Anupam Kher Reveals Naseeruddin Shah's Apology After 'Clown' Remark, Shares Insights into Their Complex Friendship

Anupam Kher, ever the open book, has once again offered a fascinating glimpse into the often-intricate world of Bollywood relationships, specifically touching upon his long-standing, shall we say, complicated bond with fellow acting legend Naseeruddin Shah. In a recent candid chat, Kher made a rather striking revelation: Naseeruddin Shah apparently apologized to him for calling him a 'clown' during the heated Citizenship (Amendment) Act (CAA) protests.

It's a moment many will recall, isn't it? The CAA protests had the nation divided, and Bollywood, too, found itself taking sides. Kher was quite vocal in his support for the CAA, while Shah expressed strong opposition. It was during this politically charged atmosphere that Shah publicly denounced Kher, labeling him a 'clown' and a 'sycophant' for his stance. Kher, never one to back down from a verbal joust, retorted sharply at the time, calling Shah a 'frustrated person' who 'drinks and says anything.' Quite the public spectacle, if you ask me.

But here's the twist, according to Kher. He now claims that Shah, at a later point, extended an apology for those harsh words. "He called me a clown. I said I am a clown, you're the greatest actor," Kher recounted, adding that Shah later told him, "I said it in anger." This quiet admission, away from the glare of headlines, certainly adds a layer of unexpected humanity to what many perceived as an outright rivalry. It suggests that perhaps, beneath the public disagreements, there's still a thread of personal connection.

Kher further delved into what he perceives as Shah's occasional 'bitterness,' not just towards him, but seemingly as a broader characteristic. He suggested that Shah's critical comments sometimes target him almost as a default. Yet, despite this, Kher emphasized their shared history. "We were friends, we stayed in the same room in NSD," he fondly recalled, highlighting their bond from their formative years at the National School of Drama. This shared past, he implies, is why he continues to hold Shah in a certain regard, despite the public spats and disagreements.

To illustrate his point about Shah's critical tendencies, Kher brought up past instances where Shah had publicly critiqued other industry stalwarts. He recounted how Shah had previously made rather pointed remarks about legends like Dilip Kumar, whom he once described as 'overrated,' and Rajesh Khanna, whose work he had labeled 'poor.' These examples, Kher seemed to suggest, fit into a pattern of Shah's outspoken and often critical nature, implying that his comments about Kher weren't entirely out of character for him. It's almost like Kher is saying, 'Look, this is just Naseer, it's nothing personal, really.'

Ultimately, despite the dramatic public exchanges and Kher's analysis of Shah's disposition, there's an undeniable undercurrent of respect and even a touch of affection in Kher's narrative. He stresses that shared journey from NSD, a time of common dreams and struggles, which he believes transcends their later political and professional differences. It's a classic case of two formidable personalities, perhaps forever linked by their shared beginnings, even when their paths diverge significantly. Kher, it appears, chooses to see the 'friend' from NSD, willing to look past the barbs because of that deeper, historical connection.