Images from RGV’s Rakta Charitra & Rattha Charitram (updated)














thanks to RC…









































































read RGV’s latest post on the film here
















LINK

Ram Gopal Varma’s prestigious project in three langagues Raktha Charitra with Vivek and Suriya in the lead will start rolling soon. The shooting for the Telugu version will start first.

Initially Aaadi (Pradeep) was supposed to do the role that Vivek Oberoi is doing in the Hindi version in Tamil and Telugu version, but now RGV clarifies: “I had signed Aadi for another film which will start very soon, and now Vivek will be doing the role of Parithala Ravi in all the three version with Suriya”

RGV also says that Vivek Oberoi, who has his roots in Hyderabad, is quite well versed in Telugu and the actor is taking diction lessons now.


Advertisements

179 Responses to “Images from RGV’s Rakta Charitra & Rattha Charitram (updated)”

  1. masterpraz Says:

    These pictures do look damn cool! I think Vivek is going to surprise a LOT of people with this, and Varma is no doubt re-launching him here. Very intense!

    With KURBAAN, PRINCE, RAKTA CHARITRA and 7/G RAINBOW COLONY I think Vivek’s line-up is looking better!

    Like

  2. Vivek is reminding me a lot of his father Suresh(another much underrated actor) in the above stills.

    Like

  3. Agree..The pictures look damn cool..

    Like

  4. I think this is the first time that a popular bollywood actor is acting as a leading man in Southern films. Pretty darn cool!

    Like

  5. The pictures look fine but Vivek’s probably a better model than he is an actor…I don’t mean to be rough on the kid but let’s just say he’s going to have a hell of a time going up against Surya.

    Like

  6. Some very striking stills here. RGV though hasn’t answered the ‘central’ question here. Given that the lead character here is not known outside Andhra at all why does he choose to make a film in Hindi? wouldn’t this be ideal as a Telugu film? His own response is that this is a national subject. But that’s too abstract an answer not least because it begs this question — does one ‘not’ make a ‘national’ film because one chooses a ‘regional’ language? By this token Ray and Adoor have never made national films (I guess Ray did once!). It is precisely by staying rooted to the local that one could in fact make the most ‘national’ film. Wouldn’t it be odd if Rathnam made Kannathil… in Hindi? Now if the idea is that that this is a subject that deserves to be seen by a national audience other questions arise. Why not choose a similar subject for the ‘North’ to make the same sort of film? A subject that would then have greater resonance for Hindi audiences. I raise these questions precisely because this seems like a promising subject. Vivek Oberoi is certainly getting his best role since Company. But unfortunately this does not make the greatest box office sense. Because the subject is one multiplex audiences are terribly averse to. They don’t know who it’s about to begin with. Given these negatives Vivek won’t pull them in. I know it’s hard to find too many stars who can look authentic in these rooted landscapes but Vivek Oberoi though better than many others is still not enough of a presence to pull this off without seeming like a poseur. If the subject has such important in RGV’s mind wouldn’t it have been smarted to be a little more pragmatic about it? And again I like many of the shots, the subject’s up my alley but RGV’s best bet would have been to make this film in Telugu which is the most logical option for such a film. I know he’s doing a bilingual here but Vivek’s apparently doing both versions which is a problem.

    By the way even in these shots it’s obvious that Abhimanyu Singh (some of the stills remind one of Gulal) is going to swallow Vivek oberoi in the film.

    Like

  7. For strange reason, even telugu industry is not looking forward for this movie.

    Like

    • well he should have attempted it as solely a Telugu project with an entirely Telugu cast. It would have made a difference.

      Like

      • Hey Guys, It doesn’t mean weather the story belongs to which region and language, we need Movie to be get good collection and Varma ia apparently settled in Bollywood, Varma did better movies compare to any south director in bollywood like Mani ratnam.

        Hey Watch ROBOT in Hindi sitting beside a North, west, East Indian, People will laugh on ROBOT,

        Rajni copied all amitab movies,

        Like

    • You are wrong. Everyone here in Andhra Pradesh is eager to see this movie if possible on the first day itself. Otherwise many cuts are expected to be imposed.

      Like

  8. If RGV and Oberoi didnt come with all that baggage, I would have been looking forward to this film.

    Like

  9. Some of these stills are incredible. Looks like a regular hackfest for RGV!

    Like

  10. “it’s obvious that Abhimanyu Singh (some of the stills remind one of Gulal) is going to swallow Vivek oberoi in the film”

    And Surya will feast on them both!

    Like

  11. masterpraz Says:

    some stills are wicked!

    Like

  12. Satyam – let’s leave Telugu cinema alone for a moment. The visual codes here are largely borrowed from modern Tamil cinema! From the costumes and weapons on the goondas, the depth of field originating from the tip or edge of a koduvaal, the lingering on images of spectacular violence. So essentially you have a Telugu narrative and political context, photographed with a “Tamil lens” for the visual, and you populate it with “Hindi faces” and one very prominent Tamil name in Surya. I don’t mean any of this as a critique, indeed it all just builds my interest in this series. I expect this to be Varma’s most ambitious upcoming venture – almost as if he’s making a kind of pan-Indian film that draws from several wells of influence, but simultaneously remains true to his own vision.

    Like

    • So, essentially, one answer to the question is perhaps that while this may not be a “national subject” in the truest way, Varma is, for better and worse, now a “national filmmaker” in more ways than one.

      Like

    • agreed.. I think theskeptic would have argued that RGV is the source of that tradition as well but I have never been convinced about this specially since Tamil cinema always had a fount called Rathnam to look upto. I think that RGV’s Shiva which is of course his seminal work really comes 2 years after Nayakan and it seems impossible to deny that this film would have been important for RGV much as Rathnam is ‘central’ for Southern cinema in general. The new Tamil cinema as I’ve argued before re-inflects the context of Bharthiraja and slashes it with Rathnam’s stress on a pop auteurist visual grammar. In other words these films are not shot like Rathnam’s necessarily but they highlight a concern that originates in the South only with him. Again with respect to RGV I just do not think he ever became the sort of central iconic figure like Rathnam to matter as much. Even within Telugu cinema and admittedly based on my cursory knowledge of the industry I am unsure if Shiva is really more important a film in cultural terms than Geetanjali, even accepting its seminal status. Even if this is so I find it hard to accept that this is a Sholay or a Nayakan for its industry. so even if RGV were as talented as Rathnam (which I don’t believe he is) he might not be the sort of figure to move entire industries in a different direction. But getting back to what you stated that is absolutely on the money. These shots are striking and I am very interested in this film. But one could come up with a number of ‘new’ Tamil films that have equally impressive work (again I don’t mean to speak for the film’s totality). Again I used to argue with theskeptic about this but I think it’s one of two things — either RGV is completely overrated or his work has never quite matched his ambition even in a minimal sense. Even his better films have more of the unfulfilled than the reverse. And I’m afraid I cannot regard a film only as a cinematographic work. But Shiva remains for me his best film inasmuch as there is a certain ‘rawness’ here that remains ‘fresh’. With Company he made I think the sort of satisfying masala movie with a certain aesthetic effect that Bhardwaj has perhaps always faltered at. With the Sarkar movies he explored a certain radical aesthetic, these are possibly his most interesting films from a formalist perspective. But all of these roads in RGV have not really led to greater works. I don’t mean to be harsh on him. But he could have achieved much more than he did or looks likely to. Oddly he has been influential enough as a figure (and I once did a piece on this) for the shaping of a new Bollywood. Much less for any single film and more for the sorts of interventions he was involved in.

      Like

      • No arguments here. Sometimes I think, these days, Ratnam splits the difference between Varma and Bhardwaj pretty neatly in that the former seems increasingly interested in technique above all else and the latter is all about the narrative and eliciting interesting, counter-intuitive, memorable performances.

