AAMIR or SRK ... the better ACTOR ?

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

ChotaBheem

@ChotaBheem

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 10 years ago

#151

Definitely Aamir better actor.No doubt.But worldwide more people know SRK

Quote

642126

Hibernated

Posted: 10 years ago

#152

@Arsal

Aamir had a miniscule role in Holi. It is not fair to count it. DHKMN is ordinary like any yuppie romance Aamir did. He was doing dozens of such films then. I only take Raakh, AAA, JJWS and Rangeela pre 1995.

QSQT is also routine. I wouldn't take Deewana either for SRK. Though both films are liked.

My point was that criteria was being shifted for every actor here. Selectively picking or leaving years.

We definitely cannot ignore rubbish like Ra 1 or JTHJ. But why also ignore good stuff like Darr, Baazigar, Anjaam and KHKN, CDI, Swades?

I wonder how good stuff of other becomes an excuse and bad stuff of another is also ignored. Or vice versa.

Compare as threadbare as you want. But at least make it clear if it is based on just present or if it is all time, because on entire career basis, many things differ. Aamir's perception was totally different in early 90s. And SRK's perception is totally different now. The kind of films done etc are also different. Actors and stars are judged on present or longer basis?

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

J-SK

@J-SK

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#153

Aamir.. He never had a film where he acted so OTT like srk did in Ram Jaane, Guddu etc.

Quote

1039919

Suspended

Posted: 10 years ago

#154

Originally posted by: atominis
@Arsal

Aamir had a miniscule role in Holi. It is not fair to count it. DHKMN is ordinary like any yuppie romance Aamir did. He was doing dozens of such films then. I only take Raakh, AAA, JJWS and Rangeela pre 1995.

QSQT is also routine. I wouldn't take Deewana either for SRK. Though both films are liked.

My point was that criteria was being shifted for every actor here. Selectively picking or leaving years.

We definitely cannot ignore rubbish like Ra 1 or JTHJ. But why also ignore good stuff like Darr, Baazigar, Anjaam and KHKN, CDI, Swades?

I wonder how good stuff of other becomes an excuse and bad stuff of another is also ignored. Or vice versa.

Compare as threadbare as you want. But at least make it clear if it is based on just present or if it is all time, because on entire career basis, many things differ. Aamir's perception was totally different in early 90s. And SRK's perception is totally different now. The kind of films done etc are also different. Actors and stars are judged on present or longer basis?

So the other side can't ignore good stuff like Darr, Baazigar, Anjaam, KHKN, CDI, Swades, but you can come up with your reasoning of Aamir's acting, then suggest "well he can't play a villain" to suit your narrative of Aamir.

You dislike Aamir and you're biased. Just admit it already.

Why pretend otherwise?

Quote

642126

Hibernated

Posted: 10 years ago

#155

Tennant

I was commenting on negative roles. I clarified already.

Otherwise I also said SRK is bad at comedy. Does it mean I hate him?

For me both have phases, merits and demerits.

I don't like or dislike either of these guys.

So keep this labelling to yourself.

Quote

642126

Hibernated

Posted: 10 years ago

#156

Originally posted by: J-SK
Aamir.. He never had a film where he acted so OTT like srk did in Ram Jaane, Guddu etc.

What about Mela, Love Love Love, Isi ka naam zindagi, Tum Mere Ho etc?

Neither of these two are different when it comes to rubbish.

Quote

1039919

Suspended

Posted: 10 years ago

#157

Nope. Not going to be selective when one picks and chooses good points of one, while highlighting the bad points of other.

Bias is always there in any debate.

Quote

566912

Hibernated

Posted: 10 years ago

#158

Originally posted by: J-SK
Aamir.. He never had a film where he acted so OTT like srk did in Ram Jaane, Guddu etc.

Watch 'tum mere ho'

😆

Quote

642126

Hibernated

Posted: 10 years ago

#159

Originally posted by: tennant
Nope. Not going to be selective when one picks and chooses good points of one, while highlighting the bad points of other.
Bias is always there in any debate.

What kind of debates are there if everything is not considered?

It doesn't make sense to me.

I am all for debates where every bit is considered on both sides. It's better that way IMO.

Otherwise there's no point of discussion really. Someone takes this, someone takes or leaves that while judging.

This one topic has always come up in these last 20 years or so. Why do you think it still lingers?

It's not exactly an obvious choice. Though it would be if some other name was there.

I agree with BI on this. It is like Lata vs Asha. It can go on and on.