During June, the Center for Cinema and Creation (CCC) highlighted «Cactus Pears» (Sabar Bonda, 2025) as its film of the month. It was written and directed by Rohan Parashuram Kanawade, a self taught filmmaker from Mumbai, India. Kanawade’s debut feature won the Grand Jury Prize in the World Cinema Dramatic Competition, at the 2025 Sundance Film Festival. «Cactus Pears» is a moving romantic drama about two men that unfolds during a ten-day period of mourning in rural India, where the protagonist, Anand, returns after losing his father. There, he meets again with an old childhood friend, Balya. Amidst the grief, love and all its possibilities flourish between them.
Thanks to the filmmaker’s generosity and his contagious passion for cinema, we sat down to discuss his film and its connection to his personal life. Below, we delve into the confluence of love and grief in the story, his scriptwriting process, the importance of making short films, and how queer romance is portrayed in modern movies.
This interview is featured in our ‘Backstage‘ section. Scroll to the end of the post to watch the full video conversation, or click here to read the Spanish transcript.
Cactus Pears is a movie about love, but it’s also about grief. How did you combine these two powerful emotions in a film that has to challenge his protagonist with these two polar opposites? The sorrow and also the love emerging in his life.
My father passed away in 2016. I had to go to my ancestral village to grieve my father, the way you see in the film. Same thing was happening with me, what happens to Anand: everyone over there was just talking about my marriage. That questions or those conversations were so claustrophobic. I had to face them with silence most of the time. In those 10 days I had this thought: What if I had a friend in this village who knew about me?; I would have just sneaked out with him for a while and stayed away from this marriage pressure.
I thought: that is an idea for a film. I started thinking about it. What intrigued me about that idea was that the story starts with death: Anand, the protagonist, loses his father. But then, spending time in this village, these 10 days, he meets his childhood friend. And the journey goes towards this friend coming into his life. So it starts with loss, but ends with someone coming in his life. So that was intriguing for me. Most of the time films about death are sad. Here you have death and a grieving period, and those rituals, but I didn’t want to make a sad film. Infusing this story with blossoming love can give the film a tender quality as well. So those were the interesting thoughts that caught my attention. I thought: I need to chase this idea… and one day I need to write this film.
One thing that makes your movie so universal is that anyone who has his father or mother passed away -my father also passed away in 2016- can relate to the emotions in the film, even if you are from another culture. In the movie you have a ritual that in my country -Chile- doesn’t exist, because cremation here is different. But in a way, we can always relate to some images. For example, the moment in which Anand sees his father in the temple (after he has passed) is so beautiful. And that happens to anyone who loses someone, you’ll eventually «see» them in person. And it feels real. You think your mind is tricking you, but he’s there. And it’s really your heart that is coming out. I wanted to ask you about these images of grief, like this one, or the images of love that are so innocent, like the shot of the two men, Anand and Balya, sharing headphones. It’s almost like teenage love, no? It’s so sweet. Do you have these images in your mind when you were writing your script, or were them coming along as you go?
My writing process is something that I spend a lot of time with the idea first. In this case, I had the idea in 2016 while grieving my father. But I started writing the script in 2020. For those four years, I was just thinking about that idea. During that time, I didn’t know what the story will be or what kind of images there will be in the film, the scenes or anything. But what happens is slowly you start seeing certain images that give you an idea of the film’s visual quality. Or sometimes you experience something and you think: maybe that can be part of this film or this idea. That becomes a vision for the film, in a way, how the visuals or the sound or the performance should be. When you have too many things in your head, it is saturated with them: those things actually force you to sit down and write. And then I just start writing the actual screenplay.
I write actual scenes. I don’t write a story outline or anything. I actually start writing the full screenplay. So once I have the first scene, then I get an idea for the second and third. And that’s how it flows for me. While writing the script even I didn’t know how the film’s gonna end. The way it ends right now, I didn’t know if that will be a part of the film.
What I knew was, I didn’t want to end this story in tragedy. Most queer stories end in tragedy.
But I didn’t know how it would end. Even while writing, you have a rough idea of the image but you don’t know how the image will be. That you get to know when you have the final locations for the film.
This village I have seen since my childhood, every summer vacation was in the village. I’ve seen the surrounding. I know how the conversations happen in the house. I have been with my cousins to grace the gods in the forest or on the mountain. This village that you see in the film, that’s actually my mom’s village. That’s where she grew up. So it’s my maternal uncle’s village. I used to go to this village every summer vacation and to the lake. My mom and some other relatives, female relatives, every morning after everyone has done taking bath, would take the clothes to wash it on the lake. So I have been to that lake so many times.
