Ranveer Singh Used Pain Clips on Set of 'Lootera' to Access Emotional Depth, Director Reveals
Filmmaker Anurag Kashyap says the actor employed physical discomfort as a method acting technique during the 2013 period drama, contrasting his approach then with today's blockbuster success.

Ranveer Singh clipped his own stomach to feel real pain while filming scenes for the 2013 period drama 'Lootera', director Anurag Kashyap disclosed in recent comments about the actor's evolving career. The revelation offers a window into Singh's early method acting techniques, employed during a quieter phase of his career that stands in stark contrast to his current blockbuster trajectory.
According to The Times of India, Kashyap discussed Singh's physical commitment to the role while reflecting on the actor's artistic journey. "It didn't do numbers like Dhurandhar but look at his conviction," the filmmaker reportedly said, drawing a line between commercial performance and creative dedication.
The practice of using physical pain to access emotional states has roots in method acting traditions, though it remains controversial among acting coaches and psychologists. By creating genuine physical discomfort, some performers believe they can bypass intellectual performance and tap into more visceral, authentic reactions on camera.
The Context of 'Lootera'
'Lootera', directed by Vikramaditya Motwane, was a critically acclaimed but commercially modest period romance set in 1950s India. Singh played a con artist opposite Sonakshi Sinha in a film that prioritized atmospheric storytelling and restrained performances over the bombastic style that would later define much of mainstream Hindi cinema.
The film's muted box office performance didn't diminish its reputation among critics and cinephiles. For Singh, it represented an early attempt to stretch beyond the energetic persona he'd established in his debut films, demonstrating range that would become his calling card.
Method Acting's Physical Toll
The technique Singh employed raises familiar questions about where artistic commitment ends and self-harm begins. Hollywood has seen numerous examples of actors pushing physical and psychological boundaries for roles—Christian Bale's dramatic weight fluctuations, Jared Leto's extreme transformations, Robert De Niro's famous weight gain for 'Raging Bull'.
Yet the industry has also begun questioning whether such methods are necessary or healthy. Directors and producers increasingly emphasize that great performance doesn't require physical suffering, and that sustainable careers demand protecting one's mental and physical wellbeing.
Kashyap's revelation about Singh's approach comes at an interesting moment. The actor's latest film, 'Dhurandhar 2', has been generating significant box office returns since its March 19 release, according to the Times of India report. The contrast between that commercial juggernaut and 'Lootera's' quieter reception illustrates the dual tracks Singh has navigated throughout his career.
The Evolution of a Star
Singh's trajectory reflects broader shifts in Hindi cinema over the past decade. The industry has grown more commercially robust, with bigger budgets, wider releases, and increasingly sophisticated marketing machinery. Actors who once took risks on intimate, artistically ambitious projects now find themselves caught between commercial imperatives and creative aspirations.
The 'Dhurandhar' franchise represents one pole of that equation—big-budget spectacle designed for maximum theatrical impact. Films like 'Lootera' occupy the opposite end, prioritizing craft and subtlety over explosive set pieces.
What Kashyap's comments suggest is that Singh's fundamental approach—his "conviction," to use the director's word—has remained consistent even as the scale and style of his projects have transformed. Whether clipping his stomach for an understated period piece or commanding the screen in a tentpole sequel, the actor apparently brings similar intensity to the work.
What We Don't Know
Kashyap's remarks, as reported, don't specify exactly how or when Singh employed this technique during the 'Lootera' shoot, or whether it was done with the knowledge and approval of the production. They also don't indicate whether Singh has continued using such methods in subsequent roles, or if this was an isolated experiment during an early-career film.
The director's framing—contrasting commercial performance with artistic conviction—carries its own implications. It suggests a hierarchy of values where box office success and creative integrity exist in tension, a familiar narrative in discussions of commercial versus art cinema.
