What is the future of Bollywood going forward?

[LordPrabhzy]

3 hours ago, chewy said:

People are still waiting for Bollywood to churn out quality movies or TV series on regular basis. And become part of India's soft culture outreach. But hasn't materialised due shallow level of talent in the industry. There is just so little talent, especially amongst female lead roles or female writers/directors.

It's a a wider problem in Hindi cinema, talent is just cr@p, despite the mocking Saas Bahu tv series gets, there are genuinely some good actors/actresses in there but again equally pathetic ones too.

Even the Indian TVs shows on Netflix and Amazon are lolworthy.

 

With the rise of Netflix, Prime, Hotstar. and better dubbing quality we have access to global TV quality like never before. In that sense Bollywood is low priority when deciding what to watch.

 

Interestingly, regional language produce, especially Marathi, is producing several gems every year.    

 

Hit the nail on the head.

 

If Manny thinks that due to star kids having a privilge in growing up in that environment ( who may not show any talent straight away) should more likely get chances than a average small town ladka who actually has talent, then the quality of films will reflect this. Nepotism has been happening since the Kapoor family took over Bollywood but back then Indian audience had no other option for an entertainment outlet. However the world has changed and streaming services which can show someone content from anywhere on the planet will make a viewer chose between a shitty Bollywood nepotism filled mindless junk or something which is an original content on Netflix, and we know 9/10 times what choice will that be.

 

My point is from my earlier posts, the Bollywood elite can keep treating the industry as their incestuous baby in wanting to keep it in the family but unless they break away from this thought process, this whole industry as we know it now will crash and burn.

[LordPrabhzy]

2 hours ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

 

Not a single entertainment industry, anywhere in the world, 'churns out' quality movies or tv series on a regular basis. It's all commercialized, mass produced crap. Quality story-telling requires time and effort, which makes it impossible to mass-produce. You also have to account for the audience - most people prefer commercialized entertainment as a 'time pass'. The high-quality productions will always cater to a niche audience.

 

It's for you to decide whether you prefer western crap or indian crap. But whatever you're watching is still crap.

Well it cant be helped if the average Indian's entertainment expectation low IQ. When an industry caters to make content only for rickshawalas and taporis to make their profits, then you know its time to leg it out of the stable. 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

21 minutes ago, LordPrabhzy said:

Well it cant be helped if the average Indian's entertainment expectation low IQ. When an industry caters to make content only for rickshawalas and taporis to make their profits, then you know its time to leg it out of the stable. 

So you're complaining about 'nepotism' while referring to "average Indians" who don't share your view as 'rickshawalas' and 'taporis'...  I hope you realize how hypocritical you sound.

 

Have you considered that your 'small town ladka with talent' might actually be a rickshawala? LOL.

 

So who should the industry cater to? People like yourself? I would argue they already do. There are plenty of NRI-themed, western style movies out there for you to enjoy. In fact, the industry catered to people like you and me for a long time, all the way through the 90s and 2000s. 

 

The reality is: profits from mass produced, commercial movies allow studios to fund more 'high quality' niche entertainment.  That's how it is everywhere, not just in india. It's why bollywood showcases greater variety today than they ever did before.

 

28 minutes ago, LordPrabhzy said:

If Manny thinks that due to star kids having a privilge in growing up in that environment ( who may not show any talent straight away) should more likely get chances than a average small town ladka who actually has talent, then the quality of films will reflect this. Nepotism has been happening since the Kapoor family took over Bollywood but back then Indian audience had no other option for an entertainment outlet. However the world has changed and streaming services which can show someone content from anywhere on the planet will make a viewer chose between a shitty Bollywood nepotism filled mindless junk or something which is an original content on Netflix, and we know 9/10 times what choice will that be.

 

My point is from my earlier posts, the Bollywood elite can keep treating the industry as their incestuous baby in wanting to keep it in the family but unless they break away from this thought process, this whole industry as we know it now will crash and burn.

