Madhubala on Filmfare (Aug 30, 1957)
- Comment
- Reblog
-
Subscribe
Subscribed
Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
This entry was posted on March 31, 2013 at 8:57 AM and is filed under the bad. 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
March 31, 2013 at 9:18 AM
Gorgeous. A year before Kala Paani.
Though a Meena Kumari cover would have marked her death anniversary today.
LikeLike
March 31, 2013 at 9:33 AM
She looks like a contented, happy typical Indian housewife.
LikeLike
March 31, 2013 at 11:37 AM
the older stars exuded a certain aura. They were part of an economy of gesturality. They were part of the transcendence of an earlier stage in the medium’s history. This transcendence disappeared from Hindi cinema more or less after the early 80s. This is not that different from global trends give or take a decade. Even in the more rarefied field of ‘foreign cinema’ the same thing happened. Different reasons for this of course but in any case contemporary stars in just about any industry today (which is to say since the loss of that transcendence) are Lilliputian in comparison. Not because they’re worse actors or worse lookers or something. This is the misinformed way in which people understand these things. It’s really the loss of transcendence. Leaving aside of course more objective considerations of when better films were made (the 50s in Bollywood were for instance better than the 60s in most definable ways) or not transcendence forms a longer history. And so in many ways these box office battles of the present, leaving aside the partisan agendas or the factual nature of such claims, are beside the point. Because success just doesn’t mean the same thing. The star (and the film) is just one more item in the consumerist superbazaar and in a world where technology makes ADD our common condition. Instantly forgotten when the newer set of stimuli arrive!
LikeLike
March 31, 2013 at 4:48 PM
Agree, especially about the transcendence .
@AA Even if the media glare wasn’t so much there were people like Baburao Patel with their weapons (Film India in his case) who could remove any aura any mystery surrounding any star.
Also, the (most) stars themselves (I think) weren’t playing a game with the media or using them to the extent they do now.
LikeLike
March 31, 2013 at 5:24 PM
“(most) stars themselves (I think) weren’t playing a game with the media or using them to the extent they do now.”–yeah Oldgold –that’s a good point I didn’t mention–even stars use the media much more..
Btw OG now havin to sit thru ek tha tiger -telly holiday–Now @ trinity Dublin bit. Btw Which did u like most -Dublin or turkey or brazil ? 🙂
LikeLike
March 31, 2013 at 10:35 AM
Agreed. None of the hottttt elegance of the contemporary stars.
LikeLike
March 31, 2013 at 12:36 PM
“Agreed. None of the hottttt elegance of the contemporary stars.”
Agreed. She does look gorgeous and ethereal. Btw Oldgold what’s wrong in being ‘hottt’ 😉
As for ‘transcendence’ -as Satyam rightly mentioned–there are other reasons as well.
a) girls/women do dress up and behave differently gesuturally now isn’t it Oldgold & sanju
b) also ‘nostalgia’ & ‘discourse’ does add a certain aura
Those who have seen ‘midnight in Paris’ know what I’m indicating.
c) the media glare and exposure in those days wasn’t excessive as in today. So it was easier to maintain a certain ‘enigma’ & ‘distance’
LikeLike
April 1, 2013 at 12:14 AM
So beautiful.
LikeLike