Drishyam: The Conclusion Writer on Why the Trilogy Ends Now

When Drishyam: The Conclusion reaches screens, it closes a chapter for more than the Salgaonkar family. Screenwriter Aamil Keeyan Khan says Vijay Salgaonkar, the character who spent three films hiding the truth to protect his family, did something unexpected for him: “He helped secure my future.”

Aamil co-wrote the finale with director Abhishek Pathak and Parveez Sheikh. After making his debut with Runway 34 and Drishyam 2 in 2022, he now gets to finish the franchise four years later.

The climax that refused to end

The team rewrote the ending so many times that Aamil says the climax itself started refusing to end. They worked out of Panorama’s conference room, where finishing a draft rarely meant the work was done.

When they finally handed over a version, Abhishek Pathak’s response was “It’s good… for now. We’ll see.” Those last three words, Aamil says, are enough to keep any screenwriter awake at night.

Most of the cast and crew were kept away from the ending. People became unusually nice to him in the hope of getting the climax out of him, but Abhishek made sure everyone knew only what their scenes required.

The dark Goa draft they left behind

During an early trip to Goa, the writers tried a much darker version of Vijay Salgaonkar. It explored how far the character could go morally and psychologically, included new characters, and nearly locked the film’s interval point. By dinner, they had backed away from it.

Aamil still has a soft corner for that draft, but even the writers were not sure they wanted to follow the beloved protagonist into that territory.

Why emotion is the real trick

The biggest challenge of a third film is that viewers already know Vijay’s methods. Aamil jokes that if the character sneezes now, fans wonder if it is Morse code. That means the writers cannot simply hand him a new plan and expect it to land.

Instead, they leaned on the difference between surprise and suspense. Surprise is the hidden twist; suspense is the audience knowing something is happening and waiting to see how it plays out. He also insists the emotional core has to work first.

As Aamil puts it:

“A twist makes the audience say, ‘I didn’t see that coming.’ Emotion makes them say, ‘I hope that doesn’t happen.’”

Without caring about the family, Drishyam becomes a story about a clever man obstructing a police investigation — not exactly something to cheer.

Why the trilogy stops here

Aamil’s argument for ending with Part 3 is simple: a story should end where it naturally ends, not where the franchise commercially runs out. He says the writers would rather leave audiences wanting more than stretch the conflict into another sequel.

Ask him what Vijay’s smartest move was across the trilogy, and his answer reframes the whole premise: “Convincing the audience that he’s a good man.” The real trick was never fooling the police; it was turning viewers into accomplices.

For fans who enjoy rewatches, he offers a practical approach to clues: a good clue has two meanings. One makes sense in the moment; the other becomes obvious only after the truth is known. The information has to be available on first viewing, but it should feel invisible until the second.

Three takeaways from the conversation:

• The ending was rewritten so many times it “refused to end.”
• An early Goa draft took Vijay into much darker territory before being scrapped.
• The writers read the Malayalam version only after their draft was ready and found no reason to borrow.

As Aamil sums up, “Filmo ka sach hona zaroori nahin, sach lagna zaroori hai” — films don’t have to be true; they have to feel true. That feeling is exactly what the trilogy is leaning on as it ends.

Source: Filmfare