Hello chennai guy sridevi is from andhra pradesh if you don't know. Don't feel so proud about her, there are better actresses you should be proud of such Vaijayantimala bali and padmini and so many.
She is best actress in Bollywood ever.....I'd say a package! Absolutely stunning& beautiful, Amazing acting skills touched with best comic sense.......a on top one of the bestest dancer! Love u Sri
@sabbirsa True what you said. Dont you agree though how Sri is beautiful and "slim" unlike her so called rivals who look today total cylinders? Now beautiful that is opinion but slim is a fact :)
@halimali Yes I think she has maintained herself really really well. I saw her during the lakme fashion show. she was wearing this golden gown designed by neeta lulla. the lady looked like a million buck. she was just gorgeous. and she has a tall, curvaceous figure.
a born actress, a true beauty, graceful and a sensuous natural dancer with timeless appeal. Her performances, Chandini, Lamhe, Judai, Moonram Pirai were simply outstanding... Life and the filmworld have not quite given her the crown she deserved but she is much loved by all who appreciated her. She is still magical and absolutely delightful and has only become more beautiful, within and without.
sridevi was the rage of the nation at this time...are you aware that she was offered a film by steven speilsberg only to turn it down...she was also the first choice for Beta, Baazigar, Darr and Hum Aapke hain kaun!! Now what a career that would have been?? Madhuri's career without HAHK..?? no career!!
Hi..iam a fan of sri..but i must admit that if divya is still alive she would have been the next sridevi..pray that divya would be reborn as an actress again. God bless her.
divya would have been a modern sridevi, sridevi has an innocence that no one could have matched.. divvya is sadly missed too everytime i hear a song from her films
Sri is by no doubt still looking pretty and young as always. I think the bollywood actress age 40 and above like her and madhuri and rekha all know very well on how to maintain their youthful looks
hafeez07- First of all, Rekha is 56 yrs old. So considering her age she still looks very stunning. And please watch the promo of Madhuri's new movie. She looks extremely beautiful and stunning as always with the million dollar smile that she only pocess.
Hi Sabbir ..Hafeez was merely saying that Madhs, Sri and Rekha know how to maintain their looks..and yes Rekha is much older and stunning...so is Hema who is slightly older...i happen to adore Madhs2 and prefer her over Sridevi...and yes that smile will linger for a long time in my mind...but doesnt mean i will undermine another actress cause she's my favs...Sridevi looks absloutely stunning here ( for her age ) dances well too and she was a fine actress also...
Sridevi looks super sexy and she dances so gracefully. She is in my opinion the best actress in india. Just to let all sri fans know that she is making a guest appearance in the new movie called halla bol which stars ajay devgan, and i have read in many places that she will be making a full comeback to movies very soon, Cant wait!
Stunning! I never thought she could improve on the original number shot in 1987, but Sridevi has disproved even an ardent admirer like me. She is the very best. After she left Bollywood there has been nobody to fill her void. The actresses of todays are like maids before this Queen.
Sridevi's childlike personailty in some of her movies resembles big brother 7 nikki grahame. Srdevi is the best as well as madhuri, I just cant choose who becuz both are gold.
is that all sharukh is good at, screaming ladies, running after a girl and making them fall in love with them, breaking up marraiges, and that boy next door character. dont you think these characters are very simple to play, but do except sharukh is the best wen it coms to by next door character. all sharukh does is plays himself, never plays a convincing character.
Steven341- So!!! Who Cares? He is a hit !! People love him both in India and outside india. Directors are ready to pay him 7 million per film. He can buy everybody's asses with that money. And that is called the power my friend. You will never understand.
faraar231- cntd...That is why KANK, unlike the other Karan johar movie did not work as well at the box office. The film was very close to being flop but luckily got saved. The reason is that people do not want to know the reality and would rather live in denial especially when it comes to their traditional views. They are likely to accept those subject matters that do not challenge their mainstream thoughts.
Thats Us, Indias, we are like this. It's not good, it's not bad. So KANK will have all of that, Omkara won't. KANK will be a succesful product, Omkara would be a succesful Cinema.
faraar231- I found KANK to be a very realistic movie. Unlike kran johars last movies, KANK explores the dark or the real side of every relationship which the mainstream society does not seem to accept. Infidelity is very real yet very controvercial in south indian society. I liked the way Karan has handled the subject matter.
Omkara would be a cult classic, like Maqbool, its for people who like to see smart cinema, yes cinema as in international cinema and not fillums. I don't think Othello is a subject that will go down well with "junta" they like singing, dancing, crying. Omkara has singing, dancing and crying, but it will be similar to things in our lives. We don't like it, we like entertainment through escapism, surrealism and at times sadomaschoism. -
faraar231- Cntd... Kank explores the incompatibility subject matter of a relationship. Both the protagonists in the film find their marriage to be incompatible. Incompatibility is does not exist in the relationships in our society. No matter how incompatible you feel you MUST work it out. My question is why? Also a man walking out of a relationshi because of this reason is okay but as soon as a women does the same thing then hell freezes over.
Commercially KANK. Indian Men and Women love watching grown Men and Women cry, they love hamming, they love over exaggerated emotions, Karan Johar is very good at this. I am very sure critics and fans would love KANK. Half decent performances from SRK and AB(s), already this film would be winning all the awards.
faraar231- Cntd... As soon as a women does that the society gives her the reminder "Think about the children" as if it is only women's responsibility. What about those good for nothing men who uses the excuse "I do not have that fatherly instinct". BULL SHIT !!
And why not. Since who made you the judge to judge who people should like or not. Everyone has different taste just like you. You are not god faraar so stop acting like one and let people enjoy w/o making unnecessary and idotic comment.
since bollywood has gone global, the film devdas was promoted and advertised worldwide, for indians and non indians, and it is not that long since madhuri left the industry. sridevi left the industry 11 years ago, where bollywood wasn't as global, and sridevi's nagina song was 21 years ago, how did didem know her, when bollywood wasn't much global.
faraar231- Men are women although biologically different but goes through the same emotions so there shoud not be any defferentiation. KANK explores this and I am very proud of Karan for making an effort to diverge away from the usual "glamourous" and "happy go lucky" nature of love.
faraar231- What about the film "Mother India". The film was nominated in the best foreign film category in the oscars and the film released in the 1950s way before sridevi came to the industry. And that was the beginning of bollywood becoming global.
I don't know. Maybe she has an Indian friend and she slept over her friends house and happen to stumble accross both songs at the same time. My god how retarded and ridiculous your question is.
faraar231- Since you were so obsessed with Sridevi's Nagina dance being copied by the turkish belly dancer I have another good news. Well good news for me but bad for you, Madhuri's Maar Dala has been copied by the same dancer (Didem). Just typer maar dala and scroll down the page you will find it.
khakee was not a flop, khakee was a blockbuster, what are you talking about, I did not mention the film dushmani, I said ajay did fantastic dushmani with legendary actor amitji, anyone else wud of hammed it. Dilip saab just did not do romantic films, watch saudagaar, his action, duniya and more, and these anit romantic films, the way he utters dialogue in duniya, whcih sharukh in don and raamjane cud not do just overact.
Khakee is a box office failure. It was a critical success. With Dilip Sahab I am talking about his films at the beginning and best phase of his career. He was always known as a romantic hero. Just look at his films when he was young. You have watched only two or three films of him. I have watced him in Devdas, Tarana, arzo, ram aur shyam, jogan, madhumati paigam. These are films that are way better than Saudagar and Duniya and he appeared as romantic lead. These are films frm the 50s.
faraar231- By using rude gestures you are making a fool out of yourself. Look at me I am making my comments without any rude references and very calmly because at the end of the day these comments does not matter anymore in the sense that bollywood is a fantacy. You can fantacise about it for a littile while but eventually you will have to wake up.
faraar231- Amir and Shahrukh are very good friends. There is nothing between them. Being the best in the business, and yes I am saying that from the majorities point of view, who would not have a little arrogance? I mean he is extremely famous in India and globally, has had so many successful films, has won so many awards theres bound to have a little arrogance. Hell if I was in his shoes I would have been the same.
