This entry was posted on November 16, 2014 at 5:32 PM 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.
exactly what i thought. this is actually a great “presentation”…but arjun kapoor just ruins it for me. these roles require some ‘gravitas’ which arjun has not shown in any of his roles. seems like a wasted good film.
Actually I think Arjun Kapoor can only do one kind of role. This kind where he is a tapori or street guy. He looks like a street smart ruffian too. I think he will do well here and to be honest that gilli role doesnt require any intensity. This might well be his solo 100 cr success
Good to see a Hind Film actor under the age of 45 (or 30) doing masala. Sad to see that it’s Arjun Kapoor, the kid with probably the worst dialogue delivery and expressions. But he looks good in the action/dance scenes. But the story seems stupid and been there done that. Nice to see Sonakshi doing something different from her usual!
Krish: “Actually I think Arjun Kapoor can only do one kind of role.” Wrong. He has played an IIM student in 2 States, with total acceptance. “This might well be his solo 100 cr success.” Wrong again. 2 States been thee first.
Actually when talking about Arjun Kapoor, people don’t undestand hsi appeal, which was apparent to me in Ishaqzaade itself. He has an earnestness which connects…something which someone like Abhishek sorely lacks.
I thought he was totally out of place in 2 states. He looks anything but a suave IIM grad. He has a rustic face – good for tapori roles as even if he opens his mouth it doesnt look off. In all other roles when he opens his mouth, it ends…
And yeah 2 States did 100 but i think Alia and kjo did the trick there + the Chetan Bhagat angle
Didnt know that IIM grads had to be suave! IMHO, some of the most rustic looking nerds are found on those campuses. My pet peeve about the IIMs is their admission process which rewards IIT nerds over anyone else.
“Alia and kjo did the trick there + the Chetan Bhagat angle. ” Really? How many other films of Kjo and Alia have done 100 crores? 2 States would never have worked unless the audience bought him as the IIM grad.
Clear case of over analysis. You think people give a damn about the stereotype of the looks of IIM grads from Delhi and Chennai and that’s why they liked 2 States?
The Film worked because it wasn’t boring and had some comedy and the whole tough love angle..
Add the extremely stereotypical tamasha of “typical Punjabi mom” and “typical drunk father” and “typical Tamil parents” there with the “typical Gora-kala stereotypes” with “typical IIT + IIM progression” with “typical happy ending”– and that’s why the film worked.
“You think people give a damn about the stereotype of the looks of IIM grads from Delhi and Chennai and that’s why they liked 2 States?” Yes, I do. People like stereo types. But people like breaking of stereotypes. You get 1 100 cr or 200 cr film when you know how to balance the two.
Yes they do..but that’s where you are so wrong about this movie’s cast in any way breaking any stereotypes. Breaking the stereotype would have been casting an ordinary looking dusky girl (just like Bhagat’s wife) rather than the darling of metro crowd actress. similar BS was exhibited by makers of Mary Kom..when they cast Priyanka chopra in the role of a north east indian boxer..It was a golden chance to cast a north eastern actress but as always bollywood is star struck.
Regarding your nonsensical reasoning of 100/200 crore films- could you tell me which stereotypes did Kick, HNY, Jai Ho, Housefull2, Rowdy Rathore, Ready,Bodyguard break while balancing.
paapaas: Out of the films you mentioned, I have seen only Kick and HNY , and they broke stereotypes a plenty. Kick has a heroine who is introduced wearing glasses, and is that way for most part of the film. They have a rival to Salman in the form of Randeep Hooda and he is shiwn as neither dumb or obnoxious. HNY has the king of romance Shahrukh as the leading man, and there is no romance between him and Deepika. They have a tapori character like Abhishek and they don’t have a choreographed dance number with him on the streets.
“Breaking the stereotype would have been casting an ordinary looking dusky girl . ” Yes. That’s not breaking stereotypes. That’s confusing films with real life. When you make a film on the life of Dhirubhai Ambani, you do not take a swarthy , paunchy man as the lead, you take Abhishek Bachchan. You dont atkea stocky plain featured woman to play his wife. You take Aishwarya Rai.
Remember, what I told you. You have to know how to mix it up. The expected and the unexpected. The stereotype and the surprise.
