Well I'm someone who believes u can either act, or u can't...there is no middle ground there...ur either an anil kapoor or a sonam kapoor...
...and I tend to not judge an actor based on the roles, but based on their performances and how convincing they are in whatever roles they are given...flowerpot or otherwise...sonakshi could act right from dabbangg...her single dialogue became a national sensation that itself shows how perfectly she delivered it...it was just a matter of doing more "showy roles"...I liked lootera mainly because of ranveer and sonakshi...their performances and their chemistry was what made it for me apart from the music...I always liked sonakshi and knew she could do it, but lootera exposed more of her skills as an actress...and that is a fact...
Coming to masala films, I'd like to weigh in...
I think it takes a truly skilled actor to make all the "larger than life" stuff in masala films work...they not playing some regular character with "shades" that the audience can identify with...they are playing someone that the audience aspires to be...they whistle at their entry...they whistle when they deliver "punch dialogues"...most people tend to think thts not acting...I agree it isn't acting coz those roles need something else...it's showmanship...which also requires an inane amount of talent...so I hate the judgemental tone that people refer "masala movies"...how people are called illiterate, or vulgar or rickshawalahs for liking rowdy rathod and dabbangg ...
Having said which, that dosent mean I enjoy any tripe that disguises itself as masala...RR, dabangg, ghajini, chennai express...hell yes...boss, himmatwala, gunday ...hell no...
Good and bad films exist in each genre...I dunt think it's right to demean any genre (masala or offbeat) or mock the audience who likes them as "illiterates" in the case of masala films, or "pseudo intellectuals" in case of slightly offbeat films...people should be allowed to watch and praise wht they want to, without being judged.
Book Talk
Anupamaa
15