 

That's not what i 'think', that HOW IT IS. I'm describing the reality. Bollywood gives the audience exactly what it wants. This has nothing to do with 'nepotism'. Why do you even care about who someone's father is? The story is what matters, why aren't you paying attention to the story?

 

There is zero evidence to suggest that 'small town ladkas' are actually being overlooked in favor of 'star kids' ON MERIT. That's nothing more than a "feeling" of yours.

 

If the medium of communication has changed from radio, to TV, to cable, to internet streaming...it doesn't matter. Entertainment industry will adjust, and Bollywood will still make huge money. Bollywood movies are more profitable now than they ever were before, and that's mainly because the 'average indian' is becoming wealthier and better educated. They won't be 'crashing and burning' anytime soon.

 

And if you think there's no nepotism in western entertainment, including "original" netflix series, then i don't know what to tell you. That's pretty gullible. It's like i said earlier, even if you choose between western crap and indian crap, you're still watching crap.

[Manny_Pacquiao]

One thing that i would definitely add, for the "back in my day" crowd...

 

While Indian movies have improved, indian music has become WORSE. Auto-tune has killed all the unique voices. Technology enables cheaper music production, but i highly doubt we'll ever see a singer comparable to Lata mangeshkar.

[Clarke]

On 5/10/2020 at 4:48 PM, Manny_Pacquiao said:

 

"Nepotism" or legacy, as it's commonly known, doesn't necessarily threaten meritocracy. If a family has a long-held tradition of producing artists, their kids will probably inherit advantages that others won't, and these advantages also include passion and craft. They are MORE LIKELY to have that 'talent and creativity'. It's no different from how the son of 2 athletes is more likely to be born with the passion and ability to play sport. By a strictly merit-based argument, power and position is earned. Maybe not by the current generation, but by a previous one. That is the crucial difference between reservations and legacy. Reservations seek to empower those lacking merit, and we don't have reservations in bollywood. Your argument is often used by non-hindus to attack brahmins.

 

Shah rukh khan had to be identified by a 'nepotistic' group of film directors to get an opportunity. It's in their best interest to find talent, wherever it may be. When bollywood fails to promote talent, you can criticize them for nepotism. But that isn't the case. Good talent HAS to be profitable. If people aren't watching you, then are you really that good? Maybe your issue is with the indian audience, rather then bollywood itself.

 

I would argue that bollywood, and all of its legacy-holding families, have earned whatever fame and fortune they currently have. And bollywood has come a long way, adding variety and finesse to its content. The only area where they have struggled to make progress, is in expanding to newer markets. But that's something they can accomplish in partnership with the government.

Legacy what ? It is still nepotism & it doesn't threaten meritocracy, it stabs it every now & then. Thats a pile of nonsense, this likelihood of film industry producing talented offspring for the same profession. 

 

It's ironic that u mention athletes since nepotism rarely happens in competitive sport beyond a point; there is a bigger trial by fire as u climb the ladder. A junior Gavaskar has to perform at millisecond level ball after ball and is kicked out if he's not good enough to face the likes of Brett Lee or bowl to Gilchrist & Ponting. Someone as successful as Rohit Sharma recently said how difficult it is to open even in LOIs when quick bouncy bowlers attack you. It's just bloody hard. 

 

Compared to that, mainstream bollywood has no such checks and balances. You have fair skin and are thin, thats all they need in an actress.  The saras and ananyas are just gifted films and newbie awards in their first year. Don't tell me they inherited some amazing acting skills! Go watch some Fardeen or Zayed movie and let us know about their talents as well. 

 

Do you also credit the likes of MSK Prasad for successful cricketers like Bumrah while it is bloody obvious to the rest of the world how good he was anyways when he showed up ? Likewise, India loved SRK from the days of Circus & Fauji, it didn't take some genius to get him into the film industry. 

