What is Wrong with Shahrukh Khan?

Hello Anil . . . from my perch here . . . I think the Indian film-goer / viewer / consumer has now got access to about 80-100 channels of television at home, and tends to demand (a) instant gratification and (b) higher technical quality and (c) some amount of credibility even in dream-sci-fi situations.

And it is in these three attributes that the South Indian film industry seems to be moving rapidly ahead of the Hindi film industry. Their movies have begun to look so . . . crisp! Even without understanding the language, and allowing for heaving bosom/thundering thigh routines in the rain.

Would you agree that to a large extent, all we seem to get out of Bollywood now are:-

a) Expensive set-piece drama films, with 3% chances of doing well, regardless of PR companies.
b) Quickie similar multiple movies with 4 jokes, 3 murders, 2 love angles and 1 boring end, which seldom do well but have good PR companies.
c) ``War`` movies which would have done well if not done to death.
d) Ram Gopal Varma, with mostly the same actors.
c) Other stuff, with a 3% chance of doing well.

SRK (apart from a wierd hairstyle) would be able to transform himself better if he now thought of doing a Kamalahassan.

Just an opinion.

Anil:
Sharukh Khan is an over-rated bum. He has always been acting himself, even in the early films like `Kabhi Haan, Kabhi Na`, although I think this together with `Yes Boss` and the huge flop `Duplicate` could be called his better performances.

I am surprised you say, ``This is in sharp contrast to the non-conformist, intense and edgy Shah Rukh we had come to love in ‘Deewana’, ‘Baazigar’, ‘Darr’, even ‘Raju Ban Gaya Gentleman’ - the fizz and irrepressibility of an actor devouring the screen with its nervous energy.`` I think these were non-conformist characters; if you watch his body language it is pretty much the same as in `Devdas` or `Chalte Chalte` (incidentally in `Saathiya, similar thematically to this one, Vivek Oberoi did a far better job).

Re. `Devdas, two people ruined the film -- Shahrukh Khan and Kiron Kher. Complete over-the-top performances. Dilip Kumar was far more subtle (even if he played himself, we are fortunate that he has this `suffering persona which went well with the character!) and he took a real risk with the character in `Musafir`. That was non-conformism.

I have not seen `Kal Ho Na Ho` yet.

SRK `s DEvdas was S@#$. Bhansali had a diahoria of extravangenza due to FULL support by his financer. A good director would have made 10 devdas out of the same budget. The dances were also S@#$- choreography cannot even compare Pakeeza.
Music was good- though I thought that the music arrangement and the compositions were better in HDDS.

I think SRK suffers from what has been ailing all Indian actors.............Dilip Kumar included............they sound typically themselves in film after film after initially proving their worth.
Even Chalte Chalte gave the feeling it was Shah Rukh and not Raj!
But since it was Shah Rukh, you could not help but lap it up!
Agreed that a lot rests on his shoulders but yes, its high time he makes a conscentious effort to carve a different path and experiment with roles as Aamir or Ajay.
The reviews of KHNH have been encouraging so far, in spite of the cliches, so lemme watch it for just this once and worry about what is wrong with Shah Rukh later.:)

Totally agreed! I identified this problem with Shahrukh khan with the movie ``Kabhi Khushi Kabhi Ghum`` as in that Shahrukh was the same as he was in the ``Muhabbatein``. Since the Muhabbatein, Shahrukh khan has been the same in all the movies with his larger-than-life style. I stopped watching his movies because in every movie he is ``Shahrukh Khan`` not the character of that movie. On the other hand, Aamer Khan has a different style to offer in every movie and be the character of the movie, not being ``Aamer Khan`` in every movie. Good analysis Anil!

In `Devdaas`, Shahrukh out did the performance of Dilip Kumar. Far out did the latter.