ET on Aamir and SRK and their contrasting brand appeal

thanks to Bliss..

In the space of two weeks in May, Indian audiences got to see two of their favourite film superstars in completely different settings.

First, Aamir Khan shook the nation’s conscience awake with an episode on female foeticide on his TV show ‘Satyamev Jayate’, an hourly program at 11 am that seeks to change Sunday TV viewing habits. In sharp contrast to the tears and gravitas of this show, Shah Rukh Khan was by turns at his brash and playful best. In the span of a week, he was in the news for swearword laced yelling contests with security guards at Mumbai one moment, and the next, turning cartwheels – black inners on show – in a free-spirited celebration of the team he co-owns winning the Indian Premier League, 2012.

In a market where younger stars are making significant inroads into the roles they once cornered and the brands they once promoted, the two Khans are taking contrasting routes to ensure their longevity – both on and off screen.

Forty seven-year old Aamir has morphed into the nation’s conscience, willing to weep for the unborn girl child on his show, and manfully brush away tears at a cause du jour every Sunday as he attempts to become the face of social change. In a country, which likes to view its film stars like the Americans do their presidents – as paragons of virtue-Aamir is seemingly making all the right moves. “This is the first time you’re seeing a star use the power of cinema, with almost the altruistic power of someone like Anna Hazare,” says Anirban Das Blah, founder and managing director of Kwan Entertainment, an event and people management firm.

In sharp contrast, Shah Rukh, also 47, has built a profile of being the impetuous Delhi boy who wants to be the country’s biggest and most visible film star. And he isn’t averse to cultivating an anti-establishment image – a la the Rolling Stones – to connect with the youth. And, as Messrs Mick Jagger and Keith Richards will testify, a bad-boy image works like a charm. To complete the rock-n-roll analogy, if SRK is to Bollywood what Jagger was to popular music in the 60s and the 70s, Aamir is closer to what a Cliff Richards was – no sex, no drugs, only music, often the gospel variety. “He has made no apologies for his ambition,” says Blah. For SRK as he is called by friend, foe and fan, this has meant leveraging his personal brand to the hilt, signing scores of endorsement deals and being available to do promotions, dance at weddings and whatever else it takes to be visible all the time.

for more follow the link..

About these ads

95 Responses to “ET on Aamir and SRK and their contrasting brand appeal”

  1. tonymontana Says:

    a related comment posed by me in the same thread:

    Recently I had a conversation with a relative of mine who’s a Maths teacher at the same school where Gauri Khan studied (Modern School).. She once introduced the teachers to her boyfriend SRK who helped the drama society of the school in play-directing n wrote the complete dialogues of the film.

    the teacher complained that the dialogues he came up with were laden with pervasive abuses. Since it was a school and they couldnt let such abuses be a part of the dialogue, they requested SRK to change the dialogues as was unsuitable for children. He promised to, but the dialogues he came up with again contained a multitude of gaalis.. Ultimately the teachers etc had no option but to reject his script.


    • Hahahaha!
      Well that’s what burst out from me as soon as I saw what AK was personified as…and how!!
      Perrrrrfect!! LOL!!

    • omrocky786 Says:

      Aside – waise Modern School Badmasho ka aur Columbus Padhne wale bachcho ka mana jaata tha ( Disacalimer- hamare zamane mein, don’t want people from those schools getting all mad at me )

  2. Ram aur Shyam? Or Saadhu aur Shaitaan?

  3. alex adams Says:

    The 3 worthwhile khans –a ‘reality check’ !!

    “to complete the rock-n-roll analogy, if SRK is to Bollywood what Jagger was to popular music in the 60s and the 70s, Aamir is closer to what a Cliff Richards was – no sex, no drugs, only music, often the gospel variety. ”
    Not sure if aamir is THAT asexual…also srk is not jaggeresque…

