Why ELKDTAL didn't work at the BO? - Page 5

Originally posted by: *Reemz*

There is a review I found which summed it up for me in this paragraph:


Instead of telling a love story, this film is more focussed on the supposedly conservative middle class viewership that it addresses. This is a misjudgement. People may be prejudiced, but if the movie is about love, they want to see a good narrative, and then, afterwards, maybe, object to the lesbian love in it, perhaps venting themselves in endless and verbose arguments on social media, as is the fashion. But lecturing the audience on the subject from the word go, and getting a young man to mediate between the family and the woman concerned, is patronising and unconvincing on the part of the writers.


Like someone mentioned here, a movie on a guys erectile dysfunction was profitable, a film about sanitary towels too. There's been so-called taboo topics on the big screen and they've been accepted too.

India may have issues with many things but if it's told in an engaging way, they won't care what it's about so I just don't agree that just the theme would stop the movie from getting collections. The film didn't need to SPEAK TO the middle class because then they may actually feel like they're being patronised.

I agree with the issues with the screen count and lack of promotion but in 2019, I don't think India is that backwards that it can't find an audience for controversial topics IF told with a compelling narrative.

Originally posted by: *Reemz*

I know it resonates with a large group but to say only homosexuals get lynched is not really accurate. In the society we live in, there's all sorts of discrimination and bullying. If people found out that a guy has an erectile dysfunction, of course there will be mocking. Nobody escapes!

If you see the first half of this movie, it's got unnecessary scenes and characters which people aren't really going to be interested in. I think there seems to be some sort of miscommunication - the criticism isn't for romance, it was for the narrative to give more importance to the love angle because if they did then the whole coming out would've been more impactful. The play was about society against the lovers, the climax was Anil accepting their relationship. We would've cared more if that relationship was given more oomph.

Nobody is going to cause riots over emotionally rooted scenes between a same-sex couple. It's about having a tighter screenplay.

Heck even the director has accepted that this is the only criticism they've got. It's not one or two people, it's the general consensus. Why wasn't there more?

Originally posted by: Maraka_Musso89

Homosexuals are part of the monorities that always get lynched. They get ostracised for it.

Someone who has erectile dysfonction will have a hard time too but this person will still be part of the bigger crowd and that problem is most often than not hidden.

Those are not comparable.

Those who have been part of a minority know how it feels and homosexuals are barely tolerated nowadays. People don't even talk about it as if it doesn't exist and try to ignore it if a close one is gay.

In a country like India (and many more countries) were mariage is a the center of society, it's hard for them to live their lives. We are talking about countrie were homosexuality is a crime or still was not so long ago.

The intent here was to ease families into seeing the struggle their closed-ones could have living a life in which they had to hide a part of themeselves. Hence why it's first and foremost a family-drama.

I haven't seen the movie so I can't judge if people are being greedy about Kuhu or if she indeed they could have shown more of her.

Anyways, from what I saw on Twitter, it was a movie were some gay people went with their parents.

I also wonder from Raja Sen's review if the man who sat there crying has lost a child because of his intolerance and is now regretting it.

Originally posted by: *Reemz*

India is a country which can't tolerate daughters being born still, they are obsessed with fair skin, there's blatant racism but that doesn't mean they won't watch movies on these topics.

Forget India, when Fawad played a homosexual character in Kapoor & sons, he didn't receive much flak when he went back to Pakistan - there were no protests. That was a sub-plot!

In ELKDTAL, where it was the foundation of the plot, it needed more conviction. Again, I don't mean physical romance, I mean a reason for us to root for this cause.

Once you watch the film you'll see what I and many others mean. A lot of screen time was wasted on characters which didn't matter to the main plot.