Female Superstardom

Do men achieve superstardom status easier than women? I can't think of many actresses who have the same mass appeal as these men. Is it harder for actresses?

Actresses usually lack unique appeal.

Rajesh Khanna for eg, had his own charm, unique mannerisms and style. Sharmila Tagore could be easily replaced with say, a Mumtaz and still a Khanna film could become superhit. But that's not the case with heroes. It's not like you can swap hero and still the film would do well.

Female superstardom is no way like male superstardom because female brings nothing unique to the table except beauty/dancing skills/ style. They don't get substantial roles either. That chirpy girl, dukhiyari naari or even headstrong woman can be played by anyone.

Female star is more or less like flavour of the season. People move on. They are not loyal to her the way they are for male. Male stars get to influence a lot, music, sets, script, casting etc. Female star has no say. If she tries to have greater say, they gradually trash her thinking she is throwing her weight around.

Films center around male superstar, songs and dialogues are written keeping him in mind. It's not so for female. And even if something is there it is the same old marriage related issues. When have we seen a woman in a film like CDI or TZP? Even if we have a film on female politician it will be more about ego clash with husband and family than some real political/social drama. No female superheroes. No film on female freedom fighter, ruler, scientist, social reformer, psychologist, teacher etc!

Sorry but even EV and Queen were about family drama or matters of heart. Kahaani is the only truly different film featuring a female lead.

Don't expect stardom when there's not even relevant content or unique persona of female stars.



Hrithik for eg had something new to offer. Physique, looks, an actor who could also dance superbly. He was unlike others. What was Amisha? Just another PYT? That's not how you become new sensation! Females generally have less to offer or aren't given the kind of roles that showcase any uniqueness.

Originally posted by: light_year

Deepika and ashwariya

Originally posted by: lhcj21

Aishwarya, yes. The only few women I can think of are Sridevi, Madhuri, and Aishwarya. Deepika is getting there, but still has ways to go.

Originally posted by: lhcj21

Aishwarya, yes. The only few women I can think of are Sridevi, Madhuri, and Aishwarya. Deepika is getting there, but still has ways to go.

Aishwarya is a diva. Not a superstar.

On one hand you compare with male superstars. On other hand you relax criteria and label any popular actress as superstar?

She has a poor box office record. She never had the pull at ticket counters that Madhuri and Sridevi had.

Beauty lists, red carpet appearances aren't superstardom.

Don't name Ash in same sentence as Madhuri and Sridevi. The latter used to give hits with even newbies. No other star after them has enjoyed such clout.

Deepika and Katrina might be today's superstars though.

But still in comparison to male superstars (as your topic began with), females have a long way to go. They are not even able to do what Hema Malini, Sridevi and MD managed to do in past.

It's simple: It's a "mans" world.

Originally posted by: light_year

Sridevi has proved her super stardom with english vinglish. Madhuri failed to do it with aja nachle. Jazba would be acid test for ashwariya. Superstardom is tested when the actor/ actress have passed there peak.

Superstardom is at the peak also!

No Superstardom if you were never a draw at your prime.

It wasn't so.

Originally posted by: atominis

Aishwarya is a diva. Not a superstar.

On one hand you compare with male superstars. On other hand you relax criteria and label any popular actress as superstar?

She has a poor box office record. She never had the pull at ticket counters that Madhuri and Sridevi had.

Beauty lists, red carpet appearances aren't superstardom.

Don't name Ash in same sentence as Madhuri and Sridevi. The latter used to give hits with even newbies. No other star after them has enjoyed such clout.

Deepika and Katrina might be today's superstars though.

But still in comparison to male superstars (as your topic began with), females have a long way to go. They are not even able to do what Hema Malini, Sridevi and MD managed to do in past.

Superstar is a term coined for box office prowess. First used for Rajesh Khanna for giving back to back hits. So don't try to divorce box office from the term or drag other extraneous stuff like modeling, red carpet or so called fan following in it.

Internationally Raj Kapoor, AB sr, SRK have all made a mark. Now Aamir is making a mark with films as Oscar nominee and overseas toppers. Bit roles in Pink Panther type films are not stardom.

These days any super successful model is also called superstar! What a joke!

Regarding work in Hollywood, Naseer, Om Puri have greater body of work there. Tom Hanks said the only Indian actor he knew was Om Puri. Tabu has films like The Namesake, The Life of Pi, Irrfan has many well known films there.

So much for hyping 1 Bride and Prejudice or Mistress of Spices made by an NRI filmmaker as "international stardom"!

If she had so many fans why is her box office record so poor?

Stop relaxing criteria for females when it comes to stardom. Otherwise don't make topics comparing male and female stardom.

No flop eye candy male is ever called superstar. Unlike the term casually thrown for females!

You yourself answered your topic by downgrading definition of stardom for females. 😆

Superstars have clear cut success. They don't need excuses like luck!