Anubhav Sinha was once a very formulaic director who only worked in the commercial space. Mulk (2018) changed everything. He married political activism with cinema and the result was films like Article 15 (2019), Thappad (2020), Anek (2022) and Bheed (2023). With IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack, he ventured into the OTT space. While he describes it as a non-political affair, read between the lines and you’ll find that he took some gentle jabs at both the unpreparedness of the bureaucrats who simply failed to control the narrative and the tired response of the politicians. Through it all, the strength of hijacking victims shines through. Instead of calling them victims, we should call them heroes for the way they came to terms with their tragedy and survived the hardships. The series is well researched and well acted. It has a veritable who’s who of dramatic actors in the cast, with some fans comparing it to an Avengers Ensemble moment for Anubhav Sinha. No wonder the director is after a superhero movie. Fragments of a consistent tete-a-tete with the nonconformist.

What is non-negotiable for you as a director?

Art itself is not negotiable. During the making of a film, compromises are inevitable, whether with nature, moments or unexpected results. Sometimes what seems inferior at first turns out to be better in hindsight. However, the core artistic vision remains uncompromising.

Your films usually have a political voice…

Yes, lately, yes.

Is it a conscious choice or are you just more attracted to her?

I think it’s the latter. It started with Mulk, driven by my strong feelings about societal issues at the time. Although Article 15 was originally titled differently and was written before Mulk, I was drawn to it for similar reasons. There is no grand design, it’s instinctive. It’s like someone asking us what we want for lunch: I might choose Indian, and you might choose Chinese. While chemical factors can influence our preferences, the choice is ultimately instinctive.

Will we ever get to see you directing something like this?

(Laughs) Flossy may seem superficial, but it has deeper layers. It will feature an eclair thread on top, but reveal more on the inside. I believe a film needs a voice to drive it and I am currently focused on refining my approach. This series presents a distinct change in form compared to my recent films, reflecting my aim to reach a wider audience and achieve a more cinematic scale.

Speaking of IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack, did you come across a lot of interesting details while researching the project?

There’s a lot to unpack, and some of the conversations I had can’t be quoted directly because they involve officers and bureaucrats I met. A lot of the nuance you see in the series comes from those discussions. You learn to separate the individual from his official role, because while the role has a specific purpose, the individual often has many facets to his personality. When you consider both together, it becomes quite complex and intriguing. Meeting these people and seeing different aspects of their personalities made them much more interesting to me. In addition, my research uncovered many details that I was previously unaware of. For example, while I knew about the plane landing in Lahore, I didn’t know about it landing in Dubai until I dug deeper. This revelation led me to investigate further: what happened in Dubai? Did they supply fuel and at what price? What were the reasons behind Lahore’s refusal to allow the aircraft to land? Understanding these decisions requires considering the context of past events in Pakistan and the circumstances that led to them. All these layers of information emerged during my research, revealing complexities beyond simple incidents.

You portrayed the attackers realistically, avoiding the usual demonization.

There are two main points to address. First, our research, which included interviews with passengers, crew members and the captain, revealed that not all five hijackers were experienced terrorists. Two of them were inexperienced rookies, one was particularly dangerous, and one was a last-minute addition to the group. Their lack of cohesion was evident as you can see from the accounts. Additionally, there have been critics online suggesting that the portrayal of the attackers is too sympathetic, particularly in the scene where he plays Antakshari with the hostages. However, this detail is based on factual information confirmed by the captain and passengers. It would be absurd for a director to invent such a scene without any basis in reality. The representation of attackers is based on our research, so we did not invent their behavior. When you think of Akbar, you might imagine him as depicted in films like Mughal-e-Azam, dressed in elaborate attire and wearing a turban, embodying a heroic image. Such portraits are often more about creating a legendary figure than reflecting historical accuracy. My approach aims for a more realistic description. Most of the characterizations and events described, especially those inside the aircraft, are based on verified accounts and real testimonies.

Did you always have this cast in mind for the show?

The cast of the show almost feels like a dream come true. As I wrote, the performances of certain actors began to shape the characters, leading to casting discussions. The casting director’s input, sometimes aligning with our vision and sometimes offering new perspectives, helped us refine our choices. We initially cast Vijay Varma, Arvind Swami, Kumud Mishra and Manoj Pahwa. As the script developed, we added Dibyendu Bhattacharya, Kanwaljit Singh, Naseeruddin Shah and Pankaj Kapur. I am grateful that they agreed to be part of this project. working
with them is an honor and feels like pure serendipity.

You have Pankaj Kapur and Naseeruddin Shah together in a movie. They worked together after years, how was the direction these believers?

The last time Naseeruddin Shah and Pankaj Kapur worked together was in Maqbool. I have known both of them for many years, Naseer bhai since college and Pankaj bhai since 2004. This long relationship made working with them easier and less intimidating. It’s not just about these two; the entire cast, including Aditya Srivastava, whom I first worked with in 1993, and Dibyendu Bhattacharya, whom I admire, added to the experience. Working with such a talented group was like Jurassic Park, exciting and a little overwhelming. It was a great experience and having so many talented actors meant making sure everyone’s input was appreciated. Overall, it was the happiest time I’ve had on set in 30 years.

There’s this scene in the series where four bureaucrats walk into a room and they’re just trying to check if it’s safe to stay in that room. It’s pure magic, tell us about that scene…

In Afghanistan, the actors were in a room with potential safety and privacy hazards. I spent a lot of time with them before shooting, making sure we had a clear understanding of their characters. For this shot, I placed the camera and told them to act like they were being followed. I let them come into the room individually to find their roles, then together with small adjustments. Each character had different priorities: Manoj focused on number of rooms, Dibyendu on toilet, Arvind on surveillance and Kumud on everything. When you see the footage, you will see the broad interest of Kumud. Dibyendu, who is overweight, was chosen to focus on the toilet, reflecting common concerns about cleanliness and its type.

Do you keep your political views out of your films? Or it is is it not possible?

You can choose to restrict your expression, as I did in this case. Films like Article 15, Bheed and Anek were influenced by my political stance, but this particular project was not. My goal here was to present the event as it happened, allowing you to form your own opinion. I have intentionally avoided expressing my personal opinions on the event itself. While there is dialogue about faith and belief, these reflect my personal views and are not commentary on the event.

As a director, do you follow the script or do you keep improvising on the spot?

The script is sacred to me, but I welcome improvisations within it. I rarely change the basic truth of the script on set. If an actor comes up with a compelling idea that I hadn’t considered while writing, I take a half-hour break to explore it. I will integrate the idea into the script, examine its effects on the scene, and evaluate the changes before and after. If I am satisfied with the results, I will continue with the adjustment. Otherwise,
I refrain from it.

What is your process for choosing a script, instinct or based on a formula?

No, no, no. If there was a formula, then we would have done something else. It’s instinctive. Suddenly, something turns in your stomach and says, yes, let’s do this.

What’s next in the course?

I am working on several large-scale projects that will have a strong voice. These films will be both visually stunning and substantial, serving as effective vehicles for the ideas I want to convey. I haven’t worked on music, visual effects or action in a while. These elements come back in my projects. One of the exciting new projects is a superhero movie. Overall, I see these efforts as a new evolution in my career as a director.