SLICKR392 Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Which ones? Pursuit of Hapyness Schindler's List Wolf of the Wallstreet (biopic) Few recent ones. There are plenty more which was a massive success during the pre-90s/80s era.
SLICKR392 Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Realistic film on unrealistic flawd plot that is what is Lunchbox. Vicky Donor is a realistic film for you? Its a comedy which can never be realistic. Tell me what exactly is not believable for you in Vicky Donor? AFAIK, I live in the same world that you do. Yeah' date=' then that is fine. But people were portraying it as once in a lifetime movie, asking to it to be send for Oscars as an Indian entry, especially, the banners associated with it likes of Anurag Kashyap and Karan Johar. This writer of the film had a one-line idea which was not researched or thought about and wrote a full script on an idea which was flawed from the start.[/quote'] It was by no means Oscar worthy, neither was it a pseudo movie. You say you don't enjoy them. Why watch any if you don't enjoy that genre and pick on the ones you don't like and call it pseudo-intellect and whatnot? The way you are projecting here, it doesn't seem like an opinion but a fact that is/has to accepted by all. The fault here is you have a set of beliefs and anything that goes past that line is non-realistic or too realistic and pseudo. Now that's fine as long as you accept it as your personal opinion but you seem hellbent to prove that these are general facts. As I posted earlier, this is a kid's mindset- hard to believe and accept someone preferring something that you are not really intrigued to. I completely abhorred 3 Idiots and found it stupid, now that's a personal opinion, not a fact. I found Lunchbox a simple movie with a beautiful projection.
rkt.india Posted October 3, 2014 Author Posted October 3, 2014 Pursuit of Hapyness Schindler's List Wolf of the Wallstreet (biopic) Few recent ones. There are plenty more which was a massive success during the pre-90s/80s era. Name some of the biggest hits of Hollywood. They mostly are non-art films, mostly include fictions, fantasy-science fictions, superheroes, etc. They are garner more global appeal. But the kind of movies, I like the most, they are very niche even for Hollywood.
BeautifulGame Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 70s, 80s and 90s. Tons of bad ones from 2000s until 2008-09. Some very good movies nowadays. Vijay, Surya and even some Telugu guys movies are hit there but my point was Malayalam movies. Which Suresh Gopi mindless films are massive hit there? There just run for 50 days and as I said it was during the Late 90s and early & mid 2000s period. Nonsense. Which Jayaram's hits were comedies like Golmaal? His movies now are utter rubbish but they barely run for 2 weeks. Name some mindless Jayaram comedy hit. Please do! One of the best genres in Malayalam is its comedy hits. Way too hard to swallow that statements- Jayaram hits were like Golmal. And the last Prithviraj hit was Mumbai Police and Indian Rupee before that. All the bad ones failed. His resurgence was through Mumbai Police after a set down post Indian Rupee. I honestly don't like watching Prithviraj as an actor but his hit movies are mostly good. Last one was Mumbai Police, Spirit and Indian rupee. There are rarely any movies released nowadays like the mid 2000s. Some directors still make such movies but they are hardly run there. Why does it matter whether they are malayalam movies or not .The fact is they are such a success among Malayalam audience shows there is definite market there for these types of movies and they like them very much. And yeah I might be bit off about about comparing Jayaram (or Mukesh ) movies to Goolmal but most of his 90s movies were repetitive boring family dramas with boring comedy. Unfortunately I don't really remember their names apart from the classic ones like God father .I watched them 10-12 years back lol As for Pritvi Raj Puthiya Mugam is one of his biggest grosses isn't it? I love him as an actor actually. Vasthavam is one my favorite movies and he has done some wonderful roles in Tamil . But most of his movies I come across of his are as stupid as Vijay or Surya ones . P.S I am not claiming an expert on Malayalam movies . I never watched them in theaters and only in Asianet or Surya in the past and now mainly online . But to deny these masala movies have a big market in Kerala is simply not true
rkt.india Posted October 3, 2014 Author Posted October 3, 2014 Tell me what exactly is not believable for you in Vicky Donor? AFAIK, I live in the same world that you do. It was by no means Oscar worthy, neither was it a pseudo movie. You say you don't enjoy them. Why watch any if you don't enjoy that genre and pick on the ones you don't like and call it pseudo-intellect and whatnot? The way you are projecting here, it doesn't seem like an opinion but a fact that is/has to accepted by all. The fault here is you have a set of beliefs and anything that goes past that line is non-realistic or too realistic and pseudo. Now that's fine as long as you accept it as your personal opinion but you seem hellbent to prove that these are general facts. As I posted earlier, this is a kid's mindset- hard to believe and accept someone preferring something that you are not really intrigued to. I completely abhorred 3 Idiots and found it stupid, now that's a personal opinion, not a fact. I found Lunchbox a simple movie with a beautiful projection. No, you are taking me wrong. Its my personal opinion. I already said above that its subjective and personal preference. Regarding lunchbox, how can anyone deny about that flawed plot. First think what is its plot, lunch box reaching to a wrong person from dabbawalas and that too everyday. Looks like writer didnt research about dabbawalas of Mumbai. This plot is so silly and ridiculous in itself.