 

If u adore Karan Johar and his ilk, fine! Just dont make up a bunch of gibberish to justify the same. 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Clarke

[LordPrabhzy]

1 hour ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

There is zero evidence to suggest that 'small town ladkas' are actually being overlooked in favor of 'star kids' ON MERIT. That's nothing more than a "feeling" of yours.

Can you give me an example of a male actor who has made it big in the last few years ( barring Kartik Aryan and maybe Sidharth Malhotra/ Vicky Kaushal) who has no Bollywood family connections?

 

Actors

Tiger Shroff- Star kid

Varun Dhwan- Star kid

Arjun Kapor- Star kid

Aditya Roy Kapur- Star kid

 

Actresses are a bit different because girls from small towns and cities have a chance of they are models already but still a lot of them are star kids:

 

Alia Bhatt

Sonam Kapoor

Shruti Hassan

Shradha Kapoor

Sonakshi Sinha

 

So my point still stands, a small town ladka with talent has next to no chance in breaking into Bollywood without the right Dad. We can keep going around in circles if you want mate but its not going to change reality.

 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

26 minutes ago, Clarke said:

Legacy what ? It is still nepotism & it doesn't threaten meritocracy, it stabs it every now & then. Thats a pile of nonsense, this likelihood of film industry producing talented offspring for the same profession. 

 

Compared to that, mainstream bollywood has no such checks and balances. You have fair skin and are thin, thats all they need in an actress.  The saras and ananyas are just gifted films and newbie awards in their first year. Don't tell me they inherited some amazing acting skills! Go watch some Fardeen or Zayed movie and let us know about their talents as well. 

 

Do you also credit the likes of MSK Prasad for successful cricketers like Bumrah while it is bloody obvious to the rest of the world how good he was anyways when he showed up ? Likewise, India loved SRK from the days of Circus & Fauji, it didn't take some genius to get him into the film industry. 

 

If u adore Karan Johar and his ilk, fine! Just dont make up a bunch of gibberish to justify the same. 

 

You're missing the point.

 

If you're born into a family of entertainers, you're more likely to have access to stage production, coaches, writers, and directors from a very young age. The environment won't intimidate you. It's easier for you to receive mentorship from experienced people in the industry. You'll develop confidence very quickly. In short, you'll be prepared for a career in acting from a very young age. It's a shorter learning curve. That is legacy, not nepotism. That is what they're inheriting, and yes, i admit that it gives them an 'unfair' advantage. But it doesn't go against meritocracy either, which is meant to separate good from average anyway.

 

You don't reject someone just because they come from a 'privileged' background. That makes no sense, and it's anti-meritocratic.

 

The unfortunate reality is that the 'small town ladka' has a much bigger learning curve. A nawazuddin siddiqui took forever to get noticed. He had fewer opportunities, less access to everything i mentioned above. He took a long time to develop confidence in himself because he wasn't prepared for a career in acting. Ultimately, he still made it, because he was persistent: https://www.republicworld.com/entertainment-news/bollywood-news/if-you-have-the-talent-you-will-get-work-nawazuddin-siddiqui-denies-the-existence-of-nepotism-in-bollywood.html

 

And that's the difference. If you're from a 'lesser' background, and you don't have legacy within a certain profession, you have to work harder. You have to be more persistent. That's the reality of competition. There are no reservations or quotas in bollywood. Some aren't persistent, others persist.

 

And yes, i give credit to MSK prasad. He held the keys to the door, and he opened the door. And no, it wasn't "bloody obvious" either. Somebody has to validate you. That's the way it works in ANY profession.

 

 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

52 minutes ago, LordPrabhzy said:

Can you give me an example of a male actor who has made it big in the last few years ( barring Kartik Aryan and maybe Sidharth Malhotra/ Vicky Kaushal) who has no Bollywood family connections?

