Filmmaker Ram Gopal Varma has weighed in on the ongoing controversy involving Ranveer Singh, Excel Entertainment, and the Federation of Western India Cine Employees (FWICE) over Don 3. The director took to X (formerly Twitter) to share his views on the dispute, expressing support for Ranveer Singh and questioning FWICE’s decision to issue a non-cooperation directive against the actor.
Don 3 controversy: Ram Gopal Varma SLAMS “kangaroo court” FWICE over non-cooperation directive against Ranveer Singh; calls the decision “a massive PR Disaster”
The controversy began after reports emerged that Ranveer Singh had exited Don 3, leading to a dispute with producers Farhan Akhtar and Ritesh Sidhwani’s Excel Entertainment. According to reports, the production house alleged that the actor’s withdrawal resulted in losses of nearly Rs 45 crores due to pre-production work, location scouting, and other development expenses.
Following the disagreement, FWICE reportedly issued multiple notices to Ranveer Singh, asking him to present his side of the matter. After the actor’s legal team questioned the federation’s jurisdiction over a private commercial agreement, FWICE announced a non-cooperation directive against him.
Reacting to the development, Ram Gopal Varma strongly criticized the federation’s involvement in the dispute. In a lengthy post on X, Varma wrote, “BAN ‘FWICE’ and not @RanveerOfficial.”
The filmmaker argued that the issue was essentially a contractual disagreement between two parties and should not be treated as an industry-wide matter. “At the heart of this whole matter is a producer claiming massive pre-production losses, but that is just a private contractual dispute between two parties like it happens in millions of cases all the time and all over India in all businesses,” he wrote.
Varma further questioned FWICE’s authority to intervene in such disputes, stating, “FWICE is neither a court of legal justice nor a government authorised regulatory body.”
He also claimed that only the parties directly involved were aware of the full circumstances surrounding the disagreement and suggested that any legal issues should be resolved through appropriate judicial channels. “Only the disputing parties will know the intricacies about what happened, and so the matter should be between them like any other civil matter, and in case one or both appeal to a court, the judge decides the matter,” he added.
The filmmaker further argued that the a
Read More