With his debut feature Early Days, filmmaker Priyankar Patra turns his attention to the intersection of ambition, intimacy and online existence in contemporary urban India. Set largely within the confines of a modest Mumbai apartment, the film follows a young couple navigating the promises and pressures of influencer culture while trying to build a life together in an increasingly expensive city. Rather than narrowing his focus to a critique of social media’s omnipresence, Patra approaches his characters with empathy and nuance. By examining how aspirations for visibility, financial security and upward mobility can subtly alter the dynamics of a relationship, Early Days offers a pragmatic portrait of contemporary urban life.

Early Days premiered at the Red Sea International Film Festival in December 2025 and later screened at the New York Indian Film Festival. In this interview, Patra discusses the origins of the film and his interest in character-driven storytelling, along with the challenges of working within constraints and the experiences that shaped his directorial journey.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Mayilaa’ Filmmaker Semmalar Annam

Dipankar Sarkar: You studied writing for the screen and stage at Northwestern University. Today, with so many filmmaking resources available online, many aspiring filmmakers choose to learn on their own. Looking back, how valuable was the formal education in your journey, and what advantages does it offer that self-directed learning may not?

Priyankar Patra: A film school education is absolutely not important to be a filmmaker. It’s a privilege if you get one, but it’s not mandatory. But I feel there’s a huge advantage of film schools that don’t get talked about enough. A school is a safe space for you to make mistakes and experiment. A lot of students make film school shorts that make it to the biggest festivals. But I used film school to make mistakes and find my voice. I’d never show those short films to anyone. They’d never get selected at any festivals, either. They were my playground, for me to really learn. You’re not judged for writing a bad script — you don’t get fired. You’re given notes. You’re literally there to improve. You don’t have to prove yourself to anybody.

When I joined Northwestern, I had many grand ideas but my execution sense was zero. I used to write terrible scripts because I was constantly emulating people whose films I liked. Film school allowed me to break out from that. The more you write, the more you film. In a setting where it’s absolutely okay to fail, you get the courage to experiment. The more you experiment, the more you know what you like, what you vibe with. When you’re learning on the job — which I had to do for many other departments (producing, directing or cinematography) — [you can’t] afford to make mistakes. And when I did make mistakes, it used to cost the production money. I don’t know about other film schools, but Northwestern was a quarter system. So, I had to write three full-length scripts in nine months and take many more classes. That instilled in me a sense of discipline. I used to write everyday — good, bad was secondary. I’d write. And then come back to it later and polish it. You’re never too married to a perfect outcome when your goal is to just learn.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Shape of Momo’ Filmmaker Tribeny Rai

DS: Before making your directorial debut, you worked on a feature film, short films and commercials as a producer. What did those experiences teach you, and how did they prepare you for directing your first feature film?

PP: Producing taught me to be objective towards a creative product. It is a “product” — sometimes we forget that. It taught me to approach direction and writing from a producing perspective. My producer’s hat is never off, even when I am writing. As a filmmaker starting out, I can write anything on my script — that doesn’t cost money. But filming it does. So, I need to be smart about what I write and smarter about how I show it with the resources I have in hand. Producing taught me to be objective about my own films, which doesn’t happen much when you’re the writer-director and you treat the ideas as your baby. Commercial production is a very different thing from independent film producing. It’s a different skill set. It doesn’t completely translate to indie film production apart from just the project-management aspect of things.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Gondhal’ Filmmaker Santosh Davakhar

DS: What first inspired you to examine the impact of influencer culture on a young couple’s relationship in Early Days?

PP: Many different things happened at the same time — all unrelated but it added up. When I first moved to Mumbai from Kolkata, I found myself in circles which had a lot of content creators and influencers. I went to a friend’s house, whose living room was like an out of store look book, but the rest of the house screamed something else completely. When I jokingly asked them why they put so much effort into the living room and not the rest of the house, I was told that the living room was sponsored by a brand. It opened up a brand new world to me. Is that possible? Around the same time, my cousin moved to Mumbai in the hopes of wanting to be a content creator. I didn’t understand what that meant. I was initially judgmental and harsh but soon figured that it’s a valid career choice. Just because films and YouTube videos use the same tools doesn’t mean it needs to be the same end-product. I realized content creation was becoming an increasingly popular professional choice which needed to be taken seriously. And then, finally, I overheard a conversation once between a couple where the girl requested the guy to break up after a month because she couldn’t afford to lose followers on her birthday month. Initially, I laughed at it and even ridiculed it. But then I really thought about it. When you turn your personal relationship into a brand and that becomes a source of income, what happens when you break up? You lose your source of income? A break up becomes equivalent to you getting fired. That’s a lot of pressure on your personal and professional life together. And I honestly started to feel for them. You can ridicule it all you want, but it’s hard to be in that position. Especially when you’re young and that’s a huge part of your identity. And you need to have empathy to feel for that.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Don’t Tell Mother’ Filmmaker Anoop Lokkur

DS: The narrative never treats influencing as something frivolous or worthy of ridicule. Was it important for you to approach that world without preconceived judgments?

