Kahaani trailers (updated)
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
This entry was posted on March 1, 2012 at 3:35 AM and is filed under the ugly. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
SATYAMSHOT
January 5, 2012 at 10:15 AM
this looks pretty terrific
LikeLike
January 5, 2012 at 10:23 AM
Gripping, well shot trailer.. Balan looks to be on a roll!
LikeLike
January 5, 2012 at 1:28 PM
Balan is taking all the other bwood females to school.
LikeLike
January 5, 2012 at 1:38 PM
absolutely and one can only celebrate her more ‘intelligent’ career. I wish her as much success as she can possibly get even if I might not care for individual films at times.
LikeLike
January 5, 2012 at 2:58 PM
This looks equally funny from the first one…Pyar ka Panchnama.
LikeLike
January 6, 2012 at 9:34 AM
vidya balan is now miles ahead of any female star right now ..
can’t see anyone riding ishqiya and dirty picture alone on her shoulder infact she easily dwarfed much senior rani in nokj
really looks great
LikeLike
January 6, 2012 at 5:24 PM
wow. agreed with all the comments made above. one of my most awaited movies this year.
LikeLike
January 6, 2012 at 7:54 PM
Has anyone seen the photos of Vidya promoting this film? Lately there has been a rush to have the stars (especially the female stars) dress “in character” for their promotional activities. It was OK when it was limited to such things as Kareena wearing salwar kameez while promoting Bodyguard, but now I see pics of Vidya complete with pillow and maternity dress while promoting Kahani. This is way beyond “too much” and makes no sense whatsoever! Do they think audiences can’t figure out she’s not really pregnant in the film, or that they will withhold their applause because she’s only “acting”? And isn’t “acting” what is supposed to be celebrated here?
I wonder what kind of idiot came up with this promotional idea!
LikeLike
January 6, 2012 at 8:09 PM
agreed completely..
LikeLike
January 6, 2012 at 8:39 PM
The last scene was something. I wonder though…does the character HAS to be pregnant? Imagine M.R’s Roja with pregnant heroine. Anyways, VB is getting solo female leads with movie makers writing roles/movies for her. WTG VB! Shahrukh-Salman-Aamir Balan ki chutti! Yay
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 4:50 AM
I think apart from VB, this is a role Rani Mukherji would have absolutely owned and there would have been a time when only Ms M would have been approached for this movie. Sad that she has gone on a very different trajectory. Whatever the reasons, she has missed the bus…
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 9:28 AM
Good points there sm, Diana , Arti
I mean, what the heck…
Movin around with a pillow and stuff to look ‘insync’ with the character
No doubt, the audience has shown some imbecilic tendencies sometimes, but they CAN make out this much surely
And yes : credit to vidya balan for carving a ‘niche’ for herself and teaching the other clones
One needs atleast ONE actress of “substance” lol
Rani is basically a textbook cse of how to ruin ones career
Btw not sure what ranis upto
Has she got married or what ? And to whom? Amy updates …
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 5:21 PM
Alex: I believe that Rani is getting married to Aditya Chopra- she was photographed at the airport with him, Uday and Yash Chopra last week. Apparently Adi is hugely anti-social, and this is only the second time he has ever been photographed by the press- so I think its fair to assume that they are very serious.
BTW, I wouldn’t write her off so fast, she has Talaash with Aamir which looks like it is going to be massive- and according to some UTV executive/ vice-president on twitter, Talaash has really edgy, performance-oriented roles for both the heroines. And then she has a quriky/ erotic north-south rom-com with Prithviraj that Anurag Kashyap is producing.
Depending on how both movies pan out, this could be an interesting year for her.
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 5:33 PM
But yes- Vidya Balan must indeed by appreciated/ applauded. I think the amazing thing about Vidya is that she has carved out her own path in an industry where every single man wants to be the hero in a mindless 100 crore blockbuster that is either an SI remake or derivative of Hollywood action, and every single woman wants to be the sexy arm candy in these movies.
In most other movie industries different kinds of stars with different sensiblities can co-exist peacefully without being pitted against each other- but in Bollywood the benchmark for every single man is Salman/ SRK’s box office success and the benchmark for every single woman is to attain Katrina Kaif’s popularity. Ofcourse its even worse for the women because they are benchmarked not only in terms of career but also image and now its got to the point where they have all had so much work done that they all look like each other as well.
In that sense, Vidya is really making her own path- it is highly unlikely that she will ever be asked to do an item number, or that she will ever get to play love interest to any of the Khans in future. And for the first time in a long time- a woman is being considered successful despite that. Hopefully more actresses become inspired by her and Bollywood will be able to accept different models of success, for actors and for actresses. It’s too early to say, but Vidya manages her career very smartly and continues to have good luck, she could become the female Aamir Khan.
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 5:44 PM
I think its time that actresses, at the peak of their careers, choose to turn producers and commision interesting medium budget projects for themselves to star in. By doing big movies with big heroes where they just have to walk around in a bikini or whatever, they are doing themselves no favours at all. That stuff is perfectly OK to get them to the point where they have a fan following and can attempt to make female-centric films, but not beyond that. However succesful a Khan film is- all the credit will only go to the Khan.
Look at Priyanka Chopra- she is quite a talented actor and dancer, obviously works very hard, has great PR and literally tortures herself to look good- nose jobs, collagen lip injections, skin bleaching. And what does she get for all of this? A 2 scene, 2 song role in Agneepath where she is sidelined not only by the hero and the villian but also by the item girl! And despite being one of the top actresses the producers totally disrespect her by singing up another top actress at the last minute to do an item song and steal her thunder.
This kind of stardom is not stardom at all. They can make a bit of money for the 3-5 years when they are the ‘it’ girls- but hat is all. Even then, the money they make is not even 10% what the top actors make in the same period- and the top actors have a much longer shelf life to earn money in.
When the rewards for such a career are so meagre- its far better to try to carve out a niche like Balan and earn respect and power, instead of just being another fit body. After MBKD, I think it is very stupid of Kat to accept roles inn films with all the 3 Khans. She has solid BO clout now- and she should be milking it and making heroine-oriented films. IF she lets the moment pass and wastes her time doing item girl roles her popularity will eventually wane and she would have lost the chance to carve out a more substantial career for herself when she could have.
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 5:49 PM
BTW- I think the trick is for actresses to make entertaining, well-marketed movies like TDP and MBKD as well as offbeat fare like this. If they only make niche movies, they will never get stardom.
I think the idea that female-centric films cannot do well has so far been a self-fulfilling prophesy. The only female-centric movies being made over the past decade were the serious or off-beat stuff or with actresses past their peak popularity, so they never became big. But the minute entertaining (in the broad Bollywood sense) films with top actresses were made and marketed prominently- they’ve big hits- MBKD and TDP are both amongst the top 10 of the year.
LikeLike
January 7, 2012 at 7:45 PM
Thanx for those updates Amy
Brilliant
Btw where have u been lately
Been studying hard. Lol
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 9:51 AM
“I think its time that actresses, at the peak of their careers, choose to turn producers and commision interesting medium budget projects for themselves to star in…”
Interesting inputs Ami. Not sure if Meryl Streep is producer or not. I think producing movies may not be everyone’s cup of tea. A super-successful woman in bollywood instantly gets labeled as lesbian (Jeetandra’s daughter for instance.
I am a huge VB admirer. In the exploitative industry were contacts and whose-father-is-what incestual bollywood, someone outsider and that too female, to come in and not with other means (like Katrina Kaif-god father or using “other” talents) but based on sheer acting-talent, to make it, is commendable. This girl is Amitabh Bachchan of the Bollywood because like him she straddles art and commerce perfectly based on sheer talent. I see big things for her. If (I know Sattu will wince here) M.R had starred her in Ravaan, instead of ARB, Ravaan would have been super-duper hit. Problem with Ravaan was 2 non-performing leads. VB makes those who act with her look good (the way AB sr did and Aamir to some extend).
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:52 AM
Like she did for Eklavya, Halo Bol or KK?
We do get carried away at times when someone taste a bit of success.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 12:14 PM
When someone’s a success nothing they’re doing is ever wrong, everything is right about their choices, their appearance and so on. When they fail the very same things become the biggest issue. It’s the usual ‘presentism’ disease. And then of course there are all the circular arguments. ‘A film connected with the audience’. why? Because it was a hit! ‘An actor was great in a film’. Why? Because the audience liked him and it became a hit! And finally there are the most overused and abused words in the lexicon. ‘Intense’ for example. It’s never enough to just like an actor’s job. He or she must be ‘intense’. In fact there isn’t a notion of acting that doesn’t incorporate this word. Then there are other ‘keywords’ like ‘connect’ and ‘body language’ and so on. And again it’s always about reading being wedded to ‘today’. When most of the interesting ‘events’ that take place are really unpredictable. I gave some examples yesterday. But this doesn’t bother those addicted to the present. They take the unpredictable event once it happens as a simply ‘given’. In the same way there are other counterarguments that similarly never disturb one’s dogmatism. For example the fact that in every industry of the world there are tons of great or greatest films that were flops or underperformers on initial release and/or panned by the critics. A film that is ahead of its time will often find it hard to find an audience ‘in’ its time! There’s nothing hard to follow here. Sometimes there are mediating factors. A script that might exert a strong emotional pull over its audience which then makes the political subversion somewhat acceptable. But in general if you attempt radical things relative to your audience you often fail. The other day Abhishek said in an interview that audiences could only connect with beera in the climax sequence but by then it was too late. That’s true perhaps but in a sense irrelevant. Because that’s just a statement about the box office. So what if the audience couldn’t ‘connect’? The audience couldn’t do so with Citizen Kane and the Searchers and Vertigo and Kaagaz ke Phool and Mera Naam Joker and countless films. The lists that are routinely drawn up by Western critics on greatest 100 films ever or what have you often have initial box office failures in the majority. Not just in the US but also Europe and so on. It is always improbable to do both. Having a cutting edge work that truly subverts something but that can also work in box office terms. But this fairly simple proposition never bothers people. That we love so many flops from the past and have completely forgotten or find unwatchable so many hits from the same past. Perhaps an actor might make decisions that are suicidal in box office terms but that isn’t the same as saying the films are worthless. And incidentally the problem seems worse in India only because critics tend to follow the box office. Even when they’re not being blatantly dishonest they’re so governed by the box office that they find it hard to be too tough on films that they think will work (barring some exceptions) and vice versa. In Hollywood you can have an Apocalypse now appreciated by critics but not by the audience. In India it’s impossible. You’ll get half a dozen serious critics to do that but by and large the film will be mauled for having ‘flaws’, for not appealing to the ‘paying public’ (this whole faux populist angle) and so on. Similarly most critics dismiss certain kinds of cinema irrespective of how good or not the film might be relative to its genre. So you combine these factors and you get the absolute failure, something that is less common in the US (for example) for serious attempts. Even when such works receive tough reviews no one is under the impression that somehow the latest Will Smith or Adam sandler is ‘better’ because its ‘connecting’ with the audience!