    its interesting hos their ages are exactly the same..
    If one adds salman to the mix, this triumvarate refuses to go away and seem easily very relevant till the start of their FIFTIES as LEAD heros—applause is due..
    by the way–a few points /questions from folks here
    a)Does this ‘sibling rivalry’ sort of ‘competitiveness’ over the decades HELP people like this to LIFT themselves up when down ONLY to match the other two
    b) Salman after the flop-streak till veer and aamir after his post-lagaan ‘personal mindblock’ lifted themselves up…
    srk has been more or less uniformly ‘perched on or near the top’ LONGER…This is his first real test of nerves–will he be able to pick himself up
    c) Who will be the first to blink, any guesses ie beome irrelevnt first (obviously all will ultimately)
    d) how much of a role the ‘women’ had in their lives (marital/extramarital/premarital)
    e) does srk NEED something on the lines of aamir in his personal life to give him the ‘spark’ back ;-)
    f) final and foremost question
    again, pardon the raking up of this again, but cant resist
    ON a cumulative basis , ALL things considered and on the evidence till now,
    how do u rate the three in totality–no1,2,3 :-)
    dont mind’fireworks’
    ps–if anyone says , why do we always compare these three only, the counter question to that person is—should we compare tusshar kapoor, aftab shivdasani and fardeeen khan??
    let the games begin….

    • Previously it used to be Dilip, Raj and Dev.

      And then it was only Amitabh with no competition.

      Now it is back to the old thing. 3 ruling the bollywood.

    • Rating the three Khans:

      1. Aamir Khan

      2. Salman Khan

      3. Sharukh Khan

      The way I see it- Aamir has the ‘prestige’, trust, talent, ‘family friendliness’ and respect- Salman has the sex appeal/ ‘bad boy’ factor/ mass appeal-SRK has none of these things- he has outgrown the ‘Raj/ Rahul’ avatar that made him so iconic- at one time he was symbolic of a new Indian middle class and also very family-friendly but that time has passed- he’s only keeping himself relavent by getting embroiled in controversy after controversy.

      Aamir today symbolizes intelligent, quality entertainment and Salman symbolizes unpretentious, mass-friendly fun. SRK was once symbolic of the great India Shining dream- but his iconic star power has now been ‘downgraded’ as much as India’s economic future superpower status. His whole appeal was about a more ‘westernized’, ‘yuppie’ image of an Indian man- but today the small towns of UP and Bihar seem to be more in vogue that the swiss peaks and London mansions. He tried capilitlizing on his fading iconic power by selling films like Ra.One as examples of ‘India Shining’ where a Bollywood movie can be ‘on par’ with a Hollywood movie- and that failed. Even our definition of ‘sophisticated cinema’ has changed today- from the KJo diasporic fantasies- to middle-of-the-road cinema like Kahaani and Vicky Donor which are much more rooted in the reailty of modern India.

      On the other hand Salman returned to power by making masala films that catered to those who were left out of the ‘New Indian Dream’ that SRK represented- while Aamir’s identity is also much more rooted in India and it’s social issues even if his image is far more sophisticated than SRK’s.

      Both Aamir and Salman have their ‘thing’ that they can continue to do for several more years succcesfully-SRK’s future looks a lot more uncertain. It doesn’t help that he looks much older than his years either.

      Before OG objects to this- it’s strictly my perception of how the 3 Khans are viewed by the general publc- not saying that anybody else has to agree.

      • sanjana Says:

        agree. Wish I can write like you.

        • alex adams Says:

          “agree. Wish I can write like you.”
          dont worry sanjana–surely u can do something else very well :-)
          and dont worry–lemme ask amy to do a review on some latest film(s)
          Amy–can u seen /written something on imported kamariya (aka shanghai) or ishaqzaade….

          • alex adams Says:

            Seems Amy has stopped writing reviews for free…
            Ever since she has signed my film (cocktail spoof), she KNOWS she will be a big star soon.. ;-)

      • BTW- when I said OG- I really meant the SRK fans in general- I shouldn’t have singled her out like that- sorry OG- no offence intended.

        • alex adams Says:

          im surprised–oldold is still ‘hiding’
          cmon oldgold–thought u were ‘brave’
          theres no LS today to ‘scare’ u off :-)

          • Come on–don’t pretend that I am this scary crazy fanatic who keeps OG away.. What bull. Incidentally, I read this article at ET site yesterday–and laughed out loud after seeing the pic. Both the khans look cute in their own way, but the aam aadmi in the middle–he’s the funniest. But I found the title to the article rather mean–and said so at the site.

