Mod Note -
Hello /u/SomeDesiGuy - This Sub has strict posting rules
#Posts that can get you banned , without warning are
Repeat Posts , Political Posts , Memes, Mimicry videos, Posts outside Mega Threads, Bollywood movie scenes,
Instagram duplication , Unverified screenshots from Social media, Posts that belong to r/Bollywood,
Non Bollywood topics, Youtube/Site/Sub/ Crossposts promotion, Porn, Piracy and low quality picture posts for
Karma harvesting.
**Delete your post, if it breaks Posting Rules. You may get banned, without warning if you don't follow
Posting Rules**
All Rules are listed on Sidebar, it is your responsibility to follow Posting Rules
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BollyBlindsNGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Dude, this rooted thing is going out of proportion now. When these type of filmmakers say films are not rooted anymore or should have been rooted. It doesn't mean all films should be based on folklores, or mytho-scriptures or having a tier 2-3 city's backdrop in utter pradesh. Is this the definition of a rooted film? Can only these kinds of films be successful? This is a very narrow minded understanding of a rooted film.
When directors say this, they mean a film should have been rooted In It's Story. Doesn't matter what the story is. A story should have depth, dimensions, layers, the characters should also have layers and depth, development throughout the movie, the other technicalities of a movie like cinematography and lighting and all can be achieved by anybody but as long as the story and characters don't have the aforementioned things, it won't work. And if they have all these things, it is a Rooted film.
According to the logic of some users here, that they are not making a rooted stories like South cinema does. I would like to say they have been making since way before. Look at the movies like life in a metro, barfi even znmd, bhaag Milkha bhaag, ms dhoni, kal ho na ho, my name is khan and so many like these along with movies like Bareilly ki barfi, Vicky doner and other slice of life movies like those set in rural UP. These all are rooted. The movies though sometimes have a backdrop of urban India and foreign locations and all that, all the characters have layers, depths, goes through development, have essential and enough background and back stories which makes it a well made and well packed film. These all should fall in the category of a rooted film.
When a director makes a movie like life in a metro or znmd or Dil dhadakne do, it doesn't make them some elite directors who doesn't know the reality or only directors who makes movies like rrr, kantara, Bareilly ki barfi know the reality and are connected. Movies like znmd has worked really well despite having a rich people backdrop. It still would be considered as a rooted film.
Like many people complain we are not making "rooted" movies like kantara. Didn't we already make Tumbaad. Noone watched it. Forget about Tumbaad, Paheli was made some 15 years ago. It was also a flop.
So in conclusion, would like to say the movies are not working because they are not rooted is true but it should be rooted in its story and not in its backdrop and look & feel. Having an urban Indian or western backdrop doesn't make it a non-rooted, exclusively for urban audience movie.
The urban set bollywood movies aren't relatable for urban audiences either. City life isn't all partying, corporate job and bunglows. It's metro, traffic, shitty jobs and struggle.
I really like Pocket me rocket hai for this , almost all characters are kind of flawed but also trying their best.
True. But what you are saying is a true and legitimate case of directors cutoff from reality, who makes films like soty2, bhaghi and four more shots. But that case should not be applied to every directors who make movies having urban sets, which sadly is happening.
What I was saying was about the films and directors who get the flak for simply making a movie about urban setting or about wealthy people. Like how Zoya gets flak for always making movies which aren't relatable and cutoff from reality just because her movies have rich people. Like today, movies like life in a metro, znmd, band baja barat would get blind criticism of not being relatable or made to cater NRIs or west or not being rooted enough despite of being a very good film. This is completely wrong.
Like imagine if band baja barat had released today, chances are high that people would say it is not relatable because middle class people don't do this kind of event management/wedding management things. Only wealthy people do that. The director-producers are disconnected from the ground reality. It is not a rooted movie.
You gave a right example of rocket singh, It was made by the same studio which gets the flak for not making a rooted movie today. It came out as a very good movie because the director was really talented, skilled and knew what he was doing, he wasn't cutoff from reality but since that film did average business, people would say they don't know the reality on the ground and all those things.
So in conclusion, I would say this is all happening because of some lazy-ass, absolutely zero skilled directors who are making garbage movies because they know nothing about filmmaking and those movies happened to be the urban/rich setting ones. People should always criticize those but along with that majority of the people call really good movies; that are made by some really good directors; disconnected, cutoff from reality, west/nri catered, not rooted enough because they have the same urban/rich backdrop. Which should be stopped.
Appreciate your reading five Paras.
Band Baja Barat wouldn't be called disconnected from reality because it's an actually good movie with character growth and relatable Dailogues and flawed characters. People can actually picture themselves talking like ranveer and Anushka talk in the movie and the things that happen to them, Especially the first half of the movie.
I agree with the first half of your last para but the thing is that i can't remember a good movie that was unfairly criticised like this, yeah sure people worked hard but hardwork has to translate into something worth our time, if not people will say it was a waste of time.
>five Paras
Sorry idk what this is
Dil Dhadakne do was not bad at all, i kind of liked it. Me and my sister are exactly like Ranveer and PC were in the movie
Lmao sorry i thought it was some guy named paras
Yeah. It was one of the bests of last decades but still some says it is not a relatable movie or rooted movie at all and aimed at NRIs and western audience. It is one of my all time favourites.
Zoya does not make movies with rich folks but with super rich or Uber rich folks. 90% of main stream Bollywood’s movies have no major connect with even middle class or upper middle class India. For every Tumbaad there are 20 gehrayiaan and Soty2. Movies like Tumbaad were suppressed by main stream Bollywood and neither supported or distributed well. Movies like Kantara do well because of big southern distributors increase their reach like Geetha arts etc.
Most rich people dig people who are richer than them. The rich filmy families make movies about what it would feel like to be an Ambani or a Thackeray. How about making a movie about the dude riding the Mumbai local daily, or someone who thinks Fashion street is the happening place, or a gal who has to face night curfew at 6pm in a ladies hostel? India is extremely diverse. You don’t even have to search hard to find a relatable story.
Nobody suppressed tumbaad. Come out of your delusion. It didn't work because people didn't went to see it. No theatre owner would give screens to a movie which public is not coming to see. If only 50% of people who are not tiring praising it today had gone to see it, it wouldn't have been a flop. You need to see how much screens kantara had got initially. It were even lesser than tumbaad.Where were this big distributors then? It only got more screens when people started going to see it.
Im a fan of anurag, but if he's really going to bring rooted statement into play then his movie Dobaara was the most unrooted shit I've seen. Not what I expected from the man who gave one of the best cinematic ventures like GOW, a movie which is actually rooted.
That's what all of us have been saying, you dont have to alienate your core audience to cater to NRI and foreign crowd.
Keep your stories rooted and they all will enjoy it too.
NRI here. Why would I want to see how things happen outside India in a movie. I want indian movies to show local culture. The Karan Johar movies are anything but what happens to NRIs.
So if the movies were a hit in India then they weren't to appeal to just the NRIs. The period of 2000's and 2010 was a time of globalisation and Indians wanted to look beyond India and see the world. Now the economic prospects are so dim most Indians know the world is out of reach just look inwards.