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 7:54 PM
At Satyam: Not sure how AB jr has got to do with VB discussion. Nehow, I think desi critics do praise movies like Dev-D, oye’lucky, lucky oye etc. I don’t think any of these were big BO success and still got critical claim. In general though most desi movies or desi critics are prolly not up the western counterpart (at least in terms of honesty/integrity). Even if every single movie of VB bombed in BO, she would still rock and thats what I have been maintaining all along. Many of her movies have sucked royally but not her performance. The most criticism she got was on her sense of style/clothes or that she didn’t have asymetric body!! If AB jr does his part well and out-shines in every character he plays in movies, whether that movie is hit/flop won’t matter, job well done, end of story! Lets forget every (formula) factors out there but one: If he was excellant, NO authority in the universe can keep him dowm and keep on criticizing him; I don’t think there is massive agenda against him as some people on this site would claim. Rahi baat radical films or hate-kay films ki, directors-writers are writing roles keeping actors in mind even in hindi movies these days. Ishquiya/Kahaani are some examples. If AB jr was really good, they would write movie roles for him and he could continue to act in movies like D6/Ravaan which are really different.
As far as connecting with protagonist/hero/heroine is concerned, it is critical for audience to understand what/why character is doing or what impact his deeds is having. In that sense one “connects” with gabbar singh or heathcliff or hamlet. It is not necessariy for audience to fall in love or have sympathy for the herod or protagonist…the “connection” or understanding the motivation is enough. If Emily B. had shown healthcliff’s pain in the very last scene, then her novel would have bombed!
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 8:44 PM
@Satyam – you have many times brought in this argument of films considered to be classics or great failing at the box office on their initial release, to which I want to say: While it is certainly true that box office is not the sole determinant of quality, and many “great” films have failed at the box office, it does not therefore follow that every film that fails at the box office is a potential “great” film whose worth will be lauded by future generations. When we want to say that “history will judge” or “time will tell”, we have to wait for history or time to do its thing, and think that such things can be predicted in the present.
Getting back to Vidya Balan, I’m glad she’s been able to find success in her own way, which really means, that I’m glad that there’s enough variety in the kind of films being made in Bollywood today for her to find the kind that give her creative satisfaction.
I also agree with whichever poster (above or below) who said that the reason for the “female centric films don’t work with the audience” chant came about was that many female centric films were niche films to begin with. Can anyone argue that Mother India is not a “female centric” film? And yet it “worked” in quite a big way with the audience! I would even argue that Mughal-E-Azam is a female centric film. Take away the Anarkali character, and what do you have left? A story about power politics and court intrigues — and we all know how well “historical” films “connect with the audience”. Again, I think a well-made historical film will have no trouble connecting with the audience,, but first it has to present its history in an engaging manner, and not be pedantic, and second it has to work to overcome the audience’s preconceived ideas (based mostly on capsule lessons in textbooks) on what that history “is.”
The bottom line is, any film will work if it is made well enough. But that “well enough” means not only that its technical aspects such as writing and direction and production values have to be up to the mark, but also that the cast has to be a good match for the characters. This is a bigger challenge in the Indian industries than in other film industries, because the Indian industries, being so heavily driven by stars whose “branding” is all important to their markets, have less room, or require greater effort, for that star to go beyond the limits of that branding. So, in many cases, while producers and directors give in to the temptation of casting big stars to capitalize on their market potential, the film would have been better served with a cast of unknowns.
I think right now Vidya Balan is closer to the Aamir Khan school of thought rather than the Amitabh Bachchan one, in terms of choosing her films carefully; but I think she is setting her own path in terms of giving greater priority to creative satisfaction rather than box office potential (Aamir, I think, wants both, which is why he alternates with a Fanaa, Ghajini, and Dhoom 3 in between his other films.)
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 9:22 PM
gr8 comments SM.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 10:21 PM
“While it is certainly true that box office is not the sole determinant of quality, and many “great” films have failed at the box office, it does not therefore follow that every film that fails at the box office is a potential “great” film whose worth will be lauded by future generations. ”
Absolutely! But it’s a bit undecidable isn’t it?! In other words it would be impossible to say except in a purely predictive sense whether Citizen Kane would be very important or not over time! In other words if I said today that Raavan would be more important over time (not that I’m saying this necessarily) I would be exactly in the position of someone predicting the very same for Citizen Kane. And I’d say on a typical list of Hollywood’s greatest films made by critics there is probably an even split between box office successes and failures. The same is more or less true as one goes industry by industry. Now this is probably less so in India because there isn’t the sort of critical culture that re-evaluates too many films but if you’re a very important director your films are quite likely to be treated kindly over time. But strictly speaking it is ‘unknowable’ and one can engage in a prediction which is only an educated guess. As likely to be right as wrong. However it is only a certain kind of film that lends itself to such a prediction. Dil Se could one day be very important, doubt Baadshah will be!
On a related note indeed no film is just about the aesthetics and so on but this is still the most ‘verifiable’ part of the work. In other words I could say what was great about Raavan or Dil Se in this sense, I could talk about the politics of each film but it would be hard to talk about his..other aspects of the ‘narrative’. Why? Because the latter is precisely open to question. The audience couldn’t relate to it! It could be that in a different age audiences would be able to ‘connect’ to the work or critics would think highly of it whether or not the audience followed (and here it is very important to remember this — the films that are reinvented over time never have to play to a commercial audience.. they always play to minority ones.. their prestige keeps increasing, they enjoy successful reruns but ultimately this is not the same as playing to a mass audience on a national level.. on a re-release Citizen Kane does not release in 1000 or 2000 screens! But on initial release it did the equivalent of this! How many people watch Kaagaz Ke Phool today? in fact it’s even possible that the percentage of people who like such a film does not change drastically over time. It’s just that with the shift in critical attention it becomes harder to argue against the film).
The problem here is of a little disorientation. It is very hard for the original reject of older films since considered great to have any emotional reality for us. Because we have never known them as rejected films, only as hallmarks of the tradition. On the other hand when we examine something like Raavan it is precisely the opposite. Let me give you a personal example here. It is always a bit disorienting for me to think of Agneepath as one of Bachchan’s 5-6 most iconic films, at least for a multiplex audience. Because having lived through the original release I never quite foresaw this turn of events. And that’s the whole point. It is precisely the less likely film that can be reinvented over time, not the most likely one. Because the latter implies a certain acceptance in the present which in turn means that enough people see value in it. Over time though unpredictable things happen quite often.
Here I should also reintroduce an older point. It’s a complete fallacy in my view to think that every film that gets rejected is only on account of failing to ‘connect’ with its audience. Actually the opposite is quite often the case with certain kinds of films. The audience sometimes rejects films precisely because it ‘connects’ with them in the sense that what’s happening isn’t exactly a mystery to them. Dil Se or Raavan might be films that the audience couldn’t quite get a handle on but they’re also films that repelled the audience by advancing certain questions about political and cultural institutions. With films in obvious commercial genres one can more easily refer to failure in narrative or the like. It’s not as easily done with the more auteurist film. I found Dil Se to be a very gripping narrative. Most didn’t agree with me. It’s not that I think this way about every film I like. I would not say the same for D6 at all. I think I could fix 30-40 min of Raavan (as a narrative matter) and make it a hit but I doubt any such fix to D6 would make a difference. No audience had a problem understanding what the Searchers was about. They were just horrified by aspects of the storyline here, it was something they preferred repressing as a historical archive.
Lastly let me bring up Vertigo. This film did barely decently when it released which was a huge disappointment given Hitchcock’s extraordinary record of commercial success and this was one of his big films. Today it is often considered one of the five greatest films ever. Many critics call it arguably the greatest film ever. Zizek thinks it will be the central age of the world to come much as Citizen Kane was in many ways the central film for so long. How could this ever have been foreseen when these films initially released? That which is truly ahead of its time will always be less acceptable if at all in its own time. which is why as our ways of looking at the world change over time depending on ideas and fashions and history in the largest sense certain films speak more to future audiences where they couldn’t have done so with their original ones.
The problem as with so much else in life is about separating the historical record as the lived reality of an age with the historical romance that is accumulated over time. When fiction supplants the truth it is hard to ‘restore’ the latter in any sense. Incidentally I often get into similar debates with people on the subject of Obama. He cannot compete with the historical romance of Lincoln or FDR but those older presidents couldn’t have competed with the same themselves! But it is very hard once again to approach those gigantic figures of the past ‘un-encrusted’ by their legends.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:34 PM
Satyam, as often happens with us, we seem to be arguing while mainly agreeing. 🙂 As long as you agree that it is “unknowable” which films will be lauded by future generations, regardless of their box office collections in the present, I have no issue.
About your examples of such films, though, I cannot agree fully. I think Dil Se has already achieved its cult status as an important film. But I think a good part of the reason for its failure earlier was not so much because of the political questions it raises, but because of the casting of SRK in the lead. Setting up audience’s expectations for a “typical” SRK romance and giving them a hard-hitting political film is not a smart move. And yet I can kind of see Ratnam’s rationale. I think he chose SRK deliberately, not only for his star power, but precisely because he wanted to subvert the tropes of the filmi romance that was most common in SRK’s films till that time. But it’s never good to play with the audience in this way; to put it another way, you can’t have your cake and eat it, too. If you want to take advantage of SRK’s brand as a romantic hero, then you have to have a proper romance to the audience, or do enough in the prerelease promotions to clearly communicate that this is not going to be the standard romance. Since I have no idea what kind of promotion Dil Se got, I don’t know how good they were in conveying this.
Similarly, I can give counterexamples to your point that the films that go on to be revered after failing on their initial release will always have a smaller audience at later times. Andaz Apna Apna is one film that has actually gained in stature after failing at the box office, not due to critical acclaim, but due to audience acceptance. If it released today it will probably do much better than its initial release. Some times a film that is “ahead of its time” will find that the audience of a later day can understand and accept it better for precisely this reason. Nowadays in Bollywood, I think there are a number of films that are better appreciated by a foreign audience (not an NRI one) than an Indian one, because they are made with more of a foreign sensibility, sufficiently so that the foreign audience can “connect” to them more easily (and more intensely) than they can with the film with the more desi sensibility.
Oh, and I always thought Vertigo to be one of Hitchcock’s weaker films. I’m surprised to see you say that it’s rated so highly by the critics.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 2:43 AM
Will get back to the rest later but Vertigo has been one of the most hallowed films around over the last 30 years or so. Not just in the US but also in Europe and elsewhere.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:31 AM
Interesting. Just got back from San Francisco. Took many “guided walking trips” and one of them was Alfred Hitchcock’s SFO. There were over 120 people in this walking trip!!! Most of them were from SFO and some even lived in the nob-hill area where parts of the film (vertigo) was shot. The tour guide was HUGE hitchcock fan and he himself had designed the tour…in fact moved to SFO from Boston because he was such a huge fan. He did say that Vertigo was flop when released.
I only pet-peeve I have with Sattu is that he keeps on harping on D6 and dil-say. Why not add more “classic” movies that failed at BO in recent times that were indeed superb movies…why just bachchan jr? Somehow you think that junior bachchan is Van Gogh of our times (!!) lolz.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:45 AM
Well, I like AB a lot- but I do not think that he is either an extraordinarily talented or an underrated actor. And I also think that brings a lot of it upon himself bynaccepting films that he clearly does not believe in and then performing very lazily in them. The difference is clear when you look at his performance in DMD and Game last year.
