Outlook on Indian heroines
Gafoor
One of the articles is about current Bollywood heroines,
which is rather cutting.
A paraphrase of the article in my words
"Aishwarya is horrible. She plays Aishwarya in
every movie & not the character at all. i.e. in Devdas
she played Aishwarya not Paro, likewise in her other
movies. Her looks/body are the type which would
evoke Envy in women, but *never* desire in men.
In Devdas, in a few frames, it was clearly established
what a huge chasm there is between Madhuri & Aish.
Rani Mukherjee's voice sounds as if she had icecream
immediatelly after having Hot Poori. Some call it husky,
others call it hoarse.
In general, most of the current heroines sound as if they
are only talking Hindi in the dialogues because they
are forced to & they switch to English, the moment the
shot is over.
No good star heroines currently. The last one was
Madhuri - the nearest after that was Kajol. Star heroine
meaning, somebody who was glamourous, a good actress,
a star & also human."
I personally, fully agree with the article.After Madhuri, there is
no true star heroine - There are excellent actresses like Tabu &
Urmila, but they aren't stars the way Madhuri etc were. There
are stars like Aish & Kaani Mukherjee but they are a pain
otherwise.
The magazine also had polls (scientific ones, I think, not
web based ones) about various different things
1) Best Comedian came out as Johnny Lever, 2nd
Paresh Rawal, nobody else even close.
2) Amitabh-Shahrukh who is better - Amitabh got 60%,
IIRC
3) Aish-Sushmita who is better actress - Sushmita.
and lots of other stuff
rkusenet
"Gafoor" <rro...@bigfoot.com> wrote in message news:3fd4moF...@individual.net...
> The current issue of Outlook is a Bollywood special.
> One of the articles is about current Bollywood heroines,
> which is rather cutting.
>
> A paraphrase of the article in my words
> "Aishwarya is horrible. She plays Aishwarya in
> every movie & not the character at all. i.e. in Devdas
> she played Aishwarya not Paro, likewise in her other
> movies. Her looks/body are the type which would
> evoke Envy in women, but *never* desire in men.
> In Devdas, in a few frames, it was clearly established
> what a huge chasm there is between Madhuri & Aish.
> Rani Mukherjee's voice sounds as if she had icecream
> immediatelly after having Hot Poori. Some call it husky,
> others call it hoarse.
many call it sexy too :-)
A quick poll on ramli may be a good excercise for inventory
check of Rani fans.
OK here is a quick list
(a) Moi
(b) AP
(c) Shishir
(d) Kamesh (?)
> In general, most of the current heroines sound as if they
> are only talking Hindi in the dialogues because they
> are forced to & they switch to English, the moment the
> shot is over.
agreed. I find it strange that all these actresses speak
fluent non vernacular accented english - which clearly
tells what background they have. In contract guys like
Govinda, Ritesh Deshmuk , Ajay Devgan don't speak
English that well.
> I personally, fully agree with the article.After Madhuri, there is
> no true star heroine - There are excellent actresses like Tabu &
> Urmila, but they aren't stars the way Madhuri etc were. There
> are stars like Aish & Kaani Mukherjee but they are a pain
> otherwise.
Kaani -> can't be a typo. R and K are quite apart in the keyboard.
Why r u calling her Kaani? Am I missing something.
I rate Rani M far better actress than Madhuri. She has a natural
aura about her, which was missing totally in Madhuri. Actually
I have the same criticism of Madhuri what is mentioned in this
Outlook article about Ash. No matter what role he did, she was
always same. IMO Madhuri was a very mediocre actress. She
was definitely the best ever dancer in hindi film industry
and definitely a star material. but it is easy to get bored
of her star material.
Gafoor
> Kaani -> can't be a typo. R and K are quite apart in the keyboard.
> Why r u calling her Kaani?
Just coz I don't like her that much :-)
lt
"rkusenet" <usen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3fd747F...@individual.net...
>
> OK here is a quick list
>
> (a) Moi
> (b) AP
> (c) Shishir
> (d) Kamesh (?)
Yes..
RM is by far ahead in the pack.
Add Aditya to the list too. I think Vishal is also a fan of RM. He dislikes
Aishwarya as an actress for sure.
yeskay
I am not in the list, I think she's like Dr. Pepper. It tastes awful
the first time, you keep having it, you don't think it's as bad as it
tasted initially. The voice is a turnoff. But, I agree that she is a
better actress than Madhuri, but not a better star (screen presence,
oomph and verve).
lt
"yeskay" <yes...@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:xalke.1052$nb.288@trndny03...
> lt wrote:
>> "rkusenet" <usen...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:3fd747F...@individual.net...
