Originally posted by: drummedup
Such a simple explanation, my dear OSO😆
But wasn't shelf life and quality of roles for female leads better in 90's than now?
Even the Khans did variety of roles.
I can see the number of '<<<' is less for movies😆 What makes you feel movies now are marginally better? Or is it that movies have evolved every decade and the trend continued?
That was my knee-jerk reaction but very accurate. 😆
The shelf life of film actresses in 90s compared to those from 2000 era wasn't better at all. I mean Juhi started losing out main lead roles in 2001 (she did some bhabhi type role in Ek Rishta to Akshay and Karishma), Manisha, Urmila, Karisma, Raveena all started fading out around the early 200s. At most, they had about a decade of shelf life. Even Rani and Priety's reign ended in 2008 (only a decade later).
Now look at the 2000s actresses, Kareena started in 2000 and she is still playing lead roles. PC in 2003 and she's still doing great. Even Katrina the non-actress who started with a Boom in 2003 is still doing lead roles. 😆
Plus, movies nowadays are a lot better. You get an Aamir, a Lootera, Udaan, Dev.D, Masaan, English Vinglish every now and then along with the staple masala films. Also, there is a high chance for small but well made films to do great due to good word of mouth on social media. I love the 90s because of the nostalgia factor but other than that, there's not much to it.😆
Arjun
Tum Se Tum Tak
Anupamaa
13