But I do agree with Satyam that Delhi 6 and Dil Se are both criminally underrated films. To add more movies- I also think that Do Dhooni Char, Rocket Singh, Luck By Chance, Gulaal and Dor did not get their due.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 7:30 PM
Actually Eklavya is one of my fav. movies. Loved all the characters in this movie including balan.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 12:34 PM
She suits only these type of roles. These kind of actresses are lucky, no media/public criticism whatever role they chose. Imagine top actresses doing her role of Silk Smitha. Media and public woud have made big fuss.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 1:23 AM
but who are the top actresses today? katrina, kareena? lol….tabu did a chaandni baar and that kind of thing was never (successfully) attempted again by anyone….in last 2 decades – tabu still remains the top “actress” if not the star/superstar.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:13 AM
Chandini bar is not as bold as TDP. I like Tabu, but she is no where closer to top actress.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:11 AM
“A super-successful woman in bollywood instantly gets labeled as lesbian”–lol-that’s some news haha
Why don’t kjo and ekta get together- a real alliance of sorts in more ways than one lol
“she straddles art and commerce perfectly based on sheer talent. I see big things for her.”–yes what vidya balan is doing needs credit-though haven’t seen TDP (&the ‘big things’)
But there was some rumour/news somewhere that she may marry v soon-hope thats only a rumour -or else-another actress of ‘substance’ gone …
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 8:00 PM
Did you see how your sattu keeps pulling VB down every single time!!!! Except when she acts with AB jr. Lolz
I think Jaya Bachchan was VB of her times. Great acting and lot of hit movies and totally unconventional heroine compared to skimpy or tight clothes wearing contempories who were only eye candies of their times…don’t ya think?!?
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 9:47 PM
That’s pretty silly actually.. when I’ve said more than once including recently that I’m cheering for Balan’s success all the way even when I don’t much care of an individual film as was the case with TDP.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 10:07 PM
Players kaisi laggi aapko? Do put up your reviews for it.
Good to see that you are VB fan as well 😉
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM
Di- many, many TV and film actresses- in Hollywood and in other industries- turn producers after achieving a reasonable amount of success. I’m not sure about the exact jargon/ job descriptions- but I think that there are different categories of producers like exectuvite producer, creative producer etc. Even if these women aren’t business minded, they could hire somebody to look after the business side of things and only be involved in the creative aspect and in getting themselves author-backed roles in scripts.
Bollywood is a very male-dominated industry, obviously, but I do believe that the women (actros, directors, producers) should take things into their hands and create content where the woman is more than just a soft porn sex object. There is no point in being a passive victim to the sexism of the industry. Most of the female centric content that achieved success in Hollywood and American TV last year had women participating as producers, writers and creators- Bridesmaids, 2 Broke Girls, New Girls, as does next year’s most anticipated female-centric film Hunger Games.
Even in Bollywood the trend of actress- producer has started catching on- but the problem is that these women only turn producer when their careers are almost over and they do not have the star power to bring about much box office success- like Lara Dutta, Dia Mirza, Priety Zinta. If Katrina and Kareena got involved in creating entertaining star vehicles for themselves in the way that SRK and Aamir do, I think we could see a significant change in the gender dynamics of the industry. These women need to start managing their careers much more smartly.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 8:06 PM
“If Katrina and Kareena got involved in creating entertaining star vehicles for themselves in the way that SRK and Aamir do,…”
Though the (desi) society too has to change a bit. There were to be movies (was it 30s or 40s?) in India, called hunterwali (strong heroine centric movies). I wonder sometimes, if those times were “ahead” in some ways.
What bollywood really-really needs is good writers.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 9:29 PM
Interesting set of points , Ami, For the present day heroines to carve out a path for themselves, they need to be secure about themselves and their talent. Unfortunately, these girls are so obsessed about looking good and being associated with success that they do not think long term. Personally for all thier posturing, they are themselves not interested in anything except fame and money. So reinventing themselves at a later stage is nigh impossible
Vidya has been a different person right from the beginning. She brushed aside criticism on her dress sense, weight and did exactly what she wanted to do. I think Rani was the only person who could have done this but for her poor choice of films with YRF.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:21 PM
I agree that the mainstream commercial actresses are mainly interested in money and fame (as a pathway to making more money), but I disagree that there’s anything wrong with that. As long as they’re clear about their goals and pursue them, I don’t see a problem, nor do I think anyone else needs to judge them for their choices. So I disagree that they don’t think long term; I think they accept that the career path they have chosen is a short term one, and devote their energies to maximize their income for its duration. If some of them reinvent themselves as they get older by doing more performance oriented or offbeat films, that’s also a perfectly legitimate choice — see Juhi Chawla.
Actually, on this point, I find the return of several of 90’s era actresses quite interesting to observe. I think Juhi gave up the mainstream a little too early, or rather, it was the mainstream that gave up on her unnecessarily. But she made lemonade out of the lemons she had been handed and started commendable work in alternate films. Now when I see Madhuri returning and trying to reclaim her position by doing the same kind of things she did when in her heyday, I feel a little sad. I think she could insist on a role written specially for her and a film which centers on her role, but it need not (and probably could not) be a regular commercial film in the standard “hero-heroine” mode. In this respect I’m quite looking forward to Sridevi’s film, which will be centered on her, but seems to be more suited to her age and experience.
So, while it is good to applaud Vidya Balan for her focus on the craft of acting, it is not necessary to look down on the more glamor oriented heroines. True, they cannot do what Vidya can, but equally, Vidya can’t do what they do. Kareena is one exception who can do both kind of films, though right now she seems to be focused on the box office returns more — but then there is Heroine in the offing.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:42 PM
I am not looking down on the choices that the present day heroines are making or saying that it is wrong- only pointing out that having expectations from them about bringing any substance to thier work is unrealistic.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:57 PM
But why should we expect any “substance” from the mainstream commercial films, for either male or female leads? What “substance” is there in any of the top hits of the year? Those films and everyone who works in them are only there to provide entertainment, which is fine by me, and, it seems, most of the film going audience.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 1:53 AM
Re:Why should we expect substance from the mainstream commercial films, for either male or female leads?
sm, This was in response to Ami’s comment on why top heroines should turn producers so that more heroine centric movies are made.
The heroines themselves are not interested as you rightly said.
By Substance I do not mean that the film should centre around them but the heroine should make a difference to the film.
So it is really upto the filmmakers and some of them do come up with interesting roles for the heroines but the choices that are available is so limited that no wonder we do not see such movies.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 12:18 AM
Sorry, I like VB but let’s not get carried away in praising her career choices. For a while she too was chasing commercial success by doing movies like Heyy Babyy, KK and BB. She tried the glamorous heroine route and failed and turned to doing smaller movies with meatier roles which is a smart move on her part. But the reality is that she will still not get the offers being made to the top actresses who have less talent.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:27 AM
Sm- I’m not saying that the glamour-oriented heroines should give up on their glamorous avatar and do serious films. I’m saying that they should do mainstream films that have more substantial, central roles for them. Even in the entertaining films, it is the hero who gets top billing, the big salary and has the box office draw. The heroine has almost nothing to do in most big Hindi films.
Regardless of the industry that they work in – most of these actresses turn producer because they want to be something more substantial than just a sex object. And just being the hot bikini body in a film is not much of a career- the lathe of respect, the pay which is a tiny fraction of what the men get, the limited shelf life and total interchangeability with other heroines.
I cannot believe that all of these women are content with just playing the love interest or dancing around 200 half-naked White women. They need ambition to make it big in such a competitive industry. And they should take it into their own hands to make movies that are entertaining, commercially viable star vehicles for themselves, just the way the top heroes do and the way actresses in many other movie industries do.
I don’t see why people would assume that they are not interested in the kind of success, power and respect that most top heroes command.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:34 AM
Tyler – VB’s The Dirty Picture was one one of the biggest hits of the year- nothing small about that. Kahaani probably will not become a huge grosser but I’m sure that the next film she signs will have commercial viability.
And what amazing roles are being offered to the top actresses today? Chikni Chameli and Chamak Challo? A 10 minute guest appearance and a kiss with Hrithik Roshan in ZNMD? I think that VB has the most enviable career in Bollywood today. 🙂
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:42 AM
@Ami — how can we know what’s in the mind of any of these heroines? For many people in India, films, TV, and modeling are brand new and immensely attractive career opportunities where nothing much is required of the participants by way of qualifications (academically or vocationally), except a good appearance and a willingness to overcome certain inhibitions. This is why these careers have been embraced by many families with “middle class values.” This is not a judgment by me, but a summary of the comments made by many aspiring and established women (and men, too) in these professions, and their families, that I have read in several new articles. So I don’t know that we can say that these women “can’t” be satisfied with what they have. We need to know what their alternatives are and were, and what their aspirations are for their future, none of which we can know. That’s why I’m saying we can’t say anything about their level of satisfaction.
I also don’t see that the career options are any better for women in Hollywood, so I don’t know why the Hindi industry keeps being singled out for this complaint.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:51 AM
Sm- Hollywood does not have the same extremely prevalent, demeaning soft porn aesthetic that Bollywood has. Especially over the last year, I think Hollywood has started objectifying men and women almost equally.
Meryl Streep is still one of the highest paid actresses even at her age. The top actresses earn 70-80% of the top actors as opposed to Bollywood where the top actresses earn 10-15% of what the top actors earn.
And look at the line-up of major films with female leads in Hollywood next year: Prometheus, Hunger Games, Snow White and The Huntsman, Haywire.
Perfect equality? Of course not. More equal than Bollywood? Of course yes.
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 11:51 AM
Amy and diana-thanks for that rational and intelligent discussion–a welcum change from counting a few pennies and pounds here n there in box office ‘debates’…
“women (actros, directors, producers) should take things into their hands and create content where the woman is more than just a soft porn sex object”–bravo Amy -I smell a feministic “leader” there lol
By the way -“should take things into their hands and create content”–hope no pun was intended there
Oops..
Btw really enjoyed the female bonding film ‘bridesmaids’ a lot
Infact I nearly fell off the chair on a few occasions
Brilliant-Kirsten wiig was awesome as was some of the “support” cast. Infact never wanted to but was FORCED to watch it n give company.
Btw ‘hunger games’ sounds errm ‘different’ lol
LikeLike
January 8, 2012 at 8:07 PM
“bravo Amy -I smell a feministic “leader”….
No bras are burning here Alex…leave us alone.
😉
lolz
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 7:26 AM
Getting carried away and praising someone on the basis of success is quite common.
I don’t think many people went to watch Vidya’s good acting in TDP.
Why is it that a good actress in a womancentric films has to be ‘bold’ or pregnant sporting a huge stomach?
Is that all a woman is about? Sexually or pregnantly portrayed is all there is to a woman?
One womancentric film which was really good minus any exploitation of body was Aaja Nachle.
People rejected it.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 7:45 AM
Brava, Old Gold, exactly! Even calling a film “woman centric” is diminishing it, in my view.
However, I watched Aaja Nachle, and I don’t think it was rejected because of being “woman centric” or not having a sexual theme, but because it was B-O-R-I-N-G.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:27 AM
“I watched Aaja Nachle, and I don’t think it was rejected because of being “woman centric” or not having a sexual theme, but because it was B-O-R-I-N-G.”
