Debutant Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Everone likes most of movies at some point of time. A person's current mindset has a huge impact on judging a movie. You might like Die Hard or Rocky if you re too bored with your life. You might like Batman movies if you are angry with society. Also, you cannot go to Godzilla on your first date with ur Girlfriend. No, you can't watch Life of Pi while drunk with a gang of friends. A good movie will hit your brain, regardless of the mindset. A bad movie will piss you off no matter how good ur mood is. WTF. Where do you guys get those pearls of wisdom. Most teen aged guys like movies like Die Hard or Rocky does not mean they are all bored with life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Debutant Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I have only watched 2 SRK movies till date in my life. Badshah and Chak De. Loved Badshah and Chak De was okay. So yeah don't like him or hate him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moniker Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 The question is, is he worthy of the hate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 ++1 And when a movie like 3 Idiots is rated by most of their prominent personalities as the best in the country, you know that's the standard they set for themselves. Let them enjoy, but it doesn't change the fact that they crave more for rubbish entertainment and money over good cinema. Add the complex towards Hollywood with that. Bollywood in terms of good movies aren't 'never ever' going to match Hollywood. Majority of those guys are dedicated towards their profession, unlike the super stars in BW. What dedication does Tom cruise or Jim Carrey have towards their profession? In the end, it is all about money. They are charging 20 mil a movie. Hollywood has made poker faced acting very popular that even BW stars are aping them now. That is why we like guys like DDL, LDC for making acting with expressions more popular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 What dedication does Tom cruise or Jim Carrey have towards their profession? In the end' date=' it is all about money. They are charging 20 mil a movie. [b']Hollywood has made poker faced acting very popular that even BW stars are aping them now. That is why we like guys like DDL, LDC for making acting with expressions more popular. LOL! Well, okay then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep1706 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 No reason to hate him. In fact I don't hate anyone. But yes I dislike some of his antics. Besides most of his films are utter crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zep1706 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 My favourite roles essayed by Aamir Khan was that of Sanju in JJWS and Munna of Rangeela. Apart form this I have never really impressed by his acting. I think Aamir was a good actor in the 1990s. I liked his acting in movies like 1947 Earth and Sarfarosh. Even DCH was also pretty good. After the long break he took in the early 2000s he became more methodical and less natural. He lost that touch of spontaneity that good actors have. So yes, I consider him an average actor now. But his script sense is better than most of the heroes, so his films are generally watchable (D3 was a torture). I thought Talaash was a really good movie until the predictable bhoot twist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 LOL! Well' date=' okay then.[/quote'] Why, you don't agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roshanrocks Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 SRK is an ordinary actor. My cousins took me along with them to watch some movie of his 2 years back and the 3 hrs I spent in the cinema hall was torture. How is this clown better than Kamal Hasan' date='MohanLal,Manmoothy?[/quote'] Was it Ra-one? :hysterical: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sidhoni Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 What's the problem with 3 Idiots Slicko? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deleted_User_1 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 What's the problem with 3 Idiots Slicko? Because the movie is......meh....nothing special. And I saw it only because everyone was promoting it like the best thing since sliced bread. :facepalm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 What's the problem with 3 Idiots Slicko? Nothing. One time watch, but I don't understand all the hype around that movie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Don't think i have seen enough of his movies. I can count. Must be around 10 movies. That's it. Most of the ridicule is related to IPL. nothing more. Not seen DDLJ either :hmmm: Is that a crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Why' date=' you don't agree?[/quote'] I thought you made that post in jest. Could you list out some 'poker faced' actors or whatever that means, in Hollywood? Are you even aware of the process a someone like DDL goes through to get into a character? If you did, you wouldn't make that comment. And since when is Hollywood responsible for making expressionless acting popular? It was never 'popular' on the first place. Its not a sort of trend that a bunch people follow. Kuch bhi? By that same logic, a Nasurdeen Shah or a Nawazudeen Siddique is good because a filth actor like Uday Chopra makes them look good? Hell! Bollywood shouldn't even be compared to Hollywood. There are plenty other regional film fields in India that is worthy enough to be compared to cinema around the world, Bollywood shouldn't even be in that list. 1 or 2 movies every 2-3 years is no match to the numerous good movies released in regional stated around India. Nawazudeen Siddique- that guy was carted around Bollywood directors for more than a decade because he lacked good looks and was dark in complexion. He was brought to the limelight by Kashyap. Look at some national award winners from Tamil, Prakash Raj or Salim Kumar from Malayalam- we give preference to talent, not fairness or six abs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I thought you made that post in jest. Could you list out some 'poker faced' actors or whatever that means, in Hollywood? Are you even aware of the process a someone like DDL goes through to get into a character? If you did, you wouldn't make that comment. And since when is Hollywood responsible for