history of Telugu and Kannada films.
The problem was with us the Hindi cinema. We were not sure whether people will watch these movies. But the narrative is changing now. People like Sanjay Leela Bhansali and Ashutosh Gowarikar are changing it. We are also trying to make some good movies in that space. People learn from their mistakes.
Mahesh Babu has said that Bollywood cannot afford him. This is coming at a time of heated discussion between Telugu and Tamil cinema, and Bollywood.
Akshay Kumar: I don’t know in what context he said that. I have also read it. But, knowing him, I don’t think that he meant it in that way. I know his wife very well and I know him too. It has been interpreted in a very different kind of way.
Deepika Padukone said at Cannes that India is at the cusp of greatness and that there will be a day when Cannes Film Festival will be held in India. What is your take on that?
Akshay Kumar: That is brilliant. Why can’t be it be held in India. Olympics will be held in India, Cannes too, and may be one day, Oscars will be held in India.
There has been a lot of debate on nepotism in Bollywood. You are an outsider. How has your experience been?
Akshay Kumar: I don’t believe in that kind of thing. I know many actors whose kids couldn’t make it in the industry. And then there are some who have got nothing to do with the industry, but they have made it big. Maybe you will get one or two films because of nepotism, but then you have to prove yourself. Rather than coming through your father or relative, I would advise everybody to make their own way.
What will you tell our viewers on Samrat Prithviraj?
Akshay Kumar: Final thoughts are that it is an educational film. I would like people to take their children and families to go and watch it. We have worked really hard on this. Please do watch it.
Chandraprakash Dwivedi: More than me, historians and authors have worked on this film. Every filmmaker works through his life. For example, when Richard Attenborough made Gandhi, it stayed with him for 21 years. The same happened with Shyam Benegal when he made a movie on (Subhas Chandra) Bose.