So the bottom line is good/strong story that is well executed. Whether it is woman centric/man-centric is only incidental. I don’t think VB had agenda to start with (that I will act only in woman centric movies) but that she thro’ her talents have reached a spot where writers are writing single woman-centric roles for her…something even Madhuri would dream of and possibly relocated to India seeing VB’s success (seems like MD is fan of Isquiya) and time is ripe for talented actresses to make it without heros or item-numbers or eye-candy. Bravo VB. We love you!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:40 AM
Yes, this is what I was saying. A good story in a well-made film will attract viewers, whether it’s a male or female or a complete unknown in the lead.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 7:54 AM
That is exactly my point. VB did not make TDP a success. It was the sexually oriented topic that made it successful. Replace VB in the role and the movie would still have been a hit. Same principal applies to movies like Murder and Murder 2. Sex SELLS. Frankly TDP was not a good movie. Success at the box office does not equate to quality.
Ami, TDP was a small budgeted movie which went on to be a big box office success. So you misunderstood my prior statement.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:09 AM
I’m sorry but the idea that TDP was a success because of the sex factor is such BS. Most Bollywood movies owe a huge portion of their success to sex- be it the heroines exposing, the item numbers or the White women in bikinis in the background. If your removed all of these factors from most movies their box office would be greatly diminished. If you took Challo and Criminal and Kareena’s sexy avatar out of Ra.One, the opening would have been a lot smaller.
People did not go to watch TDP because of the sex alone, that was just one of the factors, as it is with every Bollywood movie. Every big Bollywood movie has tons of sex and sleaze. If people only wanted sex they could have gone to watch any other Bollywood movie, most of which feature women who are far more attractive than Vidya. Even Murder 2 got only half the BO of TDP. Rascals was a full-on soft porn movie with 2 big stars and tons of really fit women in bikinis and it flopped at the Box Office. Same thing with Thank You.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:18 AM
And anyway- NOKJ was a hit as well and it featured no sex. I agree that TDP was not a great movie but Vidya’s performance was excellent. I think it is very unfair to take all the credit away from Vidya by saying that only sex sold the movie when even SRK and Salman movies have item numbers and sexy heroines added in to make them sell.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:43 AM
vidya in TDP was much better than srk in D2 😉 (pun not intended)
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:02 PM
I think TDP was also overhyped because of the Silk Smitha connection, not just sex. And NOKJ was based on the Jessica Lall case. Both the films were based on subjects which were intriguing and quite discussed in public and media at some point of time. One can’t neglect such facts either.
TDP was a Balaji production, quite overhyped and promoted even in Ekta Kapoor’s daily soaps!
It is not just about VB only. Still, due credit to her for managing to get success without relying on a Khan or Kapoor.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:10 AM
agree 100%. It is not only women centric movies, most of recent hits either have item songs or men with no shirt….
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:19 AM
There’s a great difference between having half naked extras in songs etc and a not unpopular film star taking on the lead with sex as the dominating angle of the story.
In reverse it can be said there have been several very good films with great acting, but they failed at the BO so to think it is Vidya’s acting and the goodness of the film which gave it it’s BO doesn’t gel with me.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:25 AM
I don’t see what the huge difference is- most Hindi movies today have a serious soft porn aesthetic. Sex-centric movies like Thank You also flopped. So when a sex-centric movie starring a female protagonist who is not conventionally attractive becomes one of the biggest hits of the Year I think that some of the credit should go to the actress.
I’m not saying that sex is not a major part of what sold the movie- but it is not unique to this movie alone, it is true of every single movie. And just like you wouldn’t take the credit away from Salman and give it to Munni for Dabanngg, you shouldn’t take the credit for TDP away from Vidya’s performance and rising star power and give it to her cleavage alone.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:30 AM
>And just like you wouldn’t take the credit away from Salman and give it to Munni for Dabanngg, you shouldn’t take the credit for TDP away from Vidya’s performance and rising star power and give it to her cleavage alone.
That probably explains my view. That sex and Vidya were combined, and I believe most went to watch her cleavage and scenes with the three men she had in the film.
And now she’s looking for the father of her unborn child LOL!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:40 AM
Old gold- but then how is the success of TDP any different from the success of any other Hindi blockbuster? I agree that it is unfortunate that sex is needed to sell these films. But I still think that female-centric successes do not diminish just because of the sex factor involved, just as male-centric films do not diminish because of the sex factor involved.
I think for movies to succeed where women are not sexually objectified- Indian society needs to change. Right now India is a very sexually repressed country, so selling sex is the easiest thing in the world. And the movie industry needs to change too- if we get more competent writers and directors who can make engrossing, innovative films then they will have the confidence to market their films without adding in item numbers and half-naked extras at every available opportunity.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:45 AM
It’s the subject, the topic, the theme, the actress (not a sidey rawat or mallika) which is unlike the other films where the sleaze factor did not belong to the heroine of other successful films.
But if you are still not getting my point then it’s OK.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:45 AM
“And now she’s looking for the father of her unborn child LOL!!”
Yhea. The point is not the content of the movie (writing) alone here but that writers are writing scripts keeping her in mind or FOR HER. I think that is big. B.O is huge part of it but her talents as actor cannot be discounted at any level. Salman/Aamir/SRK have their own production houses…I don’t know many outsiders writing roles for SRK or Salman (maybe Aamir) to exploit their acting skills (ahem).
VB movies,R like Shakespear’s play, intellectual will get what he/she wants from her movies and the chavvani-wala-front-seater will get the cleavage show. So it is win-win situation for all.
Mark my words though: VB at age 60 will still command such roles and she will continue to “deliver” for long time to come. Remember Godmother of Shabana Azmi…?
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:55 AM
Old gold- what is your point? That VB does not deserve credit for TDP? That female centric films with sexual subjects should not be made? That VB is not a good actress? That Bollywood will never have another female actor with BO clout because only the sex sells female-centric films? Not being sarcastic, I honestly do not understand.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:55 AM
Someone went to India and saw all the “gandgi” dirt/refuse. If THAT is all you could see then what a waste of money. You paid several thousand pounds to “see” the refuse/dirt.
There will always be the audience that will only see the shaking boobs and get entertained by it. If you didn’t “see” the TDP for what it was (a slice of life of item-number artist) then maybe you belong to a different class of audience. To each his/her own. The front-row will see shaking boobs and the intellectual will see the point of the whole story and not “evaluate” why it was a B.O success. Whether the movie is successful at B.O or not, doesn’t even really matter (to me). As long as I get entertained or get something out of it, it is a successful movie. I seldom go see B.O collection of movie to decide whether I will watch it or not. Bodyguard (the salman movie) …I couldn’t proceed beyond first several scenes and is still laying around the house. Whether it was huge hit or not, it is huge flop in my home!!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:05 AM
I agree- OG I really do not understand what your objection to VB’s pregnancy in e Kahaani trailer is? It’s not being sexualised or sensationalised in anyway? It’s probably a plot point because her pregnancy is what compels her to search for the father of her unborn child.
It’s funny but both the other trailers for the hero-oriented movies posted recently have MUCH more sleaze than Kahaani, which has a completely clean trailer- Jodi Breakers and Cassanpva and I do not see anyone complaining about that.
It’s easy to reduce anything that stars a woman to the lowest common denominator. I do not think that Kahaani has any element of sleaze in it and if it succeeds it will be purely because of VB’s star power and performance as well as the writing/ direction, not because of any sex factor. I do no see how you can precieve this trailer to be sex-centric or sleazy.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:39 AM
My point is TDP is selling on VB’s sexually dominating role.
That was a joke about her looking for the father of her unborn child in kahaani. Read my comment again. It’s OK if you don’t understand the joke either.
I stand by my opinion. If anyone has a problem with it I can’t help it, sorry.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:47 AM
Old gold- look at your initial comment- Is that all it is about? Sexual or pregnantly portrayed is all there is to a woman?
That is what I was responding to- not your exceedingly poor joke, which I got but did not find amusing.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 10:47 AM
I would prefer a Hunterwali or a Batwoman, or a Policewoman or..oh there are so many possibilities other then sexually portrayed and pregnantly portrayed women.
What about 3 female student idiots, or a Donwoman LOL!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 11:14 AM
You mean to say the only way up is to be portrayed sexually first.
You speak like a man. LOL!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 11:29 AM
“My point is TDP is selling on VB’s sexually dominating role.”
Old Gold: if that was the case then Silk Smitha would have been biggest heroine of her times or Rakhi Sawant would be #1
2 funny. Sex can only do so much. If movie is 10 crore worth then adding some sex will make it 15 crore worth.
With your argument, all porn movies would be hit movies!!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 1:30 PM
Lets not go round in circles. This point has been discussed.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 10:53 AM
OG- totally agree- I would love to see that as well. But I think it has to be a gradual process. If actresses can get box office clout and wider recognition by doing female-centric films that are made viable by the sex quotient- then the next step can be that they get to do female-bonding films and action films and so on, because of their star power. But I don’t think it is possible to jump from having women. Be sex objects in Khan films to having non-sexually objectified women star in films of their own. A middle ground is necessary- and that is what is happening right now- films like TDP and MBKD which bank heavily either on sexual themes or the sexiness of the lead actress.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 11:19 AM
The response to this comment is in the wrong place – above.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 11:35 AM
Well- do you really think that in the current climate of Bollywood where every single movie is all about the sleaze a female centric movie without sex would do well?
Even the women in Bollywood are only interested in portraying women in a sexual way- Farah Khan’s item numbers, Pooja Bhatt has signed a porn star for Jism 2 and Ekta Kapoor has been producing one sex-centric movie after another. Even Zoya Akhtar’s movie had a heroine whose most memorable scene was when she wore a corset and biked out to kiss her man and the other heroine in the film (the Spanish girl) also had a sex-centric role as a curative one night stand.
When the female filmmakers in Bollywood itself have such a narrow definition for female characters where do you expect these actresses to get success as non-sex-objects from?
I’m obviously not saying that it is the only way up for any woman- but if you choose to have a career in soft porn land a.k.a Bollywood today I do not see how it can be any other way.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 12:54 PM
“but if you choose to have a career in soft porn land a.k.a Bollywood ”
Lolz
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 1:29 PM
So you are not denying that that’s what is happening with Vidya, and this film, and its success.
That was my point.
Regarding the whys and whereofs of Bollywood, it’s is taking the discussion into an entirely different discussion.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:08 PM
This is a proposterous and daft view. To assertain the success of TDP on the sleaze/sexual factor.
There have been PLENTIFUL movies with numerous sex scenes, sex jokes, cleavage or sex themes but they have never made nearly as much as TDP at the box office. I have not even seen the movie to know simple facts that at close to 80 crore collections in India there HAS to be more than just sex that has worked for this movie! Otherwise your Jacqueline Fernandez, Mallaika Sherawart etc films should be hitting similar numbers to prove your point!!!
Kambakht Ishq, Chameli come to mind. Never made nearly the same money.
It’s quite a ridiculous position to take. Just as ridiculous as aunties turning up to watch SRK dancing bare to Dard De Disco in OSO.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:18 PM
What “sleaze” did you find in Chameli?? For a film about a prostitute, it was remarkably “clean” and actually didn’t focus on the sexual aspect of her work, but on the human being herself.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:28 PM
Whether its Chameli or not there is a huge list of them.
