Over the years, there have been three things that remained constant about my conversations with Nawazuddin Siddiqui—my struggle with Hindi, his struggle with English, and the universal language of pure passion with which he talks about his work, every single time.

The actor, who after spending a decade playing bit roles, became the talk of the town with his breakthrough act as Faizal Khan in Anurag Kashyap’s 2012 film Gangs of Wasseypur. The next decade saw him establish himself as one of the country’s greatest actors. But success, failure, stardom, critics’ words, paparazzi, politics, slander, absolutely nothing has come between the actor and his craft—his love for his craft remains unwavering, unadulterated, and unaffected by the trappings of showbiz.  In fact, even the last time we had met, exactly one year back, he was categorical: “Neither have I got used to fame nor am I comfortable with the celebrity tag. Acting is the biggest joy of my life. It transports me to a different world—it is a world of characters and not tags—and that’s the world I like to stay in. I am happy being just an artiste.”

Owing to his disinterest in the paraphernalia that come with being a popular Bollywood actor and the cacophony of the city, when not working on any project he is often found spending time in his hometown, Budhana, or in some remote hill station where life goes on in a languorous pace. It is interesting to note that his next movie outing is also set in a similar space. Rautu Ka Raaz, which is scheduled to drop on Zee 5 on June 28, will see him playing Inspector Deepak Negi, a cop posted in a sleepy Uttarakhand hamlet, Rautu Ki Beli, with almost zero crime rate. Everything moves at a languid pace until the warden of a blind school is found dead under mysterious circumstances. SHO Deepak Negi and his team are unceremoniously jolted out of their slumber as they find themselves investigating a murder. He is well accustomed to the vibe of such small towns and fits into the milieu perfectly.

“It is the laziness of the character that drew me towards it!” he quips, looking sharp and every bit a star in a striped blazer and black trousers paired with a red tie and pocket square, as we meet for a quick chat. This is not the usual getup of the actor, but I suddenly remember him slyly revealing in one of my earlier interviews: “I can play a character of a star very well though and trust me you will be convinced that I am living that life. I am good with characters!” Whether he has embraced stardom, or he is just putting up an act, only he can tell—for that’s his brilliance as an actor. Excerpts from the chat that followed:

Tell us something about Rautu ka Raaz. What made you say yes to the character? 

It has a languid vibe; the character is laidback and casual. And amid our fast-paced existence, it feels refreshing. There is no added drama. It is a murder investigation but for a cop, it is just another day at the job. In the beginning, everything goes on in an unhurried manner—the hamlet, which has not seen a crime like this in ages, seems to be almost in denial —but then slowly the investigation and the movie pick up pace and before you know it, you are sucked into it. 

Also, you will notice that as the investigation proceeds, this cop undertakes a parallel personal journey—he confronts his own complexities; there is a twin resolution at the end.

You have played a cop on screen before, what makes this one different? 

If you talk about getting into the uniform of a cop to play a character, I have done that for three movies. But the uniform is just the costume; the costume is not the character. The character behind that costume is different in each instance. That is where lies the versatility of an actor where he can play even one character in multiple different ways convincingly. Versatility is when you play the role of a king in five movies and imbue each with its uniqueness. It is not about wearing different getups and appearing in different avatars—that is why it is acting and not a fancy dress competition!

India just had an amazing run at this year’s Cannes Film Festival. And it is interesting to note that these were all helmed by students from film schools, and not by Bollywood filmmakers…As an NSD alumnus, how does that make you feel? 

I am happy that it is their originality that has gotten them recognition; Bollywood has nothing to do with their glory. Aap khushi toh mana rahey ho, par aapka usmein koi contribution nehi hai. Yeh jeet unke zidd aur conviction ki hai. They didn’t compromise with their vision and made the movies on their own terms and conditions. If you are an actor or a filmmaker, the further you stay from Bollywood, the better. If Indian cinema has to find a world audience, it would be through these smaller, independent movies. These filmmakers are the ones whose visions have not been corrupted yet and they make movies they are convinced about. They have original thoughts, and they go by their instincts; that is why their cinema finds a connection. If these people come to Bollywood, give them about 5/6 years, and the clarity of their vision is bound to get blurred thanks to the commercial trappings of the industry.

