OUTSIDERs vs INSIDERs - A Viewpoint on Films Done & Failures - Page 5

Originally posted by: cricketfan1

I don’t think its that black and white...We as audience are not aware of everything...Just to play the other side, isn’t RKR getting films after films even with such low success ratio?

But RKR is surviving completely on his talent, while many insiders who don't have talent and looks both, they still kerp getting movies. RKR doesn't get the same hype and he is still paying second fiddle in Fanney Khan and EK Ladki, also, he despite being talented had to resort to movies like Ragini MMS , his struggle has been very different. His small movies made him successful like Shahid.

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

Like Kangna Ranaut in queen.

Don’t include actors/multi starers that are side kicks or the part is not prominent . Like Amitabh and Hema are leads in Baghban, Salman and Mahima are ‘just there’.

You can include supporting actors or multi starers in terms of performance and significance. Like Kangana in fashion.

This is BIASED VIEWPOINT, Kangana having performance in Fashion, but if I list her failure film, you will counter it by saying she was "just there" in that film so no it ain't a failure?

Originally posted by: FingerFetish

Hardly mute! His vocals was the most loudest and prominent sound throughout the movie.

Someone who went to kindergarten, tried learning Hindi vowels and never recovered from it. Sounds Freudian to me😆

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

Someone who went to kindergarten, tried learning Hindi vowels and never recovered from it. Sounds Freudian to me😆

The complexities are real 😆

Originally posted by: Radhe2712

This is BIASED VIEWPOINT, Kangana having performance in Fashion, but if I list her failure film, you will counter it by saying she was "just there" in that film so no it ain't a failure?

Role should be prominent and an important plot point.

Or just limit multi starers to 4 leads.

Jackie Shroff is a prime example. He was an "outsider" but look at how many flops/disasters he has given over his career yet he continued to get work.

Honestly, I don't see why we focus so much on actors having a bad track record but still getting work. Producers/directors can cast who they want. It's clearly their loss if they keep casting actors who cannot bring in an audience.

The important thing is that the audience eventually always decides which films and actors they want to support. Any actor who gets a launch, even if you are an "insider" or "outsider", has initial hype but that cannot last forever and you will eventually fade if you are not accepted.

Originally posted by: cricketfan1

So you mean to say talent is rewarded regardless of his status being outsider or insider?

I am glad though he is getting work because he happens to be one of my favorites....

No, getting movies is something different and hype is something different. The problem comes when two actors are equally talented and both their movies are successful, but one is hyped and other one is sidelined be it in media or be it in awards. Just like Kedarnath (Sushant and Sara) and I admit that audience too is responsible for that.

Originally posted by: Renee.Clare

But RKR is surviving completely on his talent, while many insiders who don't have talent and looks both, they still kerp getting movies. RKR doesn't get the same hype and he is still paying second fiddle in Fanney Khan and EK Ladki, also, he despite being talented had to resort to movies like Ragini MMS , his struggle has been very different. His small movies made him successful like Shahid.

Rajkumar Rao's NEWTON was selected for INDIA's entry to OSCAR, his film got boast from this news & survived the Average verdict while it was going to be a complete failure & here we are hearing he isn't getting any HYPE??

Every Outsider has all the support from FILM CRITICS, their films are praised as if that has got the only QUALITY FILM material, which in reality nobody cares, they don't even watch their films on TV, yet they are promoted as Better films in media.

Originally posted by: HugeScarcity

Jackie Shroff is a prime example. He was an "outsider" but look at how many flops/disasters he has given over his career yet he continued to get work.

Honestly, I don't see why we focus so much on actors having a bad track record but still getting work. Producers/directors can cast who they want. It's clearly their loss if they keep casting actors who cannot bring in an audience.

The important thing is that the audience eventually always decides which films and actors they want to support. Any actor who gets a launch, even if you are an "insider" or "outsider", has initial hype but that cannot last forever and you will eventually fade if you are not accepted.

Jackie became friendly with Subhash Ghai

I have never heard anyone praise Tushar Kapoor. I’m in shock.