PHIR MILENGE CHALTE CHALTEE is a very addictive song from RNBDJ November 17th, 2008
and Sonu Nigam did a heck of a job with it. The use of the old movie names and songs is really really catchy. I think this song is the best of the album.
Comment by satyam on 17 November 2008:
This is another medley song, sort of.. with the RK music, the lyrics.. it’s ok.. might work on screen better.. I discern a bit of Barjatya here.. incidentally there’s Dev Anand and relevant lyrics from his songs as well.. and of course Shammi Kapoor and Rajesh Khanna and Rishi Kapoor in the same sense.. Qalandar has already commented on this latest ‘legacy’ attempt from SRK (though I note with a smile that Don and KBC and Bachchan was the beginning but it’s now everyone but him!). As Ajit would say — “smart boy”!
The best song in this regard, medley or not, was Ek Duje ke Liye. The elevator song where every word used in the song is the title of a film. And an original tune.
Comment by satyam on 17 November 2008:
But I think Haule haule is by far the best song. The one I like most after this is Tujhe main rab dikta even if it is as predictable as they come.
Comment by jayshah on 17 November 2008:
Phir Milenge Chalte Chalte lyrics and references
Comment by satyam on 17 November 2008:
Wow, thanks for the link Jay..
Comment by Qalandar on 17 November 2008:
Satyam: I have only heard Haule Haule — which sounds like the sort of thing Sukhwinder could do in his sleep — and the boring “dance pe chance”; can’t say the music enthuses me. I am genuinely puzzled why Aditya didn’t go for the likes of Shankar-Ehsaan-Loy or Vishal-Shekhar, who have served Yashraj well (in terms of audio sales) in the recent past…
Comment by ILG on 17 November 2008:
RNBDJ sound track on first listen sounded very ordinary. Tho it grows a bit on repeated lsitening. I find Haule Haule hummable but overall, ordinary. Rab dikhta hai is more melodious. Music might work depending on picturisation. On reassessing, the situation, I believe the movie has potential to work big time. Assuming Aditya doesnt screw up. The leading lady is a drag a la Sarah Palin. Extremely ordinary. What a choice by Aditya.
Comment by satyam on 17 November 2008:
ILG, this is the kind of soundtrack one gets habituated to as opposed to really liking it! But then Yashraj and Johar have specialized in this kind of music for a while! OSO I think was far better than this.
Comment by satyam on 17 November 2008:
Qalandar: Yeah dance pe dance is terrible. Aditya going to Salim-Sulaiman is mystifying indeed. Dozens of composers could do this. Why he didn’t stick with the two you’ve mentioned is surprising for sure.
Comment by Som on 17 November 2008:
“Phir Milenge Chalte Chalte” as I have said earlier,the interesting lyrics(using the name of old movies) and the voice of Sonu Nigam do make it sound good on repeated listening even if it is not entirely catchy but it will look good/bad on screen depending on the picturization.
Comment by beld on 17 November 2008:
Agree with satyam here. Disagree with ilg on anushka. More I see her - more I like her. I think she is pretty hot
Comment by ILG on 17 November 2008:
I could be wrong, Beld. Just going by whatever little I have seen so far.
Comment by neelu on 17 November 2008:
I am totally addicted to this number, and after CCTC and Billoo Barber, this is my most awaited film
I think Anushka looks real and charming and what a smile! Instead of going the Ek Duje Ke liye route - this one intelligently melds familiar melodies with new ones and titles with lines from songs, and even cheekily innovates along the way - mehfil mehfil tu phire, yahoo yahoo dil kare! I hope there is a promo for this one and Adi does not make me wait until Dec 12 to get a preview.
Comment by sandy on 17 November 2008:
“ILG, this is the kind of soundtrack one gets habituated to as opposed to really liking it!”
Satyam: Individually, no track really stands out but along with the film, I’m dead sure every song here will work. Inspite of being rather run-of-the-mill, Dance Pe Chance has already created a certain buzz— this track does have an extremely catchy BGM though.
The Haule Haule number is one which is most easy to like and it’s apparent with people already using it as their caller ids. Personally, I think this is a slightly tiresome number in the antaras…so I get bored listening to it after the mukhda is over. BUt still, very likable.
Like Satyam, I too like Rab Tujh Mein Dikta Hai without those god awful Punjabi chorus.
Somehow Phir Milenge Chalte Chalte is one number I’ve not been tempted to listen to. But again I suspect, this will be a highlight in the film.
Comment by satyam on 17 November 2008:
Sandy: You’re on a mission to like everything about RNBDJ!
Comment by beld on 17 November 2008:
Satyam, trust sandy’s gut always.
Comment by nithi_s on 17 November 2008:
I don’t think Amitabh Bachchan is a romantic hero to be included in the tribute song. I am glad he isn’t. He doesn’t it deserve it IMO.
Comment by nithi_s on 17 November 2008:
I mean he is still working. So why does he need a tribute? I guess he wasn’t happy with SRK’s tribute in Don. And I guess he would have loved it Abhishek had done the same. Then, even a crappier version would have been appreciated.
OMG! I have started thinking Bachchan’s thoughts!
Comment by sandy on 17 November 2008:
“You’re on a mission to like everything about RNBDJ”
Satyam: LOL I did say I’m hearing a few ring tones with haule Haule already but then I’m hearing many for Yuvvraaj too - and this has been supposedly a poor effort from Rahman! The prelude of Tu Meri Dost Hai has become both a very popular ring tone and caller id.
Beld: Thanks as always
Comment by sv on 17 November 2008:
Two songs are good.And anushka is good looking.This film can be a hit if it works.
satyan,anitabh is not a romatic hero.And shahrukh might be a bigger star then him,who knows.
Comment by utkal on 18 November 2008:
Amitabh not a romantic hero? Muqadar Ka Sikandra ( Salaame Ishq), Silisila ( Mein aur meri tanhai) are among the best romantic films ever. And Sharukh a biger star? Not in seven lives. Does he have the lanmark roles like Sholay, Deewar, Zanzeer,Don, Muqadar Ka Sikandar, Amar Akbar Antony, Agneepath, Black to back him up? Does he have the star charisma to draw crowds and land lead roles at the age of 65? Naa. Sharukh, Rajesh Khana are romatic stars and nothing more. Dilip Kumar and amitabh Bachchan are the legends the likes of whom we will not get again.
Comment by utkal on 18 November 2008:
Amitabh not a romantic hero? Muqadar Ka Sikandra ( Salaame Ishq), Silisila ( Mein aur meri tanhai) are among the best romantic films ever. And Shahrukh a bigger star? Not in seven lives. Does he have the landmark roles like Sholay, Deewar, Zanzeer,Don, Muqadar Ka Sikandar, Amar Akbar Antony, Agneepath, Black to back him up? Does he have the star charisma to draw crowds and land lead roles at the age of 65? Naa. Sharukh, Rajesh Khana are romatic stars and nothing more. Dilip Kumar and amitabh Bachchan are the legends the likes of whom we will not get again.
Comment by rudresh on 18 November 2008:
“I too like Rab Tujh Mein Dikta Hai without those god awful Punjabi chorus.”
This is personal prefernce.I loved punjabi chorus more than song itself , may be becuase i belong to that region.
And i am happy that yesh raj always did his best to highlight his region’s culture
Comment by jayshah on 18 November 2008:
sv - “This film can be a hit if it works” - truer words have never been spoken!
Comment by Arun on 18 November 2008:
I don’t like this song at all. The basic tune of the song is very weak, only the interludes (the instrumentals of the referenced songs) are somewhat interesting. Having said that, I’m very sure the video will be a major attraction in the movie.
Comment by beld on 18 November 2008:
Gosh, I am agreeing with arun a lot today. I agree - this song, even given the fact that it is a medley of old movies, is very flat. And honestly, not at all happy with sonu’s singing in this. I still feel mastam mastam has a better tune and actually does sound like a 70s song
Comment by Arun on 18 November 2008:
Beld:
btw, Did you get to see ‘Vaaranam Aayiram’? Watching it tomorrow! Heard Surya is brilliant here, the movie is getting mixed reviews though.
Comment by ILG on 18 November 2008:
I think after his disastrous attempt with Don, SRK has realised he isnt even fit to attempt a tribute to AB. Hence, the omission. And we should be thankful for that. There are quite a few more fitting people to pay a tribute rather than a sad, histirionically challenged, manipulative and aging non-actor with an equally clueless and challenged fan base.