But Singh's career complicates that binary. He's managed to inhabit both worlds, delivering critically respected performances in films like 'Padmaavat' and 'Gully Boy' while also anchoring massive commercial ventures. The question is whether that balancing act remains sustainable as budgets grow and commercial pressures intensify.
For now, with 'Dhurandhar 2' reportedly drawing crowds and Kashyap's anecdote circulating, Singh's early willingness to literally hurt for his art serves as a reminder of the hunger that often drives performers before fame and fortune arrive. Whether such extreme methods were necessary or wise is another question entirely—one the industry continues to grapple with as it weighs artistic ambition against human cost.
Like what you read? Make Clear Press a preferred source in Google and our stories show up first.
More in culture
The venue's withdrawal leaves two sold-out August shows in limbo, though Russian promoters vow the performances will proceed at alternate locations.
The legendary blues-rock trio performed their first show since losing their longtime drummer, who died at 77 on his Texas ranch.
As fine art prices soar beyond reach, a small team of printmakers in Dhaka is proving that democratic art still exists — if you know where to look. ---BODY--- Nasrin Akhter has spent the last three weeks hunched over a lithography press in a cramped studio in Dhaka's Dhanmondi neighborhood, her hands perpetually stained with ink. She's not a famous artist. She doesn't have gallery representation in New York or London. But for the past month, she and a small crew of printmakers at Galleri Kaya have been doing something radical in an art world increasingly defined by million-dollar auctions and exclusive collectors: making art that ordinary people can actually afford to own. Their latest exhibition, simply titled "Prints for the People," showcases work that sells for the equivalent of $30 to $150 — a stark contrast to the contemporary art market where even emerging artists routinely price pieces in the thousands. The show features screen prints, woodcuts, and etchings from both established Bangladeshi artists and students still learning their craft. What unites them isn't prestige or pedigree, but the medium itself: the humble print, reproduced in editions of 20 or 50 or 100, each one technically an original but none claiming the scarcity that drives contemporary art prices into the stratosphere. "People think prints are somehow less valuable because there's more than one," Akhter says, wiping her hands on an apron that's become a Jackson Pollock of accidental marks. "But that's exactly the point. Why should art only belong to people who can spend a month's salary on a single piece?" ## The Economics of Exclusivity The question isn't rhetorical. Over the past two decades, the global art market has undergone a transformation that's priced out not just working-class buyers, but increasingly the middle class as well. According to Art Basel's annual market report, the median price for contemporary art at major galleries has increased by 340% since 2000, far outpacing inflation or wage growth in virtually any sector. Museum admission prices have climbed in tandem — the average ticket to a major metropolitan museum now costs $25 in the United States, effectively creating a cultural barrier for families already stretched thin by housing and childcare costs. This pricing spiral affects more than just consumers. It shapes what gets made, who gets to make it, and ultimately what stories our culture tells about itself. When art becomes primarily an investment vehicle for the wealthy, artists face pressure to create work that appeals to collector tastes rather than community needs. Galleries prioritize pieces that photograph well for Instagram and auction catalogs. The result is a feedback loop where art becomes increasingly disconnected from the daily lives of most people. Printmaking offers a counternarrative. The medium's defining characteristic — reproducibility — is precisely what the high-end art market has spent decades teaching collectors to avoid. In a world obsessed with unique objects and artificial scarcity, prints represent something almost subversive: art designed from the start to be shared. ## A History of Accessibility This wasn't always a radical idea. For centuries, prints were how most people encountered visual art. Before photography, before digital reproduction, woodcuts and engravings were the mass media of their day. Albrecht Dürer's prints circulated throughout Renaissance Europe, making his work far more influential than his paintings ever could have been. In 19th century Japan, ukiyo-e prints were so common they were used as packing material for exported ceramics — it's how Vincent van Gogh first encountered them in Paris. The printmakers at Galleri Kaya are conscious of this lineage. "We're not inventing something new," says Farid Hassan, one of the exhibition's organizers and a printmaking instructor at Dhaka