I have seen those things. I would just know my memories, these kinds of moments that we have experienced with our lovers. Like with my partner, I have experienced that, you know, sharing those headphones. So maybe even if it’s not you, you must have seen it with someone else or sometimes you and your friend share headphones. So those are some human things. A human experience. We all experience those things.
I wanted to create a film that makes an audience feel that this is real: we have also done those things. That quality I wanted. I think, for that reason, I borrowed from life around me and some memories.
The movie feels so honest, so pure, because even if you don’t know that you did have these experiences, the movie exudes this kind of honesty that seems so real. This is like a documentary of one man’s life. You get transported to this world immediately. And it all makes sense.
While making the film, also, I was telling my crew -or while pitching the movie in the in the film markets or script labs- I was saying that I wanted to portray life on screen. I don’t want to make a typical film that you watch in the cinema. When people watch this film, they should feel like: I don’t think I’m watching a film, it feels like I’m watching someone’s life.
That was always the goal, because a film like this, which doesn’t have background music, which has so much simplicity, it had to feel real. Otherwise, the kind of impact I wanted wouldn’t have been there.
I liked that you were talking about the script writing process, because I was looking at one of your short films, one from almost 10 years ago. There you have a scene where there is an image inspired maybe by yourself, of a man writing a script with some post-its in the wall…
You saw «Khidkee» (2017), the black and white film.
Yeah! And then I saw the next film, «U for Usha» (2019), that I loved very much. I saw, of course, some connections in the ideas, of this queer love that is between two women in a village. One woman is more educated while the other woman works the land. What did you learn in those short films that helped you make a feature film later?
Actually, in 2013, I wrote my first feature film, because that year one of my short films went to an international film festival for the first time. And I won the Emerging Filmmaker Award there. After that festival, everyone started saying, «you must make a feature». I wrote one feature film. But nothing happened with that. And that’s when I got an idea for another short film. I made that short film. And again, that short film traveled the world, because of which I got to travel for the first time outside India. After that film, I wrote a feature film. But again, I didn’t get any support for that feature film. Then I made Khidkee, which you saw.
I’ve been making short films since 2007. I didn’t study filmmaking, I studied interior designing, and I was working as an interior designer.
In 2007, I just started making films on a mobile phone. By making the films, I was actually learning the craft.
From 2007 to 2013, it took me that much time to actually take my films to one of the festivals. Even after that, I kept making films, because I think you learn filmmaking by actually making films. And in those initial days, in 2007, I didn’t have money to join a film school. So there was no other way to learn the craft.
Because of that and because I am queer, I became friends with some actors who were closeted. They started guiding me and suggesting me films. «You should watch this film, that film…» and that’s how I got to see some masterpieces from around the world. That was really helpful. By making the short films I was learning a craft. They helped me to hone my craft or hone my filmmaking. And with each film I could be a better filmmaker, a better storyteller.
They helped me reach a point where I was able to make Cactus Pears. People like my producers, they could trust me: Okay, you can make this film. They could put all their money and their faith in this film -and me- to let me do what I wanted.
The short films are a way to show the people that you can make a film. The short film becomes that proof.
And with the short film you can also experiment, right? Different kinds of ideas or different kind of styles.
Of course, that’s what you do with the short films. It’s your film school that you’re making for yourself in a way, no?
Yeah, because unless you actually face the challenges of filmmaking… you can sit in a class and learn about filmmaking, but until you actually face the challenges of making films, or find solutions for that challenge, you would not know how to really do things. Because, to be honest, just because you have learned filmmaking, you can’t become a good filmmaker. Because there are so many students who go to a film school, but not everyone becomes a good filmmaker.
Like similarly, when I was studying interior designing, there were so many students in my class, but not all of them who studied interior designing went on to become a good interior designer. Sometimes I feel that yout need to have some sense of art or whatever that your art needs. You need to have those basic senses. Without that, you will never be able to do things. I had a certain sense about the composition because I was good at drawing. I used to love photography, even though I was not doing photography. But whenever I saw a good photograph, I really liked it. I really like to look at good paintings.
You need to have a certain sense about that medium, like in this case, the images, or the sound. When I saw «Jurassic Park» (1993), when I was what? six or seven years old. For the first time, I experienced surround sound in the cinema. And I was intrigued with that. How is this happening? How does this technology work? You need to have those kind of active senses of curiosity about it. Just by learning theory, it isn’t enough. You need to have that sense. And with that sense you will grow.
