After 'Chadke 2.0' was a superflop, most of them said - 'Now Anmol's days are over, Anmol is over.' As the film failed to do well at the box office, there was talk that Anmol's generation was over. Also, not liking 'Chadke 2.0', Anmol was defined as rejection by the audience. However, Anmol has learned the real lesson of ups and downs from such a big failure in his film career.

As the character in the film moves forward with ups and downs, Anmol also had to face similar ups and downs in his 10-year film career. 'Chadke 2.0' is one of them. However, this failure has taught Anmol a lesson. After 'Chadke 2.0', Anmol experienced first hand that one should not be discouraged by failure and learn from it. Sometimes even if you make a good film, ups and downs come in everyone's life. Was Chadke 2 good or not? Or is it a 'Furky Farky' chick or a flop waiting to be showcased? Ups and downs happen in everyone's life," says Anmol, "Failure films teach more than hit films. After coming to zero, you have the courage to struggle again like at the beginning. According to

Anmol, not only 'Chadke 2.0', but also 'Ravayan' proved to be seven and a half years old. Last year, 'Chadke 2.0' was not only drowned in the controversy, Anmol himself was drowned in fraud charges. Not only in reel but also in real, Anmol's hands were handcuffed, the case was prosecuted - fraud by criminal treachery. A complaint was filed against him in the police claiming that the production team had suffered a loss of Rs 1.5 crore for refusing to do the film after taking an advance of Rs 10 lakh from 'Ravayan'. He was caught by Sanga in Bhaktapur, spent two days in jail. The production team did not understand about certain matters, I did not understand about some things. This issue could have been settled within the film industry, but I think it was a little too much to be caught by the police as I committed a big crime,' Anmol said, 'I did not commit a big crime. But, there was more action than needed.'

A lot of insults were showered on Anmol on the pretext of these two films. However, 'Chadke 2.0' added the teaching of self-criticism. A film is made in teamwork, so the team is also a factor in the failure of the film. However, the actors who are called stars are blamed for the non-production of the film. However, this time, Anmol himself took the burden of not running 'Chadke 2.0'. It also reflects his maturity. If Anmol had wanted, he could have blamed the production team for the film not running. However, he self-criticized, showing himself as a factor in the film not running. "Chadke 2.0" was my ninth film, I should have matured more when I came to the ninth film, I failed here," he is said to have written on social media while criticizing himself.

I wrote that status saying that if I can enjoy a hit film, I should also take charge of a flop film myself. It was because of me that the film did not run," Anmol says, "Yes, it became a way for those who hate me to say 'Chadke 2.0'. Everyone poured 10 years of anger in that film.'  In the

film industry, the trend of measuring the quality of a film only from a commercial point of view has increased. Anmol argues that the quality of the film should not be viewed from a commercial perspective. It is said that a film is not good if it does not earn money. And, if they earn money, they will say the film is good,'' he said, 'so the reviewer will look at it from which point of view. The film Red Suitcase did not do much business. But that doesn't mean the movie was bad. I think, I have yet to do the best film of my life.'

Saying that 'Chadke 2.0' gave an unexpected failure, Anmol does not seem under the pressure that the new film 'Farki Farki' has to run. He knows that just as Anmol KC came after Bhuvan KC, there will be other generations after him. I don't get wet in temporary name and fame. I am happy if I can enjoy my work and during that work. Especially in my daily life I had to be happy, I had to be happy at work, life is all about doing things,'' said Anmol Duthai, "I will do another film with Farkifarki Nachle. Don't have expectations from a film, you'll do yourself a disservice if it doesn't live up to it. Isn't that what life says?'

As Anmol admits, the age of a hero on screen is fixed. However, character acting takes an actor a long way in acting. The actor who was famous as a chocolate hero yesterday is now seen in character acting. If we look at the recent films, Anmol has not tried to portray himself in a different character. Anmol, who was preferred in the character of Loverboy, tried to establish himself in the action genre after 'Kri'. After 'Kru', he became a gangster in 'Chadke' through 'Captain'.

In my film career, I definitely want to act in different genres of films and in different characters. However, we are forced to run according to the way the film is running in the Nepali market. It's about whether the investors are ready to make a film like I think or not,' says Anmol, when a film like 'Boksi Ko Ghar' is released, it encourages us to work in a different genre.''

While expressing his desire to work in a different genre, Anmol has not forgotten the taste of his audience. That's why he says, "I also become monotonous as an artist when I do the same type of film." But I know that the audience would prefer to see what happened to me. So I lean more towards their choice. There is a desire to work in an experimental character. But, whether the audience prefers to see me playing such a character or not means a lot.

Film experts say, "A director with the vision to use Anmol has not yet been born. So Anmol fell into the clutches of a weak script. His flop films are an example of that.' Anmol agrees with this statement. An artist is not only a director's medium. Shah Rukh Khan seen in Jawan or Pathan, how are they seen in Bimal Pan advertisement? That is an example of how a director can use an actor," Anmol said, "The looks of an artist are temporary. I didn't come into acting from art school. I came here while learning by doing films. I still have time to prove myself as an artist.

Anmol recently feels that he has a match with his tuning director Suyog Gurung. He saw that kind of directorial quality in his debut director Hemraj BC. "I worked a lot in the films of older generation directors. However, when working with a director like Suyog Gurung, that level of thought is also compatible. Hostel and Jerry exuded a youthful spirit. After a long time, that feeling has returned to 'Farkifarki','' he said. I got that from Suyog Gurung.

Anmol is reaching the audience again with 'Farkifarki' directed by Suyog Gurung. About 3 years ago, Suyog told Anmol the idea of ​​the story. After the lockdown, the film was made in the same script. Will the Nepali audience like the story of 'Timeloop' or not? How much will the story bind the audience? Anmol claims to have mixed a love story with commercial elements in the film. After spending a decade in the

film industry, Anmol has come to the conclusion that whatever genre a film is made in, it should be entertaining. The audience should also be able to relate to the story. Will the audience relate to Anmol's character in the Maddy character of 'Furkifarki'? We will know on May 10. He claims that this character was created from the director's whims and lobbies. The character of Maddy was written by the director according to himself. That is why it was easy to create the character, he says. I have practiced director Suyog's style. He speaks in a hushed voice while teasing. I caught it,'' Anmol said about the creation of Maddy's character. Anmol's contemporaries are also starting to get a little more serious about

character creation. A change has also been seen in the choice of films. Real critics of acting accuse that 'Anmol does not know acting'. Who can last 10 years as a 'poster boy' without acting? It has been loved by the audience for 10 years. Yes, the acting has room for improvement. How can a film run without acting?' Anmol says, 'What level of acting will I do, what level of acting will they understand? That's another part. I am always working on how to improve in acting," he said. "As far as character building is concerned, I don't think character building is strong just by plowing the field. Being good looking is also a part of character in itself. Character is built in the appearance of fury? In recent times, the village does not need to make up its face to play the character. The character of a rich society is also a character.'