Archive for S T R E E T

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23797447/

In 1992, SrK delivers his first hit Deewana. following it up with Baazigar and Darr in 1993 … and Boooom! he’s a star. well who wouldn’t be. Specially in the dry 90’s when a single hit were enough to keep you afloat for a decade. Check out the careers of Saif, Akshay, Anil Kapoor etc. They’ve had lean phases of 10, 15 even 20 straight films without a single hit… or having had 5-6 years delivering series of flops one after another. So yes.. the troika of hits were enough to propel any lallu panju into stardom in those 90’s.. why not SrK? Not to mention there were a couple of other mild successes as well amongst them mentioned there.

In 1973, Amitabh delivered his first hit after a string of flops to start off his career in Bollywood. With Zanjeer he was a star. And then he was there in Khanna’s hit Namak Haraam, was there in Manoj Kumar blockbuster Roti Kapda Aur Makaan.. and actually had a couple of modest hits of himself as well in Abhimaan and Majboor. Though nothing spectacular simply because the others stars at the times were delivering hits in hoardes tis the 70’s we talking . To begin with, a certain Rishi Kapoor delivered a blockbuster in Bobby.. That Dharam guy delivered 10 hits between 72-74. And ofcourse the reigning star of the time Rajesh Khanna had slowed down but not done. And so on and so forth. This is very much different from SrK, for whom one could actually make a sincere case for having as good as a BO record as anyone else had 92-95.. or heck expand it to 90-95. But let’s leave that aside, that ain’t the purpose of this post. Let’s just say that Amitabh became as big a star in 1973.

In 1995, SrK takes hold of the top reigns of Bollywood superstardom with two blockbusters in one year in Karan Arun and DDLJ the latter being the longest running Bollywood movie. A number of reasons account for him being able to grab the numero uno position including the imprisonment of Dutt, some bad movie choices on the part of other rivals (e.g. Anil Kapoor with Roop Ki Rani.. , Sunny Deol with Darr..etc) but it was also the momentum he carried on with his earlier hits in 92-93 and then KA, DDLJ that propelled him to the that top spot. And though he kind of stumbled in 96, he widened the gap back between him and his rivals with string of hits in 97 and 98. From there on he got the better of or atleast matched upto whatever the other stars tried to throw at him. And then there was this amazing phase post-K3G in 2001 all the way to 2005, where he had all the biggest initials, almoste every movie a hit/superhit and infact delivered more hits than the rest of the industry’s top stars’ hits combined. His closest rival  Hrithik had delivered one hit between 2000 and 2006. Another one Sunny delivered 6 back-to-back flops and distasters after the twin-hits in 2001. Aamir had a grand total of one clean hit between 97 and 2006. And Salman..? well. he held his own upto 99.. but lost steam thereafter and now is now very much a washed-up case. While Govinda decimated long ago. Forget about having a consistent rival, he rarely had any type of a competition unil 2006.  “Only SrK and Sells” , they said.

By 1978.. Amitabh was the undisputed superstar of Bollywood. Though he had delivered a Deewar in 1975.. as well as Sholay, some, well let’s say a few, were still holding their verdict as Dharam had been piling on big hits (more than a dozen of them) through 73-77.. Jugnu, Yaadon Ki Baraat, Loafer, Pratigya, Dharam Veer, Chacha Bhatija, CC, Charas etc.. and even the biggest hit of 75 - Sholay, had Dharam in a meatier role, implying in a way as him being the main lead. Also.. Manoj Kumar was in full force delivering a monster hit in RKUM, then follwing it with Sanyasi and Dus Numbri. However the momentun carried by Deewar, strengthened   by AAA, MKS, Don and Trishul not only tilted the balance in his favour but widened the gap between him and the rest big time. And through the late 70’s and early 80’s, the likes of Dharam, Vinod Khanna and Jeetendra delivered some significant hits but unable to match Bachchan’s amazing run 78-82 when the term “one-man-industry” was coined for him.

Ok.. I made a comment on one of the threads here a couple of days ago.. and today when I check it .. I cann’t fukin beleive the tirade of personal attacks against me, baseless accusions and over-reaction of the highest order. Here’s the exact comment that drew all attention:

http://www.naachgaana.com/2008/02/26/ibos-ridiculous/ 

ROFL… too funny to comment on.

Didn’t satyam claim that this guy didn’t allow his personal political stance affect his BO-reporting? then how is it that such absurd verdicts are given for Jodha Akbar ? Am I missing something here?

Imagine .. if Abhishek were starred in JA instead of Hrithik?.. How differently would NG have reacted to the movie..

well.. u guys know the drill..

