Perks in Writing - Page 3

Originally posted by: harshu.sundas

well chitra if u ask me , den i will say yes i m selfish wen it cums 2 HC playing RAGHAV...so in dat case yes i find it boring 2 watch nebody else instead of him.

but here dat is not d question.

wen d question arises dat hw d writers execute the story den we just cant giv dem a benefit of doubt.

we cannot sit nd think dat awee, dese ppl r writing 4 two long years nd it is a tough job 2 handle d characters so let us giv dem a chance...my answer wud b big NO.

cos no matter wat nd hw much tough d handling is, it is dere job nd they shud fulfill d audience demand cos one's half an hour shudnt b taken 4 granted.

wen d point cums dat writers cannot handle d characters they can just end d show, but not mess it up nd giv illogical justifications.

nd so nw i really don know wat they will try nd do wid VIRAJ's character, but i want a proper and good execution of RAGHAV nd his part of d story, as d reason is he i m here so, i will b happy enough wid his part of d story if it is handled welll...

I think things are getting repetitive. How many times people can watch it same stuff again and again? It is fine if they show it for week or so but I think in this show CVs stretch everything to the extreme that viewers has to yell stop.

I am not blaming this for actor at all. It is more likely CVs problem that they characterize his character that way.

For me it is definitely kind of boring seeing Siya getting flashbacks every other minutes yes it is necessary process they cannot show her strong over night but in 20 minutes episode if you show 10 minutes of flashback and then talk with pot where the story is moving? It has become more like horror and comedy show than what it used to be.

If I go with Indian audience then even they are more sentimental than we are so I guess actually people will not like it when you do things like this with your loved one ashes but this completely different topic and I would not like to go there

Originally posted by: BizzyLizzy

Were Viraaj's character in a different serial, with a theme that wasn't so focussed on an entirely different true-to-life issue, and with a team that had researched the disorders it was mentioning properly, maybe it wouldn't have been such a problem for some? Here, the issue of his illness and treatment are so deeply intertwined with Jhanvi's history of abuse that half the time viewers can be torn by what they should support: if they choose to support Jhanvi's choice of leaving they are being insensitive to the OCPDer, if they choose to believe that Jhanvi staying around to cure him would be better they're insensitive to her suffering. And of course there's that wonderful thing called the middle path which many could alternately follow, though I am myself a little unsure of how to define it in terms of the serial...but I'm sure you get what I mean.

I don't think that can be called sadistic or selfish, it's more or less a statement on which issues we - as individuals - feel more passionately about, or whether or not we believe that Viraaj is unaware of what he does or not. Different strokes for different folks IMO. Some of us feel he is unaware of how wrong he is and feel he can get better with a healthy amount of caring; some of us don't buy it, or at least feel that violence is not something an OCPDer *can't* control. I believe it all boils down to which issue we believe requires more, or equal, attention. For some it's domestic violence, for some it's the treatment of an OCPD patient, for some both can go hand-in-hand.

Originally posted by: -Nakshatra-

@Sundas: That's not new i know you would love to have HC onscreen 24/7 but you can't take away the central character's presence can you.

Trust me its all about TRP's so i don't think any show would deviate from that. What illogical justifications there is none like that. Nobody justified his actions he is sick and his illness is not clearly depicted that's the only perk. This show is successful why would anyone think of ending it.

I hope with Raghav's character they take the realistic route to get the intended message reach the audience.

Originally posted by: BizzyLizzy

Were Viraaj's character in a different serial, with a theme that wasn't so focussed on an entirely different true-to-life issue, and with a team that had researched the disorders it was mentioning properly, maybe it wouldn't have been such a problem for some? Here, the issue of his illness and treatment are so deeply intertwined with Jhanvi's history of abuse that half the time viewers can be torn by what they should support: if they choose to support Jhanvi's choice of leaving they are being insensitive to the OCPDer, if they choose to believe that Jhanvi staying around to cure him would be better they're insensitive to her suffering. And of course there's that wonderful thing called the middle path which many could alternately follow, though I am myself a little unsure of how to define it in terms of the serial...but I'm sure you get what I mean.

I don't think that can be called sadistic or selfish, it's more or less a statement on which issues we - as individuals - feel more passionately about, or whether or not we believe that Viraaj is unaware of what he does or not. Different strokes for different folks IMO. Some of us feel he is unaware of how wrong he is and feel he can get better with a healthy amount of caring; some of us don't buy it, or at least feel that violence is not something an OCPDer *can't* control. I believe it all boils down to which issue we believe requires more, or equal, attention. For some it's domestic violence, for some it's the treatment of an OCPD patient, for some both can go hand-in-hand.

Originally posted by: likarsh

First of all, I don't think "cure" is the right word. Everyone uses it. i think even KB used it. But really you can't be "cured." You can be treated and get better. But not cured.

As for bold, I don't think this at all. While there are others. In my view, Jhanvi has every right to leave and is under no obligation to Viraj. That's just my opinion. If she decides to try to help him work through his problems, that's one thing. But she's under no obligation to do so.

Originally posted by: likarsh

LOL, people defending and justifying the actions of a male lead? What's so new or surprising about that?