kubrickian Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Pursuit of Hapyness Schindler's List Wolf of the Wallstreet (biopic) Few recent ones. There are plenty more which was a massive success during the pre-90s/80s era. In America, there is a sizable audience for realistic type movies and there are independent studios which make these kind of movies and they are known as indie movies which get released in limited number of theaters. For instance movies like Side Effects, Mud, Me and Orson Welles etc. But even then, not all these movies make money. Only those which are critically acclaimed or which get nominated for Oscars get enough buzz so they can make some profit. I would say about 4 out of 10 movies make some profit while others flop. In India, we don't have enough people who will go out and buy tickets to watch these kind of movies, so they don't get made.
kubrickian Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Even if realistic movies are not made in India, at least filmmakers should push for more realism and sensible storytelling in commercial cinema. Its embarrassing to see an action movie or thriller and suddenly you see actors dancing with a bunch of other group dancers. It just looks ridiculous and spoils the whole experience. Then those movies also have over exaggerated or unrealistic acting, extremely silly and absurd comedy, unrealistic plot and situations. Even with entertainment, filmmakers could put some importance on quality, taste and aesthetic.
SLICKR392 Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Why does it matter whether they are malayalam movies or not .The fact is they are such a success among Malayalam audience shows there is definite market there for these types of movies and they like them very much. And yeah I might be bit off about about comparing Jayaram (or Mukesh ) movies to Goolmal but most of his 90s movies were repetitive boring family dramas with boring comedy. Unfortunately I don't really remember their names apart from the classic ones like God father .I watched them 10-12 years back lol As for Pritvi Raj Puthiya Mugam is one of his biggest grosses isn't it? I love him as an actor actually. Vasthavam is one my favorite movies and he has done some wonderful roles in Tamil . But most of his movies I come across of his are as stupid as Vijay or Surya ones . P.S I am not claiming an expert on Malayalam movies . I never watched them in theaters and only in Asianet or Surya in the past and now mainly online . But to deny these masala movies have a big market in Kerala is simply not true I have already claimed we have a large set of audience who watch masala movies. Allu Arjun guy has a huge fan following in Kerala. But my point was usually a 'hit' 'Malayalam' movie is most probably a good one than a masala one. The current on going one is Bangalore Days, again a good movie but I personally feel it was hyped. What is the other movie which released along with this? Pezhuchari- Mohanlal's which is watchable but overall it was lame, IMO. This would have been the other way around in Bollwood. Which movie had a bigger run in TN- Nayakan or Pokiri? I hope you get my point here. I'm not isolating Malayalam solely- this goes for Tamil, Marathi, Bengali movies etc. A good (realistic) flick usually runs more than a masala entertainer and most probably earns a lot more profit as well. What exactly is boring comedy? Its either comedy or OTT vulgar PJs. As I said earlier, one thing I would never agree is calling the 80s or 90s Malayalam comedy lame. They were classic comedies and one of the best without going OTT- Kilukam, Chitram, April 18, Manichtratazhu (Bhool Bhulaya) and a ton more. Jayaram and Mukesh, especially Jayaram has stooped down to the lowest low now and his movies are rarely a hit now. But the Jayaram of the 90s was pretty damn good. And to understand most Tamil-Malayalam comedy, you need to be fluent in the language, especially the old ones. Most members of my family knows Tamil and they crack up usually while watching a Tamil movie while I sit there clueless as I don't understand it well. Nowadays, there are pretty good comedy flicks but its become a trend that you need to be abusive to project comedy in Malayalam. And by abuses I mean the hardcore abuses. Mugham? Pudiye Mukham, the one with Mamoothy? Easily one of the worst movies and it din't even run for a month in whole. Watch this movie- Left Right Left, might be boring but Pritviraj's brother plays a role and you could make out who the better actor is there. Pritvhi is only good enough in doing a subtle character. His comedy is puke worthy.