He is a loser!All of his roles are the same shit.He is a nonprofessional actor.he showed that in to make fun of amir. Amir is his father in things like acting. Amir can play all types of roles. Funny,romantic, the typical Hindustani, the modern, and historical roles. And what can Srk? He plays in all his movies the boring role of devdas, which isnt even a role.He plays himself in all his shity movies. What a arroganz! He thinks he is the God of bollywood. Bootlicker Bastard.
faraar231- I thin k you have difficulty understanding english. I never compared Dilip Kumar's acting with Shahruk's. I compared their genres. Dilip Sahab was a romantic actor. He did romantic movies according to that days standards.
faraar231- Actually don't blame him for thinking like that. The audience has made him think this way. He can afford to be a little arrogant because he has come to the best phase of his career. His movies moght be boring to you but people love them. Now you cannot really say that the majority are stupid can you? Then this will make you arrogant and a hypocrite.
do not compare sharukh to legendary dilip saab, sharukh cant say an expensive hindi dialogue. sharukh hams and stamer throughout the film. who ajay cant do bazzigaar, he did very challenging dushmani with the legend amitji in khakee, if sharukh was in khakee he wud would spoiled it with his hamming. that is wat you call an actor, all sharukhs film with amitji was all the same, yash and karan
faraar231- Dushmani and Khakee was a flop so thats that. Which means the MAJORITY did not like it. I liked Ajay in Deewangee better than Khakee. Look at it this way. Without being so rude and biased both Shahrukh and Ajay have their own nich in the film induatry. And both of them are very good at that. Neither of them are replaceble. Shahrukh has done what he had to do. Ajay has done what he had to do. Both of them are unique and talented.
sharukh cud do better romantic in normal films, but he cant portray that in art film, like ajay who had every different personality of gangster to lover, thank god sharukh wasn't in the film, as we wud have to see another hamering and feet stamping, he cants say a proper dialogue without shaking his head.
faraar231- Its okay. Just like the legendary Dilip Kumar Shahrukh is a mainstream artist. Just as shahrukh cannot do an Omkara, Ajay also cannot do KKHH, DDLJ, Baazigaar and so forth. As I said without being biased and partial both Shahrukh and Ajay have their own genre and both have a solid grip on it.
saif was was astonishing, and did sometimes overshadow ajay, but ajay had to play 3 different characters, he had to play the osbsseive lover, a gangster and a politician.
If anybody deserves an award for Omkara it should be Saif for Langra Tyagi (aka iago) and Kareena for Dolly (aka desdemona). They were both brilliant. Saif was so effective that at one point he makes you despise him which means that he was a perfect villain.
Kareena despite being a men oriented film make such a incredible impact in Omkara. Her scenes with ajay when she pleads that she is not being unfaithful brought tears in my eyes. Especially the Suhag Raat scene she absolutely brilliant. 200 out of 100 on Kareenas performance. Thank god they god so much recognition from filmfare.
steven341- Ofcourse Omkara is different. Never before in bollywood Shakespeare has been made until vishal Bhardwaj made Maqbul (Macbeth) and now Omkara (Othello). I like Shahrukh's romanticism genre. They make me feel good. I do not think any other actor can do it better than him. He has a solid grip on it. His career is very similar to Dilip Kumar, a legend and happens to be Shahrukh's uncle. Dilip Kumar was also a romantic hero and he was extfremely famous for that.
omkara was not a flop, the director got award for the cinematic genius, a song omkara, was the best song of the year. if saif gets the award, that be magnificent, as he perfromed equally to ajay, and did sometimes overshadowed him. omkara was realistic, something different than sharukhs overrated ordinary romance.
steven341- When I said Omkara was a flop I meant it was not a box office success. It is a critical success which is what you said in your comment. I liked Saif as Iago a.k.a Langda Tyagi and Kareena Kapoor as Desdemona a.k.a Dolly. If anyone deseved any awards it is them and they did get a lot of recognition. Nontheless, Ajay was also very good as Othello a.k.a Omkara.
Shilpa is a liar, and she intentially created this big argument, to get publicity. There was nothing racist what jade said. Who is that talentless bitch at the top dancing, even jade cud do better than this with her eyes closed.
sharukh is jeolous of other films like omkara, ajys perfromance who fitted the character, saifs villianous role, amirs film going to oscar, sharukh cant offer any talents, which is why he is making old remakes, does don character really suit him, he's still stuck with kara johars yash's pathetic films, a typical ordinary romantic films that include running and sing around trees, watch the real omkara, that will beat any of sharukhs film hands down.
faraar231- There is a guy named steven341 who is saying rubbish just to provoke. I think he is related to calvinwayne. Lets ignore him and not make any comments.
faraar231- I am not going to argue anymore with this. Again the yash and karan deiscussion, versatility blah blah. Very overrated discussion. Well I do not men to dissapoint you but Omkara was a huge flop and probably will not give Ajay a NA. But Saif and Kareena might get it.
He dominated by the romantic films he makes, and this makes him popular with girls who don no alot about acting, and wat do you mean hypothses, everyone can see, sharukh is totally not coparable to amir or ajay in versatility, probably he had box office hits, but that does not make him the most versatile.
if you read many of reviews on sharukh khan mouthshut, a lot of the commenters have said sharukh khan is lucky, it is laughable when he is compared to acting legend amir khan. all his films were from yash camp, and every time he does something different he fails, like swadesh was not commercially succesful, becuze his fans do not like him in these roles. sharukh has the same expression who cant utter a dialogue properly without moving and stammering, with same expression, lip movement.
faraar231- I get surprized at you every time you make a comment. You make these ridiculous hypotheses and expect everyone to believe you without having any logical proof whatsoever. Its completely ridiculous and childish. "a lot of" -- plese give me a statistics. No one in their right mind would believe you. Since you cannot prove yourself rationally you incorporate cheap comments.
LOBS was not comercially succesful, but it was because of his powerful expression as Bagat singh, he received critical acclaim, and also received another NA.
faraar231- Your ridiculous obsession with NA continues. That is the only defence you got. It is very sad. Shahrukh has dominated filmfare, zee, stardust, iifa. So what? What are you tring to Proof? Say something I do not already know. Its getting really boring. You repeat yourself a millionth time.
ajy may had flops, but sharukh was lucky, he has yash chopra films to give him success, but like i said all his film are the same, nothing new, same old expression, but ajy did not need big hits like sharukh to be recognize as an actor, he had average zakhm, with small director, and it is because of his perfromance, he was the actor of the year in 1998 which he received NA.
faraar231- Well even though I do not agree your biased comments which has no proof what so ever, lets say that "luck" has bent the laws of probability on the chosen one and that is Shahrukh.
faraar231 - Lets not argue anymore about this. It is getting boring because you are again repeating the same subject matter. I have explained myself very clearly and convincingly. Lets not argue and get on with our lives. Shahrukh is Shahrukh there can never be a replacement for him and same for Ajay. They are both talented in their own ways.
paheli the fairytale, again thats all he can do romance such as fairytale, 2006Don he will be never excepted as don, KANK again the same love story, that is over 30 romantic films, more than Kajol.
Paheli is actually based on a novel named "dubhidha". I loved shahrukh as the lovable ghost and the selfcentred husband. As I repeated myself earlier Indian audiences do not give a damn about versatility. Most film stars in the film industry has his/her genre that he/she is good at. Like the legendary Dilip Sahab, Shahruk's genre is romanticism and he is very good at playing them. There is nothing wrong about that.
darr 1993, KHKN1994, DDLJ1995 and karan arju, 1996 was bad year, as he trid to be different but failed with chahat and english babu desi main, 1997DTBH, 1998KKHH, dilse the film failed because of sharukhs overacting, and yet again people did not like him to be different. 1999 bad year, and he tried to be different but failes so he carries on with romance, 2000 Mohabatai, 2001KKKG, devdas, 2003KHH, 2004MHN, veerzara, 2005
If we count Ajay's flop films Shahrukh will loose for sure. The only good year that he had was 2002 (Bhagat singh and company). Lets see after phool aur Kaate he had , 1993 (8 flops), 1995 (2 flops), 1996 (1 flop), 1997 (Ishq a hit), 1998 (2 flops but Zakhm was a critical success), 1999 (HDDCS a hit), 2000 (raju chacha a flop), 2001 (3 flops) and if I go on there will an enormous list. So as you can see faraar231 Ajy has more flops than shahrukh.
hey ram, he was there for 5 minutes, and all he did was cry, anyone could done that role, the dialogues for so simple, wat was so good about the perfromance, it just a special appearence, anjaam was ok, but this film was over 12 years ago, after that he was repetative, and every time he tried to be different, he failed, like in koyla, chahat, guddu, raamjane, 12ka4 etc.
