Killer Serve: Ashok Amritraj On and Off the Tennis Court
By Sanjay Sanghoee

Tennis Star. Hollywood Tycoon. Ashok Amritraj has done twice what most people only dare to dream.

Lucky in life and hard-working, ambidextrous Ashok Amritraj has single-handedly climbed his way to the top. Twice. Born and raised in India, Amritraj originally moved to the United States in 1975 as a professional tennis player, helping the Los Angeles tennis team win the World Championship in 1978. In 1981, Amritraj embarked on a career in the film industry. At first finding it difficult to make a name for himself, Amritraj soon succeeded to become the only South Asian producer in Hollywood. One of the biggest, most trusted names in business, Amritraj has produced over 80 films in the past 20 years which have generated revenues in excess of $1 billion. Currently the chairman and CEO of Hyde Park Entertainment, Amritraj has worked on such star-driven blockbusters such as Bandits (with Bruce Willis), Bringing Down the House (with Steve Martin) and Raising Helen (with Kate Hudson). Hyde Park Entertainment recently signed a legendary multiple-picture deal with British financier, Brass Hat Group for $400 million. Although Amritraj has attained the coveted status of a big-time Hollywood player, he retains close ties to Bollywood. Here, the self-claiming ‘ambassador’ to tinsel-town speaks out about his cinematic passions, his experience in the movie business, and the benefits of having a great backhand.

	Films By Ashok Amritraj
	South Asian Producers in Hollywood
	About the Author

SS: What took you from the world of professional tennis to movie production?

AA: Growing up in India, movies are something that were an integral part of life. Movies like Sound of Music, Ben Hur, and To Sir with Love all impressed me at an early age and I realized that showbiz was in my blood. I started playing tennis and traveling early in my life. I came to the U.S. in 1975 to play tennis for the Los Angeles tennis team, which won the World Championship in 1978. I saw the big names in Hollywood up close and was suddenly enticed to stay and create a career in the movie business.

SS: What was your experience as a South Asian entering an industry dominated by a Western aesthetic?

AA: At the time I entered Hollywood, there were no Indians in the industry. It wasn’t easy breaking in. However, I did have the benefit of being known because of tennis. I made a lot of friends through that channel: actors, producers and directors who all wanted to play tennis with me. But that too had a drawback. I would send projects around and get callbacks, but the studio executive would want to talk about his backhand for the first 20 minutes and my project for 30 seconds. It took me a good 5-6 years to work around that problem.

SS: What inspires you to make the movies you do?

AA: Primarily my childhood in India. It was full of variety and experience. I grew up in a pure time, and we grew up playing tennis and going to school. It was a hopeful, fun environment. The platform given to me to grow in India has always given me inspiration to make movies. Perhaps even more so than my time in America. I like real-life experiences and to depict them on the screen. The most compelling content comes from human experience. I also traveled around a lot early in my life and this too contributed to my awareness and inspired me.

SS: How much of your decision-making process is based on aesthetic sense and how much from a purely business perspective? Do you have creative biases?

AA: It all starts with the script. We look at thousands of ideas, develop 15-20 of them, and make 2-3 movies every year. The emphasis is on finding and developing a great idea. A perfect example of that is Bringing Down the House with Steve Martin and Queen Latifah, which really connected with audiences. When you have a good screenplay, then the business end accounts for 50% of the decision-making process. Who is right for the role, who is going to finance and distribute the film, how to position the movie, these are all decisions involving both creative and business considerations. In the end its about the best possible compromise.

SS: How much cross-pollination do your foresee between the American and Indian film industries and how will this impact the movie business in both countries?

AA: At the present time, Bollywood is evolving and Indian filmmakers have started to look outside the local market for crossover projects. There have really been none so far but that will eventually happen. India is in the early stages of trying to get into world cinema. So far nothing has really “broken out”, that is, generated more than $30 million in box office in the U.S. But with the amount of talent available (in India), they could have successes like Life is Beautiful, Amelie, City of God or Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. The difficulty is making movies with an Indian frame of mind and being able to sell those movies to someone in Iowa. You can’t make those movies sitting in India. You need international appeal. The way around that is to make movies that appeal to universal emotions and experiences.

SS: How does Hollywood see South Asian actors? Why don’t we see more South Asians in substantial dramatic roles in mainstream American films? What do you feel will it take for South Asians to break through these barriers?

AA: The reason is simple – scripts written and pitched for white, black and now Latino audiences have a large built-in audience. That’s not the case for South Asian audiences. 50% of the market for movies is the U.S. 40% of the remaining 50% are other Western countries. That leaves a small potential audience of South Asians who would see those movies. Consequently, few projects are developed with a South Asian lead in mind. The numbers are too small and risks too high. Besides, there aren’t many writers here who understand a lot about Asia or how to weave in Asian themes into mainstream films. You don’t have an audience – unless you make an extraordinary film. Jackie Chan, Jet Li and Chow Yun Fat are obvious examples of crossover stars, but even their films are not as widespread as those of big American actors. Another problem is that the Asian audience itself is splintered – Indians don’t necessarily flock to see a Chinese movie star and vice versa. So the way for a South Asian actor to succeed in Hollywood is to appeal to a wide audience on a general basis, such as Ben Kingsley, who can play a Brit or an Israeli as convincingly as he can an Indian.

SS: Are you currently involved with projects in South Asia?

AA: Yes. I am developing a project with MGM which involves an Indian female lead and an American male lead. The movie is a sort of cross-cultural Pretty Woman and is targeted for next summer.

SS: You are also on the Board of Foreign Films at the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. What does that involve?

AA: It’s a great opportunity to create the guidelines for determining what qualifies a foreign film for an Oscar. It is primarily a rule-making organization but it’s good to be involved.

SS: What is your personal vision of your career? Have you attained what you were after and where do you go from here?

AA: It’s been a long and extraordinary journey. In many respects, it has far exceeded my expectations. I’ve made over 80 films in over 20 years which have generated in excess of $1 billion. Since Double Impact in 1991, it has been an extraordinary run. I’ve had the pleasure of working with some of the finest talent in Hollywood, including Bruce Willis, Sylvester Stallone, Steve Martin, Angelina Jolie. I am always interested in discovering new avenues and intrigued by variety. In that respect, I am not a “one-genre” producer. I am looking for new experiences and the best ideas.

SS: Would you ever consider going back to India and starting perhaps a Hollywood style studio there?

AA: Not really. This is my life’s work. I consider myself India’s ambassador to Hollywood in some ways, but am not sure it would work the other way around… You have to ask yourself – do they even want the Hollywood studio system?

I think the answer is no. The studios here function with the resources of gigantic media corporations and require the stability that comes from such entities. That is not possible in India at the present moment – at least not to the extent necessary. The movie business there has a more family-oriented way of working and I think that is how it will remain for a long time. It works for them, so why should they change?

SS: How much of your success do you attribute to fate and how much to hard work and perseverance?

AA: Hard work and perseverance mainly. I’m not really a person who believes in fate. I like to make things happen. I decide what’s best for a project and then try to accomplish it. Of course, on each film things vary dramatically and it is so difficult to make good and successful movies that yes there is a certain amount of luck involved. But you can’t replace intelligence, hard work, and above all, passion. Passion’s truly the key.

SS: How is your tennis nowadays?

AA: Depends on the day. I’m glad I’m not on tour anymore… (laughs). Seriously though, I still very much play and enjoy it. Tennis has truly been one of the great things in my life. It’s brought me personal satisfaction, global travel, recognition. It brought me to the U.S. and helped me get into the movie business. .