What is Wrong with Shahrukh Khan?

HN #14,

In my very personal and not-so-humble opinion, Naseer and Shah Rukh do not
belong in the same paragraph. Naseeruddin Shah can play the role of a chair better
than a real chair. One seldom sees an actor who becomes the character with that
much ease. ``Paar`` anyone ?

Arjun-m #10,

Please compare Shah Rukh in ``Chalte Chalte`` to Oberoi in ``Saathiya``, and tell me
who`s more convincing. I`d say Farzana is completely accurate in her estimate here.
I don`t remember claiming that Oberoi has a vast body of work.

Anil:
I only saw a couple of Shahrukh`s films and was usually avoiding any film with him in it until recently when I saw a cameo role of his in Kamla Hassan`s Hey Ram. He really gave an impressive performance in it. I understand that this is the only film in which he played a muslim character.

Farzana:
Dilip did play light roles as well. If you get a chance, see an old film of his, Azaad, with a light role by another tragedienne of old days, Meena Kumari. And as a bonus, you will have some beautiful music by C. Ramchandra (marna bhi mohabbat mein kiki kaam na aaya; kitna haseen hai mausam, aplam chaplam, etc.)
And in case you didn`t know, he even sang a semi-classical duet in Musafir, which was of course carried mostly by the other singer, Lata.

Rozaiba,

From what I have heard there are three filmic adaptations of Devdas. The first one I beleive starred Kundan Lal Saigal, that famous nasal voiced voclaist that our grandfathers loved. The cinemtographer to that first Devdas was the great film director who went on to make his version of Devdas with Dilip-Vyjanthimala-Suchitra Sen. Of course, we have all seen the latest. Devdas has struck a chord with three successive generations.

What really gets me going is that the author of Devdas, Sarat Chander Chatopadhyay, was only 19 when he wrote this timeless classic. I wonder, that at the ``tender`` age of 19, how can a young man right such an ``intense`` novel, with such limited life experiences. Perhaps, I am naive in my assumption of not having the life experiences to write such a moving novel, but stil... they dont make authors like that anymore. I want those intense authors back!

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

imransuleman:

Will definately watch `Kal ho na ho`- mostly cause I hear its theme is similar to the greatest Indian movie `Anand`.

But I insist Shahrukh outdid Dilip in the role of Devdaas. Hands down!

Was talking to a friend from Hyderabad. She claims the very first Devdaas was in the Telugu language and was far better than any subsequent ones that came out.

IMO, there are very few actors who can shed their style/persona. I remember thinking Laurence Olivier had the same facial expression in Pride and Prejudice that he did in Hamlet :).

Shahrukh Khan grows on you. He had this `negative hero` phase initially which didnot work at all, IMO. After that his `buffoonry-fits-all` style was jarring. But he was good to watch in K-K-K-Gham and seeing his older movies now, I find him more convincing than he was first time round.

HN #14
Mamootty is also v. good, with a wider range than Mohanlal I thought, though I haven`t been keeping track in the last few years.

Arent you guys sick of the cheesey sappy mushy fare that Badjatya - Chopra - Johar trio dishes out? yucccckkk thooooo ;)

Ramgopal Verma rules !!

Shahrukh was much liked in ‘Fauji’, his first TV serial. He looked so down to earth and guy-next-door (he still does in most of the movies). I don’t remember vividly his exact role as we were very young that time but he had instantly become a favourite of all the gals in my colony, leaving Anil Kapoor behind. Probably that natural look and simple ‘Fauji’ charm that continued in many of his movies is now somewhat lacking in Kal Ho Na Ho.

In general, people do like SRK as in real life he is a very good human being and this very much reflects in his eyes. Whether he knows acting or not is one thing, his real life persona gets intermingled with his characters.
And Salman did a fabulous job in `Tere Naam` ..he was much appreciated but had some negative reviews just because the stigma he carried all this time sometimes goes against him.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Anil,

What you say about Shah Rukh Khan is what my better half says about Madhuri Dixit. Madhuri, appararently, has the air of ``look, I am Madhuri, I am the Star`` air about her in her latter films.