 

Actors

Tiger Shroff- Star kid

Varun Dhwan- Star kid

Arjun Kapor- Star kid

Aditya Roy Kapur- Star kid

 

Actresses are a bit different because girls from small towns and cities have a chance of they are models already but still a lot of them are star kids:

 

So my point still stands, a small town ladka with talent has next to no chance in breaking into Bollywood without the right Dad. We can keep going around in circles if you want mate but its not going to change reality.

 

 

But I wasn't disagreeing with this point. Star kids are more likely to break into the industry. That is a FACT.

 

I was disagreeing with the opinion that the 'star kids' are given preferential treatment. I was disagreeing with the opinion that 'star kids' didn't earn their roles, and if they did, they earned them AT THE EXPENSE of some 'small town' guy. I don't think that is true.

 

Star kids earned whatever they have. They deserve to be where they are. The industry is mostly fair. That's what i'm saying.

 

Naming a bunch of star kids doesn't disprove anything i'm saying either. Why don't you name the 'small town ladkas' who out-performed Varun dhawan at an audition? You have no evidence to say that these star kids were given preferential treatment over some unknown actor from lucknow.

 

How do you know that Varun dhawan got the role because of his 'dad'? Is his dad supposed to completely ignore his kid's acting ability for the sake of 'equality'? Come on....

Edited May 11, 2020 by Manny_Pacquiao

[Clarke]

On 5/10/2020 at 8:33 AM, rkt.india said:

Film making isn't coporate affair. It's a personal business. A film maker putting his or taking finance for his film has every right to caste whoever he wants because it's his money and film. The caste won't pay his debt back. It's him who will have to do that. Film making isn't a govt job offer or selection of sports team. 

 

Term like Nepotism doesn't work in personal businesses.  Film making isn't really an organised sector where actors apply for jobs and get the roles because there is no such platform. 

 

Still I should tell you few of the biggest bollywood stars are not sons and daughters of stars. Even star sons and daughters aren't sure of success. If they are good, they will do well. If they aren't, they will fade away like many in the past and present. 

 

There are many who have done great even without connections. It's the beauty of bollywood. If you have talent, no one can stop you. Yes, it may take time because as I said bollywood isn't an organised platform. So people don't know where to go, how to find things out. 

 

People like SRk, Akshay Kumar they 

aren't star sons but they are biggest stars.  Every film maker or actor started from zero. Only his work made him a star.

 

It's absolutely illogical to expect that a film maker who has made lives of many won't launch his sons and daughters.  He can only launch them but his success or failures are up to them. They will succeed if they are good, fail if not. Bollywood is a dreamland and it cannot be compared to any other working sector or business. 

 

 

For the billionth time, it is NEPOTISM. Even in a private enterprise which is not publicly listed or govt run it is not illegal but it still is NEPOTISM if you pick your unqualified kid for a kickass opportunity over a thousand better qualified talented individuals who studied and worked for that one opportunity. You can list all the exceptions in the industry and the prevalence of nepotism in other industries but it won't brush away the dirt of nepotism in bollywood. 

 

[Clarke]

33 minutes ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

 

You're missing the point.

 

If you're born into a family of entertainers, you're more likely to have access to stage production, coaches, writers, and directors from a very young age. The environment won't intimidate you. It's easier for you to receive mentorship from experienced people in the industry. You'll develop confidence very quickly. In short, you'll be prepared for a career in acting from a very young age. It's a shorter learning curve. That is legacy, not nepotism. That is what they're inheriting, and yes, i admit that it gives them an 'unfair' advantage. But it doesn't go against meritocracy either, which is meant to separate good from average anyway.

 

You don't reject someone just because they come from a 'privileged' background. That makes no sense, and it's anti-meritocratic.