      • alex adams Says:

        a pertinent point of view put forward by the eloquent amy :-)
        Amy–how would u rate the current bollywood actresses ALL things considered in a cumulative manner (excluding vidya balan)
        (reason for the exclusion–shes quite higher than the crowd acting wise and quite ‘different’ from the rest ‘appeal’ wise…)

        • alex adams Says:

          btw to add–the question wasnt only about their CURRENT respective positions which is always easier to gauge at any one point of time
          But to try to ‘quantify’ the overall worth of their entire carrers spanning two decades…

      • Amu, that’s such a fair summation and so well articulated. Can’t disagree with anything here. Just a point (addressing everyone), small towns of U.P. and Bihar r not only limited to dacoitry and gunrunning and crime (how do i know? i belong to UP). I take major offence when films show only this face of these states. As if entire UP is a badland.

      • Good write-up, Ami…as far as I’m concerned, Aamir’s been the best “Khan” since the early 90s, ever since he worked in Rangeela. I had written Salman off completely after his damp squibs, and they were quite a few in number, but he’s emerged stronger than ever before.

        SRK still has a base among the NRI audience…in India, he’s been losing steam for a while now. Not surprisingly, it’s Aamir who sets the terms of the debate these days, even though he seems to be too media shy to initiate one on his own. Everyone else, at least in the commercial arena, has been trying to play catch up with Aamir.

        Not only has Aamir’s sense of a good script become legendary, his marketing acumen is extraordinary. One SRK fan (won’t take the name) was trying to make fun of Aamir’s educational qualifications, pointing out that he hasn’t even passed his 12th standard exams. Guess what, Mansoor Khan has graduated from IIT+MIT and even he would admit that his cousin’s sense of good, honest cinema is the one to aspire for…

        • I should hasten to add that Aamir is a very interesting — scratch that — the most interesting Bollywood film personality of the last decade but I wouldn’t call him a great actor. He’s easily the best “actor” amongst the Khan triumvirate but that’s hardly a big thing.

          His contribution to the direction that Bollywood has taken, especially since Lagaan is to my mind his greatest achievement. That is not to say that Aamir isn’t a good actor, he certainly is, but his true gifts lie elsewhere.

          • Saket, agreed on Aamir not being a great actor. I think after Bachchan, i will take Sanjay Dutt over everyone in the ‘mainstream’ bwood arena as far acting goes (though i have a feeling that u don’t think much of Dutt)

          • The precise problem I have is that I can’t think of anyone beyond Amitabh Bachchan. He has spoiled my taste completely!

            I can’t settle for a lesser actor because Bachchan is still there to remind everyone how it’s done.

            It’s tough for me personally, because I would like to appreciate other commercial performances…but the level of performance that I seek or have gotten used to, courtesy Amitabh Bachchan, is no longer (was probably never!) available in commercial hindi cinema.

            I can still appreciate mainstream performances (Aamir in Rangeela, Abhishek in Yuva, Dutt in Vaastav as some examples that come to mind) but those remain qualified approvals. I have to satiate my taste-o-meter demands elsewhere, namely in offbeat, independent films.

          • “but the level of performance that I seek or have gotten used to, courtesy Amitabh Bachchan, is no longer (was probably never!) available in commercial hindi cinema”


          • Agreed esp with the 1st two paragraphs of your Saket.u know for the 1st 7-8 yrs of my life, i thought Bachchan is the only hero and rest all r villains/sideys. i remember in class 7 i got myself a bell-bottom stiched similar to the ones AB used to wear. They just don’t make them like him anymore. but Aamir in Rangeela, i thought he was better in Sarfarosh. And i will take Naam over Vaastav any day (not to say that Rangeela and Vaastav were not good)

          • I would call him the best of his generation in terms of acting as he has been able to play the varied characters with ease in his 2 decade long career, and masses have also been of the same opinion as people have faith in him that he would pull off any role given to him. His consistency has been his forte in all these years as Saif might have a Langda Tyagi or Sanjay Dutt a Munna Bhai, but they were not able to capitalize on these iconic roles and came up with some very erratic performances, which evened out the edge they had with the iconic role. And perceptions do get formed with the passage of time as has been the case with Aamir, who has cultivated this image and persona for years through his roles in the movies, for which he is reaping the golden harvest in terms of PRESTIGE, FAITH AND TRUST people have of him.

          • agreed on all scores.. Will say that I have found him more interesting as an actor over the past decade than I did prior to this even when I liked his films. But I think he’s also had impressive performances. MP for example.