        Like

  13. Ram Gopal Varma met Ranbir Kapoor, but not for ‘Sarkar 3’

    Ram Gopal Varma says he met Ranbir Kapoor but not to discuss “Sarkar 3” because he isn’t interested in making any more “Sarkar” movies.

    “I’ve meet Ranbir Kapoor. And we’ve discussed some possibilities on what we can do. But ‘Sarkar 3’ is not one of them. I don’t want to make any more ‘Sarkar’ films. Not now, not in the future,” Varma said.

    The director made the first “Sarkar” movie in 2005 with Abhishek and Amitabh and repeated the father-son duo in its sequel “Sarkar Raj”. Released in 2008, part two of the thriller also starred Aishwarya Rai. But the director says there will be no part three.

    “Can I please make one thing clear? There’s no ‘Sarkar 3’. The series ended with ‘Sarkar Raj’. There can be no film in the ‘Sarkar’ series without the Bachchans. It is unthinkable,” said the director.

    Varma reportedly wants to return to the intensely romantic language of “Rangeela” (1995) with Ranbir after he finishes with his film on media and society “Rann” and “Rakta Charitra”, a bio-pic on Paritala Ravi.

    Meanwhile the sequel to “Phoonk” is being directed for Varma by his assistant Milind Gadagkar.

    “I’ve been busy with ‘Rann’ and ‘Rakta Charitra’. So Milind did ‘Phoonk 2’. He was closely involved with the first part of ‘Phoonk’,” said Varma.

    Like

    • LOL, remember saying this the first time this silly rumor circulated in the media. Also recall suggesting that with Abhishek’s death RGV has sealed off the franchise forever even if technically the ending with Ash and the nephew around did allow for a scenario to develop. In pragmatic terms I don’t believe Abhishek will agree to any project in a hurry with RGV. SR should have hit one out of the park. It didn’t and I don’t believe these things go unnoticed even if Abhishek’s decisions in some of these matters certainly do!

      Like

  14. First things first

    Suriya Sivakumar is excited about Ram Gopal Varma’s Rakta Charitra but Tamil cinema remains a priority till he finds a firm footing in Bollywood

    By Subhash K Jha
    Posted On Thursday, March 04, 2010 at 02:31:40 AM

    Tamil superstar Suriya Sivakumar arrived quietly in Mumbai this week to shoot for his Hindi debut in Ram Gopal Varma’s Rakta Charitra. He is excited about this venture and is quite fond of the city life and its food.

    He’s staying at his wife Jyothika’s residence in Mumbai and trying hard to pick up the rudiments of the Hindi language from a coach he has brought along. Says Suriya, “Jo (Jyothika) has an apartment in Bandra. So I’ve been coming to Mumbai 4-5 times a month. I enjoy the city, its people and food and then I go back to Chennai. I don’t think this pattern will change.”

    Suriya admits his Hindi isn’t quite what Bollywood requires. “I’ve an assistant with me to help me with my Hindi dialogue. Ramu sir has assured me I don’t need to worry about my dialogue. I like to say my own lines on screen without prompting or someone else dubbing for me. I’ve to see how my Hindi goes. I did have a teacher in Chennai but that bookish Hindi won’t work in Hindi films.”

    Soft-spoken and very focused on his career Suriya doesn’t see Rakta Charitra as a new beginning. “I took up this offer because I respect Ramu sir and the way he attempts new kind of cinema each time regardless of failure or success. He’s got plenty of innovative ideas. I love Rangeela and Sarkar. We’ve been friends for 4-5 years. When he narrated this script to me I thought I must be part of this project. Also there will be a Tamil and Telugu version of the film. So I thought I’d get a chance to simultaneously be on home ground and try something new.”

    Bollywood is a different world for Suriya. “Bollywood has enough talented actors. I don’t think I’m needed here. Rakta Charitra required only 30-40 days of my time, so I could manage. I don’t think I’d be able to fit in a more time-taking Hindi project. I do have my commitments in Tamil cinema and I can’t give them up. Here the way of working is entirely different. I don’t know whether I can fit in. I don’t think I’d want to do the run-of-the-mill Bollywood films. I want to do work that would challenge me as an actor.”

    Ask him to rate himself as an actor, and Suriya, who played Aamir Khan’s role in the Tamil version of Ghajini, says, “I think my younger brother Karthik is a better actor than I am. I started taking myself seriously as an actor after doing Bala’s Nandha. I realised with a capable director I can get the performance right after 2-3 takes. I’ve seen my heroines getting it right in the first take. My wife is a one-take actor.”

    Like

    • I’ve only seen Surya’s brother in Pruthiveeran, but (admittedly not a fair comparison to measure up a debutant against a veteran) I would much rather watch Surya on screen than karthik…

      Like

    • The real news here is that it’s actually happening. This second part of RC is easily the most interesting-looking RGV film in long, long while.

      Like

      • Based on Aayrithil oruvan, Karthi’s performance seems to be more nuanced than even Surya’s. He has a good screen performance.

        Like

  15. One should feel a little sorry for Vivek Oberoi.. he’s going to be hopelessly outclassed by Surya!

    Like

    • i dont think so.surya in no way a better actor than vivek.u should watch compay,sathiya and shootout at lpkhandwala

      Like

      • I would pick Surya over Vivek Oberoi any day of the week — IMO, nothing in Saathiya, Company, and Shootout at Lokhandwala matches up with Kaakha Kaakha, Pithamagan, Nandha, and others. Vivek is a rather “obvious” performer; and one can see this in the Rakta Charitra images also, where he seems addicted to scowls, grimaces, and poses.

        Like

  16. Surya looks, as expected, arresting – more in line with Abhimanyu Singh here than Oberoi who even when shot as well as this still seems like he’s posturing a bit.

    Like

  17. Nevertheless, this is the first RGV film in a while that I am looking forward to…the subject interests me a lot more than (e.g.) Rann…

    Like

  18. Mr. Eyes – Surya

    I have always been asked this question regards to which actor surprised me the most that I have ever worked with and now I can say without a doubt that it is Surya. To elaborate on this answer I have to define first what the word ‘ACTOR’ means to me. Most people I know including both laymen and film industry people cannot differentiate between an Actor and a Character. A character is a sum result of various elements like the written role, the way the scene has been edited, the performances of the co-actors the progression of the screenplay with respect to that particular actor and of course what the actor himself brings to the table. But in this respect he is one of the many elements that contribute to the overall effect. The true test for a cinematic actor in front of a movie camera can only come in between action and cut. That’s because he has to draw an emotion on cue without the progression of the emotional content of the whole scene and the screenplay backing him up to as how it would be seen by the audience in the final cut.

    Amitabh Bachchan has a holding power through his eyes which look outwardly as calm as a sea. But if you look closely enough they have the depth of an ocean. In contrast the feelings in Surya’s eyes are like a seething volcano erupting through a rough sea. In some close-ups in “Rakta Charitra” I felt that the intensity in his eyes would burn the camera. I find it difficult to understand what emotional depths and sensitivity Surya as a person could have experienced in life for him to be possessing so much within his eyes for him to be able to convey such tremendous intensity through his eyes. His eyes don’t just speak… they literally scream.

    http://rgvzoomin.com/mr-eyes/

    Like

    • Typically over-the-top stuff from RGV, but some interesting notes here, especially that exchange with PC Sriram. And Surya looks more interesting (which is not to say “better”) here than he has in his recent Tamil films.

      Like

    • I’ll add that this is easily one of the most anticipated Hindi films in the near future for me. To have a film year where both Vikram and Surya step into Hindi terrain…can’t wait.

      Like

  19. This should be a good film but may not be multiplex friendly.
    Even I will be waiting for the DVD which in case of RGV’s movies is not a long wait anyways ! LOL

    Like

  20. Munna:

    No Full Stops

    As Ram Gopal Varma gets candid, harshikaa udasi takes notes on his Phoonk 2, detractors, cyber spat with K-Jo and upcoming film with Suriya

    Somewhere in the middle of this interview, Ram Gopal Varma declares, “I am the happiest man I know.” Even as I find it difficult to conceal my amazement, he continues, “Just do what you want to; forget the consequences.” It’s the filmmaker’s response to a question on whether he has lost the special RGV touch.