making expressionless acting popular? It was never 'popular' on the first place. Its not a sort of trend that a bunch people follow. Kuch bhi? By that same logic, a Nasurdeen Shah or a Nawazudeen Siddique is good because a filth actor like Uday Chopra makes them look good? Hell! Bollywood shouldn't even be compared to Hollywood. There are plenty other regional film fields in India that is worthy enough to be compared to cinema around the world, Bollywood shouldn't even be in that list. 1 or 2 movies every 2-3 years is no match to the numerous good movies released in regional stated around India. Nawazudeen Siddique- that guy was carted around Bollywood directors for more than a decade because he lacked good looks until he was brought to the limelight by Kashyap. Look at some national award winners from Tamil, Prakash Raj or Salim Kumar from Malayalam- we give preference to talent, not fairness or six abs. I was appreciating DDL if I didn't make it clear. That is one actor, whose movies I will never miss. Hollywood since the 60s have made bad actors look good with smart one-liners and classic underplaying of characters (what I call poker faced acting). Clint Eastwood from the 60s come to my mind. Sly, Arnold, all of them not known for acting ...are popular because they underplay the character. Tom Cruise has done it since the 80s. They are incapable of showing histrionics without making viewers cringe. JackN, Brando, AlPacino and most of the method actors didn't do it. DDL, LDC are in the same league (LDC not so much). Aamir Khan for one copied the western style of underplaying characters and look how popular his movies are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
someone Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 Imo, you shouldn't hate anyone whom you do not know personally. His acting is only a profession and should not be used to judge a person. So it's a neither for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I was appreciating DDL if I didn't make it clear. That is one actor, whose movies I will never miss. Hollywood since the 60s have made bad actors look good with smart one-liners and classic underplaying of characters (what I call poker faced acting). Clint Eastwood from the 60s come to my mind. Sly, Arnold, all of them not known for acting ...are popular because they underplay the character. Tom Cruise has done it since the 80s. They are incapable of showing histrionics without making viewers cringe. JackN, Brando, AlPacino and most of the method actors didn't do it. DDL, LDC are in the same league (LDC not so much). Aamir Khan for one copied the western style of underplaying characters and look how popular his movies are. I misread the DDL part, sorry. Hollywood since 60 has made bad actors? Clint Eastwood wasn't that good of an actor to point out one. I don't know that many actors that come under that category as there aren't a lot to name. Also, Brando, honestly, was prolly the most overrated method actor ever! DDL is way ahead of him and yet most consider Brando to be better. Tom Cruise was popular due to his stardom, not acting. Don't think anyone acknowledges him as a good actor. And Amir Khan wasn't overrated as he was before. He has been opting for better roles now, but performance wise, the Amir Khan of the 1990s and early 2000 was better. Give his roles to SRK, and he would fair better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 I misread the DDL part, sorry. Hollywood since 60 has made bad actors? Clint Eastwood wasn't that good of an actor to point out one. I don't know that many actors that come under that category as there aren't a lot to name. Also, Brando, honestly, was prolly the most overrated method actor ever! DDL is way ahead of him and yet most consider Brando to be better. Tom Cruise was popular due to his stardom, not acting. Don't think anyone acknowledges him as a good actor. And Amir Khan wasn't overrated as he was before. He has been opting for better roles now, but performance wise, the Amir Khan of the 1990s and early 2000 was better. Give his roles to SRK, and he would fair better. He was the guru, who made "method acting" popular. His wiki says.. "The art of screen acting has two chapters-"Before Brando" and "After Brando." Though Stanislavski created "method acting," it was Brando who showed the world its power." —American Film Institute's Moments of Significance Once invented (or made popular), DDL is extending it for modem / contemporary sensibilities. Calling MB overrated is a highly ignorant view. I don't consider SRK an actor at all to compare him even with Aamir Khan. He has become a star since DDLJ became a hit. He is slightly above Salman, I give you that :giggle: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
game_changerr Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 cant say hate him but sometimes he gets annoying with his over the top antics esp during award show or interview..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted May 1, 2014 Share Posted May 1, 2014 He was the guru, who made "method acting" popular. His wiki says.. Once invented (or made popular), DDL is extending it for modem / contemporary sensibilities. Calling MB overrated is a highly ignorant view. It's Stasberg who made an impact with Method, not Brando. I'm not ignoring Brando's contribution, but his on-screen performance. DDL's approach to method is far more rigid that Brando. I don't remember any Brando performance that went ablaze among the audience bar Godfather, Apocalypse Now and A Tango in Paris. His roles in Streetcar Named Desire and On The Waterfront is highly overrated. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed his roles in the last 2, but it was nothing out of the world as people presume it to be. In Godfather, it was Al Pacino who edged both DeNiro and Brando. He is a stunning actor but very underachieved. DDL, Pacino, DeNiro follow the Stasberg method, Brando too does I think. DDL is just very rigid and takes method too far. That guys is a whole different story compared to others. On the sets of Lincoln, De Levitt was strolling around the set after during the break and he saw DDL sitting with a cup of tea and thought of approaching him to have a chat before he was stopped by one of the crews because DDL was still in the character as Lincoln and would talk/reply to anyone as The President himself, and not DDL. He is a freak! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts