Super Star Rajesh Khanna - The Cary Grant of India
manoha...@gmail.com
Super Star Rajesh Khanna irrevocably impacted Indian cinema and
culture like no actor before him. His acting perfection and
application of talent were drawn solely from his inward vision. Super
Star Rajesh Khanna did not cultivate the phenomenal attributes that
created his "superstardom" by reason or will, but through the
connectedness to his own persona that the masses then idealized. For
he is one who is impervious as to who is ahead and who is behind.
Super Star Rajesh Khanna’s inward vision, a special gift from the
divine leads him always. Today he is the indomitable and highly
respected veteran of one hindred and fifty films. For me, he is like
the Cary Grant of India. Both actors are Capricorns that have played
the widest variety of roles without ever bankrupting the fascination
of the audience. Super Star Rajesh Khanna is the platinum standard for
landmark performances and sheer screen presence. Ever since the camera
discovered his photogenia it has been having a love affair with it.
His Byronic inspirations of romance as autographed elegantly on screen
endure. Super Star Rajesh Khanna is a Greatest Legend because he
kindles our affections at the highest denominators and that is a life
nobly lived means.
surjit singh
I suggest you see some really old movies starring Dev Anand, Dilip
Kumar, or in their younger days, Ashok Kumar, Motilal, Surendra, to
name a few. As far as Cary Grant is concerned, Dev Anand reminds me of
him. Rajesh Khanna does not do much for me, neither Amitabh or
Shahrukh, for that matter.
shu...@gmail.com
comparisons are bad.
by farthest imagination RK comes no where near Cary Grant,
DevAnand was compared too Gregory Peck more than Cary Grant,in his hey
days.
To me Surendra did not impress as good actor.Motilal was superb.Once
in an interview Nasiruddin said "Yakub was true natural actor very
veratile.
Pavan Jha
Ketan
shu...@gmail.com says...
>> > Super Star Rajesh Khanna irrevocably impacted Indian cinema and
>> > culture like no actor before him. His acting perfection and
>> > application of talent were drawn solely from his inward vision. Super
>> > Star Rajesh Khanna did not cultivate the phenomenal attributes that
>> > created his "superstardom" by reason or will, but through the
>> > connectedness to his own persona that the masses then idealized. For
>> > he is one who is impervious as to who is ahead and who is behind.
>> > Super Star Rajesh Khanna=92s inward vision, a special gift from the
>> > divine leads him always. Today he is the indomitable and highly
>> > respected veteran of one hindred and fifty films. For me, he is like
>> > the Cary Grant of India. Both actors are Capricorns that have played
>> > the widest variety of roles without ever bankrupting the fascination
>> > of the audience. Super Star Rajesh Khanna is the platinum standard for
>> > landmark performances and sheer screen presence. Ever since the camera
>> > discovered his photogenia it has been having a love affair with it.
>> > His Byronic inspirations of romance as autographed elegantly on screen
>> > endure. Super Star Rajesh Khanna is a Greatest Legend because he
>> > kindles our affections at the highest denominators and that is a life
>> > nobly lived means.
>>
>> I suggest you see some really old movies starring Dev Anand, Dilip
>> Kumar, or in their younger days, Ashok Kumar, Motilal, Surendra, to
>> name a few. As far as Cary Grant is concerned, Dev Anand reminds me of
>> him. Rajesh Khanna does not do much for me, neither Amitabh or
>> Shahrukh, for that matter.
>
>comparisons are bad.
>by farthest imagination RK comes no where near Cary Grant,
>DevAnand was compared too Gregory Peck more than Cary Grant,in his hey
>days.
>To me Surendra did not impress as good actor.Motilal was superb.Once
>in an interview Nasiruddin said "Yakub was true natural actor very
>veratile.
In our household, self is an avowed Rajesh Khanna fan(not for his acting skills
mind you) and the Mrs is a die-hard Cary Grant fanatic(Yes! A fanatic who can
make Osama look like a flower-power peace loving man). I can see the following
scene occuring in my house tomorrow:
Self: Heh! Heh! (Pointing to article)
Mrs: Grr! Growl! Are you nuts?