    For a man whose repertoire includes critically and commercially acclaimed films such as Satya, Sarkaar and Rangeela, and box office duds RGV Ki Aag and Nishabd, Ram Gopal Varma is someone who is very much at ease with himself. He has seen the not-so-kind side of Bollywood and, in recent times, an RGV film has been getting brickbats than ever before. But Ramu is not defensive. Quite the contrary, in fact. “I deal with it as it comes. People who talk about others don’t really understand the amount of work that goes into making a film. I feel when Sanjay Leela Bhansali makes a Saawariya, people criticise him for a month and then forget about it for the next three years till he makes another film. But in my case, the talking never stops, because my films come one after another.”

    This week sees the release of Phoonk 2, a horror film that is a sequel to the average hit last year by the same name. Though the previous one bore the directorial stamp of RGV, this one has been directed by the scriptwriter of the first, Milind Gadagkar. And the trademark RGV publicity gimmick which started with Phoonk will continue for the sequel. The producer has offered a Rs. 5-lakh award to anyone who can watch the film with an ECG machine strapped and yet clock a normal heart rate!

    Ask him why he chose not to direct the sequel, and he snaps back, “I didn’t ‘not choose’ to direct this film. I have a thousand ideas to work on and limited time. Milind has been with me for a long time and I wanted him to direct this one.” Mellowing down, he adds, “I was busy directing Rakta Charitra which is a complex film. Besides, it is his idea completely.”

    Starring Vivek Oberoi and Suriya in the lead roles as the slain political leader Paritala Ravindra and Maddelacheruvu Suri, the man accused of killing him, Rakta Charitra is being made as a two-part series in Hindi, Tamil and Telugu simultaneously. Ramu is eyeing an August 2010 release. The film is expected to be a turning point in the career of both actors. “I am not making the film to help the actors. I choose actors who fit my characters suitably. I was always fascinated by Suriya’s eyes. He has the intensity to carry this role,” he says.

    Ramu’s next project, which is still in the conception stage, has already been making waves. Titled God and Sex, the film is loosely based on the Swami Nityananda case. “I’d say the script is definitely inspired by this sex scandal but not altogether based on him. We will explore the murky world of god men through the film.”

    The man says he has 136 projects at hand right now which will eventually be made into films. And we trust each of them will get enough and more publicity, irrespective of the fate they meet at the turnstiles. “I think that’s got to do with the themes I chose; nothing to do with me,” he claims, adding even if each one of these was criticised, it wouldn’t dampen his spirits. “I love everyone,” he asserts.

    Talk about the RGV-Karan Johar cyber fights, and he quickly retorts, “I am very fond of him and his films. In fact, I have seen My Name is Khan seven times!” Tell him that’s a bad attempt at a joke and he insists he really has. “Honestly, it’s the media that gets me wrong. When I wrote I was scared of Karan’s films, I only meant I was scared of their commercial success. There are just three directors I really like in this world — James Cameron, Steven Spielberg and Karan Johar,” he says, while you end the interview in complete bewilderment.

    Like

  21. Surya has never looked better! These are fantastic stills!

    Like

    • Among younger Hindi stars today no one but Abhishek (as we’ve seen with Raavan) is capable of this kind of intense gesturality. Not one could come up with this sort of still. Again note how much of a ‘poseur’ Oberoi looks compared with Surya. Hindi cinema just produces plastic stars. Think of Vikram in the Raavanan stills, we see Surya here. This kind of ‘gaze’ Hindi stars could never represent. This ‘season’ has been pretty good in terms of stills! Again hate to bring Rajneeti up but it’s just blown out of the water with these images.

      Like

      • sometimes I feel Abhishek is unlucky not to be working in the Tamil industry. The Hindi industry which housed his father so well in an earlier age is today mostly capable of producing simply disposable cinema. To pick up the threads of that cinema one really has to head South. Isn’t it ironic that the strongest Abhishek parts and the ones most connected to the ‘Bachchanesque’ come to us by way of a Southern director (Rathnam)? Isn’t it also ironic that the ‘succession’ tale of Sarkar which is so ‘foundational’ for Abhishek in another sense comes us through another Southerner (RGV)? And what does Bollywood give him? BnB! And this is about the best! Rohan Sippy is an exception though. Hopefully Neeraj Pandey can come up with something worthwhile as well. But I am waiting for the Parabhudeva film to give Abhishek his first big encounter with true masala. Another Southerner!

        Like

        • sarvanash Says:

          b&b come from a guy who assisted and trained under a southerner.

          these stills look great. surya seems like he’s a good actor and will b awesome.

          rgv should have taken him in s.r. for a abhishekh vs. a new challenger on the scene.

          Like

          • you’re right on Shaad Ali. I actually think he’s a very talented director and I of course like BnB a lot.. I meant that he was lacking more in the sense of presenting Abhishek in a role that played more obviously to his strengths.

            Like

          • Surya’s one of the excellent star-actors of his generation. I think Maddy is more talented but sadly has damaged his career quite a bit for some reasons. But in that generation it would be Surya and Maddy for me in the South and Abhishek up north. Don’t really think anyone else is both star and ‘actor’ the way these guys are.

            Like

  22. Rajeev Says:

    “”Abhishek up north””

    Its joke of the day for sure…

    Actingwise abhishek has improved a lot over the years but not sure he is the best actor around…The less we talk about abhisheks’ star capability the better….

    Like

    • I’m quite happy to have Rathnam agree with me rather than Rajeev!

      Like

      • Rajeev Says:

        Ratnam’s word is not gospel truth…Its the public who decides…I would rather be with the public than some ratnam fellow…Who the hell cares about a ratnam….

        Like

      • Rajeev Says:

        I doubt Ratnam thinks so about Abhishek…and if he believes so then he must be hallucinating wothout fail…Clear cut case to go for a pyschiatrist…

        Like

      • Rajeev Says:

        To be very honest whoever thinks Abhisek bacchan is a big star after one solo hit and after two dozen flops in 10 years needs the attention of a pyschiatrist..

        Like

        • “..needs the attention of a pyschiatrist..”

          You’re talking a lot about psychiatrists today.. should we read something into this?!

          I would like to argue with you about Abhishek’s hits or flops but I also realize that your opinions on him are like Kasab’s on non-violence! I might be wasting my time!

          Like

          • Yeah satyam,

            You always have a problem when you have an opposing view…Probably its better servead to say only “‘yes boss”” to you like of some of us here are doing …Probably that satisfies your ego…

            But mate…when i agree with you i say so(Mostly on sachin,amitabh and other political debates) and when i do not agree with you i say so. too..

            Like

      • me my self Says:

        I’m quite happy to have Rathnam agree with me rather than Rajeev
        —–

        lol well said satyam

        Like

    • quinqart Says:

      but satyam what about aamir?
      i think you were the one who considered him the greatest.

      Like

      • Aamir does not belong to the generation of Maddy, Abhishek. Surya which is what I was referring to.

        As a pure actor I don’t believe I ever defined Aamir as “the greatest”. It is what he represents in totality or the sum of his accomplishments that seems so extraordinary to me. And while I always liked him as an actor he’s had some real standout moments this past decade. But more than all of this he has been ‘definitional’ in this period more than any of his peers. This is different from calling him the “greatest” as an actor.

        Like

  23. abhishek is better actor than marlon brando

    Like

    • well..u said it not us!! ha ha..

      Like

      • i m seriosu abhishek is ever better actor than his father

        watch his acting in SR where he dominates his father in acting

        he is toure de force actor and not his father, jack nicholson, al pacino, marlon brando can toudh him in acting

        Like

        • Rajeev Says:

          agree with aadmi…you forgot one think Abhishek is also bigger star than SRL,aamir and HR put together….Any doubts?? ask Mani ratnam…

          Like

          • defiantly agree

            abhsihek’s drona afterall made more money than krrish:)

            Like

          • Try being serious in life sometime. It’s not injurious to health..