On the other side of the wormhole it’s perhaps possible that Kick and HNY might be considered films that break stereotypes, on this side of the wormhole though I must say that’s a sci-fi theory that beats anything offered in Interstellar!
Satyam: “Kick and HNY might be considered films that break stereotypes” . Just a small correction, in case you failed to take note, Kick and HNY are films that are a mix of stereotypes and breaking stereotypes.
Sanjana: “Every film breaks stereotypes in some small way and it is not a big deal. It is still masala.” It is like the food you eat. If you like chicken, it si not as if you want eat emu when you go to a restaurant. You still want chicken, but done a little differently than it’s done at home. Maybe a different spice, or different way of cooking. And not all kind of difference is palatable to all. Cooking in coconut oil will not go well with some one from Bengal, and coking with mustrad oild for some one from Kerala. So how much to vary, in waht manner to vary is the key. But vary you must.
Jayshah: Brilliant! KFC is a great example how the same staple can be made to taste dramatically different. A bit of secret ingredient is all it takes.
But yeah loved Interstellar. This movie demands multiple times watching. Did you watching in Imax 70mm film? Unbelievable clarity and this is almost an end of the era, don’t think any other movie will be available on film on 70mm and Imax ever again.
Talking of Arjun Kapoor, what some people don’t realize is that not looking like a star in the Khan mould works to his advantage. Just as it does in the case of Ranveer Singh. They can play characters with ease, and be accepted. With Shaheed it is the opposite. With a few successful films and string characters under their built they will be able to create their own template of starry looks.
Jesus Baba Ramdev Christ..That introduction shot of Arjun Kapoor when he jumps onto the terrace and faces the camera is an expression that encapsulates an emotion when one takes a dump and after wiping, is ready to take on the world [like Will Smith in TPOH and Leo in TWOWS!!]
What a bad actor this guy is! Looking at him, it seems a very, very, cruel fate of twist what AB Jr is going through..a far superior actor and looker in every sense of the word..[and I am NOT a fan of the son; these days it is very important to have disclaimers laid-out; otherwise one for sure will face volleys of epithets like ‘biased’, ‘prejudiced against good looks’, ‘Islamophobe’,{ I am visiting this site very less ever since the loss of Bandra NRI; I am actually facing withdrawal symptoms without his daily dose of accusations} ‘bigot’.. etc etc and what not..
If this movie makes 100 cr(wh)ores which it sure will considering this is the golden age of Hi-fi, I wonder why RUN failed? And why the heck is AB Jr considered a not-so-good actor??
Arjun kapoor has the rawness that no actor has.He does action masala films well. Abhishek Bachchan cant do action films well.
An jo,you should read that satyam’s comments made on stardom some time ago.He said that stardom is something mysterious,something inexplicible.Some actors connect with the public,some dont.
a far superior actor and looker in every sense of the word..
This is your perception of Abhishek,not the public perception.
but this whole discourse over who is considered a good actor and/or who isn’t is already politicized. First off any number of directors from Ratnam to Rohit Shetty are asserting exactly the opposite about Abhishek. Even the anti-Bachchan media more often than not gives him good reviews when he does a significant part. Sometimes they’ll say stuff like he’s been wasted or whatever but the idea that he isn’t a good actor is not the majority view even in the media. In other words this whole narrative that suggests otherwise is quite fictitious and is primarily driven by blogosphere partisans. but leaving this aside these things are politicized anyway. It’s like the whole debate about entertainment. There is no neutral space where people are considered good or bad actors or films are considered entertaining or not. Referring to the Indian model here because in the West there is a critical culture that is a very different ballgame. These critical trends do change with time and they’re certainly not set in stone but the point is that within any given age any actor or star is not privileged for ideological reasons of the sort one finds in India. Part of the response here then ought to be to reject this labeling. Much like every other star is called a ‘superstar’ these days. Rather than argue about who is or isn’t one should completely reject this label as being largely incompatible with the standards of the present, certainly in Bollywood. Much as the other decoupling that must be done here is that every star who is effective on screen and is loved doing a certain part is not an ‘actor’ in any traditional sense. Now it’s certainly fair to say that acting in that same traditional sense is not the only criterion of what might be effective on screen. But by the same token one should also not insist that every star who succeeds is an actor. Even with Abhishek if you would get a strong correlation among roles that were part of successful films and where he was also considered a good actor (though he’s been liked elsewhere too the correlation is rather strong precisely in these instances much as in films where he might not have the absolute central part he is still appreciated more than in films where he does and where people have ideological issues with the film/role).