Comment by beld on 18 November 2008:
No arun - probably this weekend. Tho based on the reviews - I may see it on dvd. Ilg - u shud be called Getafix! U love to stir the cauldron - it seems. Btw - the aging non-actor is easily the biggest star bollywood has produced in the last 20 yrs. I daresay a few decades from now - srk and amitabh will be considered with equal stature. If anyone in bollywood can give amitabh’s stardom a run for his money - it is srk. That’s why the unending hatred from folks like u
Comment by nithi_s on 18 November 2008:
ILG,
You need to learn the meaning of the word disaster first. Don was anything but a disaster. The role has become so famous that it become one of the favorites of SRK’s mimicry artist.
Rumor is that SRK refused to do Amitabh’s tribute in spite of repeating request from Adi. SRK had correctly guessed that the old man is aging baldy and is going the Manoj Kumar way.
He might have tried to sue YRF for including in a tribute. Good choice SRK!
Comment by Ravi on 18 November 2008:
Looks like someone is starting to listen to 11 year old’s again.
Comment by nithi_s on 18 November 2008:
Arun,
I am sorry to disappoint. Varanam Aayiram is just not good enough. Gautham had messed it up. Can’t blame Surya though. The dialogues are bad. Doesn’t have the grip that ‘Vettaiyadu Velaiyadu’ had. It drags and bores.
Comment by nithi_s on 18 November 2008:
“Looks like someone is starting to listen to 11 year old’s again.”
On the reverse, someone’s mind has been stuck up with fascination on Amitabh Bachchan since he was 11 year old.
Comment by Arun on 18 November 2008:
Nithi: Sad to hear! Hope it’s worth it for Surya atleast. Plus, I really love the songs.
Ravi Bhai: How are you doing? Saw Avakai Biryani the other day! Decent film…the debutant actress is good. It also has wonderful music.
Comment by Ravi on 18 November 2008:
Doing good Arun, how are you? When do you start your job?
Read some reviews about “Avakai Biryani”, they were all saying it is too slow, but will now try to catch it as you have given your view on it.
I am interested to see how “Sekhar Kammula” will be doing the hindi “Happy Days”, it might do good there too as I don’t think a smilar movie is there in Hindi.
Nithya dear, you have got it wrong, It is not since I was a 11 year old kid it is more like when I was “4 years old” and watched Zanjeer.
Beld bro, nothing wrong in agreeing with Arun , he is one of the most nicest and sensible guys around, and you or any one else will find lot of things to agree with him than disagree.
Comment by Aarohi on 18 November 2008:
Ravi bhai: Hindi ‘Happy Days’? When did this happen? Who is in it?
Comment by Arun on 18 November 2008:
When do you start your job
A couple of months more, I think. The economic situation in the US isn’t helping much
Yeah, I heard about the Happy Days remake as well. Good that Shekhar is going for a fresh cast. But I’m not sure if it’ll have the same impact with the Hindi audience.
Comment by Ravi on 18 November 2008:
Aarohi bhai, the casting is going on presently for the Hindi “Happy Days” and it is going to have all newcomers I think, the telugu one had a good looking heroine while the rest of the cast were all young chaps.
Comment by Arun on 18 November 2008:
Casting Call: Sekhar Kammula in search of new faces for Hindi Happy Days
Anyone here interested?
Comment by jayshah on 18 November 2008:
“Preferably Hindi Speaking”
Rules me out…
Comment by Ravi on 18 November 2008:
That is ok Jay, we can have “rks” dub for you.
Comment by ILG on 18 November 2008:
Jay,
You also failed to notice the word ‘talent’ in the email addy.
Comment by jayshah on 18 November 2008:
I’m too old anyway - ILG you could have applied - many years ago
Comment by neelu on 18 November 2008:
“Btw - the aging non-actor is easily the biggest star bollywood has produced in the last 20 yrs. I daresay a few decades from now - srk and amitabh will be considered with equal stature. If anyone in bollywood can give amitabh’s stardom a run for his money - it is srk. That’s why the unending hatred from folks like u ;-)”
Beld - you never spoke truer words! No attempts to equate this run with the 5-6 year wonders Rajendra Kumar or Rajesh Khanna will be successful. The 10-12 year run by Dev Anand comes close, but not quite. Mr. B had the longest run of all as a mainstream hero, but some might argue that the careers of SRK, Aamir and Salman as those kinds of heroes are not over yet. Let them announce their retirement from such roles and then there can be a reckoning.
Comment by satyam on 18 November 2008:
Saying SRK will be like Bachchan with time is a bit like saying George Bush will be like Lincoln with time!
I am not saying this merely in jest. The problem with such statements is that history or forecasts of the future are used as excuses to prop up extremely shaky arguments. My own forecast incidentally is that Aamir will be the star most remembered for this entire period, also the star who will have the greatest longevity within that group and who will keep adding meaningful work to his corpus.
But leaving this aside it is the mock version of history that comes into play.
Beld, saying that SRK could become Bachchan is about as sensible as saying someone in Tamil cinema is becoming Rajni! To put it another way the SRK to Bachchan as Rajni to MGR equation just don’t hold even in the most basic sense imaginable. Surely I don’t have to go over SRK’s entire career yet again?! SRK has not been conclusively the biggest star for the lats 7-8 years forget 20!
Let’s bring Neelu into the discussion who finds logic completely useless when it comes to a SRK discussion. And most of my response is really directed to her (and some others like her).
Let me say it as bluntly as I can. There is no data, NONE whatsoever, no sensible reading of history (even SRK’s history) that would justify the claim that there is any analogy whatsoever between SRK and Bachchan in any sense. To assert the opposite is to be either an ill-informed SRK fan or simply a SRK partisan of the worst kind which is to say one who displays bad faith despite knowing the facts.
As for Bachchan fans being anxious let’s use the George Bush example again. One could assert anything and then suggest the other side was anxious if the correction were made. So in my example I could say it was absurd to compare Bush to Lincoln and I could be called ‘anxious’.
We’ve used sports analogies before. But Neelu this is the argument I had with you when you you mentioned Shreya and Lata in the same vein. There two my point was the same. There is no parameter of film music within which I find such a statement comprehensible though I would be willing to listen if a proper case was made. But this has never been forthcoming.
So Bachchan/SRK or Lata/Shreya are basically things that are simply thrown out there. There is no basis in any kind of fact. What does happen though is a falsification of the same to create completely self-serving narratives.
Saying Dev ruled for 10-12 years might be news for Dilip Kumar who was always considered first among equals! There is no Rajesh Khanna analogy with SRK because the latter never reached the former’s heights! We don’t even have to get into longevity here! The longevity issue comes up after basic questions of magnitude are settled. Otherwise good old Dharam last for 30 or more years! And the Rajendra Kumar model is still the best one. I think the most convincing case for SRK’s dominance can be established for the period between between ‘96-2000. After Hrithik’s emergence, Aamir’s resurgence, Bachchan’s reinvention things were never the same for SRK.
Essentially what the 90s is is really a post-Bachchan interregnum. The industry couldn’t quite find an alternative. Bachchan still seemed very relevant despite failures. SRK seemed to be most significant star from a cultural perspective. And the one at the helm of the diaspora. Despite all this there wasn’t the sense of SRK being the topmost star even when KKHH released! Check out the media in that period folks! In fact it has all been retrospective. The SRK as King or as Baadshah or as another Bachchan narrative really took hold among his fans and the media after 2000 when in fact he was most vulnerable. As the competition increased his fans have actually doubled down on this bet. So he was ruling for 10 years and then it was 15 and then 20 and what not! No matter what else happens with his peers seems completely irrelevant to these folks. For a year now the media has called Akshay the top star far far more than SRK. But this is somehow irrelevant. When Hrithik had his massive ‘06 he too was not the top star. Aamir has a very strong case but hey it isn’t him either. There is no argument on the stats unless one relies on a garbage site like BOI that systematically downgrades Bachchan’s past hits and is not surprisingly the favorite site for every SRK fan or partisan!
I think the 90s were rather ambiguous for this reason. The narrative of SRK as dominant star really took hold over the next decade when there were already potent rivals. I still don’t believe we have an uncontested top star today for all the reasons I’ve talked about before but Akshay for now is the chosen one in the media. If I had to I would prefer citing Aamir for a few reasons.
