Three hours with Shah Rukh Khan

CoolP |

131 | March 15, 2007 at 4:39 pm | 237 views | NaachGaana Bol| Share

Hello there! If you are new here, you might want to subscribe to the RSS feed for updates on this topic.

Three hours with Shah Rukh Khan
By: Sarita Tanwar

shah 123 Three hours with Shah Rukh Khan

It’s not easy to pin down Shah Rukh Khan. But because he makes such exciting copy, you want to go that extra step. He’s on my mind as I head to Film City.

He’s also on the mind of the cab driver in front of my car, judging by the huge sticker on his cab’s rear windshield that screams the actor’s name in bold letters.

At the end of the marathon interview that begins in SRK’s van (on the sets on Om Shanti Om) and concludes at his mansion in Bandra (close to dinnertime), I discover varied facets to the ‘Demented Pathan’, as he likes to call himself.

He’s as normal as the friendly guy next door, but the only difference is that SRK looks 15 years younger than his actual age. He’s also a proud and protective papa, ready to spring like a lion if you offend his babies.

I watch him as he instructs his driver to halt the white and black BMW at the corner of the road to pick up a helmet for his son.

I watch him as he plays with his dogs when he reaches home, looking lost because Gauri and the kids are out for the evening.

And then I see him as the undisputable people’s superstar when he steps out on the bungalow’s terrace to wave out to numerous fans standing outside.
The best part about SRK is that he has no boundaries.

‘Ask me anything, and I will answer’, is his motto. In the end, as I drive back home, I realise that when he is charming you for three hours — be it on the big screen or in person — he is at his very best right till the last byte.

KBC is rocking and you look pleased. You were asked to host the show earlier too, so what made you say yes this time?

I didn’t refuse KBC the first time around; Star just asked me if I’d be interested in doing it. At that point, they were not sure if they wanted to continue with KBC or do another programme. KBC was just one of the shows we discussed.

So you were always open to television?

Only if time permitted. That year, I was very busy. We had discussions for ten days about different shows, and zeroed in on one other show we’d do in case I could not do KBC, which I would do only if Mr Bachchan was not.

At that point, I was also talking to Zee for a show with them. Zee offered me more money, but even they couldn’t come up with a suitable format.

Would you be open to reality shows, which are all the rage these days?

Never. I am much too shy for that. I am very guarded about my personal life, even though that may not come across. I would never be able to do a show like Bigg Boss.

I am uncomfortable around too many people. I am a little anti-social sometimes. I am also very particular about where I sleep, and who I sleep with! My bathroom should also be in a certain way. I am peculiar like that.

You spend a lot of time in the bathroom, don’t you?

That the family joke! I like to spend a lot of time in the bathroom because I don’t like taking calls when I am at home. I hardly even answer anybody’s phone, be it on the landline or the mobile, unless it is imperative. That’s been a rule for years now.

It would be unfair to my family if I spent time at home talking on the phone. As you know, I can keep talking since I have a lot of people to talk to! Now, I’ve made a sort of office in my house that I walk across to when I have to and feel, ‘okay, I am not in the house’.

You’ve said before that your mother passed away because she worked too hard. Does that ever play on your workaholic mind?

My mother passed away because she was working against the world. I am working with the world. I work hard, but the results pay me ten times more than I deserve.

She didn’t get even one-tenth of that for everything she did, that’s why she passed away. She got tired. I don’t get tired because my films do well, I get paid well and work is great.

I’ve got every kind of recognition that God could perhaps give me. It’s never been at the expense of something else. It’s a dream run. The world has been kind to me, so I won’t die of over work.

How would you rate yourself as a host?

It’s not up to me to rate myself. The only change I see is that I get to interact with a lot of people that I otherwise wouldn’t get to meet. It has made me realise that magnanimity is not enough.

At the stage in which I am right now, I can be doing a lot more. And not by just giving away watches. These are material things and I do it so that certain contestants don’t get disappointed. Like with my kids — when we are playing and they lose, I still give them toffees.

The prize is the same. The whole idea is that if you guys do this, I’ll take you to Baskin Robbins. And if you lose, I’ll still take you to have ice cream.

Some contestants would rather have your watches than the prize money.

I gave away two watches even after we finished shooting that particular episode.

I felt that those people deserved it. One was a 20-year-old boy. I took him out and told him to choose a watch from my collection. I do this often with youngsters. I feel their loss.

I feel touched sometimes when someone loses. And no, it’s not a publicity plug for the watch company (Tag Heuer). These are my personal watches so I give away whatever I am wearing at that time. I don’t like to give away my watch when people ask for it, though. If I feel like giving it to you, I will. To be very honest, sometimes I don’t feel the contestant’s loss at all. I am not being mean, but I cannot play the game as if it’s charity. It’s a game at the end of the day.

Amitabh Bachchan says you are fine as a host.

It doesn’t matter. People keep harping about my performance, but I think I am just fine. Like you asked me earlier how I would rate myself as a host, I’d say I’m fine.

I’ll tell you very selfishly that people’s opinions don’t matter. I’m not being pompous, I am saying this with a lot of humility. As much as I may seem a public figure, I am very clear: only people who matter, matter.

With Bachchan, can you honestly say that there’s nothing wrong between the two of you? You can’t sense something amiss?

If sensing is through what is written in print, then you can declare this a war. But I don’t believe everything I read because I know that when I say certain things, they will sound different when written about.

You can write ‘Amitabh’s opinion does not matter’ and it will come off sounding rude, even though I don’t mean it that way.

Are you averse to criticism?

I’m not. But I realise when things are not good and make changes. I don’t like myself on screen or anywhere else. I see a million more things that are wrong with me than what other people see. So even before anyone tells me, I know.

I get embarrassed when someone tells me good things; the bad things I already know. I am very, very confident about the work I am doing, but I am not confident about the result.

I may look like someone who doesn’t take criticism well, someone who doesn’t listen to anyone’s opinions, but if someone mentions something… like my make-up man Subhash says, ‘Dada, aap massage mat do’ (referring to the massage he has given certain KBC contestants).

There is an Indian mentality where if you are a big star, how can you give a massage? So I do pay attention to what people say, but I’m already aware of most of the negative opinions I’m going to get. I’m like, ‘Tell me something I don’t know.’

Amitabh has said that Guru made more money than Don and KANK.

I know Don has made a lot of money. I honestly don’t know how much money Guru made. I would not know about Guru’s collections.

Do Amitabh’s comments bother you?

No. I haven’t read what he said, I saw it on TV. I am not the producer of either KANK or Don. I don’t know what any film’s collections are. I’ve never followed collections.

If it’s a hit film, it’s a hit film. I’m not bothered with paanch kiska jyaada tha, das kiska jyaada tha. I can’t compare my films to others. And if Mr Bachchan says that and if that is an achievement, that is also a good thing.

But why compare only your films to Guru?

I take these things as ‘my films as an actor’. But it’s possible that Mr Bachchan is referring to a Karan Johar film or a Farhan Akhtar film compared to a Mani Ratnam film.

If that’s not the case and if he’s just referring to me, then I’ll think of myself as a standard for stardom. A lot of people say I am the Badshah of Bollywood, so it’s okay if someone else’s film has done better than my film.

That makes Krissh and Munnabhai better than my films. And Guru too, which is okay (laughs). I mean I’ll try and do better than them next time!

So you don’t get caught in the ‘mine is bigger’ game?

I’ve been told that Krissh and Munnabhai were the biggest hits in terms of money. So be it. I think Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna and Don also did good business, though they were not the biggest hits.

Karan wanted to put an ad for KANK, but I said no. I told him to put the zeroes and say that the figures are still being counted. It’s smarter. I don’t like quoting figures.

It’s like you asking me about my salary. I won’t tell you that, so how can I tell you the salary of my film? That’s stupid.

Your character in KANK was not appreciated.

I knew that it would not be appreciated. I told Karan this right in the beginning, but he didn’t think the reactions would be as strong as they turned out to be. It was as strong as I’d expected it to be. But I work with directors I like.

I don’t do films because I really like the script and stuff like that. So if you make a choice like, that you’ve got to have full faith in whatever the director chooses to make. I have full faith in Karan.

You didn’t win any awards this year.

That doesn’t bother me. But I personally felt I did very well in KANK. I liked what I did in it. I’ve got five extra awards in my career. I think people confuse great roles for great acting, so I’ve gotten some awards for great characters.

In KANK, I think the role lost out to the character, which is okay. But I felt KANK was very good. No disappointments there.

Were you prepared for comparisons with the original Don?

I speak for Farhan (Akhtar) and everyone when I say that we loved their Don more than our Don, which is why we made it. We like our version and what we did with it, but Farhan and I love the old Don more. We’ve grown up on it.

You said somewhere that you started believing you are a superstar only five years ago. Why so?

It was purely from a commercial point of view. I suddenly realised that films with very high stakes were being made with me.

A lot of money started riding on me. Most of my films sell well, most of them do well. When you sit with the distributors, you start finding out cold, hard facts. They are very mean about actors.

If you tell them that you want to cast a particular actor, they will tell you, “Chhod na yaar, woh nahin chalta hai.” If you tell them that he is a very good actor, they will tell you, “Solo nahin bikega, sir…” They are the buyers.

Whoever they feel is the safest bet is a star. So five years ago, business-wise, I started understanding these things from distributors, producers and my production house.

There is a certain safety that I offer distributors universally, even though people say that I am just an overseas star.

How do you cope with competition?

In these 17-18 years that I have been in the industry, not once have I had a negative thought about anyone. I am not wishing your film well, but I am not wishing it does badly either.

I wish your film to be the greatest, and mine a little better. So I think of it very positively. Just the other day someone asked me, ‘How come you look so young?’ I genuinely believe it’s because I never think negatively.

People think I have a clique, that we sit down together and bitch about people. It is never done to bring someone down. I would never do that. I’ve never had an iota of ill will towards anyone, which is why people come on KBC when I call them. I do a film shoot and they all come.

I have a huge amount of goodwill because I have never taken advantage of people. Strangely, I don’t watch anybody else’s films. I get confused when it’s not good and it does well. I get confused if it doesn’t do well and is good. I only end up seeing my films once at the trial. Then I don’t even see my films.

Your dig at Amar Singh at an recent award function created quite a furore.

It’s silly. I have been hosting that show for many years with Saif (Ali Khan), and we’ve always made fun of people, including Hrithik (Roshan), Sanjay Dutt, Yash Chopra, Aamir Khan, Binod Pradhan and even myself. I am very clear about this: there is genuinely no malice in what I say.

I mostly pick on my friends, who understand my sense of humour. My whole idea of that awards function was to go indoors and do it like the Oscars, so let’s have fun. I am no Billy Crystal or Ellen DeGeneres or whatever.

But I have a sense of humour, and if we can all laugh at each other, then why not? Yes, it is important to laugh privately, that’s why I didn’t enjoy it as much in the open. We are making fun of each other in front of a lot of other people, not just the fraternity.

Amar Singh took offence.