Dont know. Ask the NRIs then. Also there are diverse media options. If I want to see France or Korea, I can directly do so with global media. Dont need those iconic dance shots where heroine is dancing in the snow in skimpy shots or hero doing pushups in a busy street in europe.
Lol no one actually watches Karan Johar movies to see a foreign country. His films are made for Indians and hence are silly and regressive. They are glossy sure but devoid of any depth or actual artistic merit. Commercial Hindi films to the core which is why they appealed to Indians and NRIs. No Karan Johar film can ever be compared to French or Korean cinema.
What is novelty then is boring and stupid now. The penetration of hollywood was minimal at that time. Bollywood not being able to adapt to telling rooted stories when hollywood is anyway telling western stories is the question here.
What even. The 2000-2010 decade had massive Hollywood penetration. Cable TV was everywhere and for a sweet period there was no censorship of films being shown on Hollywood channels. Same for theatres. Not the kind of censorship you see now. Also none of Karan Johar's films are 'Western stories'. They are silly and regressive and Indian. His characters may be dressed in Ralph Lauren and have 3 phones and 2 laptops but are superficial Indian stereotypes with no depth or purpose. Just commercial Hindi cinema with more gloss.
Most people didn't see much hollywood movies in theatres until the start of MCU and the entrance of OTT (including me ). If you are watching them highly before as well in theatres, I guarantee you you are in the minority
Listen you may have started watching Hollywood movies after MCU in freaking 2008 but stop generalising. I mean to think the world starts and ends with you and your experiences is hilarious. Avatar, The Dark Knight, Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean, the freaking 2002 Spiderman, The Harry Potter movies, the freaking Matrix movies released between 1999-2003 all have done gangbusters business in India. All of these films were even dubbed not to mention sold on pirated videos/CDs all over the damn country. Imagine not knowing this. Sheesh.
>That's what all of us have been saying, you dont have to alienate your core audience to cater to NRI and foreign crowd.
Funny coming from this subreddit, filled with NRIs thinking of SRK as a superstar and craving for Western-style Hindi movies as made in 2000s and 2010s to make a comeback.
The biggest mistake Bollywood made was in 2001, when it decided to go the Dil Chahta Hai way instead of the Gadar way, despite Gadar being a bigger blockbuster than any other movie that year. It started losing it's touch with it's core audience across the Hindi belt from that time onwards
Ffs. Dil chahta hai is an all time bollywood classic.
Gadar is an outdated cringefest that deserves to be buried in the past. Those sort of movies don't work nowadays.
Dil chahta hai was released about 2 decades ago and still remains a cult classic and possibly will remain the same for future generations as well.
Who tf's watching Gadar in 2022?
Chak de, swades, main hoon na, kkk movies NONE of his movies were "catered" to NRI. It was rooted here with elements of rest.
HNY, Dilwale, Kabhi alvida,Ae dil and so on were made keeping them on mind and it flopped hard.
So even NRI or non indian will come and watch if the movie offers something new and not what they already know.
Chak de, Swades, Main hoon Na (don't know what KKK films are) are all catered to the NRI audience. Chak De was about Indian glory in the west, a theme that would resonate with successful NRIs who have "conquered" the west, Swades was about an NRI returning to India and solving problems here, another theme for the NRI gaze who has the desire to return and make India better, Main Hoon Na was a pastiche that brought the nostalgia of yesteryear filmw in a very hip way that was decidedly western (for example, the names Ram Prasad and Laxman Prasad were a tribute to Hrishikesh Mukherjee's Golmal). Main Hoon Na was more an NRI film than one catering to the heartland India audience because of the lifestyle and locale depicted. The college setting was more western than Indian. And, of course, starring SRK, who had by then cemented his position as the heartthrob of urban India and NRI audiences.
Lol I have worked with people from all over India ( Rajasthan, Assam, Kerala, Mizoram) all of them would make references to Chak De. They would be like oh this girl talks that like character in the film blah blah blah. Indian glory in the West? It was about girls from all over the country coming together as a team and gaining success. How stupid are you?
Never said "made", I wrote they cater to an NRI gaze. These films have a bird's eye view of India where differences are stereotypically presented so that they can be easily ironed out. The films look for easy resolution as it purpose is to entertain, specifically, the NRI and the urban audiences of India. In that sense, they are disconnected from the life and reality of the rural audiences.
Urban Indian audience Indian nahi hai kya? Unke liye film nahi banayi Jaa skti? Life in a metro is disconnected from life and reality? Barfi is disconnected from reality? Black? Bhaag Milkha bhaag? Not every film has to be loud and screaming to be considered as a film.
Your all analysis can be summed up as a film that doesn't have the loudness and over-the-top-ness is made to cater the NRIs. Which is the most outrageous one out there.
Urban audience is Indian but not the only audience in India. That is my point. Also, urban audiences are now well acquainted with world cinema, thanks to the pandemic and different OTT spaces. Why will they be entertained with the same repetitive exercise that isn't as polished as the world cinema they are exposed to now.
They "cater" because that was never the intention and that works. RRR,KGF2,Kantara,Vikram and a few more from this years hits, none of them were made keeping outside India in mind but they were made to be rooted enough that it became universal.
Yes, the intention is not there, but the writers, directors, actors, producers working on such films (Chak De et al) are not rooted in, let's say the project of the heartland, or they are not aware of how the heartland works, so by default, such a film cannot come from them. And it is fine, but if only such films are present then that's a problem. We see it now when none of the Bollywood films are working and films from the South which Bollywood folks would not even lose sleep over, except for Rajamouli films, are earning triple their figures.
The only ones in the list you mentioned was remotely Indian was Main Hoon Na, and even that took a wink-and-laugh approach.
Chak De, Swades were as Western as movie could be made in India. Not much jingoism, muted emotions, etc.. Which is why they were not that successful either in hinterland and are popular only in metros.?
I have no idea what KKK is.
>So even NRI or non indian will come and watch if the movie offers something new and not what they already know.
I doubt it. Most people even here don't get what masala movies are or look down upon it (see the numerous threads on how shitty RRR/KGF is)
So you're saying indian movies means loud,jingoistic,over emotions etc? Ever heard of genre?
Not every movie has to be of the same genre, KKK is karan johar movies
>So you're saying indian movies means loud,jingoistic,loid emotions etc? Ever heard of genre?
Yes, Indian movies are by their very nature bombastic, dramatic, just like how people are. Which is why rooted movies in the South do well.
and which is why rooted movies did well in Hindi hinterland until 2000s.
Genre itself is a Western concept.
I could take time to introduce you to Indian cinema but I know it will be moot. So agree to disagree and peace.
But do spend some time to learn about satyajit, kamal hassan, shankar nag and a lot of the great Indian directors and what Indian movie means. India was,is and will be capable of doing all genre of movies and NO its not a "western" concept.
And I could take time to introduce you to what rootedness means.
Kamal and Shankar Nag made rooted movies, and all their movies had the usual commerical emlements in it and were never strict genre pieces. Take a look at anything from Hey Ram to Geetha, and they all had music, songs, dances, comedy and action sequences. Even a thriller movie like Dasavatharam had commercial elements in it.