What bugs me here isn’t the comparison with Bachchan as much as the plain denial of anything approaching a fact (you look at prestige and box office, Aamir’s ahead, you look at highest average initial, Hrithik’s ahead, you look at grosses, SRK rarely manages to compete with his rivals, you look at volume and consistency, Akshay’s on top, so on and so forth). one just says anything and calls it a ‘viewpoint’. Isn’t there some ethical standard one has to follow? I don’t call Ganguly a better player than Sachin and say history will bear me out!
For SRK to just survive as long as Bachchan he’d have to be working till 2032! And that’s assuming Bachchan stops next year! Anyone want to take bets on that?! SRK’s in his early 40s, he’s already slowing down to a film a year! Bachchan was at his peak at that age, dubbed the one man industry by Truffaut. Let’s get serious about this stuff. If Tendulkar plays like this after two decades can’t we surmise what he might have been like at his peak? Similarly when we see Bachchan as relevant despite some really terrible film choices can’t we guess what he must have been like at his own peak?
That Nahata piece that summarizes Bachchan’s career has been put up many times here. Here’s a guy who carries water as much as anyone for SRK suggesting that there’s simply no comparison of Bachchan with anyone else.
I have myself said many times that to get real comparisons you have to go to the South and check out someone like MGR or Rajni and so on to get that real analogy. There is no one in the North. The closest one gets is Rajesh Khanaa for a shorter period. In that period Khanna is also beyond compare. Bachchan for that very long period and Khanna for that short one are light years ahead of anyone else before or since.
Again what is truly disturbing among SRK fans (not all of them) is the completely inability to rely on anything approaching a ‘fact’. There is just this constant propaganda constantly dished out. I continue to see Rajendra Kumar as the best analogy though I’ve also stated that SRK is culturally one of the most significant stars in Hindi film history. Anyway my bets are on Aamir for the long run. Even here I think I have facts to show. I’m not just throwing out a name.
The Bachchan comparison doesn’t bother me very much because it suggests a degree of illiteracy in these matters.
Beld, incidentally most of this response isn’t about yours.. but think about how asinine you’d find someone who suggested Vijay would one day become Rajni!
Anyway I am not going to keep arguing about this. To be honest even this response was longer than I intended it to be. But really what irks me is this complete absence of fact and logic to one’s claims. This is what I’ve insisted on whether the subject is Sachin, Bachchan, Lata or whoever.
And while we’re on the subject of predictions I can only chuckle at the number of stars who were supposed to have been Bachchan’s rivals for all of his career. The names changed, the guy’s still around. The rivals eventually collapse of exhaustion! A bit like Sachin. One day Kambli was better, than Manjrekar, then Dravid, then Sehwag. Well he’s still around! But hey just throw out something — say history will consider Sehwag greater!
Comment by satyam on 18 November 2008:
As for those SRK fans who say some of this ridiculous stuff merely to provoke it’s the same thing. One has still been completely non-serious.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
On a somewhat different note, one other remarkable feature of Bachchan’s stardom is that for long periods it was “in the teeth of” the media: large sections of the media were hostile to him, and thus one did not have the contemporary fawning write-ups, dishonest coverage, and propaganda pieces. [Over the last few years they have started for everyone, including for Amitabh, but the point is that during his heyday, while like all film-stars the stardom was a function of "image", his stardom was not the construct of journalist-peddlers and sycophants.]
Comment by rks on 18 November 2008:
“we can have “rks” dub for you.”
Q is a better candidate.
Comment by ILG on 18 November 2008:
Ise kehte hai moohn tod jawab, Satyam.
**
**
Comment by satyam on 18 November 2008:
Thanks ILG.. I try to stay away from this stuff because I know I’m repeating myself but every once in a while I am forced to do this..
And to stress the same point again.. it’s about facts here.. I am all for iconoclasm but let’s hear the case being made first!
Qalandar: That is actually an excellent point and one rarely noted. Bachchan even at his peak was never a media favorite. This idea was always puzzling to me but I think now that it was the same ideological battle being fought then.
What I have forever battled is this propagandistic aspect of the SRK narrative.. I don’t have an issue with him otherwise irrespective of what I think of him as actor or star..
And the evidence once again is that when there have been arguments on Rathnam that I found similarly absurd I used to argue as passionately. Same goes for Sachin or more recently Lata. It just happens to be the case that most people here are gunning for Bachchan not these other folks.
With SRK the record just isn’t there. Of course the other interesting thing is that as SRK has slowed down or has he is not able to come up with the most buzz films or necessarily the biggest hits somehow the terms of the game have been changed. Notice how every single film of Aamir becomes a sort of acid test for him. Notice how even after scores of hits Akshay is pulled down on grounds of poor quality. Other arguments are used for other stars but no other star is really accepted as being on top irrespective of the stats or whatever.
I must say though that I sometimes see fans of other stars also get psyched out by SRK. For example if you’re a Hrithik fan you are amazed at how this guy can keep giving hits with really low brow stuff like OSO when hrithik at his peak is being so careful. But this really doesn’t say anything about SRK. There is a market for certain genres. It’s upto a star to exploit it. Hrithik could have an ‘06 like moment all the time. He’d just have to keep doing those genre films. he could have a combo as well. One stunt oriented film, one quality product. It’s his choice not to do so. if he did more he could potentially be the top star. Akshay’s the only guy who’s doing the volume. Similarly Aamir with his judgment could really mix it up every year. And make a stronger claim on the media narrative. Again he chooses not to. What happens with SRK is that he doesn’t mind dishing out OSO or RNBDJ, films that are utterly mediocre but also potential blockbusters. Much as Akshay doesn’t exactly do quality control with Hey Babyy and Welcome! Good for these stars. That’s their choice. But the other side sometimes get psyched out because they’re under the illusion that it’s only about quality. It isn’t! We see Dostana has now been well received. Unlike SRK fans I don’t believe this offers the ultimate verdict on Abhishek! What SRK did is run with the love story/family film ball once he got it. That’s fine but there were ultimately not that many films. Bachchan had multiple blockbusters every year for years in a row. You add up SRK’s significant hits for his entire career and you probably get 2-3 Bachchan years (I am not exaggerating in the slightest) and often at much greater magnitude. The same goes for Rajesh Khanna if you just look at a 4 year period of his or perhaps a bit longer. I mean Rajesh Khanna had three superhits in ‘74, the year after Zanjeer! It’s just that standards have become so debased since that a big one once in a while seems ok! You have scores of SRK flops in the 90s. This is not a ratio fit for a superstar by any stretch of the imagination. But if you’re the other side you’ve been kind of convinced with this media propaganda. SRK’s not doing rocket science here. If Dostana with mostly the youth on board can do well this genre still has enough strength left as long as it can be tweaked a bit. You can’t do KKHH all over again. But you can do a KHNH kind of deal and so on.
My problem is that there is simply no consistent definition for SRK and the reason his fans cannot offer one beyond just making statements is because no matter what criterion is used there’s a way of deconstructing him using his peers.
SRK is as I said culturally one of the most significant stars in some ways. I’ve always accepted this. He was even Bachchanesque in the overseas markets for a while. Because here even his poor films would usually outperform everything else. However that has not been the case for years even in these markets. So yeah you got a record in the US with OSO. You also got the same with JA. What’s more creditable?! Since roughly 2000 SRK has plateaued out. Clearly he is still one of the big boys but not the biggest. Perhaps no one’s the biggest. Now that’s a different debate. In the latter half of the 90s you can make a better case for SRK except that this was a post-Bachchan period. SRK didn’t have enough films to cement his claim right after DDLJ. You really had to get to KKHH which was ‘98. Even then the media didn’t say many of the things they’ve said since. But then the next film was Mohabbatein and the shadow of Bachchan fell over SRK all over again.
History doesn’t always work the same way. Even if one wants to nominate SRK as the top star in the 90s one has to be careful about dates and moreover one has to account for the difference in magnitude compared to some other stars in the past.