As I said versatility is bad for shahrukh. People are so mesmerised by his lover boy image that they always want him to do this kind of films. So far he is getting away with all the icing on the cake and it is working. Good for you shahrukh, we never want you to change. F**k versatility.
faraar231- Let us stick to the topic. Do not bring Kajol into this. It is about Shahrukh vs vesatility (or Ajay, Amir). Lets compare apples with apples not with jackfruit.
faraar231- When I said that Kajol's films are overrated I said that she always have the same theme but not shahrukhs. Yes for the past few years he does but not always. I proved my point with my so what comment about versatility very convincingly by comparing dhoom 2 and omkara. If you still cannot see the picture then take some time to think.
saif did have a meaty role, because he played a disabled character as a villian, and because of justice to this role, he stole the show, but ajy was one with powerful dialogues than saif.
faraar231- I think hear and there Shahrukh did some different films. His performance in Anjaam was fantastic, watch him in Kabhi Ha Kabhi Na -- he is wonderful, also hey ram! speaking tamil perfectly and portraying the character with conviction, raju ban gaya gentlemen the struggling boy in mumbai searching for fame and foutune is wonderful.
faraar231- Read Othello first and you will know. Saif and Jay had the exact same chracter to play so therefore there were no patiality. Stop blaminf saif for being so brilliant.
Sabbir86, you always say so what, but is it fare to say sharukh is the most versatile actor today, when he doesn't have much to offer other than being a lover boy, and comparing him to amir, ajay, amitabh is being harsh. you say kajol is overrated becuz of the boy meet girl, than why is it diff with sharukh, he did more of girl meet boy than kajol.
faraar231- I never said that Shahrukh is versatile. In fact the whole matter of versatility came out of you. I said that people in India (majority wise) do not care about versatility. They love shahrukh as the lover boy image and I am afraid he does it really well. So from the majority point of view "so what". You might think that he overacts but other people think differently. Do not expect them to think the same way!
faraar231- I said "so what" from the Indian audiences perspective. I will repeat for the last time, Indian audience (majority) do NOT care about versatility. Look how they were mesmerized by dhoom 2 and completely rejected Omkara. I think I have made my point very clearly. And what do you mean is it fair? It depends on people's taste and preference and they happen to love shahrukh in the lover boy image. No one has to agree with you.
faraar231- Yes Yash Chopra's films are about colourful indian costumes, karwa chaut, eid, holy all are important elements of south asian and indian culture. He interprets them in his film wonderfully.
There is nothing wrong about that. Like shahrukh he also focuses on romanticism (silsila, lamhe, chandni, Darr, DDLJ, DTPH) thereby having a solid grip on this genre. Good for him.
Sabbir you mention KHKN, but in this film again, he played a lover boy role, karan arjun was hit, salamn steals the show, because he looked more of a action man and acted better than sharukh, sharukh still had that lover boy image in karan arjun. apauran with ajay and nana should of been the best film of the year with black, nana's and ajays jodi was great.
faraar231- So what if he played a lover boy role? People loved it and the outcome of Kal ho na ho is right in front of you. See shahrukh does not need to be versatile. Actually you can say that versatility is bad for him because people love him as a romantic hero and he carries it of very well when compared to other actors. And yes "should have been" but not. So forget about it.
out 9 ajay film mention, you only spoke about omkara and goolmaal. omkara perfromance was brilliant, but saif steals the show because he had meatier role than ajay, and yes I also luv saif. golmaal was average, even if you think golmaal was flop, the character was still different. sabbir, wat are saying, company, LOBS, Zkhm Aupaton gangajal are powerful roles, and he put justic to each of his films with right expression, and body language, with perfect dialogue delivery.
faraar231- How can you say that saif had the meatier role? If you nhave read Othello then you will realize that the characters in Omkara has had the same amount of screen space as othello. So do not make saif responsible for portraying Iago so convincingly.
apart from choclately roles these two films were better, yash chopra's film are good, but then he repeats himself. people will like yash's film because, of colour, costumes, exotic location, people will besometimes fooled.
As I said faraar231 I found Vivek's and antra's performance in company more convincing. Vivek as a newcomer was simply fantastic. And Antra being a men oriented film has made her screen presence stand out wonderfully. It is solely my opinion. No one has to agree disagree and I am going to stick to it.
chof0319- "king khan has lost his confidence, his most memorable character would be baazigaar and in swadesh, which he got praised." Look at you !! You have such strong hypothesis but no proof what so ever to support your point. No offence but its completely biased and ridiculous!!
chof0319- Indian audiences (majority wise) do not give a damn about versatility. How would you explain a film like Dhoom 2 getting all the attention and a film like Omkara being a flop? At least Shahrukh has done some quality work (baazigar, anjaam, swades, kabhi ha kabhi na, raju ban gaya gentlemen, darr, KKHH, K3G, KHNH) which are at least way better than dhoom 2. If you really want versatility then you should probably do something. I really would like to see that!!
chof0319- As for Omkara Saif Ali Khan was way better than Ajay and got all the accolades. He was the perfect Iago a.k.a langda tyagi. The fire he infuses in this villaneous role is truely amazing. It felt like the original Iago in Othello.
faraar231- People not only love their movies but also they cannot get enough of it. Their movies become instant hits at the box office. Waht is so bad about romanticism. This world needs more love than violence today. The verdict has been given by the jury whether you accept it or not faraar231.
Gangajaal, Zakhm, qyamat was awful, but it was a hit, then LOBS, and who could of done these powerful characters, and he did win two NA, which is a powerful achievment. king khan is also good, but not as talented as ajay. king khan has lost his confidence, his most memorable character would be baazigaar and in swadesh, which he got praised.
come on, everyone knows ajay with amir is the most versatile actor right now in Bollywood. Look at, these powerful roles films like Company, then Apharan, then Deewanagee, then Golmaal, and then Omkara. His role has been different in almost every movie he has done, and he does justice to each role he does. He also performs to perfection in all his movies, and that makes him the most reliable actor in recent times. All Ajay Devgan needs is more popular movies which can bring him back to the top.
do not say everyone? Is it 10, 100, 10000, 1000000? You do not know so do not be biased. Its solely your opinion and keep it to yourself. Anyone who thinks deewangee and golmal are powerful movies need to check their vision. No wonder they were both flops. Company and Omkara(my favourite) I agree. But I liked Viveks and Antara'a performance in company more than Ajay.