          • But Satyam, Aamir does not have one stand-out performance- no Yuva/guru, no Naam/munnabhai/vaastav no Black/Agneepath/Paa. Not even any iconic ones like Dabanng. Even SRK’s Chake De act got a lot of acclaim. Aamir needs to have sumthing like this. BTW dunno abt other but i loved Anil Kapoor in Pukaar (that alongwith Meri Jung) is my fav Anil act (though he was also good in Thikaana, Saheb, Eeshwar and Nayak). in recent times i found him fantastic in Ghai’s “Black and White”

          • It’s true Aamir doesn’t have that kind of iconic or very critically acclaimed performance. Rangeela is probably the closest it gets to this. I wouldn’t put SRK’s CDI in that group by the way for more than reason and while the media reaction was very favorable it wasn’t like the reception some of those performances got.

            On Dutt as I’ve probably said before on his best day he has a very appealing and effective persona that he combines with a certain kind of performances. I have liked him on very many days but I don’t see him as a fine actor or anything. On that note I think LoC is his single most underrated performance.

            Anil Kapoor was always too crude as an actor (to my mind). A trader in the ‘obvious’. He seemed like a genius at times given the competition in his generation (!) and he was certainly competent but he had the Kareena problem beyond a point. Lost all his spontaneity as an actor early but also started ‘over-acting’ increasingly often. Finally in Parinda most preferred Jackie’s restrained job and they were right! Rishi Kapoor was probably leagues ahead of him as a talent!

          • sanjana Says:

            Saurabh, how much you want to bring down Aamir? Just dont go on with blind hatred.

          • Sanjana, WTF was that! have u read my comments properly?! i am not at all an Aamir hater, far from it. i have ‘never’ tried to bring him down. He is a great talent no doubt, just don’t find him a ‘great actor’ (but he is ‘very good’).

          • I must agree here.. people need to be a bit more reasonable in their responses.. no need to go to an extreme. Even if someone completely dislikes an actor so what?! Words like ‘hatred’ and so on are completely unproductive. First of all one has a right to hate any actor one likes but not every personal choice or criticism can be defined this way.

          • Aamir has the goodwill and blind trust of the people And Rangeela, Sarfarosh, 1947 Earth, Lagaan, Jo jeeta Wo Hi Sikandar, Raakh, Ghulam are some of the performances which are very critically acclaimed. He doesn’t have an Iconic one, Yes, but ICONIC can not be a criterion on which good acting hinges, so he has multiple roles which are etched in the memories of cine lovers and they are not remembered by Aamir the star or actor but by the names of the characters Aamir played in the movies. Be it Bhuvan of Lagaan, Aakash of DCH, DJ of RDB, Rancho of 3 Ididots, ACP Rathore of Sarfarosh, Munna of Rangeela, Siddhu of Ghulam, this amply demonstrates the indelible impact of Aamir’s acting in these roles.

          • sanjana Says:

            Aman has explained some of the iconic roles that aamir played.

            Hatred clouds impartial judgment. One can have a personal opinion and also hatred. In this respect OG is honest. While some others behave as though they are very fair in their opinions and then start backstabbing and also justifying.. This is what is called hypocrisy.

        • @ Saket–a bit about education here–from whatever I’ve read over the years, Aamir did not do college, but did complete his 12th ( Bombay Scottish, then from NM College, Mumbai). Salman is a graduate and so is SRK–who apparently started on a post grad course at Jamia , then left it mid-way.

          Mansoor khan did not complete his studies at MIT–came back to India, so he could make films and save family fortunes; dad Nazir Hussain’s films had started flopping. This is what Wikipedia says–
          Mansoor Khan attended several engineering colleges only to drop out and later pursued his career in Bollywood. He attended some of the very well known colleges like IIT Bombay, Cornell, M.I.T.


            Well according to this article, Salman did not complete college–but John Abraham is a post-graduate– John Abraham is one of the highly qualified actors in the industry.

            ‘After schooling from Bombay Scottish School, he graduated from Jai Hind College, Mumbai, and then completed MBA (Masters in Business Management) from MET (Mumbai Educational Trust).’

            And how successful is John Abraham ?

            I know somebody–graduated from one IIT, post-graduate from another–and sadly unsuccessful in career, thanks to his negative attitude.

            Education is only a tool; it is what you do with your life, with whatever you have in hand, school degree, college degree, whatever, plus extra skils that can’t be learned formally. Real education is an ongoing process through life–and the most successful people are continuously learning–through reading, actual experience, all.