It has always been precisely an ideological game within SRK’s base (also represented in the media) to always invoke Bachchan. And he is the only one ever invoked. Which certainly establishes his relevance! SRK despite his great year in ‘07 nonetheless seems closer to exhaustion. This doesn’t mean he won’t get his hits. RNBDJ might be a big one. But the relevance of these hits will keep decreasing. There is today an excitement surrounding Akshay’s stardom that there just isn’t with SRK. Similarly Aamir is actually going through his career peak at this very moment! SRK is simply buy trying to churn out a hit that will keep him competitive in that top rung. Nothing wrong with that. But the tide has been turning against him for a while. In an age where Golmaal and Race get those sorts of initials it’s not exactly the greatest achievement to give a big one in low brow entertainment. Unless one increases volume. If SRK could have two proper hits every year I’d have a different perspective on him. But that’s not happening. Even last year let’s face it. CDI was really a fluke for him. he never had such a moment before and is not likely to have it anytime soon. It’s not like Aamir where he keeps attempting this.
Comment by neelu on 18 November 2008:
I feel really sorry for people who see Amitabh as Lincoln, Sachin, Rajni, MGR, Lata and whatnot all rolled into one. If Bachchan’s early stardom was “in the teeth of the media” then we have only come to know of the towering status admired today through the modern-day journalist-peddlers and sycophants! In his days he was fending off the stardom of Vinod Khanna, Dharamendra and later on even Jeetendra and Mithun.
But Amitabh was the constant - just as in the post-Amitabh era Sahrukh is the constant and the attacks are from Aamir, Salmna, Hritik, Akshay with a different name every year. If Satyam, championed on **
**, had read my post carefully he would know that Bachchan’s stint as LEAD MAN is unchallenged - now those people can all breathe a collective sigh of relief. But wait - the challengers are still playing lead roles, they have not retired yet. What Mr. B is doing post-leading man phase is remarkable but it is not any BO supremacy. Whether the challengers will match that longevity either as lead-men, character actors, or behind the megaphone is anyone’s guess.
Why should I burden myself with providing reasons and logic to illogical minds? The adherence to BOI is mocked as it downgrades Amitabh films - but since Amitabh and SRK never co-existed at the top of the BO, such a bias (if it exists) will make no difference to the comparison between these two actors. As for upgrading SRK films over his contemporaries’ - that is worth examining and pointing out, if indeed it exists. So specific references to films that showed INFLATED EARNINGS would be useful - not a Bachchan vs SRK rant. And a useful counter argument against any other site can be provided by looking at how Satyam’s favorite IBOS treats SRK’s BO success! Or how it went into overdrive to demolish Jodhaa Akbar.
The SRK reached VS Rajesh can be compared by looking at the highest grossers to see how many Rajesh films top that list - it is an interesting exercise, and the first one to show up is Aradhana and it is not in the top 20. Dev’s longevity and heights attained are evidenced by the fact that he played lead man from 1950s to almost the late 1970s and was very successful in each decade. Today the top 3 ranks may keep changing here and there, but the one consistent name is that of SRK. His biggest films rival those of anyone else and he had more of them. Aamir is an interesting case of a poor filmography throughout the 90s with hardly many big successes until Raja Hindustani. So he has a worse past to erase to catch up with SRK in biggest grossers. Salman was there and has now lost it to the others with the rise of the multiplexes. Akshay is getting there with appeal in both single screens and multiplexes, but he had a long history of mediocre (in BO terms) successes that he needs to rise above. Hritik is the one who could have successfully dethroned the top position, but his limited release numbers will keep him out of the top spot. That is a conscious choice he has made, and it helps his BO success to keep his fans hungry and eager to lap up every film. In fact with that kind of strategy Akshay Kumar would get bigger hits than him, but he seems to prefer to have many smaller hits.
I hope some will not need dictionary.com to decipher this post - I tried to keep it simple.
Comment by neelu on 18 November 2008:
“Even last year let’s face it. CDI was really a fluke for him. he never had such a moment before and is not likely to have it anytime soon.”
If wishes were horses legacies would be passed on in the desired direction!
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Re: “…but since Amitabh and SRK never co-existed at the top of the BO, such a bias (if it exists) will make no difference to the comparison between these two actors…”
This doesn’t follow: I take it the point would be that it does makes a difference because what BOI is doing is lessening the distance between Amitabh and his rivals, vis-a-vis SRK and his rivals. Also, if the number of years at the top is reduced, then that obviously impacts Amitabh vis-a-vis other stars.
Re: “…
…”
If this is intended for me, then I do submit it is uncalled for. If it is not intended for me, then it’s not really my business and I will withdraw the objection.
Aside: IMO, whether or not someone is a bigger star than someone else doesn’t depend on history: i.e. the fact that Akshay had years of mediocre success doesn’t mean anything to the public that TODAY considers him a huge star. That is, stardom is not a mathematical equation whereby Akshay must first “make up” for his time in the negative zone as he wends his way to the positive (this is not to be confused with a demand for consistency, which is necessary to show that any particular hit isn’t a fluke; Akshay has manifestly met that threshold, as have Aamir and Hrithik; Abhishek has not, and hence cannot be considered on the same plane of stardom; Nor should this be confused with the sum of one’s career, where longevity and other factors are relevant. Thus Ashok Kumar’s years as a hero as well as his decades as a character actor are both highly relevant to his legacy, and one might even conclude that in some cosmic sense he mattered more than someone who was unambiguously at the top for 5 years and then faded). Using the mathematical logic, Bachchan should have taken years to “catch up” with Rajesh Khanna, whereas the truth is that (figuratively speaking) Khanna went almost overnight from a phenomenon that arguably not even Bachchan matched to a has-been. Given that (as noted above) Khanna had 3 big ones in 1974, how was it that Bachchan was being crowned numero uno in 1975 with the release of Deewar? Stardom is neither mathematical, nor fair. [Off-topic: BOI solves the problem by deferring Bachchan's ascent to the top spot to around 1978, which is pretty hilarious.]
Dev vs. Dilip: IMO at no point was Dev considered a bigger star than Dilip Kumar, until Dilip himself went into retirement. That he had big hits in three decades cannot be considered decisive, because by that logic Jeetendra would be bigger than Rajesh Khanna (in reality, it would be fair to say that he lasted longer than Khanna).
Comment by Kunal on 18 November 2008:
satyam, what I really like about your writeups is that you do not rely on just one or 2 parameters, you tend to analyse things as a collection of variables, and that is exactly how things are and should be. Only BO, only media, only stardom, can not determine the status of a star, it has to be analysed in the light of, if not all then, maximum of variables involved.
Let me start from Sachin, since we share as much of respect and love for the world’s greatest batsman, EVER. Pick up any sports tabloid, any online sports news section, Sachin is no longer the best batsman as per them. Dhoni is world’s best batsman right now, by tomorrow it would be Yuvraj, then may be some Chimpu Chopra, but my question to you is are these guys better than Sachin? Because I don’t think so. The news hungry people and crazy media nowdays need just one inning to put anyone higher than Sachin, without giving 2 hoots to the quality, and value of the inning. Till now no one has ever played the knock Sachin did in Chennai test match against Pak, 136, or the one against SL, WC semifinal at Eden Gardens, on such devil of a track, 66, Sharjah 2nd league match against Aussies, 1998, on his own BDay, 143 may be. Now I am not a cricket crazy guy, but I have not seen anyone playing such innings in such conditions, with such technique. But now Dhoni is the best. Why am I talking about this is that I am trying to draw a parallel between present situation of Akki vs Shahrukh as Dhoni vs Sachin. Dhoni still lags behind Sachin, though he is scoring more than Sachin even being a captain, whereas Akki still has not out grossed SRK. Akki, Aamir, to a large extent, HR, are the stars made by media to counter the dominance of Shahrukh and sell their papers and channels. Being a fan, or even a worshiper of certain, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar, I think I can see the desperation of people and media to rundown both SRT and SRK to improve their TRPs. I would quote a man I admire a lot, “when you are at top, everyone loves you, but if you stay there for too long, everyone starts hating you”.
To compare Amitabh Bachchan Vs Shahrukh let me try to bring another sport analogy, Sachin Ramesh Tendulkar vs Sir Donald Bradman. A few years ago this was our favourite national pasttime, to compare Sachin to the Don. Now correct me if I am wrong, Sir Don’s test average is something between 99-100, whereas, Sachin’s 50-55. So going by basic law of averages, Sachin should not even be mentioned with Sir Don, but there is one more stat which people generally miss, Sir Donald played his entire career in just 2 nations, Australia and England, just 10 pitches may be, at a time when Lee’s pace, Wasim’s swing, McGrath’s discipline, Shane’s spin were myths, while playing with same 11 and against same 11. I am by no means trying to take credit away from Sir Don’ exemplary record, but just trying to tell you about different eras.