PP: Influencing isn’t frivolous. It’s working in the society we live in, right? So, it needs to be taken seriously. We can get into academic circles and talk about the positive and negative impacts it may have on society and individuals. That’s a study which you can frankly do with any profession. So, I think I primarily came from that perspective which is why the thought of influencing being worthy of ridicule never occurred to me. Secondly, when I started writing the script, I was more in love with my characters. I wanted to tell a love story and really get in the depth of the characters. Once you do that and really understand your characters, you stop judging them. You may or may not agree with them but never judge them.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘I, Poppy’ Filmmaker Vivek Chaudhary

DS: Much of Early Days unfolds within a small apartment and is driven more by character than plot. Did those constraints become creative strengths, and how did they influence your storytelling choices?

PP: When I started making the film, especially the first four days, it was a complete no-budget film. There was no cost involved except hiring a handycam for 500 rupees — just four friends shooting. I knew I couldn’t tell the same story with a wider canvas. So, I went back to the old saying, “look around, see what you have and then make a film with that.” I did that. I shot it in my house with four friends. So, the style developed as a result of the constraint.

I couldn’t have made it very plotty. I didn’t have access to anything outside of the comfort of my own apartment. What I had access to was two phenomenal actors early in their careers willing to get on this mad ride with me. They were equally a part of the writing process, so I used them as much as I could, instead of relying on other set-pieces that could have told the same story. I think that ultimately benefited the film by making it more character-driven. That’s precisely why viewers empathize with the influencers now. Had the film been more plot-driven, the takeaway might have been very different. As a writer now, I have become more drawn towards character writing than I was before. Constraints help.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Vimukt’ Filmmaker Jitank Singh Gurjar

DS: The opening mind meld game quietly establishes the different temperaments of the two characters. Did you consciously think of such moments as seeds for the larger conflicts that follow?

PP: I just wanted to show that when the relationship starts, you love the differences you hold. You find those differences cute. As the relationship grows, you want to be alike. In the beginning of the film, you see how they almost fuel each other’s differences. It’s only when these differences evolve from theoretical to practical, and interfere in your day-to-day life, do you start getting irritated with the other person. So, yeah, these were designed from the beginning. The film is primarily a relationship story.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Whispers of the Mountains’ Filmmaker Jigar Nagda

DS: Samrat’s concerns often prove justified, yet Early Days never presents him as morally superior. Was maintaining that complexity an important consideration while writing the character?

PP: I don’t plan much before writing. It comes as a result of what feels natural for the character. Sarthak [Sharma], who plays Samrat, also added multiple layers to my writing. Some of it was coming from personal anxieties, as we all have. And the character is naturally complex. We all have ambitions we have to balance with our lived reality. That’s also how most of my friends are. We have big ambitions, we want to do many things. But sometimes, we can’t because we need to do a certain job so that we can pay rent and send money home. You’re balancing reality with aspiration. We all do that in some ways. Being young in today’s India is complex.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Bhediya Dhasaan’ Director Bharat Singh Parihar

DS: Preeti, portrayed by Manasi Kaushik, is ambitious, determined and often difficult, but the film remains deeply empathetic toward her. How did you ensure she would not be reduced to a cautionary figure?

PP: In a lot of ways, I think, I am very similar to Preeti. Maybe that’s why the empathy. There are things that I am more Samrat- like, [such as with] the constant fear of rent money every month. But in my ambition and my insecurities, I am like Preeti. So, when I was writing her character, I completely understood everything she was being uncompromising about. Some of it isn’t justified, but I understand where she was coming from. Manasi, the actor who plays Preeti, is also very similar to me. So, when she added her own quirks to the character, it became a very lived-in personality. Preeti isn’t a cautionary figure at all. It’s perfectly okay to have big ambitions and fail. You pick yourself up and move on to the next goal.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Secret of a Mountain Serpent’ Filmmaker Nidhi Saxena

DS: The chemistry between Manasi Kaushik and Sarthak Sharma feels remarkably authentic. How did you work with the actors to build that sense of intimacy and familiarity?

