BTW Abhishek is the only star today who is yet to go bare chested and follow the so called much hyped 6 packs thing,when almost every big stars have done it.Will he do it in future? Lets see..
Satyam - all masala that is done by any actor other than SRK is quality masala. This quality riot of colors is approved as it creates a contrast to his other persona, but some other contrasts of persona (in recent promos) CANNOT be approved as they are just not quality masala.
It is amazing what a soft focus lens can do. Here is what he really looks like:
Don’t find the song or the video especially impressive, although will wait for the CD…the scene with the six aamirs, each over-the-top and ridiculous, was funny. This has more than a little of the spoofish quality to it IMO (aside: at least some of this video’s staging seems lifted from the Sivaji video at the Guggenhein in Bilbao…)
Spoofs are really cheap masala - I think OSO proved that. And being dorky is really really cheap, much better to be a peacock with more dupattas than the leading lady.
Neelu: That’s unfair and is continued ‘resentment’ on your part. You think I am ‘gender coding’ things but every other statement of yours (if not all) seems to have me (perhaps among others) as the intended addressee! I never called at any point Fanaa ‘quality’. In fact I said at the time I couldn’t believe Ravi Chandran was the cinematographer here. So it’s not as if I start praising things just because Aamir’s involved. Those who’ve been here long enough know I’ve always had issues with RDB’s politics as well. You can hardly be the greatest Aamir partisan if you have issues with RDB. I even had a few problems with what I considered was the tame second half in DCH. This constant snideness is I think out of order. I’ve hardly been big on Dostana at any point. Surely I don’t like Aamir more than Abhishek?!
I think people can disagree about how Ghajini looks but based on the preview evidence so far if one wants to assert that this looks just like OSO and the difference is only one of ‘fandom’ then I think one is saying so in extremely bad faith.
As for spoofs being cheap masala whoever gave you that definition?! Of course just because you see six Aamir images in the same shot doesn’t mean anyone should suggest ’spoof’ here right?!
And yeah he’s looking a bit too earnest, geeky or whatever at points. What about it? Is there a deal you’re trying to reach here where SRK can be accepted as ‘dorky’ in RNBDJ if we agree Aamir’s the same?
Isn’t there any one thing you can give to someone other than SRK? Forget what others are saying here and what you are presumably responding to? Can’t there be your ‘own’, ‘honest’, ’sincere’ opinion on display sometimes or does it always have to be a ‘reaction’ to people like myself and others? Let’s say that everything you assume about me and others is right. Let’s accept for the moment that we are all involved in a great conspiracy against SRK. Does this mean that this completely constrains you from offering any genuine opinion? You had a nice piece on Dostana the other day. Why can’t you do more of this as well as opposed to this constant snideness?
And before you start jumping on me I am not ‘directing’ you to do anything. I’m just making a suggestion..
Som: I would be shocked if Abhishek ever did a six pack! he is supposed to be shaping up for the new Rathnam but I just don’t see him too committed to the idea of the six pack!
With Aamir’s physique the interesting message is ‘hey if you thought SRK was hot look at this’! Whoever was impressed with SRK’s effort is bound to be more impressed with Aamir. How he did it beats me. He just seems much bigger whereas SRK really lost weight and looked a bit of a vampire at points (dard e disco) if you ask me. I’m not making fun of him but he really looked haggard at points. After a certain age you can’t lose weight when you’re working out or you look very weird. Akshay also had the same problem in some of the shots we saw.
I just loooove the song. Supercool. Got a jazzy fel. Amir loks cool too. Very different from what one is used to in general..the song and the picturization.
Talking about Physique, I feel a lean and trim well toned body what would have suited someone like Aamir who does not have the advantage of the height. Instead he went for the conventional one, bulky muscular type. Having said that Aamir does not look bad at all, he looks fit unlike SRK who did want to have something like the lean and trim well toned body but he lost too much weight to have that sort of physique which was visible from his wearing thin face.As far as the current lot of actors are concerned Hrithik undoubtedly has got the best physique (proportional height and weight),Akshay had a fit body but he seems to have lost weight which makes him look bit anorexic and stale these days, putting little more weight will do the job.
“I just loooove the song. Supercool. Got a jazzy fel. Amir loks cool too. Very different from what one is used to in general..the song and the picturization.”
I am with you Utkal
Aamir’s is right when he says that this is full-on masala film…both he and Asin have sparkling chemistry here…
Satyam - most of what I say here on NG is like garlic to ward of vampire attacks. Fact is you cannot stop talking of SRK in each and every thread - he has taken over your life, be it Dostana BO, or in fact anything under the sun. I am merely countering your arguments. In addition, unlike you I read what people write. Please re-read the thread and see if the words spoof and geek were mentioned or not.
And as I mentioned earlier - stop telling me what to do, or even in you “paternal” way treating me like a fractious child. BTW - so far I see nothing in Ghajini to tell me it is different masala than Fanaa - only the leading lady is younger and the look has been updated to include some Hritik moments. This is based on the trailer, clip and stills - and seems fair to me. Since you have pronounced judgment on Rab ne (it is mediocre fare) based on some trailer and stills.
Why would I pay attention to people who think MHN is like any other YRF? I was never interested in paying attention to people whose opinions seems extremely biased, often verging on just plain silly. If every film with Kashmir or some nice locale is a YRF, then they had much more success than anyone gives them credit for. I wonder if people with history on NG can comment on how much interest the Tamil Ghajini inspired before it was slated for a remake with Aamir.
Re: “I wonder if people with history on NG can comment on how much interest the Tamil Ghajini inspired before it was slated for a remake with Aamir.”
Not having read every comment in this thread, I’ll say that my understanding is that Ghajini was a big hit in Tamil, and attracted a lot of attention there, i.e. it was a very high-profile success (even its soundtrack was very successful, and it was one of the films that IMO catapulted heroine Asin to the bigtime). Of course no-one in “the North” had probably heard of it. [I remember saying on NG a long time ago, when the Hindi remake was announced, that Surya's is a tough act for Aamir to follow, although I am sure he'll ensure that a better film results; the Tamil film had a fantastic premise but lost steam after the initial few reels, not to mention that it had a shockingly ineffective villain (the guy who nplayed Sultan in Sarfarosh)]…
We are going to have a test paper for members. The question paper would be objective and based on members’ comments. Everyone needs some minimum marks to qualify to be a member.
Neelu: You don’t have to listen to me. There are many otehr members here who’ve seen the Tamil original.
On not listening, you should also be a little honest and admit that you’re not listening to anyone who doesn’t think SRK’s the greatest thing to hit cinema since the Lumiere Bros were waiting for the train La Ciotat!
Satyam - still no answer to my question on whether Ghajini (Tamil) became interesting and quality cinema before or after it was announced that Aamir would star in the remake. SRK is only an upstart, actually it is Aamir who is the best thing to happen to us since sliced bread - or was that Velveeta cheese?
Neelu: I never defined Ghajini as quality cinema. I said it was masala cinema that would be given a more refined veneer by Aamir. In other words I expect it to be more refined than the original. But I never called it a great prestige product or a quality film the way I would call RDB ‘quality’. As usual you’ve not been reading carefully!
What I did however say was that there is good masala and bad masala and I expect Ghajini to be the former. Much as there is good Yashraj (DDLJ) and bad Yashraj (KKHH.. in the same Yashraj vein). In fact this is another one of those slippage moments that often occurs on this forum where ‘masala’ is first equated with poor cinema and then Aamir’s association with the first can be rejected.
Incidentally I didn’t even give Fanaa this much. All I’ve said with this film is that if you loved all the SRK films and then if you suddenly find issues with Fanaa you are being dishonest. And I stand by that.
but why go as far as Aamir? I am not calling DOstana quality cinema am I? So if I’m not saying this for Abhishek I would hardly be lowering the bar for Aamir. Maybe I’m wrong about Ghajini in which case I’ll accept it.
But you don’t have a leg to stand on with all of this. If you’ve been honest about SRK and his films you can bring up these questions about Aamir. But what you do like many other SRK fans is that you justify each and every move of his while picking apart Aamir all the time or whoever.
Just the latest example. I can believe that you didn’t like the Ghajini soundtrack. Except that you had no problems with the RNBDJ one and in fact had problems with those who had problems with it! Do you really expect any reasonable person to swallow this?! Forget Ghajini. Aamir has Lagaan, DCH, RDB, TZP. How many times have you said something good about these films? Don’t just pick on Aamir when he does the commercial stuff. For example I had certain problems with Swades but I’ve always said I have a weakness for the film. That is more than you’ve ever said for Aamir. So you keep playing ‘wounded’ when at every step you display the greatest partisanship possible.
incidentally Aamir is the best thing that happened to Bombay since 90s saccharine gave us diabetes! I mean this quite sincerely. Aamir brought the ‘prestige’ change!
I now realize how goaded Kirron Kher must have felt to try to kill herself with a fork!
1. Why must I listen to those who have seen Gahjini in Tamil? Was it worth discussing before the remake was announced? It seems Aamir can give it a patina of quality – but I say he could not do it to Fanaa, so I will withhold judgment.
2. Why am I dishonest if I call Fanaa trashy masala? I will turn it around and say that those who insist on calling KHNH, KKHH etc. trashy masala are dishonest if they do not acknowledge that Fanaa was the same if not worse.
3. Have I ever on this forum said I like all SRK films? Let me enlighten Satyam and say I do not even like all Amitabh films, or all Dilip films or all Guru Dutt films or all Dev films. I hope you get the picture. I particularly do not like ALL Aamir films or ALL Abhishek films.
4. Have I said on this forum that I loved the Rab ne album? Or that I did not like the Ghajini ST? I believe I honestly stated that both would work or not in the context of the films.
5. SRK had Swades, Dil se, Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, CDI, Yes Boss, Raju Ban Gaya Gentlemen. When a certain gentleman here starts to say something positive about the films or the performances in them then I believe he will have acquired some right to demand of me praise of certain Aamir films. Till then I will continue to praise the films I think I enjoyed. And to accusations of partisanship I say “first look at the beam in your own eye before……”.
6. Aamir was required to dilute the saccharine he infused into BW in the 90s – Love Love, Jawani Zindabad, Deewena Mujh sa nahin, Awwal number, these were all done within a year of each other and we were not even past 1990! I never saw a worse filmography of movies that were bad, trashy, and also disconnected with public opinion for
the Tamil film had a fantastic premise but lost steam after the initial few reels, not to mention that it had a shockingly ineffective villain (the guy who nplayed Sultan in Sarfarosh)]…
Q: Some bad news. Most probably this guy (Pradeep Rawat) is the villain in Hindi version also. According to some reports Rawat showed Ghajini to Aamir and encouraged him to remake it in Hindi.
I actually liked Deewana Mujhsa Nahin when I saw it…haven’t seen it in years though, but I still remember liking the song picturizationm of “Khadi raho Baith Jaao” a lot.
Everyone has done crappy films: English Babu Desi Mem; Zamaana Deewana (Ramesh Sippy should have hung himself before it came to this; but then since he didn’t hang himself after Bhrastachar he must be made of stern stuff); Chaahat; Trimurti for SRK. And Mumbai Se Aaya Mera Dost; Dus; Haan Main Ne Bhi Pyar Kiya, for Abhi. And so on…
Neelu: admittedly this might be atypical, but Ghajini was discussed on NG before Aamir’s remake was announced. There are (and used to be more) a fair number of Tamil film viewers on NG, and this was a big film back when it came out…
I am lovig Behka…more and more after repeated hearings…ARR has used different instruments…there is a lot of novelty to music and the singing creates mood of “masti”…..
Qalandar - Yes - all did poor films (and Big B was the leader as he did many more films), so why single out any one actor? BTW - the 90s should be discussed for all these actors - then we can see who did MORE saccharine. Please point me to the Ghajini thread if you can - I’d like to see what was said
“SRK had Swades, Dil se, Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, CDI, Yes Boss, Raju Ban Gaya Gentlemen.”