 

The unfortunate reality is that the 'small town ladka' has a much bigger learning curve. A nawazuddin siddiqui took forever to get noticed. He had fewer opportunities, less access to everything i mentioned above. He took a long time to develop confidence in himself because he wasn't prepared for a career in acting. Ultimately, he still made it, because he was persistent: https://www.republicworld.com/entertainment-news/bollywood-news/if-you-have-the-talent-you-will-get-work-nawazuddin-siddiqui-denies-the-existence-of-nepotism-in-bollywood.html

 

And that's the difference. If you're from a 'lesser' background, and you don't have legacy within a certain profession, you have to work harder. You have to be more persistent. That's the reality of competition. There are no reservations or quotas in bollywood. Some aren't persistent, others persist.

 

And yes, i give credit to MSK prasad. He held the keys to the door, and he opened the door. And no, it wasn't "bloody obvious" either. Somebody has to validate you. That's the way it works in ANY profession.

 

 

I don't think there's gonna be agreement but let me explain the difference between what you defined as legacy and actual nepotism. Having access to resources is normal, Arjun Tendulkar getting coached by Sachin & others in India & England isn't nepotism. However, if he opens batting/bowling for India out of the blue, it is bloody nepotism. This is what often happens in Bollywood. That's what is bloody quotas or reservation in bollywood, more on that in another post. 

 

Its may feel warm and all to point out the exceptions who made it to the industry by themselves but nepotism was one of the reasons they had to struggle so hard. Refer to the Sher Chaturvedi's response to Ananya Pandey: "jahaan humare sapne poore hote hain, wahi inka struggle shuru hota hai" 

 

I reckon a key difference in our thoughts might be expectations. You seem to give credit to the most basic of things. You seem to approve a lot of mediocrity in bollywood stars and are happy to credit someone who approves of SRK or Bumrah. Hardly something to be proud of, irrespective of how many professions it is applicable. 

 

[Clarke]

In her own words, Sara Ali Khan had a National Award-winning director pitch a script to her. All she had to do to land a role in Simmba was text Rohit Shetty. She got lead roles in two films without working in any related field. While promoting Kedarnath on the sets of Indian Idol, she actually said that her co-star, Sushant Singh Rajput “helped her improve her Hindi,” without thinking apparently that fluency in the language is a basic requirement for acting.

 

Her first film was a flop, and even before the second one came out, there were reports that she had already bagged two more projects: Love Aaj Kal 2 and the Coolie No. 1 remake.

Even by star kid standards, Khan’s privilege boggles the mind. Unlike some of her ilk, Khan did not even play assistant director to a successful director to learn the craft. But like many before her, Sara Ali Khan is being marketed so aggressively, getting so many opportunities, that the Darwinian laws that apply in this ruthlessly competitive world are turned on their heads and failing has actually become more difficult for her than succeeding.

If Kedarnath flops, there’s Simmba. If it’s pointed out that Simmba’s plot wouldn’t have changed one iota if her character didn’t exist, then there will exist Coolie No. 1, Love Aaj Kal 2, Ranbhoomi or any one of the umpteen projects she will eventually get.

https://www.dailyo.in/arts/sara-ali-khan-nepotism-bollywood-kedarnath-simmba/story/1/28820.html

 

But hey, there's no nepotism in bollywood. I mean its private industry so its ok. 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

49 minutes ago, Clarke said:

I don't think there's gonna be agreement but let me explain the difference between what you defined as legacy and actual nepotism. Having access to resources is normal, Arjun Tendulkar getting coached by Sachin & others in India & England isn't nepotism. However, if he opens batting/bowling for India out of the blue, it is bloody nepotism. This is what often happens in Bollywood. That's what is bloody quotas or reservation in bollywood, more on that in another post. 

 

Its may feel warm and all to point out the exceptions who made it to the industry by themselves but nepotism was one of the reasons they had to struggle so hard. Refer to the Sher Chaturvedi's response to Ananya Pandey: "jahaan humare sapne poore hote hain, wahi inka struggle shuru hota hai" 

 

I reckon a key difference in our thoughts might be expectations. You seem to give credit to the most basic of things. You seem to approve a lot of mediocrity in bollywood stars and are happy to credit someone who approves of SRK or Bumrah. Hardly something to be proud of, irrespective of how many professions it is applicable. 