            One of my favourite writers, the very successful and absolutely readable, wise funny Sue Townsend–she dropped out of school, aged 15. BTW, I am reviewing her latest book, for a paper.

          • “As for difficulty of admission as a transfer student, let me assure you that I went to MIT as an international transfer student, your famous movie producer Mansoor Khan transfered to Cornell from IIT (I think it was Kanpur) and then again to MIT as a junior (he was my class fellow and good friend), and each year I met many new transfer students from many countries. ”

          • @ Munna. Thanks for the link to blog and especially the video. Am watchig it. Understood Reality curve, but not money curve. Maybe i need to watch it again; but good lecture. Anyway, here is the link to Mansoor’s farm-resort business in Nilgiris hills, TN–


            Interesting Aamir’s first wife Reena had at one point wished that he too would follow the cuz and take up eco-farming–Aamir has mentioned it in an interview. Aamir refused to take biwi’s suggestion– I guess because somebody is needed in Mumbai to help the family make real money, have a strong base, make good films and money. I think they have some mango orchards in UP–but that sort of revenue dries up in the long run.

      • I think this is a very bit of analysis..

        • Well summed up Ami and Saket.
          Unfortunately for SRK, his image has taken a beating -fairly or unfairly. And, his movies havent really rocked the BO inspite of being big grossers. Aamir on the other hand has gone from strength to strength with each move and Salman made up a lot of ground by giving three back to back mega-grossers.
          SRK has been perenially playing catch-up for a while now and even Akshay with Houseful 2 and RR has muddied the waters even further.

      • oldgold Says:


        For me the three Khans (at least these two) ARE EXACTLY AS SHOWN in the picture.

        Just Loooove the angelic (hahaha) AK and the shaitan SRK.

        As the article says, both are trying hard to remain relevant at their age. Amir, shrewd as he is has CHOSEN A PATH. **please note**, I’m not saying he’s doing it out of any sense of altruism, but as the article says (and I have always said) he is ‘choosing’ how to stay relevant (reinventing).

        Apart from this I don’t have any deep philosophical theories about them.

        • oldgold Says:

          PS: By ”Chosen a Path” – I mean this path of “righteousness” – on which he can walk at any age.

        • “but as the article says (and I have always said) he is ‘choosing’ how to stay relevant (reinventing).”
          It could be a mid-life crisis, a la aamir khan? Maybe this is how intellectuals have a mid-life crisis. Instead of buying porsche, they let go of crores of endorsement deal and make SMJ.

  4. alex adams Says:

    ;-) sanjana-but whats your ranking for those 3 overall… ;-)

  5. That is the most biased piece of S**T I’ve ever read! I think they forgot to mention that SRK donated $4 million to a Cancer foundation after celebration of KKR’s victory. And also that Shahrukh adopted 5 villages at the 2009 NDTV Greenathon. Or maybe that Shahrukh paid all the medical expenses for 2 Kashmiri Orphans who suffered burns from a terrorist frag grenade. During RA.One’s premiere, he, Kareena Kapoor and Arjun Rampal held a very high-profile dinner and raised money to build a workshop for handicapped children. He funds a children’s ward in a top city hospital! Also, he was also appointed by The UNOPS to be the first global ambassador of The Water Supply and Sanitation Collaborative Council that works to improve the lives of poor people by enhancing sanitation quality and water supply.

    I don’t see any mention of that. OH YEAH, cuz these idiots only take into account a matter of weeks…it’s just horrendous seeing the pieces of crap that have absolutely no idea what they’re talkin about!!!

    I have the utmost respect for Aamir and all that he is doing in Satyamev Jayete and everything else he’s been doing! But, saying that Shahrukh Khan has a bad boy image??? BITCH PLEASE!

    • sanjana Says:

      It is not bad boy image. It is boisterous.

      • refer to the last two words in my original post!

        • oldgold Says:

          I think you are completely misinterpreting the article.
          They don’t seem to be praising Amir for his so called kind heartedness. In fact they are rather neutral and objective about it.

          They aren’t listing Amir’s god deeds as you have listed SRK’s. People don’t know about SRK’s good deeds because there’s no show about it so there was no need for the article to talk about it.

          The article mainly speaks of SHOW that’s involved in their activities, and how both are going about it in their own ways – to stay relevant.

          I think SRK’s way of doing kindness is much more preferable, he’s not incrporating that into a SHOW!!