Neelu it is exactly this kind of statement that reveals your complete bad faith. With SRK anything that does not belong to his time tested genre is considered ‘different’ while for Aamir he has to clear the highest bar before he gets credit.
But let’s look at these films. Swades was a different film for SRK, one I like, but it is not patch in any department of filmmaking, on Lagaan. Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa is a nice, small film but there’s nothing extraordinary about it. You can’t put this and Dil Se in the same league as ‘different’! Yes Boss is ‘different’? C’mon! You should have nominated Asoka instead! Raju Ban Gaya is a rather stale reworking of Shree 420, nothing more to say about this. That leaves CDI. Alright I won’t argue about this even if it’s a sports film.
If these films are your criteria for the ‘different’ I wonder why you can never find it in your heart to discuss first off a very early Aamir film like Raakh (the most truly experimental film any star of that generation or beyond has done!) but also Sarfarosh, Lagaan, DCH, RDB, TZP, MP, Rangeela. Are those SRK films you mention really the equal of this bunch leaving aside the Rathnam?! Let’s be serious!
Since Qalandar has already named SRK’s junk I won’t say more but presumably you prefer Guddu, English Babu Desi Mem, Zamana Deewana, Ram Jaane to those Aamir films?! By the way it is actually a credit to Aamir that he did that trash early on his career when he was still finding his way. What was SRK’s excuse?!
Do you know why I have never called the likes of KKHH ‘trashy masala’? Because I have never considered these films masala at all! And anyone who does simply does not know what masala is! As simple as that. I have said a lot about KKHH but not that it’s masala.
On Ghajini again you reveal your lack of knowledge in these matters. The film was hit in Tamil. Why would a Hindi audience know it?! Does such a question even make sense?! As for Fanaa Aamir was never trying to do anything interesting with this film. He is more invested in Ghajini than Fanaa. Just because he does a Fanaa how does it logically follow that every commercial film of his is like Fanaa? Are you even thinking before making such bizarre statements?
On the soundtracks or for that matter the actors it’s pretty useless to say that you like and dislike works of every actor and so forth or that you haven’t said that you liked or disliked RNBDJ. Why? Well the silence is precisely the point. You devoted a whole review to Ghajini. On RNBDJ you had nothing to say. Not even a sentence! When Qalandar called it ‘generic tripe’ your response was that this was a little different and actually Dostana’s music was generic tripe! There is no place where you’ve said anything negative about SRK. But if you have pull up the comments. I might have missed something. Meanwhile you’re constantly attacking Aamir and indulging in snide remarks and what not. As I said the other day if you’re doing it to provoke me or anyone else that’s still a pity. Because it means your remarks are nonetheless insincere. Forget everyone here. What are your honest opinions on many things including RNBDJ?! We never hear those. But somehow you want us to buy that you are as evenly disposed toward everyone. You indulge in completely ridiculous comparisons of Bachchan with SRK but hey that’s neutrality! So no you’ve never said you like all SRK films but we always hear what about Aamir or Abhishek or whoever you dislike quite a bit!
Now again you say here you do not like “ALL” Aamir or Abhishek films. Yet you’ve also said a few times that you like Abhishek in lighter roles and seem to have enjoyed Dostana judging by your review. So yet another statement here that is just meant to provoke. What happens then is that it’s hard to take you seriously for one more reason!
Saying that you do not like all the films of the stars you mention is a little strange because if one liked every film of one’s favorite star one would be the biggest fanatic around. You make it sound as if it’s a credit to you!
Qalandar: As you might recall we discussed Ghajini in the context of Tamil films a number of times. But on my part the moment it was launched I said outright that I didn’t much care for the original film but I fully expected (based on what I’d heard) Aamir to better the original on the technical side and so forth. Leaving this aside we’ve discussed tons of Tamil movies here even if Neelu sadly has been unaware of this.
But again the point here is something else: SRK kept doing films like KKHH that took set design cues from Saved by the Bell and all these films were fine. Aamir on the other hand made a conscious decision (when he finally had the power to do so) to engage with more quality cinema than not. Since Sarfarosh at the very least it’s fair to say that he’s been very consistent (even if there were some attempts before this as well) about doing quality cinema. But he does one Fanaa and everyone starts biting him. He’s doing one Ghajini and it’s such a big deal. How is this entire trajectory comparable to SRK? You have professors spitting and men running around Manhattan clutching their failing hearts and Gujaratis calling coke ‘cock’ and hall ‘hole’ and so on.. but hey let’s jump on Aamir for doing Fanaa and Ghajini. This is pure and simple anti-Aamir propaganda!
Re: “Yes - all did poor films (and Big B was the leader as he did many more films), so why single out any one actor?”
Some can be singled out: for instance, Shatrugan Sinha obviously did a lot more poor films than Amitabh; Jeetendra probably did even more…
Over the past 10 years, Aamir has been associated with more quality films than most. For every Fanaa (itself a film rather squarely in a sort of ’60s sort of tradition) there is a Rang de Basanti or a Mangal Pandey (with most actors all one has are the Fanaa-analogues)…
anyways, speaking of bad films, I’m signing off: am about to start watching Deshdrohi…
I’ll add that Aamir has said on his blog a long time ago, that he very consciously wanted to do films like Fanaa as well as other sorts of films, and for populist reasons; it is obvious that for a long time now Aamir has been trying to “renew” the masala tradition (hence Ghulam, Sarfarosh, Lagaan, Fanaa — there’s a trajectory here). My point is that just because a film is a “masala” film, as Ghajini looks to be, is no reason to believe it is going to be a bad one…
Here are some older comments of mine on the Ghajini. The first from May ‘07:
“A Gajini flop would certainly put pressure on him but I just don’t see this happening. I’ve seen the Tamil original, Aamir will I suspect better the original, and I really see a massive hit here. While anything can flop I’d be stunned if this one did. If this film were releasing today I think it could easily make 65-70 crores or more.
“This film has solid action tied to a thriller sort of deal (shades of Memento here but more suggestive in some ways, as opposed to clues being present on scraps of paper these are inscribed on the protagonist’s body!), lots of masala and so on. A few years ago I wouldn’t be as confident of the subject but today I believe even the multiplexes would be on board in a big way. And it will simply roar in small centers whenever it releases.”
“This summary is a bit unfair. Clearly the tamil film for all the inspiration did not aim to be anything more than masala fare. Having said that there was one aspect in terms of which the Tamil film bettered the original. The clues as opposed to being on pieces of paper and so on are inscribed on the protagonist’s body!
then from July ‘07:
“I am actually not a great fan of Memento though I like Nolan elsewhere. I find the film quite overrated. Nolan eventually fills in all the memory gaps and so what you have at the end is a ‘total’ version of events. The film is therefore never more than a structural trick. This was in a sense the problem with Virumandi as well for all of the film’s other strengths. But with a film like Rashomon you never know at the end what the ‘canonical’ version of the tale is and therefore the memory gaps are never filled.
getting back to Gajni I expect Aamir’s version to be better than the Tamil one. I am in fact not a fan of the latter.”
then from Feb of this year:
“the original is an action potboiler married to the Memento idea, though somewhat more interestingly done here in that the clues are inscribed on the body! It is an intense kind of role, not very new in terms of characterisation for Tamil cinema, but certainly ‘new’ enough for the current Bollywood scene and specially given Aamir is doing it. I don’t much care for the original but I expect a better film than the original here. And of course Rahman’s doing the music unlike the original! The actor in the original was much younger than Aamir though.”
The other thing to note that is that for better or for worse, in this decade, the post-Lagaan Aamir has been a trendsetter: prior to Lagaan, most were content to just keep doing films that they thought would be successful (Aamir himself included, perhaps). After Lagaan, that suddenly wasn’t good enough, and suddenly everyone wanted the prestige that comes from critically acclaimed films. Not all of these films were good/unproblematic (I have had numerous issues with Rang de Basanti), but the important point here is that they were accepted and viewed by the public as setting benchmarks. The result is that Aamir Khan has come to occupy a position wholly other than the one he had 10-15 years ago, and it is a position that is not reducible simply to the sum of his grosses…
By the way if one does a search for Surya in the comments section 10 pages turn up. If one did searches for Vikram or Kamal or Rajni or Rathnam as many or more would turn up. There in fact used to be a lot more Tamil discussions once than there are today, rather regrettably. But the idea that no one was discussing Tamil films or Ghajini and is only doing so now is really absurd. First off this isn’t the case but even if it were only Tamil film viewers are aware of the film which restricts the discussion somewhat!
““This film has solid action tied to a thriller sort of deal (shades of Memento here but more suggestive in some ways, as opposed to clues being present on scraps of paper these are inscribed on the protagonist’s body!), lots of masala and so on. A few years ago I wouldn’t be as confident of the subject but today I believe even the multiplexes would be on board in a big way. And it will simply roar in small centers whenever it releases.”
Satyam, add to this - wonderful music (ideal for a masala, commercial action-romantic-thriller) - Ghajini is going to rock….let critics be damned…KAISE MUJHE instrumental is a haunting composition - can’t wait to watch its picturisation…
Aside: When the news of a Ghajini remake started doing the rounds there was a very strong buzz that Shriram Raghavan will direct it. It didn’t materialize eventually :(. If it had Ghajini would have been the most awaited film for me. Somehow Murugadoss directing this has failed to enthuse me.
Aarohi: Not sure if Raghavan could have handled straight up masala as well though.. I think Aamir’s attempting solid masala here. He’s trying to improve the film in some technical departments but he’s not shying away from the masala aspect of it.
satyam: Agree with you on straight up masala and Raghavan. But it would have been a better film no doubt. However BO would have been a question mark given how Johnny Gaddar fared.
It is PRECISELY to expose the bad faith of some here that I want a detailed discussion on the 90s. But no one has the guts to do that. List all the films, let us look at their riskiness, their status at the BO.
“presumably you prefer Guddu, English Babu Desi Mem, Zamana Deewana, Ram Jaane to those Aamir films?! By the way it is actually a credit to Aamir that he did that trash early on his career when he was still finding his way. What was SRK’s excuse?!”
There you go again – did I say I prefer any of those films? You seem to be the most illogical person I have even met. Aamir was the scion of a notable filmi family - so he had no need to do the usual masala to establish himself, his uncle was making films for him and his cousin was directing them for him. In that scenario he did fluffy romcoms ad infinitum with one Raakh thrown in. If that was the most truly experimental film that any star ever did then what was Ketan Mehta’s Maya? Or Mani Kaul’s Idiot? For an actor with no filmi backing to easily break into films, what were roles like Darr, Baazigar, Anjaam? Aamir established his comfort level all through the 90s for 11 years, with inane films “except Raakh”. Because if Kabhi Hana Kabhi Naa can be dismissed as a small film of no consequence then all of Aamir’s filmography in the 90s falls short of that mark and is inane. So it is NOT one Fanaa that is at issue. It is pushing an agenda that “poor” Aamir is indulging himself in ONE masala film, so why are people upset. In fact he was the master of masala for years, and he was never good at it either - except Raja Hindustani nothing hit the mark at all. In fact SRK had more excuse to do masala early to get a foot in the door, and eschewed it much more than Aamir.
SRK comes out leagues ahead of Aamir in the 90s. And is comparable to Aamir in his outside the box production ventures - they were brave though not so successful at the start. What were Asoka and Paheli if not risky films? If neither Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa or Dil se were risky films then I would say that neither were Lagaan and DCH risky films. And Raju Ban Gaya was a mere reworking of Shree 420? Then I would say that Fanaa is a rehash of Eye of the Needle and Ghajini a pale and dumbed down theft of Memento.
“you haven’t said that you liked or disliked RNBDJ. Why? Well the silence is precisely the point.”
Precisely - so do not go accusing me of hating one ST and loving the other. You can only presume anything when it is actually said – omission is not any admission of guilt.