Whenever I could I watched a movie. I had taken a membership of a DVD library in Mumbai. I could get an original DVD every day. I used to watch one film every day. After that, I got another membership where I used to get two DVDs every day, so I used to watch two films every night. The first thing I used to watch in those films was the bonus feature, which was the making of the film or the interviews to writers and directos, the BTS from the shoot. I wanted to know how do they do these things. Is the cinematographer talking about the camera? about the lenses? to learn how certain lenses gave a different feeling. I was always curious about those things. Why does the the image from this film looks different than that film?. That actually helped me understand things.
So now when I make films, I do my complete homework first. With this film I wanted to shoot on celluloid, but I couldn’t because we didn’t have that much of funds. I told my cinematographer Vikas Urs:
ROHAN I don't like the look of modern lenses, the ultra sharp look, so what can we do? VIKAS Can we use vintage lenses?. ROHAN Can we? I mean, I don't know if our budget will allow that. VIKAS We can, we will negotiate it.
And that’s when found the Russian vintage lenses Lomo Illumina Mark II. I did research about those lenses. Then we did some test shoots and the kind of look that we got, I really liked it.
Similarly, with the sound of this film, I always wanted to use 360 degree surround sound to immerse audience in space because the technology now at Dolby Atmos gives you that chance, to create the world which is outside this rectangle that we see.
With sound you can create the world which exists outside the frame.
I incorporated those things into the script. It helped my sound designers understand what kind of soundscape I wanted to create. They could take those ideas and actually create that. So I think you need that sense or curiosity to do that. That’s when you can be good at what you are doing.
Yes, absolutely. When you love cinema… I did the same thing. You watch the behind the scenes. You want to know everything because cinema has this twofold experience: there’s emotion that a filmmaker has given you through the film, but there is also a technical aspect to it. You were talking about Jurassic Park, for example, a movie that in your childhood makes you wonder. Then, when you grow up, you ask yourself: but how does Spielberg did this shot? How how does he frame it? Why does this shot takes this time?
I wanted to talk about the camera in your film. You have very long takes, with no cuts, that sometimes last five minutes or more, where you have the actors sitting in the floor talking. When did you came up with this way to tell the story? This slow, like you said, frame of a world?
When I was grieving my father in my village, me and my mother, we were just sitting in the house all day. Sometimes we just sit outside the house and maybe not talk, just sit. I wanted to bring that quality where you feel as if you are the third person looking at these two characters. So if someone is having a conversation, like in this case, mother and son, and you are sitting nearby, you would just sit there and maybe look at them and watch them and hear them. I wanted to get that quality as if someone is witnessing that moment. This long take feels real because there is no editing involved in it.
There are some silences, pauses that actually give you the feel as if you are watching someone. And also I felt that the long takes will become a big challenge for actors. They have to be so present in the scene because there is no cutting, no editing that’s going to save their performance. There’s no background music to heighten their emotions. They have to perform right then and there. That was also a big challenge for me to get this feeling right through this long takes. I had to write those long takes like that. I got really good actors who could really perform them. Some sequences, you do see some cuttings and some shot changing.
When Anand comes to his house in the end with Balya, when he takes that photo frame out and he starts crying, and then Balya comes and sits next to him. That’s a long take. You should feel as if you are really watching these people. Long takes can also be about the camera movement but that was not the point here.
I love the scene where Anand is hugged by his mother after a have a very long conversation. It’s very beautiful because his mother understands him very well, she is very encouraging. It’s a very sweet and tender moment. As you said, it conveys this emotion by not cutting.
You talked about tragedy, movies that are very sad. There is maybe a tendency in some movies about queer love where there is always a very heartbreaking, sad tragedy in the end of the story. You avoid this kind trap because you wanted something more truthful. Something that felt a little more honest. Were there other things that you wanted to avoid during the scriptwriting and filmmaking process?
I wanted the film to actually end on an optimistic note, not a «they lived happily ever after» because in this film you don’t know if they will live together for a long time. But at least they have taken a step to explore further and give a chance to the bond that has developed between them. Sometimes I think queer people -what I have experienced- are scared of relationships. I don’t know why, everyone’s reasons are different. But most of them don’t find partners and sometimes even if they find partners the relationship doesn’t last that long. So people are scared but at least these two guys are taking that step to explore. I just wanted to end on that optimistic note.