Within the fraternity, we don’t take these things personally. and I would imagine that anyone who is at an awards function is from the fraternity.

If you come to an awards function, you become part of the fraternity. And if by virtue of that fact I see you at every awards function, you’d better be ready to take a joke.

Amar Singh’s supporters protested outside your house after your comment.

I had to cancel my shoot and rush home four hours early because my six-and-half-year old daughter (Suhana) was crying. People were screaming and shouting outside my house.

My eight-year-old son (Aryan) wasn’t crying, but he was made to stay in the house just in case someone decided to throw something or scream abuses. That scares me to the extent of not having any fear at all.

If you scare me by saying that you will harm me, I will be scared, because if I die, who will look after my kids? But if you threaten my children, I will not be in self preservation mode.

I can give my life for my kids. Come on, there are only women in my house. My wife wasn’t there, my sister is not well and my little daughter was crying. I don’t like it! I am a Pathan and I am very, very, very, very protective about my family.

Did you think of calling Amar Singh?
No. I wouldn’t. My wife will be very scared when she reads what I am about to say, but if I’d been there… if I’d reached before the cops cleared the protestors… I would have made them all cry for making my daughter cry. And that’s the promise of a Pathan.

I would not have spared them. You don’t make my children cry. If you have a problem, talk to me. I know where that crowd came from, but now I am being told that Amar Singh did not send them.

Twenty fans of his came from all over India to protest. It’s okay. Maybe he didn’t send them. I’d like to give him the benefit of doubt because I never lie, so I assume that no one else would either. But don’t you scare my harmless kids.

Would you think twice before cracking a joke again?

Like I said, I joke with my friends. If I don’t joke with you, you are not my friend. So the next time, I will see. I’ve been very disturbed after this incident. My daughter crying is not a joking matter.

I take it very seriously. How seriously I take it depends on when I come face-to-face with the people responsible. I wish they’d been there when I arrived, but the cops took them away as soon television channels got there.

What I said was a joke. If you can’t take a joke, don’t come for these events. They’re meant for the fraternity. You make a big issue and ask my wife to apologise? Balls. My wife will not apologise to anyone.

Amar Singh has said he will humiliate you in public too.

Let me just say that it is not in my nature to humiliate anyone. I have never done that. I am too educated, too apolitical and too courteous. You know, in all comic acts, the guys sitting in the front row get picked on.

Come on, it’s a joke and one should not try to make it more serious. There are a lot more serious issues that the association of 20 people who came to my house can look into rather than scare my daughter.

I take that very personally. And I am not even the kind of guy who expects an apology for this. It depends how I feel the next time. Just remember, I am a demented Pathan.

How will you react when you come face-to-face with Amar Singh now?

I don’t know. I don’t think in advance. I will not joke with him, that’s for sure. Amar Singh said somewhere that ‘Shah Rukh makes jokes publicly and apologises privately.’

I have privately apologised to no one. I would apologise publicly if I felt I had done something wrong. The only thing I do privately is meet friends. I find that whole drama outside my house a little over-the-top, and there are a lot of stories about why it happened.

It could be because elections were on, the publicity factor, whatever,so they did it as my cost. It’s okay. I am a public figure. People use me for everything. You can use me too.

But don’t bring people to my house knowing fully well that my kids are alone. I don’t like that. I have not said anything to your kids, neither will I do that. I would only wish children well. It’s in my nature to wish children well.

You have no actor friends. Is that deliberate?

If it wasn’t for my wife, I don’t think I would have any friends at all. I am little bit of a recluse. I don’t spend too much time with people. I like being at home. Now, all my director friends — Farah (Khan), Karan (Johar) and Farhan (Akhtar) — are acting, so you cannot say that I don’t have actor friends.

Coming to your problems with the Chopras…

It’s very strange — this whole thing about my problems with the Chopras. We are friends. It’s embarrassing to explain.

At one time, they only worked with you. Not anymore.

That is because they are doing six films, and I can’t and won’t do all six of them. I’ve worked with several directors and the Chopras have never questioned me about it. You know, when they put up their studio, Adi came to me and said, ‘I need to get the money we borrowed for the studio.

There are films that I’m starting and I don’t know if they’ll do well. I am just taking a shot. I know one film that will pull me through is Veer-Zaara, so I need your dates now.’ I was like, ‘We’ll shoot whenever you want.’

I was shooting Swades then, and I shot for Veer-Zaara in between. That’s the kind of relationship we have. Fortunately, Hum Tum, Veer-Zaara and Dhoom happened in the same year and all did very well.

Isn’t Chak De India the project that brought you back together?

Adi wanted to make Chak De. I told him, ‘I don’t have time; you know my dates.’ He went to other actors, but that didn’t work out for whatever reasons. One night, he came over to my place at 2 am.

He said, ‘Ab kab karega tu? Tu bas haan kar de.’ He asked me to SMS his director and my writers, so that they’d get charged and then work on choosing the leading ladies. So I said yes and I sent the SMSes.

Then I told him, ‘Don’t talk to me about Chak De till August.’ On August 25, Adi called me and asked, ‘Can I trouble you with Chak De?’ Our relationship is like that. We’ve never discussed business.

I don’t have to tell Adi that he’s made a good film, neither does Adi have to tell me that my performance in so-and-so film was good.

Today, when I do budgeting and other things for my production house (Red Chillies Entertainment) my understanding comes from Adi. He knows the business and also guides me. He yells at me, ‘Mat kar yeh picture.’ He’s a very close friend.

Any Chopra films you wanted to do?

There are certain films for which I call Adi and say, ‘Main karta hoon, yaar.’ Like Bunty Aur Babli; I liked the title. I’ve also known Shaad (Ali) for many years, so I wanted to do it. Adi said, ‘No, it’s not of your stature.

You need to do films of your stature. It has to be new people.’ I think he meant it had to have a younger actor. I call the Chopras for roles and they tell me to go to hell. Like Dhoom:2.

I wanted to do the villain’s role, which Duggu (Hrithik) did. I said I’d do it if it was 20-25 days before starting KANK. Adi said, ‘No. It has get-ups and all and you’ll lose patience.’

They also know that I like to work in a certain atmosphere. They know I’ll get irritable with make-up and get-ups and all that jazz.

Unlike other actors, you’ve not signed any multi-crore deals.

You can’t woo me with money. I do films because I want to do them. I’ve done 50 films till now and I’ve never done them for money. Except for one or two, when I wanted to buy a house. so I signed Baazigar and Guddu.

I will never be able to sign deals for ‘x’ amount of crores. I’d rather dance at a wedding and make that money.

Will you work till you are 60?

I would not like to work till I am 60, though my son tells me that I have to. I tell him that I will work till he becomes 18-years-old, and that I don’t want to work beyond that, but he has other ideas. For me, the logic is quite simple: I’ll work as long as I get work.

Do you see anyone worthy of your crown?

I’m a little confused. Am I really the guy who wears the crown? Every other day, I am told there are other people who are now wearing that crown, so I don’t know.

As for who I would choose to replace me — whoever is honest, hardworking and has a sense of humour. A sense of humour is very important. If they don’t have a sense of humour, they won’t be where I am

Shah Rukh Khan detained for 2 hours at Newark Airport in US

‘I Only Make Love Stories’: Shah Rukh Khan

I am just a “dumb” star: Shah Rukh Khan

I’ll destroy Aamir Khan: Shah Rukh

Shah Rukh Nahin, toh Abhi sahi

There Are 131 Responses So Far. »

coolp 15 March 2007
04:42:30 pm

It’s an intereseting lengthy interview.

Street Pharmacist 15 March 2007
05:00:04 pm

Bachchan interviews are much better… much more honest with his answers, and really witty and intelligent.

rks 15 March 2007
05:12:39 pm

Nice and honest one!
I do not agree with, who ever comes to award functions is part of fraternity. There are politician (Vilas Rao Deshmukh is seen at lots of places), fans..

Agree with what ever he said regarding protest outside house.

Sid 15 March 2007
05:18:23 pm

Nice interview – but some questions were a bit probing.

akshay shah 15 March 2007
05:54:27 pm

Nice interview, ALWAYS enjoy SRK’s interviews!!!!

akshay shah 15 March 2007
06:16:49 pm

Amar Singh is a COWARD…I LOVE SRK’s atittude here and agree EVERY BIT with what he says

“If you scare me by saying that you will harm me, I will be scared, because if I die, who will look after my kids? But if you threaten my children, I will not be in self preservation mode.

I can give my life for my kids. Come on, there are only women in my house. My wife wasn’t there, my sister is not well and my little daughter was crying. I don’t like it! I am a Pathan and I am very, very, very, very protective about my family.

Did you think of calling Amar Singh?
No. I wouldn’t. My wife will be very scared when she reads what I am about to say, but if I’d been there… if I’d reached before the cops cleared the protestors… I would have made them all cry for making my daughter cry. And that’s the promise of a Pathan.

I would not have spared them. You don’t make my children cry. If you have a problem, talk to me. I know where that crowd came from, but now I am being told that Amar Singh did not send them.

Twenty fans of his came from all over India to protest. It’s okay. Maybe he didn’t send them. I’d like to give him the benefit of doubt because I never lie, so I assume that no one else would either. But don’t you scare my harmless kids”

Sid 15 March 2007
06:44:25 pm

Yes thats true Akshay. He very rarely gives boring interviews.

akshay shah 15 March 2007
07:10:07 pm

Love this line too…lol

“Just remember, I am a demented Pathan.”

Must say, Amar Singh has taken this thing WAY too far…frigging idiot!@

Sid 15 March 2007
07:55:35 pm

I heard SRK was really funny at the FF awards – am waiting to get my hands onto the DVD ofthe awards.

Sameer 15 March 2007
09:38:59 pm

Very interesting interview. SRK also talks about Yashraj and Aditya Chopra. I loved when he said “…if I’d reached before the cops cleared the protestors… I would have made them all cry for making my daughter cry. And that’s the promise of a Pathan”

And SRK repeats exactly my first thoughts over FF incident: “If you can’t take a joke, don’t come for these events. They’re meant for the fraternity.”

LOL, not a surprise that I’m SRK fan!

Bollywoodblog » Drei Stunden mit Shahrukh 15 March 2007
09:57:02 pm

[...] Interview auf Naachgaana, das sich für mich Nichteingeweihten sehr interessant und informativ liest [...]

Sameer 15 March 2007
10:53:10 pm

Sid: You can watch this year’s Filmfare on You Tube. I found the first part for you, you’ll find the rest easily.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....38;search=

Sid 15 March 2007
11:00:11 pm

Oh Wow ! Awesome ! thanks heaps mate. I did see the bits you had posted some weeks back. Will check this one out too.

Tango 16 March 2007
12:07:22 am

Wow , extremely intelligent , to the point and combustible at the right places .

One of his best interviews for sure .