“Meanwhile you’re constantly attacking Aamir and indulging in snide remarks and what not. As I said the other day if you’re doing it to provoke me or anyone else that’s still a pity. Because it means your remarks are nonetheless insincere.”
I did not realize that my comments were any worse than or even equal to you constant comments about SRK, the legacy theft, the poisoning of some atmosphere is films, the pushing of some agenda to make him bigger than what he is, his deluded fans, his fans who are dishonest, insincere – etc. etc. Do I really need to provide examples of all this? And then have you write another 50 page rebuttal?
“Forget everyone here. What are your honest opinions on many things including RNBDJ?! We never hear those.”
Because I will not opine on anything more than what the promos show. I have not seen the film yet. You have declared it mediocre Barjatya fare – but I have more sense than that. On Ghajini many can opine – the original source, and the source once removed are known to all.
“So no you’ve never said you like all SRK films but we always hear what about Aamir or Abhishek or whoever you dislike quite a bit!”
And you see something wrong with that? In fact I have told you quite categorically about Kal Ho Naa Ho, but you seem to have selective amnesia. Please do enlighten me on what Aamir or Abhishek et al. you have heard about quite a bit from me. Some specific examples would be nice.
“Now again you say here you do not like “ALL” Aamir or Abhishek films. Yet you’ve also said a few times that you like Abhishek in lighter roles and seem to have enjoyed Dostana judging by your review. So yet another statement here that is just meant to provoke.”
You like ALL Abhishek films? How about ALL Aamir films? Then you have to be a most undiscriminating cinema viewer – I am a discerning viewer and may or may not like films, but the ones I enjoy I am not afraid to talk about. I think more people are like me. You are unique and if that provokes you into another thesis then be my guest.
Discussions on the virtues of Ghajini included pulling down Memento – since a ripofff at the hands of Aamir had to be better than the original.
Qalandar: “prior to Lagaan, most were content to just keep doing films that they thought would be successful (Aamir himself included, perhaps).”
That is not correct and you know it. In no way were films like Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, Maya, Darr, Baazigar, Idiot, films that would automatically be successful. But agree that Aamir was stuck in films done mostly for their success value. In fact Baazigar was a masala film, as was Karan arjun – revenge sagas of the old school type. So even there the idea of resurrecting old school masala was not new.
Neelu: Re: “In no way were films like Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, Maya, Darr, Baazigar, Idiot, films that would automatically be successful. But agree that Aamir was stuck in films done mostly for their success value. In fact Baazigar was a masala film, as was Karan arjun – revenge sagas of the old school type. So even there the idea of resurrecting old school masala was not new.”
How can you include films like Maya Memsaab, Darr, Baazigra, Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa as examples? A newcomer to the industry, especially one not from a filmi family, hardly has a choice. Maya Memsaab maybe, but I doubt anyone — Yash, Aamir, SRK, Juhi, or Sunny — thought Darr was an experimental film.
Baazigar and Karan arjun were hardly made with idea of resurrecting masala — such self-consciousness was hardly on the agenda, since masala was not dead yet. This is a bit like saying Sunny Deol’s Arjun Pandit was a retro film, or that Aaj ka Arjun or Phool aur Kaante were retro films. They simply weren’t: stated differently, every revenge saga of the old school is not an attempt to resurrect anything. Context is key: if SRK does a reincarnation film in 2007 I will obviously view it through a very different lens than a film on the same theme released in 1982. And even here one has to see this on a case-by-case basis: Abhishek’s RUN was not any attempt to resurrect masala, but was simply a “straight” re-do. The film was utterly out of sync with urban, upwardly mobile India’s tastes (one of my favorite Abhishek performances btw), it was simply too “late” to do what it was doing, but its belatedness did not by itself put it in a different category than debased masala. “Fanaa” is a different, and stranger case, apparently hearkening to an even older paradigm, ’60s ishtyle, perhaps Rajesh Khanna ishtyle. This was self-consciously “cleaned” up and prettified, and aspects that could be expected to alienate contemporary multiplex audiences were weeded out; superficial nods to issues like terrorism etc. were made, and so on. “Om Shanti Om” is a third way: its engagement with historical masala is through the prism of spoof. So I would argue there are various modes of engagement with the cinematic past that are on display.
[I am not getting into the wider discussion here; i.e. my point is not that SRK is better/worse than anyone else; but the notion that "Aamir was stuck in films done mostly for their success value" while SRK was doing edgy cinema like Karan Arjun beggars belief. If Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa is risky, then what about Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander; Hum Hain Raahi Pyar Ke? Throughout the 1990s, there was never any sense that SRK was doing edgier cinema than Aamir (yes it's almost certainly true that public perception was that Salman was doing trashier films); if one had Raja Hindustani and Ishq, then the other had Karan Arjun and Koyla.]
So SRK doing risky films as a newcomer is of no consequence as he hardly had any choice? What about Mani Kaul’s Idiot? It is of no consequence that a newcomer gets roles with Ketan Mehta, Kundan Shah, Mani Kaul? What about a full out villain role, with no redemption, while still playing hero in other films? Does that count or were there many examples of actors who did that? He was just doing run of the mill stuff like all his contemporaries? Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa was a small and unique film, and no ripped off imitation like JJWS. I still like JJWS, but you do grave injustice to Kundan Shah and his team with this kind of downgrading. Ghulam in 1998 was an attempt to resurrect masala, but masala had not died in 1995 at the time of Karan Arjun? If you truly believe this kind of logic then I misjudged you.
As for who was doing edgier cinema - I urge you to draw up a list of the complete filmographies of each of the three Khans in the 1990s to debate this.
The difficulty I’m having is that I never said SRK doing anything was “of no consequence” — it is you who claimed that Aamir was somehow uniquely “stuck in films done mostly for their success value”, or at least vis-a-vis SRK. Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq, etc. I simply do not think it a fair reading of their careers during the 1990s to say that one was “stuck in films done mostly for their success value”, while the other was doing edgy stuff.
This decade, of course, things are somewhat different, and I believe Aamir has carved out a unique space for himself, as discussed earlier.
Qalandar - still no list of films in the 90s. Unless we see how many films out of the total films done were of consequence and how many were stuck in a mode, we cannot make any comparisons. You argue just like Satyam don’t you? Karan Arjun was masala - that would not be dead for the next three years - but it was still masala so what puts it below Ghulam? And what downgrades DTPH? Just the fact that it is a romance? I say it successfully resurrected romance after Silsila and Kabhie Kabhie (something that Chandni and Lamhe could not do) and is of unique consequence! That leaves Kuch Kuch Hota Hai - which I really like - but if you want me to say it was a trashy one like Raja Hindustani - then so be it. It was still more successful trash. And you have to explain to me exactly when masala suffered a demise.
BTW, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai did not gross more than Raja Hindustani in India. And why and how did Dil to Pagal Hai resurrect romance? I think you are forgetting Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak (1988), Main Ne Pyar Kiya (1989), and Aashiqui (1990), which brought back love stories in a big way and made them viable again, after years of rather violent films — unlike Love Story (1983) which did not spawn many successful love stories, the likes of QSQT and MPK had progeny (by contrast, an Andaaz Apna Apna had no progeny in its day, and didn’t even do that well; it’s impact, if any, is belated, and thus I don’t consider it as “starting” anything where comedies are concerned). Chandni is generally not considered part of this trend only because its heroes were ageing stars etc., and the trend is perceived to have changed when the new breed of younger actors showed up (Silsila was a disappointment at the box office, and was again a “mature love story”, and utterly overshadowed at the time by the fact that it was widely received as mirroring a real-life triangle; it didn’t have any impact on Bollywood trends — except of course for the “Dekha Ek Khwab” song video, which changed the way romantic song videos were made for a (or maybe two) generation(s)). Even in SRK’s own career Dilwaale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge (1995) preceded Dil to Pagal Hai.
PS– never said Kuch Kuch Hota Hai was or was not trash vis-a-vis Raja Hindustani; point is they were both very mainstream films obviously made to maximize box office receipts.
PPS– the “death of masala” is a concept, not a literal burial. Thus my answer would have to be, depends on what and who we are talking about. It’s obvious that in 1990 it probably wasn’t dead for anyone; by 2003 it was probably dead for most (but evidently not for the likes of Sunny Deol, or Himesh even in 2007). Ghulam is a film I have thought about for a while (I really consider it one of the most significant in aamir’s career, not from an industry-perspective but for himself), and the subject demands a fuller write-up than I can offer at 3am, I confess. On Karan Arjun, I note that you seem to view this only through the prism of a “SRK film”; I view it through the prism of its director Rakesh Roshan, who was making pretty “straight” masala right through — Kaho Na Pyar Hai (2000) is one of the successful examples, even though by then the paradigm was dead to most other big-ticket filmmakers. Heck even in Krrish the whole rural boy + older friend setting is done not in any spoofish way, but utterly un-selfconsciously (that same setting could not be attempted “straight” by most contemporary filmmakers; it would almost always be tongue-in-cheek).
Snide remarks are not conducive to reasoned discourse here (”you argue just like satyam” is something I would take as a compliment, but it’s evident you don’t mean it in that way), especially uncalled for given that I haven’t made any such comments. And I certainly don’t intend to be bullied into giving “a list of films in the 90s”; the points I am standing on have been made above, and in previous comments. We evidently don’t see eye to eye on this issue, so continuing this discussion doesn’t seem to be very useful. That being said, thanks for the discussion.
That point about similar argument styles was a pejorative for you? Just because Satyam and I do not see eye to eye? Hmm - again I misjudged you. In fact you do argue the same way - because any argument you make can be turned around to be an argument for the other side. Let me illustrate:
“Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq, etc.”
I could turn that around and say - Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai etc. The same happened with Satyam’s comments on KKHH vs. Fanaa. How is it possible to look down on one and not on the other? And if you will notice - none of this started with any attempt to downgrade Aamir vis-a-vis SRK, but rather an attempt to figure out why he is upgraded vis-a-vis SRK in every discussion.
Your comment below:
“for a long time now Aamir has been trying to “renew” the masala tradition (hence Ghulam, Sarfarosh, Lagaan, Fanaa — there’s a trajectory here)”
Could apply just as well to “renewing” the romance tradition in DTPH.
And the same comment supposes that in 1998 with Ghulam the masala tradition was being renewed - yet you said it was not even dead in 1995 at the time of Karan Arjun. So why is that snide? I just do not understand the point.
As for the list - you think asking that a list be used to determine who was doing more of the same and who was not, is unreasonable? How do we determine more of the same if we do not know the context of how many films were not the same? Is that bullying? I surely did misjudge you - and I am sorry for that, and for any offense you perceived in my comments. Adios.
Re: “I could turn that around and say - Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai etc.”
That’s my point: but it is YOU who said that Aamir was “stuck in films done mostly for their success value” throughout the 1990s, suggesting that SRK was somehow blazing an edgy trail. [My own claim about Aamir was generally limited to Lagaan-and-after; prior to that I see him as grappling to re-invent himself, but he isn't there yet. I made no claim about Aamir doing edgy stuff in the 1990s, hence there's nothing for me to defend; it is you who made that sort of claim for SRK.]
Re: “Could apply just as well to “renewing” the romance tradition in DTPH.”
Sure it could — except Dilwaale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge has the far better claim, and is the far more influential film. Not sure what needs to be renewed in 1997 when DTPH was released, as romance was thriving. DDLJ brought together the whole NRI/foreign setting/love story angle that was not there before, and can be described as “renewing” something, or perhaps even “creating” something. My objection is to the choice of film, not to the concept of renewing romance or creating it anew.
Q - I already said that everything about SRK is not an initiated argument but a response argument. Please do read what I wrote.
As for renewing the romance tradition - if the masala tradition can be renewed from 1998 through to 2008 by Aamir, then why can SRK not do the same? I too object to the choice of Ghulam and Fanaa in a similar way. In fact I find romance quite likable, for some masala may have a similar appeal. But please pardon me if I defend what I like. There is nothing in Ghulam that makes it edgy, appealing or even unique - even the story is a clean ripoff. So my objection too is to the choice of film.