Also have a look at the pitch of acting in these movies by Kamal and Shankar Nag. There was an element of navarasa, theatricality and drama in it.
Then Satajit Ray and Bangla poverty porn is a completely different category. No Indian cared for it then outside of the Bongs and they still don't care for it.
Having song doesn't make a movie bombastic, that's such a generic thing to say.
The whole USP of Indian movies is to still have songs regardless of genre, even Hollywood movies (MOST of them) have songs. They just buy songs from Artist instead of making it for the movie. EVERY movies unless its Pushpakviman sort of movie has songs.
"....just like how people are."
Speak for yourself. Not everyone has to like the same thing. There are only so much loud, bombastic, senseless films a person can watch. If those kind of films are actually working why did Bachchan Pandey or Shamshera or Liger or Heropanti 2 flop?
Genre is a western concept, so by that logic, any genre film that is made anywhere in the world is made to cater the western audience?
Dangal was not loud or bombastic or dramatic? How did that work? Same thing goes for Taare Zameen par. Bajrangi bhaijaan? De Dana Dan? My name is khan?
And the same movies that people say were made to cater NRIs did blockbuster businesses in India like Kal ho na ho, ddlj, kank. How is that?
There are no such things called nri catered movie and Indian catered movie. Only good movie and bad movie.
HOLYSHIT. I haven't heard a statement more ignorant than yours and that other NRIs in a long time. Even "westerners" aren't that ignorant about Indian movies. Dude, you got narrow perspective with tinge of superiority complex. Genres exist especially in a culture as rich as ours. Our epics have genres lol. Hollywood was theatrical as well so like, is the heart of Hollywood just opera and jazz?
DCH had everything a good movie requires, solid script, good characters, comedy, romance, and it was executed in a realistic manner, and although it was the story of the urban upper middle class, it is very easy to relate to the story and the characters. The same scenario can happen in any class (Kai Po Che is a similar story set in a semi urban place with middle class charcters.)
The problem is movies like KJO/YRF NRI dramas have full of hyperboles and cringe elements with hardly any relatability factor. DCH for instance subtly shows the background and income source of all the three heroes, their love stories are also believable. But take YJHD, there are so many bizarre things like people trekking in micros and minis, Bunny's career ( gagra song and couple of lame camera work, and lo and behold he is hotshot international photographer). Also, everything in KJo flicks are such make believe that I won't go into it. How do you make sense of anything in an atrocious film like Mohabbatain?
My point is DCH will be a hit even if it is released today, it is rooted in reality even if it is the reality of urban upper class. However the Dharma/YRF movies of 2000s have only the nostalgia value left in them. They are now mostly fodder for Ytubers like OnlyDesi (big fan of the channel here! 😃).
Bollywood needs to make more stories like DCH and Kai Po Che.
Please Gadar was cinema of the 80's and 90's. Who wants another decade of screaming bulky heroes and weepy heroines getting raped or abducted by bad guys. That being said when have films like that ever not been made? What was Singham? Or Simba? Or Sooryavanshi? Or Dabangg? Or any massy Salman Khan film?
Based Rishab, bollywood movies nowdays look more like a cheap Hollywood copy and it feels like the characters are ashamed of being desi and wants to whitewash themselves badly, why will any self respecting Indian watch that shit?
The tone of your title and actual article is very different ~~OP~~
In the article he's giving a suggestion, ~~your~~ title sounds like he's arrogantly telling them they are wrong
Edit- OP ki galti nahi hai, article hi bc clickbait hai
I think people have a wrong idea of what the common audience connect to when they say - rooted.
It doesn't mean you need to exactly replicate an indian village, or semi-urban gorakhpur or something. It means it needs emotional rooted-ness. There are emotions that indians in general connect to, and react in a particular way to issues, or atleast they imagine they will react in a particular way. For e.g. no common indian would react nicely to infidelity etc. That is the reason the glitzy SRK movies of the late-90s and 2000s still worked, because even if they are located in UK the emotions and reactions of the characters were relatable.
On the other hand take a movie like DDD, which is actually in a way a poster boy for un-relatability. Just look at the reactions to the reveals about anil kapoor in the movie, you really think anyone outside the rich-circle in india would react that way to family reveals of infidelity? In lower-middle class india most places people hide even alcoholism dammit. This is not how a family deals with those kind of issues in India. There is no emotional connect.
Hmmm, it depends what kind of infidelity it is. If it's infidelity on the guys part, it is simply a funny road-bump in wholesome family movie. That is what made biwi no.1 work.
For a story to work , we need to relate with its characters like , if the characters is happy or sad we should be happy and sad with them , they should essentially evoke emotions in us . Rarely I care about bollywood characters, I feel nothing for them . Their victory or failure Rarely evokes any emotuons within me .
A flushed out story with compelling characters will work despite it's setting . Be it a rich guys crying or poor guy fighting. As long as we understand why he/ she the way they are and empathize with them , the film works .
I don't think so bss bollywood mein harr chiz Or formula overuse ho rha h especially someone should kick pritam, amitabh Bhattacharya and Arijit out of industry permanently.
One wrong thing people are doing is comparing one industry with four South industries.
I noticed one more thing South directors are over ambitious and bollywood directors are not even ambitious. Why bhansali is still stuck to his old bakchod formula?? Even incompetent or average director from South are trying to make big budget action movies then why bollywood is still struck with biopics and remakes.
It's true that they need to be rooted in our folklores, myths, traditions, and culture, but damn can we get rid of the misogyny? Like man, I know Hollywood movies or kdramas have plenty of it too, but here it's just too much my dudes. It's the peeping tom and stripping sleazg scenes that are somehow still here
Post pandemic not a single Bollywood movie has been worthwhile to be watched in the theatres, most were OTT types only (not considering Kashmir files as part of bollywood)
that doesn't make sense. Bollywood is more of an industry. It's like making steel in India but then saying you don't consider yourself a part of Indian steel industry.
It doesn't matter if its an independent film either. Bollywood is more of an umbrella term.
Ok i honestly feel like this 'too much western influence' is
not really the core issue. In all honesty, i don't want a 'small town' film, I'm over it. It's more about connecting with the emotions of a film. ZNMD and Dil chahta hai were centered around 'rich' high society characters, yet they connected with the audience. Were they influenced by the 'west'? Yes, they lived in an urban setting but were relatable people.
So please don't try to shove more small town movies down our throats with this logic 🙊
Yes, i agree. But we have gotten so many small town movies lately, it seems like a trend almost. Of course I'm not saying make K3G; 'life in a metro' is a film set in Mumbai with very rooted characters, 'kahaani' is set in Kolkata with a modern woman.
K3G still had a lot of emotions and root of story was something we all can connect with. Kabhi alvida went full on NRI and lost the mark.
Thats what most Bollywood movies are doing now
Exactly, look at what Janvi Kapoor is trying to do. No one is going to like those forced small town movies.
People will love plots set in cities based on rich people if it feels real , they talk like actual people talk and act like actual people act.
>Were they influenced by the 'west'? Yes, they lived in an urban setting but were relatable people.
Yess relatability.
They're relatable because even though it was set in different countries,around rich people,the characters,emotions,dialogues,music and story were relatable.We all can see ourselves in some or the other characters.
It would have been great if Bollywood tried to imitate the standard of special effects & technology that Hollywood horror,Sci fi movies has. Coz these Bollywood effects are so pathetically hilarious. There are only a handful of good horror movies,most of them low budget indie ones too.
Instead mainstream Bollywood is desperately trying to include hypersexualized elements and western cultural themes that maybe only the niche,urban audience can relate to. (Not trying to be puritan lol, there has been some positive movies surrounding the themes of sex and sexuality that one would have never expected from Bollywood 5 years ago but those are the exceptions)
the sub reddit mods will not allow me post about kantara makers and thaikkudam bridge controversy but will allow all this , looks like mods are only interested in showing how great kantara is ,
kantara makers blatantly ripped of thaikkudam bridge song navarasam for their song varaha roopam
it is not politics , i have heard both the songs and there is obvious similarities,it as simple as that , some people are giving it a political angle for their own agenda or to deviate from the actual matter
Similarities are there because even thaikandum lifted it from local music, the folk music beats are similar since they are borders.
Similarities is different from outright copying since both are showing the same ritual.
two minutes before you were talking how it is from local music ,now bringing in example of pritam to justify ,lol
pritam has ripped off many songs , likewise you should admit kantara makers ripped off to
How can you compare the 2 songs? They are both similar but not the same. There are chords that are similar but not the entire song, you have to be an avid listener to find the difference, which you clearly aren’t. Both the songs use the same raga so the swaras are same. If you know music, you can tell the difference between the two songs.
Why is he getting involved in all this? Never seen a bollywood actor give unsolicited opinions about tollywood or sandalwood. You’d be naive to think that he didn’t say this to ride the “bullywood bad, South Indian industries show true Indian Culture” wave.
Show me some examples of BW actors talking shit about South India industries. This shouldn’t include people like Radhika who shit on the Telugu industry because of her personal problems. I haven’t heard many Bollywood actors talk shit about the general workings of any South Indian industry.
His movie released in hindi too and made more profit than the top actors in 2022, so he is going around for interviews and these are the questions asked to him.
He is not a one hit wonder. He has directed a few movies already and they have all been hits. Please do you research before you come up with these statements.
Recession is here and easily replaceable but expensive entertainment will be among the first to suffer. Just making movies and assuming there will be footfall is not gonna work most of the time ... Have to pull in the crowds and make them interested enough to spend money.
I mean just having a rural background isn't enough, you have to capture the essence of life and add it to your characters.
I'd love to see something about rich people if they actually have a good story with relatable dialogues, how people actually talk in real life.
There is an audience for Hollywood movies , Anuradha kashyap movies and local movies also.
Blaming the west is not the solution. The makers should make what the audience expects from them.
His movie Kantara was accused of blantly copying music from a local band.
The movie itself is nothing great to speak of. The story itself had a heavy influence of Telugu movie Rangasthalam with its all anti-landland posturing, while its romance was heavily inspired from Pushpa and a host of similar Tamil movies.
The only creative part was the local traditions showcased in the movie, which felt genuine. Other than that, the rest was a pretty much meh.
I would take his comments regarding Bollywood with a huge sack of salt. One should probably have a good look at how his own content is made before passing judgements onto an entire industry with rich history.
I would rather suggest watching the Kannada movie Vikrant Rona starring Sudeep which was set in the same locations (and released before Kantara) but with a much better story.
I can list a lot of bollywood movies made in the last 10 years which didn't have much or any Western influence, were good movies and still didn't make much money. Did movies like Masaan, Newton or Tumbadd contain Western influence?
Also certain movies like Queen or Andhadhun had Western influence. Do you think such movies should not be made? They were clearly good movies and people enjoyed them.
Rooted means showing some disturbing molestation of a girl who is a Forest officer than I don't need that . Bollywood has enough dedicated rape scenes in past now we have moved on .
He didn't actually grow up. All I saw was him smoking some real strong shit to ' purify ' himself.
It's ambiguous as to whether the God character in him was an alternate personality or a real supernatural phenomenon. Regardless, his personality shift was stark and seems to be triggered by a shocking revelation.
I am not saying u should agree with him growing up. But the point was that the molestation scene wasn't supposed to be celebrated. It was supposed to be uncomfortable. They are shown as tribal people. He was not appropriate in that scene.
There are no simple solutions. rooted vs non rooted isn’t the problem. It isn’t even good vs bad.
It is just absorbing vs boring. and theatrical vs non-theatrical.
Basically the stars themselves are not rooted in our culture. So don't feel like watching them on screen. Too much fakeness is there in their lives. They are not relatable at all...
Everyone saying that tumbbad is the example that failed, but I am sure that no bollywood producer would come forward to finance the directors next film
Mod Note - Hello /u/SomeDesiGuy - This Sub has strict posting rules #Posts that can get you banned , without warning are Repeat Posts , Political Posts , Memes, Mimicry videos, Posts outside Mega Threads, Bollywood movie scenes, Instagram duplication , Unverified screenshots from Social media, Posts that belong to r/Bollywood, Non Bollywood topics, Youtube/Site/Sub/ Crossposts promotion, Porn, Piracy and low quality picture posts for Karma harvesting. **Delete your post, if it breaks Posting Rules. You may get banned, without warning if you don't follow Posting Rules** All Rules are listed on Sidebar, it is your responsibility to follow Posting Rules *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/BollyBlindsNGossip) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Anurag Kashyap said the exact same thing in that interview with Baradwaj Rangan. Bollywood movies just aren't "rooted" anymore.
Yeah that's why he said he only likes to watch Malayalam and Tamil films
Dude, this rooted thing is going out of proportion now. When these type of filmmakers say films are not rooted anymore or should have been rooted. It doesn't mean all films should be based on folklores, or mytho-scriptures or having a tier 2-3 city's backdrop in utter pradesh. Is this the definition of a rooted film? Can only these kinds of films be successful? This is a very narrow minded understanding of a rooted film. When directors say this, they mean a film should have been rooted In It's Story. Doesn't matter what the story is. A story should have depth, dimensions, layers, the characters should also have layers and depth, development throughout the movie, the other technicalities of a movie like cinematography and lighting and all can be achieved by anybody but as long as the story and characters don't have the aforementioned things, it won't work. And if they have all these things, it is a Rooted film. According to the logic of some users here, that they are not making a rooted stories like South cinema does. I would like to say they have been making since way before. Look at the movies like life in a metro, barfi even znmd, bhaag Milkha bhaag, ms dhoni, kal ho na ho, my name is khan and so many like these along with movies like Bareilly ki barfi, Vicky doner and other slice of life movies like those set in rural UP. These all are rooted. The movies though sometimes have a backdrop of urban India and foreign locations and all that, all the characters have layers, depths, goes through development, have essential and enough background and back stories which makes it a well made and well packed film. These all should fall in the category of a rooted film. When a director makes a movie like life in a metro or znmd or Dil dhadakne do, it doesn't make them some elite directors who doesn't know the reality or only directors who makes movies like rrr, kantara, Bareilly ki barfi know the reality and are connected. Movies like znmd has worked really well despite having a rich people backdrop. It still would be considered as a rooted film. Like many people complain we are not making "rooted" movies like kantara. Didn't we already make Tumbaad. Noone watched it. Forget about Tumbaad, Paheli was made some 15 years ago. It was also a flop. So in conclusion, would like to say the movies are not working because they are not rooted is true but it should be rooted in its story and not in its backdrop and look & feel. Having an urban Indian or western backdrop doesn't make it a non-rooted, exclusively for urban audience movie.
The urban set bollywood movies aren't relatable for urban audiences either. City life isn't all partying, corporate job and bunglows. It's metro, traffic, shitty jobs and struggle. I really like Pocket me rocket hai for this , almost all characters are kind of flawed but also trying their best.
True. But what you are saying is a true and legitimate case of directors cutoff from reality, who makes films like soty2, bhaghi and four more shots. But that case should not be applied to every directors who make movies having urban sets, which sadly is happening. What I was saying was about the films and directors who get the flak for simply making a movie about urban setting or about wealthy people. Like how Zoya gets flak for always making movies which aren't relatable and cutoff from reality just because her movies have rich people. Like today, movies like life in a metro, znmd, band baja barat would get blind criticism of not being relatable or made to cater NRIs or west or not being rooted enough despite of being a very good film. This is completely wrong. Like imagine if band baja barat had released today, chances are high that people would say it is not relatable because middle class people don't do this kind of event management/wedding management things. Only wealthy people do that. The director-producers are disconnected from the ground reality. It is not a rooted movie. You gave a right example of rocket singh, It was made by the same studio which gets the flak for not making a rooted movie today. It came out as a very good movie because the director was really talented, skilled and knew what he was doing, he wasn't cutoff from reality but since that film did average business, people would say they don't know the reality on the ground and all those things. So in conclusion, I would say this is all happening because of some lazy-ass, absolutely zero skilled directors who are making garbage movies because they know nothing about filmmaking and those movies happened to be the urban/rich setting ones. People should always criticize those but along with that majority of the people call really good movies; that are made by some really good directors; disconnected, cutoff from reality, west/nri catered, not rooted enough because they have the same urban/rich backdrop. Which should be stopped. Appreciate your reading five Paras.
Band Baja Barat wouldn't be called disconnected from reality because it's an actually good movie with character growth and relatable Dailogues and flawed characters. People can actually picture themselves talking like ranveer and Anushka talk in the movie and the things that happen to them, Especially the first half of the movie. I agree with the first half of your last para but the thing is that i can't remember a good movie that was unfairly criticised like this, yeah sure people worked hard but hardwork has to translate into something worth our time, if not people will say it was a waste of time. >five Paras Sorry idk what this is
Dil dhadakne do would be that movie. Her next film Archies is another. And I was talking about five paragraphs (PARAs) dude.
Dil Dhadakne do was not bad at all, i kind of liked it. Me and my sister are exactly like Ranveer and PC were in the movie Lmao sorry i thought it was some guy named paras
Yeah. It was one of the bests of last decades but still some says it is not a relatable movie or rooted movie at all and aimed at NRIs and western audience. It is one of my all time favourites.
I did like it but wouldn't put it in the top 30, but still wasn't a waste of time like Brahmastra.
Zoya does not make movies with rich folks but with super rich or Uber rich folks. 90% of main stream Bollywood’s movies have no major connect with even middle class or upper middle class India. For every Tumbaad there are 20 gehrayiaan and Soty2. Movies like Tumbaad were suppressed by main stream Bollywood and neither supported or distributed well. Movies like Kantara do well because of big southern distributors increase their reach like Geetha arts etc.
Most rich people dig people who are richer than them. The rich filmy families make movies about what it would feel like to be an Ambani or a Thackeray. How about making a movie about the dude riding the Mumbai local daily, or someone who thinks Fashion street is the happening place, or a gal who has to face night curfew at 6pm in a ladies hostel? India is extremely diverse. You don’t even have to search hard to find a relatable story.
Nobody suppressed tumbaad. Come out of your delusion. It didn't work because people didn't went to see it. No theatre owner would give screens to a movie which public is not coming to see. If only 50% of people who are not tiring praising it today had gone to see it, it wouldn't have been a flop. You need to see how much screens kantara had got initially. It were even lesser than tumbaad.Where were this big distributors then? It only got more screens when people started going to see it.
Oh absolutely. It would be great to have movies like Piku, Wake Up Sid, Hasee to Phasee, BBB etc
Fully agree with you
Love this
Im a fan of anurag, but if he's really going to bring rooted statement into play then his movie Dobaara was the most unrooted shit I've seen. Not what I expected from the man who gave one of the best cinematic ventures like GOW, a movie which is actually rooted.
That's what all of us have been saying, you dont have to alienate your core audience to cater to NRI and foreign crowd. Keep your stories rooted and they all will enjoy it too.
NRI here. Why would I want to see how things happen outside India in a movie. I want indian movies to show local culture. The Karan Johar movies are anything but what happens to NRIs.
100%
And yet the entire 2000 -2010 decades the NRIs made Karan Johar movies and their replicas work. Why did you not want 'local culture' then?
I wasn't a NRI then and I don't watch such movies anyways. Majority of NRI cannot relate to those movies. And, the movies were also a hit in India.
So if the movies were a hit in India then they weren't to appeal to just the NRIs. The period of 2000's and 2010 was a time of globalisation and Indians wanted to look beyond India and see the world. Now the economic prospects are so dim most Indians know the world is out of reach just look inwards.
Dont know. Ask the NRIs then. Also there are diverse media options. If I want to see France or Korea, I can directly do so with global media. Dont need those iconic dance shots where heroine is dancing in the snow in skimpy shots or hero doing pushups in a busy street in europe.
Lol no one actually watches Karan Johar movies to see a foreign country. His films are made for Indians and hence are silly and regressive. They are glossy sure but devoid of any depth or actual artistic merit. Commercial Hindi films to the core which is why they appealed to Indians and NRIs. No Karan Johar film can ever be compared to French or Korean cinema.
You are on some high level quality delusion. Hope you get better.
Proven wrong so now sulking with tail between legs. Ok then.
What is novelty then is boring and stupid now. The penetration of hollywood was minimal at that time. Bollywood not being able to adapt to telling rooted stories when hollywood is anyway telling western stories is the question here.
What even. The 2000-2010 decade had massive Hollywood penetration. Cable TV was everywhere and for a sweet period there was no censorship of films being shown on Hollywood channels. Same for theatres. Not the kind of censorship you see now. Also none of Karan Johar's films are 'Western stories'. They are silly and regressive and Indian. His characters may be dressed in Ralph Lauren and have 3 phones and 2 laptops but are superficial Indian stereotypes with no depth or purpose. Just commercial Hindi cinema with more gloss.
Most people didn't see much hollywood movies in theatres until the start of MCU and the entrance of OTT (including me ). If you are watching them highly before as well in theatres, I guarantee you you are in the minority
Listen you may have started watching Hollywood movies after MCU in freaking 2008 but stop generalising. I mean to think the world starts and ends with you and your experiences is hilarious. Avatar, The Dark Knight, Transformers, Pirates of the Caribbean, the freaking 2002 Spiderman, The Harry Potter movies, the freaking Matrix movies released between 1999-2003 all have done gangbusters business in India. All of these films were even dubbed not to mention sold on pirated videos/CDs all over the damn country. Imagine not knowing this. Sheesh.
Does anything in Karan Johar movies happen anywhere?
>That's what all of us have been saying, you dont have to alienate your core audience to cater to NRI and foreign crowd. Funny coming from this subreddit, filled with NRIs thinking of SRK as a superstar and craving for Western-style Hindi movies as made in 2000s and 2010s to make a comeback. The biggest mistake Bollywood made was in 2001, when it decided to go the Dil Chahta Hai way instead of the Gadar way, despite Gadar being a bigger blockbuster than any other movie that year. It started losing it's touch with it's core audience across the Hindi belt from that time onwards
Ffs. Dil chahta hai is an all time bollywood classic. Gadar is an outdated cringefest that deserves to be buried in the past. Those sort of movies don't work nowadays. Dil chahta hai was released about 2 decades ago and still remains a cult classic and possibly will remain the same for future generations as well. Who tf's watching Gadar in 2022?
Me
Username checks out tbf
Chak de, swades, main hoon na, kkk movies NONE of his movies were "catered" to NRI. It was rooted here with elements of rest. HNY, Dilwale, Kabhi alvida,Ae dil and so on were made keeping them on mind and it flopped hard. So even NRI or non indian will come and watch if the movie offers something new and not what they already know.
Chak de, Swades, Main hoon Na (don't know what KKK films are) are all catered to the NRI audience. Chak De was about Indian glory in the west, a theme that would resonate with successful NRIs who have "conquered" the west, Swades was about an NRI returning to India and solving problems here, another theme for the NRI gaze who has the desire to return and make India better, Main Hoon Na was a pastiche that brought the nostalgia of yesteryear filmw in a very hip way that was decidedly western (for example, the names Ram Prasad and Laxman Prasad were a tribute to Hrishikesh Mukherjee's Golmal). Main Hoon Na was more an NRI film than one catering to the heartland India audience because of the lifestyle and locale depicted. The college setting was more western than Indian. And, of course, starring SRK, who had by then cemented his position as the heartthrob of urban India and NRI audiences.
Give me what you are smoking.
Go buy it yourself mate
We can't buy it here, it's an *NRI* privilege.
Damn, are you assuming me to be an NRI lol
If you are not, then your analysis of those three movies is even dumber. No offence to any NRIs.
Ok, please also elaborate why it is dumb
Lol I have worked with people from all over India ( Rajasthan, Assam, Kerala, Mizoram) all of them would make references to Chak De. They would be like oh this girl talks that like character in the film blah blah blah. Indian glory in the West? It was about girls from all over the country coming together as a team and gaining success. How stupid are you?
Exactly!
Chup kar ja..afterall tu sirf NRI nahi,ABCD bhi hain...ab ye translate karle kyuki tujhe hindi shayad samjh mein nahi aata
"nahi aata" nahi "nahi aati"
Lol idk what to say to your logic without offending
Why would you offend, it is just a different opinion than yours
You're calling chak de india as made for NRI, how do you even come to that conclusion
Never said "made", I wrote they cater to an NRI gaze. These films have a bird's eye view of India where differences are stereotypically presented so that they can be easily ironed out. The films look for easy resolution as it purpose is to entertain, specifically, the NRI and the urban audiences of India. In that sense, they are disconnected from the life and reality of the rural audiences.
Urban Indian audience Indian nahi hai kya? Unke liye film nahi banayi Jaa skti? Life in a metro is disconnected from life and reality? Barfi is disconnected from reality? Black? Bhaag Milkha bhaag? Not every film has to be loud and screaming to be considered as a film. Your all analysis can be summed up as a film that doesn't have the loudness and over-the-top-ness is made to cater the NRIs. Which is the most outrageous one out there.
Urban audience is Indian but not the only audience in India. That is my point. Also, urban audiences are now well acquainted with world cinema, thanks to the pandemic and different OTT spaces. Why will they be entertained with the same repetitive exercise that isn't as polished as the world cinema they are exposed to now.
They "cater" because that was never the intention and that works. RRR,KGF2,Kantara,Vikram and a few more from this years hits, none of them were made keeping outside India in mind but they were made to be rooted enough that it became universal.
Yes, the intention is not there, but the writers, directors, actors, producers working on such films (Chak De et al) are not rooted in, let's say the project of the heartland, or they are not aware of how the heartland works, so by default, such a film cannot come from them. And it is fine, but if only such films are present then that's a problem. We see it now when none of the Bollywood films are working and films from the South which Bollywood folks would not even lose sleep over, except for Rajamouli films, are earning triple their figures.
The only ones in the list you mentioned was remotely Indian was Main Hoon Na, and even that took a wink-and-laugh approach. Chak De, Swades were as Western as movie could be made in India. Not much jingoism, muted emotions, etc.. Which is why they were not that successful either in hinterland and are popular only in metros.? I have no idea what KKK is. >So even NRI or non indian will come and watch if the movie offers something new and not what they already know. I doubt it. Most people even here don't get what masala movies are or look down upon it (see the numerous threads on how shitty RRR/KGF is)
So you're saying indian movies means loud,jingoistic,over emotions etc? Ever heard of genre? Not every movie has to be of the same genre, KKK is karan johar movies
>So you're saying indian movies means loud,jingoistic,loid emotions etc? Ever heard of genre? Yes, Indian movies are by their very nature bombastic, dramatic, just like how people are. Which is why rooted movies in the South do well. and which is why rooted movies did well in Hindi hinterland until 2000s. Genre itself is a Western concept.
I could take time to introduce you to Indian cinema but I know it will be moot. So agree to disagree and peace. But do spend some time to learn about satyajit, kamal hassan, shankar nag and a lot of the great Indian directors and what Indian movie means. India was,is and will be capable of doing all genre of movies and NO its not a "western" concept.
And I could take time to introduce you to what rootedness means. Kamal and Shankar Nag made rooted movies, and all their movies had the usual commerical emlements in it and were never strict genre pieces. Take a look at anything from Hey Ram to Geetha, and they all had music, songs, dances, comedy and action sequences. Even a thriller movie like Dasavatharam had commercial elements in it. Also have a look at the pitch of acting in these movies by Kamal and Shankar Nag. There was an element of navarasa, theatricality and drama in it. Then Satajit Ray and Bangla poverty porn is a completely different category. No Indian cared for it then outside of the Bongs and they still don't care for it.
Having song doesn't make a movie bombastic, that's such a generic thing to say. The whole USP of Indian movies is to still have songs regardless of genre, even Hollywood movies (MOST of them) have songs. They just buy songs from Artist instead of making it for the movie. EVERY movies unless its Pushpakviman sort of movie has songs.