I think he has said ” all” that people wanted know and hear but within the limits of decency .

rajen 16 March 2007
07:07:23 am

Nice interview.I have seen better interviews by SRK.Admire his sentiments about his daugter and family but really doubt if he thinks he is brave or strong enought to take on 20 people.But anyways thats a father reacting.
I think I find AB-SRK controversy a bit like Jeter-ARod controversy with SRK being more of A Rod.
He is an intelligent guy but soemhow I always find he is a little bit disenchanted with life in general inspite of joking around and everything.He has everything one could want but …….

sandy 16 March 2007
08:26:30 am

Ace interview…no one to beat this guy where giving interviews is concerned.

A few things here are quite interesting
I’m glad SRK thinks he was “very good in KANK” though many disagreed. As he rightly says, people got confused between his role and his acting in it. I personally found him damn effective. It’s good that he KNOWS he was good, whatever the populr sentiment may have been. It’s very important for actors to judge their performance on their own, without getting swayed by what others feel.

I love his answer on Don and his honest admission that he too liked the old Don better. Also, if Amitabh has really said that Guru earned more than KANK and Don, then I have to agree with SRK that ‘he is indeed becomming a standard to judge stardom’
Why did Big B say that anyway?!!!

There’s a rift between SRK and Bachchans — no doubt about it. Just read between the lines…
“There are certain films for which I call Adi and say, ‘Main karta hoon, yaar.’ Like Bunty Aur Babli; I liked the title. I’ve also known Shaad (Ali) for many years, so I wanted to do it. Adi said, ‘No, it’s not of your stature.”

“Not of your stature” — isn’t this a clear jibe at Abhishek Bachchan?

Sameer 16 March 2007
08:41:57 am

Sandy, the statement given by AB”Most of them had written off the film but the fact remains that after three months — that is if you really want to know — the film has collected more than Rs 85 crores in this country.

The collections of Guru is better than those of Don and Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna.

Guru has amply proved its merit and this was proved later on despite all the brickbats from the media. So you never know when the media is proved wrong.
”

Link: http://ia.rediff.com/movies/2007/mar/12amitabh.htm

rajen 16 March 2007
08:44:40 am

Agree Sandy.I have always siad KANK was one of his better performances.But difficult for audiences to root for.And there in lies SRK’s failure.Inspite of his mega charisma he is unable to succed in having audiences accept him outside his image.
Certainly a smart indivisual and knows how to givwe effective interviews.BTW DOESNT LOOK 15 YEARS YOUNGER THAN ACTUAL AGE.With the paint off he looks older and probably is secondary to his smoking.

Sameer 16 March 2007
08:59:48 am

Sandy: ““Not of your stature” — isn’t this a clear jibe at Abhishek Bachchan?”

It might be or might not be. Even during 2 years back when BnB was in shoot, SRK gave an interview where he asked Adi for BnB just coz he loved the title. Adi told him the story demands youngsters and not BIG stars.

For all said, Adi is sharp businessman, he will not offer SN to SRK or Aamir. He knows which movie to offer to a particular star.

Tango 16 March 2007
09:13:24 am

Sameer , both Amir would have pulled SN to 5-7 crores more than Saif , but I guess you are right ” Adi is sharp businessman”

Rocky 16 March 2007
09:14:20 am

Nice Interview, this proves that Big B and SRK do have a problem, it seems even KJO took offence to Bachchan’s ststement and wanted to put ads in the newspaper with figures but SRK persuaded him not to. Camps……

sandy 16 March 2007
09:15:17 am

Sameer: I got a very nice interview with Mani Ratnam today. Will post it tomorrow.

Sameer 16 March 2007
09:19:31 am

“I got a very nice interview with Mani Ratnam today. Will post it tomorrow.”

Wow, Thanks! Will wait for it!

sandy 16 March 2007
09:20:55 am

I was quite stunned wtih some of the things he said. Like ‘I am a mainstream director. No two ways about that’

Also, a lot of my good friends (abzee, q satyam esp), who read too much into his films will be surprised by some of his answers

Sameer 16 March 2007
09:21:14 am

I dont think there is even ONE non-srk Yashraj project in recent times where I would have wanted SRK to be a part of. None of those movies required SRK and he is better off without such movies!

sandy 16 March 2007
09:27:18 am

Agree Sameer. I really DO think SRK is better off without Yash Raj, considering the crap they are making these days.

SRK needed Yash Raj while he was still growing as an actor and star but today, he’s in a position to pick and choose what he wants.

I certainly want to see him in a Swades rather than a predictable film like Veer Zaara that really does nothing to his reportoire as an actor. It’s like Fanaa for Aamir, maybe even lesser, considering that at least in the latter, the actor had a superb role

Tango 16 March 2007
09:28:25 am

Sandy ji , looking forward to it

” I was quite stunned wtih some of the things he said. Like ‘I am a mainstream director. No two ways about that’

Also, a lot of my good friends (abzee, q satyam esp), who read too much into his films will be surprised by some of his answers “

Qalandar 16 March 2007
09:30:29 am

Sandy: can’t wait to read the interview. But why were you shocked with his reference to himself as “mainstream”? He has said that on multiple occasions, and in fact always comes across as a very down to earth and unpretentious fellow.

Re: “a lot of my good friends (abzee, q satyam esp), who read too much into his films will be surprised by some of his answers…”

I doubt it actually; speaking personally, the question of INTENTIONALITY does not settle the question of INTERPRETATION — ultimately the text/film, the work, stands for itself, and becomes separate from and in a sense bigger than its author. That is, the “meaning” of the work of necessity EXCEEDS any specific intention of the author — and that’s because each reader/viewer “reads” the work in a necessarily personal and idiosyncratic way, and this universe of readings is far beyond the ken of any one author.

Put differently, a text is rich in meaning not because it has a godlike, omniscient author like a Ratnam or whoever else, but precisely for the opposite reason. i.e. Ratnam is “merely mortal”, and no mere mortal can keep with the multiple, endless chain of meanings and significations that is unleashed when the work is released and read by “the public.” On my reading, Ratnam’s greatness rests not on his intentionality — it is manifestly clear that an Eklavya is more self-consciously ambitious and profound than the vast majority of Ratnam films I have seen — but on his ability to create films that sustain multiple readings, more so than many other films, that are rich in meaning — profundity may not be willed, and Eklavya fails.

Rocky 16 March 2007
09:34:19 am

“I find that whole drama outside my house a little over-the-top, and there are a lot of stories about why it happened.
I know where that crowd came from, but now I am being told that Amar Singh did not send them.”

I think he is pointing fingers at the Bachchans. Amar Singh is an Idiot.

sujith 16 March 2007
09:41:26 am

SRK wanted to do Dhoom2 and Bunty Aur Babli but Adi didnt want him.

Adi:”Not of your stature”=Adi:”I want to Diversify and not tie the YRF brand too tightly with SRK”

Brief Reflections on ‘Intentionality’ in Cinema… 16 March 2007
09:43:06 am

[...] was initially going to add these comments to this thread but decided to put them up in a separate post [...]

sandy 16 March 2007
09:50:16 am

“speaking personally, the question of INTENTIONALITY does not settle the question of INTERPRETATION”

Very well articulated qutie and this a wonderful point you bring forth. But somehow, I do feel the ‘intention’ of the director does count in a way. Even if it doesn’t, one can’t presume things on behalf of the film and say stuff like, ‘This is a metophor for such and such thing and that is a symobolic allusion to XYZ’ ….esp when the filmmaker never meant it like that way.You’re welcome to disagree with me here.

Your point about richness in Mani’s films and its layered and textured essence is something I buy totally.

PS: I’m kicking myself for not asking him about the strobe effect in Guru’s climax.

satyam 16 March 2007
09:51:12 am

Two points here:

1)I find it more than a little insincere when SRK fans suddenly start saying there’s nothing in the Yahsraj stable that they would have SRK do. So presumably they really loved it when SRK did intellectually stimulating stuff like DTPH earlier or pathbreaking cinema like KHNH (not Yashraj but what’s the difference?!) or what not! And frankly for SRK fans to say that they don’t want SRK to be associated with 80 crore films or even 60 crore ones is disingenuous and scarcely believable!

2)Of course if Aditya chopra isn’t offering stuff to SRK he is going to be polite about it. “not of your stature” and so on is an old con job in the industry! But of course when BnB was being made SRK was way bigger than Abhishek. Not sure what the controversy here is!

3)SRK could never turn down Yahsraj even at his peak. That’s the whole point. He still cannot and will not. His entire career reveals this. He tried different stuff that never worked and hence was always beholden to yahsraj. He never had a Guru moment in his career! As for D3 he will do it if offered. The dates issue and everything is nonsense. But yes the man has some self-respect and will obviously not do something unimportant in the film. Incidentally on what Abhishek is doing in D3 the truth has been exactly the opposite of what people think it is though unfortunately I can’t say more. Also I know of at least a few stars who have bluntly refused good projects with Yashraj at a number of points. SRK isn’t one of them. But again I can’t divulge more.

4)As for the bachchan quote sure he’s become rather testy and garrulous since Guru. Personally I don’t agree with a lot of the stuff he’s been saying for all sorts of reasons. However let’s not be holier-than-thou on this and pretend that SRK’s never done anything. It takes two hands to clap! SRK has over the years given many many provocative interviews. But every time he’s pushed into a corner he starts playing victim and people lap it up. But I still don’t think bachchan should be saying many of these things even if there is a ‘backstory’ here.

Rocky 16 March 2007
09:51:15 am

You make a big issue and ask my wife to apologise? Balls. My wife will not apologise to anyone.

Balls…. Made me remember my College days in SRCC, Delhi when This term- “Balls” was used a lot.
ab US mein to F…. se kaam chalan padta hai!!!

sandy 16 March 2007
09:53:33 am

I would love to have Sameer’s inputs here as well but he keeps disapperaing everytime any critical analysis of Guru and Mani Ratnam happen. Don’t you think the ‘intention’ of the director matters?

satyam 16 March 2007
09:57:23 am

Sandy: Actually the intention of the director does NOT count for anything! But whatever the intention is you are quite wrong to assume that Rathnam (in this example) would simply reveal it in an interview. This isn’t his style.

I think quite frankly that you have this anti-intellectual streak where you simply turn off beyond a point. That’s fine of course and your prerogative you can’t say that people are just throwing out words like ‘metaphor’ and what not. Speaking for myself I wrote a number of long responses on Guru and in each case cited evidence within the film. let me remind you once again that while you laughed at our MP pieces you wrote a similar one on UJ (a fine piece) that put you in at least as much of a minority as we were with MP!

To get back to rathnam the ‘evidence’ as I see it is within his films and so obviously there that I wouldn’t even have thought this point was up for debate.

sandy 16 March 2007
09:59:02 am

SRK has over the years given many many provocative interviews. But every time he’s pushed into a corner he starts playing victim and people lap it up.”

Satyam: That’s the first thing that struck me when he spoke about his daughter crying and he’s mentioned that particular thing at least ten times in the interview. Also what was all that ‘My wife won’t apolige etc’ It’s the sympathy card he’s playing her FOR SURE.
But again, besides this, there are other things in the interview that I liked.