Ok.. first of all, I’m sure it’s clear aboutw hat I think of Jayshah or his BO brains… and everytime I make a comment about them, I get in trouble. So, here I am not going to make any comment about jayshah himself.. but simply his BO posts. And I know Satyam has repeatedly asked that those who don’t agree with them simply ignore and skip them. Not so easy. I can say the same about any post here. The forum will be one dead ass place if the only posts under which you posted a comment were the ones you agreed with. And secondly, it’s not like my (or many others these days) difference with jayshah’s reports are based ons tupid assumption like… “why BOI had 69 cr for LRM and not 70?”.. or “why BOI didn’t mention KANK’s WOM on the 2nd day of release in their reports?”. Anyways… the latest is Taran’s classification of films of 2007.. and they simply don’t make it easier for jayshah. In fact, they are very much in line with THE OTHERS. … boi, tango, joginder etc.. And I had this initially posted as a comment in an old-n-forgotten thread some 25-30 pages back.. but decided to make a new thread since I missed that discussion weks ago.

So yeah.. here it is again… why is Taran calling OSO a mega-blockbuster? In the past we have been told that Komal is pro-SrK. Tango is obviously a fan. BOI is also very pro-srK.. and I guess joginder is too. All these sources are pro-SrK? but what about Taran now? how is it that Taran’s verdict is consistent with all those other guys out there. Taran doesnt even use Film Informarion. He uses (and actually provides teh figures for ) Trade Guide.. and some of teh numbers from rade Guide are posted o indiafm through which mr. Jayshah makes up his totals. Does Jayshah’s OSO total look anything like a “mega-blockbuster” or an “all-time-blockbuster”? I am not gonna spill the beans on jayshah’s agendas et al (that’s for you guys to decide yourself) but don’t you see how obvious it is?

And OSO is merely one example.. What about Guru? mr. Jayshah cooked up some numbers and made some wacky calculations to propose that what NL made in 10 weeks, Guru made in some-thing like 2-3 weeks or something of the sort.. And according to mr. Jayshah.. Guru has made significatly more than NL. .. then how is it that Taran has put NL in a bracket ABOVE Guru? … hey this is not a 2 cr films vs a 20 cr.. one.. the films are relatively of teh equal sizes. and most likely sold in the market at similar prices.. then where does the distortion come from? part of the agende? you decide….

Then there’s Apne and CK scenario.. and how jayshah and satyam rose over rooftops crying foul.. and how BOI was showing their “biased colours” towards the Deols… and being so anti-Bachchans. The whole world, trade and the rest of teh media, were talking about how good a business Apne was doing in E.Punjab.. but mr. jayshah failed to acknowledge it and keptt on comparing CK’s urban collections with that of Apne to prove that the former had done so much better. Ofcourse , it helped his case that Taran didn’t provide a single centre from E. Punjab in his weekly collections. Anyways.. now what? Apne is a Hit and TWO BRACKETS above Cheeni Kum.

What do you get when you put into a mix a director like Farah Khan and an actor like SrK? A director like Farah who rose in Bollywood against all odds, whose route to the top echelons came the hard way, who had no filmi daddy, mommy, uncle autny .. none.. noone wh was ever anything at anytime in Bollywood.. And then there’s SrK who’s one of kind in his generation. In fact the only one who became a star, a lead hero of a major film, without no prior connections to the movie brethren. Both of them started from all the way at the bottom of the ladder, and climbed it step by step.. one a time, but quick enough to reach the highest of spots within a short span. SrK focurse started off with free theatre work in Delhi, then went on to do some small roles in little TV serials, then them roles got bigger and bigger as the appreciations grew larger and larger. His role in Doosra Keval was supposed to last just a few episodes and that too only for short screen times in the “flashbacks”, but audiences fell in love with his portrayal instantly, and the makers at Doordarshan had to expand his role, so much that he became the central focal point of the TV series. Anyways, the transition from TV to Movies wasn’t easy (as the one from theatre to TV), and has never ever done (before or after) successfully. He was offered his first role in a woman-oriented heroine-flooded film Dil Ashna Hai, by a female director (how ironic eh?) Hema Malini. It was a small role but Srk found his admirers on the sets itself and the word spread fast enough that he got atleast 4-5 other offers within a year and a year from his first release he was offered and he signed a Yash Chopra film.

Farah’s track was even harder, in a sense, that being a female in teh men-dominated film-industry is hard enough to begin with, but unlike SrK who started as an actor, she actually began her career in choreography. Ok, there’ve been female directors, so she wasn’t the first one. But then there aren’t really any female directors who make out-an-out commercial capers. Mira Nair, Aparna Sen, and even Tanjua Chandra… none of them really on the mainstream end of the industry.  What’s funny with Tanuja is that she will write a DTPH but when it comes directions she won’t do much more than a Sur. Atleast there aren’t many females who’ll have top stars do fight scenes in their movies. But anyways, Farah, also like SrK, had no connections. Pooja Bhatt makes a movie.. but would she be given teh chance if daddy Mahesh wasn’t her father.

