Lets settle this once and for all - Page 4

Originally posted by: -Radhe-

Edited my posts as per peace agreement 😉😆

Originally posted by: Karan.

Originally posted by: Skepblun

So ultimately nothing else to talk of except Khan comparisons?

Phew.

SRK and Aamir have just above average talent with some spurts of excellence occasionally (they're no acting schools or stalwarts but not non-actors either). SRK's more charismatic and uninhibited as an actor - which is his plus point. Aamir gets in skin of his characters and will do everything to make them believable.

SRK's problem is that he sometimes hams a lot or is unable to control his energy onscreen. Aamir's problem is that he sometimes appears as if he is trying too hard..seems too laboured as actor (especially since The Rising he is losing his naturalness and ease as a performer, unlike his 90s days).

Stardom-wise: SRK's way ahead of Aamir Khan in every definition of stardom - popularity, worldwide fame, fan following, craze, consistency at box office, significance as cultural icon. Aamir was being overshadowed by Salman and SRK through 90s and he was compelled to take the "different" route to carve his own niche (he did a swell job with it). He has his place now but is behind SRK as a star (record breaking recent hits give him a boost but he lags in other aspects associated with a star).

Credibility: Aamir Khan has more of it than anyone else. He's smart enough to keep controversial side aside and only his good deeds go viral across social networks (except the blunder of the dog blog). SRK had enormous goodwill till 2007, began losing it due to controversies with politicians and cricketers, 2011 and '12 were bad for his image.

Future: Both have a better future than their other counterparts. Both have good survival instinct (SRK will keep sticking around, Aamir will try something different or just go underground if something goes wrong!).
Aamir seems to focus more on production and recently is foraying into offbeat kind of cinema. His experiments have not got universal acceptance of late...if he keeps going like this, it'd be tough. But he's vociferously pushing forth his social side, so I guess he'll always get a certain degree of respect even if his films are less appreciated. As actor he has big films lined up for two years so it's bright for him (at least by looks of it).
SRK may get hits but doesn't seem like he'll break records or dominate. He seems to focus on business anyways and is top of the tops there, so serves him well. As a star/actor he needs reinvention or else he'll only have his success in business.

Resume:

SRK's going to be judged higher on basis of consistency and overall significance of his career. His career was like an event in history of not just Indian cinema but popular culture also. All things which stars do now, image management, turning into brands themselves, engaging media or doing marketing - importance of that was brought about by SRK (though Amitabh also tried it, but it was SRK who did this in a big way as growth of media and liberalisation also helped him). Globally he has no comparison at all.

Aamir will always be known as a credible actor and guy who made good films. Though he's broken records with 3I and Ghajini, aam junta views him as a trustworthy, serious, no-nonsense kind of guy who works on his own terms, gives socially relevant movies/shows. His appeal is tied totally to his work. He doesn't elicit much response for what he is or what he does. All response towards him is actually tied to his work. International fans and media also describe him as guy who starred in 3 Idiots or the one who produced Lagaan, whereas SRK's known by his own name, they don't really have to mention movies to remind people who he is.

SRK's got more hits in his career than Aamir. Aamir has better films. Both have a couple of really good performances as actors. One was at his best in 90s, another post Lagaan in 2000s.

Aamir's a better filmmaker than SRK can hope to be. SRK's a better businessman/ entertainment industry kingpin than Aamir can ever try to be.

For Aamir, the only thing that goes against him is his poor record before Lagaan...every magazine that acknowledges his stature, only talks of 2001 onwards phase when talking of his career. SRK's dominated narrative since 90s, never taken breaks or gone out of the picture so he gets an edge.

Lastly, the lame Khan war arguments will happen forever even though the stars' goals and career decisions have been vastly different. Aamir's more of a maverick, only limited to cinema and prone to reclusiveness while SRK's complete opposite, who wants to expand to several ventures, is addicted to limelight and never tries to avoid it. There's nothing common to compare but nonetheless fanatics will continue comparisons!

P.S - I think Aamir could've been much bigger had he not made some crucial mistakes in 90s, been so reclusive or taken breaks or ventured into so called mood/arthouse/offbeat cinema. Taking serious image route has helped him in some ways but also gone against him as commoners ceased to relate to him, who find him kind of distant and even boring/preachy at times. He's more of a classes guy even if he's given some biggest hits. Since Oscar nomination of Lagaan there's more curiosity attached to him and whatever he does, so it's that curiosity which draws everyone to theatres and not necessarily his own appeal as a star-actor (unlike an SRK or a Salman).