Again, I take your point that SRK certainly won’t burn his bridges with Yash Raj.His insecurity as an actor and star is his biggest weakness and ironically his strength too.

Sameer 16 March 2007
10:01:00 am

” Don’t you think the ‘intention’ of the director matters?”

Sandy to answer this, lemme give an example. There was song in Black Friday ‘Bharam Bhaap ke’ and there Aditya(Badshah Khan) is staring at the girls. And there was this HUGE theory and the analysis on NG and how Anurag was so great in creating such a scene, so on. But when I asked him(during chat) as what was HIS thought to shoot the scene way, he said its simply that he was feeling LONELY and seeked a company! So, all the analysis bit goes out. So, in other words, INTENTIONS do matter.

But, I also feel some directors create master strokes or scenes by accident which they later realize was a classic scene!

sandy 16 March 2007
10:01:26 am

Satyam: Trust you to subvert everthing that I’ve said

Rocky 16 March 2007
10:07:26 am

As for the bachchan quote sure he’s become rather testy and garrulous since Guru.

Satya(m) Vachan!!!!!!

sandy 16 March 2007
10:12:47 am

One more anecdote Sameer…

When Satyajit Ray made a film and it was up for reviews, there was this one particular scene that every high brow critic in town was intrigued about.

They saw a crow flying in one of the scenes and were splitting their hair over what it could signify. Every conceavable theory was produced – from it being a heralder of doom to what not…you get the drift)
Eventually when Ray was asked about it, he said ‘What crow! I never even noticed it was in a scene’

So how can intentions not matter?

jayshah 16 March 2007
10:14:13 am

Intentions do matter. Surely if an interpretation matters then the intention matters just as much. Afterall a director is only playing out his interpretation on celluloid.

BTW there is no right or wrong answer in interpretations. When I was in school we had to read many Shakepearean books and poems from the 19th century. There is NO correct way to interpret things and there is hardly any way to understand intentions. Its up to us as readers to draw our own conclusions. Whether the writer or director or poet meant something else DOES mean something but it is not the bible. We look at things our own way. We look at the metaphoric aspect of poetry and try to understand what the poet might have meant. But we can NEVER be sure.

Sameer 16 March 2007
10:17:43 am

“What crow”

LOL!!! Funny stuff!

sandy 16 March 2007
10:18:08 am

“But when I asked him(during chat) as what was HIS thought to shoot the scene way, he said its simply that he was feeling LONELY and seeked a company!”

LOL! That’s really funny. And what was that analysis people did on her wearing an orange salvar kameez and hence being a symbol of Shiv Sena’s ‘facist ideology’.
LMAO…as you would put it.

satyam 16 March 2007
10:22:29 am

Jay: Your second paragraph is making exactly my points. Intentions are unknowable for one. But even if we did the interpretations not consonant with the author’s interpretation would hardly be nullified. Because a work gives rise to a plethora of meanings, all of which the author cannot ‘intend’.

Remember, interpretations matter because these depend on the evidence provided by a text. The author’s intention (even if known) becomes one of these interpretations and has no privileged status as interpretation. The author’s genius lies in creating the work and offering it up for all sorts of readings. This is the condition of all art.

To reiterate the author’s intentions are simply an approach to the work and not some sort of ‘fixed meaning’ beyond which other interpretations cannot go. If that were so there would be no art work. Every work of art depends on this.

coolp 16 March 2007
10:24:35 am

Rajen Said “I think I find AB-SRK controversy a bit like Jeter-ARod controversy with SRK being more of A Rod.
He is an intelligent guy but soemhow I always find he is a little bit disenchanted with life in general inspite of joking around and everything.He has everything one could want but …….”

You are not suggesting that AB is less talented than SRK, by using Jeter-ARod analogy. Are you ?? Becoz in my opinion Jeter is less talented than ARod.

sandy 16 March 2007
10:24:49 am

We look at the metaphoric aspect of poetry and try to understand what the poet might have meant. But we can NEVER be sure.”

Jayshah: Surely, all works of art are open to interpretation but the idea is ultimately to get as close as possible to the originator’s thoughts. When you take up a poem, you try and see what feeling it evokes in you (that is an individual’s reading) but at the same time, you also research on the factors that prompted the poem, right.

Of course, some filmmakers leave the interpretation open (hardly happens with Bollywood though, which is why I disagree so much with the others) and in such a case, I appreciate any number of views but to ‘assume’ things is not corect just as the author’s interpretation need not be the ‘Bible’

jayshah 16 March 2007
10:25:58 am

I wouldn’t make fun of interpretations. This is one of the fascinating things about writing pieces on films, art or music. Its not something that should be frowned upon. Even if one goes into the deepest of details what it illustrates is a passion and creativity in thinking. I certainly don’t possess this skill and never have.

satyam 16 March 2007
10:29:13 am

Sandy: I’ve heard many such ‘non-serious’ anecdotes. There are of course ‘critics’ who take things too far in many instances and make a mockery of the enterprise. But one is also expected to be an intelligent reader on one’s own part. As readers we have a certain responsibility too! Just as we should differentiate between Bimal Roy and David Dhawan or between Dostoyevsky and John grisham we are also required to distinguish between good and mediocre critics! That you could only find the critics who reflected on that crow in Ray and not the many others who had seminal things to say about the director indicates either more hostility on your part (the anti-intellectual thing!), which prevents you from seeking out better quality stuff or a certain naivete that confuses any bit of writing on a director (author) as valid as anything else! I think questions of ‘taste’ matter in everything!

I am not being subversive. Just brutally honest!

sandy 16 March 2007
10:31:55 am

I am a student of literature and live on things like analysis but one does that kind of thing for something that is genuinely rich and every reading brings forth fresh nuances.
Sorry, Guru is not that kinda film that needs head-splitting over its scenes.
It’s a good commercial film and let it just be that.

satyam 16 March 2007
10:32:27 am

Sandy: Getting as close as possible to the author’s thought is a dream. It is ‘impossible’ for a variety of reasons, many of which I’ve pointed out. But even if one theoretically did this would defeat the artwork. Because that would entail everyone reading a work in only ONE way in every place and at any given point. This would not be an artwork but a piece of propaganda! There is art because there is always a multitude of meanings!

sandy 16 March 2007
10:34:01 am

That’s it Satyam, I’m ignoring you now.

jayshah 16 March 2007
10:35:25 am

RE ‘Surely, all works of art are open to interpretation but the idea is ultimately to get as close as possible to the originator’s thoughts.’

Sandy I don’t completely agree with the second part of this sentence. I watch film’s for entertainment not to understand what a director mean by X, Y or Z. Its always great to see what he may have meant with hindsight but even after knowing his intentions I might not even agree ! Art is a lot about interpretations. Intention is just one man’s perogative – its not the way everyone should read the art. Its just ONE opinion. An opinion that matters completely but again its not the bible.

I don’t read books, watch films to understand them the same way the originator did. This would take all the fun out of it !

satyam 16 March 2007
10:37:17 am

Sandy: Whoever said Guru was Shakespeare?! I think you’re evading the points I’ve made here! There have been important books written on Hindi cinema that even feature good essays on films like DDLJ. This does not mean the author is equating DDLJ with Ray! Commentary can be of different kinds, just because one has offered a close interpretation of a work does not mean it is invalid. And again you’ve objected to the Guru pieces I’ve put up or the earlier MP ones. Here’s my provocative response: if it can be dismissed why not do so on its own terms? If much of what I’m saying on these two films is junk surely it can be easily taken apart?! But this still brings me back to your UJ review. Most of what you said in that very nice piece would be considered exactly the same kind of ‘overreading’ and ‘hair-splitting’ that you think I’m indulging in! What’s different there?!

rks 16 March 2007
10:37:54 am

Sandy”But somehow, I do feel the ‘intention’ of the director does count in a way. ”

I agree that directors might some hidden meaning in particular scene. But when he is directing movie for masses (to maximize reach to audience, hence more money), I do not thing director is going to put some abstruse or vague thing which very few people could decipher.

There were some comments regarding Bluffmaster(I do not remember the author) on NG. I just could not agree with the interpretation being discussed. Though a good movie, in my opinion it was adaptation of Spanish movies Nine queen and Michael Douglas’s Game.
I agree some times there could be interpretations.
1. recently I watched Mystic River, In ending scene Kevin Bacon acknowledges Sean Penn and Sean Penn moves his hand saying similar to “What could I have done”. There could be interpretation.
2. Mulholland Drive: This movie is full of interpretation. Director wants you to interpret things.

Rocky 16 March 2007
10:39:23 am

I am yet to decipher the intention of Gautam Ghose in “Paar”. What a waste of NFDC money.

Qalandar 16 March 2007
10:45:50 am

Aside: we should all remember that if we say “intentionality” matters and is the most important determinant of interpretation, then we must also admit that we are privileging newer authors over older ones. Why? Because we know an awful lot more about Salman Rushdie’s life etc. from which intentions may be deduced than we do about (e.g.) Shakespeare, Dante, Homer. How are the latter to be interpreted since (taking Homer) we have nothing except for the text from which to gauge intentionality?

Aside 2: Intentionality is especially problematic when it comes to theater or film. Consider: In the case Yuva whose intentionality MATTERS? Ratnam, because he’s the director? Anurag Kashyap, because he was the writer? Ravi Chandran, who was the cinematographer? Abhishek Bachchan, who actually played the character of Lallan? What if Kashyap’s and Ratnam’s intentions DIFFER (as Kashyap has suggested in interviews), whose intentions govern? Indeed in Hindi films the question of intentionality is FURTHER complicated by the fact that we have additional “authors” (of a sort) in the form of music directors and lyricists, whose work in most Hindi films is part OF the film but also exists, and is INTENDED to exist (by music companies) and be heard APART from the film as well! Lest anyone think I am being facetious with this last bit, consider: don’t ARR and Prasoon Joshi have some claim to authorship where a film like RDB is concerned? Aren’t ARR and Vairamuthu “authors” of Iruvar?

satyam 16 March 2007
10:46:36 am

Rks: But sometimes things work at two different levels. Shakespeare wrote for the masses of his day but he was also recognized by his fellow writers as being among the most profound of his age. History has confirmed this.

Also the ‘masses’ do patronize quality cinema a lot of times. Films like Awara and Shree 420 and Madhumati and Deewar and what not qualify as ‘intelligent’ cinema that nevertheless offered the ‘audiences’ enough entertainment. Guru is that sort of film. This does not make these films art the way Ray’s films are art but this definitely does elevate them over films like Hero no 1!

satyam 16 March 2007
10:50:51 am

Say it ain’t so Rocky! Paar is one of the finest films to have come out of that entire ‘art’ movement. I assume you’ve not seen this in recent years. I’m sure you’d like it more if you did.

sandy 16 March 2007
10:52:41 am

Satyam: What I said in my UJ review and what you, q and abzee did with MP are NOT the same things.

Whatever I said was in tandem with the story and the filmmakers’ possible perspective. I maybe wrong in a couple of places eg abhishek’s character analysis etc but more or less, I stuck to what I felt instead over ‘overintellectualising’ it.

