BV is losing its charm - Page 8

Created

Last reply

Replies

77

Views

8.6k

Users

30

Likes

473

Frequent Posters

GoodDoc_2105 thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 11 years ago
#71

The only redemption which was shown in convincing manner is Dadisa.

A person's grey traits or negative traits never go away. A person who caused a lot of damage to himself and other people because of this negative traits may learn lessons like Dadisa and Basant Singh did but they are not shown forgetting their past and behaving in complete white way.
They have been shown as someone constantly battling their weaknesses to do what they think is right and try not to behave the way they did in the past.
Redemption is all about battling with inner demons and inner struggle not about turning milky white and super positive
A person who bowed down before external pressures and went wrong way - the redemption is about trying hard not to bow down before the external pressures
Redemption is also about never forgetting where you have come from. A pwrson may change but that doesn't mean he/she can completely forget what kind of a person he/she has been in the past.
Dadisa never forgets her mistakes and in her evry action we can see her attempt to wipe out some of those effects.If she was responsible for Jamuna's death by denying medical help she tried to make up for it through helping Ganga
If she was responsible in a way for fights between Basant and Gehna Jagya and Anandi she now tries to make up for it by trying to mediate between Jagya and Ganga by trying to ease the situation between them
So many instances they have shown and that's why Dadisa's redemption is convincing.
That process has been so gradual and now she fights for women's college it looks so natural
That's how redemption of other characters also should have been shown but they never did.
Dadisa - illtreated Anandi so much and screwed up her life but she rebuilt Anandi's life in an even more beautiful manner and that's why her redemption and DSa and Anandi's relationship looks so convincing.
There is redemption and there is white washing.
rohini55 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#72
@siriuslysujal
I had vowed on another thread that I will not engage with fans because that means getting into a ceaseless cycle of replies and misunderstood counter-replies.
However, I'm replying just one last time because the comments that have generated so much ire were made by me or have been attributed to me.
I have been accused of lampooning a child birth delivery that Jagya did while in Mumbai. To the best of my knowledge I was not an active participant here at the time. The fact that in the last two years I have made only 200-odd posts testifies to my inactivity on the forum.
Besides, I'm only too aware that emergency deliveries are made in all kinds of circumstances. So it seems odd that I mocked a delivery by a qualified doctor. But assuming I did, I was at worst being insensitive. I certainly don't deserve the kind of condemnation I'm getting.
Jagya being a farmer has been entirely torn out of context. I said this by way of comparison. If Anandi had been made a doctor and Jagya a farmer ( I cannot make him a house-husband can I? Hence the analogy of a farmer), would that not have hugely upset the Jagya fans?
Anandi was a brilliant student but she had no interest in medicine. She passed up the chance to become a doctor so as to pursue her interest in social service. If I'm not mistaken she took a degree in social service.
She has demonstrated her natural leadership qualities over and over -- whether in stopping child marriage or conducting adult education classes or in devising ways to reach the canal water to needy villages, or finally in pulling off the daring rescue of mannu. Her work turned a village into a district and earned her an award from the Chief Minister.
With all these qualifications, she is reduced to pandering to an endless series of regressive in-laws while Jagya, who has shown no interest in social service, gets a double career as a doctor and a politician.
The irony is compounded by the fact that the family structures in BH are geared to offer him support in both endeavours while A is confined to the kitchen-- whether in BH or in KB. If this is not absurd what is?
The angst from our side was because of this: BV showcases itself as a carrier of progressive messages. And yet when it comes to execution it becomes a vehicle for the same gender discrimination that it rails against.
The voiceover message always harp on this or that injustice but BV CVs seem to have completely missed the paradox of a Balika Vadhu, subjected to all kinds of horrors in childhood, being subjected to more domestic tyranny after marriage.
Where is the message in this? And if there is none, should BV not stop broadcasting all those silly little homilies at the end?
I did say Jagya was an MLA more in terms of his sartorial elegance. What is so objectionable about it?
The forum will become dead place if we cannot be irreverent with the characters. I have made even more fun of Anandi and her penchant for carrying trays to people who can't bear to be near her.
Shashank is a great actor and his forte is portraying multiple shades. My own personal favourite scene in BV is the dialogue between Bhairon and J over the latter abandoning Anandi. I was on A's side but J's arguments were completely convincing and the acting was superb and compulsive.
I said he is a good actor but he has not been able to pull off the politician act. This means the script is not working, at least according to me. And I'm entitled to feel this way.
I said the character looks tepid in a "milky white" role. And the reason for this is that A is already "milky white".
We can't have the entire cast becoming clones of A. It is terribly boring to watch the same scenes being enacted again by a different person.
What was point of making A a sarpanch and show her stopping child marriage and so on, if someone else is to do the same things later on, and unconvincingly at that?
I will end by quoting from a post I made in another thread: If people can learn to distinguish among criticism of the character, actor and fan groups there would be no problem. The first is 100 per cent kosher, the second too is perfectly legit provided it is restricted to the acting and does not descend into personal abuse. The third should be avoided. Trouble starts when criticism of the character and, occasionally even the acting, is confused with and taken as criticism of the fan group
====================
rohini55 thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#73
@aparna
A classic example of what you are saying is this: When Saanchi fell for J and assumed it was Anandi who had wronged him, J should have disabused her of the notion. He owed it to her to come clean on his past. He should have let her know of every single wrong he did, and he should have explained why Anandi left him and married Shiv.
The CVs did not show him doing that. Had he done that Saanchi might have forgiven him -- as Ganga did -- or she could have as well decided she was better off not marrying a man with his kind of past.
But knowing everything, he allowed her to think of him as great man who had been wronged by his wife. She kept telling him that the only woman who understood him was she herself. She thought this way because she was unaware of the full story.
GoodDoc_2105 thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 11 years ago
#74

