We don't make films for profit, that's exactly why it follows: Dinesh Vijan

The hit-machine. That is the moniker for Dinesh Vijan’s Maddock Films. In a market where filmmakers are fumbling to understand audiences, the makers of Chhava, Stree 2, Munjya etc seem to be getting it right consistently. In 2022, Nepean Capital, a private equity fund, acquired half of Maddock Films at an undisclosed valuation. With a net profit of ₹80 crore on revenues of ₹380 crore in the financial year ending 2024, Maddock is clearly on a roll. Vanita Kohli-Khandekar met the elusive Vijan (45) at his office in Mumbai for a chat on his approach to the business. Edited excerpts.

 

 

How did you go from banking to films?

 

After my MBA, I got into investment banking. But they wanted me to sign a three-year bond, and I didn’t want to make that kind of commitment at that point. I had done my summers with JM Morgan Stanley (now Morgan Stanley), and the person I worked with had joined ING Bank. So I transitioned into private banking. On the family front, we had a successful family logistics business that my dad hoped I’d join. But I kept coming back to the idea of making films. I ended up producing Being Cyrus (2005), which got a lot of acclaim. Saif (Ali Khan, the lead actor) and I hit it off, and we co-founded Illuminati Films in 2009. Love Aaj Kal (2009) really gave us a foothold. Later, I started Maddock Films, and we’ve made films like Badlapur (2015), Hindi Medium (2017), Mimi (2021), Stree (1 and 2) and Chhaava (2025).

 

What were the big takeaways?

 

With Love Aaj Kal, we realised that just being a joint holder of the IP (intellectual property) wasn’t enough. To really make a difference, you needed control not only of the IP but also of distribution. That allows you to decide how its value is built over time. Internationally, studios are very clear about this. If you believe in your story, you have to also back it by holding on to its rights and making sure you’re in control of its journey.

 

Where is Maddock placed in the movie ecosystem?

 

Maddock has always been a place where unusual stories find a home. If someone walks in with an idea that feels whacked-out, different, or tough to place, we’ll always give it a serious listen. We try to stay original, to have a distinct voice, and to make films that stand for something beyond just the obvious. Of course, when you’re doing something new, there’s always business pressure.

 

What is that pressure?

 

The biggest pressure, honestly, is that people want you to repeat a formula. But our formula is that there is no formula. We’ve done a horror-comedy, a historical epic, slice-of-life films -- if we just stuck to one zone, Maddock wouldn’t be Maddock.

 

In the last 12 months, Stree 2 and Chhaava have become two of the top-grossing Hindi films at the Indian box office. It’s a huge moment, but also a reminder that nothing lasts forever. I’ve seen enough to know that whoever is on top today can just as easily be struggling tomorrow.

 

Could you explain that?

 

Early on, studios would “de-risk” the producer. They’d put in the money, control distribution, and we’d just make the film. It felt convenient. But financially, you’re barely left with anything. If you’re making just 10 per cent on a film, how do you fund your next one? Hindi Medium did really well, including in China. But since we didn’t control the full rights, most of that success didn’t come back to us.

 

On the other hand, when you want to make a film that doesn’t have an obvious market, like Stree, nobody wants to fund it. It was a horror-comedy based on a small-town legend. People said, “Yeh kaun dekhega?” We decided to hold on to the IP, put in our own money, and released it on our own terms. We did the same with Chhaava. That helped us have a better ROI.

 

When you believe in something, back it fully-- own it, build it, release it. That’s when it works financially and emotionally because the film is truly yours, from the first idea to the final frame. In a sense, we don’t make films for profit and that’s exactly why profit follows. The decision to make a film, to create art, can never be commercialised.

 

You’re saying that what is driving Maddock are the choices you make?

 

No. The greenlighting process is mine. It is a combination of a lot of people but the onus is mine. If it goes wrong, it’s me. My role at Maddock Films is content. This will be for a while. When my ability to spot content turns, I don’t know. What we have to find in the next 5-6 years is the next Dinesh Vijan to head Maddock Films.

 

A film should be entertaining and in your zone. Is that your philosophy?

 

In my career, I’ve noticed that three things usually happen when a film of ours truly lands. One, there’s no reference point to the film. Stree -- a horror comedy rooted in Bharat. Hindi Medium too, was rooted in Bharat. Two, an actor is either reinvented or invented like Vicky (Kaushal) in Chhaava or Kriti (Sanon) in Mimi. And three, everyone involved, from the director to the streaming platform, must feel they got a great deal. Why? Because they came in at a time when most people thought the film wouldn’t work. That creates a shared sense of ownership, which is rare, and very powerful.

 

Where does Nepean come in?

 

Nepean came in about four years ago. We wanted to scale to bigger films and branch into music soon. (Last week Maddock announced a strategic tie up with Universal Music). Their backing allowed us to tighten our servicing, bring HR, finance etc. Our philosophy is still the same, only our dreams have become bigger. Now, if we don’t want to sell a film to a platform, we don’t have to. If we want to hold back theatrical rights or skip an MG (minimum guarantee) deal, we can. That flexibility is invaluable.