And who was doing more of the same and who was blazing an edgy trail in the 90s can only be determined by looking at all the films these guys did in that era. I demand no lists of anyone - but I stand by my contention that it is necessary to look at the 90s in their entirety for any evaluation.
Guys, any idea why there is no official music release ceremony for Ghajini?????
Aamir’s supposed to make it a grand affair - at least bigger than that 1 minute teaser release…..
Some good responses here Qalandar.. you’ve saved me some work here!
Neelu: The very fact that you keep going on endlessly about this changing parameters all the time to somehow always have SRK not seem secondary to anyone else (sometimes Bahchcan, sometimes Aamir..) indicates how impartially these discussions are on your side. Depending on the day of the week Dil Se or Maya Memsaab or DTPH are all equally different for you! Depending on the hour of the day the choices SRK made in 1992 or in 2007 are all the same, completely decontextualized and deserve equal credit! Hey maybe SRK combines Bachchan and Aamir. LOL!
The larger point to be made here is that contexts are important. Just about any star will do different stuff (name any major star in Hindi film history and 99% of the time I will be able to point out ‘different’ films that go against the received image of the star.. therefore contexts are critical..)
Aamir did the truly experiment Raakh (I believe this was his second release, following QSQT). But I don’t give him as much credit for this as I do for a Sarfarosh later or other stuff even later. Because stardom changes the equation. The audience starts expecting certain things. When the image truly solidifies it’s even harder. Speaking of SRK I have in the past given him credit for trying out different stuff in the 90s to an extent but nothing worked here. This is the other slippage that occurs. leaving aside Aamir’s greater commitment to forging a new path (people forget that the 90s were rather difficult for him, despite the fact that he was always a big star, precisely because he refused to jump on the Yashraj bandwagon (remember he walked out of Darr!), he also did not want to go the Indra Kumar way totally and do too many films like that, the market still wasn’t a multiplex one and hence he couldn’t do then what he did later on, even if he tried when he had the chance, so in a sense Aamir compromised on his potential greatly in this period.. this could not be said for SRK or even Salman) when it’s a question of the box office SRK’s is neatly juxtaposed with Aamir’s.. all context is stripped away (I once did a contextual comparison on NG and the results were interesting) so you have SRK obviously emerge with bigger grossers than Aamir in the 90s (excepting RH).. then when it’s a question of ‘different’ the term is really stretched to include anything SRK did other than DDLJ at any point in his career (!).. but of course the other conclusion is not drawn that SRK failed at the ‘different’ whichever way you define it between DDLJ and CDI (in ‘07, 12 years after DDLJ!) completely! Nothing worked but for those films. Of course one then starts calling Yes Boss ‘different’! It’s another matter that this film grossed decently relative to price where it was undersold at the time.. Aamir made the different work, even in the 90s. Rangeela worked, Josh didn’t! Sarfarosh worked before Lagaan. SRK doesn’t have anything. To include earlier stuff when he didn’t have a set image is a little silly. Incidentally even RBGJ (which is a solid commercial film) just about scraped through. KHKN was made on pennies, again did decently for the scale and so forth, again all before his image solidified, but even so these were hardly significant successes in any sense. Aamir on the other hand had a proper image from his very first hit. He had to then walk away from this.
There is simply no comparison here. To keep just arguing for the heck of it, desperately changing the terms of the debate at every corner is just bad faith. And again what’s new here? One day it’s Bachchan, one day Aamir. Is SRK really secondary to anyone at all?!
Anyway I’m done with this debate as well for now.. I’ve said all I’ve needed.. I haven’t seen the case being made.. just as I never saw one on Bachchan/SRK, just as I never saw one on Ghajini/Fanaa, just as I never saw one on Lata/Shreya. If there’s something ‘different’ (!) offered I shall respond.
It is also amply clear that only some actors are judged, not just for doing different, BUT ALSO for making it successful. Sarfarosh was above average in the same year that Badshaah - a spoof and “different” was an average film but made more money than it - I think Sarfarosh must have been sold to be a hit at a lower cost, seems logical I suspect Raakh was a huge success. Josh and Rangeela were both semi-hits! I am sure RGV saved money on making the film with the casting couch approach for Urmila - just saying this because now we have to somehow find excuses for every film that worked - Yes Boss sold for lower price bla bla. The fact is the NO ONE here dares to bring out the filmography for both SRK and Aamir and discuss it in its entirety - in context.
But one thing is so good to know - so please no one take this as anything different, it is simply more of the same. I will stay away from offering anything different - just to keep some people’s essays down to a minimum. Satyam - there is nothing new here for you - cannot be as you never responded to the same old same old in any intelligent fashion.
As for comparing SRK to Big B - the only person to try and set up that scenario is you - because you have some insane idea of legacy theft. And you keep bringing that up to whip up the Bachchan fans - fortunately none have risen to the occasion. More power to them - no one ever denied Bachchan’s position in BW. Only you imagination has created that scenario so you can use it to further push down the achievements of “the culturally most significant” (LOL!) of our time.
Since I don’t accept anything BOI claim I will stick to the IBOS ratings which have Sarfarosh at 15 crores and #5 grosser for that year while Baadshah with 10.5 crores is at #9.
The rest is (sorry to put it bluntly) a plain ‘lie’. You’ve been comparing BAchchan incessantly with SRK in recent times. I’ve looked at Aamir’s entire career a million times. I’ve done it more different ways than the number of films you’ve probably seen in your lifetime! On the box office stuff as I made clear just here this is the one criterion that other box office obsessed SRK fans will never look at — whose ‘different’ films do better?
As always your responses are completely, totally, irredeemably incoherent. You just pick out something here, something there, throw in lots of resentment and spin out a response.
and by the way Rangeela was the 5th biggest grosser of ‘95 with 13.5 crores (a proper hit) and Josh was at #5 in 2000 (a full 5 years after Rangeela! and a notch behind Fizaa as well).. by the way it’s one thing for a film like Sarfarosh to not open big, remain stable and become a hit and quite another for films like Baadhshah to run up decent grosses and not be big loses because of an initial. If you look at things that way no Hrithik flop was really one (not 99% of the time). Most of those got initials and were relatively safe. Given that Hrithik outinitialled and outgrossed everyone else with his biggest films he must be easily considered the top star for this new decade!
This is exhibit #124 of where bad faith, ad hoc arguments, designed simply for the moment lead you!
If a person thinks that SRK has done the different as much as Aamir, all things considered, or has shown as much dedication to this idea, one has clearly been a victim of ‘alternate reality’!
Stayam - why did you come back? I offered nothing new - and you came back with numbers from Imaginary Box Office Site? Surely you could do better. If I am lying then so be it - but I am sure even your “thick” head has noticed the absence of any support for anything you say? Now begone - go read the Bachchan blog or something and dream of more ways to tell us how the legacy was usurped. What goes on in your imagination vis-a-vis SRK and Big B, or relating to Aamir’s 90s filmography, thankfully the rest of us are not privy to.
RKS if my comments in inverted commas are deleted then I will demand the same be done to the comment above mine. I have seen more films than this “foaming at the mouth bigot” can begin to imagine.
“If I am lying then so be it - but I am sure even your “thick” head has noticed the absence of any support for anything you say?”
I have never engaged in my views to win popularity contests. I’ll say this stuff even if I am the only one saying so or the last one saying so. I am all about the truth!
“I have seen more films than this “foaming at the mouth bigot” can begin to imagine”
Why ‘bigot’? Just curious! Is it bigotry to not accept the propaganda on SRK? Or is this just one more attempt on your part to just launch the first ‘name’ that comes to mind?!
And by the way I have been through more SRK partisans like yourself on NG than the films you’ve seen! How’s that to reconcile the two points?!
Behka Trailor - Ghajini 
Comment by Aarohi on 21 November 2008:
This is good.
btw it should be ‘Behka’.
Comment by jayshah on 21 November 2008:
Changed…
Comment by A C H I L L E S on 21 November 2008:
I dont like the gaudy colors at all … hurts my eyes!
But what has surprised me is how young Aamir is looking in this song and Guzarish!
Comment by neelu on 21 November 2008:
Ouch! But wait - it is quality masala.
Comment by Som on 21 November 2008:
The song is fine.My only grudge is with the sort of costumes, Aamir has worn and too much use of colors.
Comment by Som on 21 November 2008:
BTW Abhishek is the only star today who is yet to go bare chested and follow the so called much hyped 6 packs thing,when almost every big stars have done it.Will he do it in future? Lets see..
Comment by jayshah on 21 November 2008:
http://webstore.tseries.com/product_details.php?type=acd&pid=4085
Ghajini music is available (I think)
Comment by Arun on 21 November 2008:
Behka Promo (Good Quality)
Comment by satyam on 21 November 2008:
Like the video and the song..
Achilles: Agreed.. Aamir is really looking young here..
Som: I think they’re overdoing this look with the colors et al to create a really dramatic contrast with the other look.
Overall though the film has a sharp look in terms of the visuals..
Neelu: if this doesn’t look like quality masala to you after being a fan of everything Johar’s dished out I’m not sure what to say!
Comment by neelu on 21 November 2008:
Satyam - all masala that is done by any actor other than SRK is quality masala. This quality riot of colors is approved as it creates a contrast to his other persona, but some other contrasts of persona (in recent promos) CANNOT be approved as they are just not quality masala.
It is amazing what a soft focus lens can do. Here is what he really looks like:
http://tinypic.com/view.php?pic=2wrovth&s=4
Comment by johnnybrutal on 21 November 2008:
yea, this movie seems really risky!
Comment by johnnybrutal on 21 November 2008:
btw i dont see no six packs in the pic posted above, all i see are the two new little friends of aamir.
Comment by johnnybrutal on 21 November 2008:
did i say little? sorry that was a typo
Comment by A C H I L L E S on 21 November 2008:
A colorful short peacock is better than a dorky or cheaply dressed wannabe dancing diva getting trained by a wife half his age!
Comment by Qalandar on 21 November 2008:
Don’t find the song or the video especially impressive, although will wait for the CD…the scene with the six aamirs, each over-the-top and ridiculous, was funny. This has more than a little of the spoofish quality to it IMO (aside: at least some of this video’s staging seems lifted from the Sivaji video at the Guggenhein in Bilbao…)
Comment by neelu on 21 November 2008:
Spoofs are really cheap masala - I think OSO proved that. And being dorky is really really cheap, much better to be a peacock with more dupattas than the leading lady.
Comment by jayshah on 21 November 2008:
Of the teasers, this is the song I took to least. Only the geeky Aamir look works.
Comment by neelu on 21 November 2008:
I am glad you called him geek, because dork would be simply unacceptable.
Comment by Jesse on 21 November 2008:
Good stuff.
Comment by satyam on 21 November 2008:
Neelu: That’s unfair and is continued ‘resentment’ on your part. You think I am ‘gender coding’ things but every other statement of yours (if not all) seems to have me (perhaps among others) as the intended addressee! I never called at any point Fanaa ‘quality’. In fact I said at the time I couldn’t believe Ravi Chandran was the cinematographer here. So it’s not as if I start praising things just because Aamir’s involved. Those who’ve been here long enough know I’ve always had issues with RDB’s politics as well. You can hardly be the greatest Aamir partisan if you have issues with RDB. I even had a few problems with what I considered was the tame second half in DCH. This constant snideness is I think out of order. I’ve hardly been big on Dostana at any point. Surely I don’t like Aamir more than Abhishek?!
I think people can disagree about how Ghajini looks but based on the preview evidence so far if one wants to assert that this looks just like OSO and the difference is only one of ‘fandom’ then I think one is saying so in extremely bad faith.
As for spoofs being cheap masala whoever gave you that definition?! Of course just because you see six Aamir images in the same shot doesn’t mean anyone should suggest ’spoof’ here right?!