>>
>>>OK here is a quick list
>>>
>>>(a) Moi
>>>(b) AP
>>>(c) Shishir
>>>(d) Kamesh (?)
>>
>>
>> Yes..
>> RM is by far ahead in the pack.
>>
>> Add Aditya to the list too. I think Vishal is also a fan of RM. He
>> dislikes Aishwarya as an actress for sure.
>
> I am not in the list, I think she's like Dr. Pepper. It tastes awful
> the first time, you keep having it, you don't think it's as bad as it
> tasted initially.
Perfect analogy. I finally found another desi who speaks positively of Dr
Pepper. Among the sodas, this is my first choice always.
lt
V
I like Rani, she is better than most of the other actresses around. The
only actress I've been a bigger fan of, recently, is Tabu. Maachhis,
Filhaal, Astitva, Chandni Bar, Virasat. I do not think any other
current actress has a resume as good as Tabu's. Too bad she hasn't been
in too many movies recently.
V
awful
> > the first time, you keep having it, you don't think it's as bad as
it
> > tasted initially.
>
> Perfect analogy. I finally found another desi who speaks positively
of Dr
> Pepper. Among the sodas, this is my first choice always.
I am sort of the other way round. When I first tasted it, i thought it
tasted different and was pretty good, but after a while I just got
bored of it, and never went back to it again.
Arjun Pandit
>
> many call it sexy too :-)
> A quick poll on ramli may be a good excercise for inventory
> check of Rani fans.
> OK here is a quick list
>
> (a) Moi
> (b) AP
Was. Moved on after seeing her in one of the "Walk the talk" programs.
She seemed very normal and hardly as charming as she is made to appear
on the screen. I prefer Priyanka Chopra these days who rocks even off
screen. She was invited to one of the cricket matches (last Asia Cup i
think) during the Waz/Shaz (Wasim Akram/Ravi Shastri) show and she had
both these men flirting with her :-)
I even like Lara Dutta who I think can be a very good actress if given
the right kind of roles. And both of these have oomph too.
Gafoor
Tabu & Urmila are the best acting wise today - but they aren't
top at the box-office like Madhuri, Sridevi, Zeenat etc were.
Other good films of Tabu are Hu Tu Tu & Takshak.
I didn't particularly like her in Virasat - nobody can be that
stupid like she acted in the beginning - but that was more a
problem with the character than Tabu's acting.
Chetan Vinchhi
yeskay:
> I think she's like Dr. Pepper.
lt:
> Perfect analogy. I finally found another desi who speaks positively of Dr
> Pepper. Among the sodas, this is my first choice always.
V:
> I am sort of the other way round. When I first tasted it, i thought it
> tasted different and was pretty good, but after a while I just got
> bored of it, and never went back to it again.
Aditya:
> Mine too. I love the cherry flavour. And have loved it from the first
> time I had it.
The above conversation is sounding like a metaphor rum amok. I can
no longer make out who is talking about raanii and who is talking
about the paanii :)
C
V
Gafoor wrote:
>
> Tabu & Urmila are the best acting wise today - but they aren't
> top at the box-office like Madhuri, Sridevi, Zeenat etc were.
>
Sridevi/Zeenat/Madhuri weren't the best acting wise either during their
times.
Sridevi - Smita Patil/Shabana Aazmi
Zeenat Aman - Waheeda Rehman, Sharmila tagore
Madhuri - hmmm. I am not sure, Tabu may be. As someone pointed out,
Madhuri was always madhuri, rather than the character. be it Sailaab,
Ram Lakhan or Khalnayak.
Also, I am not sure about Urmila. She is decent, but over dramatic most
of the times, and definitely doesn't know how to cry.
> Other good films of Tabu are Hu Tu Tu & Takshak.
>
Yes, those slipped out of my mind.
> I didn't particularly like her in Virasat - nobody can be that
> stupid like she acted in the beginning - but that was more a
> problem with the character than Tabu's acting.
I think people can be that simple. specially in rural villages, though
TV/Cable making inroads into the villages is changing that. It was
still good acting though.
rkusenet
"V" <vr...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
news:1116944032....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Gafoor wrote:
>>
>> Tabu & Urmila are the best acting wise today - but they aren't
>> top at the box-office like Madhuri, Sridevi, Zeenat etc were.
>>
>
> Sridevi/Zeenat/Madhuri weren't the best acting wise either during their
> times.
>
> Sridevi - Smita Patil/Shabana Aazmi
I agree but with a condition. Sridevi in only Hindi movies. In her south movies
pre 1983 (before she immigrated to Mumbai), she showed enuf variety and
caliber. As an actress, I rate her much higher than Madhuri.