            Like

          • quinqart Says:

            hahaha….satyam first you saying that abhishek is the best star actor we have in bollywood.and then you telling someone to be serious.i think abhishek is a very good actor.no doubt but this guy really doesnt have any star quality.
            and this will be again proven by raavans opening and final collections.
            and when you talk about mani ratnam then people like VB have also said that SRK is the most natural actor we have.

            Like

          • Quinqart, let me put it another way. If I were a star I’d rather have his lineup than SRK’s or Hrithik’s or Akshay’s! But that’s just me. Perhaps that’s no index of stardom. Perhaps top projects just keep falling into his lap for some mysterious reason.

            On VB the day he starts signing up SRK as opposed to just indulging in such statements (par for the course for most industry figures) perhaps the analogy with Rathnam/Abhishek will be more apt.

            Then again what do I know? I am foolish enough to believe acting with Mehra or Rathnam or Neeraj Pandey or some of those others names (past and present) means something. It should really only be about fine cinema like Kites and Housefull that can become successful. That’s the only standard I suppose. Thankfully there were other fools in the history of Bombay cinema who thought otherwise and still do. One goes by the name of Guru Dutt if memory serves.

            This remarkable anxiety Abhishek always provokes.. this absolute insistence that he not be termed a star.. meanwhile Shahid or Ranbir can be called superstars.. not a problem.. but Abhishek shouldn’t be called one.. if he works with great directors let’s call them worthless before we start giving anything to Abhishek.. his very significance is underlined by this profound anxiety he generates in various quarters..

            Like

  24. myselfaamir Says:

    i agree with Rajeev that in terms of stardom, Abhishek has still to prove a lot and actingwise as well he is very inconsistent. As an actor he is is more diverse than most of his contemporaries, but his boxoffice pull is still dubious and this aspect can’t be overlooked, until he gives some big openers and big grossers. His is a very complex case as he shows a lot of potential, but have’t lived up to that.

    Like

  25. Rajeev Says:

    also i believe except in the movies like yuva and Guru he has come as a cropper as far acting is concerned….Yes he has potentiall but when you watch a movie like D2 he looks like a sidekick and ameature as far as acting is concrned…

    cant imagine somebody told he is “”star actor”” of the North…I mean i am still laughing my heart out since yesterday whenever i read that post…Wonder how people’s inteligence goes to drain when they become biased..

    Like

    • It’s hilarious, and says a lot about you as a film-goer, that you would base your opinion of the actor on a film like D2…Abhishek has been fine in several films but he could continue doing this for another decade and people like you would still bark up the same tree.

      Like

      • GF,

        “””Abhishek has been fine in several films but he could continue doing this for another decade and people like you would still bark up the same tree.””

        You are assumptions are as ridiculous as your opinions about abhishek being the greatest star actor of North…

        Like

        • not sure if GF made this claim.. I certainly did so let me repeat it.. Maddy and Surya are the best star-actors of their generation in the South (at least among those I’ve seen) and Abhishek is the best star-actor in Bombay.

          By the way as this discussion goes on Abhishek will sign a few more interesting directors. Santoshi’s the latest. What’s happening to these directors?! Rajeev you must save them from Abhishek!

          Like

          • Interestring directors??? LOL…good phrase nonthless…The so called interesting directors and the best star actor from Bombay doesnt generate excitement in public…Probably the public is fool or wait are they wise???

            Like

          • The director could be Guru Dutt but if the public doesn’t have the required taste what can the poor director do?

            I expect a Guru-like success or more here. You will still have BOI to count on!

            Like

          • Not more interesting than Anubhav Sinha.. I grant you that!

            And that’s it from me at this point..

            Like

          • “”I expect a Guru-like success or more here. You will still have BOI to count on!””

            And i expect you to count on IBOS and make a 60 cr grosser look like 90 cr grosser and beat your own chest about abhi’s stardom and “”i said so”” phrases……

            Like

        • me my self Says:

          You are assumptions are as ridiculous as your opinions about abhishek being the greatest star actor of North
          —–
          look at this guy,,rajeev just one word abhi is better actor then srk,and hrithik.in my opinion,,,so tell me if my opinion is also redicullous..lol

          Like

    • Not that there’s any point in making this distinction with you but for others reading I’ll offer a clarification. When I used Surya, Maddy, Abhishek as examples of the best star-actors in their generation. I wasn’t gauging magnitude of stardom (here in any case) as much as I was simply being descriptive. These are good actors but also stars as opposed to Irffan Khan who is a good actor but not a ‘star’ in any traditionally recognizable sense (though he has developed a brandname even if Bollywood is usually too bankrupt to profit much from him). An even better example is someone like Atul Kulkarni.

      And a related point I made just the other day:

      https://satyamshot.wordpress.com/2010/05/04/an-image-from-kites/#comment-49664

      Like

    • oldgold Says:

      While we see eye to eye where SRK is concerned, I don’t agree about Abhishek’s acting being limited to Guru and Yuva.

      He was great in Dostana, B&B, Umraojaan etc.
      In D2 it is unfair to compare him to HR. The latter had a flashy sexy role, compared to a cop.
      I agree that he wasn’t among those who acted very well from their first film itself.
      He wasn’t so good then, but over years he has learned to act well, and I think he can be compared to the best we have – after all the one considered ‘best’ is very mediocre IMO. 😉

      I see Abhishek as a steady runner.
      And he is also the best looking actor (in my eyes).

      Like

  26. myselfaamir Says:

    @ GF so have been many others actors, so this penchant with Abhishek is beyond me! I think he has been given enough time and no. of movies to prove his caliber, but at best he has been just decent. He needs Maniratnam to realise his potential, which is ludicrous as it is HE only who knows what he is capable of, which implies that after so long he needs a certain director to rescue him!!!

    Like

    • “so have been many others actors”

      If you honestly, truly believe “many” actors in this industry, in this generation, (Abhishek’s) with the kind of movies being made by and large these days, are somehow far better than Abhishek, what can I say? We’ll have to agree to disagree! I personally can’t think of “many” (in fact only very few) within this generation that I would even term as good star-actors.

      As for him at best being “just decent” that’s also a matter of subjective opinion. I happen to disagree. And I’m glad you brought up Ratnam. If India’s greatest director within the mainstream decides Abhishek is a good enough actor to be in his films, I’m willing to bet there’s some logic there.

      Your last sentence makes no sense to me.

      Like

      • “””Abhishek is a good enough actor to be in his films, I’m willing to bet there’s some logic there.””

        i trust you guys to twist the originbal debate…Abhishek is a decent actor is not the argument actually…nor the fact that he is a decent star…But claim of greatest Star actor of this generation is absolutely beyond me…

        I believe Ranbir Kapoor is a bigger star and a better actor than abhishek alreday with just three movies…His performnmace is APKGK and sawariya are suprelative…

        Like

        • me my self Says:

          I believe Ranbir Kapoor is a bigger star and a better actor than abhishek alreday with just three movies…His performnmace is APKGK and sawariya are suprelative
          ——-

          ranbir bigger star and better actor hahahaha funny very funny
          i am sure you r srk or hrithik fan

          Like

          • Ranbir who is only Five film old alreday have a solo hit which has grossed atleast 25 pct higher than that of a solo abhishek grosser…Ranbir has one hit,two semi hits and one a honorable flop(Rocket singh)

            IN all the above movies Ranbir has performed very well…way better than what Abhi performed in his first 20 movies…

            So you do not need to become a Ranbir fan to ascertain that Ranbir is better than abhishek both BO wise and acting wise…

            Like

          • “”ranbir bigger star and better actor hahahaha funny very funny
            i am sure you r srk or hrithik fan””

            and from your comments it is evident that you are oldy who is more than 45 years old and a self proclaimed intellengencia grom Uganda…

            Like

      • “”If India’s greatest director within the mainstream decides Abhishek is a good enough actor to be in his films, I’m willing to bet there’s some logic there””

        This is one of the weirdest logic i have come across…Just because Mani ratnam decides to cast abhi doesnt make him a great actor automatically…On that count even Vivek Oberoi would have been a great actor(yuva) and so as Ajay devgan(Yuva),govinda (Ravaan) , SRK(Dilse) and Arvind swamy (bombay and Roja)

        Like

        • Rajeev, I already accepted this.. just because Rathnam has done a hatrick with Abhishek in three potent parts doesn’t mean anything.. what Rajeev says goes..