But that said, SRK was not a terrific actor from the begining. He had a screen presence perhaps, that is at the best crisp. No woder, he does not feel comfortable away from the Yask Johar/ Yash Chopra`s circus tent of chiffons...and keeps singing...i have miles to go before I peep.

But, even among actors who have taken risks, and attempted a variety of roles, very few succeeds. And in this, especially, those with screen presence tend to be at a disadvantage.
I can only think of Naseer who has played different characters convincingly for a major part of his career, without being Naseer throughout.

I can spot Kamalaahaasan in every film of his, even when he is playing a midget. And yet, look at Naseer, from the reviews, he has done a very tacky Nemo with Sean Connery.

Malayalam actor Mohanlal, called the Deaupardieu *spelling IS wrong`` of Indian cinema, is currently celebrating his 25 years in films. And, currently, fighting off charges that Mohanlal the star is protruding far more inelegantly through his roles. Though, it also has to do with him shifting to do a lot of action and supermen roles lately.

On the other hand, some lesser actors have grown admirably with films. I think Sunjay Dutta broke through with Naam. Similalry, Jackie Shroff managed to act a little in a little known Mahesh Bhatt film called Kaash. Jackie, and Sunjay Dutt to a lesser extent, has made tremendous advances on their voice and diction. Compare Sunju bab of Vidhaata and Jackie of Hero with their later film roles.

HN

Farzana: I agree, I think too SRK exhausted his personality`s potential when he played that author backed role in Azi Mirza`s Kabhi Haan Kabhi Na.

``Filmgoers secretly want ‘one of us’ to be a superstar on the magic screen, not an unreal visage cosmeticized by dress designers, make-up artists, scriptwriters and film directors``
Validated

Nice article to change the taste ...

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

North Amrican perception (dem nri`s)...of KHNH

Women:
Movie good. SRK poor guy, he looks not well... but wait that is his role! No big discussion of clothes etc..

Men: Agree with Anil... and were uncomfortable with (fragile PC sensibilities are hurt) showing NRI Gujjus as vulgar.

Everyone liked the movie.. but nothing earth-shattering ....

I loved Kal ho na ho. If you are anew yorker, its a treat. Even if you are not, it worrks. Yes, I can be a sucker for such soppy, yuppy, melo-drama.

I cant stand the way Sharukh acts.

But I will say he has a penchant for picking the rigth scripts. He has starred in many of my favorite movies. But i think the reall credit goes to the Yash Chopra camp, and their spin off`s (Yash Chopra, Karan Johar, Aditya Chopra, and now Nikhil Adwani). And then because he is big star, he will bag the big names, like the Subhash Ghai`s and the Sanjay Leela Bhansli`s.

I think its a classic case of networking with the right people.

And Rozaiba, please. Shahrukh outdoing Dilip?? Im a sucker for good performances and great urdu, and Dilip is a hundred times better in both (yes, i know Devdas was in bengali, so where does the urdu bit come in, but still...). After all, could a Shahrukh ever say with such painful passion the Josh Malihabadi verse, the way Dilip did in devdas, when Chandra Mukhi (Vyjanthimala) talks to him about toelrance and his love for drink: ``Arrey, kaun kambakht bardaasht karney kay liye sharaab peeta hai!``

Love the new Devdas for cinemtaography, Madhuri Dixit, Aishwarya, music, madhuri, and aishwarya....

Shahrukh is a bad actor, a great networker, and his songs rock. Go watch Kal ho na ho, preferbaly on the big screen. You`ll love it!

Farzana #5,

Agree with you completely. He is grossly over-rated, and Vivek Oberoi was far more
convincing in Saathiya than Shah Rukh in Chalte Chalte. Shah Rukh is nothing but
a collection of repeatedly overdone mannerisms.

Kal Ho Na Ho is a classic movie. For the first time in Indian Film industry this kind of story is used and it will carve a genre of this kind of movies in Bollywood. I simply love SRK movies.