Unfortunately her Hindi stint was very ordinary. I think Hindi was a major
impediment for her, just like it is for KamalHassan.
> Also, I am not sure about Urmila. She is decent, but over dramatic most
> of the times, and definitely doesn't know how to cry.
decent actress. she also remains Urmi no matter what role she does.
IMO no actresses in Bollywood today showed variety like Nargis, Savithiri (in south).
Not Meena Kumari. She was the same roona-dhoona type lady in every movie.
Madhubala OTOH was good for only tomboyish roles.
In Hollywood Julia Roberts beats our actresses by a mile. Witness her acting
in "sleeping with the enemy" and "Erin Broncovich". Two totally different type of
movie. Terrific actress with star material too.
asi...@my-deja.com
rkusenet wrote:
> I agree but with a condition. Sridevi in only Hindi movies. In her south movies pre 1983 (before she immigrated to Mumbai), she showed enuf variety and
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Tamilnadu is a different country now? ;-)
> IMO no actresses in Bollywood today showed variety like Nargis, Savithiri (in south).
> Not Meena Kumari. She was the same roona-dhoona type lady in every movie.
> Madhubala OTOH was good for only tomboyish roles.
I thought Meena Kumari was quite overrated too. I think her tragic
personal life was responsible for the pathos that she exhibited on
screen and that was perhaps the reason for her appeal. But I could
never admire her for her acting alone - except perhaps in Sahib Biwi,
where she was outstanding. I think Waheeda was much better since she
has acted in dramatically different roles in her longish career.
I do think that father time has not been kind to artistes of the past.
When one watches mainstream Hollywood films of the past, one does see a
different type of film (acting, screenplay, choreography and so on).
They were meant to be over the top. Perhaps, we should not current
films as a yardstick to judge actresses of the past. [Though Sandhya,
Rajashree, Priya Rajvansh, Asha Parekh etc would be terrible in any
era. :-)]
I like Deepti Naval quite a bit. Although she was never a superstar,
she did act in a wide variety of films. The contrast between 'Kamla'
and 'Chashm-e-Buddoor' is striking.
I'm surprised that Rekha has not featured in V's list. I would contend
that she has been the most versatile Indian actress (star too!) ever.
Here's a representative of her versatility:
a. mainstream-nonsense [Mr. Natwarlal, Muqaddar Ka Sikander]
b. art [Utsav, Vijeta, Kalyug, Umrao-Jaan]
c. semi-art [Ijazzat, Zubeida]
d. mainstream-sense [Khubsoorat, Namak-Haram, Silsila, Zubeida and
others],
Plus her role in at least one Hollywood [KS] film - not to mention
other roles in other South Indian languages. She has laughed, cried,
danced, joked with the best of them.
> In Hollywood Julia Roberts beats our actresses by a mile. Witness her acting
> in "sleeping with the enemy" and "Erin Broncovich". Two totally different type of
> movie. Terrific actress with star material too.
Give me Michelle Pfeiffer any day. :-)
Cheers
Arun
Gafoor
> Gafoor wrote:
>>
>> Tabu & Urmila are the best acting wise today - but they aren't
>> top at the box-office like Madhuri, Sridevi, Zeenat etc were.
>>
>
> Sridevi/Zeenat/Madhuri weren't the best acting wise either during
> their times.
No - they weren't. What the author (& me) is talking about here is
a combination of acting skills, looks, glamour etc which gives you the
star quality.
For eg. even after many years, people will remember Zeenat, Sridevi,
Madhuri, Parveen, Rekha more than they remember Poonam Dillon
or Bindiya Goswami or Ranjeeta Kaur or Rati Agnihotri though the
latter set of heroines had their own good qualities & starred in many
hit films.
What I feel is that none of the present bunch will leave a mark like
Zeenat, Madhuri etc - none of Aishwarya, Rani, Preity Zinta
etc.
I like Mallika Sherawat - but I haven't watched any of her movies,
just watched clips & songs.
Gafoor
> "V" <vr...@nyc.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:1116944032....@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>>
>> Gafoor wrote:
>>>
>>> Tabu & Urmila are the best acting wise today - but they aren't
>>> top at the box-office like Madhuri, Sridevi, Zeenat etc were.
>>>
>>
>> Sridevi/Zeenat/Madhuri weren't the best acting wise either during
>> their times.
>>
>> Sridevi - Smita Patil/Shabana Aazmi
>
> I agree but with a condition. Sridevi in only Hindi movies. In her
> south movies pre 1983 (before she immigrated to Mumbai), she showed enuf
> variety
> and caliber. As an actress, I rate her much higher than Madhuri.
> Unfortunately her Hindi stint was very ordinary. I think Hindi was a
> major impediment for her, just like it is for KamalHassan.