Self: It's kinda true you know
Mrs: (Calling all psychiatrists in my health plan to have me certified)
Self: But the article makes a good point.
Mrs: So does this (applying rolling pin to my coconut)
Self: Ouch! I say! (pushing pointy bump on head back into scalp)
Ok, so even I am tempted to gag a bit at the above article. Rajesh Khanna's
superstardom had much to do with the swinging 60s than his own looks or acting
abilities. They helped(or certainly did not harm him), but I very much doubt he
would have gotten where he was had it not been for 4 people behind him--Kishore
Kumar and Basu-Manohari-Maruti(yes all Burman music is composed by them, is my
new stance). I don't agree so much with the "acting perfection" and "application
of talent" statements, but I do tend to agree with the "connectedness to his own
persona that the masses then idealized" part. He wasn't the handsomest guy
around--Dharmendra, Sunil Dutt, even the recently departed Feroz Khan were more
handsome, but he could charm the pants off a cow(Note: so far I have never
actually seen a bovine in anything pleated, cuffed or having suspenders, but you
get the idea). It's like Obama(esp when you see him at a press conference like
the one he did this evening. He isn't the handsomest US President or the best
communicator(Reagan could beat him on both counts), but he can charm you to hell
and back. At a time when Shammi Kapoor was desperately trying to act half his
age, and the rest of the pack were floating around aimlessly,(with the possible
exception of Shashi and Dharam) along comes Rajesh looking ever so vulnerable.
Two movies set him up brilliantly for that--as an unemployed, down-on-his-luck
figure in Baharon ke Sapne and as a mental patient in Khamoshi. In both movies,
you had the heroines--women who had been around 10 years longer than him in the
industry, falling in love with him, thus making him look as a romantic
possibility for older women--someone safe to take home to mother, or maybe for
the mother herself. And then comes Aradhana, where again, one sees him romancing
a young woman and being loved secretly by that same woman as his mother. And
when you add to that mix, THAT VOICE and THAT MUSIC(by the world's greatest
outsourcing manager), the public was sold.
Cary Grant on the other hand, I would say(and this comes from being forced to
watch hours of his movies, thanks to being married to a fanatic--and you think
waterboarding is torture?), never seems to be trying to be charming. He just is
charming or makes it look so effortless and natural, that one might come away
thinking, "what's the big deal?" I can totally see why the likes of Ingrid
Bergman and Audrey Hepburn desperately wanted to work with him. His acting is
right there on the surface--loud, gesture ridden, even hammed up and yet
understated. It's a magic trick, and I haven't seen anyone else pull it off as
brilliantly as CG does. By 1973 though, one can see Rajesh making the effort to
be charming, something that once came naturally. You can almost predict when his
head will tilt or how many times it will shake. And I think that's what killed
him ultimately. He began to take acting seriously(no doubt pushed to do it by a
certain Big B). So in that sense Cary Grant is more like Dev who again has never
tried to be charming(he has got to have tons of charm, if he can get spot boys,
gaffers, cameramen, even clapboard boys to help him make movies even today), but
just is. I don't know who is the better charmer amongst CG, RK and DA, but I
will admit that CG is a far far better actor than the other two(and this
confession was obtained without being subjected to any enhanced interrogation
techniques) and stands way above the other two when it comes to screen presence
as well. Where I admire and find similarities between CG and RK, is in the fact
that both of them walked away from the limelight once they knew their time was
up. DA hasn't and one could debate endlessly if the Big B's time is really up or
has he just changed the parameters of how we measure it.
Ketan
surjit singh
> In article <d39a3540-df89-41d7-92e0-496a55ae5...@v23g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> shub...@gmail.com says...
>
>
>
> be charming, something that once came naturally. You can almost predict when his
> head will tilt or how many times it will shake. And I think that's what killed
You forgot that silly aankhon kaa jhapakaanaa :)
BTW I missed the RK wave as I was in US 1969-75. I watched a few of
his movies in re-release after 1975 and was not impressed by him.
Music (and leading ladies, Mumtaz, Saif's mom) definitely played a big
role in his popularity.