“Jesus Baba Ramdev Christ.” roflol
I came across Shammi Kapoor’s son’s interview recently. He chose not to go into movies even though both his parents were stars. Good choice. People in India need to be more ‘original’ with their career choices. Unless you are an artist, you shouldn’t go into acting business and torture your audience!! If you are an artist then you shouldn’t care about BO and keep making low budget quality movies.
In terms of looks, all of them look shady..arjun, imran, shahid, bachchan jr, both ranveer/bir etc. Most of the present crop of actors are just well packaged/presented intheir movies. The good lookers (IMO) in no particular order are Akshay, Randeep Hooda, Vidyut Jamval, manoj bajpai, Salman Khan.
I think Arjun connects with the audience because of a certain sheepish/clumsy type looks and behavior. Speaking in Hindi comes more naturally to him than Bachchan Jr / Saif and that shows in his dialogue delivery, which maybe weak but endears him to masses.
2 States worked because of right presentation and packaging. It was the film adaptation of what i consider the most popular of Chetan Bhagat’s books after 5 Point Someone, and the music also worked for SEL after long time. As much as we cry lack of novelty in our movies, the general Indian audience likes to watch ghisa pita stuff more than unconventional themes.
Agree with Sameer…the audience loves ghisa pita stuff with repackaged stuff and most of times with good packaging it just works and make a movie a hit.
Arjun Kapoor reminds me of Abhishek especially in the Locha-E-Ulfat song from 2 States. But Arjun Kapoor is also better than Abhishek at everything….except acting (i.e. dance, action, presence, style, attitude etc). Unfortunately, the majority of the audience values all these things more than acting…
On the new song-it’s pretty catchy, reminds me of Salman’s Jalwa from Wanted. Arjun Kapoor is playing to his strengths and never thought of him as a good dancer until this song. The video was pretty cool. It is refreshing to see an actor under 45 (actually 30 to be precise) doing action/bollywood masala. Glad to know that once the Khans/Devgn/Kumar actually retire, we won’t be stuck with only YJHD/Barfi/basically all Imran Khan/Ranbir Kapoor/Sidharth Malhothra/etc type movies.
Abhishek lost the plot when he decided to leave mass stuff for stupid Mani Ratnam stuff like Raavan. You should have done a sequel of Bunty and Bubly along with Bluff Master and continue with that momentum…somwhere the entire plan failed.
SATYAMSHOT 
November 10, 2014 at 8:45 AM
The trailer is effective but Arjun Kapoor is completely inadequate. And clearly this is one where Bajpai will walk away with every scene he’s in.
LikeLike
November 10, 2014 at 5:17 PM
exactly what i thought. this is actually a great “presentation”…but arjun kapoor just ruins it for me. these roles require some ‘gravitas’ which arjun has not shown in any of his roles. seems like a wasted good film.
LikeLike
November 10, 2014 at 10:35 PM
Actually I think Arjun Kapoor can only do one kind of role. This kind where he is a tapori or street guy. He looks like a street smart ruffian too. I think he will do well here and to be honest that gilli role doesnt require any intensity. This might well be his solo 100 cr success
LikeLike
November 10, 2014 at 10:25 AM
Yes looks interesting. But Manoj Bajpai would be show stealer.
LikeLike
November 10, 2014 at 7:57 PM
Superb trailer.
Gentle warning for Abhishek- if yourlookalike starts looking and doing better than you, it is time for Kabaddi Kabaddi….
LikeLike
November 10, 2014 at 11:47 PM
Good to see a Hind Film actor under the age of 45 (or 30) doing masala. Sad to see that it’s Arjun Kapoor, the kid with probably the worst dialogue delivery and expressions. But he looks good in the action/dance scenes. But the story seems stupid and been there done that. Nice to see Sonakshi doing something different from her usual!