Girlfriend
Ek Choti Si Love Story
Tauba Tauba
Kis Kis Ki Kismat
Tumsa Nahin Dekha
Raaz
Jism
Khwahish
Love sex aur Dokha
to name just a few
Not to forget the sheer number of item numbers, sleazy promos to get the audience in the first place! The combined total of the above won’t even be 80 crores!
Give poor Vidya Balan a break. Sure its a “factor” among many. The super promotion and soundtrack, maybe people liked the story etc
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:37 PM
I understand the main point you were making, but to put Chameli under the same heading as films like Girlfriends is nothing short of a travesty, sorry.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:39 PM
And to attribute a films success purely on sex/sleaze is daft – I maintain
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:41 PM
To answer your own question – if you have seen the movie why did you? To watch the sex or sleaze?
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:55 PM
Of course you would think that it’s daft to attribute the success to anything but it’s sexual angle.
You would like to be listed in the category of people who appreciate good cinema, good acting etc etc LOL!!
I saw the film to see what made the audience of the film predominantly male (I noticed this when I went to watch Don2 in the same cinema hall)….and to be able to speak in an educated manner.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:45 PM
“I saw the film to see what made the audience of the film predominantly male”…
how noble of you to spend your money on your whims about a male dominated audience and to be able to speak in an educated manner. Unfortunately you failed on both matters as you as a lady was in the audience and I am sure there are many more women who did see it (maybe they were as noble and giving as you), and rather than speak in an educated manner you’ve made a broadly ridiculous statement about the male species in general.
To say a popular star in a sex centric theme movie scores of a non popular star is quite true. But to say the films success is because of the theme and the popularity of the star is just plain ridiculous. They are to completely different statements.
You noticed the cinema was male dominated for Don 2. What ridiculous reason will you pull out for this then?
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:14 PM
I hate these kind of discussions when the person commenting begins to get smug and cheesy with his comments.
It’s not a competition here about whose opinion will win.
I stand by my opinion and you can stand by yours and desisit from calling anyone’s opinion as daft.
Before you came we were also discussing but not calling anyone’s opinion daft or belittling it.
This spoils any incentive to come along expressing oneself.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:34 PM
Since my answer (Contd) went off elsewhere I’m repeating.
that I didn’t buy the ticket. I watched it on my computer yesterday to be able to discuss here after I read the comments. It seems my answer was not clear to you with all the talk of nobility involved. I see any film I wish to discuss on my computer as there’s no other way, though I could have seen TDP in a cinema Hall while on holiday but the idea of sitting around watching a sleazy film with a hall with men was very off putting. I did think of disguising myself like Nargis in Rockstar but decided against it.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:34 PM
>Otherwise your Jacqueline Fernandez, Mallaika Sherawart etc films should be hitting similar numbers to prove your point!!!
Not again!!
You’re late for the party jayshah. We’ve been through these points.
It’s your view which is daft, to think that a whole film with a popular leading actress taking on a role (which was touted as ‘BOLD’ – and no other actress would have dared) which was NOT an item number, nor a song sequence but a whole length film regarding the subject, and compare it with the likes of the actresses you’ve mentioned.
Anyway, you and others may consider the good acting and good film (?) as the reasons for it success – I DON’T!!!
So, what will you do about my so called daft views? Get me Banned??
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:38 PM
On the one hand you say its the subject, on the other hand you say “popular leading actress” and comparing with the actresses I mentioned. I think you answered the question yourself. You already differentiate between the Vidya or Jacqueline/Mallaika in your language so there you go.
If you think a film on the subject of sex for 2 hours is enough to get 80 crore in India then SRK is wasting his time doing Ra.One and Don 2.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:46 PM
What rubbish are you deducing from my comments.
Of course I’m differentiating between a small time actress indulging in sexual display and a leading actress doing the same.
Even the people on this blog won’t go for a Malika Sherawat or any other small time actress’s film, but will go for a Vidya Balan.
Why? Don’t ask me?
If today Katrina was to act in such a film it would be a greater success, I can vouch for that.
Clearly it’s the subject matter AND the status of the star combined.
It raises the standard of the film from being called porn, I guess, and gets it the ‘art’ status. LOL!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:03 PM
“Even the people on this blog won’t go for a Malika Sherawat or any other small time actress’s film, but will go for a Vidya Balan.”
And pray how/when did VB become a “big time” actress?!?!? Only after TDP.
And NO mallika sheravats or Kaifs of this world cannot hold candle to Ms VB in terms of time after time fantabulous performance. All those ladies are good at is botox that makes their faces rigid to expression, implants that make their bodies assymetrical and they definitely cannot carry single actress roles. The only “roles” written for them would be item numbers by sub-par directors like Farah Khan.
I guess if VB is head to toe clad in saari and doing a bharatnatyam, then you will consider that as high art and applaud! Desi audience has such double standards. They want to ogle at katrinas of the world and marry VB type of Bhartiya Naaris for wife (comment not intended for you so don’t take it personally)!!!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM
@DI, Vidya became a “big” actress because of her performances in Parineeta, Paa, Ishqiya, and NOKJ, so she had this status before TDP.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:25 PM
that’s true but TDP is easily her greatest triumph. The gross of all those films combined probably gets you to 80 crores or whatever. also Parineeta had Saif, Paa was had two male stars and was all about Auro, Ishqiya is fair since Naseer and Warsi are not commercially significant and so is NOKJ (this had Rani though). But even accepting her consistency, which is certainly remarkable, in TDP she’s grossing like a major male star which is saying something!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:38 PM
Thank you Satyam and Jayshah- this is exactly what I am trying to say.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:39 PM
So, Satyam, you agree that Vidya became a big “actress” with the earlier films, but became a big “star” because of TDP, and that’s because of its box office collection?
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:42 PM
So now to be considered on par with “male stars” a female actor has to have a film with no male actors? But don’t all the big hits of the big “male stars” have female leads? Even TDP had three male actors in important roles. I don’t understand this male/female distinction.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:49 PM
“that’s true but TDP is easily her greatest triumph. The gross of all those films combined probably gets you to 80 crores or whatever. also Parineeta had Saif, Paa was had two male stars and was all about Auro,….”
Movies are always collaborative effort (unlike say a writer orc painter who have 100% control over the medium, an actor unfortunately is dependant on so many factors). Having said that, if someone is exceptionally talented, then that person will shine (may never become popular or famous or rich). Having that courage of conviction, facing hard times (as an actor, trying to get that break into movies/tv/drama) then is (also) the biggest challenge. People like Bajpai took forever to buy even a small car/flat in Mumbai. Sometimes thespians can remain unrecognised and are popular only in theatre-circles. Then there are actors like Anthony Hopkins who suffered from personal demons (alchoholism) for most part of his youth or Marlon B. who gained huge amts of weight.
Just saying.
VB: She never has gotten BIG break. IT was always B actors like Saif (none of the top khans I believe). The bigb (paa) I don’t count because amitabh was not amitabh in that movie!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:36 PM
Thank you Jay!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:21 PM
haven’t been following this debate but having seen the film (and I wasn’t a fan of the work) I agree with your point here..
But again not sure how this debate started and too many comments now to read everything!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:23 PM
@Satyam, can you please clarify with whom you agree? It’s not clear from your post, and there have been so many divergent viewpoints. 🙂
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:26 PM
with Jay’s longer comment that the film isn’t only selling because of sex and sleaze. Actually I’d say that on both counts there’s far far more in most of Emran Hashmi’s collaborations with the Bhatts!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:24 PM
Jayshah, of course. It cannot be me!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:26 PM
And I didn’t buy a ticket to watch the film. I saw it the way I see any new film being talked about – on my computer. I saw it yesterday after reading the comments here because I wanted to express my opinion, and I wanted to do it with knowledge.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 5:51 AM
“I saw the film to see what made the audience of the film predominantly male (I noticed this when I went to watch Don2 in the same cinema hall)….”
Suggests you bought a ticket when you say I noticed this when I went to watch Don2 “in the same cinema hall”
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 7:09 AM
Well, it ‘doesn’t’ suggest that.
It suggests that when I was at the ‘multiplex’, I saw ‘men’ buying tickets for TDP. THere were a ot of women buying Don2 and some for Pappu Can’t Dance Saala’ which I also saw and thought it was a typical small film with good things.
Perhaps my saying cinema hall instead of multiplex confused you?
Your third degree is absolutely unnecessary to the discussion, jayshah.
It doesn’t contribute to the discussion where my point is that the film is succeeding ‘mainly’ due to the ‘raunchy VB’ mode. My having seen it doesn’t change this opinion I have.
So OK, If I say I watched it in the theatre.
Now does it change my opinion?
Did I watch it for the sleaze?
Maybe?
Does it change my opinion?
LOL!!
I’m not even saying VB shouldn’t have done that role (much as I would prefer women in different kind of roles).
So what’s your point.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:29 AM
“Getting carried away and praising someone on the basis of success is quite common.”
Lol Oldgold. So it is ok for others to be “carried away” with SRK or Aamir or Salman but not ok to be fans of VB. What are you saying here Gal?!?!?
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:32 AM
It’s OK here too, as long as one is aware.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:47 AM
“as long as one is aware.”
As long as one is “aware” of what? That they are watching a highly talented actresses and is in raptures with the performance?!? You are too funny OG.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:42 AM
It’s OK if you haven’t understood my comment.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 10:17 AM
I guess I am too dumb to understand your high level humor. Nehow it is ok for you to not understand what we are trying to say either. 😉
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:20 AM
“That is exactly my point. VB did not make TDP a success. It was the sexually oriented topic that made it successful”
The “topic” of the movie made people go to see the movie which was hate-kay or niche movie according to filmmakers. I remember many moons ago Smita Patil starred in art-house movie called Chakra. Many-many cinegoers went to see the famous “bath” scene and that was their only interest. But in the process the script writers “gets” people in to see the movie, so he can tell his story. The bathing scene was also very central because that is how it is in jhopad-patti (in other words the script called for such a scene). Just because of that scene or such content (kissing scene in Ishquia for instance) doesn’t devalue the movie itself imo. One cannot point fingers to these writers and say “cheating”..lolz
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 8:28 AM
Excellent point DI. This is what I’m trying to say. Anyway even all the big male-centric movies have lots of sexual objectification of women. If sex is going to get people into the theatre to see female-centric movies that give the heroine an opportunity to move beyond just being a sex object- I think that is a good first step.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 10:15 AM
Thank Ami..I think there is agenda against (our) VB 😉
People don’t like her being successful in such short time. How dare she taste success when lot of others are struggling. Like Ab Jr. Sorry. Couldn’t resist.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:54 AM
Brilliant stuff Amy and all the other girls/ladies
High level discussion
Keep it up
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 10:14 AM
Thank you Alex. Not sure if I am brilliant..just your aam aadmi argumentative indian 😉
so what r your thoughts? Should VB be pregnant in Kahaani (or not)? When a woman is pregnant the “desirability” goes away…right? So then she is not a sexual object anymore. Do you think that was what the writers were targetting? Or were they trying to get audience sympathy because the heroine is preggers? Does it take away from the character (the fact that she is preggo?)? What say you?