> him ultimately. He began to take acting seriously(no doubt pushed to do it by a
> certain Big B). So in that sense Cary Grant is more like Dev who again has never
> tried to be charming(he has got to have tons of charm, if he can get spot boys,
Both CG and DA just played themselves with no pretensions at being
serious actors. Audience loved them, critics did not. Remember CG
never got a regular oscar and DA got a few (contrast with Dilip and AB
whom critics loved). I am a huge fan of both CG and DA, having most of
their pre-1970 movies in my collection.
> gaffers, cameramen, even clapboard boys to help him make movies even today), but
> just is. I don't know who is the better charmer amongst CG, RK and DA, but I
> will admit that CG is a far far better actor than the other two(and this
> confession was obtained without being subjected to any enhanced interrogation
> techniques) and stands way above the other two when it comes to screen presence
> as well. Where I admire and find similarities between CG and RK, is in the fact
Another point against RK being CG is that critics did like RK and did
give him awards.
> that both of them walked away from the limelight once they knew their time was
> up. DA hasn't and one could debate endlessly if the Big B's time is really up or
> has he just changed the parameters of how we measure it.
About your other point about Assistants doing much of the work of the
MDs (you chose RDB as an example) , I am also tending to that point of
view. There is a recent book about the unsung assistants. I don't know
how much of it to believe, but according to the assistants, they did
most of the background music, they created a lot of interlude (between
the main melody) music and did almost all of the setting and
arranging! That would partly explain how so many assistants became
successful MDs in their own right.
>
> Ketan
Deepak
news:0746765e-a715-4be7...@p6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
> BTW I missed the RK wave as I was in US 1969-75. I watched a few of
> his movies in re-release after 1975 and was not impressed by him.
> Music (and leading ladies, Mumtaz, Saif's mom) definitely played a big
> role in his popularity.
1969 - 1975 would be when I was 19 - 25 years old. I don't recall any RK
Wave then. He did release a few films but they were films in which he looked
old and fat and yet trying to act the roles that were out of touch with his
appearance.
> About your other point about Assistants doing much of the work of the
> MDs (you chose RDB as an example) , I am also tending to that point of
> view. There is a recent book about the unsung assistants. I don't know
> how much of it to believe, but according to the assistants, they did
> most of the background music, they created a lot of interlude (between
> the main melody) music and did almost all of the setting and
> arranging! That would partly explain how so many assistants became
> successful MDs in their own right.
Have you looked at the book - Behind the Curtain by Gregory D. Booth?
http://www.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780195327649/?view=usa
Deepak
surjit singh
> "surjit singh" <surjitsi...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Yes, that's the one I read recently.
>
> Deepak
pdg
"About your other point about Assistants doing much of the work of the
MDs (you chose RDB as an example) , I am also tending to that point of
view."
It depends on who you ask. I seem to remember having heard or read
that Salil Chowdhury did most of the work himself and did not rely too
much on assistants. I have read books on the lives and works of MD-s
from Bengal like Kamal Dasgupta, Pankaj Mullick, Himangshu Dutta,
Hemant, etc. and several others who were not very active in Hindi
films but pretty prolific in Bengali, and I have not heard any claim
or indication that their assistants were ever responsible for their
tunes.
As someone mentioned a few days back on RMIM, this situation is a lot
like Ph.D. student-work. In some research groups professors work more
than students, in some both work more or less equally, while in others
the work-scale is tilted more towards the students. And, generally,
the bigger the professor's name, the more the work-scale is titled
towards the students. That, however, never invalidates the fact that
the professor had worked very hard in his times to get to where he/she
is now.
-Prithviraj
surjit singh
> On Apr 30, 12:42 pm, surjit singh <surjitsi...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> "About your other point about Assistants doing much of the work of the
> MDs (you chose RDB as an example) , I am also tending to that point of
> view."
>
> It depends on who you ask. I seem to remember having heard or read
> that Salil Chowdhury did most of the work himself and did not rely too
SC case is a well-known exception. He has even given background music
to a non-song film.
> much on assistants. I have read books on the lives and works of MD-s
> from Bengal like Kamal Dasgupta, Pankaj Mullick, Himangshu Dutta,
> Hemant, etc. and several others who were not very active in Hindi
> films but pretty prolific in Bengali, and I have not heard any claim
> or indication that their assistants were ever responsible for their
> tunes.