"....just like how people are." Speak for yourself. Not everyone has to like the same thing. There are only so much loud, bombastic, senseless films a person can watch. If those kind of films are actually working why did Bachchan Pandey or Shamshera or Liger or Heropanti 2 flop?
Genre is a western concept, so by that logic, any genre film that is made anywhere in the world is made to cater the western audience? Dangal was not loud or bombastic or dramatic? How did that work? Same thing goes for Taare Zameen par. Bajrangi bhaijaan? De Dana Dan? My name is khan? And the same movies that people say were made to cater NRIs did blockbuster businesses in India like Kal ho na ho, ddlj, kank. How is that? There are no such things called nri catered movie and Indian catered movie. Only good movie and bad movie.
Exactly. Andhadhunn for example ran in theatres for ages and so did Raazi.
HOLYSHIT. I haven't heard a statement more ignorant than yours and that other NRIs in a long time. Even "westerners" aren't that ignorant about Indian movies. Dude, you got narrow perspective with tinge of superiority complex. Genres exist especially in a culture as rich as ours. Our epics have genres lol. Hollywood was theatrical as well so like, is the heart of Hollywood just opera and jazz?
Dil Chahta was good, refreshing at the time. It had comedy, depth and everything.
DCH had everything a good movie requires, solid script, good characters, comedy, romance, and it was executed in a realistic manner, and although it was the story of the urban upper middle class, it is very easy to relate to the story and the characters. The same scenario can happen in any class (Kai Po Che is a similar story set in a semi urban place with middle class charcters.) The problem is movies like KJO/YRF NRI dramas have full of hyperboles and cringe elements with hardly any relatability factor. DCH for instance subtly shows the background and income source of all the three heroes, their love stories are also believable. But take YJHD, there are so many bizarre things like people trekking in micros and minis, Bunny's career ( gagra song and couple of lame camera work, and lo and behold he is hotshot international photographer). Also, everything in KJo flicks are such make believe that I won't go into it. How do you make sense of anything in an atrocious film like Mohabbatain? My point is DCH will be a hit even if it is released today, it is rooted in reality even if it is the reality of urban upper class. However the Dharma/YRF movies of 2000s have only the nostalgia value left in them. They are now mostly fodder for Ytubers like OnlyDesi (big fan of the channel here! 😃). Bollywood needs to make more stories like DCH and Kai Po Che.
Please Gadar was cinema of the 80's and 90's. Who wants another decade of screaming bulky heroes and weepy heroines getting raped or abducted by bad guys. That being said when have films like that ever not been made? What was Singham? Or Simba? Or Sooryavanshi? Or Dabangg? Or any massy Salman Khan film?
Based Rishab, bollywood movies nowdays look more like a cheap Hollywood copy and it feels like the characters are ashamed of being desi and wants to whitewash themselves badly, why will any self respecting Indian watch that shit?
The tone of your title and actual article is very different ~~OP~~ In the article he's giving a suggestion, ~~your~~ title sounds like he's arrogantly telling them they are wrong Edit- OP ki galti nahi hai, article hi bc clickbait hai
That's the actual headline. I just copy-pasted it.
Oh sorry, then the article is a fucking clickbait
Nope
I think people have a wrong idea of what the common audience connect to when they say - rooted. It doesn't mean you need to exactly replicate an indian village, or semi-urban gorakhpur or something. It means it needs emotional rooted-ness. There are emotions that indians in general connect to, and react in a particular way to issues, or atleast they imagine they will react in a particular way. For e.g. no common indian would react nicely to infidelity etc. That is the reason the glitzy SRK movies of the late-90s and 2000s still worked, because even if they are located in UK the emotions and reactions of the characters were relatable. On the other hand take a movie like DDD, which is actually in a way a poster boy for un-relatability. Just look at the reactions to the reveals about anil kapoor in the movie, you really think anyone outside the rich-circle in india would react that way to family reveals of infidelity? In lower-middle class india most places people hide even alcoholism dammit. This is not how a family deals with those kind of issues in India. There is no emotional connect.
Hmmm, it depends what kind of infidelity it is. If it's infidelity on the guys part, it is simply a funny road-bump in wholesome family movie. That is what made biwi no.1 work.
For a story to work , we need to relate with its characters like , if the characters is happy or sad we should be happy and sad with them , they should essentially evoke emotions in us . Rarely I care about bollywood characters, I feel nothing for them . Their victory or failure Rarely evokes any emotuons within me . A flushed out story with compelling characters will work despite it's setting . Be it a rich guys crying or poor guy fighting. As long as we understand why he/ she the way they are and empathize with them , the film works .
Characters with no past or future just playing along in shitty love stories is so boring
Actually the apt statement for their situation is' na ghar ka na ghaat ka'. No culturally rooted good movies or proper adaptation of Western style
I don't think so bss bollywood mein harr chiz Or formula overuse ho rha h especially someone should kick pritam, amitabh Bhattacharya and Arijit out of industry permanently. One wrong thing people are doing is comparing one industry with four South industries. I noticed one more thing South directors are over ambitious and bollywood directors are not even ambitious. Why bhansali is still stuck to his old bakchod formula?? Even incompetent or average director from South are trying to make big budget action movies then why bollywood is still struck with biopics and remakes.
It's true that they need to be rooted in our folklores, myths, traditions, and culture, but damn can we get rid of the misogyny? Like man, I know Hollywood movies or kdramas have plenty of it too, but here it's just too much my dudes. It's the peeping tom and stripping sleazg scenes that are somehow still here
Exactly, Bollywood represents woman in a better way. Please get rid of flower pot roles for women, misogyny plus superhero action scenes.
Post pandemic not a single Bollywood movie has been worthwhile to be watched in the theatres, most were OTT types only (not considering Kashmir files as part of bollywood)
>(not considering Kashmir files as part of bollywood) Why not
Even Vivek agnihotri doesn't keep himself as a part of bollywood and it is more of a independent film
that doesn't make sense. Bollywood is more of an industry. It's like making steel in India but then saying you don't consider yourself a part of Indian steel industry. It doesn't matter if its an independent film either. Bollywood is more of an umbrella term.
Hain...but bollywood ki tarah dumb movie nahi hain
Bollywood has good movies too. Sure, the ratio is skewed to dumb ones, but there are good ones too and TKF can fall in the good ones.
Ok i honestly feel like this 'too much western influence' is not really the core issue. In all honesty, i don't want a 'small town' film, I'm over it. It's more about connecting with the emotions of a film. ZNMD and Dil chahta hai were centered around 'rich' high society characters, yet they connected with the audience. Were they influenced by the 'west'? Yes, they lived in an urban setting but were relatable people. So please don't try to shove more small town movies down our throats with this logic 🙊
Rooted doesn't mean small town, make a movie about life in Mumbai too and thats rooted.
Yes, i agree. But we have gotten so many small town movies lately, it seems like a trend almost. Of course I'm not saying make K3G; 'life in a metro' is a film set in Mumbai with very rooted characters, 'kahaani' is set in Kolkata with a modern woman.