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 1:29 PM
brillaint discussion people have to say i would be much more pleased if the so called big bollywood male lead may play support to this female lead ( ala srk playing second lead to madhuri in gajagamini)
on this subject kahani actually there was a film which was just an inversion where a pregant lady runs away from here hubby and her hubby search for her and this included some of the really top performer female protagonists and the film was “LAJJA”
gender divide and female stereotypes are more common female representation and here again some of the so called leading actress are responsible for it as they are being sold to cheaply
vidya balan is lucky to get the platform which was set up by konkana sen( huge fan of some of her bengali movies)
btw people here forget one thing why there is a so called shift in so called women “heavy issues” centric movies to much entertaining movies its because of huge migration to them in urban centre and more freedom to them
now there is a market for them which earlier it not had
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 3:51 PM
Oh, please! As I said earlier, wasn’t Mother India a “woman centric” film? What about Guide? Let’s not pretend that everything started the day before yesterday.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 3:55 PM
And according to Satyam and several others here, HAHK was a woman-centric film. I would put HSSH in that category, too, because the entire story and resolution was driven by the actions of a woman character. I also consider KKHH to be a woman centric film where Kajol was “supported” by two (count ’em) Khans.
As was said above, if one only wants to see sleaze and female objectification in films, then one will be missing well-rounded female characters and portrayals in a great many Hindi films.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:19 PM
There are several examples from old films.
Nargis in Anhonee (Raj Kapoor was like a supporting actor) comes immediately to mind.
There was a film called Anpad with Mala Sinha. The hero Dharmender gets killed before interval.
BTW, I liked Aaja Nachle very much and didn’t find it boring at all. The music was good, and I like stories set around a village or small town with plenty of characters living there. Chintiji was another such film which I love.
I also Liked the Laila Majnu show that was put up at the end.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 4:35 PM
It’s good that you liked Aaja Nachle, Old Gold, and so did many others. But just not enough of them. I found it not only boring, but also disappointing for not giving Madhuri a proper role and film. Obviously, these are subjective reactions.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:19 PM
I said it was a Madhuri-centric film and universally judged as such at the time. Not quite the same as calling it ‘woman-centric’. Salman has as much footage here.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:12 PM
back n tired…
Now thats whats woman power !!!
A good “debate” after a while
A welcome change from the nitpicking of a few pennies, few crores rupees here n there–which im not really a fan of
Going to the distributor/ producers pocket anyhow..lol
So amy, oldgold, diana, sm–cheers
And Diana—if u r new–welcome to the jungle—and yes, u write quite well
Anyhow, btw just a cursory glance on the posts is enuf to tell me that the number of times “sexual” or “sex” has been mentioned is uncountable hahaha (anyhow nothing wrong with that–the topic is such, isnt it…)
I was about to announce my own coveted award (sic wtf) for the most “intellgent” posts to someone but now there are lots of contendors suddenly…..lol
Tough competition now !! haha
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:32 PM
“What about 3 female student idiots, or a Donwoman LOL!!”–yaay haha
any suggestions for who should play donwoman??
“Even Zoya Akhtar’s movie had a heroine whose most memorable scene was when she wore a corset and biked out to kiss her man and the other heroine in the film (the Spanish girl) also had a sex-centric role as a curative one night stand.”–hohoho
vintage Amy…
btw (already ducking for cover) and at the risk of being physically abused—wanna say that really liked this “she wore a corset and biked out to kiss her man” lol
Before this scene, katrina was in my “scotoma” list and never saw any of her movies
After this–
watched New York-found her reasonably good
And then in “mere brother”–was the “hero” of the film
Counts less (but not that less) than VBs “heroinics”–considering where she cums from– alien industry, language, culture etc
To move from the “boom scene” (dont need to elaborate, i think) to this stage of carrying the film on her shoulders is no mean feat.
Perhaps one shouldnt take her “sexiness” against her
oops—am i defending/promoting jatrina kaif—was unthinkable only a few months ago when she was a pet hate….
Wow–as usual, coined a new word
“Heroinics” –hahaha
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:43 PM
Lol nothing wrong with liking that scene Alex. I’m not saying that the scene was offensive in any way- and it was a nice change from all the usual demure Hindi heroines. It is just sad that this was the most memorable scene for the female lead in a movie that was made by an intelligent female director. Her character could have really been better developed and given more screen time.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:58 PM
haha–agree with your point amy ^^
btw Think Zoya did a v good job
have high hopes for her next film
That reminds me–
Now check out MY poetry used in this film (hahaha)
Think these pieces were among the high points of this movie
The “affluence” and the lack of “real sorrow” in the protagonists here is notable but that doesnt make the concerns of these folks any lesser (for them)
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:37 PM
“Lol nothing wrong with liking that scene Alex.”
Waah…bacche ko ulti patri pay chadha rahey ho.
Alex: you need to close your eyes every time “sex” scene comes on screen. So for TDP, you need to go to sleep. lolz
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:46 PM
haha diana ^^^
Thats why I havent seen TDP (and most probably wont)
Dont wanna get “spoilt” u know lol
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:37 PM
“But again not sure how this debate started and too many comments now to read everything!”
haha
Satyam: my bunch of intellgent gals has left u far behind lol!
And u kept counting pennies and pounds on box office threads and weekly trends (jokin)
ps-just realised–ooops—think i should delete that “my” to prevent some from getting offended lol
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 5:49 PM
find this “hotter” tha Kareena
enjoy folks n party
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:06 PM
“if you have seen the movie why did you? To watch the sex or sleaze?”–haha
in a lighter vein–think oldgold has a “history” there.
oldgold–remember “jude” (think it was u , lol—if so, u know what i mean)
btw cmon guys n gals–pray dont be so derogatory towards “sex” and “sleaze”
Thats also an “art” form involving “humans”
dont be inhuman/racist/antisocial
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:14 PM
Speaking of Zoya Akhtar- very nice piece that she has written about her brother (Farhan, that is)
http://www.firstpost.com/bollywood/we-were-worried-he-had-no-ambition-at-all-zoya-akhtar-on-farhan-172926.html
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:27 PM
thanx for that link amy –gud 1 ^^
Feel both LBC and ZNMD were good
In ZNMD, zoya was being “safe” first
Feel her best is yet 2 come
She seems capable of quite instinctive, endearing films
Anyhow–Amy-totally unrelated-have u seen “the beginners”
Evocative, empathetic –liked it
and what were your “views” on “friends with benefits” (clearing my throat..)
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:37 PM
I actually saw The Beginners today 🙂 I really really liked it- it’s my favourite kind of a film- an intelligent, witty, elegant dramedy.
Ewan McGregor and Christopher Plummer were great and I really liked Melanie Laurent- she had such a charming role in this.
I like Zoya Akhtar a lot. I loved LBC and ZNMD was one of 2011’s best Bollywood movies- but it was a letdown
after LBC. I hope she plays it less safe with her next. But I enjoy reading/ watching her interviews- one of the very few people in Bollywood who can open her mouth without embarrassing herself. 😉
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:43 PM
“I actually saw The Beginners today”–pat on the back, amy!!!
not a film many will watch, forget enjoy…
“it’s my favourite kind of a film- an intelligent, witty, elegant dramedy.”–must say u share my taste then
(well, my tastes do change a lot though–day to day)
“really liked Melanie Laurent”–YES
dont get me started now lol
suggest watch Paris or inglorious basterds if u can
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 6:57 PM
“could have seen TDP in a cinema Hall while on holiday but the idea of sitting around watching a sleazy film with a hall with men was very off putting. I did think of disguising myself like Nargis in Rockstar but decided against it.”
hahaha
Well said oldgold
reminds of “jungli jawani”
anyhow Good night guys n gals
need 2 catch some (more) work….
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:11 PM
A lot has been said, but I feel people tend to be too myopic while discussing the reasons why a film clicked or did not click. It’s not just about a particular star, sex or music – but also the subject, the whole setting of the story & the times in which the film released. For eg., HAHK – it’s not just successful due to Madhuri Dixit alone. I was much younger when it released, but I do remember everyone wanted to watch it because after a long time there was this ”clean”, light-hearted, family film, with traditional Indian values – everyone is happy, conflicts are rarely there or if there are conflicts they get easily resolved as someone makes a sacrifice or someone realises his/her mistake soon, there was so much ”apnapan” among all characters – friends, neighbours and even the pet included! Great music, dresses, jewellery which everyone wanted to emulate in their weddings – everything came together to make this film a massive success. Till date, there’s not a single wedding where a HAHK song is not played.
To say that only Madhuri was responsible for its success is, bluntly speaking, a joke! MD & Salman’s characters were like the ideal daughter/DIL/son/SIL – good looking, well behaved, educated, and devoted to their families.
It was a refreshing change from not just action films but also all those films where lovers were running away from family or family was trying to get them killed! No kissing or intimate scenes, no item numbers, violence or foul language – so majority of people lapped it up!Till date the film is liked because it’s one clean, light-hearted family film!
Coming back to TDP & NOKJ – yes there is VB, but it’s a fact both films were based on topical/controversial subjects – Silk Smitha & Jessica Lall case. People’s curiosity over these subjects also helped the success of these films. Good/catchy music, excessive marketing/hype (even in daily soaps as in case of TDP) – all are contributing factors to its success.
Today, people are attributing even NOKJ’s success solely to Vidya, but it was Rani who dominated the promotions of the film & her songs/scenes as the fiery, foul mouthed reporter caught people’s fancy (though VB was no less as a performer in the film). Amit Trivedi’s songs, especially, Dilli & Aali re had become huge hits. Its subject (Jessica Lall case) was of course the top reason to raise curiosity levels among people.
Also since last 2 years or so, it has become a trend to champion the cause of ”hatke” cinema, with even an A-lister like Aamir Khan producing and promoting small budget offbeat films (I brought his name just as an example to explain the trend, not comparing him with VB!) so it’s not surprising that success of TDP, Ishqiya or NOKJ is being celebrated to such extent.
Funny, that people pick & choose just one reason (usually an actor!) for success or failure of a film and state it as if it were as universally applicable as Newton’s Law of Gravity! There are too many factors, and audience is too vast,diverse (in thought, age, tastes, region etc.), wide spread to put their mentality or preference under one classification!
Coming back to Vidya Balan, she deserves all credit and appreciation for attaining such success without any big male co-star or even big banners but it does not signify anything for status of actresses in the industry or in people’s eyes. Actresses still can’t sell a film on their name alone as actors can. At least it is not a ”given” as in case of male stars. Kahaani might get a lot of critical acclaim and perhaps even decent box office success (like Ishqiya) but might not necessarily do a TDP.
Magnitude of BO success also differs. What difference the subject of Silk Smitha’s controversial life and the almost single-minded focus on sex scenes made, is evident in difference in collections of an Ishqiya vs TDP.
P.S. – I didn’t bring such factors only to explain an actress’ success. I feel the same for every film, any bigshot male star’s film included!
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:35 PM
Talking about females’ status in Hindi films, I agree I’d love to see films on female bonding (not superficial ones like Aisha, where bonding doesn’t go beyond giving each other makeovers or going for shopping!) like Dil Chahta Hai, or films which focus on female students and what unique challenges they face. In fact, I did feel why female perspective was neglected in 3 Idiots – where almost everyone followed his passion and broke free from family or society’s diktat except for Kareena’s character who became a doctor as per her father’s wishes and was even marrying the guy he chose for her. They never let the audience know even once whether Pia was indeed passionate about being a doctor or did she also have some other dream for the subjects she wanted to study or hobbies she wanted to pursue further! [Just one of the many examples in our films]
Why only solely female centric subjects? I feel it’d be great to see films which give equal weightage to both male & female perspectives and in which males & females engage in much more than just romantic/sexual encounters!