That's why I wondered how much of it I could believe.
You should get hold of the book mentioned by Deepak. Your library
should have it or ILL would help. I should mention that most of the
interviews are with people who worked with MDs during 60s and after.
This is when MDs swamped themselves by taking unthinkable numbers of
assignments per year and would have needed their assistants' help.
I cannot imagine anybody being able to do full justice to more than 5
or 6 movies a year. [Pursuing your analogy, even at the peak of my
paper-publishing career I was not able to publish more that 6 papers
in a year! However, professors who have a large number of helpers
routinely publish many dozens of papers a year.]
Anant Rege
"Deepak" <deepak...@hp.com> wrote in message
news:gtcqvq$3ua$1...@usenet01.boi.hp.com...
> "surjit singh" <surji...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:0746765e-a715-4be7...@p6g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
>
>> BTW I missed the RK wave as I was in US 1969-75. I watched a few of
>> his movies in re-release after 1975 and was not impressed by him.
>> Music (and leading ladies, Mumtaz, Saif's mom) definitely played a big
>> role in his popularity.
>
> 1969 - 1975 would be when I was 19 - 25 years old. I don't recall any RK
> Wave then. He did release a few films but they were films in which he
> looked old and fat and yet trying to act the roles that were out of touch
> with his appearance.
>
> Deepak
I think you missed the subject of the thread that is referring to Rajesh
Khanna and not Raj Kapoor.
Anant
Deepak
news:a540$49fb2104$cebf06c2$21...@PRIMUS.CA...
You are correct. I got confused because in my mind RK banner stood for only
one name. I liked Rajesh Khanna movies in those days (romantic themes go
well when you are 19 - 25). But I could never associate Rajesh Khanna with
RK. My bad.
Deepak
Srinivas Ganti
> On Apr 29, 10:07 pm, Ketan <Ketan_mem...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>
> > In article <d39a3540-df89-41d7-92e0-496a55ae5...@v23g2000pro.googlegroups.com>,
> > shub...@gmail.com says...
>
> > be charming, something that once came naturally. You can almost predict when his
> > head will tilt or how many times it will shake. And I think that's what killed
>
> You forgot that silly aankhon kaa jhapakaanaa :)
>
> BTW I missed the RK wave as I was in US 1969-75. I watched a few of
> his movies in re-release after 1975 and was not impressed by him.
> Music (and leading ladies, Mumtaz, Saif's mom) definitely played a big
> role in his popularity.
During the last 2 years I have heard several real time experiences of
the craze generated
by Rajesh Khanna thanks to my landlord
He was in college during the RK wave and becomes very nostalgic when
we watch his movies.
While watching 'Mehboob Ki Mehindi' he mentioned that RK's attire in a
particular scene
was made of Tussar Silk and he went to a Mafatlal store immediately
after the movie
to buy that. Another anecdote was about the cuff links that RK wore in
"Saccha Jhoota"
RK for sure was had a meteoric rise and was a fashion icon. Having
said that
his reign at the peak didnt last long
Its easy to see why die hard RK fans mostly belong to 1 or 2
generations while DA wow'ed
several generations. I find several Dev Anand fans among people born
after DA was past his
prime and feel his impact was more lasting.
Given their longevity, Evergreen Star is an apt term for them ! I
like to call them
matinee idols as they are celebrated more for their looks ad style
with acting talent not being
the focus.
kcp
> You should get hold of the book mentioned by Deepak. Your library
> should have it or ILL would help. I should mention that most of the
> interviews are with people who worked with MDs during 60s and after.
Many of them were active in the 50's too.
I miss Marutirao Keer in that book !! A backbone of SDBurman &
Pancham's rythm section.
kcp
kcp
> "s> > successful MDs in their own right.
>
> Have you looked at the book - Behind the Curtain by Gregory D. Booth?http://www.oup.com/us/companion.websites/9780195327649/?view=usa
>
> Deepak
Just for convenience uploaded the snippets from the same website ,
audio files only, here :