I’ve done the same thing with my Guru review as well but again I didn’t ‘assume’ too many things on behalf of the film. But I merely interpreted staying ‘withen the director’s vision and perspective’ and that was very enjoyable as well.

Qalandar 16 March 2007
10:58:13 am

Re: “what you, q and abzee did with MP are NOT the same things…”

Sandy: why not go for the more obvious explanation? i.e. that I had a different interpretation of MP than you did? I don’t see this as a “right” versus “wrong” issue, at least given that I (think I) gave reasons in my writings on MP, reasons that were not shown to be incoherent or contradictory. Stated differently, I am with jay in that I don’t see “interpretation” as about finding out “a right answer”, but about engaging with the work/film/text, and trying to do in a way that is meaningful to me and, hopefully, meaningful to some others as well…

Just my two cents…

sandy 16 March 2007
11:08:04 am

“How are the latter to be interpreted since (taking Homer) we have nothing except for the text from which to gauge intentionality?”

I don’t mean to say AT ALL that you need to know a lot about the author/filmmaker to interpret his work correctly. It helps, especially with authors, since their experiences colour their intensions in some ways.

What i mean here is that one needs to follow the ‘director’ keenly —in a literal sense, allow him to direct you into his film rather than mis-reading things. That takes out all the fun also. Every single film evokes feeling in us but let that not be confused with formal interpretation, that’s all I’m saying here.

jayshah 16 March 2007
11:12:33 am

This is very individualistic. I won’t talk about MP but maybe RDB.

This movie from the numerous comments on NG I have read has been deemed as ‘confused politics’. This is fair and I can see where this interpretation has come from. However I doubt Rakesh Mehra intentionally wanted to make such a film. His intentions have been made clear by numerous interviews and also Aamir has stated many times its a movie for the youth and promotes standing up for what you believe in, being more active in society etc.

In fact I completely agree with Mehra’s/Aamir’s vision here. I read the film exactly like this.

On Guru/MP/UJ … people write pieces because they are passionate about things they have seen or witnessed. Whether they over indulge or under indulge is open to ‘interpretation’ but the ‘intentions’ are fair ones IMO !

Heck I over indulge in BO numbers and probably go into more detail then anyone wants to see !

sandy 16 March 2007
11:15:47 am

but about engaging with the work/film/text, and trying to do in a way that is meaningful to me and, hopefully, meaningful to some others as well…”

I wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments here. I too always interpret things, drawing from my own experiences and making it meaningful for myself. But I do get irritated when I see a particular value attached to something that does not deserve it. It’s plain what the director intended to do and there you are splitting hair over it.

This is not about having an anti-intellectual streak. It’s merely realistic assessment.

Qalandar 16 March 2007
11:18:52 am

Re: “What i mean here is that one needs to follow the ‘director’ keenly —in a literal sense”

“It’s merely realistic assessment.”

I understand, and acknowledge your views, but I do not agree, first because I am not a literalist in these matters, and second because I do not equate literalism with realism…

Let’s agree to disagree, as we have very different perspectives on this issue. However, this was a good dicscussion, and better than abusing this or that star!

satyam 16 March 2007
11:21:43 am

Sandy: I HAVE actually followed Rathnam keenly. even though I’ve seen most of his films many times I nonetheless re-visited all the major ones before watching Guru. I am all too familiar with both his Hindi and Tamil oeuvres. This allows me to see correspondences, themes etc across the director’s work. Guru forms some sort of trilogy with Nayakan and Iruvar, however one rates it in this sense.

Also the problem here is that you want to ‘decide’ on how much interpretation is valid for a film/filmmaker! But why should or anyone else follow you definitions of how deep an interpretation should go? My way is the more democratic one — write an essay on MHN if that’s your thing! I would be interested for sure.

Why does it bother you if someone else writes detailed pieces on MP or Guru is what I’m not quite able to get. You might find it overdone or whatever but why is it a problem?

Finally I don’t know quite honestly what ‘allowing a director to take me into a film’ would mean! As far as I’m concerned rathnam’s Guru enabled the interpretation I have.

Tango 16 March 2007
11:26:01 am

Hmm… Sandy ji aap ka yeh roop maine pehle nahi dekha tha

Anyway goodnight , looking forward to your Mani interview !

Rocky 16 March 2007
11:27:58 am

Guys, this was supposed to be a post about Big B and SRK’s war of words, not Sandy- Satyam’s….

Saanu Kee !!!!!!

sandy 16 March 2007
11:29:53 am

There is scope for very little distance between interpretation and intention in Hindi cinema – let’s be very clear on that.

PS: Lending an above average/bad film a zillion interpretations does not make it a good film.

Qalandar 16 March 2007
11:30:59 am

Just so I am clear, none of my comments have anything to do with Guru, or even with Ratnam per se, but I was making a more general point. Plus, there’s the whole question of WHOSE intentions matter: http://www.naachgaana.com/2007.....ment-15821

jayshah 16 March 2007
11:40:59 am

‘PS: Lending an above average/bad film a zillion interpretations does not make it a good film’

The statement I agree with BUT it could just so be the intention is not to make it a good film but just to throw up an interpretation and see things from a different perspective – thats all.

satyam 16 March 2007
11:54:55 am

Jay: I agree with your last statement. Speaking for myself I am always interested in just looking at things from a different angle. And rather than trying to make a film ‘better’ it is because of the reasons that I cite that I like/dislike a film.

Sandy: Again you evade resonding to my specifics! That a bad film cannot be made better by ‘interpretation’ is something most of us would agree on! And I don’t see myself as being guilty of that charge! But again your statement is arbitrary. Who decides what film is ‘bad’ enough not to warrant more than a certain level of interpretation? In your responses you keep putting youself forward (perhaps ‘unintentionally’!) as the ultimate arbiter on these matters!

But again as Jay suggests even assuming it’s a film that one finds ‘bad’ one can nevertheless learn something from it. I did not like Bhansali’s Devdas but I found it useful to write several pieces on it!

Like Qalandar, Guru is again an example with me. As everyone know I can talk anyone’s head off on just about anything (unfortunately for the members on this forum!).

Rocky: Isn’t Sandy/Satyam far more interesting than Bachchan/SRK?!

sandy 16 March 2007
12:03:48 pm

Satyam Re:”Why does it bother you if someone else writes detailed pieces on MP or Guru is what I’m not quite able to get. You might find it overdone or whatever but why is it a problem?”

It’s a problem because a) there’s an arrogance that reeks through that analysis that suggests that a “great masterpiece” has been callously cast aside by a mass of unimaginative fools!

b)It’s an alternative way of putting the film on a pedestal and giving it a stuture it does not deserve.

so yes, I have a problem with that.

Rocky 16 March 2007
12:07:52 pm

Although I am very much against the over analysis of movies or anything for that matter, but I must confess that S,J,Q ki baatoon mein Dum hai.

the intention is not to make it a good film but just to throw up an interpretation and see things from a different perspective – thats all.
Keep throwing the interpretations on the wall, sometimes, somethings will Stick.

Rocky 16 March 2007
12:14:17 pm

Rocky: Isn’t Sandy/Satyam far more interesting than Bachchan/SRK?!

Well- Yaaa !!!!

rks 16 March 2007
12:16:53 pm

Q”What if Kashyap’s and Ratnam’s intentions DIFFER (as Kashyap has suggested in interviews), whose intentions govern?”

Movie is director’s vision and every one else assist him. I do not deny that their role is less significant but director’s vision prevails.

Satyam”Also the ‘masses’ do patronize quality cinema a lot of times. Films like Awara and Shree 420 and Madhumati and Deewar and what not qualify as ‘intelligent’ cinema that nevertheless offered the ‘audiences’ enough entertainment.”
Best directors are one who can combine both quality(definition differ person to person) and quantity. Intelligent (art) movie director might win some award but ultimately he is making film for himself and very few.

sandy 16 March 2007
12:17:14 pm

“Who decides what film is ‘bad’ enough not to warrant more than a certain level of interpretation?”

I’m not against rediscovering films or trying to see another person’s percpective but I refuse to accpet an arrogant, overbearing assessment of a film, that didn’t work for almost anybody. (that’s bad enough I thought or are four members on NG enough to decide the stature/fate of a film?)

Rocky 16 March 2007
12:35:54 pm

are four members on NG enough to decide the stature/fate of a film?

Why are people so mad at “NG the forum” all the time????

rks 16 March 2007
12:37:08 pm

Sandy”I refuse to accpet an arrogant, overbearing assessment of a film, that didn’t work for almost anybody.”

Silly question. Which Movie are we talking about? MP, Guru or UJ?

Sameer 16 March 2007
01:49:57 pm

“Which Movie are we talking about? MP, Guru or UJ?”

I assume its MP. Sandy aur MP ka purana aur gehra rishta hai! LOL

rks 16 March 2007
02:19:14 pm

“I assume its MP. Sandy aur MP ka purana aur gehra rishta hai!”
IMO MP was one the better movies than most of the Bollywood releases. People had lot of expectations and it failed to raise itself. I think Ketan made the film with passion but faulted when he tried to introduce Masala (songs and love stories) in plot. I think only few directors know where to put the song correctly.

Jesse 16 March 2007
02:34:31 pm

Wow. This is a great discussion. Some very interesting points made by Sandy, Satyam, Qalandar, Jay, and Sameer.

Street Pharmacist 16 March 2007
10:59:24 pm

Satyam … I don’t quite agree with your view on SrK not being able to turn down a Yashraj film. I don’t think it’s even a question of wanting to turn them down. And neither is it a matter of Yashraj being the sole producers that SrK did that with. Even after delivering one of the biggest setbacks of his career (as SrK admits) he still went on to do another movie with Aziz Mirza.. it’s a question of gratitude there. And don’t be surprised if you see SrK in the next KJo film after the debacle of KANK. Whether SrK made Yashraj or the other way round… SrK and Adi are very close friends nad have mutual respect unlike any other in the business.

Secondly, there hasn’t really been situtation where SrK would have WANTED to turn down a Yashraj film. Not only are Yashraj films guranteed successes, they’ve always kept their best for him. And not only the movies, but even the roles in the movies. Who would have tured down a DTPH, Mohabattein, or a Veer Zaara .. the last 3 yashraj films with SrK? Chak De India is the only Yashraj film with SrK where neither the father or the son are directing it.. and unless I don’t see teh film I am not going to make any judgement about the film. With Shimit Amin at the helm and relatively foreign concept for Bollywood, it very much looks like a helluva interesting film and a quite a roel for SrK. And again where Dhoom3 is concerned, it is Yashraj’s next biggest film.. and SrK was offered both the roles – the villain and the cop, while a certain other actor who supposedly “turns down Yashraj and every other big shot director” had to walk away coz h didn’t get the role he wanted to.

And please don’t tell me… Aamir is willing to do a Kunal Kohli Yashraj flick like Fanaa.. and then turns down a Aditya Chopra directorial Dhoom3… Bullshit.