 

 

 

Arjun tendulkar has a huge advantage over other kids, and is more likely to become a talented cricketer - if he chooses to. He shouldn't be excluded on account of his legacy. I don't think he'll ever 'come out of the blue' to open the batting in the Indian team, but if they're picking u19 or youth level sides, then coaches will definitely favor him. Ultimately, arjun still has to play WELL, and if he doesn't, his 'legacy' won't save him.

 

"Nepotism" will get your foot in the door, but that's about it.

 

The same is true for these star kids. Their legacy will give them an advantage, but it won't sustain their careers. The audience HAS TO LIKE YOU. If the audience doesn't like you, then you're a failure...and your legacy won't save you. Ananya pandey benefited from her legacy, but let's see how long her career lasts? She can't pay the audience to like her crappy music. How long did Aryaman birla survive with the rajasthan royals?

 

That's why i think the industry is mostly fair, and complaints over 'nepotism' are irrational. Competition can only be fair, it can never be equal.

 

I'm not approving 'mediocrity' either. The fact is, my approval doesn't even matter.

Who decides what is 'mediocre' in the film industry? The audience does. If the audience likes tiger shroff doing stunts, or Salman khan's formulaic bullshit, then that's all that matters. It's a profit-based business, isn't it? Whether we like them or not, they're not mediocre if they're turning a profit.

 

Like i said earlier, i think the problem is that you guys have a preference for movies that aren't preferred by the average Indian. You are more of a niche.

 

Edited May 11, 2020 by Manny_Pacquiao

[LordPrabhzy]

2 hours ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

Naming a bunch of star kids doesn't disprove anything i'm saying either. Why don't you name the 'small town ladkas' who out-performed Varun dhawan at an audition? You have no evidence to say that these star kids were given preferential treatment over some unknown actor from lucknow.

 

How do you know that Varun dhawan got the role because of his 'dad'? Is his dad supposed to completely ignore his kid's acting ability for the sake of 'equality'? Come on....

Even if they did would anyone get to know about it? Or the fact are these auditions are just formalities when it is already decided the star kids are going to to cast? or big producers coming themselves to someone like Sara Ali Khan ( someones who's only legacy to date that she is Saif's daughter) to pitch her a script as if she is a royalty?- THAT is preferential treatment

 

To the second point, yes the abilities of these dumbo start kids is often ignored. Because if it wasnt then bozos like Arjun Kapoor would not be anywhere near the industry.

 

As I said we can agree to disagree but the fact that nepotism and preferential treatment exists in Bollywood is a fact and that doesnt to give the industry the god given right to expect people to watch the garbage they come out with. The average indian mindset on film entertainment is a different topic but this is a 'chicken or egg situation'.

[Vilander]

9 hours ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

Its the result of a more conducive environment. Not genetic.

 

Which of these 2 kids are more likely to specialize in french literature?

 

1. kid who grows up in a french-speaking family with a long history of studying and writing french literature

2. kid who grows up in a muslim family speaking urdu near a dirt poor muslim jhopadpatti

 

There's no such thing as 'merit' when people are born into different circumstances.

People learn to make rockets in a university not at home, experiential learning happens initially in a school or university. 

[chewy]

10 hours ago, Manny_Pacquiao said:

 

Not a single entertainment industry, anywhere in the world, 'churns out' quality movies or tv series on a regular basis. It's all commercialized, mass produced crap. Quality story-telling requires time and effort, which makes it impossible to mass-produce. You also have to account for the audience - most people prefer commercialized entertainment as a 'time pass'. The high-quality productions will always cater to a niche audience.

 

It's for you to decide whether you prefer western crap or indian crap. But whatever you're watching is still crap.