          • Yes, that’s what I’m saying. I’m not saying anything about Aamir being praised in the article. I’m saying, YES HE SHOULD BE PRAISED for bringing awareness about some issues that need to be addressed. However, the article is (i think) biased and it is downing SRK based on just the recent controversies. Yes, I may be misinterpreting it.

            I don’t really have any preference for kindness. As long as someone’s doing a good deed, it doesn’t matter if they do it through a show or if they do it “secretively”.

            Personally, I think I’m from the select few, who respect all three Khans. (Maybe for different things, but, still, lots of admiration and respect for SRK, Salman and Aamir) :)

            I just wish people would stop looking down on the other star (esp speaking of HARDCORE SRK and Salman fanboys)

          • oldgold Says:

            Oh please, let me enjoy finding fault with Amir :-)

            I don’t mind Salman.

          • alrighty…you, uh, enjoy!

        • Arsh Khehra Says:
          June 13, 2012 at 1:00 PM


          lol @ bitch plz

          loved the passion with which you wrote.

          I agree that if someone does charitable deeds they do not have to tell everyone. I guess each to their own

          • If charity bit is taken in to consideration, then it would be a Pandora box as who is doing what is only a conjecture and when this facet is also included to rank stars, only GOD KNOWS who is doing what, so it is meaningless to bring something of this sort , which is very personal and ought not to be included to gauge the real worth of the star.

          • @KM
            thanks! :)

            I’m just saying that the article “forgets” to mention what Shahrukh is doing in terms of philanthropy. Rather, it focuses on the previous weeks’ controversies and THAT’s IT.

  6. tonymontana Says:


    Which Sigmund Freud book would you recommend people:

    Jokes and their relation to the unconscious
    the psychopathology of everyday life,
    The ego and the id

    • Among those three the first two are better as introductions than the last one. The best place to start though is still Interpretation of Dreams. Or the Introductory Lectures on Psychoanalysis.

    • Agar freud pad rahe ho toh phir saath may Jung bhi pad lena.

      • tonymontana Says:

        freud ka to pata nahi lekin abhi sherlock holmes ki ek aad story padne ki koshish ki thi.. bore ho gaya!

        • Both Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) and Carl Jung (1875–1961) were so influential that they have become adjectives. But their story begins with Freud. Young Sigmund was the first one to push the idea of the unconscious (a.k.a. the part of your thought process that happens without you knowing it) on the masses. Freud thought that the best window into the unconscious was the dream, and he fixated on sexual development and the libido. In doing so, Freud divided childhood into the oral, anal, and phallic stages, based on what part of the body gives a child pleasure. It was here that he postulated his famous Oedipus complex—the one where sons want to kill Dad and marry Mom (the female version is the Elektra complex). It’s no wonder, then, that Freud believed that a lot of humanity’s problems came from repressed libidos. He thought, for instance, that women were particularly susceptible to “hysteria” (from the Greek for uterus, the same root as that of hysterectomy). And don’t forget penis envy, his (now discredited) theory that women’s psychological problems stemmed from their lack of said appendage.
          Of course, Freud also brought words like id, ego, and super-ego into the popular lexicon. The id is home to our base instincts and desires, or our animal impulses; the superego is our subconscious nanny, keeping the id in check; and the ego is the I, balancing desire and acceptable behavior.
          In addition, we still use lots of Freud’s other terms in daily conversation, especially when psychoanalyzing our friends. Such coping mechanisms as projection (attributing our faults to others), denial (pretending something never happened), and rationalization (explaining something intellectually, removing the painful emotion) all come straight from Freud.
          As for Carl Jung, Freud’s slightly younger contemporary, he fathered analytic psychology. This was based on the idea that the conscious and unconscious minds need to be in harmony with each other. If not, you get neuroses, like depression or phobias.
          We use a lot of Jungian gems, too. He coined the words introvert and extrovert. He also postulated the concept of the collective unconscious, or those shared mental characteristics that keep popping up in our cultures and dreams. Early in his career, Jung befriended Freud, but Jung quickly moved away from his predecessor’s theories, emphasizing the role of myth, art, and religion in informing the unconscious.

          • tonymontana Says:

            That’ll make more sense to me once I pick up and read.. but thanks..

            Hard for me to finish a book though, even if i start reading. lets hope Freud helps me

          • Is Freud still relevant ( except concept of sub and unconscious mind) ???