The fact is, nobody turns down Yashraj… unless they get a really really insignificant role.. and in some cases some supposedly top stars have even accepted really bad roles in quite significant movies (Abhi in D2, Akki in DTPH)… but anyways.. so yeah.. why should SrK turn down a Yashraj film.. when they’re offering their biggest films and their best roles to him???
Same with KJo… SrK doesn’t really have a reason to turn down Karan Johar… unless he thinks lowly of them as directors.. and no matter what me and you say here, SrK and the rest of film fraternity and the Indian critics in general and the audience.. think very highly of Karan Johar, Yash Chopra and Aditya Chopra.

BTW… what big film offer did Aamir Khan reject? ..and please don’t give me something liek Swades or Josh or something along those lines.. … I am talking of really BIG Films… I’m sure (1500% sure) that Aamir won’t have said no to any of these huge films if offered – Mohabattein, K3G, Veer Zaara, Devdas, Dhoom2 or Dhoom3, Kriish, Don, KANK, etc..etc. ..s crew that.. he wouldn’t have teh balls to turn down even an Eklavya, Guru and Khakee.

Fact 1 : Aamir has only turned down the likes of Darshans and Indra Kumar and other such directors who are not rally considered very much a top league dirctor… specially BO-wise.
Fact2 : Aamir never really gets the most pretigious of offers to begin with. ..and even when he does get a director’s biggest film.. he doesn’t get the best role in it.. e.g. Josh, Dhoom3

Street Pharmacist 16 March 2007
11:03:07 pm

On the other hand, SrK has turned down some very high profile directors.. and their biggest films. Turned down RGV ’s Company, VVC’s Mission Kashmir and Elavya and even Munnabhai, a couple of RKS scripts and Priyadarshan’s been trying to work with him forever. Who’s left there?

Tango 17 March 2007
01:38:22 am

SP – very well summed up about SRK .

You should put up more such analysis

As I have said above it is one of his best interviews and he has said ” all” that people wanted to hear .
It may be liked by some and may be too scorching to bear or handle for some others .

Everyone has his or her own opinion !

akshay shah 17 March 2007
02:24:06 am

Excellent set of thoughts here, I will leave Sattu and Sandy to battle out their discussions…

SP: Aamir quiet frankly has a much better script sense than SRK anyday! I don’t see rejecting films with the likes of RGV, VVC, Priyan, etc and doing films like a KANK necessarily a “good” thing:)

I would MUCH rather see SRK doing a LAGAAN or a COMPANY than a V-Z and DTPH

A.Shah

akshay shah 17 March 2007
02:24:27 am

Everyone has his or her own opinion !—thats my saying abid:P!

Tango 17 March 2007
06:35:20 am

Akshayshah but one thing ( Sandy ji maaf kar do pehle se) .

The only TWO Yash Raj banner films that Amir chose were Parampara ( pure trash) and Fanaa ( a very run of the mill stuff) , rejecting Darr ?

sandy 17 March 2007
06:41:24 am

“Aamir never really gets the most pretigious of offers to begin with”

Aamir makes a film pretigious on his own SP. He has the ability to turn the smallest film into a ‘pretige film’, so I guess that’s more creditable than doing a predictable big banner film, what say?

satyam 17 March 2007
06:46:31 am

Street: I cannot unfortunately agree with anything that you’re saying. The reason is that I don’t express ‘opinions’ in these matters. I know certain things for a fact that I cannot unfortunately divulge. I will repeat though that there are a few actors who’ve refused Yahsraj and SRK isn’t one of them. All I will say about Aamir is that is a record holder here! SRK fans always find it a little shocking that other stars could do this to Yashraj when SRK couldn’t. Well because SRK never had that kind of leverage vis-a-vis Yashraj because he could never get success elsehwere. This isn’t true for these other stars I know about.

As for Fanaa well hardly the most usual Yashraj film. The format seems familiar except that the hero is a terrorist who never reforms. Hardly the most conventional ending either. Let’s give Aamir some credit here! No other Yashraj film is likely to be comparable on either score. Also Aamir extract more than a pound of flesh from Yashraj for this one!

But again I am talking about facts here not about opinions. I have to be reticent for a few reasons but there you have it.

Finally it is hardly fair to talk about Parampara and Darr at this point, that’s ancient history! However with Darr Aamir revealed his ethical side. He left the film solely because he felt Yash Chopra was playing dirty with Sunny Deol, Yash Chopra was essentially narrating somewhat different scripts to both actors, Aamir realised that he would get the better part but was bothered by the unprofessionalism here. Even at that early stage in his career he walked out of the film. History might have been a little different had he not done so!

But far be it from the SRK partisans to give any credit to any star for anything be it Aamir or Abhishek, Akshay or Hrithik!

sandy 17 March 2007
06:51:34 am

“The only TWO Yash Raj banner films that Amir chose were Parampara ( pure trash) and Fanaa ( a very run of the mill stuff) , rejecting Darr ?”

So association with yash Raj has only been detremental to Aamir. Fair enough, he genuinely doesn’t need them, you know that! Shah Rukh probably DOES , as his script sense is not too strong(like SP says, he rejected all those great films, remember?. And in any case, he keeps working with every director that Aamir has worked with, just to be on the safer side.

Leaning on Yash Raj is a bad habit that will die hard for SRK. Aamir can direct his own films for god’s sake, he doesn’t need Yash Raj!

Tango 17 March 2007
06:55:42 am

Maine pehle hi maafi maang li hai Sandy ji

I was just engaging Akshayshah in a discussion

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
09:56:11 am

Sandy and Akshay.. I agree that Aamir has a better sense of script choices and maybe He does bring more prestige to the film than the film brings to him, but that was never the point of the dicussion. Here Stayam, on MERE SPECULATIONS and no NOT FACTS, proposed that SrK cannot turn down a Yashraj film simply on the reason of leverage. … that he’s not been in a position to reject their offers. But on teh contrary, whether Fanaa be a better film than VZ, is a different matter, but any Star worth his salt will do a Yashraj film where Chopra himself is directing after 6 year hiatus. No two ways about that. SrK has not yet been offered a film that he would WANT to reject. He’s been getting their biggest films the whole time.

As for Darr and Aamir, there’e been thousand of theories as to why he walked away… but I tend to beleive the one more consistent with Aamir’s track record. He just didn’t feel secure enough to play a villian to Sunny Deol’s hero. Playing villains back in the day was not very fasjionable.. just as playing hero nowadays is not, when another star is cast in the role of the bad guy. And It shouldn’t surprse any of us that Aamir walked out of Dhoom3 as well. And yes, on same grounds he walked out of Josh and the RKS movie as well.
Ethical grounds?? my ass.. It’s a commonly known fact that Aamir plays around with his costar’s screen time.. and even tehir casting. RDB being teh latest example. .. and whether he kicked out Rampal for good or bad, it sure raises teh question of this ethical side.

BTW.. Satyam keeps on muttering “facts” and facts.. but can you please name those stars who turned down Yashraj films.. and can you also tell me what those Big films or what the star’s roles in those films were?? The smaller films maybe, but I wonder if Yashraj ever offered their big films to another actor and that certain other actor rejected it.

satyam 17 March 2007
10:12:26 am

I have nothing more to add Street to what I said earlier. The problem with your responses is that you pass off fiction as fact. It is hard to know where to begin. If one wants to assert SRK is God one should say it and keep repeating it because propaganda is in any case your game. The rest of the time your lengthy responses are simply attempts to pull down other stars in every conceivable sense. One day it’s Abhishek, another day it’s Aamir, yet another day it’s Bachchan! I hate to be so blunt about it but yours is not a serious discourse. Therefore I find it impossible to engage with you. But just for the record here every bit of what you said about Aamir here is about as true as my being the Pope!

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
10:21:33 am

Also.. why is it that these so-called small directors who make it big thanks to Aamir, do not return to Aamir with their more ambitious projects?? Farhan does DCH with Aamir… but offers his huge Don to SrK (and Hrithik). Gowariker did his Lagaan with Aamir… but never even offered him Jodha Akbar. Aamir got Rangela but never offered a role in Company. Even Mansoor khan, his cousin, went ahead to make Josh without him and never once did he offer him the role he wanted. So yeah, Aamir , for all his talents and script sense and his ability to rise over the script, just doesn’t the respect from the top notch directors and producers out there… for whatever reason.

Let me name the biggest names in the industry the past decade and half… Ghai, Dhawan, Chopras, Johars, VVC, RGV, Ratnam, Dutta, Roshan, Bharjatya, Bhansali and prolly a couple more names. Has any of them ever offered a good role in any of their movies to Aamir?? Even Salman been offered (and even rejected) a number of these guys’ films before… but not Aamir.
So yeah, Aamir fans boast about Aamir doing so many films with small-time directors and producers.. but is it coz he wants to or is it more because of lack of choice. A Darshan or an Indra Kumar movie is not quite an offer one cann’t refuse.

Tango 17 March 2007
10:25:58 am

SP suna hai maine tumhari anti/insulting post put up kar di , as per Bond/… bhai

Let me know if you think that way , so that I may take remedial measures , so that you don’t get angry

Checkout my BOindia post for details about how I insulted you !

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
10:33:21 am

It’s ok Satyam if you ‘ve got nothing in reply.. but please do point out what part of it all was fiction?? The part where SrK has been getting Yashraj’s biggest films??? or the pasrt that DTPH, Moh, VZ etc were their biggest films to begin with… or the part that says SrK has turned down offers from RGV, VVC, etc?

Actually fiction is beleiving that SrK never wanted to do any of those Yashraj movies and couldn’t say no to them. As much of a fction as it when one claims that Aamir walked out of Darr, coz he wasn’t happy with Sunny’s role… lol. And fiction is Aamir rejecting high-profile directors all the time, when there’s hardly any evidence of him being offered any good roles in big films to begin with.

No Satyam, I am not ring to bring down Aamir.. in fact I agreed with everything Akshay and Sandy said about Aamir being an actor with much better script sense and yes he does make his films rise a few notches at the least in quality and prestige. But it’s pretty obvious that you try to bring down SrK and discredit him in every possible way, using any other star whenever possible. Using the Aamir card here, the Hrithik card in another discussion.hanging on to Dutt’s XXXX in yet another topic and if nothing else.. just use Bachchan.

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
10:34:42 am

nahin tango bhaiyya. I knew whom you pointed that post to.. itna to akal hai mujhme yaar.

jayshah 17 March 2007
10:35:49 am

I am with Sandy’s views here on Aamir. I think he is one of the few who would happily turn down the Chopra’s and he has up until never needed them ! I don’t even think a Fanaa success will change this.

Every interview Aamir takes he always says the script comes first and he sounds like a guy who goes with HIS conviction. He is pretty vocal about this.

‘He’s been getting their biggest films the whole time’

Actually if one looks at the BO performance of YashRaj movies post Darr, DDLJ is the biggest grosser (adjusted for inflation), then comes D2 and then comes Fanaa. So its hard to say that SRK has indeed been offered the biggest films each time. Personally I think D2 is the biggest movie post DDLJ that YashRaj have produced and Fanaa is up there with DTPH. Mohabbatein slightly ahead of Fanaa/DTPH.

