Lack of Hema Malini, Sridevi, Madhuri, and Urmila

There is barely anyone similar to them in the stardom. They were the QUEENS OF SILVER SCREEN.

All those actresses used to make about 8-10 films per year at their peaks. At least 70% were trash. Today ladies have 2-3 films per year on average. They are producing far better content and performances. This is the golden era. Nostalgia is blinding. Pay attention.

Urmila and queen of silver screen..like seriously?

Originally posted by: Rekha_ji

All those actresses used to make about 8-10 films per year at their peaks. At least 70% were trash. Today ladies have 2-3 films per year on average. They are producing far better content and performances. This is the golden era. Nostalgia is blinding. Pay attention.

For the most part today's ladies aren't better at all, apart from the likes of Tabu and Vidya Balan. They still do mostly shit, play weak roles etc. not to mention the amount of star kids is increasing despite most of them showing zero talent. None of the post 2010 actresses hold a candle to the best 90's-2000's actresses

Wat a insult to hema, sri, madhuri lol, who is urmila lol , urmila didn't come in their league of stardom

Originally posted by: Unconventional

Urmila and queen of silver screen..like seriously?

Yes, she became queen of silver screen after the release of Rangeela and her biggest regret was rejecting DDLJ for Kajol's role.

Originally posted by: Rekha_ji

All those actresses used to make about 8-10 films per year at their peaks. At least 70% were trash. Today ladies have 2-3 films per year on average. They are producing far better content and performances. This is the golden era. Nostalgia is blinding. Pay attention.

But are they naturally gifted with amazing talent like sridevi or madhuri? Or they are lucky to be in era where good roles are available?

Originally posted by: Tippy-top

Yes, she became queen of silver screen after the release of Rangeela and her biggest regret was rejecting DDLJ for Kajol's role.

Didn't know that that role was offered to her first. Anyway she was only popular after Rangeela, she quickly faded away so she definitely shouldn't be compared with Madhuri and Sridevi..both legends

Originally posted by: harun98

But are they naturally gifted with amazing talent like sridevi or madhuri? Or they are lucky to be in era where good roles are available?

Sridevi had a 50-year career. Madhuri has been going for 35+ years. Comparing them to Alia Bhatt who debuted 7 years ago is ludicrous.

In the 90s, older fans used to say the same things: these Mahduri, Juhi, Urmila, Manisha, Karisma, Sonali, Raveena girls have got nothing on the evergreen Rekha, Hema, Parveen, Raakhee, Reena, Zeenat queens of the 70s/80s.

And before that, when it was the Hema-Rekha era... the previous generation of fans said "there will never be a Madhubala / Meena / Nutan / Nargis.

It's called getting old and losing touch. The generation we grow up with becomes "golden" to us. For me too, that is the 90s. My queens are Sridevi and Madhuri and Juhi. But I can also objectively see the bigger picture, the cycles, the trends, the patterns.

Urmila was a huge star. She's had some big films: Rangeela, Satya, Judai, Jungle, Bhoot, Jaanam Samja Karo,etc.