I used to think, 'any history breaks after a while'. 'Loot' came at a time of crisis in the film industry. A new dimension started in the film industry with 'Loot'. Then came the film 'Kabaddi' in which I acted myself.

'Loot' and 'Kabaddi' set the scene for innovative experimentation in film. Then the hero's standard was also broken. Especially the characters started to become heroes. At that time, I guessed, 'Someone will come again at some point and twist this trend.'

This year, the film 'Poorna Bahadur Ko Sarangi' broke more than 12 records. Business also set an unexpected record. I was always playing the role of a supporting character, but I had the resolve to act as the main character. But I never thought that the first film I played as a lead character would make history or twist. I was 'surprised' myself.  As for

, my beginning in the film started from a situation where the trend was changing. At that time, Dayahang Rai, Saugat Malla had already proved themselves with a few films. Our journey focused on natural and original presentation in future films. Like a different taste of acting. Our acting was such that when we were talking to someone, we felt as if we were talking to our own people.

'no acting' i.e. the style of not acting at all. We broke the traditional style of acting and moved forward. However, our environment consists of three layers - mountains, hills, plains. According to the geography, there is diversity in languages ​​and customs. We thought at that time, 'Our character can be loud. The character should be like us even while being loud. We must have matched our faces and no one recognized us on the road.' Because we are common faces. We are not a face that stands out from the crowd. 

Hero's recognition was not a good thing. At a time when a well-built body, a chocolate face was considered a hero, our generation established a style of heroizing the character. Now the hero had to be neither strong nor fair. After a decade and a half of practice, all the makers were convinced that the hero of the film should be the character of the story. During that interval I worked as a character actor. Even though I worked as a side character, my character never felt like a supporting character to me. Because my character had his own journey. The

used to be the background. The purpose was So I enjoyed my process. When I played the lead role in 'Poorna Bahadur Ko Sarangi'. Even being the chief became easy. In many supporting roles I got to see the load I was carrying and the load others were carrying when I was leading. When I worked as a leading character, I realized that the weight of being a leading man is different. At first I always felt that only the main character in the film got the credit. But there is a lot of burden on him whether he wants it or not. By carrying that burden, the leading role gets more credit. It's natural to get it.

comfort zone 

There was a change in the story, the standard of the hero and the acting style. But we still have to fight to become the environment we want. For a film to be strong, the screenplay must be strong. The characters in the story should also look alive. Now we have a belief that 'good actors do good acting'. This is wrong. Despite the good acting, the film is the medium of the director. It should show the character you envisioned. Preparation is very important for this. Lately, I see less preparation.

It puts the artist in the comfort zone. After sitting in the comfort zone, a new character emerges. To get away is to look the same as what I did. I have even read the stories of some films on the sets. That's our fault. Sometimes it is restricted. Sometimes this mistake is made because of not being able to keep the promise given to friends and sometimes for the sake of meaning. It is not meant to be done at such a time. Because it is thought that I am an actor. An actor is backing up different characters. It's like reading a story on set – I fuse my backup character into it. However, there is self-blame. Even now, when I remember a film, I think, 'What a fake acting was done for money.' If I am working on a character, I have to do some twisting and breaking. You don't have to change the whole cover just because it's new. But you have to churn yourself. Now there is a shortage of churning. What is the preparation to be done before going to the film, discussion about the character, the character thought by the writer and what the director wants to show? It should be taken out together. A new character is born out of it. If not, it happened by itself. This is something that comes from constant practice. 

I see the lack of this thing lately. Many films are being made now. As soon as the film is made more, the demand for actors comes. As soon as the artist is in demand, he has to work in many places. As soon as you work in many places, you have to constantly go one after the other when arranging the lineup. In the same way, the screenplay may sometimes have to be read there. It looks like the maker is in a hurry. There is pressure to make films quickly and release them quickly. Again the number of artists they can choose from is also limited. Makers look for a moving face. You don't trust strong people. 

Even in my case, the lead offer increased after the release of 'Poorna Bahadur Ko Sarangi'. Only when our society accepts it, the maker accepts it. I also say - if you want to bring a new face, don't do casting. If a limited film is made and does well, the actor also gets time for preparation.

At least 30 days should be given to an artist for a film. This gives it time to churn. There is a schedule of films one after the other. One's schedule is piling up. A relationship has to do. Attached to an emotion. It is done by making it difficult in some sense. Film makers also have a lot of investment. There is pressure to get it out quickly. These are risky things. This is a loss for the film and acting. 

A writer has one dream about a story, a director has another dream. And another dream of the producer and the actor. Eventually, everyone's dreams come true. It is the guilty director. Because the designer is the same. Everything is controlled by the director. A good director settles down and gets what he wants out of the story and the actors. But may not apply to all directors. 

Search for 'face value'

The search for the lead character in our film is based on the market. You have to search according to the character written in the script. Now the writer is writing with a character in mind. And how does something new come about? If you think of me, you have an attitude towards me. Write accordingly that Vijay does comedy. For me it is repetition. I don't enjoy it. The more you freely write, the more a new character is created. 

Let's brainstorm about the main character's quest. In my experience it is sought in two ways. First of all, how much is his discussion in the international market? Second, who's character comes to the mind of the director? Acting ability goes last. While taking the name of the artist, one thinks about how much money is raised in the market from his face. There are plenty of actors based on