On why directors don’t go back to Aamir ? I have no answer to this. It might be that he is difficult to work with. But this is not a worrying thing at all for Aamir. Its quite clear he doesn’t need anyone to bat for him and as long as he keeps his strong sense of script picking he will always be a strong force.

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
10:36:57 am

One more observation in this interview… notice how SRK says a clear “NO” when asked about a rift with Yashraj.. but doesn’t quite deny the rift with Bachchans in that same manner …proving yet again that yes there’s something between them.

Rocky 17 March 2007
10:40:19 am

SRK decides to give this interview to Midday- Bachchan’s not so fav. paper… Things are getting Ugly!!!!

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
10:47:29 am

jayshah.. DO you seriously beleive that Ghadvi’s Dhoom and Kohli’s Fanaa.. were more pretigious films than Aditya Chopra’s Mohabattein, and YAsh’s DTPH and Veer Zaara??
And why is it that when Adi himself directs the Dhoom instalment (or anytime he directs a film), he automatically goes to SrK??

I think you are confusing big film with big grosser. Also.. looking at teh market in 2006, I wonder how DTPH, MOH and VZ would have done in a year like this.

and Jay” I think he is one of the few who would happily turn down the Chopra’s and he has up until never needed them !”

What makes you beleive, I mean what evidence is in there to suggest that?? Don’t you think it’s mere speculation , hindsight on your part? Has there ever been an instance where Aamir has turned down a juicy film from Yashraj? .. or for that metter any other bigshot producer/director?

Tango 17 March 2007
10:48:01 am

Thanks SP , even if you had not responded I would have taken your answer for granted

BTW – I think this is a very painful interview for ppl who think that SRK is out and others in for Aditya ( not that I think very highly of Aditya , I have made my views clear about him many times , spl during Saif’s National award) .

SRK has clearly said why he did not do project X and why he is doing project Y . I think it takes guts to say things quoting Aditya directly .

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
10:54:08 am

totally agree with you there Tango..

and yes Rocky.. things are getting nasty there.. but honestly.. I ‘m loving it. What better drama than tow of the biggest names in the industry going at each other like that.
Must say tho, that unliek Bachchan, SrK hasn’t quite taken shots openly at SrK and his position (read: Guru BO remark here)

Rocky 17 March 2007
10:58:27 am

SP, I agree that that was in bad taste and does not suit his stature, but then SRK did not not cover himself in glory either when he said this is my Sadi, that was yours.That is something which i am sure even Karan Johar will not agree.
But hey, I am enjoying it too !!!!

Rocky 17 March 2007
11:05:09 am

Waise, hitting back when pushed to the wall – yeh Bachchan ki purani aadat hai. He gave so many interviews during Major Sahab, to prove that a. There is a consipiracy against him and b. The movie is a big hit.

I also remember one interview of SRK after Mohabbaten but befor KBC in which he said something to the effect that he and Adi ( Note that he had included himself with adi) were very clear that Bachchan sahab ka role unke ststure ke hisab se hona chaiye. This to me looked that he considered himself part of the decision making process of casting Amitbah in Mohabbaten. I remember being very mad at SRK back then.

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
11:08:43 am

Bachchan did a total of 16 films with Desai and Mehra.. Is that to suggest that Bachchan didn’t have the leverage to turn down any of their films… or was it more of case of them being the biggest names in the industry and Bachchan being happy with getting the best of roles in their movies?

Wake me up when the Chopras (Adi and Yash) cast another actor in the lead role when they’re directing a movie themselves.

P.S. those 16 films came across a period of 16 years.. From Zanjeer in 73 to Jaadugar 89.. So yeah.. almost every year there was atleast one Bachchan release with either one of them.

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
11:12:14 am

ohh.. that’s some interesting bit there Rocky… (the Moh part).

Tango 17 March 2007
11:16:48 am

Rocky , yes you are right Major Sahab was one of the 10-biggest hits of the year unlike what the media said while demeaning the movie .

About the ’sadi’ thing . SRK just said in a couplet and that should be taken in the rt spirit ” Keh do Meero Ghalib se … Woh tumhari sadi thi …Yeh hamari sadi hai .”

And that should be taken in the classic Urdu sense .

I think the media should be hanged for twisting his words by saying that Mr. Bachchan’s time is over .

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
11:34:21 am

btw.. I wanted to post here.. but then decided to do in a new topic post.. the whole reason behind over-rating Aamir and how he’s always been a top star..and how he’s supposedly a bigger draw than say, Srk and more importantly Hrithik… etc by them Bachchan fans. It’s very little to do with their liking for Aamir, heck most of them would put Abhishek ahead of Aamir on the acting front lol. But anyways.. it’s more to more to do with downplaying the whole dominance of SrK in past decade or so… specially afte the downfall of Salman that it’s pretty clear none of his close rivals amongst his contemporaries are in the race anymore. Govinda went out first.. then Sunny.. and now Salman. And wonder how long before the rest leave it. Akshay, Saif and Aamir are up there but this is their peak and they were never in the top tier at any time throughout the 90’s. and no matter what none of them will be crowned the superstar of Bolywood at anytime soon. It’s Srk.. until the youngsters take over , i.e., Hrithik, Abhishek or what have you.

Tango 17 March 2007
11:51:58 am

SP ” It’s very little to do with their liking for Aamir”

LOL- You are on the money SP .

Its a case parallel to the love affair with Lage Raho Munnabhai and lots of hullabaloo about how BOI undermined it but a mum about the under-reporting of LRM by Ganesh .

I think that is why the word hypocricy was coined .

satyam 17 March 2007
12:02:43 pm

Actually Street most of the stuff that you say (if not all of it) sounds strikingly similar to many many things my favorite ‘member’ here (!) and your true friend has said in the past on different occasions. Your views totally match his.. do you guys compare notes? Just wondering. Sometimes it’s almost verbatim!

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
12:23:56 pm

maybe it’s coz we speak facts and as they unceover.. as opposed to make up theories and fictionalized statements.

Notice.. our views and opinions on films and actors are very very different from each other.. but on facts like what star in on top and which one is at the bottom and all that.. yes we do agree with each other most often.

Jesse 17 March 2007
12:30:48 pm

“Its a case parallel to the love affair with Lage Raho Munnabhai and lots of hullabaloo about how BOI undermined it but a mum about the under-reporting of LRM by Ganesh .”

I’ve went through this many times, perhaps you should pay a bit more attention. It’s not a BOI vs IBOS thing for me, as IBOS could be well off LRM’s total. What the bigger problem is that both LRM and Don either missed or crossed a milestone number respectively by just a bit, which seems statistically improbable without fudging the numbers a bit. To make matters worse, BOI has been rounding off their numbers for years, so why not round LRM up to 70? Unlike you, whenever I am questioned on something I will provide a legit response.

Which reminds me, I am still waiting for a resonse from you and you seem to never reply in a thread once I pose a question:
“This discussion is really getting annoying at this point. There is no clear evidence out there that indicates anything other then the 50 cr number, since no one is willing to provide any evidence for this.

Tango(Abid?): There is quite a simple way to solve this problem and that is that you provide the math and the reasoning to show what number you would get. To support your claim you should also analyse a few other films which may include Don, Fanaa, RDB, KANK, PHP, etc.

Also, if you would like to use the makers 18 cr number be free to, but you MUST consider that since you have made a systematic error you would have to adjust the other films accordingly. In other words, if you get a 20 cr number for Guru but you take the 18 cr instead you are admitting that you generally predict 11% over the “real total”. So you would apply this to say Don’s 24 cr and you would get a “real total” for Don that would be 21.36 cr.”

”

Satyam: No need to apologize as I am not annoyed by your comments and I welcome more of them. What I’m annoyed with is that you and Jay go through a great amount detail to come your totals, and we then get Abid just throwing out a single number and saying that is the end of the discussion since he is the so called “expert”. It almost gets to the point where it feels like you are arguing with a child, who seems to push off everything that is rational due to being stubborn.

I’ve asked so many questions to Abid because I feel that since he is the “expert” he should be able to answer without to much difficulty. But instead of getting a direct response, I always get something like “Sure Guru is a hit, now Abhishiek coud join the leagues of Fardeen, Shahid, etc” or a “How long have you been following the BO? Do you know what source IBOS uses?”.

Also, a more personal annoyance for me is that since I tend to agree with the rational and logical arguments that Jay and Satyam put out, I have somehow been labelled as “pro-Bachchan, anti-SRK”.”

If you need a refresher on the context of the thread here is the link:
http://www.naachgaana.com/2007.....e-on-guru/

By the way, I will keep posting this question whenever you post something questioning my BO view until I get an answer. If your the expert on this it shouldn’t be too difficult, but based on past responses I have a hard time understanding why you can be an “expert” when you don’t have a grasp on basic statistical concepts.

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
12:44:32 pm

jesse I just read your whole 100 word post.. and just on’t understand what u’re complainig about?

Is it Guru’s 41 cr total? or BOI not givein LRM the 30 dd lackhs extra to allow the movie reach 70 cr mark.. or is it about Don’s 50 cr gross? what exactly is it?

And I keep reading “jay’s and Satyam’s that” over and over again. Can someone post a link to any of them. I’ve read Satyam’s math many a times.. and it’s hardly rathional or locical.. it’s almost filled with advent speculations and hard-to-swallow theories.
As far as jay’s math been concerned in recent past, it’s all to do with trending and attrition rates rather than estimating totals and always always influenced by satyam’s theories in a huge huge way.

And where LRM is concerned, didn’t jay, satyam and teh likes have huge problems with BOI all along that they purposely lowered it its total to make it close to Kriish.. now hat heppened to all those conspiracy theories when their beloved site has given Kriish actually bigger total than LRM. Forget Satyam, I;ve yet to hear any complaints from the so-called non–fans like jay on that matter.

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
12:47:30 pm

And also.. Tango is accused time and again as being anti-Abhishek and pro-khan in here for his totals, how come no one ever questions jogindar even tho he has almost exact totals as Tango, BOI and the rest.

Tango 17 March 2007
01:00:15 pm

SP that is because Joginder is all over Indiafm , Glamsham , Indiaglitz usko gussa aa gaya to bura ho jaye ga

Just joking Joginder is a very nice & gentle guy . A true gentleman .

Jesse 17 March 2007
01:22:05 pm

What I am complaining about is quite simple, I want a bit more that “X film did y cr this week” as that simply doesn’t cut it. Tommorow I can go out and open a website and claim to use Komal or Taran as a source and then say that Don collected 60 cr, and much like Abid it doesn’t mean my word is true.

As far as Jay and Satyam go, they post totals based on Taran’s numbers every week. And our resident expert has yet to come up with anything legitimate to attack their numbers to date. If their math is weak wouldn’t it be easy to dismiss, especially by an expert?

Perhaps, I am wrong here and I will be fully willing to accept it when Abid posts the analysis I have requested for some time now. Perhaps, my math and stats is not applicable to the Box office, but I need to know why as the stats/math surely beats pulling numbers out of the air.

