Raghuvir Yadav, who debuted with the famous Massey Sahib (1985), is originally from theatre and one of those veterans in Hindi cinema who’d rather not do films for lack of meat, than do them just for the heck of it. He’s the only Indian actor, who went ahead to win two international awards. One, the Silver Peacock Best Actor Award, at the International Film Festival of India, and the other, Fipresci Critic’s award (Venice Film Festival) for Best Actor for his role in the acclaimed Massey Sahib. Raghuvir was last remembered for his role in Ashutosh Gowarikar’s Lagaan. We saw and applauded you hugely in Massey Sahib and Meera Nair’s Salaam Bombay. We didn’t see you much after those. I am one of those actors who can be motivated only by the quality of work he undertakes. There are films made left, right and centre but I really feel they are not that kind of cinema I could ever justify. In a way it also mutual, I don’t find substance in that kind of cinema and obviously the kind of roles that are in the offing are not meant for me. What happened after Lagaan? I did do a couple of other films like Ram Gopal Varma’s “Darna Mana Hai”, but if you are talking about the number of times I appeared on screen, yes, I may have disappointed you. I can’t do films for the count; the kick a subject gives me is the only reason for actors like us to get going. We didn’t see you much on TV either after the soft, mushy and hugely successful Mungeri Lal. I did a few serials after that, the most recent being Chacha Choudhary, but eventually in television too it’s all about quantity and not quality. If an actor is doing five episodes in a week, what creativity can you expect from him? It’s just like working in the factory-machines are running-production is on-quantity is all that matters. Television has just become a replica of the big screen. “Keep churning” is the mantra, regardless of “what” and “how”! Do you think the character of Hindi cinema has changed as well, from being parallel or mainstream film earlier to simply being single-screen and multiplex films, now? Is it maybe because of the change in cinema making and viewing that actors of your calibre are not seen enough? There can be no categories of films, whatsoever, except two-a good or a bad film. All films are either just good or bad, nothing else woks. Look at the amount of money being pumped into films, of which most are not even able to recover their making cost. It’s become a race, a gamble. There are so many beautiful stories that could be made into films but maybe the makers are a bit lazy to look around or maybe they are completely cash register dominated. As far as I am concerned every actor has his own space and unless he finds that in a film, it’s difficult to become a part of it.