Yeah just like Silsila, Lamhe, Deewar, Daag all of these are overrated isn't it my friend? Only you could have said that. Yash chopra and Karan Johar are one of the biggest and talented directors in bollywood today.
ajay devgan the two times national award winner, will be recognized for ... Ajay R. Desai in zakhm, malik as underworld Don in company, the bhagat singh in LOBS, Yashwant Angre, Former Police Officer in khakee etc. sharukh wouldn't be recognized for don, as it is a remake, people wud not belive him to be don, is raj and rahul, that will be his history, and just a superstar not an actor.
faraar231- The jury (audiences) have reached a verdict. Don is a hit and you cannot do anything about it. Majority rules. As for minority go hide yourself under the closet and curse about shahrukh. The world cannot here you!!!!
please dont compare sharukh to ajay and amir, after a century, what will sahrukh be recognized for, raj and rahul characters in yash and karans film. amir and ajay, will be recognized for ddifferent qualitable charaters. i.e. muna of rangeela, sidharth of safarosh, bhuvan of lagaan, dil chata hai character,DJ/Chandrashekhar Azad of rang de basanti, Sepoy Mangal Pandey and Akash Malhotra.
faraar231- Its okay !! We love shahrukh as the lovable Raj and Rahul. Yash and Karan are the biggest and best film brands in the business, and shahrukh is working with them because he is the best in bollywood (after amitabh, dilip sahab etc. Ajay does not have the status to work with these best brands. He is suitable for working with a c-grade director like Ramu or Mahesh Bhatt. Go shshrukh!! You Rock!!
which don is better, sharkh khan in remake of don or ajay Dev in company. shaukh khan does not have the personality for this character, please just stick to your luvie duvi roles, and dont imitate other actors, by playing Don. Sharukh khan is far behind Ajay as an actor, ajay fits in so many characters, what does your so call sharukh fit in. Sharukh khan, my piece of advice to you is, do your usual romance, and running and dancing around trees, with your overacting screaming.
as an actor sharukh is way behind, people like ajay devgan, amir khan, etc are way ahead of him. as a star and fame he is ahead, but as an actor thats a question? sharukh, just stick to you choclaty role, and karan and yash, forget about being a don, your still a bacha more these manly powerful roles.
sharukh isn't talented enough for parralel, cinema, as he knows, these same old facial expression, same lip movement, same hammering and stammering, wud not convince the the juries.
the only reason director casted him in don, is to make business, as no matter what, people will blindly go and see the film, and praise the overacting. Have you seen raamjaane, he tried do copy amit in agneepath, because of his redulous overacting, film was super duper flop.
faraar231- If you go to the fifth page of comments, under ajaydev12 i have said that NA acknowledeges parallel cinema 95% of the time. The ramaining 5% I left for mainstream cinema. So I was not biased and am safe and absolutely correct.
faraar231- Let me give you some examples of parallel cinema: 1)Arth 2)Mr. and mrs. iyer 3)Black 4)Sadma 5)Ekushe October (bengali) 6) Bariwali (bengali) 7)Godmother 8) Khandar 9) Chandni Bar 10)Machis If I go on there will be a huge list. These were all recognised by NA. The ramaining 5% goes to agnipath, hum tum and other mainstream cinema.
Steve --- I highly recommend you to watch Omkara because i think ajay was very good. But unfortunately more then Ajay its Saif Ali Khan who steals the show althrough with his fantastic performance playing langda tyagi the equvalent of iago in the original othello.
ajaydev12- Unfortunately, historically there has been very few parallel cinema in bollywoods film induatry and the trend continues till date. People in India and in Bangladesh and different parts of South Asia are still facinated by mainstream movies rather than parallel movies. That is why a wonderful film like Omkara has become a flop. Being a huge fan of Othello I thought Omkara was a fantastic movie.
ajaydev12- If you compare hollywoods oscar with NA then you will see that oscar in hollywood considers both parallel and mainstream cinemas while NA only gives greater emphasis on parallel cinema making it unequivalent to Oscar in hollywood. Filmfare on the other hand acknowledges both parallel and mainstream like hollywoods oscar. Shabana Azmi a parallel filmstar like ajay has won 3 bestactress filmfare awards. Also Tabu another parallel film actress has won two best actress filmfare.
sabbir86, If you type "ajay devgan National award rediiff" on google, then it will say ayay winning the NA in 2003, means he was the best actor of that year. Sharukh fans are complaining that he did not deserve this award, and ajay is far to young to win this award. This means, the NA is equivalent to oscars, as sharukh on filmfare through fan votes, ajay won by the juries.
ajaydev12- Please, read my original message. I said that NA being bollywoods oscar is a man made concept. Some people think that filmfare is bollywoods oscar because of its historical and cultural significance in hindi cinema. If you go back to 1953, most prominant film stars (Dev Anand, Dilip Kumar, Raj Kapoor, Vyjanthimala, Nutan, Ashok Kumar) all of them have only won filmfare award. .
faraar231- Let me remind you once again that Omkara is a parallel cinema. Shahrukh is a mainstream artist. Mainstream cinema is the heart of bollywood. 97% of the movies made in bollywood every year are mainstream films. If shahrukh thinks that he wants to do parallel cinema then he will do it. Its his choise.
I JUST LOVE HER!!
nashmoviefreak 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Hello chennai guy sridevi is from andhra pradesh if you don't know. Don't feel so proud about her, there are better actresses you should be proud of such Vaijayantimala bali and padmini and so many.
Debooou 2 years ago
wow....she is totally awesome i am realy proud that she belongs to our motherland TAMILNADU..........
theChennaiguy 2 years ago 2
She is best actress in Bollywood ever.....I'd say a package! Absolutely stunning& beautiful, Amazing acting skills touched with best comic sense.......a on top one of the bestest dancer! Love u Sri
bobbybne 2 years ago 5
2007
chof0319 3 years ago
damn.she still looks good after all these years.and i just love this song.when exactly did this show take place?
igotyou62 3 years ago 2
Who is Bharit, sridevi came before Divya bharti.
chof0319 3 years ago
i guess ppl who are madhuri fans are not allowed to compliment sridevi without getting mobbed, right halimali?
Unifree 3 years ago
I just cant understand bringing Madhuri topic here. This is not even a comaprison video!!! There is no Madhuri mention here
halimali 3 years ago 7
@halimali people are entitled to their opinion. what there to understand? leave them alone.
sabbirsa 1 year ago
@sabbirsa True what you said. Dont you agree though how Sri is beautiful and "slim" unlike her so called rivals who look today total cylinders? Now beautiful that is opinion but slim is a fact :)
halimali 1 year ago
@halimali Yes I think she has maintained herself really really well. I saw her during the lakme fashion show. she was wearing this golden gown designed by neeta lulla. the lady looked like a million buck. she was just gorgeous. and she has a tall, curvaceous figure.
sabbirsa 1 year ago
@halimali and yes w/o a doubt she looks 100x better than the actresses today. no doubt whatsoever.
sabbirsa 1 year ago
I agree Sridevi was so innocent, back in her old movies, cute.
chof0319 3 years ago 3
i'm a madhuri fan and all but omg this woman is hott!!!! she dances so well!!
Unifree 3 years ago 3
theres an innocence sridevi had which just cannot be matched by madhuri, i will always like sri better
zaazi123 3 years ago 3
i guess we all have our own opinions lol .. i'm kinda biased, i think madhuri is better than any actress in this world
Unifree 3 years ago
Unifree. This is a charactersitic of all Madhuri fans. All biazed and try to force their taste on others. Sridevi Ka Jawaab Nahin
halimali 3 years ago
lol i'm not trying to force anyone to do anything.. i'm just saying we all have our own opinions.. but i expected this kind of a response
Unifree 3 years ago
good for u
Unifree 3 years ago
my heart cries when i see what she did to herself, but i love her most of all the actresses (in a non sexual way)
zaazi123 3 years ago 2
a born actress, a true beauty, graceful and a sensuous natural dancer with timeless appeal. Her performances, Chandini, Lamhe, Judai, Moonram Pirai were simply outstanding... Life and the filmworld have not quite given her the crown she deserved but she is much loved by all who appreciated her. She is still magical and absolutely delightful and has only become more beautiful, within and without.
villagebelle 3 years ago 11
Very true indeed.
sabbirsa 3 years ago 2
This woman is SOOOO stunning. Far beyond than madhuri ( always showing her teeth even crying) and aishwerya. Sridevi u Rock!!!!
asheys75 3 years ago 3
well duh!! luks like women in ur country dont shave theirs!!
juliesngh 3 years ago
she shaved her armpit!!!!!beautiful woman
azmipkr 3 years ago
she was 44 in this video but she look younger,hot and sexy
azmipkr 3 years ago
sridevi was the rage of the nation at this time...are you aware that she was offered a film by steven speilsberg only to turn it down...she was also the first choice for Beta, Baazigar, Darr and Hum Aapke hain kaun!! Now what a career that would have been?? Madhuri's career without HAHK..?? no career!!