I also decided that this film is not going to be about coming out. In this film coming out has happened in the past, it’s not happening right now. What happens after coming out, most of the time, is that your parents don’t know how to deal with the questions of marriage, the relatives keep asking them, and then they don’t know how to deal with it. Some parents are involved in their kids lives. If they have partners they are involved, they treat the partner as their family member as well. Those things happen after you come out, if your parents have accepted you.
I wanted to use my own background in the film in a way. My father was a driver, my mom is illiterate. I wanted to use those backgrounds and not an elite background or elite family. I wanted to show that to accept your kids you don’t need to be highly educated or a really rich person. When I came out to my parents they immediately accepted me. My father, when I just told him, within a minute he said «you know about yourself, that’s most important so there’s no need to get married to any woman».
Why did this happen? I realized it’s because my father loved his son and that love was enough for him to accept his son the way he is and whatever his son’s happiness is. He had to accept it. It was that simple. But most of the time films don’t show that.
They only show the drama of acceptance where parents don’t accept it. That happens but that is not the case all the time. Like in my case. So it’s as simple as that: if there is love that is enough for parents to accept their kids. After I came out my parents didn’t have to go on to read books on homosexuality to understand what it is. I think we just sometimes complicate these things through films. I know that for some people there is lots of hardship, their parents don’t accept and all but there is another side as well where some people found acceptance by their parents. When are we going to talk about those stories?. We don’t talk about those stories. All the time we talk about the hardship and homophobia but when do we start showing the other side?. That’s when we start changing the conversation around it. People talk «We need to change the storytelling of queer story» but how do you do that?.
You don’t have to be educated or rich, you just have to be a good person, by your nature or by your heart. I have some friends who come from a very rich background, they have highly educated parents but their parents never accepted them. Their highly educated parents could have used their critical thinking to understand the simple things, but they didn’t. You just have to be a good person and there should be love. I didn’t want to use those coming out cliches, I didn’t want to show these two characters like Balya and Anand, the two leads, to show them as if they have no idea about what is this thing happening to them, why are they feeling attraction towards the same sex. They know about it, they’re comfortable with it and that is how they want to live in their life and that’s what they are trying to navigate. Now, how should we stay true to what we are?
Most movies show that in villages people don’t know or guys don’t know anything or they are confused. I know in villages people are already using Grinder and people are meeting other guys. I met some guys who come from very small villages and very poor families but even their families accepted their sexuality so I wanted to show that even in villages it’s not that people don’t know about sexuality or about same sex attraction.
I think other movies especially when talking about love, even movies about straight love, sometimes they have too many side characters, too many antagonists and here in your movie I think the antagonist is fear, it’s about commitment… do I want a romantic relationship? it’s not about sex because it’s about something deeper between Balya and Anand. I think that the way you wrote those parents expresses what you have just said, that some parents can be more accepting where in the case of Balya its more difficult for him. I don’t want to take more of your time so I would like you to–
— One of the small things I wanted to add —
Yes?
I also didn’t want to cast actors who are overtly good looking and have a masculine physique because that’s what we see in queer films all the time. I was like no: queer people are just normal human beings and I want to cast actors who look like just a normal human being, and not, you know…
…Models
That was another thing I had decided that that will not happen in my film.
It will be a total disconnection to see, yeah, some kind of Henry Cavill walking in the village… it will be like…what is going on?.
To end this talk, what movies have made an impact in your life? That made you take the decision to be a filmmaker, maybe from your childhood or more recent films?
To be honest it was not the films that attracted me towards filmmaking, it was actually the gadgets. The first ever love was actually the projector. I wanted to know how does this machine work, it felt magical to me. I wanted to know that or how the camera captures all of these things. Those gadgets were the first love and as I grew up in my last days of school that’s when I started getting interested in storytelling. That’s when I started understanding the stories more.
I’m still in love with gadgets so that’s why I keep doing all my research about the cameras or lenses or any other thing. About the projectors as well. About the films… many films, I can’t even say this is the best one that actually inspired me. Different filmmakers make different kinds of film and what I loved about those films is that I knew only those filmmakers could make those films, because they brought their own life experiences, their perspective to that story and that is why those films were so different. The way they pushed the storytelling boundaries. That inspires me. So that’s why I keep watching different kinds of films.
Any good film that inspires you I think that’s great. I have seen films from all over around the globe. All the good films have inspired me. I still get inspired because when you feel low, when you are still uncertain…now I’m trying to write my next film and.. then you watch something good that inspires you: ¡I have to do it, I have to do it!.