Let’s bring the question of Shahrukh vs Amitabh now. Amitabh was the hero of the nation which was bounded by the chains of red tape and socialism, when the competition and even intellect in the insustry was at bare minimum. There was no piracy, no choices on TV or radio, forget about English serials, even movies had no release in India, when cinema was the only mode of entertainment for people of India. Welcome to year 2008, new movies on youthbe in an hour, torrents in 2, on cable in a day. When Shahrukh not only have to counter a better breed of competition in India but also has to fight it out with Bond and Spiderman. Daily soaps on 100 channels, radio channels are more than tv channels were at that time.
So I think while considering the whole picture of two different societies in two different eras, its totally naive to suggest Shahrukh has not achieved the parity. Its not just in movies, but everywhere you see that no one from the new generation has got as big of a fan base as those from old generations. Though overhyping is a problem in present scenario.
Though I like your stance of relying on all variables, you tend to treat them individually. How Aamir is ahead of Shahrukh on BO, Btw? If you take all prestige, Bo, volume, status into consideration, there is hardly any competition to Shahrukh, unless someone is trying real hard to stay oblivious to common sense. You bring in individual variables is same as saying, Ganguly has better timing than Sachin, inzy had more power, Lara had better technique, Yuvi is a match winner, Sehwag a more devastating opener, so Sachin is barely competing these players. You are in a way, refuting your own hypothesis by your own arguments, or may be you just use different logics for Shahrukh and Sachin.
Then again you are the same person who dissed Shahrukh for not giving a tribute to Amitabh in OSO and then agreed with Q for Shahrukh forcibly trying to be yesterday’s stars. Being uneducated or illiiterate, as you like to put, is not a crime, but being illogical and hypocrite is, for me, and sorry to say, thats how your arguments sound to me.
Also you are dissing BOI for negativity for Bachchans, but then overly drooling for Bachchans IBOS is fine by you. IBIS carried the article of SR having housefull on 10 random theaters. Opening figures showed a different picture altogether, either that was a horribly intellectually challenged sample, or utmost biased article, you make the choice.
In your last sentence of that long post, try replacing Shahrukh with Sachin, and rest of the actors with all other names.
Comment by rks on 18 November 2008:
Comment by Julie on 18 November 2008:
This debate has been done to death. Whilst I will always maintain that Amitabh is in a different league as an actor from SRK, Aamir, Hriik and Akshay, there is no reason not to suggest that one of them can superceed his predecessors in pure “commercial success” terms. As of now SRK does look pretty strong on paper to become one of the most if not the most succesful actors of all times. This is not to challenge the greatness or the might of AB or DK or RK. Part of SRK’s success also comes from being media savvy, charismatic, people friendly and may I add extreme popularity with fairer sex.
In pure acting terms I find none of today’s actors even in the league of Dharam and Vinod Khanna, forget about the other stalwarts. But BO has become one of the most critical drivers of BW films with so much of distributors money at stake, hence simply making good films with no scope of commercial success is no longer doable. The entire paradigm of commercial cinema has changed. Hence stars have become very image conscious and media savvy. SRK picked on it much earlier, others have learnt to do the same but at a later stage.
Comment by neelu on 18 November 2008:
Qalandar - why would I consider you illiterate? You do me great injustice.
No Qalandar - since the distance between Amitabh and his rivals was never an issue - it was only between SRK and Amitabh as per Stayam - he does not recognize that Amitabh has any rivals
The question is not about bigger stars, but about a long stint at the top of the BO - and that has to be seen over the years and not in isolation for one or two years. About Bachchan - BOI does exactly what you said - puts him in the top 3 in 1975 - have a look
https://www.boxofficeindia.com/cpages.php?pageName=top_actors
Dev is considered a big star IMO for exactly his longevity and successes (not stray ones but consistent ones) in every decade. At no point was I comparing anyone to Dilip.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Off topic, magar kya karen, cricket ka mazaa hi kuch aur hai:
I am a huge Sachin fan as all know, but Bradman’s record in those two countries is more astounding than anyone’s record even at home. Or even anyone’s record against any ONE quality team. Not to mention that no contemporary player has faced bowling as hazardous as Bodyline — and Bradman averaged 56+ in that series too!
[Aside: if we are talking about pace, swing, spin, then full credit must go to the great batsmen of the 1970s: imagine facing the West Indian battery without helmets, on bouncy pitches! Nor was their great respite in other countries: Australia had the vicious Lillee and Thompson; India had their best spin attack ever, and Kapil by the end of the decade; Pakistan had a combination of Imran and excellent spinners; and England had a more potent pace/spin combo than they did for years before and after -- heck even anemic New Zealand had Richard Hadlee!]
That being said, IMO Sachin has as good a claim as anyone to be the greatest batsman since Bradman, but I don’t think he has a good claim to being the greatest batsman ever. But given the crazy pressures he faces, I do consider his sanity a more remarkable achievement than Bradman’s.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Re: “Or even anyone’s record against any ONE quality team.”
No sooner had I hit “submit comment” that I realized the above statement was erroneous: Younis Khan’s pasting of India’s sad attack on flat pitches is actually more than Bradmanesqu, LOL! If memory serves me correctly he averages 100+ in test matches against us.
But it must be said that Bradman’s ~90 average against England is pretty damn impressive — in an era of uncovered pitches, no less.
Where I will agree with Kunal is that Bradman never had to face the best spinners in the world at test level — as they played for Australia (though his first-class record against attacks with Grimmett and O’reilly is, um, Bradmanesque). The same holds true of the great West Indian batsmen of the 1970s, who never had to face their own battery. By contrast, because India didn’t have a good pace attack, every team would once upon a time have an incentive to try and bury us. Heck in the 1990s India didn’t even have the world’s best spinners, so Sachin and Rahul were always facing imposing attacks, relative to what a Ponting or Hayden would have to face.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
PS– first let Dhoni perform consistently abroad, or in test matches anywhere, then we can factor him in. [He remains one of the most valuable members of the team, for his poise and grace under fire].
Comment by rks on 18 November 2008:
“Or even anyone’s record against any ONE quality team.”
Zaheer Abbas against India?
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
RKS: true re: Abbas, although even he had a very poor series in 1981 when he came to India (in general I think his record is impressive against India in Pakistan, not while on tour), when he really became a “c Gavaskar b Kapil” bunny…
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Re: “In pure acting terms I find none of today’s actors even in the league of Dharam and Vinod Khanna…”
I never thought much of Viunod Khanna as an actor, although he certainly isn’t bad. I think several of today’s actors are better than him…although he could look damn villainous.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Just checked Cricinfo: The tour was actually in 1979-80: Zaheer’s scores in the 6-test series were 40 & 31*; 3 & 50; 2 & 11; 5; 0 & 15; DNP, for an average of <20; Kapil took his wicket 5 times out of the eight he was dismissed, and every time did so when he was on a low score. [But my memory had played tricks on me on the "c Gavaskar" part -- that was only one dismissal, although the combination of caught behind (Kirmani), slips (Sunny) and bowled (2 out of 5) was how Kapil got his man.]
Comment by rks on 18 November 2008:
Q: I started listening cricket commentary around 1982. He was like a wall.
Link
Comment by Kunal on 18 November 2008:
Q, as I said before, I have absolutely nothing but respect for Don, but seriously, he played 52 test matches, against 5 teams, one of them was India in 47. There was just one quality team at that time, England, intact they were better. So 52 matches, in 14 years. Not even 4 tests a season, even if you take out 5 years of the war, 52 in 9 years, not even 6 an year.
Now compare with Sachin’s 154 tests, 417 ODIs in 19. Where not just one, but most of the sides are pretty good. I am not even going into first class cricket, which again Sachin played around 3 times.
Now you see the difference?
I do not have any idea about English side at that time, but WI side which you are talking about I guess came much after Don, I might be mistaken though. Also if batsmen are provided with protective gear and rules, but what about pace of the ball, quality of the ball, extensive cricket, mental challenges, so many places, so much of travelling, not to mention, Steve Buckonor.
At the end of the day, record of both the batsmen, par excillance, kinda evens out.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
You are right: the WI side I was referring to was the one from the 1970s (commonly held to be one of the candidates for greatest team of all time, along with the 1948 Australian team, and (more questionably) the South African team of the late 1960s immediately before it was banned.