So what do you get when you allow such two individuals to make a film on the film industry and the film fraternity? You get an OSO, a film that, bsides everything else, makes sure to take a deep breathed dig at all that is wrong about Bollywood and all that folks like Farah And Shahrukh have their grudges against. Yes, on surface, and if one were to beleive every word that comes out Farah’s mouth, one would say they were just celebrating Bollywood and giving it their tribute and hence all the lively fun and the boisterous buffonery, the escapade mood and ofcourse the festive ambience throughout, but OSO was much more than that. OSO was much more intelligent.. and I’ll say that Farah and Shahrukh thought much beyond that and fooled everyone into it. The conscious mind looks at all those “starsons” (there’s a number of them in the movie ..including Om Kapoor himself) and laughs at their inability to act (or jump over a little height of fire), their medicority in everything they do, their lack of talent of any kind and all that, but the unconcious mind goes beyond that.. at the back of mind, as I said perhaps unconsciously,  one is thinking about all those over-privilaged, incompetent, inept, unqualified bunch of unworthy, undeserving stars that we pay to watch every Friday and how many Om Prakash Makhija’s are out there… ? shown the door, slapped aside, looked well over.. for some good-for-nothing Om Kapoor? a star who is simply there, because his daddy or mommy was a star. And the Khans left no stone unturned to portray this species as they are.. that they are untalented is obviously something for all to see on the screen, but they are also very rude, overly proud, egoistic, blunt, brutish, bad-manered and crude all the same off the screen. And yes, they walk around with a liver spoon tucked into their mouth.

And again and again, this little fact about teh industry is stamped over and over by the Khans throughout the film. *SPOILER ALERT*… There’s the mention of Raj Kapoor coming to Chintu Baba’s set in the very first scene of the movie. Then there’s the fire scene. Then, the entire first 4-5 sequences of Om Kapoor’s section. ..including one where he mentions the actress and the director to be in the film because they were his childhood friends. A good example of that we see today in half of Abhishek starrers. They are all either producerd by daddy’s friends or directed buy his own childhood friends… including Mehra and DIlli 6. Or how Farhan Akhtar approaches Hrithik first for every film, coz once again he was a long-time friend…. read “part of the film fraternity”. But perhaps his biggest punch, his trump line, his ace-ka-teenka was teh scene where he, as Om Kapoor, clearly poses the question to his superstar father.  ”Agar main aapka beta nahin hota,  to kya mujhe koi kuch kaam deta?” It’s funny how he not only asks whether he’d have been a big star or no.. but he goes to the fundamental, would he gave got any work at all? Here’s a Srk questioning teh merits of every other major star of today, and asking whether they are actually given a lot more credit for what they do or where they are or not.

Amongst many other things, art is supposed to offer an introspection into a philosophy of life that one may not necessrilly pertain to, or simply not yet introduced to. Movies, perhaps by structure if not by virtue, are the most influential and most effective at that amongst all the art forms. Because, amongst others, movies don’t require one to pitcure the scenraio, the event, the situation, you actually see it all in the course of action, and yes there’s ways to decorate it through a thousand other non-connected, unrelated factors to enhance the effect.
For e.g. Amitabh’s Vijay brought with him a certain philosophy to life, that whether one agreed with or not, whether one followed it or not, came across as very attractive, simply coz there was a certain Amitabh with a towering personality bringing it on the table. His personality, on paper, my be an unrelated factor when one put forthe that philosophy but on the screen it’s very much a part of it all.
Or for that matter, Khanna in Anand, brought with him the utmost charm an actor can possibly bring with him to a character, and it worked wonders with the philisophy of life that the writers of his character vested in. So, as it is, with the two above examples alone, one cann’t deny the fact, that any tenet or thought system, specific set of ideologies, etc. one wills to put forward in a movie, works best by imbedding the respective qualities into its certain characters, preferably the main protagonists of a movie. So, if the director/writers of a movie wanna endorse a happy-golcky attiude to certain situations in life, it can be best achieved by romanticizing that ideology through certain charcters in the film that adhere to those qualities - cheerful, easy-going, breezy characters, more than having the underlining theme of the movie And if those actors involved can somehow muster out the required characteristics, not necessarily great acting, it goes a long way clicking with the audiences. Khanna is no great actor, and that’s something I’m sure every critic in the country will attest to. But at the same time, can his character of Anand be played as convincingly by any other star actor since his time, or even before him. Most critics, if not all, will say no to that as well. So how did an okay actor deliver such a performance, that will be hailed amongst the best of its generation, of not the best of all-time? ecause, Khanna brought him certain other characteristics, that complimented greatly with the philosophy of life the writers of Anand, or director of the film had attempted to present.

