Jackie Shroff has spent decades creating memorable characters, but Javed Akhtar feels Hindi cinema could have made far greater use of what makes the actor so captivating. For Akhtar, Shroff does not need lengthy dialogues or dramatic expressions to hold attention. Even his silence can suggest that there is an entire story unfolding beneath the surface.Speaking to India Today, Akhtar admitted that filmmakers, including himself, did not fully recognise or utilise this aspect of Shroff’s personality. He believes Shroff has an unusual ability to remain engaging even when his character is doing very little.“I am so disappointed with the writers and directors because they have never taken full advantage of this quality in Jackie. I include myself in that,” he said.Explaining what he sees in the actor, Akhtar said, “There is something in Jackie Shroff’s personality that, even when he is quiet, he does not look empty-minded. You feel that there is something inside him that we are not able to fully understand. That quality has not been completely utilised.”For Akhtar, this is not simply about Shroff’s appearance. He believes the actor naturally creates curiosity, making audiences wonder what his character might be thinking even when nothing is explicitly revealed.
Smita Patil had a similar quality
Akhtar sees a parallel between Shroff and the late Smita Patil. He described both performers as actors with an inherent mystery that cannot easily be manufactured.“Something has been in my mind about Jackie Shroff, and this is something I have been thinking about for many years. Some actors, like Smita Patil, have an inborn, enigmatic quality in their personalities,” Akhtar said. He further explained how Shroff can make a silent moment compelling.“Jackie can just be quiet. You can have a silent close-up of him, and he will not look blank. He will look as though there is more to him than what we are seeing. Smita had this quality too.”Remembering Patil’s performances, Akhtar said even a simple close-up could leave viewers with the feeling that they had not completely understood what was happening inside the character.“Take a straight close-up of Smita, you would feel that there was something inside her that we did not fully understand. Jackie also has that enigmatic quality,” he said.
Success can change with time
Akhtar also used the conversation to question the importance often given to immediate popularity. According to him, an actor or a creative work cannot always be judged accurately by how successful it is at a particular moment.“At any given point in time, somebody or something can be a big success. Somebody or something may not be that big a success. But time is the best judge,” Akhtar opined.He believes history can completely alter the way audiences perceive a work.“It is not as though, when the first edition of War and Peace was published, everybody immediately said, ‘This is a classic.’ It takes time. There were films that were extremely popular at that time, but today you will not be able to talk about them in the same way.”Akhtar’s observations about Shroff ultimately point to a larger idea about cinema: some performers possess qualities that may not always be fully understood in their own time, but their screen presence can continue to invite curiosity long after individual films have faded from public memory.
