A cameo in a Bengali film (Antaheen), an English film set in London (Life Goes On) and now a Marathi film (Samantar).... On the basis of what are you picking your films?

Thank god that signing a film for money is no longer the criterion! Sometimes you sign a film for the set-up. Even that is not the case anymore because I am no longer in any kind of race. It is now only about the role or if it’s a friend. Like Sangeeta Dutta’s Life Goes On... she has assisted Rituparno Ghosh, she is a Bengali and I like her as a person. Samantar was for Amol Palekar. He makes his kind of films. He is very professional and makes one film every year. Also, to reach out to another audience is always very tempting and the Marathi audience is very discerning — as naak unchu (snooty) as Bengalis and as difficult to please! Then, the character is not very verbose. She is like poetry, like a refrain from a song, like a nuance. Antaheen... Tony (director Aniruddha Roy Chowdhury) was not even asking me because the role was so small. (Music director Shantanu Moitra rang up and then I heard the script. I liked it and it became even better during shooting. I don’t think the length of the character matters that much.

But we definitely want to see more of you, more than two or three scenes...

A filmmaker has many commercial compulsions today. A huge percentage of the audience is under-25. Also, these directors are also young. What would they know about old people? They are making films from their points of view. If Tony was to make the film entirely on my character, it might have looked forced. He knows the young characters more. Like Vishal Bhardwaj understands violence, Imtiaz (Ali) makes young love stories, Raju Hirani has his own interests. They are good directors and I would love to work with all of them. But they also have to feel comfortable. They must be distracted by the fact that if we cast Sharmila Tagore, we can’t give her a small role.

How was your Cannes experience?

It was a very positive experience. Being part of an international jury, watching international cinema and finding such commonalities... it was very good. How we came to a consensus with so many diverse opinions was quite incredible. Everybody on the jury had very strong views. (Actress) Isabelle Huppert (president of the jury) kept us together. There was contradiction everywhere. It was a very mixed bunch of films. There were very good films, but all the established directors disappointed us.

What about Quentin Tarantino’s Inglourious Basterds?

I didn’t like it. The message was wrong. Jews scalping Nazis in these times didn’t seem right.

But you did give Best Actor to Christoph Waltz...

There was a problem, really. The actor from A Prophet was very good. But Prophet got the Grand Prix and apparently you couldn’t give two awards to the same film. Once Prophet went, there wasn’t much of a choice. Because this time most of the films had woman protagonists. Bright Star, Antichrist, Thirst... all had women in the lead. Michael Fassbender in Fish Tank had a very small role... otherwise he could have been fitted. This guy (Waltz) was brilliant in Inglourious Basterds and deserved the prize but we didn’t want to give anything to Tarantino’s film because he (Waltz) would go up on stage and say: “I thank Tarantino”. We didn’t want that film to be mentioned also! But then Isabelle convinced us.

And what’s your take on the most controversial film of the festival Antichrist?

I loved it. The women in the jury loved it. All the men hated it. She (Charlotte Gainsbourg) was brilliant. The film is open to interpretations. I didn’t think it was a horror film at all. It’s a gender film, it’s a relationship film. It makes you think. He (director Lars Von Trier) makes you respond.

As the Censor Board head, while watching a film like Antichrist, do you feel such films should make it here?

Good is good and bad is bad. And a job is a job also. In our country I don’t think I have yet been challenged that much. I was challenged by Closer. We asked for cuts and the self-respecting director said ‘no’. Then there was Fire, Bandit Queen... you can count them on your fingertips. We live in India and the law and order situation is getting worse. In Bihar people are burning trains. So I think we have to share the responsibilities. We have to accept the scene here. Cinema is a big thing. Schedule caste, minority, everything comes up.

Today there is a case against Kaminey because one shot has “Apna haath Jagannath” written on a door. People take offence very easily. And not even people, certain groups, who want visibility out of it. Take Love Aaj Kal, one Sardar guy created so much fuss. Singh is Kinng, I can understand. But Saif’s beard was fine in Love Aaj Kal. I have pictures of many Sikhs who have beards like that. And producers don’t want to risk it. They are ready to pay money because the film has to release and the first weekend is very important.

Yes, some kind of censorship is necessary. We are not ready for Antichrist. In Bandit Queen, when she was gangraped, people whistled and clapped. That was some time ago but people see things for the wrong reasons. We are not yet as mature as them.

Is the Indian audience ready for nudity on screen? Tell t2@abpmail.com