          Like

        • You either can’t read or don’t want to. Either way, I’ll just say two things. Nowhere on this thread did I suggest that I think Abhishek is the greatest star-actor of his generation. Nor did I say that he is a “great actor automatically”. You on the other hand, have here suggested that Ranbir Kapoor in APKGK (!) and Saawariya are what you consider to be “superlative” performances. I like Ranbir quite a lot but I’m not going off the deep end quite yet! I think that statement draws the contours of your taste pretty clearly. I’ll reserve total judgment, but suffice it to say that we’re very different movie goers.

          But you’re great for a bullfight (in every sense!). All I need to do is wave a flag in one direction and you’re all over it. Tiresomely predictable responses, as always.

          Like

          • “”But you’re great for a bullfight (in every sense!). All I need to do is wave a flag in one direction and you’re all over it. Tiresomely predictable responses, as always.””

            and hat do you think your responses are very diverse??

            You just need a clue to sing songs for Abhishek …Its a different thing even abhi is not interested in all these syncophony…

            Like

          • Of course what you ignore is your total manipulation or manufacturing of things I never said…so forget for a moment about the “diversity” of my responses, or the songs I sing. Because of other discussions in the past where my prevailing opinion on him have been those of admiration, even if I said Abhishek sucks ass today, your irrational mind will somehow make it sound like I want him to win an Oscar.

            Oh, and I think the word you’re attempting to spell is sycophancy. Say whatever you want, man. But I’d suggest learning to read first.

            Like

        • u seem to me a SRK fan.u hav got a misconception that teenagers or youths only like that crap actor SRK.who hasnt done a single good movi except swadesh.i would liKE to tell u that i m 18 years old and i hav to think a million times when i go to watch an SRK movi,i fear that it would b same kachara story of one guy and girl and girls family.they will fall in love in the end girl eill b married tio srk.DDLJ K3G KKHH MOHABBTEIN DTPH OSO KHNH RNBDJ VJ all r boring and nonsnse movies.it sunds like biggest joke ofthe world when u tel that RANBIR is better actor than ABHI.I WATCHED WAKE UP SID that was an averge movi bot AJAB PREM was a crap.ranbir kpoor is UNDISPUTED CHAMPUION OF OVERACTING IN WORLD.i also thik that anjaana is going to b worst movi of the year,although in india majority likes to watch kachara and boring karan johar tyope miovieas it would b a hit.there r ten better actors that SRK in bollywood only if u cont tamil and telgu there will b 20.ABHI is far bettrr than srk. i think u r a fan of that crap movimakrS karn johjar and adityta chopara.after BIG B in india i think best actors r AJAY,SURYA,NASSIRUDDFIN SAH,ABHAY DEOL,KAMAL,though i m a viovek afn but i dont think vivek.desrves to b here but in a few years he will b.even at now he is better than srk.

          Like

    • But those like myself who think highly of Abhishek do not think he performs only with Rathnam. So this is a bit of a straw man. The proposition that you’re advancing hasn’t been agreed to by many of us! I could name a number of films where I think he’s good or better. Is his best work with Rathnam? Sure! The way De Niro’s best work is with Scorsese! But let’s turn this around on its head as well. It’s not every actor who suddenly becomes fine with a great director! Or else Rajiv Kapoor would have been a fine actor in Ram Teri Ganga Maili! Rathnam designs extraordinary parts for him. Is Bachchan as good in Khuddaar as in Deewar, as good in Kaalia as in Trishul, as good in Barsaat ki ek raat as in Kaala Pathar?! Of course not! Even for a titanic figure like Bachchan this holds.

      The issue is a bit different. The question is (assuming someone sincerely doesn’t like his acting as opposed to just being a partisan): does Abhishek stylistically ‘disappoint’ people in a commercial industry where audiences expect a certain ‘kind’ of performance? Another question: do his film choices disappoint not because they don’t work at times but because they feature him in roles and backed up by performances that do not allow the audiences to partake of the ‘star signature’ (D6 for example)? Note: Rathnam always respects the star signature. It is ironic to see even the biggest partisans admit he acts well with Rathnam because Rathnam’s roles are those that MOST assume his star signature! Those are in other words the most charismatic parts he gets one way or the other! And one final question: despite what I consider his imposing screen presence (which too is most ‘exploited’ in Rathnam’s films) is it that his kind of physicality inasmuch as it resists the ‘plastic present’ creates a disturbance in the system? There is minimally a love-hate deal here. I think female audiences are on the whole a lot less conflicted about him but the point is that even as he is seen as cool in a metro-sexual way or reflective of ‘Bombay-cool’ and alternatively the inheritor of a Bachchan ‘physical set’ (for want of a better term) and liked or admired for these reasons he ‘troubles’ in equal measure because he is also seen as ultimately (and I think rightly) as not really being with the new India ‘multiplex’ (suggesting certain lifestyle choices) program. He is the only such star other than Akshay at the moment and as I’ve said in the past before the multiplex audience ‘condescends’ to Akshay. they enjoy the comedy with the proviso that ‘only Akshay is fit to do this’! In other words the audience engages in pleasure without guilt. Somewhat earlier Govinda/Dhawan occupied a similar space. But such ‘hypocrisy’ is not possible with Abhishek who is simply the most blue-blooded guy around! So it then has to become more about ‘physicality’.

      Like

      • by the way all of this as always is not an argument for why ‘no one should dislike Abhishek’. This is a matter of opinion. But one can’t keep employing Zizek’s borrowed kettle example where a number of explanations are mutually exclusive in logical terms. What am I trying to say here? One can not connect to him as an actor but one ought not to be able to deny that he seems to land work at a regular rate that would be the envy of every other star. One should wonder why this happens and confront this question honestly. This doesn’t mean changing one’s opinion. Similarly one should have a more adequate understanding of his box office based on some of these factors as well. To wit he’s no one but somehow his films always have the highest profiles, are always counted among the ‘biggest’ releases and when they fail these are a big deal for partisans as well. But why all this if he’s no one?!

        I’ll sign off here with an extraordinary statement — name the top 5 stars of Bombay right now. I think I know what everyone’s list looks like. With the exception of Hrithik Roshan almost to a man every one of those other stars considers Abhishek to be a better actor than themselves.

        Like

      • I think Abhishek Bachchan is a very fine actor period: among the non-Rathnam films, Bunty aur Babli, Bluffmaster!, Run, Unmraojaan, Phir Milenge, Jhoom Barabar Jhoom, and (to an extent) Delhi-6 and Sarkar 1 & 2 illustrate his nuance and range; especial strengths are intense dramatic roles and wry comedy. Everyone has some weakness, and his is IMO that he can at times be uneven — e.g. Delhi-6 was fine, but there was some tonal inconsistency; some of that might be that the film was planned and shot as if it’s the dead guy looking back, and Mehra changed that at the last moment. But that’s a different weakness than lack of competence.

        Like

        • Qalender,

          I believe the argument is not about Abhishek is a good actor or not..Its about if he is the best “‘star actor in North”””….