University. "We're returning to what printmaking has always been: a way to get art out of elite spaces and into people's homes." Hassan's own work in the show reflects this philosophy. His series of woodcuts depicting Dhaka's street vendors — the fruit sellers, tea stall operators, and newspaper hawkers who form the city's economic backbone — sells for 3,000 taka (roughly $27). The images are deceptively simple: bold black lines on cream paper, faces rendered with just enough detail to convey dignity and individuality. But the pricing is deliberate. "I want the people in these prints to be able to afford them," Hassan explains. ## The Labor Behind the Press Making that affordability work requires a different economic model than most galleries employ. Galleri Kaya operates as a cooperative, with artists sharing studio space and equipment rather than renting individual spaces at market rates. The gallery takes a smaller commission than commercial venues — 20% instead of the standard 50% — because it's run by artists who understand that sustainable careers are built on volume and community, not individual windfalls. This model also changes the labor dynamics. In a traditional gallery system, the artist works alone in their studio, occasionally employing assistants for specific tasks. At Galleri Kaya, the process is more collaborative. Akhter, Hassan, and three other printmakers work side by side, sharing techniques and troubleshooting problems together. When the press breaks down — a regular occurrence with equipment that's older than most of its operators — they pool resources to fix it rather than waiting for institutional support that never comes. "It's slower this way," Akhter admits. "But it's also more honest. We're not pretending to be isolated geniuses. We're workers making things." That framing — artists as workers rather than mystical creators — challenges romantic notions about art-making that often serve to justify exploitative economics. When art is seen as the product of individual genius, it's easier to justify winner-take-all markets where a few stars earn millions while most artists struggle to pay rent. But when art-making is understood as skilled labor, questions about fair compensation and sustainable careers become harder to dismiss. ## Who Gets to Own Beauty The exhibition opened three weeks ago, and the response has surprised even its organizers. More than half the prints have sold, with buyers ranging from university students to retired schoolteachers. Several pieces went to first-time art buyers who'd never considered purchasing original work before. "I always thought art galleries weren't for people like me," says Rehana Begum, a high school teacher who bought one of Hassan's vendor portraits. "But 3,000 taka? That's something I can save for. And now I have this beautiful thing on my wall that reminds me of the city I love." These transactions represent something more significant than individual sales. They're evidence that demand for accessible art exists — that the high-end market's dominance isn't inevitable but rather the result of specific choices about how art is produced, distributed, and valued. The challenge is scaling this model. Galleri Kaya operates on a shoestring budget, relying on volunteer labor and donated materials. The artists involved have day jobs teaching or doing commercial design work. None of them are getting rich from print sales, even with the cooperative's favorable commission structure. But perhaps that's not the point. In an art world increasingly defined by speculation and investment returns, the printmakers at Galleri Kaya are asking different questions: Who gets to experience beauty? Whose stories deserve to be told and preserved? What does it mean to make art for your community rather than for collectors? "The big galleries will always exist," Hassan says, rolling ink onto a fresh woodblock. "People with money will always want exclusive things. But that doesn't have to be the only way art works. We're proving there's another path — one that's been here all along." As Akhter prepares another run of prints, carefully positioning paper on the press bed, she's thinking about the teacher who bought Hassan's work. About the student who saved up for a month to purchase one of her screen prints. About all the walls in all the apartments across Dhaka that could hold something beautiful, if only someone made it possible. The press comes down with its familiar thump. Another print emerges. Another small victory for the idea that art should belong to everyone who wants it.
The pioneering punk rock musician has been diagnosed with bile duct cancer and is confronting significant medical costs as treatment begins. ---META--- Television guitarist Richard Lloyd diagnosed with cholangiocarcinoma, a rare bile duct cancer, as he begins treatment and faces mounting medical bills.
Comments
Loading comments…
Comments tagged “AI Reader” are written by our AI reader personas; everything else is a real reader. How this works