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 12:08 AM
U mean: Nice to see Sonakshi finally being paired with her own age-bracket hero, instead of with 46+ yr old uncles.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 12:26 AM
Krish: “Actually I think Arjun Kapoor can only do one kind of role.” Wrong. He has played an IIM student in 2 States, with total acceptance. “This might well be his solo 100 cr success.” Wrong again. 2 States been thee first.
Actually when talking about Arjun Kapoor, people don’t undestand hsi appeal, which was apparent to me in Ishaqzaade itself. He has an earnestness which connects…something which someone like Abhishek sorely lacks.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 1:33 AM
I thought he was totally out of place in 2 states. He looks anything but a suave IIM grad. He has a rustic face – good for tapori roles as even if he opens his mouth it doesnt look off. In all other roles when he opens his mouth, it ends…
And yeah 2 States did 100 but i think Alia and kjo did the trick there + the Chetan Bhagat angle
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 9:58 AM
Didnt know that IIM grads had to be suave! IMHO, some of the most rustic looking nerds are found on those campuses. My pet peeve about the IIMs is their admission process which rewards IIT nerds over anyone else.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 1:44 AM
“Alia and kjo did the trick there + the Chetan Bhagat angle. ” Really? How many other films of Kjo and Alia have done 100 crores? 2 States would never have worked unless the audience bought him as the IIM grad.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 1:54 AM
A film like 2 States worked because it broke the boring stereotype of what a couple of IIM grads from Delhi and Chennai should look like.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 7:52 AM
Clear case of over analysis. You think people give a damn about the stereotype of the looks of IIM grads from Delhi and Chennai and that’s why they liked 2 States?
The Film worked because it wasn’t boring and had some comedy and the whole tough love angle..
Add the extremely stereotypical tamasha of “typical Punjabi mom” and “typical drunk father” and “typical Tamil parents” there with the “typical Gora-kala stereotypes” with “typical IIT + IIM progression” with “typical happy ending”– and that’s why the film worked.
People like stereotypes more than you think.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 8:19 AM
Interesting trailer.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 9:50 AM
“You think people give a damn about the stereotype of the looks of IIM grads from Delhi and Chennai and that’s why they liked 2 States?” Yes, I do. People like stereo types. But people like breaking of stereotypes. You get 1 100 cr or 200 cr film when you know how to balance the two.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 10:54 AM
“But people like breaking of stereotypes.”
Yes they do..but that’s where you are so wrong about this movie’s cast in any way breaking any stereotypes. Breaking the stereotype would have been casting an ordinary looking dusky girl (just like Bhagat’s wife) rather than the darling of metro crowd actress. similar BS was exhibited by makers of Mary Kom..when they cast Priyanka chopra in the role of a north east indian boxer..It was a golden chance to cast a north eastern actress but as always bollywood is star struck.
Regarding your nonsensical reasoning of 100/200 crore films- could you tell me which stereotypes did Kick, HNY, Jai Ho, Housefull2, Rowdy Rathore, Ready,Bodyguard break while balancing.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 11:08 AM
paapaas: Out of the films you mentioned, I have seen only Kick and HNY , and they broke stereotypes a plenty. Kick has a heroine who is introduced wearing glasses, and is that way for most part of the film. They have a rival to Salman in the form of Randeep Hooda and he is shiwn as neither dumb or obnoxious. HNY has the king of romance Shahrukh as the leading man, and there is no romance between him and Deepika. They have a tapori character like Abhishek and they don’t have a choreographed dance number with him on the streets.
“Breaking the stereotype would have been casting an ordinary looking dusky girl . ” Yes. That’s not breaking stereotypes. That’s confusing films with real life. When you make a film on the life of Dhirubhai Ambani, you do not take a swarthy , paunchy man as the lead, you take Abhishek Bachchan. You dont atkea stocky plain featured woman to play his wife. You take Aishwarya Rai.
Remember, what I told you. You have to know how to mix it up. The expected and the unexpected. The stereotype and the surprise.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 11:52 AM
I think you are extremely stereotyped as far as blabbering just about anything to prove your point.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 12:11 PM
On the other side of the wormhole it’s perhaps possible that Kick and HNY might be considered films that break stereotypes, on this side of the wormhole though I must say that’s a sci-fi theory that beats anything offered in Interstellar!
