Exclusive! Author Balaji Vittal: OTTs have given a bigger platform for villains to shine

Balaji Vittal is a corporate professional-cum-writer who's an authority second to none about trends surrounding Hindi cinema and its music over the years. It's hard to not be curious about his latest book, Pure Evil, where he has opened up on the many iconic, flamboyant baddies who've defined villainy in Hindi cinema. 

The co-author of books like R.D. Burman: The Man, The Music, (which won the National Award for Best Book on Cinema), Gaata Rahe Mera Dil: 50 Classic Hindi Film Songs, and S.D. Burman: The Prince-Musician opens up about OTT trends, the origin of the hero-villain formula, female antagonists and more in this exclusive interview with OTTplay.

When did the idea of a hero and a villain in Hindi cinema begin?

The idea of the hero and a villain have existed right from the days of our epics - Ramayana and Mahabharatha. The same mythological stories were captured in our films because our storytellers had no other material to go with. The late 1930s and 40s witnessed the rise of socials, mirroring our lives, which also featured a protagonist and an antagonist. The antagonist was necessary to make the hero look good. It has existed right from the beginning of Hindi cinema, the villain has evolved, grown in multiple shades before taking the current form.

When did baddies become more popular, fashionable and began to earn a fan following of their own?

In every decade, there have been different shades of the villain that came to the fore and clicked with audiences. There was once a psychotic doctor, who injected deadly substances into his wife in a film called Pagal. In 1943, you had the first anti-hero through the film Kismat. The 1950s was also another decade of anti-heroes, then came the neighbourhood dadas, the black marketers in films like Footpath, Kala Bazaar. Later, you had smugglers (which coincided with the rise in import duties in the nation), who robbed goods from one nation and sold it to the other. 

There were parents who objected to their son/daughter's marriage. From the suspicious Lalita Pawar to Gajendra in Raam aur Shyam who whips a young boy, you've always had villains in some shade or the other in the home and the world. There were drug mafia, dacoits of the Robinhood types in the 70s. The next couple of decades saw many characters who became a bhai, local Bombay dons, say Parinda or a Satya. Post the 2000s, we have seen villains alike the Dhoom series where the villain is as strong as the hero. They've become more colourful, with more shades of black with time.

What's the thin line that separates a villain from a anti-hero?

A villain is a person with bad intent while the anti-hero is the person with a good intent who adopts wrong means to achieve it. At the end of the day, the anti-hero's act is also equally unethical - the perfect example would be Vijay Varma of Deewar. His intentions are noble, he has seen his mother go through such humiliation, trouble to bring up two kids in a big city and all Vijay wants is his mother to lead a life of dignity. He lives with that single obsession but treads the wrong path by joining a smuggler's gang. His intent is right, the means is wrong. Because he's doing something illegal, he finds a place in the book on villains but we've placed him in a different category (so those hardcore villains are not confused with him).

The difficulties of writing 'Pure Evil' alone (most of your books had a co-author) and that too bringing it together during a pandemic..

In a way, I still can't claim that I did this book alone. A film isn't successful because of the director alone - you have at least two dozens of people backing him/her to tell that story. Similarly with Pure Evil, I had to interact with the project guide Kaushik Bhaumik, co-author to my previous books, Aniruddha Bhattacharjee quite frequently. They chipped in with rare trivia, whose contribitions have been acknowledged and the book is a product of great team work. 

The reason I was the sole author of this book was because Aniruddha Bhattacharjee (my regular co-author) is working on another major project and it became burdensome for him to handle two books at once. He and I are equally excited for both of our books to come out. The core of the manuscript was done in mid-2019 but we had to revise it later because a few felt the manuscript was not getting into the core of the characters. I had to flesh out the characters during 2020, which I was doing by watching those films at home, conduct telephonic interviews. So, it wasn't quite difficult doing that at home.

Why are there very few evil women around in Hindi cinema? Simi Garewal in Karz..Kajol in Gupt..Juhi Chawla in Gulaab Gang..were just fantastic..

They are fewer in number and the best we can say about it is that it's unfortunate. Women make for fantastic villains. From the days of Nadira, Lalita Pawar (in Mr and Mrs 55), they've always been upto something but our films have reduced them to dancers, vamps and didn't give them their due fully. You give them the opportunity to rise and shine on their own and they work wonders with the script. Look at Urmila Matondkar in Kaun. All through, she comes across as the hunted and she turns out to be the hunter. It's a perfect example to show the villainy that women can pull off. All they need is more opportunities.

Music has been an integral part of your book writing journey..

It all started with RD Burman because Aniruddha and I shared a common love for RD Burman since childhood and college years. We grew up with his music. When this contract from Harper Collins came in, we jumped at it. They had signed us for the book on villains (which is Pure Evil) and another book (Gaata Rahe Mera Dil) immediately after that. They realised that we both knew the bigger context of Bollywood while telling a story. It was a long journey to land at Pure Evil. And of course, starting out with a series of music books was our choice and we wholeheartedly thank our publishers for it. 

How would you describe the trend of mainstream superstars starting their careers with negative roles - Chiranjeevi, Rajinikanth, Shahrukh Khan, Vinod Khanna?

It has always been the script that has been biased towards the hero. How is the anti-hero any different from the henchman who does the job for his master? He is doing his duty after all. His family may also have to go through penury and face greater difficulties. Yet, still we call Vijay an anti-hero and the henchman as a goonda. It's the way the script is written such that we have our sympathies for the hero. 

You cannot have a handsome looking villain as smart as the hero. He gets snatched away from villany and is put on the path towards superstardom. That's why I appreciate the new movies of the millenium more - look at the Dhoom series. Hrithik and Abhishek match each other wit for wit. It's only in the recent times that the villain has got his rightful place. It's a fair contest. Look at films like Naam Shabana and you will know what I am talking about.

Beyond the characters they play, do you see a common thread that connects all the baddies?

They are extremely nice people and thorough gentlemen (and women). They have been so courteous, cooperative, humble, achieved so much and still agreed to meet me in their vanity vans - Ranjith, Danny Denzongpa, Zeenat Aman to name a few. I just can't believe all of them, without exception, are such nice people. Maybe, they consciously try to live a different life on screen in comparison to their true self. I interviewed about 46 people for this book and I only have good things to say about them.

Have villains become less charismatic lately? Are they becoming overly realistic?

Let's talk about someone like Bob Biswas in Kahaani. He blends into the crowd and anyone around us could be a Bob. That's what adds to his menace. If it was a Mogambo trying to push Vidya Balan off the track, everybody would've jumped and grabbed him. No body in the film actually believes that the humble-looking guy could push her in front of an approaching train. The villains in Mr India, Shaan belonged to a different era and had a particular role to play. 

How has OTT content impacted the idea of a normal-looking villain? We've also had a spin-off movie on Bob Biswas alone that released on ZEE5 recently.

OTT has witnessed a boom more so in the pandemic era because people couldn't go out anywhere and it was a great time for them to flourish. Whether these normal-looking villains got their due because of OTT is not something I can be totally sure about. Even in the case of Bharathiraja's Sigappu Rojakkal, Kamal Haasan's character was a businessman, owns a big house, goes in a big car to an office. Who would've thought that this guy would kill women and bury them in his rose garden everyday? This trend has existed before but OTT has given them a bigger platform, helped them gain more reach in the digital era. I also must admit that OTT has been a prime research material for Pure Evil, giving me access to hundreds of movies across different eras.