Agree, not many movie industry churn out quality movies on regular basis, it's expensive, but compared to other movie/TV sectors, Bollywood's frequency of producing quality is depressingly very low, and i too enjoy the odd slapstick comedy masala, but the recent ones in Bollywood is cringe-worthy, littered with actors/actresses who can't even put two lines of Hindi together.  

 

And Bollywood needs to get its act together, every year the number of Hollywood movies occupying India's top grossing movies is increasing, I think 4 or 5 Hollywood movies occupied top 10 grossing in 2019, the audience in India are slowing preferring western crap over Bollywood crap - no surprises why - better effects, better on-screen acting, quality voice dubbing by competent actors/actresses

 

With improving internet speeds and connectivity coverage across India, the audience will have access to better quality entertainment streams. Bollywood will continue to fall down the pecking order because of it's mediocre quality, heck, millions of 20-40 year old men prefer PUBG over Bollywood.   

 

India needs Bollywood as part of soft culture outreach (domestic and globally), but the industry's flagbearers are full of talentless hacks. 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

15 hours ago, LordPrabhzy said:

Even if they did would anyone get to know about it? Or the fact are these auditions are just formalities when it is already decided the star kids are going to to cast? or big producers coming themselves to someone like Sara Ali Khan ( someones who's only legacy to date that she is Saif's daughter) to pitch her a script as if she is a royalty?- THAT is preferential treatment

 

To the second point, yes the abilities of these dumbo start kids is often ignored. Because if it wasnt then bozos like Arjun Kapoor would not be anywhere near the industry.

 

As I said we can agree to disagree but the fact that nepotism and preferential treatment exists in Bollywood is a fact and that doesnt to give the industry the god given right to expect people to watch the garbage they come out with. The average indian mindset on film entertainment is a different topic but this is a 'chicken or egg situation'.

That's my whole point. There's zero evidence to say that the 'star kids' didn't win an audition on merit. You simply don't know. Because bollywood isn't accountable to the public.

 

Arjun kapoor is failing. He had a big hit with gunday, but hasn't had any big success ever since. I don't think 'nepotism' is gonna save his acting career. He'll eventually move on to some other job. The audience doesn't like him.

 

Sara has just started her career, and she had a big hit with 'simmba'. I'm not sure she ever moves beyond being a 'pretty face'. We'll see what happens with her. She is very attractive, and she has some stage presence, so she's definitely there on merit. Do you disagree?

 

How many 'star kids' actually have long-lasting careers? Hardly any. You can't pay people to like you. The audience will decide. And that's why the industry is mostly fair.

 

 

[Manny_Pacquiao]

13 hours ago, chewy said:

Agree, not many movie industry churn out quality movies on regular basis, it's expensive, but compared to other movie/TV sectors, Bollywood's frequency of producing quality is depressingly very low, and i too enjoy the odd slapstick comedy masala, but the recent ones in Bollywood is cringe-worthy, littered with actors/actresses who can't even put two lines of Hindi together.  

 

And Bollywood needs to get its act together, every year the number of Hollywood movies occupying India's top grossing movies is increasing, I think 4 or 5 Hollywood movies occupied top 10 grossing in 2019, the audience in India are slowing preferring western crap over Bollywood crap - no surprises why - better effects, better on-screen acting, quality voice dubbing by competent actors/actresses

 

With improving internet speeds and connectivity coverage across India, the audience will have access to better quality entertainment streams. Bollywood will continue to fall down the pecking order because of it's mediocre quality, heck, millions of 20-40 year old men prefer PUBG over Bollywood.   

 

India needs Bollywood as part of soft culture outreach (domestic and globally), but the industry's flagbearers are full of talentless hacks. 

 

I disagree, the amount of garbage coming out of hollywood is greater than what you see in bollywood. There is no shortage of commercialized, mass-produced crap in the west either.