SLICKR392 Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 No' date=' you are taking me wrong. Its my personal opinion. I already said above that its subjective and personal preference. Regarding lunchbox, how can anyone deny about that flawed plot. First think what is its plot, lunch box reaching to a wrong person from dabbawalas and that too everyday. Looks like writer didnt research about dabbawalas of Mumbai. This plot is so silly and ridiculous in itself.[/quote'] I have seen documentary about them where it says they never make a fault while delivering the package and about some calculation they do for this cause. Again, they don't make a mistake every single day. Its an error on Day 1 and they later deliver it to the same table every single day. The reason I like the story, is because its an out of the box plot with 2 different shades. A housewife and a widower kicking it off.
SLICKR392 Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Even if realistic movies are not made in India' date=' [b']at least filmmakers should push for more realism and sensible storytelling in commercial cinema. Its embarrassing to see an action movie or thriller and suddenly you see actors dancing with a bunch of other group dancers. It just looks ridiculous and spoils the whole experience. Then those movies also have over exaggerated or unrealistic acting, extremely silly and absurd comedy, unrealistic plot and situations. Even with entertainment, filmmakers could put some importance on quality, taste and aesthetic. Exactly. Even in these high grossing 100c-200c flicks, there should be some sensibility in general. Cast an SRK, Amir, Salman or Hritik, then you have the licence to go full retard with the plot since it wouldn't matter as the audience are ready to go watch it. Which is what matter for those guys at the end of day.
SLICKR392 Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Name some of the biggest hits of Hollywood. They mostly are non-art films' date=' mostly include fictions, fantasy-science fictions, superheroes, etc. They are garner more global appeal. But the kind of movies, I like the most, they are very niche even for Hollywood.[/quote'] Like the above post of Kubri- you have a good story, acting and direction in these movies. Lets have 2 OTT movies as an example- Expendables and Django Unchained; The former is star studded with some massive, massive names and one of their prominent actor directing it. The latter has DiCaprio and most importantly its a Tarantino flick. Django obviously had a better story line and some high quality performances from all 4 actors. Whereas Expendables was a pure entertainment with a brain fart story and 9-10 stars. Django ended up winning earning more and eventually a bigger success at the box office. Django was removed from the theaters here much quicker than Expendables- that shows the difference of audience in both states. Although it might be a brain fart entertainer out there, it has overall got more quality in acting, screenplay and story than the ones in Bollywood, not Indian movies, but Bollywood. ^ Dito. But again not whole of India follow the same suit.
BeautifulGame Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 Mugham? Pudiye Mukham, the one with Mamoothy? Easily one of the worst movies and it din't even run for a month in whole. Watch this movie- Left Right Left, might be boring but Pritviraj's brother plays a role and you could make out who the better actor is there. Pritvhi is only good enough in doing a subtle character. His comedy is puke worthy. Puthiya Mugam the one in which he was tagged along side Priyamani . I very well understand Malayalam so that's not an issue. When did I criticize movies like Kilukkam or Manichitra Tal.I am a big Mohanlal fan lol .
rkt.india Posted October 3, 2014 Author Posted October 3, 2014 Exactly. Even in these high grossing 100c-200c flicks' date=' there should be some sensibility in general. Cast an SRK, Amir, Salman or Hritik, then you have the licence to go full retard with the plot since it wouldn't matter as the audience are ready to go watch it. Which is what matter for those guys at the end of day.[/quote'] Yes, that is what my grudge with Indian filmmakers too, but they usually stick to formula which brings them those 200 crores. It is a business after all. There is a reason only hardcore masala films do 150-200 crores with stars. Akshay did 8 x 10 Tasvir, a very different film with Nagesh Kukunoor which flopped at a time when his brainless comedies were getting 100 crores. Same happened with other star actors. Hritik did guzarish which proved disaster at BO. You cannot expect these guys to do such films and deliver flops.