Originally posted by: Skepblun

So ultimately nothing else to talk of except Khan comparisons?

Phew.

SRK and Aamir have just above average talent with some spurts of excellence occasionally (they're no acting schools or stalwarts but not non-actors either). SRK's more charismatic and uninhibited as an actor - which is his plus point. Aamir gets in skin of his characters and will do everything to make them believable.

SRK's problem is that he sometimes hams a lot or is unable to control his energy onscreen. Aamir's problem is that he sometimes appears as if he is trying too hard..seems too laboured as actor (especially since The Rising he is losing his naturalness and ease as a performer, unlike his 90s days).

Stardom-wise: SRK's way ahead of Aamir Khan in every definition of stardom - popularity, worldwide fame, fan following, craze, consistency at box office, significance as cultural icon. Aamir was being overshadowed by Salman and SRK through 90s and he was compelled to take the "different" route to carve his own niche (he did a swell job with it). He has his place now but is behind SRK as a star (record breaking recent hits give him a boost but he lags in other aspects associated with a star).

Credibility: Aamir Khan has more of it than anyone else. He's smart enough to keep controversial side aside and only his good deeds go viral across social networks (except the blunder of the dog blog). SRK had enormous goodwill till 2007, began losing it due to controversies with politicians and cricketers, 2011 and '12 were bad for his image.

Future: Both have a better future than their other counterparts. Both have good survival instinct (SRK will keep sticking around, Aamir will try something different or just go underground if something goes wrong!).
Aamir seems to focus more on production and recently is foraying into offbeat kind of cinema. His experiments have not got universal acceptance of late...if he keeps going like this, it'd be tough. But he's vociferously pushing forth his social side, so I guess he'll always get a certain degree of respect even if his films are less appreciated. As actor he has big films lined up for two years so it's bright for him (at least by looks of it).
SRK may get hits but doesn't seem like he'll break records or dominate. He seems to focus on business anyways and is top of the tops there, so serves him well. As a star/actor he needs reinvention or else he'll only have his success in business.

Resume:

SRK's going to be judged higher on basis of consistency and overall significance of his career. His career was like an event in history of not just Indian cinema but popular culture also. All things which stars do now, image management, turning into brands themselves, engaging media or doing marketing - importance of that was brought about by SRK (though Amitabh also tried it, but it was SRK who did this in a big way as growth of media and liberalisation also helped him). Globally he has no comparison at all.

Aamir will always be known as a credible actor and guy who made good films. Though he's broken records with 3I and Ghajini, aam junta views him as a trustworthy, serious, no-nonsense kind of guy who works on his own terms, gives socially relevant movies/shows. His appeal is tied totally to his work. He doesn't elicit much response for what he is or what he does. All response towards him is actually tied to his work. International fans and media also describe him as guy who starred in 3 Idiots or the one who produced Lagaan, whereas SRK's known by his own name, they don't really have to mention movies to remind people who he is.

SRK's got more hits in his career than Aamir. Aamir has better films. Both have a couple of really good performances as actors. One was at his best in 90s, another post Lagaan in 2000s.

Aamir's a better filmmaker than SRK can hope to be. SRK's a better businessman/ entertainment industry kingpin than Aamir can ever try to be.

For Aamir, the only thing that goes against him is his poor record before Lagaan...every magazine that acknowledges his stature, only talks of 2001 onwards phase when talking of his career. SRK's dominated narrative since 90s, never taken breaks or gone out of the picture so he gets an edge.

Lastly, the lame Khan war arguments will happen forever even though the stars' goals and career decisions have been vastly different. Aamir's more of a maverick, only limited to cinema and prone to reclusiveness while SRK's complete opposite, who wants to expand to several ventures, is addicted to limelight and never tries to avoid it. There's nothing common to compare but nonetheless fanatics will continue comparisons!

P.S - I think Aamir could've been much bigger had he not made some crucial mistakes in 90s, been so reclusive or taken breaks or ventured into so called mood/arthouse/offbeat cinema. Taking serious image route has helped him in some ways but also gone against him as commoners ceased to relate to him, who find him kind of distant and even boring/preachy at times. He's more of a classes guy even if he's given some biggest hits. Since Oscar nomination of Lagaan there's more curiosity attached to him and whatever he does, so it's that curiosity which draws everyone to theatres and not necessarily his own appeal as a star-actor (unlike an SRK or a Salman).