sujoyshreya555 3 years ago 2
NO SHES MINE!!!!!!!!!! I LOVE HER!!!!
zebie2006 3 years ago
wow she looks AMAZING!i love her so much
lorrybollywood 3 years ago
She looks gorgeous! Reminds me of the late Divya Bharti
divyabhartifan 4 years ago 3
Hi..iam a fan of sri..but i must admit that if divya is still alive she would have been the next sridevi..pray that divya would be reborn as an actress again. God bless her.
dev2000indian 3 years ago
Aww! So sweet of you to say that. Yes, she'd definitely would've been a super star. Both kinda look like sisters.
divyabhartifan 3 years ago 2
divya would have been a modern sridevi, sridevi has an innocence that no one could have matched.. divvya is sadly missed too everytime i hear a song from her films
zaazi123 3 years ago 2
who is Divya
candyluver27 3 years ago
divvya bharti
zaazi123 3 years ago
No to forget Urmila was a big fan of Sridevi.
chof0319 4 years ago 6
She has a little bit of Urmila in her...
nsam 4 years ago 4
oh my god I loooove her sari!!!!
nav4evah 4 years ago 3
Anyone can tell me how old is Sridevi???
227681994 4 years ago 3
she born in 1963..probably 44+
mangil15 4 years ago 2
thanks
227681994 4 years ago 2
work done on gold lame...such a stunning mega star stage presence...leaves her fans speechless....
mayaz85 3 years ago 2
sridevi and hemamalini are the best in all india
finderwg 4 years ago 4
i have only heard about this on youtube from other members, i wish she does though
D9NGR 4 years ago
Sri is by no doubt still looking pretty and young as always. I think the bollywood actress age 40 and above like her and madhuri and rekha all know very well on how to maintain their youthful looks
hafeez07 4 years ago
hafeez07- First of all, Rekha is 56 yrs old. So considering her age she still looks very stunning. And please watch the promo of Madhuri's new movie. She looks extremely beautiful and stunning as always with the million dollar smile that she only pocess.
sabbir86 4 years ago 2
Hi Sabbir ..Hafeez was merely saying that Madhs, Sri and Rekha know how to maintain their looks..and yes Rekha is much older and stunning...so is Hema who is slightly older...i happen to adore Madhs2 and prefer her over Sridevi...and yes that smile will linger for a long time in my mind...but doesnt mean i will undermine another actress cause she's my favs...Sridevi looks absloutely stunning here ( for her age ) dances well too and she was a fine actress also...
tonynaso 4 years ago 3
What a beautyyyyyyy
afggirl2 4 years ago
Sridevi looks super sexy and she dances so gracefully. She is in my opinion the best actress in india. Just to let all sri fans know that she is making a guest appearance in the new movie called halla bol which stars ajay devgan, and i have read in many places that she will be making a full comeback to movies very soon, Cant wait!
D9NGR 4 years ago
its as if da older she gets da more beautiful she is
AusBabe01 4 years ago
I first saw her when I was kid in Nagina. This women is ageless in both her looks and her demeanor. She's absolutley amazing! GO SRIDEVi!!
shizzledaddy 4 years ago
shez an ever green lady
zonnmub 4 years ago
STUNNER! 44...she looks AMAZING!
I want her 2 do a comeback!!
desiprincess4lyfe 4 years ago
Never thought that Sree will appear in big screen again until I saw this clip. Lots of fans are undoubtedly waiting for her comeback...
mujhe24 4 years ago
I LOVE YOU SRIDEVI!!!!!!!!!
naughtyinae 4 years ago
she is still so beautiful!
maileexiong2005 4 years ago
Amazing one by Sridevi!!!
sthitapradnya78 4 years ago
Damn man, she looks as if she is 22,
eltaaf 4 years ago
I love Sridevi, she will always be my favourite! So stunning & gorgeous and still has the moves even though she in her 40s, u go girl!
hippychick12345 4 years ago
Stunning! I never thought she could improve on the original number shot in 1987, but Sridevi has disproved even an ardent admirer like me. She is the very best. After she left Bollywood there has been nobody to fill her void. The actresses of todays are like maids before this Queen.
yusuf001 4 years ago
sridevi looks ABSULOUTLY GORJUZ!!!!!
ILOVELAKSH 4 years ago
she's so damn preety
zunirakhan 4 years ago
she looks fabulous!
treddy13 5 years ago
really, does sridevi really has similar personality as that BB7 nikki.
faraar231 5 years ago
dont people reckon Sridevi's childlike personailty in some of her movies resembles big brother 7 nikki grahame.
srimads2BQ 5 years ago
Sridevi's childlike personailty in some of her movies resembles big brother 7 nikki grahame. Srdevi is the best as well as madhuri, I just cant choose who becuz both are gold.
srimads2BQ 5 years ago
srimads2BQ- I absolutely agree with you. No doubt about that.
sabbir86 5 years ago
is that all sharukh is good at, screaming ladies, running after a girl and making them fall in love with them, breaking up marraiges, and that boy next door character. dont you think these characters are very simple to play, but do except sharukh is the best wen it coms to by next door character. all sharukh does is plays himself, never plays a convincing character.
steven341 5 years ago
Steven341- So!!! Who Cares? He is a hit !! People love him both in India and outside india. Directors are ready to pay him 7 million per film. He can buy everybody's asses with that money. And that is called the power my friend. You will never understand.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- cntd...That is why KANK, unlike the other Karan johar movie did not work as well at the box office. The film was very close to being flop but luckily got saved. The reason is that people do not want to know the reality and would rather live in denial especially when it comes to their traditional views. They are likely to accept those subject matters that do not challenge their mainstream thoughts.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Great number but did Sridevi do her own singing or was she dubbed?
johnyzero2000 5 years ago
Thats Us, Indias, we are like this. It's not good, it's not bad. So KANK will have all of that, Omkara won't. KANK will be a succesful product, Omkara would be a succesful Cinema.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- I found KANK to be a very realistic movie. Unlike kran johars last movies, KANK explores the dark or the real side of every relationship which the mainstream society does not seem to accept. Infidelity is very real yet very controvercial in south indian society. I liked the way Karan has handled the subject matter.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Cntd... Sorry there has been a mistake. it is not "south indian" but rather I meant "south asian" society .
sabbir86 5 years ago
Omkara would be a cult classic, like Maqbool, its for people who like to see smart cinema, yes cinema as in international cinema and not fillums. I don't think Othello is a subject that will go down well with "junta" they like singing, dancing, crying. Omkara has singing, dancing and crying, but it will be similar to things in our lives. We don't like it, we like entertainment through escapism, surrealism and at times sadomaschoism. -
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Cntd... Kank explores the incompatibility subject matter of a relationship. Both the protagonists in the film find their marriage to be incompatible. Incompatibility is does not exist in the relationships in our society. No matter how incompatible you feel you MUST work it out. My question is why? Also a man walking out of a relationshi because of this reason is okay but as soon as a women does the same thing then hell freezes over.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Commercially KANK. Indian Men and Women love watching grown Men and Women cry, they love hamming, they love over exaggerated emotions, Karan Johar is very good at this. I am very sure critics and fans would love KANK. Half decent performances from SRK and AB(s), already this film would be winning all the awards.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Cntd... As soon as a women does that the society gives her the reminder "Think about the children" as if it is only women's responsibility. What about those good for nothing men who uses the excuse "I do not have that fatherly instinct". BULL SHIT !!
sabbir86 5 years ago
And why not. Since who made you the judge to judge who people should like or not. Everyone has different taste just like you. You are not god faraar so stop acting like one and let people enjoy w/o making unnecessary and idotic comment.
sabbir86 4 years ago
since bollywood has gone global, the film devdas was promoted and advertised worldwide, for indians and non indians, and it is not that long since madhuri left the industry. sridevi left the industry 11 years ago, where bollywood wasn't as global, and sridevi's nagina song was 21 years ago, how did didem know her, when bollywood wasn't much global.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Men are women although biologically different but goes through the same emotions so there shoud not be any defferentiation. KANK explores this and I am very proud of Karan for making an effort to diverge away from the usual "glamourous" and "happy go lucky" nature of love.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- What about the film "Mother India". The film was nominated in the best foreign film category in the oscars and the film released in the 1950s way before sridevi came to the industry. And that was the beginning of bollywood becoming global.