But you have been part of Bollywood. How have you managed to keep the artiste in you uncorrupted by these? 

It is not that I have been immune to it. Beech beech mein main bhi corrupt hua hun. When I sign a big movie, people often say that I am corrupting myself. But for me, it is a balancing act. I have often signed commercial movies so that I can make money from those and keep doing the smaller movies for that gives me creative satisfaction for a meagre amount.

In all these years what have you learnt about working in Bollywood? 

It takes time. Try to hold on to your original thoughts. Work on your terms and conditions. Go inwards, you need to mine yourself to find your gold. Don’t get swayed by the box office; it makes you lose your originality. Know the difference between a hit movie and good cinema… although they are not always mutually exclusive. As far as acting is concerned, you can learn from the techniques of great actors—not ‘stars’ mind you—but use them to create something original.

In your previous release Haddi, you played a transgender. There is a lot of conversation around inclusivity where many are of the view that trans people should be allowed to play trans characters... 

If tomorrow there is a role of a carpenter, would you go and find a carpenter? Yes, that happens in Iranian cinema, but even there that carpenter would have to go through extensive workshops before the shooting starts. 

I am an actor, I have trained extensively for five years, then spent almost 20 years in the industry as a professional, and after that, I can say that I can do justice to a role like Haddi. Every job requires specific expertise. To act, you need to learn the craft of acting, just as to work as a pilot you need to learn how to fly an aircraft – you can’t wake up one day and do it.

An actor hardly has much creative control over the final result of his work. As an actor, do you find that limiting? 

That happens a lot. There are multiple instances of good scripts getting spoilt by the overconfidence of the director. Then there are instances of your work getting mutilated on the editing table; this has happened 3-4 times with my films. Here we have a tendency to cut portions that have no dialogue…now those bits might be crucial to establish the emotional journey of the character. Then some are notorious for cutting the pauses, they don’t know how important pauses are to a performance. A film gets a new life on the editing table. If the editor is good, he can make the film more beautiful.  This is why I love the way Aamir Khan works. You will find him working in every department of his movie—he will sit with the makeup team, costume team, writers, he will also be there during the editing. He gives 100 per cent in his performance and ensures everyone else does the same. Filmmaking is a collaborative process—the director, the spot boy, and the actor are all equally important. If the filmmaker thinks that he will do everything his way, then he should go home and make a painting and put it up for an art exhibition.

What is your take on portraying toxic masculinity on screen? 

I don’t think showing toxic masculinity on screen is problematic. It is a character, and it is cinema. You might or might not like it, that is your personal experience. You have the right to say that. If you don’t like the acting or the film, of course you can say that. Our society has far more toxic and obnoxious people than you see in movies; you can’t be in denial. People make movies on Hitler as well where some actor plays Hitler… People had a problem with the violence in Raman Raghav 2.0, now that character was based on a real person, he had killed people with such brutality. In movies like Sacred Games or Gangs of Wasseypur we are showing such men, but we are also showing the consequences of their actions. It is not that at the end people applaud their actions; they also get killed. 

Today we are creating issues out of everything. I recently did a movie where my character, who is the hero, kisses the heroine…people took offense at that and started talking about my age gap with the actress. Now, it is not I who kissed the woman, it was my character. It is a movie, cinema hai yeh… pata nehi chalta hai kya? Log bewakoof hai kya?

But is there anything you are averse to doing on screen? 

I am open to everything. I am an actor aur mein paani ki tarha rehna chahta hun and I want to take the shape of the vessel which is the character—at least that is the attempt, how successful I am in that will depend on my acting talent. But I don’t want to create any image of my own. I am what the character demands me to be at that point.