How did Kareena last longer in Bollywood than rani? - Page 3

Rani is a fab actress but Kareena has always been more popular, more beautiful and has a better screen presence than her, and also she has done all kinds of films, some of them are still hugely popular, I mean people still remember some of her characters like Poo and Geet. Overall Kareena has always had more star power.

Originally posted by: Enycedoll

rani is my fav, but this is the truth.

Kareena has more versatile looks.

Kareena's the only one from her generation who Akshay and the Khans are still willing to act opposite with. Otherwise they seem to prefer younger girls these days. Somehow she managed to have(and more importantly maintain) a rapport with all her leading men and be in their good graces.Let's be real here. A Bollywood hero still wields enormous power in deciding the career-span of a leading lady.

She keeps herself fit and fashionable and relevant. The audience still perceives her as young and is not ready to name her an oldie like they did with Kajol when she was acting opposite SRK.

She has always been willing to take unimportant roles in hero-centric films and she still follows the formula. Unlike Rani who's a bit more selective these days and wants better roles in her resume now.

With the help of khan including Taimur and Jeh baat.

Originally posted by: cougarTown

This is the industry where Katrina kaif is more relevant and a bigger star than the two combined..so lets not even bring talent into discussion or else konkona, tabu etc will be huge stars

Kareena has always been more glamorous, she has a much bigger male following which leads to more popularity.. even when kareena was going through a rough career patch and rani was doing really well..she was always wildly popular..

Rani is a great actor, kareena is lazy but can be really good when she wants to be like in Talaash, a movie she shone as bright as Aamir let alone Rani..

Yup, you nailed it. It's basically this. Also I think at their peak, while both were super ambitious with Rani being the more hard working one, post marriage and motherhood, Rani seems to want to keep a lower profile.than Kareena who is go-go-go.

It's possible that some of it is also driven by necessity, Rani's husband is a bigshot studio honcho- she doesn't really need to work so much. Kareena's is not, and she and Saif are both just working actors at the end of the day.

I think it was Salman that once said that Kareena is very smart in terms of knowing how to keep herself relevant and evolving and changing with time.

Personally I would take a Rani movie over Kareena's anyday. I used to avoid Kareena's movies like plague but she did learn acting and her performances have improved a lot. And then she became the total package. She was already glamorous and good acting made sure people loved watching her onscreen.

Also didn't help that Rani restricted herself to YRF. If she would've done more movies like black, she would be sought out like Tabu today. Most of her older roles seem so similar to each other now.

Rani is still releasing films which are successful, so it's not like Rani has disappeared while Kareena is ruling the roost. It's just that Kareena has managed to maintain her superstar status, which Rani could not. So the question should be 'How has Kareena managed to maintain her superstar status while Rani could not'. 2 reasons:

1. Kareena reached peak late, very very late. She had some hits and acclaimed performances before 2007, but no one took her seriously as an actress and she certainly wasn't a fan favorite before JWM. Even in 2007, Katrina was clearly the bigger star, and there was more mania surrounding Deepika and Sonam than Kareena. Then she had another dull year in 2008, before finding success with 3I and Kurbaan in 2009. That was the start of her successful era. Rani, on the other hand, not only reached her peak way before 2009, but she also found success and therefore fizzled out by that time. She sorta found her first solo hit with Saathiya in 2002, was a top actress from 2003-2006, before finally fizzling out in 2007.

Generally what happens is that when audiences see you for a very long time, they get bored of you and move on to the next hot thing in town. Since Rani was so overexposed in 2003-2006 (literally starring in every big film of that year with the biggest stars like SRK or biggest banners like YRF/KJo), people got thoroughly sick at the sight of her and moved on to newer actresses. Kareena, on the other hand, had a very dull phase from 2002-2007. Even in 2007, she wasn't the most popular actress (katrina was). Then another dull year in 2008, before finally hitting her stride in 2009. Kareena almost felt like a new face -- that was the time she started to get paired with the Khans or big banners, something Rani has achieved 5 years earlier.

So yes, reaching her peak very late did help her cause.

2. Kareena has maintained herself well. She can easily pass of as a 25 years old even at the age of 40. Rani, on the other hand, started to look old and jaded by as early as 2010 (when she was in her 30s). Let's be honest -- looking hot and glamorous is a huge part of Bollywood. Kareena can play these bubbly ott commercial roles or shake her assets in some glamorous dance -- something Rani can't do convincingly today. Hence Rani is limited to her artsy Mardaani type roles, while Kareena can play commercial roles and therefore still retain her superstar status...