Of underrated actors

Page

Next Last

Poll

Whom do you prefer?

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

Hollywood's Leo and Aamir Khan have a lot in common. Both are great actors, but don't get the awards and recognition. But whom do you prefer and why?

To help you decide, here is an assessment

The similarities

- Both dropped out of high school and never obtained a degree

- Both were considered "pretty boy" type stars on debut

- Both are critically acclaimed and considered the finest actors of their time

- Both are perfectionists and try to deliver high quality cinema

- Both get frequently overlooked by award shows despite terrific performances

- Both even when nominated usually lose out to someone else

The differences

- Aamir was born into a film family, Leo a third generation immigrant had no ties to any film family

- Aamir had an extended run as a fluffy Bollywood romantic before turning serious, Leo immediately established himself as an acclaimed actor

- Aamir refuses to attend award ceremonies that refuse to acknowledge his art, Leo attends every Hollywood event as is cheering heartily for his fellow actors

- Aamir runs a television show to preach to the nation about issues, Leo does stuff like own only hybrid vehicles, solar power his house, speak at tiger summits, donate millions to orphanages, earthquake relief, gay rights, wildlife conservation etc, buy an island for eco friendly tourism, create a computer lab for students in underprivileged sections of LA so on and so forth

- Aamir usually produces his own films or that of his family, Leo produces films for other big names like George Clooney (Ides of March), Christian Bale (Out of the Furnace) and Justin Timberlake (Runner Runner)

- Aamir usually tries to make hit movies about issues, Leo produces straight to Netlix documentaries like Virunga

- Aamir is a clean family actor, Leo does violent films like The Departed or debauchery laden films like Wolf of Wall Street

- Aamir takes himself seriously because he is like a serious actor, Leo still likes to party and have fun

Quote

Frequent Posters

return_to_hades

@return_to_hades

Stunner

+ 6

Posted: 11 years ago

My vote goes for Leo who is to me is much more gracious and personable. Aamir is too much of a pretentious prick for me.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

870349

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

Leo is the answer for me . Aamir is a douche .

Also before he hit it big in movies Leo was on a family sitcom . It had Kirk Cameron . It was called growing pains 😆 😆

Quote

IAmLuvBolly

@IAmLuvBolly

Sparkler

+ 8

Posted: 11 years ago

As actors it is really difficult for me to judge because Hollywood and Bollywood are so different. But if I had to choose I would go with Leo. He did What's Eating Gilbert's Grape at 18. In his early 20s Aamir was doing typical 90s Bollywood romance. It might be unfair to judge them like this because despite how well Aamir is doing now with his movie choices he never did and never will have the choices that Leo always has. But for the sake of this debate, well, it is what it is. Leo is better.

As individuals honestly I didn't know a lot of what you mentioned about Leo. The only thing I knew about is how passionate he's always been about environmental causes. On the surface it is easy to say Leo. But as someone who doesn't live in India am I the right person to judge that Aamir doesn't do enough for his environment or society? Also in spite of its crude and intrusive paparazzi and tabloid culture Hollywood also gets covered fairly and honestly by main stream media. I don't know if that distinction exist for Bollywood. Bollywood media seems very biased, very controlled by certain segments, and is easily bullied.

Quote

blue-ice.

@blue-ice.

Achiever

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

Its difficult to choose between these two...but I will have to go with Aamir...and I hope Leo wins an Oscar soon...its about time now😡

Quote

pinkeye

@pinkeye

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 11 years ago

Leonardo de caprio for his work and less pretentious offscreen self. He does work for societal good without boasting aboyt it unlike aamir khan.

Aamir is a grwat actor and I look forward to his work onscreen but his pseudo intellectual, social reformer image very cleverly crafted ro benefit his own goods as per convenience is a serious put off.

And as you said, leonardo de caprio is little more gracious than giving only opinions about anything and evrything when even not needed.

Quote

WinterAesthetics

@DanceUntilWeDie

Stunner

+ 4

Posted: 11 years ago

Environmentalist unapologetic playboy over fakester pseudo intellectual anyday

Quote

IAmLuvBolly

@IAmLuvBolly

Sparkler

+ 8

Posted: 11 years ago

Another point I want to make. I think Leo always attending the Oscars and Aamir never attending Filmfare is not a fair comparison at all. Oscars have gotten it wrong at times (Gwyneth Paltrow? Seriously?!) and there is a lot of lobbying and compaigning that takes place for certain movies and actors. But overall they manage to stay within the realm of correct and fair. They also are not slaves to box office numbers. While money makers like Lord Of The Ring or Titanic can sneak in there mostly they award films that are more message oriented and artsy in nature.

Filmfare awards have to improve by a 100 folds before it can even be compared with Oscars.

Edited by IAmLuvBolly - 11 years ago

Quote

998331

Suspended

Posted: 11 years ago

Aamir. I avoid watching Leo's movies: Has a face of a person who has hemorrhoid.

Quote

-Arsal-

@-Arsal-

Dazzler

+ 3

Posted: 11 years ago

#10

Originally posted by: return_to_hades
Hollywood's Leo and Aamir Khan have a lot in common. Both are great actors, but don't get the awards and recognition. But whom do you prefer and why?

To help you decide, here is an assessment

The similarities

- Both dropped out of high school and never obtained a degree
- Both were considered "pretty boy" type stars on debut
- Both are critically acclaimed and considered the finest actors of their time
- Both are perfectionists and try to deliver high quality cinema
- Both get frequently overlooked by award shows despite terrific performances
- Both even when nominated usually lose out to someone else

The differences

- Aamir was born into a film family, Leo a third generation immigrant had no ties to any film family
- Aamir had an extended run as a fluffy Bollywood romantic before turning serious, Leo immediately established himself as an acclaimed actor
- Aamir refuses to attend award ceremonies that refuse to acknowledge his art, Leo attends every Hollywood event as is cheering heartily for his fellow actors
- Aamir runs a television show to preach to the nation about issues, Leo does stuff like own only hybrid vehicles, solar power his house, speak at tiger summits, donate millions to orphanages, earthquake relief, gay rights, wildlife conservation etc, buy an island for eco friendly tourism, create a computer lab for students in underprivileged sections of LA so on and so forth
- Aamir usually produces his own films or that of his family, Leo produces films for other big names like George Clooney (Ides of March), Christian Bale (Out of the Furnace) and Justin Timberlake (Runner Runner)
- Aamir usually tries to make hit movies about issues, Leo produces straight to Netlix documentaries like Virunga
- Aamir is a clean family actor, Leo does violent films like The Departed or debauchery laden films like Wolf of Wall Street
- Aamir takes himself seriously because he is like a serious actor, Leo still likes to party and have fun