And yeah he’s looking a bit too earnest, geeky or whatever at points. What about it? Is there a deal you’re trying to reach here where SRK can be accepted as ‘dorky’ in RNBDJ if we agree Aamir’s the same?
Isn’t there any one thing you can give to someone other than SRK? Forget what others are saying here and what you are presumably responding to? Can’t there be your ‘own’, ‘honest’, ’sincere’ opinion on display sometimes or does it always have to be a ‘reaction’ to people like myself and others? Let’s say that everything you assume about me and others is right. Let’s accept for the moment that we are all involved in a great conspiracy against SRK. Does this mean that this completely constrains you from offering any genuine opinion? You had a nice piece on Dostana the other day. Why can’t you do more of this as well as opposed to this constant snideness?
And before you start jumping on me I am not ‘directing’ you to do anything. I’m just making a suggestion..
Comment by Qalandar on 21 November 2008:
Som: If abhi managed to get out of doing so in Dostana, then he is safe forever! May the throwback long continue in this vein!
Comment by satyam on 21 November 2008:
Som: I would be shocked if Abhishek ever did a six pack! he is supposed to be shaping up for the new Rathnam but I just don’t see him too committed to the idea of the six pack!
With Aamir’s physique the interesting message is ‘hey if you thought SRK was hot look at this’! Whoever was impressed with SRK’s effort is bound to be more impressed with Aamir. How he did it beats me. He just seems much bigger whereas SRK really lost weight and looked a bit of a vampire at points (dard e disco) if you ask me. I’m not making fun of him but he really looked haggard at points. After a certain age you can’t lose weight when you’re working out or you look very weird. Akshay also had the same problem in some of the shots we saw.
Comment by utkal on 21 November 2008:
I just loooove the song. Supercool. Got a jazzy fel. Amir loks cool too. Very different from what one is used to in general..the song and the picturization.
Comment by Som on 21 November 2008:
Talking about Physique, I feel a lean and trim well toned body what would have suited someone like Aamir who does not have the advantage of the height. Instead he went for the conventional one, bulky muscular type. Having said that Aamir does not look bad at all, he looks fit unlike SRK who did want to have something like the lean and trim well toned body but he lost too much weight to have that sort of physique which was visible from his wearing thin face.As far as the current lot of actors are concerned Hrithik undoubtedly has got the best physique (proportional height and weight),Akshay had a fit body but he seems to have lost weight which makes him look bit anorexic and stale these days, putting little more weight will do the job.
Comment by ideaunique on 21 November 2008:
“I just loooove the song. Supercool. Got a jazzy fel. Amir loks cool too. Very different from what one is used to in general..the song and the picturization.”
I am with you Utkal
Aamir’s is right when he says that this is full-on masala film…both he and Asin have sparkling chemistry here…
Comment by neelu on 22 November 2008:
Satyam - most of what I say here on NG is like garlic to ward of vampire attacks. Fact is you cannot stop talking of SRK in each and every thread - he has taken over your life, be it Dostana BO, or in fact anything under the sun. I am merely countering your arguments. In addition, unlike you I read what people write. Please re-read the thread and see if the words spoof and geek were mentioned or not.
And as I mentioned earlier - stop telling me what to do, or even in you “paternal” way treating me like a fractious child. BTW - so far I see nothing in Ghajini to tell me it is different masala than Fanaa - only the leading lady is younger and the look has been updated to include some Hritik moments. This is based on the trailer, clip and stills - and seems fair to me. Since you have pronounced judgment on Rab ne (it is mediocre fare) based on some trailer and stills.
Comment by ideaunique on 23 November 2008:
btw, I am loving BEHKA song more and more - and I believe after hearing/watching the full song - i’d like it more…
Comment by cticize on 24 November 2008:
I like the Behka song too
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
“so far I see nothing in Ghajini to tell me it is different masala than Fanaa”
Perhaps you might want to pay attention at some point to those of us here who have seen the Tamil original on the former!
Fanaa is as much like Ghajini as KA is like OSO!
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
Why would I pay attention to people who think MHN is like any other YRF? I was never interested in paying attention to people whose opinions seems extremely biased, often verging on just plain silly. If every film with Kashmir or some nice locale is a YRF, then they had much more success than anyone gives them credit for. I wonder if people with history on NG can comment on how much interest the Tamil Ghajini inspired before it was slated for a remake with Aamir.
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Re: “I wonder if people with history on NG can comment on how much interest the Tamil Ghajini inspired before it was slated for a remake with Aamir.”
Not having read every comment in this thread, I’ll say that my understanding is that Ghajini was a big hit in Tamil, and attracted a lot of attention there, i.e. it was a very high-profile success (even its soundtrack was very successful, and it was one of the films that IMO catapulted heroine Asin to the bigtime). Of course no-one in “the North” had probably heard of it. [I remember saying on NG a long time ago, when the Hindi remake was announced, that Surya's is a tough act for Aamir to follow, although I am sure he'll ensure that a better film results; the Tamil film had a fantastic premise but lost steam after the initial few reels, not to mention that it had a shockingly ineffective villain (the guy who nplayed Sultan in Sarfarosh)]…
Comment by jayshah on 24 November 2008:
“Not having read every comment in this thread”
It’s probably a good thing nowadays on NG
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
LOL jay, I think on that top stars of the decade thread, I was gone after comment # 5 or 10!!!
Comment by goodfella on 24 November 2008:
Jay - perfectly put.
Comment by rks on 24 November 2008:
We are going to have a test paper for members. The question paper would be objective and based on members’ comments. Everyone needs some minimum marks to qualify to be a member.
Comment by jayshah on 24 November 2008:
Do we get a chance to revise?
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Re: “We are going to have a test paper for members. The question paper would be objective and based on members’ comments.”
If the answer is “qalandar”, they are eligible to be members…
Comment by goodfella on 24 November 2008:
Who’s the proctor?
Comment by jayshah on 24 November 2008:
Damn it rks, you have me worried about this test now. I feel like I am back in school! And your the headmaster!
Goodfella Answer : Qalander!!!
Comment by rks on 24 November 2008:
Goodfella: Proctors - Aarohi(India and others) and Qalandar (US).
Q1 - Which one of them has not been used by Shetty as his screen name.
1. Nagdansh Jurhad
2. vaatlaggayi
3. Hjst knzdd jlpyts hh
4. Kashinath Sahu
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
Neelu: You don’t have to listen to me. There are many otehr members here who’ve seen the Tamil original.
On not listening, you should also be a little honest and admit that you’re not listening to anyone who doesn’t think SRK’s the greatest thing to hit cinema since the Lumiere Bros were waiting for the train La Ciotat!
Comment by jayshah on 24 November 2008:
rks
Answer : 2. vaatlaggayi
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
LOL Rks, too easy.
Comment by jayshah on 24 November 2008:
Everyone shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh..I am trying to concentrate on the test!
Comment by rks on 24 November 2008:
Please arrange them wrt NG joining date, starting with the earliest.
1. goodfella
2. qalandar
3. Sambaba
4. Sandy
Comment by jayshah on 24 November 2008:
Time to go to sleep!
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
That’s a toughie: my guess is that they are already arranged in order of joining.
Comment by rks on 24 November 2008:
Apart from KhalNayak, who is fan of Sanjay Dutt (first choice)?
1. rks
2. Sid
3. Aarohi
4. Rohit
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Sid.
Comment by rks on 24 November 2008:
Who is not a Hrithik’s fan?
1. ILG
2. Julie
3. Myna
4. Rudresh
5. None of the above.
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
None of the above!
Satyam - still no answer to my question on whether Ghajini (Tamil) became interesting and quality cinema before or after it was announced that Aamir would star in the remake. SRK is only an upstart, actually it is Aamir who is the best thing to happen to us since sliced bread - or was that Velveeta cheese?
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
Neelu: I never defined Ghajini as quality cinema. I said it was masala cinema that would be given a more refined veneer by Aamir. In other words I expect it to be more refined than the original. But I never called it a great prestige product or a quality film the way I would call RDB ‘quality’. As usual you’ve not been reading carefully!
What I did however say was that there is good masala and bad masala and I expect Ghajini to be the former. Much as there is good Yashraj (DDLJ) and bad Yashraj (KKHH.. in the same Yashraj vein). In fact this is another one of those slippage moments that often occurs on this forum where ‘masala’ is first equated with poor cinema and then Aamir’s association with the first can be rejected.
Incidentally I didn’t even give Fanaa this much. All I’ve said with this film is that if you loved all the SRK films and then if you suddenly find issues with Fanaa you are being dishonest. And I stand by that.
but why go as far as Aamir? I am not calling DOstana quality cinema am I? So if I’m not saying this for Abhishek I would hardly be lowering the bar for Aamir. Maybe I’m wrong about Ghajini in which case I’ll accept it.
But you don’t have a leg to stand on with all of this. If you’ve been honest about SRK and his films you can bring up these questions about Aamir. But what you do like many other SRK fans is that you justify each and every move of his while picking apart Aamir all the time or whoever.
Just the latest example. I can believe that you didn’t like the Ghajini soundtrack. Except that you had no problems with the RNBDJ one and in fact had problems with those who had problems with it! Do you really expect any reasonable person to swallow this?! Forget Ghajini. Aamir has Lagaan, DCH, RDB, TZP. How many times have you said something good about these films? Don’t just pick on Aamir when he does the commercial stuff. For example I had certain problems with Swades but I’ve always said I have a weakness for the film. That is more than you’ve ever said for Aamir. So you keep playing ‘wounded’ when at every step you display the greatest partisanship possible.
incidentally Aamir is the best thing that happened to Bombay since 90s saccharine gave us diabetes! I mean this quite sincerely. Aamir brought the ‘prestige’ change!
Comment by goodfella on 24 November 2008:
Re: First to join - I think you’re right, Q
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
I now realize how goaded Kirron Kher must have felt to try to kill herself with a fork!
1. Why must I listen to those who have seen Gahjini in Tamil? Was it worth discussing before the remake was announced? It seems Aamir can give it a patina of quality – but I say he could not do it to Fanaa, so I will withhold judgment.
2. Why am I dishonest if I call Fanaa trashy masala? I will turn it around and say that those who insist on calling KHNH, KKHH etc. trashy masala are dishonest if they do not acknowledge that Fanaa was the same if not worse.
3. Have I ever on this forum said I like all SRK films? Let me enlighten Satyam and say I do not even like all Amitabh films, or all Dilip films or all Guru Dutt films or all Dev films. I hope you get the picture. I particularly do not like ALL Aamir films or ALL Abhishek films.
4. Have I said on this forum that I loved the Rab ne album? Or that I did not like the Ghajini ST? I believe I honestly stated that both would work or not in the context of the films.
5. SRK had Swades, Dil se, Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, CDI, Yes Boss, Raju Ban Gaya Gentlemen. When a certain gentleman here starts to say something positive about the films or the performances in them then I believe he will have acquired some right to demand of me praise of certain Aamir films. Till then I will continue to praise the films I think I enjoyed. And to accusations of partisanship I say “first look at the beam in your own eye before……”.
6. Aamir was required to dilute the saccharine he infused into BW in the 90s – Love Love, Jawani Zindabad, Deewena Mujh sa nahin, Awwal number, these were all done within a year of each other and we were not even past 1990! I never saw a worse filmography of movies that were bad, trashy, and also disconnected with public opinion for
Comment by Aarohi on 24 November 2008:
Q: Some bad news. Most probably this guy (Pradeep Rawat) is the villain in Hindi version also. According to some reports Rawat showed Ghajini to Aamir and encouraged him to remake it in Hindi.
Comment by khan on 24 November 2008:
“Apart from KhalNayak, who is fan of Sanjay Dutt (first choice)?”