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 12:34 PM
Satyam: “Kick and HNY might be considered films that break stereotypes” . Just a small correction, in case you failed to take note, Kick and HNY are films that are a mix of stereotypes and breaking stereotypes.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 12:41 PM
Every film breaks stereotypes in some small way and it is not a big deal. It is still masala.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 12:51 PM
Sanjana: “Every film breaks stereotypes in some small way and it is not a big deal. It is still masala.” It is like the food you eat. If you like chicken, it si not as if you want eat emu when you go to a restaurant. You still want chicken, but done a little differently than it’s done at home. Maybe a different spice, or different way of cooking. And not all kind of difference is palatable to all. Cooking in coconut oil will not go well with some one from Bengal, and coking with mustrad oild for some one from Kerala. So how much to vary, in waht manner to vary is the key. But vary you must.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 1:15 PM
KFC anyone?
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 6:26 PM
I am a vegetarian.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 1:32 PM
Jayshah: Brilliant! KFC is a great example how the same staple can be made to taste dramatically different. A bit of secret ingredient is all it takes.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 2:08 PM
Sure and also something that is not very good for your health either!
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 2:36 PM
LOL!!
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 7:50 PM
Satyam: where is my comment about Interstellar? I don’t find it. I posted on Sunday.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 8:17 PM
I checked everywhere.. can’t find it… you had that initial comment where you said you’d put up your thoughts later.. didn’t see anything after that.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 9:07 PM
Okay thanks for looking.
But yeah loved Interstellar. This movie demands multiple times watching. Did you watching in Imax 70mm film? Unbelievable clarity and this is almost an end of the era, don’t think any other movie will be available on film on 70mm and Imax ever again.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 10:43 PM
yes absolutely.. saw it on a proper IMAX screen two days in a row.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 11:36 PM
I think people who have really liked it..couldn’t help watching it again..I have seen it twice and can’t wait to watch it again.
LikeLike
November 11, 2014 at 11:05 PM
Talking of Arjun Kapoor, what some people don’t realize is that not looking like a star in the Khan mould works to his advantage. Just as it does in the case of Ranveer Singh. They can play characters with ease, and be accepted. With Shaheed it is the opposite. With a few successful films and string characters under their built they will be able to create their own template of starry looks.
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 12:12 AM
Not starry looks. They will be like Raj Babbar.
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 11:15 AM
Jesus Baba Ramdev Christ..That introduction shot of Arjun Kapoor when he jumps onto the terrace and faces the camera is an expression that encapsulates an emotion when one takes a dump and after wiping, is ready to take on the world [like Will Smith in TPOH and Leo in TWOWS!!]
What a bad actor this guy is! Looking at him, it seems a very, very, cruel fate of twist what AB Jr is going through..a far superior actor and looker in every sense of the word..[and I am NOT a fan of the son; these days it is very important to have disclaimers laid-out; otherwise one for sure will face volleys of epithets like ‘biased’, ‘prejudiced against good looks’, ‘Islamophobe’,{ I am visiting this site very less ever since the loss of Bandra NRI; I am actually facing withdrawal symptoms without his daily dose of accusations} ‘bigot’.. etc etc and what not..
If this movie makes 100 cr(wh)ores which it sure will considering this is the golden age of Hi-fi, I wonder why RUN failed? And why the heck is AB Jr considered a not-so-good actor??
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 11:17 AM
twist of fate..sorry!!
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 12:19 PM
Arjun kapoor has the rawness that no actor has.He does action masala films well. Abhishek Bachchan cant do action films well.
An jo,you should read that satyam’s comments made on stardom some time ago.He said that stardom is something mysterious,something inexplicible.Some actors connect with the public,some dont.
a far superior actor and looker in every sense of the word..
This is your perception of Abhishek,not the public perception.