sabbir86 5 years ago
I don't know. Maybe she has an Indian friend and she slept over her friends house and happen to stumble accross both songs at the same time. My god how retarded and ridiculous your question is.
sabbir86 4 years ago
faraar231- Since you were so obsessed with Sridevi's Nagina dance being copied by the turkish belly dancer I have another good news. Well good news for me but bad for you, Madhuri's Maar Dala has been copied by the same dancer (Didem). Just typer maar dala and scroll down the page you will find it.
sabbir86 5 years ago
khakee was not a flop, khakee was a blockbuster, what are you talking about, I did not mention the film dushmani, I said ajay did fantastic dushmani with legendary actor amitji, anyone else wud of hammed it. Dilip saab just did not do romantic films, watch saudagaar, his action, duniya and more, and these anit romantic films, the way he utters dialogue in duniya, whcih sharukh in don and raamjane cud not do just overact.
faraar231 5 years ago
Khakee is a box office failure. It was a critical success. With Dilip Sahab I am talking about his films at the beginning and best phase of his career. He was always known as a romantic hero. Just look at his films when he was young. You have watched only two or three films of him. I have watced him in Devdas, Tarana, arzo, ram aur shyam, jogan, madhumati paigam. These are films that are way better than Saudagar and Duniya and he appeared as romantic lead. These are films frm the 50s.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- By using rude gestures you are making a fool out of yourself. Look at me I am making my comments without any rude references and very calmly because at the end of the day these comments does not matter anymore in the sense that bollywood is a fantacy. You can fantacise about it for a littile while but eventually you will have to wake up.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Amir and Shahrukh are very good friends. There is nothing between them. Being the best in the business, and yes I am saying that from the majorities point of view, who would not have a little arrogance? I mean he is extremely famous in India and globally, has had so many successful films, has won so many awards theres bound to have a little arrogance. Hell if I was in his shoes I would have been the same.
sabbir86 5 years ago
He is a loser!All of his roles are the same shit.He is a nonprofessional actor.he showed that in to make fun of amir. Amir is his father in things like acting. Amir can play all types of roles. Funny,romantic, the typical Hindustani, the modern, and historical roles. And what can Srk? He plays in all his movies the boring role of devdas, which isnt even a role.He plays himself in all his shity movies. What a arroganz! He thinks he is the God of bollywood. Bootlicker Bastard.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- I thin k you have difficulty understanding english. I never compared Dilip Kumar's acting with Shahruk's. I compared their genres. Dilip Sahab was a romantic actor. He did romantic movies according to that days standards.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Actually don't blame him for thinking like that. The audience has made him think this way. He can afford to be a little arrogant because he has come to the best phase of his career. His movies moght be boring to you but people love them. Now you cannot really say that the majority are stupid can you? Then this will make you arrogant and a hypocrite.
sabbir86 5 years ago
do not compare sharukh to legendary dilip saab, sharukh cant say an expensive hindi dialogue. sharukh hams and stamer throughout the film. who ajay cant do bazzigaar, he did very challenging dushmani with the legend amitji in khakee, if sharukh was in khakee he wud would spoiled it with his hamming. that is wat you call an actor, all sharukhs film with amitji was all the same, yash and karan
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Dushmani and Khakee was a flop so thats that. Which means the MAJORITY did not like it. I liked Ajay in Deewangee better than Khakee. Look at it this way. Without being so rude and biased both Shahrukh and Ajay have their own nich in the film induatry. And both of them are very good at that. Neither of them are replaceble. Shahrukh has done what he had to do. Ajay has done what he had to do. Both of them are unique and talented.
sabbir86 5 years ago
sharukh cud do better romantic in normal films, but he cant portray that in art film, like ajay who had every different personality of gangster to lover, thank god sharukh wasn't in the film, as we wud have to see another hamering and feet stamping, he cants say a proper dialogue without shaking his head.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Its okay. Just like the legendary Dilip Kumar Shahrukh is a mainstream artist. Just as shahrukh cannot do an Omkara, Ajay also cannot do KKHH, DDLJ, Baazigaar and so forth. As I said without being biased and partial both Shahrukh and Ajay have their own genre and both have a solid grip on it.
sabbir86 5 years ago
saif was was astonishing, and did sometimes overshadow ajay, but ajay had to play 3 different characters, he had to play the osbsseive lover, a gangster and a politician.
faraar231 5 years ago
If anybody deserves an award for Omkara it should be Saif for Langra Tyagi (aka iago) and Kareena for Dolly (aka desdemona). They were both brilliant. Saif was so effective that at one point he makes you despise him which means that he was a perfect villain.
sabbir86 5 years ago
sridevi looks so great
faraar231 5 years ago
Kareena despite being a men oriented film make such a incredible impact in Omkara. Her scenes with ajay when she pleads that she is not being unfaithful brought tears in my eyes. Especially the Suhag Raat scene she absolutely brilliant. 200 out of 100 on Kareenas performance. Thank god they god so much recognition from filmfare.
sabbir86 5 years ago
steven341- Ofcourse Omkara is different. Never before in bollywood Shakespeare has been made until vishal Bhardwaj made Maqbul (Macbeth) and now Omkara (Othello). I like Shahrukh's romanticism genre. They make me feel good. I do not think any other actor can do it better than him. He has a solid grip on it. His career is very similar to Dilip Kumar, a legend and happens to be Shahrukh's uncle. Dilip Kumar was also a romantic hero and he was extfremely famous for that.
sabbir86 5 years ago
omkara was not a flop, the director got award for the cinematic genius, a song omkara, was the best song of the year. if saif gets the award, that be magnificent, as he perfromed equally to ajay, and did sometimes overshadowed him. omkara was realistic, something different than sharukhs overrated ordinary romance.
steven341 5 years ago
steven341- When I said Omkara was a flop I meant it was not a box office success. It is a critical success which is what you said in your comment. I liked Saif as Iago a.k.a Langda Tyagi and Kareena Kapoor as Desdemona a.k.a Dolly. If anyone deseved any awards it is them and they did get a lot of recognition. Nontheless, Ajay was also very good as Othello a.k.a Omkara.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Shilpa is a liar, and she intentially created this big argument, to get publicity. There was nothing racist what jade said. Who is that talentless bitch at the top dancing, even jade cud do better than this with her eyes closed.
steven341 5 years ago
steven341- Good very good. Thanks for your input. Now we can all move on.
sabbir86 5 years ago
sharukh is jeolous of other films like omkara, ajys perfromance who fitted the character, saifs villianous role, amirs film going to oscar, sharukh cant offer any talents, which is why he is making old remakes, does don character really suit him, he's still stuck with kara johars yash's pathetic films, a typical ordinary romantic films that include running and sing around trees, watch the real omkara, that will beat any of sharukhs film hands down.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- There is a guy named steven341 who is saying rubbish just to provoke. I think he is related to calvinwayne. Lets ignore him and not make any comments.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- I am not going to argue anymore with this. Again the yash and karan deiscussion, versatility blah blah. Very overrated discussion. Well I do not men to dissapoint you but Omkara was a huge flop and probably will not give Ajay a NA. But Saif and Kareena might get it.
sabbir86 5 years ago
pathetic bollywood dancers, Madonna cud do better than this lady. Oh! I'm racist for saying that.
steven341 5 years ago
steven341- Its okay. We don't give a flying fuck about your trashy comment.
sabbir86 5 years ago
steven341- Its okay !! We do not really give a flying fuck on what you trashes say or do. Have a nice day.
sabbir86 5 years ago
He dominated by the romantic films he makes, and this makes him popular with girls who don no alot about acting, and wat do you mean hypothses, everyone can see, sharukh is totally not coparable to amir or ajay in versatility, probably he had box office hits, but that does not make him the most versatile.
