Ekta's masala version of Chandrakanta - Page 3

Originally posted by: --sanchita--

My point is that why use the name of the chars from a novel if u don't follow them. The show name could be diff with diff chars name. Why to use the title "chandrakanta"?

Originally posted by: ssuuvvii

On star.. dey r using name of devsena nd while promoting dey used bahubali's name also...but it's was nowhere related. .So chill..

If any xyz show has character name arjun thats doesn't means..Makers will show mahabharat !

Originally posted by: harivij

I think we should stop replying. Whatever reply we give complaints will never end. So friends I think our forum members will stop replying let them write their views. Because our replies are enough for whatever views they write.

Originally posted by: girlTalks

Agree,no more wasting time on people who just wont stop complaining no matter how many logical explanations you give.
I am done in this thread.

Originally posted by: flat_everest

Three things!!

1. This forum belongs to ekta kapoor s version of Chandrakanta. So pl refrain from talking about my olden days version bla bla..coz we don't encourage negativity here

2. If u still feel u ll b making dis post pink by making us all reply to u, sorry.. this s not d supportive crowd

3. We love the show . We love the leads. We love all the tracks that are woven around..so , thank u for visiting the forum. Join AT if u feel u can't stop admiring Vishal despite d masala track ( that u hav just mentioned)

C ya around...

Originally posted by: Luna99

I have seen this show and while I appreciate reimagining and reinterpreting an old story, one must not destroy the essence of a character.

Well, there has been interpretations like Maleficent where the villain has been the central character of the film

Well, in Maleficient, the villain has been shown In a positive light and the base story of Sleeping Beauty has also been changed a lot.

Where in the original story, Maleficent dies, but in the film, Maleficient crowns Aurora the queen at the end.

But do you know why the audiences could relate to Maleficent even in the film?

Because, her established personality traits were still retained in this show.

The film simply shaded a light on how Maleficent became the evil sorceress we know.

She became a well wisher of Aurora late in the serial, but proper explanations were given on why she took such a decision.

You need to be logical while writing a fantasy story also.

The problem that I have with this show is that the writers have played with the essence of both Chandrakanta and Virendra.

As a girl who has read the book, I've problems relating with the protagonists of this show because they are not whom I've read about in this book.

I think it is the same with the viewers who have watched the DD show and/or read the original book.

Essence is the most important feature of a character.

You can change his/her personality traits while reinterpreting the particular story once again, but you cannot change the essence of the character.

If you change the essence of the character, then it doesn't remain the character as people know it.

Also, after seeing only the 1st episode (couldn't bear the others because the show is shitty in itself) , I can sense that the writers didn't understand the essence of the book itself.

I know reinterpretations are a lot different from the original source itself, but the writer of the reinterpreted version should understand the base Concept and the underlying message of the original text.

This lack of understanding the source text is a feature I found in this Ekta version of Chandrakanta.

The CVS of this version has completely misunderstood the concept of Tilism, which is the base of the Entire Chandrakanta book.

Tilism in the book is described as a maze in which Chandrakanta is trapped into

But here, EK is describing Tilism as some kind of magic.

Also, in the original book, it is Chandrakanta whom everyone is after.

But here, everyone is after a tilism khanjar.

WITHOUT. EXPLAINING. ITS. PURPOSE.

Oh, also ayyars are magicians instead here instead of expert spies like in the book

I know many fans would counter me saying that EK gave an explanation that this show isn't related to the book.

But if it's not related to the book at all, why is the show's name Chandrakanta and why EK maata is using characters(rather names of the characters) and stray terminologies like Tilism and Ayyari from this classic book , without even understanding their meaning and purpose ?

Keeping in mind the fact that there is another Chandrakanta show running on another channel, EK could easily name the show and its protagonist Rajnibala.

And christen Virendra as Rajendra too.

It will be better for the crowd who has seen the DD serial or read the book to relate with this fisherwoman of a princess (who looks like 40 even though she's supposedly 21) and this daku of a prince (more of slave really) who romances the aforementioned heroine in the beaches and then forcefully Marries her if they don't go with the names of Chandrakanta and Virendra respectively.

Also EK will be dissed less for ruining a classic book and maybe even Praised for coming up with an original fantasy romantic drama.

(She would've nevertheless, dissed for coming up with this Rotten mess of this show)

Originally posted by: -SuPeRNaTuRaLs-

OMG i thought this forum is dead and noone's gonna even comment on my topic...i mean considering there r hardly 3-4 topics in the entire forum 😆...but today when i come here after 2 days i m surprised to see so many replies 😲 🤣...and the war of Like Ok Vs Colors Chandrakanta also seem to b going on 😆

this Ekta's Chandrakanta look much better than Life OK one though till NOW...lets see whats next...