          I believe Abhishek is a decent actor and a decent star at this momnet of time…I was only reacting to the claim of “”Best star actor in North”””

          He was a absolutel crap to start up with but in many way i believe “‘run”” is the turning point in his career..After that movie his acting capabiloities have definitely improved…But to say he is the best star actor of North is a bit far fatched…

          Like

      • I liked him, found him REAL in D-2 compared to others. Abhishek doesn’t have plasticity to attract the young multiplex audience.

        His choice of roles might be the reason for not getting box office openings very high.
        i feel he needs to be present himself well . In D-6 being NRI, his dressing, appearance can be more polished..

        Recently there was an article of top 10 good looking actors in Bollywood. He has not figured in the list whereas very short heroes with different age groups appeared. Media shows indifference to him, he has to live with that.

        Like

  27. myselfaamir Says:

    Qalandar, my argument is more about his inconsistency and unevenness, which he keeps on coming with very often, in spite of so many years and after the number of movies he has done, is something i can’t overlook. For if that is done in his case, why not this very criterion extend to some others as well on the same premises.

    Like

    • WTH, which BW actor is not inconsistent and uneven in their performances? Even Aamir had OTT scenes in TZP, Ghajini and 3I so that argument is bogus.

      Hrithik until recently has been terrible in most of his movies regardless of all the awards.

      Why are you focusing on Abhishek? There are senior actors who are doing worse performance wise – Salman, Saif, Akshay, John, etc and younger ones too – Shahid, Imran, etc.

      Sometimes I wonder if BW fans even know good acting when they see it? Or have they been conditioned to associate box office results with acting?

      Like

    • myselfaamir: I would extend it to others too. But not everyone has the same issue: example another actor might be very consistent, but an inept performer (e.g. Fardeen Khan has no consistency issue — he consistently fails to make any impact); yet another actor might be consistent, but might have a very limited range (e.g. Ajay Devgan, who in the right role is effective — but the ambit of such “right” roles is a small one). Quite frankly, if I had to choose, I would prefer occasional inconsistency over the latter — not to mention that rough edges showing is often the mark of a difficult role, or something “more” being attempted; if you do “Thoda Pyar Thoda Magic” or “Dostana” there isn’t much excuse for inconsistency, and neither Saif nor Abhishek show any in those films. [That’s true of other departments too: e.g. very few of Mani Rathnam’s films are unqualified successes IMO, very many suffer from narrative problems — but when the ambition is such as to give us “Iruvar”, of course I’ll prefer it over a modest film like Hum Tum that should be harder to mess-up; Iruvar can also be critiqued on narrative grounds, but its failures are more sublime than Hum Tum’s successes… Using a recent Hindi film example I would cite Delhi-6: a flawed film, but also more ambitious, interesting than a Paathshaala any day of the week in my book…]

      Like

  28. I love Viveik’s role in this one… very intense. I hope he lives up to my expectation in the film

    Like

  29. alex adams Says:

    Vivek oberoi seems to be clawing his way back .
    he does seem to be making a spirited effort in general.
    I like these “comeback” efforts -if it proves to be one indeed.
    not sure what ws the final outcome of prince.
    heard that music wa doing well and the film was having reasonable/ mixed reports.
    but if he could manage not to be in the negative with that solo release, thats a start.
    like the guy from gulal-maybe abhimanyu something in the middle pic. have not seen gulal, but the brief appeared interesting-will catch it one day.
    only recall him in a brief but noteworthy (for me) roel on aks as the rookie cop—like something about him.

    Like

  30. Rajeev: here’s the problem with all of your responses on Abhishek currently…

    1)I’ve noticed this in the past also but Abhishek usually becomes a ‘trauma’ for many like yourself. The one ‘star’ whose ‘stardom’ must always be denied. Usually when there’s a ‘triggering event’ the criticism gets more ferocious and proportionately more ridiculous as well. Let us call that event ‘Raavan’ here much as some years ago it was ‘Guru’ but it has also had other names (namely every high profile project Abhishek does!).

    2)The most honest response for people like yourself would be: ‘I hate Abhishek’! And end it there!
    But of course this doesn’t happen. Because a lot of times or even most of the time the secret of the trauma is unknown to the subject himself (or herself). You might not know why Abhishek creates an anxiety in you.

    3)In a past lifetime people used to say that their reactions (which they even implicitly accepted as ridiculous a lot of the times if you unraveled their ‘code’.. in one instance one guy actually told me a couple of years into the argument that he always agreed with everything I said but that his ‘ego’ prevented him.. in the interests of not hitting a guy when he’s down I responded politely though what I really wanted to say was ‘yeah and that was pretty obvious’! Of course there was still a code there.. the word ‘ego’.. it wasn’t about ego at all. It was about the trauma Abhishek was causing) were based on the fact that I talked about Abhishek too much or praised him ‘unfairly’. Presumably if I started praising Fardeen a lot he too would be attacked mercilessly! But of course the ‘obscene’ truth here is that neither could anyone praise Fardeen this way nor could he be attacked in the same ways.

    In any case here were see that I actually haven’t said very much. Your extreme reactions came about when the Raavan stills and trailers started appearing. The better these looked, the more they made an impression the more extraordinary strange your criticism got.

    4)It also followed a whole series of ‘explanations’ that were (as is always the case.. and I’ve been in enough of these debates to know!) that are really mutually exclusive in terms of their logic. So for example:

    a)the previews don’t look that great
    b)even if they look great this means nothing for the box office
    c)there is no buzz for the film (eventually this leads to hair-splitting over the meaning of buzz)
    d)maybe there is buzz but it doesn’t mean the film will be a hit
    e)even if Raavan looks great I shall maintain silence of Abhishek
    f)hey he doesn’t have a solo hit in ‘x’ many years (the ‘solo’ is one of those codes when all else fails.. if one were to apply this code elsewhere one could suggest that 95% of SRK’s hits were multistarrers!)
    g)even if he gets a solo hit so what?
    h)he 45 hits in a row to be considered a top star
    i)working with Rathnam doesn’t make anyone an elite star
    j)working with Rathnam three times in a row in potent lead roles does not make anyone an actor either
    k)working with a number of elite directors also means as little
    l)so what if he works with top directors? Where are his hits?
    m)even if he is a star and an actor Ranbir is far ahead (here enters the dubious math if not earlier)
    n)Raavan looks good but Abhishek overacts
    o)actually he doesn’t look good either
    p)I am a Vikram fan as of today. Raavanan will be my first Southern film, this too I will not see actually as I will know looking at him in the Hindi version how infinitely superior he is to Abhishek
    q)off topic, even a snail has more charisma than Abhishek
    r)maybe Abhishek is a star and an actorm, maybe he has top projects but I just watch SRK, Aamir, Hrithik in the theater. With them I’m like a Pavlovian rat, with the others it’s WOM, of course with Abhishek it’s never good WOM as all of my reasons above illustrate
    s)but where’s the buzz, it’s been so many days? No one I know has even heard of the film.
    t)All the TV channels showing it, all the print and online media talking about it means what exactly?
    u)This is an undependable media when it’s not about SRK
    v)The box office is undependable too when not reported on by a known anti-Bachchan outfit like BOI
    w)just because everyone’s talking about it doesn’t mean it’s a hit
    x)he’s not a star if he cannot jump off that cliff
    y)alright he jumped off that cliff but why didn’t they retain his shot?
    z)the soundtrack sucks, what’s happened to Rahman?
    z+1)he’ll never be Amitabh, so there!
    ..
    ..
    ..
    on and on to infinity…

    So here’s the issue Rajeev, you hate Abhishek, you don’t want his films to do well, you can’t stand the fact that he is where he is and always threatens to race ahead of the race.. you heave a sigh of relief everytime he fails or underperforms.. you are eagerly following him on Twitter to see when Hrithik or someone else outraces him.. you are eagerly following his TV show when the ratings dip and not when they’re record-breaking.. all of this is OK! Just say all of this and start with this position. there’s no issue here! It’s the pretense that you’re Mr Neutral on Abhishek that’s problematic.

