If content is king, why did JHK flop?

People are saying content is king, but JHK received very good reviews- glowing reviews, in fact- and still flopped. I think that proves that star-power and content go hand-in-hand. It's not like content alone rules. Look at Article 15. It did so well despite being a dark, gritty film, because of Ayushman's star power. So before we say a movie works only because of content, we should look at JHK as an example of how without starpower, nothing is possible.

Pure guesswork here.

JHK looks like a movie that might appeal to deshi cinemaphiles. This target audience is usually aware of the happenings in Bollywood. So there are good chances they're aware of the "actual" Kangoli saga, and not the one that played out on media channels.

And maybe they've already picked a side....

The opening collections/weekend of a movie would include starpower as a major influence but much more than critics' reviews, it's the WOM from the audience that decides the fate of the film; its trend during weekdays and whether it sustains or not. And nowadays, with films like Andhadhun, Uri, Stree, Article 15 etc doing well, I guess we can say that there is significantly a shift in mindset where people would rather watch content-driven films more than films like Race 3 or Zero. Even Queen. It started off slowly but picked up because the audience liked the content, despite it not being the typical money-minter type of film.

Race 3, Tubelight, Zero etc may have had huge openings because of Salman and SRK but eventually they crashed because of negative WOM. It all depends on what the majority opines.

JHK may be a film with good content and good messages idk, but if the audience in general judges it as bad, then the writing's on the wall for its collections, irrespective of critics' ratings.

Even the critics were mixed so I don’t think it qualified as “good” content. When the first reviews came out I thought wow this film may really work. As soon as the reviews on the following day came out I knew it was unlikely to work. Almost every review started out glowing and had a lovely headline but then toward the end said almost the same things: too long, too much borrowed from Kangana’s real life, easily predictable twist. A surprising number either said she veered toward overacting or made some allusion to her not acting (as in being mental). Despite that many of those same reviews gave 3.5 stars 🤓 I truly think either part of the budget bought some positive reviews or journalists, trying hard to be unbiased, overshot and overrated the film.

I disagree "Good Content" cannot be declared by a handful of chosen and paid media outlets. That is simply part of the pre-release media campaign.

Kangana and her films all seem to have the same issue or same PR, I remember the calling of Manikarnika a year before it was released as her "Magnum Opus" I wrote that it sounded more like a "Magnum Floppus because you see a Magnum Opus is magic that happens and it happens well after the work is done, NEVER before.

Same thing with "Good content" The judge and jury is the paying public, the anonymous Joes that pay to go see the work and exhilarated by this work they recommended it or give it good reviews that are unsolicited and not paid.

This film had a lot of hype, but the second you see the lead creating controversy not with one issue but several, in fact in some of the promotions the last thing she talked about was the movie, and THEN you know even she knows the film is crap.

Can you count how many controversies kangana was in just prior to the release?

Due to rain per rangoli 🤣

So you means kangana doesn't have star power .

Sab HR, kjo aur aloo ki saazish hai.

Movie isn’t that good honestly. Direction is weird, writing is lazy and hazy. First half is gritty, but second half is KLPD. Kangana shines but is let down by the script. It will appeal only to people who are looking for something crazy and unique but not necessarily excellent.

Kangana is phenomenal in the film so is Raj. The film dips down in second half.