I think filmmakers end up making trash even if they make films which give good/heroic part to females. Rekha’s Madam X (about some female don) was junk and so was a film starring Sheeba in which she played a spy (forgot its name)! Or else female centric films are too sad, dark, depressing, gory, full of stories about rape, torture, domestic violence etc. – which make for offbeat stuff.
”Newer” examples of female oriented films which are entertaining and draw audiences are Seeta Aur Geeta & Chaalbaaz I guess. They still get good viewership on TV, were box office successes when they had released and didn’t rely on sleaze or sex in any way. I hope we get more such films on different subjects, which are entertaining and also give due to female characters without relying on stereotypes (either sleaze or romance or domestic issues) all the time.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:43 PM
Prateek: “Why only solely female centric subjects? I feel it’d be great to see films which give equal weightage to both male & female perspectives and in which males & females engage in much more than just romantic/sexual encounters!”
Exactly. I think this would be the best situation.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 9:47 PM
Do see Shabana Azmi’s Godmother. I liked it a lot.
LikeLike
January 9, 2012 at 10:01 PM
‘give due to female characters without relying on stereotypes (either sleaze or romance or domestic issues) all the time’
-agree totally. The heroine need not be waging a personal battle or taking up the baton all the time.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 7:10 AM
Excellent comment Prateek- totally agree. Even if female oriented films cannot be made- having better developed, more significant female characters in male-centric movies would be the first step. Films that give equal weight age to both make and female prespectives are a great idea as well.
And I also agree that they should move away from stereotypical female issues. Although I did not like NOKJ very much- it should be appreciated because they made a female-centric film a commercial success without any sleaze or stereotypical stuff.
What I really want to see- is a female bonding film. We have had so many, many male bonding films but not a single female bonding Bollywood film unless you count Aisha- which was so superficial. Dor was such a lovely film in this category- but it off-beat not commercial. A film like DCH with female protagonists would be perfect. And if it was a medium budget film- I see no reason why it shouldn’t be successful.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 8:05 AM
When ZNMD released, I was chatting with a young friend of mine in Mumbai, where I asked if they could ever make a female version of this film. She had been full of praise up to that point about how realistic the film was, because some guys she knew were at that very moment on a very similar trip to Europe. But when I asked about the female version, she changed tack and said no, it couldn’t happen, because their parents wouldn’t let them go out of the country on their own. Yes, even though the friends she could think of were all in their mid to late 20’s and had been working for a while (so that they would not only have the money for such a trip, but also the maturity of holding down a responsible business position for a while). But the absolute killer for me was that, of her three guy friends gallivanting around Europe, two were married! And had left their wives behind in India so they could do some male bonding with their good buddies.
So maybe the reason there are no female bonding films of the DCH type is that there is no plausible scenario in real life when that could happen. Still, there have been a couple of female bonding films that I can think of off hand — one with Rekha and Mallika Sherawat, and one with Manisha Koirala and ?? could it be Sushmita (probablly not). Neither one was a big hit, though I think the first one, at least, managed to break even.Sorry I can’t remember their titles.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 8:20 AM
Sm- I think it also depends on the specific kind of people who are going on the trip. Both Farhan and Zoya make movies about the liberal upper class of Mumbai- I’m sure that all of those parents would let their daughters go on such a trip.
Also- ZNMD was about Indians who live and study abroad. I study in the UK and there are several Indian girls here (including me) who are from Mumbai, Delhi, Bangalore ad Chennai who are 19-21 years old, still financially dependant on their parents and ‘allowed’ to travel through Europe during semester breaks. I also have a lot of female friends from India studying in the US who travel through South America and do projects there during their summer holidays.
Even my mother, who is a married 50 year old woman living in Chennai, often goes on trekking trips to Nepal and Cambodia with her married female friends.
Especially given the kind of people usually depicted in an Akhtar film- the Bandra Elite- I do not think that Indian women travelling by themselves would be unusual at all. Infect- it would be more unusual if women of the same socioeconomic background as the Akhtars were not allowed to travel by themselves.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 8:22 AM
In fact- the ironic thing is that Zoya said she came up with the idea for a male-bonding road movie when she was on a trip to Barcelone with a group of her girlfriends (including Reema Kagti who co-wrote the film).
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 8:24 AM
There you go –why don’t you write a script of one of your mother’s treks with her friends and send it to Zoya? (I’m not really joking)
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 8:32 AM
Haha- I would- but I fear that I am neither knowledgeable nor talented in the art of scriptwriting.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 8:39 AM
You don’t have to write the whole script. Anyway, I’ve found that in Bollywood, the word “script” is used very loosely, oftentimes meaning no more than a story outline and a brief description of the characters. I’d go to watch a film like this. Imagine how great it’d be to see some “yesteryear” actresses in this kind of film. Or even younger ones looking for a comeback, like Madhuri, Raveena, and Sridevi. They can go to Cambodia, and either have a peaceful, pleasant trip, or get caught up in some terrorist attack. 🙂
Talk to your mom, get some memorable incidents together, and knock out an outline and send it to Zoya pronto!
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 10:20 AM
And with Dev Anand in Teen Deviyan
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 10:05 AM
Another old female bonding film that comes to mind is ‘Dekh Kabira Roya’. It was a kind of Hrishikesh Mukherji comedy (Golmaal). And this song was fabulous, the kind of bonding as seen between Amitabh and Dharmender, complete with a mouth organ 😀
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 10:19 AM
BTW Shammi Kapoor’s heroine Kalpana in the film ‘Professor’ passed away on 4th January, but announced only today.
RIP
She bonded well with Parveen Chowdhary as sisters. There are other more beautiful songs than this, but just for the two together I’m posting this one.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 1:16 PM
Thanks.. didn’t know..
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 10:22 AM
oops. I don’t know what happens with posting comments. The song with Dev Anand should be here.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 10:20 AM
There was “waiting to exhale” I think with 3 african american women and their relationship experiences. I think this would be a huge hit if made in Indian subtext. It doesn’t necessarily need to be “bonding” or travelogue type of movie. It could be 3 generations of women and their trials and tribulations over time (with some desi style double roles thrown in or even lost-found formula tear jerker). It can start with indian independance/partition to all the way mordern times. It would be so interesting to see how far women have come in the society and how their roles/expectations have evolved.
BTW did you guys know that for TDP, VB had 6 different faces (prosthetics) to show her evolution? Interesting stuff.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 10:21 AM
Dhobi Ghat is on the BAFTA long list for Best foreign film. I highly doubt it will make the BAFTA shortlist though.
But Kiran Rao’s next film should really be marketed by Aamir Khan as international art house release.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 2:00 PM
I like DG (inspite of Prateek’s lousy performance). I espcially “connected” with the Aamir and the video he watches of the former renter. I know Satyam believes that “connection” is irrelevant or unimportant but I personally think that if something doesn’t pull your heart’s strings (which to me is that connection) then it is quite worthless.
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 3:08 PM
“but I personally think that if something doesn’t pull your heart’s strings (which to me is that connection) then it is quite worthless”
yes there were plenty like yourself when Kaagaz ke Phool released..
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 3:22 PM
Aha: incidentally ZNMD satellite release/rerun coming on tv-just started now …
Don’t have time really…but
But lemme see how long it ‘hooks me’
Costa brava and Pamplona -yaay…
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 7:31 AM
ZNMD was 1 of the best films of 2011
Spain has been shot beautifully – just wow!
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 4:52 PM
aaila..now you are blaming my lot for failure of KKP.
I think KKP pulling the heart strings too much. I wish not to be entertained by my tears (alone). It should be combination of sad and happy..sad initially and by the time “The End” comes all issues should be resolved and no tears.
Imagine Three Idiots with only suicide stories (even if true) and pain and torture of studying. It would be cult-classic and also be super-flop movie 😉
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 4:57 PM
You didn’t like DG either Satyam?
I think KKP might be later on “recognised” because G.D’s life so much resembled that of the hero. Maybe it became so autobiographical that people ultimately “connected”. Since you don’t like the word connected, lets say emphatized with the hero?!
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 5:47 PM
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 9:10 PM
awesome read…thanks.
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 7:35 AM
DG was too ‘heavy’ for me….its definately a very niche audience. I watched it till halfway but then could not continue. I
LikeLike
January 10, 2012 at 4:55 PM
Sattu: BTW: it was that “pull of strings” possibly that KKP was later on recognised as cult-classic…no?
I wonder though, why it takes 2 centuries to recognize Van Gogh. R people of those times dumb or are they looking at the genius up close and personal thro’ magnifying class and cannot *see* things clearly?
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 7:37 AM
Kahaani looks fantastic
Will definately be worth a watch
Vidya is on fire – go girl!
😉
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 10:28 AM
Good comment there Diana
Recently went to some art galleries in Europe
More for giving gracious company and to appear interested
But
Was impressed by some work of the so called greats
In here, one can sense the ‘aura’ of those works, though for us , retrospectively
One can sense when one comes across a van gogh,Picasso, Renoir, Dali even if one doesn’t know the details
Like Monet
Also came to know of the ‘minimalistic’ style and loved it
Are their any painters here-raise your hands..
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 2:58 PM
“In here, one can sense the ‘aura’ of those works, though for us , retrospectively…”
One can sense…lol…you are copying “the master” here lexy!!!!
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 12:03 PM
effective trailer no doubt. At a time when filmmakers are obsessed about filming Delhi, Mumbai or the lush landscapes of foreign countries, its great to see Kolkata being captured.
Vidya has indeed made an intelligence choice here. the only thing is, Sujoy Ghosh’s track record bothers me !
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 12:16 PM
Indeed.. Calcutta is a great Indian city, unique is so many ways but it has rarely attracted the attention of Hindi filmmakers. In general the archive of Bengal has more or less vanished from Hindi cinema and for a long time now. To the discredit of the industry. The Punjab archive has been dominant for the last twenty years and we see the results. It has simply meant song and dance and loud parties. Little more. This is not an ‘ethnic’ statement. But one can compared a cinema informed by Bengali artistic and cultural impulses with one based on the same from Punjab. The contrast is glaringly obvious.
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 12:55 PM
devdas, parineeta , yuva , much acclaimed namesake ( ironically a hw movie ) have the essence of calcutta in recent times
LikeLike
January 13, 2012 at 4:34 PM
Yuva yes.. but Devdas and Parineeta basically had calcutta ‘on the sets’!
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 7:07 AM
Vidya would not have been out of place if she had been an actress in the 50’s or the 60’s….she looks so natural in classical movies……like Parineeta & Ek Lavya and then she’s got flair to do a ‘Dirty Pciture’.
My favourite ‘actresses’ are – Kangana/Vidya/Mahi Gill & Gul Panag.
I would’v loved to see Aamir & Gul Panag pair up in Dhoom3
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 9:17 AM
Wonderful…being a Bong myself, just loved this ! Usha Uthup, the one and only, wow !!
“Aami shotti bolchi” ( I speak the truth ) indeed !!!
Also liked how words like “Gondogol” ( meaning “fishy” in Bengali ) was interspersed in the lyrics.