RKS: certainly, I didn’t mean to cast any aspersions on Abbas’ quality– from those who have seen him, he was also supposed to be a very elegant player.
Aside: Bradman lost six years at the peak of his career due to World War II (he debuted in 1929-30, and retired in ‘48).
Comment by rks on 18 November 2008:
Q:”certainly, I didn’t mean to cast any aspersions on Abbas’ quality– from those who have seen him, he was also supposed to be a very elegant player.”
Comment by Kunal on 18 November 2008:
Q, can’t agree more with you on Dhoni. Let him prove himself for 5 more years before any comparison with Sachin can be initiated. But then why so much of eagerness to run down Shahrukh with Akshay? Why the folks who want Dhoni to prove himself for 7 years before any comparison with mighty Sachin, are the very same people who are talking about Akshay being the new king of BO, when infact Dhoni is outscoring Sachin and Akshay still has not out grossed Shahrukh highest grosser of the year in any year?
you know what I mean?
its like questioning your own logic.
Also already we came to know that Rab ne is a midiocre movie, how cool is that? Wish I had those future gogs, which enables me to predict the outcome of future ventures and products, I would have been making a killing in the stock market than wasting my time to run down random people.
You may not like me saying this, but its hypocracy at its best.
Comment by Som on 18 November 2008:
“In pure acting terms I find none of today’s actors even in the league of Dharam and Vinod Khanna, forget about the other stalwarts”
I never thought highly of both as “actors”.As Qalandar said(he specifically talks about Khanna only though) many of today’s actors are better than them.In that era (70’s and 80’s) Bachchan and Sanjeev Kumar IMO were head and shoulders above the rest as far as mainstream cinema was concerned.
Comment by beld on 18 November 2008:
Disagree with q here on dhoni. Success and longevity definitions have changes dramatically over time. Dhoni will never be a sachin - he comes nowhere close as a batsman. But I think dhoni has already had as big an impact in the short while he has been around than lot of the erstwhile big players. Plus india play so much more cricket nowadays so 2-3 yrs is equivalent to 6-7 yrs in the 90s or early 2000s. At least in my books - dhoni has achieved much more than a dravid/ganguly/laxman/kumble etc. He has made india winners in all forms of the game. He personifies the cool calm india of today rather than the emotional, over the top india of yore. He is easily the best leader we have had since maybe wadekar - I wud daresay he is the best leader we have had ever in sports.
Satyam - problem with u and ur ilk is that all ur opinions are driven by this one overlying emotion of srk hatred. That makes u almost work up a foam in ur diatribes. And anyone who talks positive on srk is a fanatic or partisan or whatever. U, ilg and some others are like the extreme right wing conservatives - but u personally are a o’reilly there - whom I enjoy :D. Saying srk hasn’t achieved anything or there are no facts etc is just selective blindness on ur part. He, more than anyone else, has revitalized bollywood and beyond. Yuppie villain, yuppie loverboy, self confident-self made actor, brand supreme - u can keep adding to the list. He is the undisputed no 1 in the last 15 yrs or so. Every other actor today is following his footsteps whether it is in handling the media, marketing of movies or whatever. He has successfully transformed himself into a businessman and is running a profitable sports franchise. His movies, good or bad, generate the max buzz whenever they come. And ya the comparison is not rajni - comparison is like obama and kennedy, reagan and roosevelt, vajpayee and nehru, dhoni and kapil dev - etc etc
So what if he is manipulative. Have u read the annals of history. Almost all great leaders/people are manipulative in their own ways - churchill or nehru, patel or patton, amitabh was a womanizer at his peak(its different that srk may be a one woman man for other reasons ;-)), aamir is a conspirer in his own rite, akshay - cheesehead that he is - used to sleep around and compete with sunil shetty of all people. As for aamir being remembered - definitely so - but not in the same league as srk or amitabh.
Comment by Gabber on 18 November 2008:
Some interesting discussion by Q, beld, rks and kunal, linking cricket with bollywood. Though not the first time on NG, it always teases everyone.
I admire Sachin and Dhoni and do not take their contribution in terms of number of years but impact on cricket, fans, runs scored, etc. Same for stars in bollywood in terms of movies, hits, fans, etc.
I liked the parallels drawn for Sachin-SRK and Dhoni-Akshay, though it looks like cricketers perform better.
My similar take for other star cricketers will be : Yuvraaj-Hrithik, Laxman-Salman, Gambhir-Abhishek and Dravid-Aamir combo.
Comment by Kunal on 18 November 2008:
And TBH, he is one graceful 43 year old who is not displaying his chest to seduce or get lime light, if someone throws up the example of OSO, I think he just has no idea what OSO was all about.
Also, I have no problems with people not liking SHahrukh Khan. I hate Salman Khan, I give a damn to what and how he is an idol to anyone, I think he should be in jail. Same way I understand if someone comes to me and say that Amitabh is the actor I grew up with, and nothing can surpass him for me. But presenting these statements as facts??? and then calling others illiterate is not something I would like to indulge myself in.
Let me be the first one to say so, if I haven’t said it enough already. Shahrukh is the star, person, actor, who I grew up with. Every second of my life I have been trying to be the very characters he has donned in his career. I have always tried to inculcate his self deprecating, sarcastic, tongue in cheek sense of humor. I have always, always tried to be him, as a person. You can call me a geek, a nerd, a dork, a retard, for all I care, but for me NO ONE WILL EVER BE AS GOOD AS SHAHRUKH EVER.
According to me Shahrukh is the best cultural mascot of India. If someone comes to me and ask how is India and how are Indians, I would describe Shahrukh to him, a bit goofy, but cool, a bit smart still fool. We are religious, yet not fanatical, we are not good looking in traditional sense, but still smart enough, we are lod and so damn proud. And guess waht? we are no longer shy to say that we are better than you. If you think I arrogant, so be it, if you don’t like me, better get used to it, because much like Shahrukh, as he is at every hoarding, every ad, every channel, every news paper, we are everywhere, smiling and sometimes even laughing at you.
Now thats a personal opinion, not something I can present as a fact, and call anyone illiterate if he/she don’t agree with me. There will be a time when Someone may even go beyond Shahrukh and Amitabh’s phenomenon, and may redifine the word superstar, King, Badshah, but I don’t think it will ever happen for me. May be at that time I will post the way some do over here, and call others illiterate and question their cinematic knowledge, critiquing abilities, logical understanding to like anyone more than Shahrukh Khan
Beld: I like Dhoni a lot, and truly believe that his influence is lot more than as a batsman, keeper on the team India. As an influence, he surpasses Dravid and Laxman and Kumble, but not Saurav, not yet anyways.
Remember, Saurav started kicked off this new India, the one which fights fire with fire. May be it was started at Azhar’s second stint as captain, but Ganguly I believe was the one who defined a captain in India. His support to his team mates, no matter what, right or wrong, his encouragement to youngsters, even against finicky board of India (may be due to his own experience) and mind boggling confidence…. AWESOME. No matter how much you ridicule his taking his shirt off stint, but dude, that turned India upside down. That moment I believe was a defining moment in the Indian cricket. A perfect reply to that Andrew Flintoff.
Dhoni, though extremely capable, talented and above all influential, still is not at Saurav’s level. Not to mention Saurav developed world’s scariest opening partnership with :bow: Sachin :bow:
Dhoni I think is the most able commander entrusted with the legacy of Saurav. And I believe that one day he will not only match Saurav, but get beyond him. But Saurav’s contribution to Indian cricket can not be measured in averages, matches lost, won, runs…. Dhoni has a way to go.
