His e-mail address is rajivmenon007@hotmail.com. And that's not the only thing the ad filmmaker, ace photographer and director shares with the daredevil secret agent. Thirty-eight-year-old Rajiv Menon is an inveterate risk-taker. He started his career with photography, dabbled with movie making, made his mark in ad films and now divides his time between advertising and feature films. In this interview to Shamni Pande of agencyfaqs!, Menon explains why the two art forms require different attitude and treatment and how he dabbled with various media to be a complete filmmaker.

Q. Tell us something about your initial years in ad filmmaking?

A. I started work with many local projects meant for the southern markets. This culminated in the Asian Paints Pongal ad done for Ogilvy & Mather. Alyque Padamsee noticed it and appreciated the simplicity of the film. This brought me the required attention, which soon brought in a flurry of projects from Mumbai.

Q. Did your debut in ad filmmaking have anything to do with the fact that you weren't getting far in feature films?

A. No, I did not get into ad films in sheer desperation. I was always interested in ad films and used to regularly visit agencies. In fact, my stint in films was jinxed. As I was involved with two half-done projects, I got branded as an unlucky filmmaker whose projects never saw the light of the day. Things, of course, changed in 1996 when I did the cinematography for Mani Ratnam's film Bombay.

Q. You started with the Steadicam on shoots; then you dabbled with advertising photography as well as industrial photography. Your way to the top of the filmmaking pile was not an easy one, was it?

A. Yes, it has been a chequered career in the sense that I went through several stages in terms of personal evolution. After my return from the US, I joined Prasad Video in 1991 and used to take the Steadicam to various shoots. I started with still photography, did some industrial photography, but, thankfully (in retrospect), could not take the plunge, as setting up the equipment was frightfully expensive. Instead, I started visiting friends at agencies and slowly began assisting for ad film shoots, which is where I found my true calling.

Q. One of the things that one can't help notice about your ad films - like your feature films - is the emphasis on people and emotions. Can you talk a little bit about your approach to work?

A. You can hardly be creative if you resort to clichés to describe routine everyday activities. So expressions cannot be hackneyed, and emotions have to be used creatively. My latest work for Bru - the 'sh-sh-sugar boy' ad - uses a very common situation; it can happen in anyone's life. But it had to be used in the proper context to get the effect right.

The fact that you are wearing a steel watch tells me so many things. It tells me about your taste, but it also tells me that what was once available in our country many decades ago has now come full circle and is a fashion statement today. I am constantly observing things around me and the challenge before me is to communicate all of that. I keep asking myself how can I weave a little learning that I have gained out of an observation into something that I am doing?

Q. Many ad folks see your understanding of how consumers/audiences respond to cinema as your biggest plus. How do you think people respond to cinema, and how do you extrapolate this to sell a brand to consumers through a commercial?

A. People respond to real things. If you try and fool around too much with gloss and technical wizardry then you will get caught. You have to do a lot of things and be interested in everything around you. For instance, reading is important and so is writing. That is because when you attempt to write something you are actually being a director in your mind - trying to think through a situation or a scene. These are bits that add to your entire grooming. I do not, however, think in terms of target audience, consumer etc.

Q. Shyam Benegal, Girish Karnad and, of course, Mani Ratnam… you have had the chance to work with some of the most fascinating directors in India. What have you learnt from stalwarts like them? How did they influence your style of filmmaking?

A. I don't want to begin taking names, because I do not want to miss out on anyone. I have gained from the insights of so many people… A colleague who was nowhere near Shyam Benegal's stature opened my eyes to the importance of lighting; but then, Bombay was the result of that interaction. I infused emotion in the film through the use of lights - the sense of hope was depicted with rays of lights filtering in through the windows of the house, the protagonists' sense of discovery… the chill that grips the heart with the passing of the crowd and the overcast sky, the dull fog that grips the city…

My appreciation for western music was the result of a friend letting me listen to his collection. I have been influenced to read voraciously by Girish Karnad. He is such an erudite person; I am yet to come across a person who is so widely read. Mani Ratnam has always egged me on to direct a film, as he always felt that there was a director in me somewhere. I owe my mother Kalyani Menon, who's a classical vocalist, a lot too. So how do I even begin to recount all the names? It's impossible!

Q. You have gone on record saying you hate Mumbai and it's a fact you have made it big in Chennai. So how would you rate the opportunities in the city of Chennai when compared with Mumbai?

A. I really think Mumbai is a very difficult place to live in. Distances are huge and you just can't have the quality of life, which, I feel, is possible in Chennai. As for professional distance from where the action is, well, I guess, my work has managed to bridge the distance. On the face of it, Chennai does work out to be remote, but it is not difficult once you get down to it.

Q. Working for Bombay must have been a tough learning ground - you had little filmmaking experience and you were working with a tough taskmaster such as Mani Ratnam...