Safely adding Kahaani to this year’s must watch list along with Gangs of Wasseypur, Talaash & Shanghai.
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 10:15 AM
If nothing this song will definitely promote the Calcutta tourism(I feel like going there pronto)…opps kolkota. Y did they take bidiya/bida and not Rani. Rani would have been more authentic. Bidiya’s only claim to being bong is that she was bong in last birth. lolz
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 1:56 PM
This is very nice. Like it!
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 2:16 PM
“Wonderful…being a Bong myself..”
Yo shubh
Btw have noticed that the few bongs I’ve corne across
Have an ‘artist’ in them
They all are either painters/singers/writers
Etc
What’s your talent 😉
“My favourite ‘actresses’ are – Kangana/Vidya/Mahi Gill & Gul Panag.”
Km- that’s a v interesting n good choice –
Btw r u a guy or a girl..
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 4:38 PM
So the sporadic gossip segment is back on popular demand!!!
Talking of vidya balan and her super duper acting …
Some more Oscar award worthy stuff 😉
Throwing open another discussion
What’s your vote on the best onscreen kisses, folks -let’s restrict to Bollywood here (since Hollywood may need another blog, not thread 🙂
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 4:59 PM
Lexy..since you are asking the question, why don’t you go ahead and answer it. Now don’t select imran hashmi. hahaha
BTW, you are supposed to close your eyes for such scenes. Chotey baccho ko yeh sab dekhna mana hai 😉
That nargis fuckiri is really bad looking.yikes. India may ladki kum pad gayi thi ki usko liya? Not sure why you are so obsessed with her.
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 5:04 PM
Omg lemme run from Di…
Anyhow Di:let’s have your ‘expert’ list -top 5….
Know only u have the guts here for this
Keep it up Diana-u are a star 🙂
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 5:51 PM
Ok so let’s throw the gauntlet… 🙂
@ Satyam, Di, Oldgold, sm, amy, filmibuff, aamirsfan, kash etc
Top 5 all time onscreen kisses in Bollywood …
Cmon folks: u don’t have to ‘perform’ it here-just a list will do
U have got so ‘scared’-c’mon get over your inhibitions…
Hohoho
Will let u grapple with your inhibitions -gud nite 🙂
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 6:05 PM
There was old Satyajit Ray movie, where the hero and heroine in silhoutte kiss; it was wonderful. I think even if script *demands* it, (the passion) can be shown without the actual titillating act (mostly not required). Then there are mallika sherawat-hashmi style whose movies sell because how many times they kiss in the movie. blech. I think if that particular scene from Ishquiya was taken out, the film still would have been good. So not sure about script “demands” especially in desi context. Mughal-e-azam too had lot of electric chemistry and not kissing/touching!
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 6:07 PM
I don’t like any Bollywood kisses because almost all of the time they’re either awkward or seem to be suffering from the anxiety to be convincing in a Hollywood kind of way.
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 6:18 PM
My favourite kissing scene is here at about 2.58 – 3.00 (it’s there even if you don’t see it).
In fact the whole thing is far more erotic than that Nargis Fakhri’s ugly mouth being kissed uggggh.
ooops.
Sorry alex.
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 6:24 PM
I think something is wrong with that so here’s the (not so nice) coloured clip.
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 8:45 PM
OMG…the famous feather scene is actually kissing scene….how dump of me…lolz. The *song* is divine and simply fab for the situation in the movie.
LikeLike
February 2, 2012 at 4:41 PM
Ranbir kapoor does share my ‘sense’ of female ‘acting capabilities’-move over the likes of vidya balan
ROTFLOL
LikeLike
February 3, 2012 at 3:27 AM
Good classy ones there-di and oldgold
Btw it was “top5″& actual kissing lol
And satyam has tactfully tried to escape the question (but has already viewed these clips 10 times today)ha
So the other ‘silent’ ones are still grappling with their ‘hesitations’
Time to grow beyond..
😉
LikeLike
February 3, 2012 at 5:23 PM
Suspect folks here are not interested in kisses etc
More onto devotional stuff
Btw thanx to oldgold for ‘opening up’ & that ‘feather scene ‘
Shocking confession but had never seen that scene b4
Thanx for the ‘education’ oldgold
Btw haven’t seen MeA And even sholay properly
Don’t get time from dodgy stuff 😉
LikeLike
February 3, 2012 at 7:58 PM
here..just to humor you…the worst list 😉
in one, kamal hasan is multi-tasking!!
in another, akshay’s neck muscles are so streched that they might explode. in another one priya’s lips are like pillows–huge–ugly.
N’joy
LikeLike
February 8, 2012 at 3:56 AM
Di: some of these posts are such that u can’t even open em @ work
U will get me into trouble 🙂
Ok back 2 pretend 2 work and boss over others lol
Ps-the ‘multitask’ kiss has really opened my horizons
Thanx do for that insight –
LikeLike
February 8, 2012 at 4:36 PM
lexy..did u see episode of Seinfeld, where george is making out and experiementing with eating…talk about multi-tasking!
I think those (kramer, george) were/are immensely talented actors (on that particular show).
LikeLike
February 8, 2012 at 6:09 PM
Di–u somehow know the things i like 🙂
It is no surprise that I will find kramer interesting ..
btw the somewhat charm bout kramer for me is the idiosyncracies and conflicting offensive brutness..
Basically Kramer is an attitude
ps–what do u think bout Hugh Lauries’ ‘house’–another of my favorite …
LikeLike
February 3, 2012 at 8:49 PM
Just saw this Diana -haha
Your cumments were more fun-btw like your wit!!
Lol@ “lips like pillows”& “multitasking”
3 cheers to di and oldgold
They have now got free exclusive membership to my (Osho style) ‘health centre’ (ashram)
😉
LikeLike
February 4, 2012 at 10:30 AM
Diana -just viewed this properly
The kamel hassan one was a really good one
Being a fan of ‘multitasking’ myself 🙂
Even the saif deepika one has an interesting ‘buildup ‘
U surely know how 2 keep me happy 😉
Keep em cumin
And wtf happened to PCs lips
Has she had an allergic reaction or stuck her lips onto a vacuum cleaner 🙂
Or is it the collagen injections Amy talks
Bout (and want to get lol)
LikeLike
February 5, 2012 at 7:37 AM
“Nargis Fakhri’s ugly mouth being kissed uggggh.
ooops.
Sorry alex.”
Basically what oldgold means is–
“my own mouth is much better so….” fill in the blanks folks.
hahaha caught ya
isnt it oldgold 🙂
LikeLike
February 5, 2012 at 7:59 AM
>“my own mouth is much better so….”
NO! It doesn’t automatically mean that.
Actors and actresses are there to be judged by people. This is an example, just as we talk about fat/thin crass/gentleman ugly/beautiful etc etc
LikeLike
February 5, 2012 at 8:35 AM
Haha OG -was pulling your leg there 😉
Anyhow -can’t compare ‘mouths’ in this case anyhow.
Btw don’t mind NFs mouth/pout somehow-difficult to explain
Theres Somethin interesting 🙂
LikeLike
February 5, 2012 at 8:41 AM
It’s not real. Botoxed or whatever they call it.
LikeLike
February 8, 2012 at 4:01 AM
Oldgold u don’t get lips botoxed
Apparently there is some collagen injection
If u want details can fetch em
Btw
Am not annoyed with u (yet) 😉
And pardon for mistaking u for that weirdo girl ‘karankumar’
U r any day much much classier
Peace
LikeLike
February 6, 2012 at 3:23 PM
NF in St Barts
knowing my views on NF–
A common friend has sent me this update
(i usually try to be off twitter/fb though for privacy purposes lol)
http://twitter.com/#!/NargisFakhri/media/slideshow?url=pic.twitter.com%2FhXKZFRFQ
ps–really like st barts myself
LikeLike
February 8, 2012 at 5:39 AM
Hmm…I have to agree with Satyam that most Bollyqood kisses look too forced/lacklustre to me. But one kiss that does come to mind is the scene where Aamir Khan is spying on Rahul Khanna and Nandita Das in Earth. In recent times the kiss in the car between Tashi and Menaka (Delhi Belly) looked a little more natural than the norm in Bollywood.
LikeLike
February 8, 2012 at 2:52 PM
Good 1 there amy -the delly belly one was ‘natural’ 😉
Any links
LikeLike
February 16, 2012 at 9:40 PM
I love the new promo- so atmospheric and Vidya seems to be in top form here. She looks so naturally beautiful as well. Very excited for this film- hope it releases in the UK.
LikeLike
February 16, 2012 at 10:54 PM
Sujoy Ghosh’s track record doesn’t inspire a lot of confidence but this does look pretty arresting. Each trailer has been pretty solid and for Balan this looks like a truly special role as opposed to the cliched caricature she tried to make work in TDP.
LikeLike
February 17, 2012 at 2:27 AM
Interesting discussion on women centric films here. IMO one of the reasons that there are fewer female oriented films is that there aren’t many good and charesmatic actresses around who can carry a film on their shoulders. Most films of Meena Kumari and Nutan were female centric with token male presence but they were very successful and well loved. Even heroines who didn’t have main roles like Waheeda Rehman, Vijantimala and others played important and meaningful parts. Not just eye candy. Till Sridevi and Madhuri heroines played important roles in the films but recently till Vidya nobody’s been able to do that.
Nowadays people, both men and women, want just good looking stars in movies. There is not connect with reality, its all a make believe glamorous world, hence 6 pack heros and barbie doll heroines.
LikeLike
February 19, 2012 at 4:35 PM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/mumbai/Sketch-and-the-city/articleshow/11945570.cms?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=tweets
This ‘encounter’ sequence isn’t a strand of Anurag Kashyap’s dark imagination. It belongs to the soon-to-be-released Indian graphic novel Mumbai Confidential. In the book, no stone has been left unturned to capture the Mumbai underworld in all its gritty authenticity- writer Saurav Mohapatra’s characters speak the real stuff, so the English lines are interspersed with Marathi and Hindi . And artist Vivek Shinde actually went around the city taking photographs of various slums before replicating them in his sketches.
This attempt to bring out local character and setting in a visually cinematic way is the newest achievement of the Indian comic book industry. Unlike an earlier generation that had to make do with mythological storylines set in fictional locations, younger comic book artists are making sure that their characters are placed in distinctly identifiable Indian locales. The proof lies in the comic books that are at the ongoing national Comic Con in Delhi-Hyderabadi Biryani about a pizza delivery boy in Hyderabad; Black Gold set in Mumbai’s Manmad; and Stupid Guy Goes To India, a translation of a Manga comic created by a Japanese man about his misadventures in Delhi.
LikeLike
March 2, 2012 at 9:30 AM
Vidya Balan’s next movie is “Kahaani” in which she is playing a character of pregnant lady….
.
.
Aur karo Ooh laa laa… Ooh laa laa
LikeLike
March 2, 2012 at 9:30 AM
a friend’s FB update 🙂
LikeLike
March 5, 2012 at 8:59 AM
really well made promo
hope the movie is a good
will definately be watching it
😉
LikeLike
March 7, 2012 at 9:35 AM
Just saw that Vidya won the National Best Actress award for Dirty Picture. More power to her- she’s definitely going from strength to strength.
LikeLike