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 11:32 AM
but this whole discourse over who is considered a good actor and/or who isn’t is already politicized. First off any number of directors from Ratnam to Rohit Shetty are asserting exactly the opposite about Abhishek. Even the anti-Bachchan media more often than not gives him good reviews when he does a significant part. Sometimes they’ll say stuff like he’s been wasted or whatever but the idea that he isn’t a good actor is not the majority view even in the media. In other words this whole narrative that suggests otherwise is quite fictitious and is primarily driven by blogosphere partisans. but leaving this aside these things are politicized anyway. It’s like the whole debate about entertainment. There is no neutral space where people are considered good or bad actors or films are considered entertaining or not. Referring to the Indian model here because in the West there is a critical culture that is a very different ballgame. These critical trends do change with time and they’re certainly not set in stone but the point is that within any given age any actor or star is not privileged for ideological reasons of the sort one finds in India. Part of the response here then ought to be to reject this labeling. Much like every other star is called a ‘superstar’ these days. Rather than argue about who is or isn’t one should completely reject this label as being largely incompatible with the standards of the present, certainly in Bollywood. Much as the other decoupling that must be done here is that every star who is effective on screen and is loved doing a certain part is not an ‘actor’ in any traditional sense. Now it’s certainly fair to say that acting in that same traditional sense is not the only criterion of what might be effective on screen. But by the same token one should also not insist that every star who succeeds is an actor. Even with Abhishek if you would get a strong correlation among roles that were part of successful films and where he was also considered a good actor (though he’s been liked elsewhere too the correlation is rather strong precisely in these instances much as in films where he might not have the absolute central part he is still appreciated more than in films where he does and where people have ideological issues with the film/role).
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 1:41 PM
“Jesus Baba Ramdev Christ.” roflol
I came across Shammi Kapoor’s son’s interview recently. He chose not to go into movies even though both his parents were stars. Good choice. People in India need to be more ‘original’ with their career choices. Unless you are an artist, you shouldn’t go into acting business and torture your audience!! If you are an artist then you shouldn’t care about BO and keep making low budget quality movies.
In terms of looks, all of them look shady..arjun, imran, shahid, bachchan jr, both ranveer/bir etc. Most of the present crop of actors are just well packaged/presented intheir movies. The good lookers (IMO) in no particular order are Akshay, Randeep Hooda, Vidyut Jamval, manoj bajpai, Salman Khan.
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 3:36 PM
I really like Randeep Hooda, very underrated actor, and good looking too. For pure acting, I feel Raj Kumar Yadav is one of the best we have got.
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 12:23 PM
No one can define acting.Everyone defines acting in their own way.
LikeLike
November 12, 2014 at 12:38 PM
A good actor is a superimposition on the star who is effective on the screen.Stardom often makes the actor.
LikeLike
November 14, 2014 at 4:43 AM
I think Arjun connects with the audience because of a certain sheepish/clumsy type looks and behavior. Speaking in Hindi comes more naturally to him than Bachchan Jr / Saif and that shows in his dialogue delivery, which maybe weak but endears him to masses.
2 States worked because of right presentation and packaging. It was the film adaptation of what i consider the most popular of Chetan Bhagat’s books after 5 Point Someone, and the music also worked for SEL after long time. As much as we cry lack of novelty in our movies, the general Indian audience likes to watch ghisa pita stuff more than unconventional themes.
LikeLike
November 17, 2014 at 1:50 PM
Agree with Sameer…the audience loves ghisa pita stuff with repackaged stuff and most of times with good packaging it just works and make a movie a hit.
LikeLike
November 18, 2014 at 3:20 AM
Arjun Kapoor reminds me of Abhishek especially in the Locha-E-Ulfat song from 2 States. But Arjun Kapoor is also better than Abhishek at everything….except acting (i.e. dance, action, presence, style, attitude etc). Unfortunately, the majority of the audience values all these things more than acting…
On the new song-it’s pretty catchy, reminds me of Salman’s Jalwa from Wanted. Arjun Kapoor is playing to his strengths and never thought of him as a good dancer until this song. The video was pretty cool. It is refreshing to see an actor under 45 (actually 30 to be precise) doing action/bollywood masala. Glad to know that once the Khans/Devgn/Kumar actually retire, we won’t be stuck with only YJHD/Barfi/basically all Imran Khan/Ranbir Kapoor/Sidharth Malhothra/etc type movies.
LikeLike
November 18, 2014 at 12:25 PM
Abhishek lost the plot when he decided to leave mass stuff for stupid Mani Ratnam stuff like Raavan. You should have done a sequel of Bunty and Bubly along with Bluff Master and continue with that momentum…somwhere the entire plan failed.
LikeLike
November 18, 2014 at 3:16 PM
Trailer starts effectively…till the hero appears…same look and expression…blah
LikeLike