A. No. Bombay was not really my first brush with filmmaking, I had worked with two projects earlier, as I mentioned before. But yes, it was difficult. Mani, unlike what people think, never interferes with other people's work, he never asks you to shift things or gives suggestions. But he demands perfection and excellence. You have to give to him the best and he keeps pushing you to give the best. And I was pushed very, very hard to deliver the best, which I think was appreciated by everyone in the end. Things got a lot better for me after that. Superstitions rule very high in the film industry and to have broken the jinx was a very liberating experience.

Q. Popular opinion is divided on the corporatisation of the film industry. What are your views on this?

A. I think it would be a very good thing. Today, the biggest problem in the industry is that it depends on a lot of people who need to channel their 'excess' earnings in this industry and be part of the glamour game. And this is possible because no one thinks in terms of a project estimate - how much a certain thing will cost, how much time it would take, what could be the losses or the profit. If things work in such a haphazard fashion, it's bound to attract the wrong kind of finances. So it's time that people started treating this industry like any other industry.

Besides, no one has a clue as to how big the film industry really is. The glamour and the hype that surround this industry have led the likes of Arthur Anderson to grossly overestimate its size. This, in turn, has attracted the wrong kind of investors who want to make a quick buck. My view is that the advertising industry is bigger than the film industry in terms of revenue generation. So let's get real.

Q. Now you have done a lot of work for Titan, Dove, Cadbury's, Bru. Did your ad film making experience help you in any way in the making of feature films or vice versa?

A. Doing an advertising film requires an absolutely different skill set. For a film, you have to think of a scene in the context of the entirety and its justification and relevance. While for an ad film your entire thought process and creativity should come through with its 'definite' message within a few seconds. I would say that one should not take for granted one's familiarity with a particular medium to do justice to another. I am one of the few ad filmmakers to branch off successfully into feature filmmaking. The switch was not easy.

Q. Okay, let me ask the same question differently: How is ad filmmaking different from feature films?

A. The technical abilities are easy enough to grapple with, but the thought process is completely different. In a feature film you are completely on your own. There is nobody to tell you this needs to be shot and not that, why a particular scene is necessary, how it will reinforce a story and so on. So far as an ad film is concerned you are prepared to the extent that you are given a brief, you are given a storyline and the creative content, and you have to shoot within that framework.

However, managing people in ad film shoots is far more difficult. One has to constantly listen to the client, the agency, the client servicing head, somebody's wife … So managing people and delivering a good product is a very tough task. In a film, no one comes to tell you what you have to shoot. Each scene has to be thought through by you piece-by-piece, inch-by-inch, to highlight the story. Each frame is a story and yet it is not. So, that's what I mean when I say that you cannot assume that if you know one, you know the other as well.

To be a competent ad filmmaker you have to keep your antenna on the alert mode all the time. The first sign of gray hair is the end of an advertising career. I mean, if you do not constantly weave in innovation into your work and tell probably an everyday story of a product in a new light that is the end of you. And, of course, I have to think in terms of the consumer being bombarded with the same ad so many times during the day. So how should I try and hold onto consumer interest? It can only be possible if I am able to communicate a real feeling and not just try to impress consumers with technical wizardry and beautiful images. These will be seen for what they are worth and forgotten. These do not stick in memory, because they flash images which are not real and, therefore, not relatable. Ads too are a film, only one thinks differently.

In fact, I was criticised for (my film) Minsara Kanavu (meaning electric dream) or Sapnay (its Hindi equivalent) for not having a story line; which is why I did Kandukondein Kandukondein in 2000 that was entirely driven by a story. And I am happy with the results, not just at a personal level for having satisfied my creative urge but because it was appreciated by moviegoers as well.

Q. But what is your true calling? The advertising community loves to think that you are their man…while you have made your mark as a moviemaker too. Which of the two is more rewarding - financially and spiritually?

A. Ad films are my first love and it will stay that way. It also happens to be financially rewarding. Films, I would say, are something that I do to satisfy my need to say more than can be said in a single framework. It fulfills several talents and needs within. So yes, films - in the context of your question - satisfy me spiritually.

Q. How big is your set-up today, in term of turnover?

A. I have Rajiv Menon Productions and there is Mindscreen to handle my work for ad films. My wife, Lata Menon, is also a successful ad film producer and her set-up is called Iris. Together, we do a turnover of Rs 7 crore a year.

Q. As I speak to you you come across as a tremendously focused person. But then you've dabbled in just about everything from photography to acting and even singing. Which is your biggest passion?

A. I am extremely focused about film making, but I think all the other things I have done are necessary to make you a competent filmmaker. You need to read, you should listen to music … In fact, I insist that my assistants listen to music, especially western classical music, as it teaches you how to structure your thoughts at some level. I have acted too - though I was not for it at all - but Suhasini Ratnam insisted that I do a bit-role for a serial she was making. So I obliged. I have done some jingles for ad films alongside.

I am now trying to write another script, which I think will take at least two years to complete. All these things are very necessary to break tedium and infuse energy, give a fresh perspective to whatever one is attempting to do.

December 10, 2001
Chennai
You can write to Rajiv Menon at
mindscreen@vsnl.com