    Notice I don’t pretend neutrality. I say very clearly what my estimation of Abhishek is. And the same goes for anyone else whether I like or dislike them. It is not a sin to hate a star irrespective of the reason of the original trauma. There is no moral obligation to like anyone at all! But when you come up with the kinds of explanations you have it really makes the anxieties transparent.

    Let’s start with a simple proposition — Abhishek’s nobody. So ignore him then!

    Of course I’ve advanced this proposition before with little luck. I was hated for being only too right not the opposite!

    [apologies for not being comprehensive. There were many other ‘reasons’ that I wasn’t able to get to]

    Like

    • me my self Says:

      satyam abhi does’t need some one like rajeev

      and i am so happy to be a new member here

      Like

    • STANDING APPLAUSE SATYAM FOR AN OUTSTANDING RESPONSE!!!!
      moral of d story is– when it comes to abhishek..i think rajeev cares a bit too much!! u r absolutely right..when you say dat if these ppl really think dat he is a nobody..den they should really IGNORE!! its just dat when u can’t ignore..means dat d guy is actually important to you(in whichever way)!! i dont think anybody would really care if you would have been talkin abt…say an emrran hasshmi or even sharman joshi(who r also decent actors imo) becoz somehow..they wont really matter!! its always abhi dat brings out d anxiety..i wonder why?! whether he has given hits or flops..it doesn’t matter..d truth is dat he is a decent star(if not a very big one) nd a very good actor..nd an important one at dat!!
      p.s. nd plss. dont say rajeev dat he is important only bcoz of his “bachchan” surname..bcoz dats utter bull crap!! i think no one gives two hoots abt a surname if ur a talentless guy..!! nd certainly not d likes of rathnam or gowarikar!!

      Like

    • i dont understand what makes you write such an long essay ??

      Yes i dont like abhishek as an actor(i like him as a person though)..yes i believe he is no more than a decent star and decent actor….

      But i have my opinions and i dont want you to agree to me …The fact that you are writing such a long boring essay prove that you and your freinds are rattled beyond limits…

      And yes i dont agree to a lot of accusations you have made…Period…

      Like

      • quinqart Says:

        rajeev its ok.the fact is and will remain that abhishek is not that big a personality that his success or failures bother his non fans(doesnt mean haters).he definitely is a star and may be the best actor ever born but again it really doesnt matter.
        abhishek has a great line up and mani rathnam thinks he is the best actor we have in india..ok…so what???????

        Like

    • “””In any case here were see that I actually haven’t said very much. Your extreme reactions came about when the Raavan stills and trailers started appearing. The better these looked, the more they made an impression the more extraordinary strange your criticism got.””

      Dont think so..You are twisting facts…My reaction was only to your tall claim of “‘star actor””..I havent yet uttered a single word against Raavan or its trailor..Infact whatever little i have said about the trailors are “”not negative “” in nature…

      Like

    • but why do you talk about Akshay and his films.You should ignore him.

      Like

  31. me my self Says:

    and from your comments it is evident that you are oldy who is more than 45 years old and a self proclaimed intellengencia grom Uganda
    ———–

    lol is doctor in the house hahaha you really need a doctor
    and yeeh if i am 45 how old r u rajeev 14-15 blah blah blah

    Like

  32. I guess after 3 months concerned parties will have their answers…!!!
    Raavan definitely a huge movie in every sense for abhishek.

    If he performs upto the expectations, tat will prove he is the best actor in the last 10years bwood created.

    As for a star i belive long way to go. He should give some big commercial hits.And involving ranbir in this thread is little immature honestly….its too early !!!!

    Like

  33. Suriya with NDTV

    Like

  34. Surya looks absolutely bananas in these new stills. Looking forward to this.

    Like

  35. The shot at the top is outstanding with those two ‘diagonals’.. my next favorite is the one that’s sixth from the top..

    Like

  36. Some outstanding stills here…As most of here said the stills of surya is the scene stealer…Vivek all set for a grand come back..

    Like

  37. OmSuryamaNamaha Says:

    Seeing the skills reaffirm to me that this will be a new character. This kind of intensity markedly differs from Nanda, Aaru, etc (weakest being the clean shaven parts of “Ghajini”). Something tells me this will be his best.

    Like

  38. RGV: “ENJOYED SHOOTING A MAN’S BODY, CREDIT TO SURIYA”!
    Suriya
    May 19, 2010

    Director Ram Gopal Varma is a happy man today, thanks to Suriya. When the director approached him to begin the shooting of Raktha Charithra, the actor asked for a month’s time to tone up his body. RGV was sceptical about it because Suriya already had a fabulous body but decided to honour his wishes. A month later, when the actor presented himself before the director, he was surprised at the changes.

    RGV said, “I was zapped to see the improvement. For all my reputations of shooting a Woman’s body this is the first time I enjoyed shooting a man’s body and the credit goes to his determination and spirit and his constant strives to better himself…” .

    Like

  39. Sorry, I haven’t really read this thread, but I have a question. I was under the impression that this film is about a real life person (Paritala Ravi) and his real life incidents as he joined the Naxals and what ensues. So how come the Telugu poster which I’ve just noticed says, “A fictional story inspired by real people and real events?” Is this a legal cover, or are all claims of it being the life of Paritala Ravi untrue?

    Like

    • I thought so too but based on your Telugu translation (which I trust!) looks like he’s decided to provide himself some fictional cover! Just as well though. I think it’s more interesting this way..

      Like

    • btw, good to see you here again SM…I am not in favor of e-banvaas…

      Like

    • Srinivas Says:

      I think RGV is just trying to cover all his bases. I think he shot the film honestly according to the evidence he gathered from newsreports & interviews.
      But once the film releases, *there will be* quite a bit of unrest in the volatile Rayalaseema region as to who the movie portrays sympathetically – Paritala Ravi or Suri. Already there are huge debates going about it in the local media.
      To avoid the situation from getting out of hand, i think RGV is proactively & wisely packaging it as story which is inspired from real events.

      Like

  40. RGV makes the best Film Poster in Bollywood. Enough Said. His movies are another matter altogether though. Last movie I liked of his was Sarkar Raj. This one looks like a Satya-hangover feel. Not really interested unless it’s that terrific.

    Like

    • why_so_serious Says:

      Satya was just a warm-up. Shiva and Kshana kshanam along with Company, etc being the peaks in otherwise forgettable body of work. RGV’s best is yet to come. But this particular Ravi vs Suri rivalry is so dense and event-filled, with rich characters & the motif of revenge/violence overworked, for him to exploit cinematically.

      Like

  41. there are two parts? releasing at same time?

    Like

    • two parts in Telugu, I think they’re releasing sequentially.. in Tamil there is just one part with Surya dominating.. There’s supposed to be a two part Hindi version also. I wonder if RGV has changed his mind on this because there has been zero Hindi advertising so far.

      Like

  42. The Vivek Oberoi smoking poster is similar to a Company poster with Devgan though this more rustic – very cool!

    Like

  43. Both posters up top are pretty terrific.

    Like

  44. Really great stills.. some especially so..

    Like

  45. alex adams Says:

    as i expected, oberoi seems to have taken the lifelines (albeit limited) given to him, with both hands and with folded hands.
    gfor me, impritantly he does show a “spark ” and “spirit”.
    surprisingly, even the most uneducated dumbo viewer somehow intuitively picks up this “spirit”.perfect eg was “bachchan in zanjeer after his mutliple failures.
    not seen prince and wont ever—but the promos which were panned universally were undoubtedly cheesy but he did seem to be putting up an earnest performance . must add- quoting prince here is not the appropriate example and certainly not to be read in context to zanjeer!
    although the scale, ambition and motivations are different, this reminds me of another effort –abhishek in raavan failed to take the “bull by the horns”.
    somehow, i do feel an actors personal struggles( or lack of it) does have an impact on performances esp intense ones.