rkt.india Posted October 3, 2014 Author Posted October 3, 2014 Like the above post of Kubri- you have a good story, acting and direction in these movies. Lets have 2 OTT movies as an example- Expendables and Django Unchained; The former is star studded with some massive, massive names and one of their prominent actor directing it. The latter has DiCaprio and most importantly its a Tarantino flick. Django obviously had a better story line and some high quality performances from all 4 actors. Whereas Expendables was a pure entertainment with a brain fart story and 9-10 stars. Django ended up winning earning more and eventually a bigger success at the box office. Django was removed from the theaters here much quicker than Expendables- that shows the difference of audience in both states. Although it might be a brain fart entertainer out there, it has overall got more quality in acting, screenplay and story than the ones in Bollywood, not Indian movies, but Bollywood. ^ Dito. But again not whole of India follow the same suit. On thia thread, we are talking about art films or films who claim to be set realistic but comes as across as pseudoreality with mismash of reality and fiction. Django isnt an art film. It may not have big stars, but it was still an entertainer.
kubrickian Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 On thia thread' date=' we are talking about art films or films who claim to be set realistic but comes as across as pseudoreality with mismash of reality and fiction. Django isnt an art film. It may not have big stars, but it was still an entertainer.[/quote'] You can't demarcate some films easily as art films or entertainers. Some entertaining films could be really well made and have fantastic writing and acting. Even the art films that you think have a niche audience are also entertaining but not in the conventional sense. They are entertaining in terms of how engaging the story is, how original they are, how realistic they are, how they explore the interesting aspects of characters, themes, relationships, ideas. Just because they don't have mainstream appeal, doesnt mean they are not entertaining. For instance, movies like Godfather or Lord of the Rings are highest quality films but they were also super hits at the box office. Same thing with Django. Even though its a Western genre movie, the quality of writing and acting is of the top most level. Its also original, mostly sensible, realistic(within the rules of the world in which the story is set) and engaging as a story. Django can be considered an art film in every sense of the word because its mostly a unique, creative film. In any case, art film is a misused word by some people.
Texan Posted October 3, 2014 Posted October 3, 2014 If that was the case' date=' reality kind of films would be getting 100-200 crores but they do not.[/quote'] There is an audience for every kind of film. Even though light-hearted dumb movies often make lots of money, they do not leave much of an impression. You won't be talking about that movie 3 months after you watch it. While some movies that cater to the "realistic genre" may not make the same amount of money, but will leave a lasting impression. Some movie makers like to "influence" their audience and not just mint money. To give you an analogy, beer is the most widely consumed alcohol in the world, but true connoisseurs enjoy Scotch :winky:
Crookbond Posted October 4, 2014 Posted October 4, 2014 There is an audience for every kind of film. Even though light-hearted dumb movies often make lots of money, they do not leave much of an impression. You won't be talking about that movie 3 months after you watch it. While some movies that cater to the "realistic genre" may not make the same amount of money, but will leave a lasting impression. Some movie makers like to "influence" their audience and not just mint money. To give you an analogy, beer is the most widely consumed alcohol in the world, but true connoisseurs enjoy Scotch :winky: I've been trying to make this same point on the thread. The "realistic films" keep earning revenue for a longer period via DVD sales. I also gave an example of the movie Gandhi My Father.
kubrickian Posted October 4, 2014 Posted October 4, 2014 I've been trying to make this same point on the thread. The "realistic films" keep earning revenue for a longer period via DVD sales. I also gave an example of the movie Gandhi My Father. Perhaps 1 movie every once in a while may make some money in the long term but most of them will be flops. Hence producers or investors will not invest money confidently in such productions.
rkt.india Posted October 4, 2014 Author Posted October 4, 2014 I've been trying to make this same point on the thread. The "realistic films" keep earning revenue for a longer period via DVD sales. I also gave an example of the movie Gandhi My Father. But that money is nowhere close to what those other films make that is why you see more of those and less of art films. I would say art films, not realistic film. Realistic films can be entertainer too, but art films like the OP are more focused on craft than entertainment and most of these even fail to put the craft together.
Recommended Posts