RKS, You forgot Raging Bull
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Aarohi: OH NO!!!! That guy was a useless villain…
I’ll be quite sore if this is true…
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
I actually liked Deewana Mujhsa Nahin when I saw it…haven’t seen it in years though, but I still remember liking the song picturizationm of “Khadi raho Baith Jaao” a lot.
Everyone has done crappy films: English Babu Desi Mem; Zamaana Deewana (Ramesh Sippy should have hung himself before it came to this; but then since he didn’t hang himself after Bhrastachar he must be made of stern stuff); Chaahat; Trimurti for SRK. And Mumbai Se Aaya Mera Dost; Dus; Haan Main Ne Bhi Pyar Kiya, for Abhi. And so on…
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Neelu: admittedly this might be atypical, but Ghajini was discussed on NG before Aamir’s remake was announced. There are (and used to be more) a fair number of Tamil film viewers on NG, and this was a big film back when it came out…
Comment by ideaunique on 24 November 2008:
I am lovig Behka…more and more after repeated hearings…ARR has used different instruments…there is a lot of novelty to music and the singing creates mood of “masti”…..
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
Qalandar - Yes - all did poor films (and Big B was the leader as he did many more films), so why single out any one actor? BTW - the 90s should be discussed for all these actors - then we can see who did MORE saccharine. Please point me to the Ghajini thread if you can - I’d like to see what was said
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Can’t point you to the Ghajini thread(s) I’m afraid — they are on earlier versions of NG and aren’t accessible (NG 1.0 is not accessible)…
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
“SRK had Swades, Dil se, Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, CDI, Yes Boss, Raju Ban Gaya Gentlemen.”
Neelu it is exactly this kind of statement that reveals your complete bad faith. With SRK anything that does not belong to his time tested genre is considered ‘different’ while for Aamir he has to clear the highest bar before he gets credit.
But let’s look at these films. Swades was a different film for SRK, one I like, but it is not patch in any department of filmmaking, on Lagaan. Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa is a nice, small film but there’s nothing extraordinary about it. You can’t put this and Dil Se in the same league as ‘different’! Yes Boss is ‘different’? C’mon! You should have nominated Asoka instead! Raju Ban Gaya is a rather stale reworking of Shree 420, nothing more to say about this. That leaves CDI. Alright I won’t argue about this even if it’s a sports film.
If these films are your criteria for the ‘different’ I wonder why you can never find it in your heart to discuss first off a very early Aamir film like Raakh (the most truly experimental film any star of that generation or beyond has done!) but also Sarfarosh, Lagaan, DCH, RDB, TZP, MP, Rangeela. Are those SRK films you mention really the equal of this bunch leaving aside the Rathnam?! Let’s be serious!
Since Qalandar has already named SRK’s junk I won’t say more but presumably you prefer Guddu, English Babu Desi Mem, Zamana Deewana, Ram Jaane to those Aamir films?! By the way it is actually a credit to Aamir that he did that trash early on his career when he was still finding his way. What was SRK’s excuse?!
Do you know why I have never called the likes of KKHH ‘trashy masala’? Because I have never considered these films masala at all! And anyone who does simply does not know what masala is! As simple as that. I have said a lot about KKHH but not that it’s masala.
On Ghajini again you reveal your lack of knowledge in these matters. The film was hit in Tamil. Why would a Hindi audience know it?! Does such a question even make sense?! As for Fanaa Aamir was never trying to do anything interesting with this film. He is more invested in Ghajini than Fanaa. Just because he does a Fanaa how does it logically follow that every commercial film of his is like Fanaa? Are you even thinking before making such bizarre statements?
On the soundtracks or for that matter the actors it’s pretty useless to say that you like and dislike works of every actor and so forth or that you haven’t said that you liked or disliked RNBDJ. Why? Well the silence is precisely the point. You devoted a whole review to Ghajini. On RNBDJ you had nothing to say. Not even a sentence! When Qalandar called it ‘generic tripe’ your response was that this was a little different and actually Dostana’s music was generic tripe! There is no place where you’ve said anything negative about SRK. But if you have pull up the comments. I might have missed something. Meanwhile you’re constantly attacking Aamir and indulging in snide remarks and what not. As I said the other day if you’re doing it to provoke me or anyone else that’s still a pity. Because it means your remarks are nonetheless insincere. Forget everyone here. What are your honest opinions on many things including RNBDJ?! We never hear those. But somehow you want us to buy that you are as evenly disposed toward everyone. You indulge in completely ridiculous comparisons of Bachchan with SRK but hey that’s neutrality! So no you’ve never said you like all SRK films but we always hear what about Aamir or Abhishek or whoever you dislike quite a bit!
Now again you say here you do not like “ALL” Aamir or Abhishek films. Yet you’ve also said a few times that you like Abhishek in lighter roles and seem to have enjoyed Dostana judging by your review. So yet another statement here that is just meant to provoke. What happens then is that it’s hard to take you seriously for one more reason!
Saying that you do not like all the films of the stars you mention is a little strange because if one liked every film of one’s favorite star one would be the biggest fanatic around. You make it sound as if it’s a credit to you!
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
Qalandar: As you might recall we discussed Ghajini in the context of Tamil films a number of times. But on my part the moment it was launched I said outright that I didn’t much care for the original film but I fully expected (based on what I’d heard) Aamir to better the original on the technical side and so forth. Leaving this aside we’ve discussed tons of Tamil movies here even if Neelu sadly has been unaware of this.
But again the point here is something else: SRK kept doing films like KKHH that took set design cues from Saved by the Bell and all these films were fine. Aamir on the other hand made a conscious decision (when he finally had the power to do so) to engage with more quality cinema than not. Since Sarfarosh at the very least it’s fair to say that he’s been very consistent (even if there were some attempts before this as well) about doing quality cinema. But he does one Fanaa and everyone starts biting him. He’s doing one Ghajini and it’s such a big deal. How is this entire trajectory comparable to SRK? You have professors spitting and men running around Manhattan clutching their failing hearts and Gujaratis calling coke ‘cock’ and hall ‘hole’ and so on.. but hey let’s jump on Aamir for doing Fanaa and Ghajini. This is pure and simple anti-Aamir propaganda!
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Re: “Yes - all did poor films (and Big B was the leader as he did many more films), so why single out any one actor?”
Some can be singled out: for instance, Shatrugan Sinha obviously did a lot more poor films than Amitabh; Jeetendra probably did even more…
Over the past 10 years, Aamir has been associated with more quality films than most. For every Fanaa (itself a film rather squarely in a sort of ’60s sort of tradition) there is a Rang de Basanti or a Mangal Pandey (with most actors all one has are the Fanaa-analogues)…
anyways, speaking of bad films, I’m signing off: am about to start watching Deshdrohi…
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Satyam: our comments crossed.
I’ll add that Aamir has said on his blog a long time ago, that he very consciously wanted to do films like Fanaa as well as other sorts of films, and for populist reasons; it is obvious that for a long time now Aamir has been trying to “renew” the masala tradition (hence Ghulam, Sarfarosh, Lagaan, Fanaa — there’s a trajectory here). My point is that just because a film is a “masala” film, as Ghajini looks to be, is no reason to believe it is going to be a bad one…
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
Here are some older comments of mine on the Ghajini. The first from May ‘07:
“A Gajini flop would certainly put pressure on him but I just don’t see this happening. I’ve seen the Tamil original, Aamir will I suspect better the original, and I really see a massive hit here. While anything can flop I’d be stunned if this one did. If this film were releasing today I think it could easily make 65-70 crores or more.
“This film has solid action tied to a thriller sort of deal (shades of Memento here but more suggestive in some ways, as opposed to clues being present on scraps of paper these are inscribed on the protagonist’s body!), lots of masala and so on. A few years ago I wouldn’t be as confident of the subject but today I believe even the multiplexes would be on board in a big way. And it will simply roar in small centers whenever it releases.”
“This summary is a bit unfair. Clearly the tamil film for all the inspiration did not aim to be anything more than masala fare. Having said that there was one aspect in terms of which the Tamil film bettered the original. The clues as opposed to being on pieces of paper and so on are inscribed on the protagonist’s body!
then from July ‘07:
“I am actually not a great fan of Memento though I like Nolan elsewhere. I find the film quite overrated. Nolan eventually fills in all the memory gaps and so what you have at the end is a ‘total’ version of events. The film is therefore never more than a structural trick. This was in a sense the problem with Virumandi as well for all of the film’s other strengths. But with a film like Rashomon you never know at the end what the ‘canonical’ version of the tale is and therefore the memory gaps are never filled.
getting back to Gajni I expect Aamir’s version to be better than the Tamil one. I am in fact not a fan of the latter.”
then from Feb of this year:
“the original is an action potboiler married to the Memento idea, though somewhat more interestingly done here in that the clues are inscribed on the body! It is an intense kind of role, not very new in terms of characterisation for Tamil cinema, but certainly ‘new’ enough for the current Bollywood scene and specially given Aamir is doing it. I don’t much care for the original but I expect a better film than the original here. And of course Rahman’s doing the music unlike the original! The actor in the original was much younger than Aamir though.”
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
The other thing to note that is that for better or for worse, in this decade, the post-Lagaan Aamir has been a trendsetter: prior to Lagaan, most were content to just keep doing films that they thought would be successful (Aamir himself included, perhaps). After Lagaan, that suddenly wasn’t good enough, and suddenly everyone wanted the prestige that comes from critically acclaimed films. Not all of these films were good/unproblematic (I have had numerous issues with Rang de Basanti), but the important point here is that they were accepted and viewed by the public as setting benchmarks. The result is that Aamir Khan has come to occupy a position wholly other than the one he had 10-15 years ago, and it is a position that is not reducible simply to the sum of his grosses…
Now, on to Deshdrohi!
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
By the way if one does a search for Surya in the comments section 10 pages turn up. If one did searches for Vikram or Kamal or Rajni or Rathnam as many or more would turn up. There in fact used to be a lot more Tamil discussions once than there are today, rather regrettably. But the idea that no one was discussing Tamil films or Ghajini and is only doing so now is really absurd. First off this isn’t the case but even if it were only Tamil film viewers are aware of the film which restricts the discussion somewhat!
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
qalandar: Agreed. wrote a piece on IBOS about Aamir as you might recall:
http://www.naachgaana.com/2008/05/15/aamir-khan-and-his-revolution/
Comment by ideaunique on 24 November 2008:
““This film has solid action tied to a thriller sort of deal (shades of Memento here but more suggestive in some ways, as opposed to clues being present on scraps of paper these are inscribed on the protagonist’s body!), lots of masala and so on. A few years ago I wouldn’t be as confident of the subject but today I believe even the multiplexes would be on board in a big way. And it will simply roar in small centers whenever it releases.”
Satyam, add to this - wonderful music (ideal for a masala, commercial action-romantic-thriller) - Ghajini is going to rock….let critics be damned…KAISE MUJHE instrumental is a haunting composition - can’t wait to watch its picturisation…
Comment by Aarohi on 24 November 2008:
Aside: When the news of a Ghajini remake started doing the rounds there was a very strong buzz that Shriram Raghavan will direct it. It didn’t materialize eventually :(. If it had Ghajini would have been the most awaited film for me. Somehow Murugadoss directing this has failed to enthuse me.
Comment by satyam on 24 November 2008:
Aarohi: Not sure if Raghavan could have handled straight up masala as well though.. I think Aamir’s attempting solid masala here. He’s trying to improve the film in some technical departments but he’s not shying away from the masala aspect of it.
Comment by Aarohi on 24 November 2008:
satyam: Agree with you on straight up masala and Raghavan. But it would have been a better film no doubt. However BO would have been a question mark given how Johnny Gaddar fared.
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
It is PRECISELY to expose the bad faith of some here that I want a detailed discussion on the 90s. But no one has the guts to do that. List all the films, let us look at their riskiness, their status at the BO.
“presumably you prefer Guddu, English Babu Desi Mem, Zamana Deewana, Ram Jaane to those Aamir films?! By the way it is actually a credit to Aamir that he did that trash early on his career when he was still finding his way. What was SRK’s excuse?!”
There you go again – did I say I prefer any of those films? You seem to be the most illogical person I have even met. Aamir was the scion of a notable filmi family - so he had no need to do the usual masala to establish himself, his uncle was making films for him and his cousin was directing them for him. In that scenario he did fluffy romcoms ad infinitum with one Raakh thrown in. If that was the most truly experimental film that any star ever did then what was Ketan Mehta’s Maya? Or Mani Kaul’s Idiot? For an actor with no filmi backing to easily break into films, what were roles like Darr, Baazigar, Anjaam? Aamir established his comfort level all through the 90s for 11 years, with inane films “except Raakh”. Because if Kabhi Hana Kabhi Naa can be dismissed as a small film of no consequence then all of Aamir’s filmography in the 90s falls short of that mark and is inane. So it is NOT one Fanaa that is at issue. It is pushing an agenda that “poor” Aamir is indulging himself in ONE masala film, so why are people upset. In fact he was the master of masala for years, and he was never good at it either - except Raja Hindustani nothing hit the mark at all. In fact SRK had more excuse to do masala early to get a foot in the door, and eschewed it much more than Aamir.
SRK comes out leagues ahead of Aamir in the 90s. And is comparable to Aamir in his outside the box production ventures - they were brave though not so successful at the start. What were Asoka and Paheli if not risky films? If neither Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa or Dil se were risky films then I would say that neither were Lagaan and DCH risky films. And Raju Ban Gaya was a mere reworking of Shree 420? Then I would say that Fanaa is a rehash of Eye of the Needle and Ghajini a pale and dumbed down theft of Memento.
“you haven’t said that you liked or disliked RNBDJ. Why? Well the silence is precisely the point.”
Precisely - so do not go accusing me of hating one ST and loving the other. You can only presume anything when it is actually said – omission is not any admission of guilt.
“Meanwhile you’re constantly attacking Aamir and indulging in snide remarks and what not. As I said the other day if you’re doing it to provoke me or anyone else that’s still a pity. Because it means your remarks are nonetheless insincere.”
I did not realize that my comments were any worse than or even equal to you constant comments about SRK, the legacy theft, the poisoning of some atmosphere is films, the pushing of some agenda to make him bigger than what he is, his deluded fans, his fans who are dishonest, insincere – etc. etc. Do I really need to provide examples of all this? And then have you write another 50 page rebuttal?
“Forget everyone here. What are your honest opinions on many things including RNBDJ?! We never hear those.”
Because I will not opine on anything more than what the promos show. I have not seen the film yet. You have declared it mediocre Barjatya fare – but I have more sense than that. On Ghajini many can opine – the original source, and the source once removed are known to all.
“So no you’ve never said you like all SRK films but we always hear what about Aamir or Abhishek or whoever you dislike quite a bit!”
And you see something wrong with that? In fact I have told you quite categorically about Kal Ho Naa Ho, but you seem to have selective amnesia. Please do enlighten me on what Aamir or Abhishek et al. you have heard about quite a bit from me. Some specific examples would be nice.
“Now again you say here you do not like “ALL” Aamir or Abhishek films. Yet you’ve also said a few times that you like Abhishek in lighter roles and seem to have enjoyed Dostana judging by your review. So yet another statement here that is just meant to provoke.”
You like ALL Abhishek films? How about ALL Aamir films? Then you have to be a most undiscriminating cinema viewer – I am a discerning viewer and may or may not like films, but the ones I enjoy I am not afraid to talk about. I think more people are like me. You are unique and if that provokes you into another thesis then be my guest.
Discussions on the virtues of Ghajini included pulling down Memento – since a ripofff at the hands of Aamir had to be better than the original.
Qalandar: “prior to Lagaan, most were content to just keep doing films that they thought would be successful (Aamir himself included, perhaps).”
That is not correct and you know it. In no way were films like Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, Maya, Darr, Baazigar, Idiot, films that would automatically be successful. But agree that Aamir was stuck in films done mostly for their success value. In fact Baazigar was a masala film, as was Karan arjun – revenge sagas of the old school type. So even there the idea of resurrecting old school masala was not new.
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
Neelu: Re: “In no way were films like Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa, Maya, Darr, Baazigar, Idiot, films that would automatically be successful. But agree that Aamir was stuck in films done mostly for their success value. In fact Baazigar was a masala film, as was Karan arjun – revenge sagas of the old school type. So even there the idea of resurrecting old school masala was not new.”
How can you include films like Maya Memsaab, Darr, Baazigra, Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa as examples? A newcomer to the industry, especially one not from a filmi family, hardly has a choice. Maya Memsaab maybe, but I doubt anyone — Yash, Aamir, SRK, Juhi, or Sunny — thought Darr was an experimental film.
Baazigar and Karan arjun were hardly made with idea of resurrecting masala — such self-consciousness was hardly on the agenda, since masala was not dead yet. This is a bit like saying Sunny Deol’s Arjun Pandit was a retro film, or that Aaj ka Arjun or Phool aur Kaante were retro films. They simply weren’t: stated differently, every revenge saga of the old school is not an attempt to resurrect anything. Context is key: if SRK does a reincarnation film in 2007 I will obviously view it through a very different lens than a film on the same theme released in 1982. And even here one has to see this on a case-by-case basis: Abhishek’s RUN was not any attempt to resurrect masala, but was simply a “straight” re-do. The film was utterly out of sync with urban, upwardly mobile India’s tastes (one of my favorite Abhishek performances btw), it was simply too “late” to do what it was doing, but its belatedness did not by itself put it in a different category than debased masala. “Fanaa” is a different, and stranger case, apparently hearkening to an even older paradigm, ’60s ishtyle, perhaps Rajesh Khanna ishtyle. This was self-consciously “cleaned” up and prettified, and aspects that could be expected to alienate contemporary multiplex audiences were weeded out; superficial nods to issues like terrorism etc. were made, and so on. “Om Shanti Om” is a third way: its engagement with historical masala is through the prism of spoof. So I would argue there are various modes of engagement with the cinematic past that are on display.
[I am not getting into the wider discussion here; i.e. my point is not that SRK is better/worse than anyone else; but the notion that "Aamir was stuck in films done mostly for their success value" while SRK was doing edgy cinema like Karan Arjun beggars belief. If Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa is risky, then what about Jo Jeeta Wohi Sikander; Hum Hain Raahi Pyar Ke? Throughout the 1990s, there was never any sense that SRK was doing edgier cinema than Aamir (yes it's almost certainly true that public perception was that Salman was doing trashier films); if one had Raja Hindustani and Ishq, then the other had Karan Arjun and Koyla.]
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
So SRK doing risky films as a newcomer is of no consequence as he hardly had any choice? What about Mani Kaul’s Idiot? It is of no consequence that a newcomer gets roles with Ketan Mehta, Kundan Shah, Mani Kaul? What about a full out villain role, with no redemption, while still playing hero in other films? Does that count or were there many examples of actors who did that? He was just doing run of the mill stuff like all his contemporaries? Kabhi Haan Kabhi Naa was a small and unique film, and no ripped off imitation like JJWS. I still like JJWS, but you do grave injustice to Kundan Shah and his team with this kind of downgrading. Ghulam in 1998 was an attempt to resurrect masala, but masala had not died in 1995 at the time of Karan Arjun? If you truly believe this kind of logic then I misjudged you.
As for who was doing edgier cinema - I urge you to draw up a list of the complete filmographies of each of the three Khans in the 1990s to debate this.
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
The difficulty I’m having is that I never said SRK doing anything was “of no consequence” — it is you who claimed that Aamir was somehow uniquely “stuck in films done mostly for their success value”, or at least vis-a-vis SRK. Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq, etc. I simply do not think it a fair reading of their careers during the 1990s to say that one was “stuck in films done mostly for their success value”, while the other was doing edgy stuff.
This decade, of course, things are somewhat different, and I believe Aamir has carved out a unique space for himself, as discussed earlier.
Comment by neelu on 24 November 2008:
Qalandar - still no list of films in the 90s. Unless we see how many films out of the total films done were of consequence and how many were stuck in a mode, we cannot make any comparisons. You argue just like Satyam don’t you? Karan Arjun was masala - that would not be dead for the next three years - but it was still masala so what puts it below Ghulam? And what downgrades DTPH? Just the fact that it is a romance? I say it successfully resurrected romance after Silsila and Kabhie Kabhie (something that Chandni and Lamhe could not do) and is of unique consequence! That leaves Kuch Kuch Hota Hai - which I really like - but if you want me to say it was a trashy one like Raja Hindustani - then so be it. It was still more successful trash. And you have to explain to me exactly when masala suffered a demise.
Comment by Qalandar on 24 November 2008:
BTW, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai did not gross more than Raja Hindustani in India. And why and how did Dil to Pagal Hai resurrect romance? I think you are forgetting Qayamat Se Qayamat Tak (1988), Main Ne Pyar Kiya (1989), and Aashiqui (1990), which brought back love stories in a big way and made them viable again, after years of rather violent films — unlike Love Story (1983) which did not spawn many successful love stories, the likes of QSQT and MPK had progeny (by contrast, an Andaaz Apna Apna had no progeny in its day, and didn’t even do that well; it’s impact, if any, is belated, and thus I don’t consider it as “starting” anything where comedies are concerned). Chandni is generally not considered part of this trend only because its heroes were ageing stars etc., and the trend is perceived to have changed when the new breed of younger actors showed up (Silsila was a disappointment at the box office, and was again a “mature love story”, and utterly overshadowed at the time by the fact that it was widely received as mirroring a real-life triangle; it didn’t have any impact on Bollywood trends — except of course for the “Dekha Ek Khwab” song video, which changed the way romantic song videos were made for a (or maybe two) generation(s)). Even in SRK’s own career Dilwaale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge (1995) preceded Dil to Pagal Hai.
PS– never said Kuch Kuch Hota Hai was or was not trash vis-a-vis Raja Hindustani; point is they were both very mainstream films obviously made to maximize box office receipts.
PPS– the “death of masala” is a concept, not a literal burial. Thus my answer would have to be, depends on what and who we are talking about. It’s obvious that in 1990 it probably wasn’t dead for anyone; by 2003 it was probably dead for most (but evidently not for the likes of Sunny Deol, or Himesh even in 2007). Ghulam is a film I have thought about for a while (I really consider it one of the most significant in aamir’s career, not from an industry-perspective but for himself), and the subject demands a fuller write-up than I can offer at 3am, I confess. On Karan Arjun, I note that you seem to view this only through the prism of a “SRK film”; I view it through the prism of its director Rakesh Roshan, who was making pretty “straight” masala right through — Kaho Na Pyar Hai (2000) is one of the successful examples, even though by then the paradigm was dead to most other big-ticket filmmakers. Heck even in Krrish the whole rural boy + older friend setting is done not in any spoofish way, but utterly un-selfconsciously (that same setting could not be attempted “straight” by most contemporary filmmakers; it would almost always be tongue-in-cheek).
Snide remarks are not conducive to reasoned discourse here (”you argue just like satyam” is something I would take as a compliment, but it’s evident you don’t mean it in that way), especially uncalled for given that I haven’t made any such comments. And I certainly don’t intend to be bullied into giving “a list of films in the 90s”; the points I am standing on have been made above, and in previous comments. We evidently don’t see eye to eye on this issue, so continuing this discussion doesn’t seem to be very useful. That being said, thanks for the discussion.
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
That point about similar argument styles was a pejorative for you? Just because Satyam and I do not see eye to eye? Hmm - again I misjudged you. In fact you do argue the same way - because any argument you make can be turned around to be an argument for the other side. Let me illustrate:
“Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq, etc.”
I could turn that around and say - Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai etc. The same happened with Satyam’s comments on KKHH vs. Fanaa. How is it possible to look down on one and not on the other? And if you will notice - none of this started with any attempt to downgrade Aamir vis-a-vis SRK, but rather an attempt to figure out why he is upgraded vis-a-vis SRK in every discussion.