ajaydev12 5 years ago
if you read many of reviews on sharukh khan mouthshut, a lot of the commenters have said sharukh khan is lucky, it is laughable when he is compared to acting legend amir khan. all his films were from yash camp, and every time he does something different he fails, like swadesh was not commercially succesful, becuze his fans do not like him in these roles. sharukh has the same expression who cant utter a dialogue properly without moving and stammering, with same expression, lip movement.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- I get surprized at you every time you make a comment. You make these ridiculous hypotheses and expect everyone to believe you without having any logical proof whatsoever. Its completely ridiculous and childish. "a lot of" -- plese give me a statistics. No one in their right mind would believe you. Since you cannot prove yourself rationally you incorporate cheap comments.
sabbir86 5 years ago
LOBS was not comercially succesful, but it was because of his powerful expression as Bagat singh, he received critical acclaim, and also received another NA.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Your ridiculous obsession with NA continues. That is the only defence you got. It is very sad. Shahrukh has dominated filmfare, zee, stardust, iifa. So what? What are you tring to Proof? Say something I do not already know. Its getting really boring. You repeat yourself a millionth time.
sabbir86 5 years ago
ajy may had flops, but sharukh was lucky, he has yash chopra films to give him success, but like i said all his film are the same, nothing new, same old expression, but ajy did not need big hits like sharukh to be recognize as an actor, he had average zakhm, with small director, and it is because of his perfromance, he was the actor of the year in 1998 which he received NA.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Well even though I do not agree your biased comments which has no proof what so ever, lets say that "luck" has bent the laws of probability on the chosen one and that is Shahrukh.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231 - Lets not argue anymore about this. It is getting boring because you are again repeating the same subject matter. I have explained myself very clearly and convincingly. Lets not argue and get on with our lives. Shahrukh is Shahrukh there can never be a replacement for him and same for Ajay. They are both talented in their own ways.
sabbir86 5 years ago
paheli the fairytale, again thats all he can do romance such as fairytale, 2006Don he will be never excepted as don, KANK again the same love story, that is over 30 romantic films, more than Kajol.
faraar231 5 years ago
Paheli is actually based on a novel named "dubhidha". I loved shahrukh as the lovable ghost and the selfcentred husband. As I repeated myself earlier Indian audiences do not give a damn about versatility. Most film stars in the film industry has his/her genre that he/she is good at. Like the legendary Dilip Sahab, Shahruk's genre is romanticism and he is very good at playing them. There is nothing wrong about that.
sabbir86 5 years ago
darr 1993, KHKN1994, DDLJ1995 and karan arju, 1996 was bad year, as he trid to be different but failed with chahat and english babu desi main, 1997DTBH, 1998KKHH, dilse the film failed because of sharukhs overacting, and yet again people did not like him to be different. 1999 bad year, and he tried to be different but failes so he carries on with romance, 2000 Mohabatai, 2001KKKG, devdas, 2003KHH, 2004MHN, veerzara, 2005
faraar231 5 years ago
If we count Ajay's flop films Shahrukh will loose for sure. The only good year that he had was 2002 (Bhagat singh and company). Lets see after phool aur Kaate he had , 1993 (8 flops), 1995 (2 flops), 1996 (1 flop), 1997 (Ishq a hit), 1998 (2 flops but Zakhm was a critical success), 1999 (HDDCS a hit), 2000 (raju chacha a flop), 2001 (3 flops) and if I go on there will an enormous list. So as you can see faraar231 Ajy has more flops than shahrukh.
sabbir86 5 years ago
hey ram, he was there for 5 minutes, and all he did was cry, anyone could done that role, the dialogues for so simple, wat was so good about the perfromance, it just a special appearence, anjaam was ok, but this film was over 12 years ago, after that he was repetative, and every time he tried to be different, he failed, like in koyla, chahat, guddu, raamjane, 12ka4 etc.
faraar231 5 years ago
As I said versatility is bad for shahrukh. People are so mesmerised by his lover boy image that they always want him to do this kind of films. So far he is getting away with all the icing on the cake and it is working. Good for you shahrukh, we never want you to change. F**k versatility.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Let us stick to the topic. Do not bring Kajol into this. It is about Shahrukh vs vesatility (or Ajay, Amir). Lets compare apples with apples not with jackfruit.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- When I said that Kajol's films are overrated I said that she always have the same theme but not shahrukhs. Yes for the past few years he does but not always. I proved my point with my so what comment about versatility very convincingly by comparing dhoom 2 and omkara. If you still cannot see the picture then take some time to think.
sabbir86 5 years ago
anyway sabir, I think we are arguing in the wrong link, this is sridevi clip, so lets forget the debate, and we can do it in sharukhs clip.
faraar231 5 years ago
saif did have a meaty role, because he played a disabled character as a villian, and because of justice to this role, he stole the show, but ajy was one with powerful dialogues than saif.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- I think hear and there Shahrukh did some different films. His performance in Anjaam was fantastic, watch him in Kabhi Ha Kabhi Na -- he is wonderful, also hey ram! speaking tamil perfectly and portraying the character with conviction, raju ban gaya gentlemen the struggling boy in mumbai searching for fame and foutune is wonderful.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Read Othello first and you will know. Saif and Jay had the exact same chracter to play so therefore there were no patiality. Stop blaminf saif for being so brilliant.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Sabbir86, you always say so what, but is it fare to say sharukh is the most versatile actor today, when he doesn't have much to offer other than being a lover boy, and comparing him to amir, ajay, amitabh is being harsh. you say kajol is overrated becuz of the boy meet girl, than why is it diff with sharukh, he did more of girl meet boy than kajol.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- I never said that Shahrukh is versatile. In fact the whole matter of versatility came out of you. I said that people in India (majority wise) do not care about versatility. They love shahrukh as the lover boy image and I am afraid he does it really well. So from the majority point of view "so what". You might think that he overacts but other people think differently. Do not expect them to think the same way!
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- I said "so what" from the Indian audiences perspective. I will repeat for the last time, Indian audience (majority) do NOT care about versatility. Look how they were mesmerized by dhoom 2 and completely rejected Omkara. I think I have made my point very clearly. And what do you mean is it fair? It depends on people's taste and preference and they happen to love shahrukh in the lover boy image. No one has to agree with you.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Yes Yash Chopra's films are about colourful indian costumes, karwa chaut, eid, holy all are important elements of south asian and indian culture. He interprets them in his film wonderfully.
There is nothing wrong about that. Like shahrukh he also focuses on romanticism (silsila, lamhe, chandni, Darr, DDLJ, DTPH) thereby having a solid grip on this genre. Good for him.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Sabbir you mention KHKN, but in this film again, he played a lover boy role, karan arjun was hit, salamn steals the show, because he looked more of a action man and acted better than sharukh, sharukh still had that lover boy image in karan arjun. apauran with ajay and nana should of been the best film of the year with black, nana's and ajays jodi was great.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- So what if he played a lover boy role? People loved it and the outcome of Kal ho na ho is right in front of you. See shahrukh does not need to be versatile. Actually you can say that versatility is bad for him because people love him as a romantic hero and he carries it of very well when compared to other actors. And yes "should have been" but not. So forget about it.
sabbir86 5 years ago
out 9 ajay film mention, you only spoke about omkara and goolmaal. omkara perfromance was brilliant, but saif steals the show because he had meatier role than ajay, and yes I also luv saif. golmaal was average, even if you think golmaal was flop, the character was still different. sabbir, wat are saying, company, LOBS, Zkhm Aupaton gangajal are powerful roles, and he put justic to each of his films with right expression, and body language, with perfect dialogue delivery.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- How can you say that saif had the meatier role? If you nhave read Othello then you will realize that the characters in Omkara has had the same amount of screen space as othello. So do not make saif responsible for portraying Iago so convincingly.
sabbir86 5 years ago
apart from choclately roles these two films were better, yash chopra's film are good, but then he repeats himself. people will like yash's film because, of colour, costumes, exotic location, people will besometimes fooled.
faraar231 5 years ago
As I said faraar231 I found Vivek's and antra's performance in company more convincing. Vivek as a newcomer was simply fantastic. And Antra being a men oriented film has made her screen presence stand out wonderfully. It is solely my opinion. No one has to agree disagree and I am going to stick to it.
sabbir86 5 years ago
chof0319- "king khan has lost his confidence, his most memorable character would be baazigaar and in swadesh, which he got praised." Look at you !! You have such strong hypothesis but no proof what so ever to support your point. No offence but its completely biased and ridiculous!!
sabbir86 5 years ago
chof0319- Indian audiences (majority wise) do not give a damn about versatility. How would you explain a film like Dhoom 2 getting all the attention and a film like Omkara being a flop? At least Shahrukh has done some quality work (baazigar, anjaam, swades, kabhi ha kabhi na, raju ban gaya gentlemen, darr, KKHH, K3G, KHNH) which are at least way better than dhoom 2. If you really want versatility then you should probably do something. I really would like to see that!!
sabbir86 5 years ago
chof0319- As for Omkara Saif Ali Khan was way better than Ajay and got all the accolades. He was the perfect Iago a.k.a langda tyagi. The fire he infuses in this villaneous role is truely amazing. It felt like the original Iago in Othello.
