Kani Kusruti is probably the best-known fresh Indian face today after the country’s exquisite run at the 77th Cannes Film Festival. Two of her films, Shuchi Talati’s Girls Will Be Girls and Payal Kapadia's All We Imagine As Light were screened at the festival to packed houses with the latter even picking up the Grand Prix. 

More recently, it was Girls Will Be Girls that got another moment in the sun when it picked up the Grand Jury Prize at the 2024 Indian Film Festival Of Los Angeles—a unique platform that brings independent films coming out of South Asia and its diaspora to the Los Angeles audience—after winning Grand Jury prizes at Transylvania International Film Festival in Romania and Biarritz Film Festival in France. We spoke to the Malayalam actor of international repute, who has two webseries and a movie coming up, about cinema, female representation, artistic freedom, and more. Excerpts: 

Tell us something about Girls Will Be Girls. How was the character on paper and what was the most challenging part about playing the watchful parent in the coming-of-age drama? 

Sometimes, some scripts don’t immediately click or connect to me. Girls Will Be Girls was one such. I was not really understanding this relationship between the mother and daughter. I have never seen or experienced anything like it. I still understood the daughter’s character a bit but not the one I was playing, the mother’s. It didn’t help that I have not experienced motherhood in real life! It was after having multiple conversations with Suchi and rehearsing with my co-actor Preeti (Preeti Panigrahi) that I kind of started to connect with the character. So, Anila was a character that unravelled itself slowly to me. It was very challenging to understand her and play her but it was an actor’s journey that I really enjoyed. 

Girls Will Be Girls had a women crew. How was that experience? 

For Girls will be Girls I was so happy to see that it was mostly run by women. It was one of the most peaceful sets I have been to. Since I have started working, film sets have been a very male-dominated space just like our society in general. The set of Girls will be Girls was an opportunity to feel the vibe of a space where women are an equal part if not more. It was amazing to be part of such an experience. 

Although India was always making good cinema and there were a few wins here and there along the way, it seems suddenly the world audience is waking up to Indian movies and documentaries. How do you see this? Do you see the recognition at Sundance, Oscars, and Cannes changing the ground realities for Indian independent cinema back home? 

I don't know if it’s a sudden spotlight or was it something that was slowly coming together. I have been fascinated by the few independent cinema that comes out of India. Whether it was recognised or appreciated enough is another question but there has been some interesting narratives and some unique ways of storytelling coming out of India since the last 20 years. If this kind of recognition translates into independent films getting producers who will help the filmmakers translate their vision onto the screen, it will be great. I am not sure if that will happen, but I hope it changes things for Indian independent cinema. I think we would need another decade to go by to truly understand what impacts this has, if at all. We need to look at it retrospectively. Right now, things are still happening… we are in the middle of it, and hence can’t have an objective perspective.  

Does international acclaim translate into ensuring a theatrical release or the movie making money at the box office?  

Some of these recognitions and appreciations can kind of help in creating a buzz around it and making more people curious about the film, which might help in its theatrical release. 

But I don’t really know if all the films are supposed to release theatrically. Some are experimental, some are for a certain audience…each has its own way of showcasing. Not everything is for everyone, but it is important that the right audience don’t miss it. We just have to make sure the film reaches its own audience. 

Back in India while we are hailing Malayalam cinema, what we are not talking about is the prominent absence of women in substantial roles in the recent movies. Bramayugam, Aavesham, Manjummel Boys hardly have women characters. Do you think there is a deliberate gender bias or is it a mere coincidence? 

For actors, the Malayalam industry has been always amazing. It might have its ups and downs, but in India, Malayalam cinema has been the best, at least since I have known it. 

Maybe these movies didn’t require any female characters. There is a thing as the requirement of the story. I don’t believe in forcefully putting female characters in stories; if a story requires only male characters, then it should be written thus. But it will be interesting to delve into why there is such lack of scope for female characters in our stories. It will be nice to see all kinds of genders, including trans man and trans woman, and all kinds of different characters in our stories as that is how a versatile storytelling culture should ideally be. Our stories need to be more diverse. 

Also, even if there is no deliberate gender bias, there should be a deliberate or conscious attempt to make stories inclusive. There should not only be characters of all genders but also of all age brackets—we mostly see the main parts being played by a certain age group between 20 and 40.   

You are one of the rare few who made a bold political statement by carrying a watermelon clutch in support of Palestine at the Cannes film festival. What happens when a politics of a movie doesn’t align with your personal politics or even aesthetics? How do you ethically find the balance between the actor and the person?  

There are multiple instances where a film or a theatre production has not aligned with my personal politics or my aesthetics. I have my own political beliefs and stances which I keep refreshing and try to learn and unlearn. But as an actor, you have to work according to the director’s vision or as per the storytelling, of which you are just one part. But then there are times where you absolutely can't agree with the politics of a film, and in such cases, I had the privilege to say no.  So far, I have not been part of a project I had strongly disagreed with. 

It is similar when it comes to the aesthetics. You rarely get an opportunity to be part of an aesthetics that you probably like or admire. But I think as actors, most of the times you have to submit to the aesthetics and politics of the film. If you are choosing projects based on your personal politics and aesthetics, then I am not sure how much and often you would end up getting work.  

What is your take on an actor’s accountability when it comes to playing a character? 

I am not sure how much accountability can an actor take, practically. There are actors who have a lot of privilege in choosing their work because the major chunk of projects/opportunities go to them. Then there are actors who hardly get any work; for them it is difficult to cherry pick as they also need to survive. So, you can’t judge. In an ideal world, where everyone has equal opportunity, then maybe an actor can be held accountable for the choice. But then again, why should an actor only be held accountable?  An actor is as much a part of a movie as the DOP, the editors…we are all working as per the director’s vision. So, either all departments take that accountability or everyone submits to the script.  I think it is wrong to pick only the actor to be accountable.