Your comment below:
“for a long time now Aamir has been trying to “renew” the masala tradition (hence Ghulam, Sarfarosh, Lagaan, Fanaa — there’s a trajectory here)”
Could apply just as well to “renewing” the romance tradition in DTPH.
And the same comment supposes that in 1998 with Ghulam the masala tradition was being renewed - yet you said it was not even dead in 1995 at the time of Karan Arjun. So why is that snide? I just do not understand the point.
As for the list - you think asking that a list be used to determine who was doing more of the same and who was not, is unreasonable? How do we determine more of the same if we do not know the context of how many films were not the same? Is that bullying? I surely did misjudge you - and I am sorry for that, and for any offense you perceived in my comments. Adios.
Comment by Qalandar on 25 November 2008:
Re: “I could turn that around and say - Personally I don’t believe one can say that about a guy was was doing Raja Hindustani, Ishq; any more or less than one can say that about the guy who was doing Karan Arjun, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, Dil to Pagal Hai etc.”
That’s my point: but it is YOU who said that Aamir was “stuck in films done mostly for their success value” throughout the 1990s, suggesting that SRK was somehow blazing an edgy trail. [My own claim about Aamir was generally limited to Lagaan-and-after; prior to that I see him as grappling to re-invent himself, but he isn't there yet. I made no claim about Aamir doing edgy stuff in the 1990s, hence there's nothing for me to defend; it is you who made that sort of claim for SRK.]
Re: “Could apply just as well to “renewing” the romance tradition in DTPH.”
Sure it could — except Dilwaale Dulhaniya Le Jaayenge has the far better claim, and is the far more influential film. Not sure what needs to be renewed in 1997 when DTPH was released, as romance was thriving. DDLJ brought together the whole NRI/foreign setting/love story angle that was not there before, and can be described as “renewing” something, or perhaps even “creating” something. My objection is to the choice of film, not to the concept of renewing romance or creating it anew.
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
Q - I already said that everything about SRK is not an initiated argument but a response argument. Please do read what I wrote.
As for renewing the romance tradition - if the masala tradition can be renewed from 1998 through to 2008 by Aamir, then why can SRK not do the same? I too object to the choice of Ghulam and Fanaa in a similar way. In fact I find romance quite likable, for some masala may have a similar appeal. But please pardon me if I defend what I like. There is nothing in Ghulam that makes it edgy, appealing or even unique - even the story is a clean ripoff. So my objection too is to the choice of film.
Comment by rks on 25 November 2008:
Hey Bhagwaan Lawyer and Researcher sentence ko tod marod kare kachumar nikaal denge.
Aap log is thread ke maap dando se behak gayen hain
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
And who was doing more of the same and who was blazing an edgy trail in the 90s can only be determined by looking at all the films these guys did in that era. I demand no lists of anyone - but I stand by my contention that it is necessary to look at the 90s in their entirety for any evaluation.
Comment by manoj16_391 on 25 November 2008:
I heard the entire song on the radio and the lyrics r NOT GOOD.(euphemistic words for aweful).
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
rks - kam se kam Aamir is under discussion. Aise hi bhatke rahenge sab until 30th December.
Comment by Aarohi on 25 November 2008:
Now that manoj has brought the thread on topic, I am off to Behka.
Comment by rks on 25 November 2008:
BTW, just finished “Hors de prix” (Priceless). A perfect masala movie for desi audience (ideal for remake). Predictable but a good watch.
Comment by Aarohi on 25 November 2008:
Wow! I was watching this flick on World Movies 2 days ago. Couldn’t watch it fully due to the Ind-Eng match. Looking forward to the repeat run.
Comment by rks on 25 November 2008:
Aarohi: It just got released on DVD over here. {Ranbir and Deepika would be ideal for lead roles in remake}
Comment by jayshah on 25 November 2008:
What does Behka mean?
Comment by Arun on 25 November 2008:
Behka = lost
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
Behka can have several meanings - here I think it means lost my way, could also mean inebriated.
Comment by jayshah on 25 November 2008:
Thanks
Comment by ideaunique on 25 November 2008:
Guys, any idea why there is no official music release ceremony for Ghajini?????
Aamir’s supposed to make it a grand affair - at least bigger than that 1 minute teaser release…..
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
Some good responses here Qalandar.. you’ve saved me some work here!
Neelu: The very fact that you keep going on endlessly about this changing parameters all the time to somehow always have SRK not seem secondary to anyone else (sometimes Bahchcan, sometimes Aamir..) indicates how impartially these discussions are on your side. Depending on the day of the week Dil Se or Maya Memsaab or DTPH are all equally different for you! Depending on the hour of the day the choices SRK made in 1992 or in 2007 are all the same, completely decontextualized and deserve equal credit! Hey maybe SRK combines Bachchan and Aamir. LOL!
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
What next? KKHH very different from DDLJ?!
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
You’re starting to sound like Karan Johar would on SRK.
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
The larger point to be made here is that contexts are important. Just about any star will do different stuff (name any major star in Hindi film history and 99% of the time I will be able to point out ‘different’ films that go against the received image of the star.. therefore contexts are critical..)
Aamir did the truly experiment Raakh (I believe this was his second release, following QSQT). But I don’t give him as much credit for this as I do for a Sarfarosh later or other stuff even later. Because stardom changes the equation. The audience starts expecting certain things. When the image truly solidifies it’s even harder. Speaking of SRK I have in the past given him credit for trying out different stuff in the 90s to an extent but nothing worked here. This is the other slippage that occurs. leaving aside Aamir’s greater commitment to forging a new path (people forget that the 90s were rather difficult for him, despite the fact that he was always a big star, precisely because he refused to jump on the Yashraj bandwagon (remember he walked out of Darr!), he also did not want to go the Indra Kumar way totally and do too many films like that, the market still wasn’t a multiplex one and hence he couldn’t do then what he did later on, even if he tried when he had the chance, so in a sense Aamir compromised on his potential greatly in this period.. this could not be said for SRK or even Salman) when it’s a question of the box office SRK’s is neatly juxtaposed with Aamir’s.. all context is stripped away (I once did a contextual comparison on NG and the results were interesting) so you have SRK obviously emerge with bigger grossers than Aamir in the 90s (excepting RH).. then when it’s a question of ‘different’ the term is really stretched to include anything SRK did other than DDLJ at any point in his career (!).. but of course the other conclusion is not drawn that SRK failed at the ‘different’ whichever way you define it between DDLJ and CDI (in ‘07, 12 years after DDLJ!) completely! Nothing worked but for those films. Of course one then starts calling Yes Boss ‘different’! It’s another matter that this film grossed decently relative to price where it was undersold at the time.. Aamir made the different work, even in the 90s. Rangeela worked, Josh didn’t! Sarfarosh worked before Lagaan. SRK doesn’t have anything. To include earlier stuff when he didn’t have a set image is a little silly. Incidentally even RBGJ (which is a solid commercial film) just about scraped through. KHKN was made on pennies, again did decently for the scale and so forth, again all before his image solidified, but even so these were hardly significant successes in any sense. Aamir on the other hand had a proper image from his very first hit. He had to then walk away from this.
There is simply no comparison here. To keep just arguing for the heck of it, desperately changing the terms of the debate at every corner is just bad faith. And again what’s new here? One day it’s Bachchan, one day Aamir. Is SRK really secondary to anyone at all?!
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
Anyway I’m done with this debate as well for now.. I’ve said all I’ve needed.. I haven’t seen the case being made.. just as I never saw one on Bachchan/SRK, just as I never saw one on Ghajini/Fanaa, just as I never saw one on Lata/Shreya. If there’s something ‘different’ (!) offered I shall respond.
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
It is also amply clear that only some actors are judged, not just for doing different, BUT ALSO for making it successful. Sarfarosh was above average in the same year that Badshaah - a spoof and “different” was an average film but made more money than it - I think Sarfarosh must have been sold to be a hit at a lower cost, seems logical
I suspect Raakh was a huge success. Josh and Rangeela were both semi-hits! I am sure RGV saved money on making the film with the casting couch approach for Urmila - just saying this because now we have to somehow find excuses for every film that worked - Yes Boss sold for lower price bla bla. The fact is the NO ONE here dares to bring out the filmography for both SRK and Aamir and discuss it in its entirety - in context.
But one thing is so good to know - so please no one take this as anything different, it is simply more of the same. I will stay away from offering anything different - just to keep some people’s essays down to a minimum. Satyam - there is nothing new here for you - cannot be as you never responded to the same old same old in any intelligent fashion.
As for comparing SRK to Big B - the only person to try and set up that scenario is you - because you have some insane idea of legacy theft. And you keep bringing that up to whip up the Bachchan fans - fortunately none have risen to the occasion. More power to them - no one ever denied Bachchan’s position in BW. Only you imagination has created that scenario so you can use it to further push down the achievements of “the culturally most significant” (LOL!) of our time.
Comment by rks on 25 November 2008:
Jay: behka has different meaning and depends upon the context. Broadly “not following a normal course”
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
Since I don’t accept anything BOI claim I will stick to the IBOS ratings which have Sarfarosh at 15 crores and #5 grosser for that year while Baadshah with 10.5 crores is at #9.
The rest is (sorry to put it bluntly) a plain ‘lie’. You’ve been comparing BAchchan incessantly with SRK in recent times. I’ve looked at Aamir’s entire career a million times. I’ve done it more different ways than the number of films you’ve probably seen in your lifetime! On the box office stuff as I made clear just here this is the one criterion that other box office obsessed SRK fans will never look at — whose ‘different’ films do better?
As always your responses are completely, totally, irredeemably incoherent. You just pick out something here, something there, throw in lots of resentment and spin out a response.
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
and by the way Rangeela was the 5th biggest grosser of ‘95 with 13.5 crores (a proper hit) and Josh was at #5 in 2000 (a full 5 years after Rangeela! and a notch behind Fizaa as well).. by the way it’s one thing for a film like Sarfarosh to not open big, remain stable and become a hit and quite another for films like Baadhshah to run up decent grosses and not be big loses because of an initial. If you look at things that way no Hrithik flop was really one (not 99% of the time). Most of those got initials and were relatively safe. Given that Hrithik outinitialled and outgrossed everyone else with his biggest films he must be easily considered the top star for this new decade!
This is exhibit #124 of where bad faith, ad hoc arguments, designed simply for the moment lead you!
If a person thinks that SRK has done the different as much as Aamir, all things considered, or has shown as much dedication to this idea, one has clearly been a victim of ‘alternate reality’!
Comment by neelu on 25 November 2008:
Stayam - why did you come back? I offered nothing new - and you came back with numbers from Imaginary Box Office Site? Surely you could do better. If I am lying then so be it - but I am sure even your “thick” head has noticed the absence of any support for anything you say? Now begone - go read the Bachchan blog or something and dream of more ways to tell us how the legacy was usurped. What goes on in your imagination vis-a-vis SRK and Big B, or relating to Aamir’s 90s filmography, thankfully the rest of us are not privy to.
RKS if my comments in inverted commas are deleted then I will demand the same be done to the comment above mine. I have seen more films than this “foaming at the mouth bigot” can begin to imagine.
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
SRK/Aamir Comparison
Comment by satyam on 25 November 2008:
“If I am lying then so be it - but I am sure even your “thick” head has noticed the absence of any support for anything you say?”
I have never engaged in my views to win popularity contests. I’ll say this stuff even if I am the only one saying so or the last one saying so. I am all about the truth!
“I have seen more films than this “foaming at the mouth bigot” can begin to imagine”
Why ‘bigot’? Just curious! Is it bigotry to not accept the propaganda on SRK? Or is this just one more attempt on your part to just launch the first ‘name’ that comes to mind?!
And by the way I have been through more SRK partisans like yourself on NG than the films you’ve seen! How’s that to reconcile the two points?!