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- People not only love their movies but also they cannot get enough of it. Their movies become instant hits at the box office. Waht is so bad about romanticism. This world needs more love than violence today. The verdict has been given by the jury whether you accept it or not faraar231.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Gangajaal, Zakhm, qyamat was awful, but it was a hit, then LOBS, and who could of done these powerful characters, and he did win two NA, which is a powerful achievment. king khan is also good, but not as talented as ajay. king khan has lost his confidence, his most memorable character would be baazigaar and in swadesh, which he got praised.
chof0319 5 years ago
come on, everyone knows ajay with amir is the most versatile actor right now in Bollywood. Look at, these powerful roles films like Company, then Apharan, then Deewanagee, then Golmaal, and then Omkara. His role has been different in almost every movie he has done, and he does justice to each role he does. He also performs to perfection in all his movies, and that makes him the most reliable actor in recent times. All Ajay Devgan needs is more popular movies which can bring him back to the top.
chof0319 5 years ago
do not say everyone? Is it 10, 100, 10000, 1000000? You do not know so do not be biased. Its solely your opinion and keep it to yourself. Anyone who thinks deewangee and golmal are powerful movies need to check their vision. No wonder they were both flops. Company and Omkara(my favourite) I agree. But I liked Viveks and Antara'a performance in company more than Ajay.
sabbir86 5 years ago
Don was average in box office, not a super duper hit.
faraar231 5 years ago
again your comparing a talented actor with a star. yash and karan are overrated who only make romantic.
faraar231 5 years ago
Yeah just like Silsila, Lamhe, Deewar, Daag all of these are overrated isn't it my friend? Only you could have said that. Yash chopra and Karan Johar are one of the biggest and talented directors in bollywood today.
sabbir86 5 years ago
ajay devgan the two times national award winner, will be recognized for ... Ajay R. Desai in zakhm, malik as underworld Don in company, the bhagat singh in LOBS, Yashwant Angre, Former Police Officer in khakee etc. sharukh wouldn't be recognized for don, as it is a remake, people wud not belive him to be don, is raj and rahul, that will be his history, and just a superstar not an actor.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- The jury (audiences) have reached a verdict. Don is a hit and you cannot do anything about it. Majority rules. As for minority go hide yourself under the closet and curse about shahrukh. The world cannot here you!!!!
sabbir86 5 years ago
please dont compare sharukh to ajay and amir, after a century, what will sahrukh be recognized for, raj and rahul characters in yash and karans film. amir and ajay, will be recognized for ddifferent qualitable charaters. i.e. muna of rangeela, sidharth of safarosh, bhuvan of lagaan, dil chata hai character,DJ/Chandrashekhar Azad of rang de basanti, Sepoy Mangal Pandey and Akash Malhotra.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- Its okay !! We love shahrukh as the lovable Raj and Rahul. Yash and Karan are the biggest and best film brands in the business, and shahrukh is working with them because he is the best in bollywood (after amitabh, dilip sahab etc. Ajay does not have the status to work with these best brands. He is suitable for working with a c-grade director like Ramu or Mahesh Bhatt. Go shshrukh!! You Rock!!
sabbir86 5 years ago
which don is better, sharkh khan in remake of don or ajay Dev in company. shaukh khan does not have the personality for this character, please just stick to your luvie duvi roles, and dont imitate other actors, by playing Don. Sharukh khan is far behind Ajay as an actor, ajay fits in so many characters, what does your so call sharukh fit in. Sharukh khan, my piece of advice to you is, do your usual romance, and running and dancing around trees, with your overacting screaming.
ajaydev12 5 years ago
as an actor sharukh is way behind, people like ajay devgan, amir khan, etc are way ahead of him. as a star and fame he is ahead, but as an actor thats a question? sharukh, just stick to you choclaty role, and karan and yash, forget about being a don, your still a bacha more these manly powerful roles.
faraar231 5 years ago
sharukh isn't talented enough for parralel, cinema, as he knows, these same old facial expression, same lip movement, same hammering and stammering, wud not convince the the juries.
faraar231 5 years ago
the only reason director casted him in don, is to make business, as no matter what, people will blindly go and see the film, and praise the overacting. Have you seen raamjaane, he tried do copy amit in agneepath, because of his redulous overacting, film was super duper flop.
faraar231 5 years ago
amitabh bachan won NA for agnnepath, saif ali khan won NA for Hum Tum, and they were not paralel cinema.
faraar231 5 years ago
faraar231- If you go to the fifth page of comments, under ajaydev12 i have said that NA acknowledeges parallel cinema 95% of the time. The ramaining 5% I left for mainstream cinema. So I was not biased and am safe and absolutely correct.
sabbir86 5 years ago
sabbir86 5 years ago
Steve --- I highly recommend you to watch Omkara because i think ajay was very good. But unfortunately more then Ajay its Saif Ali Khan who steals the show althrough with his fantastic performance playing langda tyagi the equvalent of iago in the original othello.
sabbir86 5 years ago
ajaydev12- Unfortunately, historically there has been very few parallel cinema in bollywoods film induatry and the trend continues till date. People in India and in Bangladesh and different parts of South Asia are still facinated by mainstream movies rather than parallel movies. That is why a wonderful film like Omkara has become a flop. Being a huge fan of Othello I thought Omkara was a fantastic movie.
sabbir86 5 years ago
ajaydev12- If you compare hollywoods oscar with NA then you will see that oscar in hollywood considers both parallel and mainstream cinemas while NA only gives greater emphasis on parallel cinema making it unequivalent to Oscar in hollywood. Filmfare on the other hand acknowledges both parallel and mainstream like hollywoods oscar. Shabana Azmi a parallel filmstar like ajay has won 3 bestactress filmfare awards. Also Tabu another parallel film actress has won two best actress filmfare.
sabbir86 5 years ago
sabbir86, If you type "ajay devgan National award rediiff" on google, then it will say ayay winning the NA in 2003, means he was the best actor of that year. Sharukh fans are complaining that he did not deserve this award, and ajay is far to young to win this award. This means, the NA is equivalent to oscars, as sharukh on filmfare through fan votes, ajay won by the juries.
ajaydev12 5 years ago
ajaydev12- Please, read my original message. I said that NA being bollywoods oscar is a man made concept. Some people think that filmfare is bollywoods oscar because of its historical and cultural significance in hindi cinema. If you go back to 1953, most prominant film stars (Dev Anand, Dilip Kumar, Raj Kapoor, Vyjanthimala, Nutan, Ashok Kumar) all of them have only won filmfare award. .
sabbir86 5 years ago
faraar231- Let me remind you once again that Omkara is a parallel cinema. Shahrukh is a mainstream artist. Mainstream cinema is the heart of bollywood. 97% of the movies made in bollywood every year are mainstream films. If shahrukh thinks that he wants to do parallel cinema then he will do it. Its his choise.
sabbir86 5 years ago