            His Psychoanalysis theory is debunked and defunct now. His total rejection of spiritual dimension of soul/ personality was shattered by Jung( even though freud tried his best to have Jung as his pupil)

          • Alex adams Says:

            Di -I’m a bit pleasantly surprised by your comment here :-)

          • @alex

            Why :) ??

            Do you expect only Satyam to write long long comments :D or you didn’t expect Di will make such comment on Freud and Carl Jung :) ???

          • bliss…yeh mera comment nahi hai. ;-)
            Now you can go back to relaxing.
            BTW…i have ‘studied’ all of this and literature too in college…was very impressed…but as I grow older, I tend not to get all that impressed :-(

          • Alex adams Says:

            Di plz tell us about your ‘college days’

          • “Is Freud still relevant ( except concept of sub and unconscious mind) ???…”
            Bliss, go and check out the “debate” with Satyam (on the pervert thread). All this intellectual theorist mumbo-jumbo (especially hysteria and penis envy) was ‘radical’ enough to earn him his bread. Looks good at theoretical level and good to know someone’s ideas. But don’t have to swallow it down as holy satyam (truth) and nothing but the truth!

          • @Di

            — Bliss, go and check out the “debate” with Satyam (on the pervert thread).

            Utni himmat mujh main nahin hain ;)

            better to be in state of bliss than state of headache :(

  7. khan vs khan bores me to death…..

  8. I actually like both Khans and it is painful to come across these petty battles on internet forums. I do defend Aamir though–I hate it when he is unfairly picked on, especially by the usual suspects. The media is mischievous too, in a big way actually, constantly pitting one against the other. After the smj tv show, a section of the media has been especially uncharitable towards aamir–and i am not the only person who feels this way.

    Months after the release of Ra-1, i watched it on tv and found it OK, said so my blog; wondered why it was bashed so. Anyway, for SRK fans here is a personal encounter experience–from an SRK fan; good to read.

    • this is quite an encounter!

      Really liked it…..SRK seems like a chilled out sort of guy

      His biggest weakness imo is script selection……you need to be able to hit that on that bullseye. Amitabh was like SRK too…gr8 in the angry man role and enjoyed gr8 success but after seeing an actor doing the same thing over and over again loses its sheen. SRK has reached a long time ago. Salman has got this now….a tough guy sort of screen image……only Aamir has steered clear of this – gr8 strategy.

  9. alex adams Says:

    NDTV poll–top 100 bollywood actors of all time !!!\

    • LOL, it’s fun to watch Johar squirm here. He sounds so resentful! Of course his first response highlights once again his utter vapidity. Never thought I’d see the day when the likes of Habib Faisal and Motwane would be able to gang up on the likes of Johar!

      Of course note the classic Johar response here (and this isn’t the first time) — it is to pretend that there’s nothing that special about these newer trends whether it’s Udaan or Dabanng! Or these are choices as cynical as his Yashraj-inspired stuff. Gimme a break!

      • alex adams Says:

        kjo cheered my fatigued self
        to give him credit, he admits that all his hits havent given him the ‘credibility’ of a 3 crore ‘udaan’!!
        Atleast kjo said this….welldone…
        also kjo seems to be ‘encouraging’ these other two new kids on the block (even if not heartfelt)–still looks graceful….
        enjoy kjo going ballistic and his confessions about ‘gap’ and other branded stuff
        oh this ‘humility’
        thats y kjo is helming one of the biggest production houses at 40!!

  10. alex adams Says:

    was damn tired but enjoyed this ndtv link…
    kjo goes after the ‘kashyap’ surname !! around 6;00 onwards
    but kjo is showing ‘grace’ to admit a lot of things ;-)
    ps-liked this motwane guy–though havent seen udaan…

  11. alex adams Says:

    lol @ “rustic ishqiya meets omkara “–lol @kjo

  12. alex adams Says:

    came across some veer zara playng on telly
    not sure how long will grip me -lets see
    but the opening credits with some ‘poetry’ fro yash and srk at his peerless best–
    enjoy(with no biases)

  13. alex adams Says:

    My veer zaara viewing again started and stopped at this song :-)
    couldnt withstand what followed–will try again
    as of now—
    try these visuals and poetry folks
    ps–oldgold–some good stuff for the srk fan in u ;-)

Leave a Reply

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

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s