Originally posted by: rohini55

@aparna

A classic example of what you are saying is this: When Saanchi fell for J and assumed it was Anandi who had wronged him, J should have disabused her of the notion. He owed it to her to come clean on his past. He should have let her know of every single wrong he did, and he should have explained why Anandi left him and married Shiv.
The CVs did not show him doing that. Had he done that Saanchi might have forgiven him -- as Ganga did -- or she could have as well decided she was better off not marrying a man with his kind of past.
But knowing everything, he allowed her to think of him as great man who had been wronged by his wife. She kept telling him that the only woman who understood him was she herself. She thought this way because she was unaware of the full story.

So true. He could have told Sanchi also just like he told Ganga that he was responsible for the break up of his marriage with Anandi.
Ganga understood his reasons. Sanchi would have stopped troubling Anandi.
Sanchi would have backed off because she only wanted to prove that she is better than Anandi and that's one big reason in her twisted mind behind wanting to marry J.
aprilq thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#75

Originally posted by: neensm

this political track is extremely boring whenever that ( don't even remember his name) person is on screen with dadisa I prefer to change the channel.

political character played by jagiya is horrible.he is very poor in this role.

sanchi being shown so dumb is undigestable.😭

to top it all find oversmart bua dadi irritating WHY IS EVERYONE LIKE PUPPET IN HER HANDS.???😡

SABHI DEVI DEVTA BANANE KI KOSISH KAR RAHE HAIN

be normal HUMANS

If😭 CREATIVES DONOT HAVE ANY STORYLINE IT IS BETTER TO WIND OFF THE SHOW.



BV started losing its charm when the main lead was replaced. And then the CVs mangled the Ganga track which started on a positive note into a distasteful mess, by painting poor Sumitra black and introducing the totally unwanted track of Sanchi which does not fit into the serial's primary message of child marriage.

Worse of all, they showed a fugitive sheltered in a house casually presuming to set her sights on the son of the house, take over the kitchen and overall behave thanklessly to her kind benefactors who never thought of anything more than a recipient of their charity. The previous actress nicely portrayed the desperation of the character who wanted to get attached to the haveli and Jagdish by hook or crook and achieved her goal after a lot of melodrama, the one currently playing the role is like the second version of Gehna - mellow, content and just blends into the background.

This serial was once a near-to realistic portrayal of rural India, it is now just another of interchangeable soaps. I stopped watching it when Jagdish married Ganga which was highly unrealistic in a soap that promoted itself seriously - in real life, a semi-literate woman sheltered in a house will hardly be able to get away with what Ganga did and if this were true every other ayah will start dreaming of getting shelter in a rich haveli, overstaying their welcome and eventually marrying the son of the family.

Gauri was a complex and interesting character - even her mean parents were sketched out well. Wish they had closed that track properly.

Sanchi's track was a waste of space- it was unbelievable how evil she was and her story was not relevant to the serial at all.
The way Ganga's track was handled and Sanchi's track made the serial lose almost all the remaining charm after the second Anandi's exit.

It is not so surprising to see that fine characters like Bhairon and Sumitra have left the show.
Awfulggt thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#76

Originally posted by: rohini55

@aparna

A classic example of what you are saying is this: When Saanchi fell for J and assumed it was Anandi who had wronged him, J should have disabused her of the notion. He owed it to her to come clean on his past. He should have let her know of every single wrong he did, and he should have explained why Anandi left him and married Shiv.
The CVs did not show him doing that. Had he done that Saanchi might have forgiven him -- as Ganga did -- or she could have as well decided she was better off not marrying a man with his kind of past.
But knowing everything, he allowed her to think of him as great man who had been wronged by his wife. She kept telling him that the only woman who understood him was she herself. She thought this way because she was unaware of the full story.


I had felt the same when this track happened. He could have dared to speak out the truth instead of putting up the act like he was sacrificing himself for his family's sake and his family for Anandi's sake, while Anandi had gained absolutely no benefits from these useless self proclaimed sacrifices. And I wouldn't have expected this from him if he never claimed to be a changed person. When one says they redeemed , I think it is fair enough to expect such dignified behaviour from them
jagan_fan thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#77
i dnt thnk it is losing charm...it has already lost 😛😛
731627 thumbnail
Posted: 11 years ago
#78
with too much sweetness bv losing it charm and with too much viloence shown in bv is loosing charm .hur dushmani mein itna violence dikhana jaroori hai kya like killing champa madan beating abhishek ratan beating ganga villagers throwing anandi at jyoti marriage

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".