On the film, as I said, nothing else really stands out. The story’s been done a million times. Guy, done with life, encounters a girl and the seriesof events thereafter forces him with her. First they hate each other, then they become friends.. and then.. well you know what. The dialogues, however, are really good. Old plot, same old story, and even the treatment not all that much diferent, butthe screenplay overall somehow keeps you interested throughout. And though there’s not really much stomach-aching comedy, there’s quite some qoutient of light-hearted comic moments throught out the film. Music was okay.. just found one song likeable.. and that too just about okay .. the “Nagada Nagada” track. As for teh performances. Well already mentioned about Kareena .. and how she is the single, by far, the best thing about the movie (lots of credit to the writers for etching out such a character). Shahid was just about Okay. The guy seriously needs to do his own thing and stop aping SrK. rest of the characters din’t have much of a role.. but I thought the guy who played Kareena’ uncle, I believe, (Narang from SrK’s Don), stood out amongst the others.

Last 5 films of the main lead actors and top stars in bollywood today. Cann’t beat SrK.. whether in hit/success.. or variety of roles and how different the movies are genre-wise, thematically, content or execution-wise. Each film belongs to an entirely different universe.. each role is different from the other in a million-and-a-half ways.

> SrK .. last 5 films: OSO, CDI, Don, KANK and Paheli.. I don’t see any similarity between any two movies.. or any two roles he’s played in any of those movies. At most, I guess one can say that SrK has a double role in 3 of them… but boy how different are all 6 of those characters from each other.  

>Aamir - Fanaa, RDB, MP, DCH and Lagaan .

 - 3 of the 5 (RDB, MP, and Lagaan) are Historicals or more precisely pre-Independence/British-rule  setting. all 3 of them have a patriotic theme.

I have some very close Iranian (Persian, Kurdish and Turkish) firends, and I was having a disussion with them the other day.

 Lagaan was a master-piece.. and Swades is, well depending on what camp you belong to, considered anything between a boring docudrama to a flawed masterpiece and I don’t think there’s anyone in here who’s not interested in Jodha Akbar, atleast in some degree. And hence, it’s not surprise when every minute little detail about the film is, and will be, put under the microscope.

To begin with, it’s the main casting of the film and seems like Ashu took quite some heat, atleast on NG, for choosing Hrithik.  Apart from the popular beleif here that he’s not talented enough to do justice to such a prestigious role (I somewhat differ) a lot of people raised the issue about the physicality aspect of it.  Akbar the Great, as we all know, was a Moghul and of Afghan descent and if I am not wrong Humayun’s son and Babar’s grandson, the latter two being borin in the present day Afghanistan. By most accounts, that would automatically translate into him being a Pathan. But the stereotype Pathan look (male) -  that of broad-shouldered and tall fair-skinned and occasionaly blue-eyed brown haired one, doesn’t match to anything we’ve read about and seen in the historical pictures (well .. paintaings) of the times. They all desribe Akbar as this short, stocky man with a round face, black eyes and dark hair. And that doesn’t change for the rest of the Mughals either. So why is it that these Mughals of Afghan origina differ so much from the Afghan images we are prone to. And it takes no rocket science to figure out that Hrithik’s physicality matches up very well with that Pathan , and ofcourse more importantly as I beleive Q mentioned sometime ago, the royal princely look.

Anyways, while discussing the Mughals with them Persian and Afghan friends, I noticed, and to my surprise, that the Mughals are actually of Eastern Asian descent and morso remnants of inter-breeding of the Mongols with the Central Asian inhabitants. The stereotype look of a Mughal according to these Persians describes them as Orientals. They identify by very similar features that one identify the common Chinese or Tibetan by (I may sound racist here.. but trust me I aint). This explains why them history textbooks and all those ancient paintaings had them Mughals look the way they did.. and why didn’t look anything like the Pathans do.

Deepika Padukone was recommended by her director Farah Khan,  to watch all the super hit films from the 70’s - to help her prepare for her role as a film star of that period. 

Did you know, before the final look for Shah Rukh was decided for the first half of the film, he had to try out different hairstyles of the popular heroes of the 70’s era . The list included Amitabh Bachchan, Vinod Khanna, Shashi Kapoor and Rajesh Khanna. And he looked adorable in most of them.