 

I'm less critical of bollywood because i think they've come a long way since the 90s. I thought bollywood was absolute crap during the 90s and 2000s. Nowadays, you have more variety, and i would argue that bollywood has, in fact, "got its act together".

 

I think 4 or 5 Hollywood movies occupied top 10 grossing in 2019, the audience in India are slowing preferring western crap over Bollywood crap

 

Source?

 

Hollywood has been in india forever. But hollywood, by its own admission, doesn't tell 'asian stories'. They don't have that capability. So it will always be a niche. Leaving aside the more commercial crap, like the "Avengers" movie...which are easily dubbed and practically made for overseas markets like China.

 

[Mariyam]

@OP

Vicky Kaushal is an industry insider. He was one of the ADs for Gangs of Waseypur only because his father was in the industry and could reach out to people and vouch for his son. That is where he got on Kashyap's radar. And then Luv Shuv tey chicken khurana/Masaan happened. 

 

Why are people hating on Sara Ali Khan? Aside of Love aaj Kal, where she had a real role, she has acted in Simmba & Kedarnath. She had next to nothing to do in Simmba. How can you judge a person's acting for a role that doesn't require any acting?

She did fairly well in Love Aaj Kal. Or so I thought. Even though the movie is really bad.

 

Also, I don't like to judge people on the basis of their first 2-3 movies.

I'd say Saif Ali Khan was an extremely cringey actor for the first decade of his career. But today, he is one of our finest. People adapt and learn over time.

 

Bollywood isn't all about lead actors. Today Bollywood is open to Script writers/ singers/ choreographers from the wider world. There are talent hunts. There are contests for these. This would have been unheard of in the 80s and 90s.

The advent of corporate production houses means that there is a certain process in place. And the process calls for screening of talent where it can.

[Manny_Pacquiao]

2 minutes ago, Mariyam said:

@OP

Vicky Kaushal is an industry insider. He was one of the ADs for Gangs of Waseypur only because his father was in the industry and could reach out to people and vouch for his son. That is where he got on Kashyap's radar. And then Luv Shuv tey chicken khurana/Masaan happened. 

 

Why are people hating on Sara Ali Khan? Aside of Love aaj Kal, where she had a real role, she has acted in Simmba & Kedarnath. She had next to nothing to do in Simmba. How can you judge a person's acting for a role that doesn't require any acting?

She did fairly well in Love Aaj Kal. Or so I thought. Even though the movie is really bad.

 

Also, I don't like to judge people on the basis of their first 2-3 movies.

I'd say Saif Ali Khan was an extremely cringey actor for the first decade of his career. But today, he is one of our finest. People adapt and learn over time.

 

Bollywood isn't all about lead actors. Today Bollywood is open to Script writers/ singers/ choreographers from the wider world. There are talent hunts. There are contests for these. This would have been unheard of in the 80s and 90s.

The advent of corporate production houses means that there is a certain process in place. And the process calls for screening of talent where it can.

Mariyam, only you can save this thread!! I'm completely out-numbered, and i'm fighting a losing battle.

 

People on this forum hate bollywood for no reason. I dont get it.

 

[Mariyam]

16 hours ago, Vilander said:

People learn to make rockets in a university not at home, experiential learning happens initially in a school or university. 

I agree with you.

But making a Bollywood movie is *not* like making a rocket. Its a relatively simpler exercise.

When a person belongs to a film family, he she is exposed to a lot of the tricks of the trade, including camera work, acting etc from an early age. Its like 10+ years of apprenticeship. 

While it maybe horrible acting, but it is still exposure. Intuitively these people would do a lot of stuff right.

 

An outsider simply doesn't have this exposure. Those outsiders who are good and secure a seat at a NSD or a FTII have made it into Bollywod. Of course they have had to struggle more, but they have gotten their due share of recognition and success.

 

At the end of the day your cast should be marketable. That is all that the producers/ corporate production houses ask for.

 

 

Edited May 12, 2020 by Mariyam