Abou t batting in in tests, and purely tests, Dhoni still is not at the level of Laxman and Dravid, in his batting. But in ODIs, he genuinely is ahead of both. And I hope with crossed fingers, that he will take his game to match Sachin, and may be even surpass him some day.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Kunal: you are missing my point. As I wrote in my comment earlier, whether someone is a bigger star than someone else is not like the Dhoni/Sachin comparison as batsmen. Let me illustrate: if someone said that in India today Dhoni is as big a star as Sachin, or possibly bigger at present, that might be an arguable claim but it is NOT a ridiculous one, and might even be the majority view. That is an entirely separate question from whether Dhoni (or Sehwag, or Gambhir, or whoever) is a better BATSMAN than Sachin (or anyone else). My point was that the question of how big a star Akshay is or is not is like the former question — not the latter. Whereas, the question of who has achieved more over the course of his/her career is like the latter question — not the former. As to that question, I have no doubt the answer is SRK (as opposed to Akshay); but if the question is who the bigger star is AT A GIVEN MOMENT, then what the public feels AT THAT MOMENT is the only gauge — and my contention is that what the public feels is not based on some mathematical formula whereby if SRK was +5 in 1997 and Akki was -5, and if since then both have given equal numbers of hits and of equal magnitude, then Akki is nevertheless behind because the original “gap” of 10 won’t be covered unless Akshay “covers” it by giving more hits. The hypothetical is reductive and crude, but illustrates my point: that’s not how people think of stars and stardom at all. When SRK hit the big time with Deewana, it was just tough luck for Anil Kapoor, Salman, Aamir, Sunny, whoever; similarly with Hrithik and Kaho Na Pyar Hai, because overnight he was in the big leagues. Stardom is neither a level playing field, nor fair in some absolute sense…
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Re: “If someone comes to me and ask how is India and how are Indians, I would describe Shahrukh to him, a bit goofy, but cool, a bit smart still fool. We are religious, yet not fanatical, we are not good looking in traditional sense, but still smart enough, we are lod and so damn proud. And guess waht? we are no longer shy to say that we are better than you. If you think I arrogant, so be it, if you don’t like me, better get used to it, because much like Shahrukh, as he is at every hoarding, every ad, every channel, every news paper, we are everywhere, smiling and sometimes even laughing at you.”
I think Satyam would agree with this statement, inasmuch as he consistently refers to SRK’s cultural importance. I certainly have also always said that SRK incarnates and articulates the aspirations of a certain sort of Indian, in particular the post-liberalization, upwardly mobile, urban Indian. Nothing “wrong” or “right” about this at all (what bothers is me when other paradigms are slighted (and I certainly would say that he represents not “India” but a certain segment), and SRK says stuff suggesting that he and he alone is responsible for making the industry cosmically “better” in some way; I am referring to interviews such as where he said that prior to him “educated” people did not come to the industry, and that he basically brought about this sea change. This is the sort of thing that gets my goat, because it clearly shows that he is looking down on a whole lot of people, and is also a pretty superficial analyst (i.e. the sociological and socio-economic changes that have led to a change in the industry are bigger than his career)…That of course is a separate question from his importance/significance, and goes to an ideological difference that I have with SRK and (possibly) some of his fans. [Nor is it only with SRK; for instance, the "who cares about Bihar?" attitude that we see RGV display in interviews is also offensive.]
Comment by rudresh on 18 November 2008:
I also think that Dhoni would never be equal to Sachin.
He will be compared with Kapil mostly.
Comment by Qalandar on 18 November 2008:
Aside: I feel bad that Dhoni has become the example that has been used, because actually he is one of my favorites in the team: love his attitude, his poise, and the unruffled-Ranchi-cool he brings with him (displayed to great effect in the Videocon Om Shanti Om/SRK-Dhoni ad)…he is truly the “people’s captain”, and I hope that when he is tested with adversity the emdia doesn’t devour him as it seems to enjoy doing…
Comment by beld on 18 November 2008:
kunal - i beg to differ on dhoni vis-a-vis ganguly tho i understand your point of view(which i believe is probably the majority view now). i have multiple issues with ganguly as an individual and captain. before i get into that lets give him his due a. he put aggression into the indian blood b. he had an eye for talent(yuvi,kaif, bhajji, zaheer etc) and he stood by them c. he actually won abroad
now the issues i have are many which kind of make it a tainted success. a) the aggression he taught is kind of a stupid aggression and not the classy type. many folks, me included, disliked the way ganguly handled things. you see his class of aggression in idiots like bhajji, sreesanth etc. Dhoni on the other hand is very very classy
b) what is overlooked or i should say underlooked is that ganguly, more than any other captain, had perhaps the best batting lineup in peak form for india of all times in dravid/laxman/sachin. now - yes - a captain gets some of the credit but not all. its funny that people call dhoni lucky - i thought ganguly was very lucky.
c) there is a difference between winning and winning importantly. look at dhoni - he seems to win series rather than matches. ganguly - except for a few cases - won matches more than series
I feel that dhoni embodies india much more than a ganguly did. You cant take away the contribution of ganguly but i think dhoni has already surpassed him.
Comment by Kunal on 18 November 2008:
Q, can we reorder the star status every Friday? every weekend? or end of the month? Because if we can, then we might put Yousuf Pathan as better than Sachin, after all Yousuf has already hit a 50 in the series… Sachin hasn’t even batted
Around 12 months ago, Shahrukh gave OSO, highest grosser of BW, and suddenly his popularity is nowhere near Akshay because Akshay had 2 releases, and Shahrukh had none???
BTW, Akshay also has a flop on his name in this present year only. Shouldn’t we give chance to Shahrukh as well to present his claim before we make any conclusive “fact”? no pun intended. And so what if Rab ne goes Swades way??? Tashan way??? like you said, Shahrukh still would remain bigger than Akshay for some time. And I totally agree with your +5, -5 theory, its totally accurate. Crowd, people, audience don’t work on mathematical equations, every Friday stars are made and destroyed (figure of speech).
Also my rant on Shahrukh is my own opinion, right or wrong, truth or lie, its mine, and I agree that even in a small street of Delhi where I live, there are all kinds of India which can be seen. But this is what I have felt in my interaction with most, if not all.
Also, I haven’t read or heard, or seen any such statement by Shahrukh, so do not know the context or question it was an answer to. thats why no comments
But I heard him saying that he started the brand endorsements to such level that actors have become a brand in themselves. And somehow I do agree with it. Again much like Sachin. Though Kapil Dev and Sunil Gavaskar had started the brand endorsement era, but it was truly Sachin who took it to a new level all together. I still remember that he signed a deal worth 100 cr + with Word Tel, an amount which was deemed as a mythical figure at that time. I remember when his earnings were being compared with that off David Beckham himself. He truly revolutionalised the ad world for cricketers. Even with Shahrukh I believe that he did had a similar impact on movie stars’ ad world romance.
Also about Dhoni, I am a big big big fan of him. I am lying that for me Dhoni is like Akshay, he is far superior than Akshay and may be even Shahrukh. He has been immense for team India, and you don’t even have to be in India to see his impact on the nation. He truly personifies the very Indian I proud to be.
He truly is the “people’s captain”.
Comment by neelu on 18 November 2008:
“but if the question is who the bigger star is AT A GIVEN MOMENT, then what the public feels AT THAT MOMENT is the only gauge — and my contention is that what the public feels is not based on some mathematical formula”
But the question was never that Q. It was about consistency and long sun of success. As for this year - we have SRK coming off two of the three biggest hits last year. BTW - it is a comical level of hate that would call CDI a fluke that wil never be repeated. That shows how galling the success of CDI was for some. This year Akshay has already had a flop. So how can we judge him to be better? Neither were his films bigger, nor all successful. However, based on sheer numbers he comes damn close. It is also amusing to see Rab Ne already branded mediocre, and Ghajini being hailed as some kind of masala masterpiece. Has anyone seen either film? Why does the love for masala entertainer supercede the love for a family entertainer?
Comment by jayshah on 19 November 2008:
Bradman is the best ever. Period. The point is we are NOT comparing an average of 56 (Sachin) with Bradman (65). Bradman averaged 99 point something - and the era example is void simply because no batsmen in “Bradman’s era” was even close to him aswell period. If Bradman had those “advantages” (that Kunal pointed out) all batsmen in his era had that advantage…but no one even comes close to him even from his era. I think only second on the list would be batsmen averaging maybe 60 odd…the difference is so huge that such an example becomes nullified. His record is not great (!) it is absolutely an extra-ordinary record, practically flawless.
Sachin being the best after him is debatable but more than plausible. I would push him there just cos I’m in awe of his batsmenship. But in reality even in “his” era he has another batsmen whose achievements are near enough the same level in Brian Lara. This is why it is not so easy to push Sachin past Bradman, in fact it is nearly impossible. Because there examples of batsmen in Sachin’s era achieving greatness too. And then likes of Gavaskar or Richards to in their era. The point is, Bradman was the only one who stuck out like a sore thumb in his era - by a humungous margin.