On LRM: My issue with the totals is as stated as above. I’m not sure if any else has the same problems with it or not. It isn’t a matter of the actual number for me, instead it has to do with its position relative to the milestone of 70 cr.

By the way here are the reported center totals for some of the key films discussed here from Taran:

Guru: 29.95 cr
Don: 24.69 cr
(It’s hard to swallow that Guru barely crossing 40, while Don doing 50 looking at these numbers)

D2: 40.31 cr
LRM: 37.81 cr
Krrish: 41.67 cr
(Although I do admit IBOS under-reported LRM, the possibility that Krrish outdid LRM and possible D2 can’t be thrown away based on Taran’s numbers. Note as I said before my point was against the stopping of LRM at 69.99999 cr at BOI not the actual number)

Jesse 17 March 2007
01:28:56 pm

On Joginder: I have never attacked his totals, because he has never made it a point to go after anybody elses thoughts on the BO. That’s the way it should be IMO, since in the end this is a guessing game and nothing else so even thinking that one has more accuracy in their estimations over another is ridiculous. Plus, of the BO writers out there he surely is much better at hiding any personal bias’ within his column compared to others. Ofcourse, his numbers match BOI and Abid, but that is likely because they use a similar method along with the same source. And I am fairly certain that he knows that the method used has some very large holes in it, as it isn’t near perfect.

Jesse 17 March 2007
01:31:21 pm

By the way Abid, the question isn’t going to go away! I am still awaiting a response.

Tango 17 March 2007
01:39:26 pm

( responce meant only for Jesses , as he has addressed the query to me )

What responce do you want Jesse . I did not address apost to you or did I ?

Anyway , if Taran is the referred to expert here take his verdicts too

Taran’s classifications for movies in 2005
http://www.indiafm.com/features/2006/01/07/937/index.html

Classification of films 2005
By Taran Adarsh, January 7, 2006 – 22:53 IST

SUPER DUPER HIT
No Entry

HITS
Bunty Aur Babli
Garam Masala
Hanuman
Kyaa Kool Hai Hum
Maine Pyaar Kyun Kiya
Page 3 [Super Hit in Mumbai]
Sarkar [Super Hit in Mumbai]
Salaam | Namaste [Super Hit in Overseas]
Waqt [Super Hit in Mumbai, Overseas]

SEMI HITS
Apaharan
Dus
Kaal
Kalyug
Parineeta
Zeher

PARTIAL SUCCESS
Barsaat [Hindi belt]
Black [multiplexes of metros]
Dosti – Friends Forever [Hindi belt]
Iqbal [multiplexes]
Lucky – No Time For Love
Mangal Pandey – The Rising [due to extra-ordinary initial]

AVERAGE
Aashiq Banaya Aapne [some circuits]
Bluffmaster! [Better in Mumbai, Delhi; losing in some circuits]
Ek Ajnabee [some circuits]

SETBACKS
Bewafaa
Blackmail
Chocolate
Deewane Huye Paagal
Dil Jo Bhi Kahey…
Elaan
Home Delivery
Insan
James
Jo Bole So Nihaal
Jurm
Kisna
Kyon Ki…
Main Aisa Hi Hoon
Maine Gandhi Ko Nahin Mara
Mr. Ya Miss
Mumbai Xpress
My Wife’s Murder
Neal ‘N’ Nikki
Padmashree Laloo Prasad Yadav
Paheli
Shaadi No. 1
Shabd
Shikhar
Silsiilay
Taj Mahal
Tango Charlie
Vaada
Viruddh

Note:- All films ranked in alphabetical order.

or for last year

http://www.indiafm.com/trade/special_features/3.html

Classification of movies in 2006

Blockbuster
Dhoom 2
Krrish
Lage Raho Munnabhai

Super Duper Hit
Fanaa
Rang De Basanti
Vivah [Blockbuster in Bihar]

Super Hit
Phir Hera Pheri

[b]Hit[/b]
Gangster [Mumbai; Semi Hit in other circuits]
[b]Kabhi Alvida Naa Kehna[/b]
Malamaal Weekly

[b]Semi Hit[/b]
Apna Sapna Money Money
[b]Don[/b]
Golmaal – Fun Unlimited
Pyaar Ke Side/Effects
Taxi No. 9211

Partial/Moderate Success
Aksar
Bhagam Bhag
Chup Chup Ke [Mumbai, Delhi]
Khosla Ka Ghosla
Woh Lamhe

Average
Being Cyrus [metros]
Corporate
Shaadi Se Pehle [some circuits]
Tom Dick And Harry [some circuits]
36 China Town [some circuits]

You agree with it 100 % then correct others who do not and refer to his numbers .

By PB Guru is a superhit

http://www.planetbollywood.com/BoxOffice/

and by Taran it is hit .

http://www.indiafm.com/trade/top5/326.html

So what does that show ?

Street Pharmacist 17 March 2007
01:52:36 pm

Those totals you posted jesse are for how many weeks?.. and don’t you think the anti-Don stance Taran tied himself to all along has anything to do with such distortions???

Plus if I have to take a 30 cr reported total for Guru, I would wanna know what the reported total for RDb, PHP, KANK and Fanaa were.. and how is it that it’s only 7 cr less thanthat of LRM’s reported centres’ total ?
The 7 cr difference in reported totals add up to 20 cr in final totals??

And what about that 40cr D2 being lower than Kriish’s 41cr total?? Are you telling me Kriish is a bigger grosser than Dhoom2?

And if jay and satyam have been using these numbers to come to their totals along, how on earth were they complaining about BOI for not giving LRM a significantly higher total than LRM??? that’s quite some bullshitness right there.

Mr.Bond 17 March 2007
02:15:28 pm

Guys, India has lost the match against Bangladesh by 5 wickets. Pakistan are also in trouble but could still win as Ireland are 80/4.

Qalandar 17 March 2007
02:26:57 pm

Sadly India lost. Rain has stopped play in the Pakistan Ireland match, and if play stops Ireland will win as they are ahead of the required number of runs under the Duckworth Lewis method. If Ireland win Pakistan is virtually out of the world cup. For India every match is now a must-win situation: they have to beat both Bermuda and Sri Lanka to advance.

rks 17 March 2007
02:28:13 pm

I agree with Satyam about Aamir’s Darr story. Aamir wanted joint narration with Sunny Deol, which Yash Chopra refused. Yash Chopra wanted to make movie around Villain but he wanted Hero of stature doing good guy’s role. Sunny was furious after release of movie. Aamir actually wanted to do negative role during that time. His role in Earth was negative; not the biggest role;meaty? yes.

There is no doubt that Shahrukh’s movies were doing good in later half of nineties and start of this decade(It was unquestionable). But currently there are other stars who command similar respect.

SP”Has there ever been an instance where Aamir has turned down a juicy film from Yashraj?”
I do not know which one the movies from YashRaj could be classified as juicy?

jayshah 17 March 2007
02:36:04 pm

‘As far as jay’s math been concerned in recent past, it’s all to do with trending and attrition rates rather than estimating totals and always always influenced by satyam’s theories in a huge huge way’

SP please don’t make assumptions on behalf of my intentions when doing a BO column.

Secondly I wasn’t vocal at all about LRM because I NEVER analysed the numbers. I’ve only made questions and queries on two films – Don and Guru. Thats all.

But basically I’ve realised now that I am tired of explaining my intentions to you because you have a habit of

1) Clubbing me with a group
2) Completely dismissing my numbers on the basis of absolutely nothing

BTW its not just as much of coincidence that my numbers are similar to Satyams because we use the smae source i.e. Trade Guide. This is just the same that Abid, Joginder and BOI get similar totals becuase they use similar sources. What is so difficult to understand on that ?

‘And where LRM is concerned, didn’t jay, satyam and teh likes have huge problems with BOI all along that they purposely lowered it its total to make it close to Kriish.. now hat heppened to all those conspiracy theories when their beloved site has given Kriish actually bigger total than LRM. Forget Satyam, I;ve yet to hear any complaints from the so-called non–fans like jay on that matter.’

This is exactly the ridiculous kind of statements I am talking about. I have never EVER had such a conspiracy theory !

SP I have absolutely nothing left to say to you from now on. Several times now I’ve been clubbed unneccesarily into a group and have had accusations thrown at me for no reason. I don’t mind the odd discussion on SRk or Aamir with you because you place your debates well (even if I don’t agree with them) but when it comes to IBOS and BOI I’ve pretty much given up on defending myself to you.

Jesse 17 March 2007
02:45:23 pm

Abid you are ignoring my question again. I have no idea what made you post Taran’s classifications as some sort of response to me. This is the off tangent style response that I have been talking about.

And SP: My point of posting Guru’s and Don’s numbers was mostly to show that it is difficult for me to see how Guru is put at 40 while Don gets 50. Other totals for films by Taran: RDB is at 30.15 cr, KANK at 24 cr, PHP at 22.39 cr, and BB at 24 cr. I am willing to agree that Guru is in the same range as Don, but putting it significantly behind Don and KANK, and in the same place as BB and PHP doesn’t fly for me.

On LRM, I can’t speak for either Satyam or Jay but my problem with BOI wasn’t to do with the actual number as I have already stated.

rks 17 March 2007
03:15:40 pm

“So yeah, Aamir fans boast about Aamir doing so many films with small-time directors and producers.. but is it coz he wants to or is it more because of lack of choice. A Darshan or an Indra Kumar movie is not quite an offer one cann’t refuse.”

Probably he has more control(creative) with small time director. I do not think he tries to cut any body role in any movie, But I am sure he wants best for himself and movie.

And why is it that when Adi himself directs the Dhoom instalment (or anytime he directs a film), he automatically goes to SrK??
Gadhvi has become big after Dhoom2. And there were talks of friction between Gadhvi and Adi?

Street Pharmacist 18 March 2007
01:40:17 am

RKS… Darr came in 1992.. and Earth came in 2000 (or 99… not sure) By then playing villan was no more a taboo.. and something stars were more willing to play.

jayshah.. It’s not me who keeps on clubbing you with certain other members here, it’s them certain other members who start every sentence with “me and jay”. Don’t blame me there please. And don’t tell me you neer posted stuff about BOOI’s so-called “tone” on LRM vs that of KANK and Don.

jesse, no matter what, Taran would not be the source I’d use to quote anything on Don anyways. After 5 weeks, Taran still had the tag “new” in his column for Don… unable to decide what verdit he wanted to give the film. Did you raed any of his weekly analysis of Don?? It’s was more of a rant and frustration as to why Jaan-e-mann failed than how exactly Don was doing. I’ve every damn reason to beleive Taran under-reported Don’s collections on his site.

jayshah 18 March 2007
01:50:49 am

‘And don’t tell me you neer posted stuff about BOOI’s so-called “tone” on LRM vs that of KANK and Don’

Yes thats true. But I have never questioned the numbers of KANK or LRM. Only the commentary attached to it. I’ve never questioned there totals, I am pretty sure on that.