    Like

  46. new Rakta Charitra working stills with surya, vivek, sudeep, shatrughan sinha, sonakshi sinha… http://rgvzoomin.com/my-reactions-to-reactions-62/

    Like

  47. Abhimanyu Singh is not surprisingly looking like the ‘presence’ here other than Surya. Vivek’s look is fine but I think he’s going to be overshadowed by both these guys. Love Surya’s gaze at the top. This is the sort of ‘look’ Hindi actors today barring Abhishek are simply not capable of. This is also a Bachchan legacy that has not found the right adherents. Not least because it involves the right ‘look’ of course but also a level of performance. What we have instead is the Devgan model (though I find him quite enjoyable in his overman outings..) where the ‘deadpan’ is combined with dialogue and a certain swagger to produce the ’empty’ gestural. And audiences seem to be satisfied. Again an index of the age. Bachchan in Deewar or Zanjeer or anywhere else in the ‘angry young man’ angst-ridden mood is never about just ‘formalism’. Today however it is not surprising that audiences otherwise addicted to a cinema which even across genres mostly evades any serious ‘stakes’ (emotional or political.. and so forth) find this kind of Bachchan translation most acceptable. At any rate dramatic roles that have lots of one-liners are often esteemed more than the rest. So for example Guru over BM (not saying one shouldn’t prefer Guru, just that most audiences might prefer it for this reason). But beyond the emptiness it is also the ‘obviousness’ of the acting mode that today’s audiences seem most eager to embrace (not only in dramatic modes). You can sense the line or the gesture coming a mile away! Surya therefore in this kind of still symbolizes for me the ‘meaning’ of a certain Bachchan heritage (of course he can do ‘masala-manic’ quite well also!). Vikram is again the obvious star who works principally in that silent mode though the above still requires a level of ‘performance’ that is probably beyond him.

    I shall leave everyone with this Raavan still:

    Like

    • “At any rate dramatic roles that have lots of one-liners are often esteemed more than the rest.”

      But that’s also because acting in films is eventually a derivative of acting in theater, where essentially the gestures don’t cut it. You have to mouth your lines and inhabit a certain space to create an overall effect. The space part isn’t in the hands of an actor in cinema, but the dialog part still remains. The gestures become significant when viewed alone, but that’s mostly a director’s prerogative, lending it meaning or otherwise.

      Here’s why a single gesture doesn’t make sense without a whole: If we freeze-frame runners starting off a 100m dash, there may be runners who’d start better than Usain Bolt, but what finally decides the outcome is the run across the finishing line. In other words, isolating gestures is an intellectual exercise (which depends on a number of factors, not limited to sharp editing and camera angles); analyzing performance as a whole is a more intuitive and thoughtful process…

      Like

      • Adding to the point, as we look at data for drawing conclusions, the more the data available, the more it points towards a certain conclusion. Not absolute certainity, however.

        It should be the case with actors and acting as well. The more we get to see an actor, not only in terms of screen time, but parameters like dialog delivery, voice modulation (which is part of the former), body language, general suitability to play a part (mostly physical constraints), even make up and lighting, the more easier it is to come to a particular conclusion.It’s more likely that performances aided by great directors will tend to leave a long-lasting impression. To think of acting (or any aspect of filmmaking) without other dimensions being accounted for, doesn’t really tell the whole story.

        Like

        • Well said Saket. Also, the more one sees of a new sort of presence, the more one becomes accustomed to the signature. When I first saw Devgan (in Phool aur Kaante) I couldn’t believe that an actor as bad/wooden as this was on screen. Heck, everything about him seemed a bit off. Within a few years, however, that aspect simply didn’t register anymore.

          Like

          • LOL. Not sure if that’s a positive or negative appraisal but that’s more or less true for a lot of actors these days.

            Like

          • 🙂

            Well, no secret I’ve never thought very highly of Devgan-the-actor. But, over time, he has become adept at the art of not doing much very effectively. I don’t mean that in an insulting way — at his best, in Zakhm, Company, etc., he can be very effective — and I appreciate the fact that he lends dignity to most roles he does, but there it is. There are others too: saif’s voice seemed comically weak to me when I first encountered his work. It remains weak, but I think I’m so used to it now it just seems a part of his “saif-ness”…

            Admittedly, there are some actors I have never gotten accustomed to: Suniel Shetty, for instance.

            Like

          • “But, over time, he has become adept at the art of not doing much very effectively. ”

            This description and formulation of what Devgan is about cannot be surpassed!

            Like

          • “the more one sees of a new sort of presence, the more one becomes accustomed to the signature. ”

            Absolutely! In Devgan’s case, with the passage of time, people have become immune to his physical attributes. At least that’s not the reason why I don’t think he’s a great actor, or even a very good one.

            Like

          • John Abraham and Arjun Rampal are two actors who I thought were very offensive to watch when I first saw them. Now these guys aren’t exactly giving Pacino competition these days but I’ve really grown “comfortable” with their presences. Rampal for the first time gave a performance in Raajneeti (the best in that blah film) and Abraham is perfectly passable in certain formats.

            Of course this is a different point from the one you’re making, and has more to do with an actor finding his groove, a certain niche where he can function without failing or failing too blatantly.

            Like

          • True — on Rampal, though, I would say Om Shanti Om kinda opened my eyes to the fact that he could be an effective villain; Rajneeti also develops him along the baddie lines, and it is good to see…

            Like

          • liked Rampal for the first time in OSO, didn’t mind him in Rock On either and yes he was quite a show stealer in Rajneeti.

            Like

  48. Abhimanyu Singh has enormous presence in these stills. Just fire in those eyes.

    Like

    • I was highly impressed by his performance in Gulal… that man has Presence and as saket said creates his own ‘Space’…. no one gives them full fledged role so we unfairly compare them with star-actors…

      Like

  49. Hey guyz does anybody know whos role is that guy cosying up on the bed with a lady playing. . . .

    Like

  50. RGV should promote his films solely on stills…

    Like

  51. all these political, dialogue driven dramas remind me of tarantino’s work..
    Unless RGV gets himself out of the notion that zoomed in shots of actors’ noses and the tiniest details of their ugly beard is an idea of great cinema, he will continue to disappoint his forgiving fans..

    Although i hope he proves me wrong with this flick

    Like

  52. What in the world is RGV doing with these latest posters?! It sounds like parody!

    Like

    • Corny as hell.

      Like

      • Although, in the quest for an easy rhyme, the inversion from “Robot the Rajni” to “Surya the Ghajini” (in the first case the ultimate referent is “Rajni”, in the second it is “Ghajini,” not “Surya”), inadvertently illustrates the gulf between Rajni and others!

        Like

      • Of course I say this even though I’m thoroughly pumped for this second chapter. It’s just nobody needs this kind of “wit” to prod them along.

        Like

    • masterpraz Says:

      LOL! cheesy for sure….doesn’t capture the sentiment of RC

      Will put my RC review up after another watch

      Like

      • Look forward to it.

        Like

        • masterpraz Says:

          I will add, that Varma for the most gets everything right here. Essentially he is forever remaking his own films (something which he’s very vocal about).

          All his horror films are essentially a “remake” of each other, and same with his gangster films. RAKTA CHARITRA so damn well because it manages to perfectly combine everything that “is RGV” into one. The grittiness and violence of SHIVA and SATYA, the compelling story-telling of COMPANY, the majestic and larger-than-life characters of SARKAR/SARKAR RAJ….

          Yes the film is violent, but the subject warrants it and within the confines of the genre this isn’t an issue.

          In essence, Varma has been replicating the same formula for ALL his films in this genre, however sometimes he just doens’t have the right story/cast (SHIVA Remake, AAG) while others, the content, context, style and characters all fall perfectly together (RAKTA CHARITRA)

          Like

  53. Dang, a longer wait for RC-2. RGV’s tweet:

    “Rakta charitra 2 is releasing on november 26th in telugu and tamil nd on december. 3rd in hindi”

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s