Dhoni is no way achieved more than Ganguly as captain. He is only in the role for 2 tests so far! Bloody hell! Even in ODI cricket his judgement will be ultimately made with his world cup record and ODI series against the best in the world.
I’m Dhoni’s biggest fan and pretty sure he will be a great captain. But his achievements thus far are great but the time period is too small to make him the best ever. That he “could” be is a different point. One thing which he suggests is a very attacking yet pragmatic approach to captaincy. He knocked Australia out with those tactics on Day 3 of bowling to 8-1 field - which could be “perceived” as defensive, but when your 1-0 it is exactly the approach that was needed. There are traits so far that suggest he could be a great captain, that he already is - is way too early to compare with Ganguly.
To put Ganguly into context he was a great captain, but the way he left his captaincy somewhat tainted his achievements. It is kind of what Dravid is going through - from a great batsmen he is falling bit by bit and it is tainting his achievements somewhat. This has played its part.
Also compare apples to apples. It is true Ganguly had a great batting line-up - but the opposition such as the Aussies were incredible in this period. Now the Aussies are in decline too and Dhoni is entering his stint in a position where numerous commentators are pointing India to be the best in the world - whether this is because they have risen to be the best, or that Aussies have fallen or both (I think both) means there is a whole sub-text here.
Comment by jayshah on 19 November 2008:
Also the “tests” facing Ganguly and Dhoni are different. When Ganguly entered India were nowhere in world cricket. And the batting line-up was there under the previous captain. His challenge was to turn this side into a competitive one IMO. His achievement was that he did this and actually more was expected from him and his team. Also he gave India prominence in overseas tours. Away draws to England in 2002 or Australia in 2003/04 were remarkable for side who lacked a genuinely potent bowling attack. India beat Australia at home in 2001 when frankly Australia were on a 16 match test wining streak.
Dhoni’s challenge is completely different. India is already competitive and on the crest of being the best in the world potentially. His ultimate challenge is to put India there and keep them there with his team. In his stint, if he merely keeps India in the mix with likes of Australia (declining performances), SA or SL it is nonetheless what Ganguly pretty much did - the difference was when Ganguly captained it really was Australia and everyone else.
Comment by Julie on 19 November 2008:
“I never thought highly of both as “actors”.As Qalandar said(he specifically talks about Khanna only though) many of today’s actors are better than them.In that era (70’s and 80’s) Bachchan and Sanjeev Kumar IMO were head and shoulders above the rest as far as mainstream cinema was concerned.”
Just precisely the point. I do not rate them highly too in that era but definitly better than most of the top rung actors of today’s era. Sanjeev Kumar is another name that comes to mind. Ultimately taste and likes is subjective but I have a better affinity, and liking for actors of yester years than today. Amitabh is just one example. There are so many others who would stand out on a one to one comparison with any given one commercial actor of contemproray times. BTW as I have said before, this has nothing to do in just pure BO comparison.
Comment by beld on 19 November 2008:
Jay, I see it differently. What exactly did ganguly win in a macro setting. A series win against australia in india and against pak in pak. Other than that he just won test matches here and there but not series. Even the world cup - he went and got thrashed in the final. Let’s take shoni’s achievements even leaving the 3 test wins out of 3 against strong sa side(who beat us that series) and a declining aus side(who are still pretty strong batting side). He won a 20-20 world cup, won one day series in sl and aus(arguably the 2 toughest locations) against strong sides. His only losses - asia cup(mendis factor which he conquered in sl) and ipl finals. So ya - no way has ganguly achieved more imo. Yes - as kunal said he pioneered the winning ways but was a pretty classless guy in my books. Dhoni(in his still young career) on the other hand - has been the epitome of class.
Comment by satyam on 19 November 2008:
Too many comments to respond to here.
Neelu: I’ve nothing to add to what I’ve already said.
Kunal: I agree completely with Jay on the sports analogies.
Qalandar: Completely agree with your interventions as well.
Julie: I love Dharam and Vinod Khanna (more the former) but in fairness I wouldn’t call either one a better actor than most today necessarily. Aamir to my mind has been in recent years about as good an actor as one is likely to find in Hindi film annals barring some in the uppermost echelons. And there too if one looks at the ’star-actor’ deal one would be hard pressed to choose more than really a couple over him. Vinod Khanna was ‘lesser’ than Dharam as star-actor though perhaps ahead of the latter in box office terms for a brief period. But Dharam is about the greatest star Bollywood has ever seen who wasn’t at any given point the #1 star or never had parity with a top star in a multi-top star scenario. But even going to other actors I don’t think that comparisons cannot be made with these two. Even if I would prefer Dharam and Vinod to 99% of stars today! Where I think you probably have a point is that the stars of an earlier age were much more tied up with ‘aura’ and knew how to use it as well. It’s a different age today. Media technologies make that kind of aura all but impossible in today’s age. Having said that most stars today have just no understanding of how to use the ‘off screen’. Cinema in general has lost much of its transcendence worldwide. But what this means is that cinema actually had more of a cultural impact in some ways in earlier periods whereas today it is merely one among many items of consumption.
Comment by satyam on 19 November 2008:
Incidentally SRK for a brief period after DDLJ had a certain magic about him. But he lost it very quickly. Because he just got very lazy as an actor and it was quite visible very soon after DDLJ. I remember Ghai suggesting in an interview when Pardes was about to release that SRK had a tendency to play to the galleries. By KKHH this was manifestly true. A level of badness crept into SRK’s performances very early on. This sort of thing happens to actors much later in life. This is not suggest that he was ever a fine actor or anything. But his persona on screen had a certain flamboyance and spontaneity to it that was very appealing.
Comment by satyam on 19 November 2008:
And Kunal thanks for your comments.. I try to be as comprehensive as I can!
Comment by satyam on 19 November 2008:
By the way since this thread started with RNBDJ let me add something on the subject (!) having heard the album a few times. Haule haule is still easily the best in my view though it definitely loses its luster after a few times. Not an innovative tune or anything but there’s something sweet about the song. I think the next best in tujh main rab dikhta hai even if this is completely predictable and mundane. Dance pe dance is just poor and the Nigam medley again doesn’t do much for me at all. But all four songs I think will be more than acceptable in the film. Which is all Yashraj aspires to these days!
Comment by Julie on 19 November 2008:
Satyam - well summarized.
Aamir is perhaps the only actor for whom an excpetion can be made but that too, Aamir post the Lagaan reinvention. I guess I added the term “commercial” actors with a purpose. A commercial actors job is to entertain, and in entertainment quotient, Dharam, VK were not far behind the stalwarts of that era i.e AB and RK. The other name that has been mentioned is Sanjeev Kumar. If I go further back into history, you can count the likes of Raj Kapoor, Dilip Kumar (head above shoulders the actors of his time),Dev Anand and Shammi Kapoor.
Perhaps it was the script, perhaps a combination of script, music, direction, acting whatever but you will agree that movies of that era have infinitely greater repeat value than movies of this era. SRK has been the most entertaining actor of this era, but again how many movies other than DDLJ, KKHH can you actually repeat. AB and RK are two actors whose movies I never tire of repeating. Dharam, Dev Anand, Shammi Kapoor are others whose movies have been associated with with very high entertainment quotient.
I guess I should rephrase my sentence into the most entertining commercial actors of all times rather than the best actors, because the likes of Om Puri and Nasser would instantly gain top ranking. I don’t want to even start with the list of actresses.
Amitabh and Dilip Kumar are actors par excellence and par comparison who gave resounding commercial hits and who to date are known for some of the most memorable perfromances in the entire BW history.
Comment by sandy on 19 November 2008:
The Ghajini music is still not out and there’s no chance of it coming out till much later this week. Could it be possible that Aamir wanted people to have their fill of Rab Ne music and then unleash his songs? Or is it plain mis-management by T-series?
Comment by Julie on 19 November 2008:
“Cinema in general has lost much of its transcendence worldwide. But what this means is that cinema actually had more of a cultural impact in some ways in earlier periods whereas today it is merely one among many items of consumption.”
Well said. Cinema in earlier times was a magical and cultural experience with a lot of thought and weight given to content, script, music, acting, direction (on wholesome package) but today it has become merely just another commodity catering to the rapidly burgeoning middle market consumer segment in India and the expanding NRI market. More and more emphasis is given on superficial touch ups, grande sets, cosmetic d