PP. They’re also a real-life couple. So, I had to do very little in that department. In fact, a lot of the inputs came from them. I just had to create moments where they could be themselves as a couple. That was my only contribution.

But I’d like to add that Anupam Sinha Roy, who’s the editor and producer, had a big role in also crafting the evolving intimacy of the characters. In the beginning of the film, when the two are together, just being themselves or creating, there [are] hardly any cuts within the scenes. As the story progresses, there are more cuts. Some are even jarring and some which don’t make sense in isolation. [The] edit creates a rhythm. And that rhythm helped in creating familiarity and then breaking it.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Ghich Pich’ Filmmaker Ankur Singla

DS: Early Days relies heavily on close-ups and handheld camerawork. As the cinematographer, what drew you to that visual approach, and how did it help you convey the emotional world of the characters?

PP: I love close-ups. Faces are so expressive. I love faces, in general. My actors were expressive. Since we were all friends, they felt comfortable with me being so close to them with a camera. It didn’t feel intrusive… rather an invitation. And lately I am seeing films with less and less hand-held close-ups. The desire came from representing that also. I feel like hand-held close-ups are similar to how we visualize things in a crowded metropolitan [city] like Mumbai. There is a lack of space, people are up-close and everyone is always running and shouting and talking. That’s my chaotic reality of living in Mumbai. So, I wanted to represent that.

I am also a big fan of the Safdie Brothers, and much of the film’s craft was influenced by the American independent cinema scene, particularly the early works of Joe Swanberg, Noah Baumbach, the Duplass Brothers and Stephen Cone, who was one of my professors. There’s a certain personality in their close-up cinematography. It doesn’t feel restrictive… rather freeing. So, I chose to study that and embrace that as my visual approach when I realized I was making the film in similar logistical constraints as some of these filmmakers.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘White Snow’ Filmmaker Praveen Morchhale

DS: Towards the climax, the final confrontation takes place in an open public space. Given that much of the film unfolds within confined domestic interiors, what drew you to stage this pivotal moment in such a contrasting setting?

PP: That was always part of the film’s design. What drew me to the story was the idea that what the couple wants to project to the world is constructed within the privacy of their apartment, while what they don’t want others to see unfolds in public. It’s a journey from creating content to becoming content.

The climax became even more heightened because we ended up shooting it on a highway, which wasn’t the original plan. The movement of traffic and surrounding chaos amplified what the characters were experiencing. Since we didn’t have permission to shoot, we filmed the confrontation from across the road. Visually, it created an interesting contrast: throughout the film, you’re close to the characters, hearing and seeing everything. But here, you’re distant, with noise and movement obscuring details. You can see them but [can’t] fully access them — which creates a voyeuristic tension.

In many ways, those constraints shaped the film’s visual language. Not being able to rent a tripod during the first few days also pushed me towards the handheld approach — something I’d like to carry forward in future projects, even when I’m not the cinematographer.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Moonwalk’ Filmmaker A.K. Vinod

DS: Early Days began its festival journey at the Red Sea International Film Festival last year and has since screened at the New York Indian Film Festival. How has the journey been so far? What lies ahead for the film?

PP: The audience reception has been great! The Red Sea audience was a mix of a very young audience local to Jeddah and international film critics. So, the conversation there was very different. The audience, irrespective of their nationality, could relate to influencing a growing culture. People saw themselves in Preeti and walked up to Manasi, who attended the premiere. It was so nice to see.

At NYIFF, the audience was primarily Indians, specifically Indians living in New York. So, the reaction was very different again. Everyone could relate to the dialogues more, and there were a lot more laughs and claps in the first 10 minutes, which was very new to me. We have been getting good reviews which is humbling. We’re a very small team without institutional backing, so every screening feels like a milestone. I am not allowed to say where our next screening is, but it’s a continental premiere in August.

By the end of the year, I want to screen [Early Days] in India and eventually release it. It’s a Mumbai-based film. It’s a Mumbai story. So, I want to bring it to the people of India, but especially the youth of Mumbai. I also want to watch it with my crew, who have all tirelessly worked on the film. They contributed far more than I have. Given a chance and opportunity, I’d actually like to screen it for influencers. It’s a film about them. So, I hope they watch it and engage in a conversation. Their verdict would actually matter to me the most.

Dipankar Sarkar (@Dipankar_Tezpur) is a Rotten Tomatoes-approved film critic based in India. As a freelancer, he regularly contributes to various Indian publications on cinema-related topics.

Early Days Interview: Related — An Interview with ‘Pinch’ Filmmaker and Actress Uttera Singh