Even in Hindi movies, Sridevi was a better actress than Madhuri.
However, her squeaky voice & dialogue delivery just took a little
away from her performance. In several of her earlier Hindi movies,
her voice was dubbed by others.
sandaa...@yahoo.com
Gafoor wrote:
>
> What I feel is that none of the present bunch will leave a mark like
> Zeenat, Madhuri etc - none of Aishwarya, Rani, Preity Zinta
> etc.
What sort of mark has Zeenat left? I've watched a few of her films now
- Yaadon ki Baaraat, Don, Satyam Shivam Sundaram - and I really can't
tell what the big deal is. Doesn't seem that good-looking, is
overweight compared to a lot of today's actresses, and isn't
particularly convincing as an actress. If she left a mark for something
else, I'm not sure that's the sort of stain you'd want to leave as an
actress ...
Rani has done a few quite different roles, and uniformly well - from
"KKHH" to "Hai Ram" to "Yuva" and god knows how many others. Aishwarya
doesn't have the same range, although I was quite impressed with her
part in Raincoat. (Perhaps that has more to do with the stories.)
> I like Mallika Sherawat - but I haven't watched any of her movies,
> just watched clips & songs.
Pouty lips, flat nose and a face, which only looks good when her hair
is straight. Dances well. Can't say much about her acting.
Aditya
V
sandaa...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Gafoor wrote:
>
> >
> > What I feel is that none of the present bunch will leave a mark like
> > Zeenat, Madhuri etc - none of Aishwarya, Rani, Preity Zinta
> > etc.
>
> What sort of mark has Zeenat left? I've watched a few of her films now
> - Yaadon ki Baaraat, Don, Satyam Shivam Sundaram - and I really can't
> tell what the big deal is. Doesn't seem that good-looking, is
> overweight compared to a lot of today's actresses, and isn't
> particularly convincing as an actress. If she left a mark for something
> else, I'm not sure that's the sort of stain you'd want to leave as an
> actress ...
Perhaps Gafoor is trying to say that none of those around today have
the combinations of oomph and acting that Zeenat or Parveen Babi had.
Either they are reasonable actresses (Rani, Tabu), or they are just sex
symbols like Mallika ( Did anyone see her pictures from Cannes, she was
busy selling herself), Neha Dhupia. Zeenat or Parveen babi weren't the
greatest of actresses, but they were were still pretty decent. And
Zeenat was pretty hot for her times. I guess what the problem could be,
is that today there are way too many Zeenat's around, whereas the
competition was far less back in the 70's and so these girls stood out.
Champak Bhumiya
>
> > IMO no actresses in Bollywood today showed variety like Nargis, Savithiri (in south).
> > Not Meena Kumari. She was the same roona-dhoona type lady in every movie.
> > Madhubala OTOH was good for only tomboyish roles.
>
>
> I thought Meena Kumari was quite overrated too. I think her tragic
> personal life was responsible for the pathos that she exhibited on
> screen and that was perhaps the reason for her appeal. But I could
> never admire her for her acting alone - except perhaps in Sahib Biwi,
> where she was outstanding. I think Waheeda was much better since she
> has acted in dramatically different roles in her longish career.
I agree with Arun. I do not find anything special about heroines of
50s/60s
as compared to 70s-00s.
> I do think that father time has not been kind to artistes of the past.
> When one watches mainstream Hollywood films of the past, one does see a
> different type of film (acting, screenplay, choreography and so on).
> They were meant to be over the top. Perhaps, we should not current
> films as a yardstick to judge actresses of the past. [Though Sandhya,
> Rajashree, Priya Rajvansh, Asha Parekh etc would be terrible in any
> era. :-)]
>
> I like Deepti Naval quite a bit. Although she was never a superstar,
> she did act in a wide variety of films. The contrast between 'Kamla'
> and 'Chashm-e-Buddoor' is striking.
>
agree again. Deepti Naval was also very good in Ek baar phir (with
suresh
Oberoi)
> I'm surprised that Rekha has not featured in V's list. I would contend
> that she has been the most versatile Indian actress (star too!) ever.
> Here's a representative of her versatility:
> a. mainstream-nonsense [Mr. Natwarlal, Muqaddar Ka Sikander]
> b. art [Utsav, Vijeta, Kalyug, Umrao-Jaan]
> c. semi-art [Ijazzat, Zubeida]
> d. mainstream-sense [Khubsoorat, Namak-Haram, Silsila, Zubeida and
> others],
>
> Plus her role in at least one Hollywood [KS] film - not to mention
> other roles in other South Indian languages. She has laughed, cried,
> danced, joked with the best of them.
>
>
>
Champak