Originally posted by: Skepblun

So ultimately nothing else to talk of except Khan comparisons?

Phew.

SRK and Aamir have just above average talent with some spurts of excellence occasionally (they're no acting schools or stalwarts but not non-actors either). SRK's more charismatic and uninhibited as an actor - which is his plus point. Aamir gets in skin of his characters and will do everything to make them believable.

SRK's problem is that he sometimes hams a lot or is unable to control his energy onscreen. Aamir's problem is that he sometimes appears as if he is trying too hard..seems too laboured as actor (especially since The Rising he is losing his naturalness and ease as a performer, unlike his 90s days).

Stardom-wise: SRK's way ahead of Aamir Khan in every definition of stardom - popularity, worldwide fame, fan following, craze, consistency at box office, significance as cultural icon. Aamir was being overshadowed by Salman and SRK through 90s and he was compelled to take the "different" route to carve his own niche (he did a swell job with it). He has his place now but is behind SRK as a star (record breaking recent hits give him a boost but he lags in other aspects associated with a star).

Credibility: Aamir Khan has more of it than anyone else. He's smart enough to keep controversial side aside and only his good deeds go viral across social networks (except the blunder of the dog blog). SRK had enormous goodwill till 2007, began losing it due to controversies with politicians and cricketers, 2011 and '12 were bad for his image.

Future: Both have a better future than their other counterparts. Both have good survival instinct (SRK will keep sticking around, Aamir will try something different or just go underground if something goes wrong!).
Aamir seems to focus more on production and recently is foraying into offbeat kind of cinema. His experiments have not got universal acceptance of late...if he keeps going like this, it'd be tough. But he's vociferously pushing forth his social side, so I guess he'll always get a certain degree of respect even if his films are less appreciated. As actor he has big films lined up for two years so it's bright for him (at least by looks of it).
SRK may get hits but doesn't seem like he'll break records or dominate. He seems to focus on business anyways and is top of the tops there, so serves him well. As a star/actor he needs reinvention or else he'll only have his success in business.

Resume:

SRK's going to be judged higher on basis of consistency and overall significance of his career. His career was like an event in history of not just Indian cinema but popular culture also. All things which stars do now, image management, turning into brands themselves, engaging media or doing marketing - importance of that was brought about by SRK (though Amitabh also tried it, but it was SRK who did this in a big way as growth of media and liberalisation also helped him). Globally he has no comparison at all.

Aamir will always be known as a credible actor and guy who made good films. Though he's broken records with 3I and Ghajini, aam junta views him as a trustworthy, serious, no-nonsense kind of guy who works on his own terms, gives socially relevant movies/shows. His appeal is tied totally to his work. He doesn't elicit much response for what he is or what he does. All response towards him is actually tied to his work. International fans and media also describe him as guy who starred in 3 Idiots or the one who produced Lagaan, whereas SRK's known by his own name, they don't really have to mention movies to remind people who he is.

SRK's got more hits in his career than Aamir. Aamir has better films. Both have a couple of really good performances as actors. One was at his best in 90s, another post Lagaan in 2000s.

Aamir's a better filmmaker than SRK can hope to be. SRK's a better businessman/ entertainment industry kingpin than Aamir can ever try to be.

For Aamir, the only thing that goes against him is his poor record before Lagaan...every magazine that acknowledges his stature, only talks of 2001 onwards phase when talking of his career. SRK's dominated narrative since 90s, never taken breaks or gone out of the picture so he gets an edge.

Lastly, the lame Khan war arguments will happen forever even though the stars' goals and career decisions have been vastly different. Aamir's more of a maverick, only limited to cinema and prone to reclusiveness while SRK's complete opposite, who wants to expand to several ventures, is addicted to limelight and never tries to avoid it. There's nothing common to compare but nonetheless fanatics will continue comparisons!

P.S - I think Aamir could've been much bigger had he not made some crucial mistakes in 90s, been so reclusive or taken breaks or ventured into so called mood/arthouse/offbeat cinema. Taking serious image route has helped him in some ways but also gone against him as commoners ceased to relate to him, who find him kind of distant and even boring/preachy at times. He's more of a classes guy even if he's given some biggest hits. Since Oscar nomination of Lagaan there's more curiosity attached to him and whatever he does, so it's that curiosity which draws everyone to theatres and not necessarily his own appeal as a star-actor (unlike an SRK or a Salman).