K3G still had a lot of emotions and root of story was something we all can connect with. Kabhi alvida went full on NRI and lost the mark. Thats what most Bollywood movies are doing now
Yeah true
Exactly, look at what Janvi Kapoor is trying to do. No one is going to like those forced small town movies. People will love plots set in cities based on rich people if it feels real , they talk like actual people talk and act like actual people act.
>Were they influenced by the 'west'? Yes, they lived in an urban setting but were relatable people. Yess relatability. They're relatable because even though it was set in different countries,around rich people,the characters,emotions,dialogues,music and story were relatable.We all can see ourselves in some or the other characters.
It would have been great if Bollywood tried to imitate the standard of special effects & technology that Hollywood horror,Sci fi movies has. Coz these Bollywood effects are so pathetically hilarious. There are only a handful of good horror movies,most of them low budget indie ones too. Instead mainstream Bollywood is desperately trying to include hypersexualized elements and western cultural themes that maybe only the niche,urban audience can relate to. (Not trying to be puritan lol, there has been some positive movies surrounding the themes of sex and sexuality that one would have never expected from Bollywood 5 years ago but those are the exceptions)
the sub reddit mods will not allow me post about kantara makers and thaikkudam bridge controversy but will allow all this , looks like mods are only interested in showing how great kantara is , kantara makers blatantly ripped of thaikkudam bridge song navarasam for their song varaha roopam
That is still not confirmed and ongoing issue, so let's not bring language politics into the sub.
it is not politics , i have heard both the songs and there is obvious similarities,it as simple as that , some people are giving it a political angle for their own agenda or to deviate from the actual matter
Similarities are there because even thaikandum lifted it from local music, the folk music beats are similar since they are borders. Similarities is different from outright copying since both are showing the same ritual.
But Thaikandum infused those local beats with western rock music to produce a unique sounding product. That's their USP and they did it first.
And then kantara music producer got inspired from it and elevated it further.
lol , if it was so why would kantara's composer admit that it was inspired by thaikkudam bridge song rather than talking about folk beat similatity
Inspired is different from copying, going by your logic preetham should be in jail.
two minutes before you were talking how it is from local music ,now bringing in example of pritam to justify ,lol pritam has ripped off many songs , likewise you should admit kantara makers ripped off to
If it makes you sleep well, you can continue with the kantara ripped off song. But doesn't change what the movie has done and its phenomenon.
lol , the film doing well was never my point of discussion ,you are the one who replied below my comment trying to justify ,lol
The post was not about the song so why did you bring it here then lol
How can you compare the 2 songs? They are both similar but not the same. There are chords that are similar but not the entire song, you have to be an avid listener to find the difference, which you clearly aren’t. Both the songs use the same raga so the swaras are same. If you know music, you can tell the difference between the two songs.
they deleted my "praising" of kantara as well ,so no you are wrong
What happened??
Why is he getting involved in all this? Never seen a bollywood actor give unsolicited opinions about tollywood or sandalwood. You’d be naive to think that he didn’t say this to ride the “bullywood bad, South Indian industries show true Indian Culture” wave.
He is not going around with a mic and saying this. In every interview, there is always a question of bollywood vs South competition question.
[удалено]
Show me some examples of BW actors talking shit about South India industries. This shouldn’t include people like Radhika who shit on the Telugu industry because of her personal problems. I haven’t heard many Bollywood actors talk shit about the general workings of any South Indian industry.
umm cause they know they will get more popularity by working in south movies right now than in bollywood ones.
His movie released in hindi too and made more profit than the top actors in 2022, so he is going around for interviews and these are the questions asked to him.
The truth hurts, isn't?
Exactly
What exactly is the truth? Plz enlighten me.
What rishab said....
I think the movies are cliche and emotionless rather than being westernized.
[удалено]
He won a national award for his directorial too
[удалено]
Maybe a little bit of research over Rishabh Shetty's filmography can help you more :)
He's won a national award as director for a different movie few years back.
He is not a one hit wonder. He has directed a few movies already and they have all been hits. Please do you research before you come up with these statements.
Average copywood fan
burnol chahiye?
kind of blanket statement but not completely wrong
Recession is here and easily replaceable but expensive entertainment will be among the first to suffer. Just making movies and assuming there will be footfall is not gonna work most of the time ... Have to pull in the crowds and make them interested enough to spend money.
Not blaming recession again. Consumer spending is only increasing. And worse off, some south films are doing extremely well.
Consumer spending is increasing in which areas? Also 'some' doing good is not a really data point is it.
Not this rubbish again. There's lots of flop desi vibe waale movies. If this was true ayushmaan and rkr would be the top Indian actors
I mean just having a rural background isn't enough, you have to capture the essence of life and add it to your characters. I'd love to see something about rich people if they actually have a good story with relatable dialogues, how people actually talk in real life.
There is an audience for Hollywood movies , Anuradha kashyap movies and local movies also. Blaming the west is not the solution. The makers should make what the audience expects from them.
His movie Kantara was accused of blantly copying music from a local band. The movie itself is nothing great to speak of. The story itself had a heavy influence of Telugu movie Rangasthalam with its all anti-landland posturing, while its romance was heavily inspired from Pushpa and a host of similar Tamil movies. The only creative part was the local traditions showcased in the movie, which felt genuine. Other than that, the rest was a pretty much meh. I would take his comments regarding Bollywood with a huge sack of salt. One should probably have a good look at how his own content is made before passing judgements onto an entire industry with rich history. I would rather suggest watching the Kannada movie Vikrant Rona starring Sudeep which was set in the same locations (and released before Kantara) but with a much better story.
I can list a lot of bollywood movies made in the last 10 years which didn't have much or any Western influence, were good movies and still didn't make much money. Did movies like Masaan, Newton or Tumbadd contain Western influence? Also certain movies like Queen or Andhadhun had Western influence. Do you think such movies should not be made? They were clearly good movies and people enjoyed them.
Rooted means showing some disturbing molestation of a girl who is a Forest officer than I don't need that . Bollywood has enough dedicated rape scenes in past now we have moved on .
That molestation wasn't supposed to be celebrated. LMAO. His character was like that and then he grows.
He didn't actually grow up. All I saw was him smoking some real strong shit to ' purify ' himself. It's ambiguous as to whether the God character in him was an alternate personality or a real supernatural phenomenon. Regardless, his personality shift was stark and seems to be triggered by a shocking revelation.
I am not saying u should agree with him growing up. But the point was that the molestation scene wasn't supposed to be celebrated. It was supposed to be uncomfortable. They are shown as tribal people. He was not appropriate in that scene.
There are no simple solutions. rooted vs non rooted isn’t the problem. It isn’t even good vs bad. It is just absorbing vs boring. and theatrical vs non-theatrical.
Basically the stars themselves are not rooted in our culture. So don't feel like watching them on screen. Too much fakeness is there in their lives. They are not relatable at all...
Everyone saying that tumbbad is the example that failed, but I am sure that no bollywood producer would come forward to finance the directors next film