Why is there lack of craze for actresses who are now in their 20's?

mintyblue thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 5 years ago
#1

It's a first in history of BW that older actresses like Katrina, Deepika, Shraddha who are the darling of the masses are all in their 30's. Alia is the only one in 20's who is doing well for herself, but most people agree her stardom is curated and manufactured. Not a single other actress has that craze/hype/fandom which is organic and expected of actresses in their 20's. I was just seeing a poll on Instagram of Katrina vs. Kiara, and believe me, not a single person has voted for Kiara. It was quite surprising, I thought she had the launde lapades eating out of her hand.


No actress in 20's is universally loved and accepted. A bit hard to digest, isn't it? Why do you think this is the case?


Also moving onto actors, it's the same picture there also. No actor in his 20's is successful.


Are the actors/actresses born in 90's jinxed? I know that sounds weird, but I can't think of anything better to explain the lack of hype/craze/attention!

Created

Last reply

Replies

9

Views

1k

Users

10

Likes

22

Frequent Posters

Ashley.Tisdale thumbnail
Visit Streak 750 Thumbnail Visit Streak 500 Thumbnail + 7
Posted: 5 years ago
#2

The main reason imo is that majority of the actresses in their 20s today look like teenagers so they appeal only to a certain demographic. Compare today's teens to Madhuri and Karishma's or even Kareena and Preity when they debuted. On top of that their maturity when they open their mouth is.....

Today's actresses would have a larger fanbase if we had teen based films or shows like the West has TVD, The Kissing Booth, After etc.

Kiara is probably the only one who fits in the universal appeal category along with Disha. Even Jacqueline has more appeal. But they haven't had the chances that our 2000s actresses got due to nepotism.

Autumn_Rose thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 5 years ago
#3

They all look the same.

Palak_Paneer thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail Visit Streak 30 Thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#4

Heroines today are so generic.Nothing unique about them plus they all play safe

More than the heroines,their PR is interesting 😆

Veni-Vidi-Vici thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 5 years ago
#5

All look as if they are from the same mould.. No distinguishing factor

Anjalika01 thumbnail
6th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#6

It’s always like this in the beginning... then (usually) the older stars begin to fade out or start sticking to senior roles and the new stars get more popular...

And then of course there’s the nepotism issue... like no matter how much they get pushed people aren’t going to accept Ananya or Jahnvi as the new Deepika or Priyanka 😂😂🤷🏽‍♀️

Equine thumbnail
14th Anniversary Thumbnail Dazzler Thumbnail Fascinator 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#7

I guess the 20’s actresses are not getting any meaty roles written for them. BW itself has moved on from teenage love stories to mature love stories, which is more suitable to actresses in their 30s and 40s.

NoraSM thumbnail
Sparkler Thumbnail 6th Anniversary Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 5 years ago
#8

They get competition from millions of Instagram accounts

Beauty and trend is not exclusive anymore

1123225 thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#9

The 20-somethings hogging the limelight are not star quality. Alia, Jhanvi, Ananya, et al.


If there were a Madhuri or Juhi or even a Deepika or Katrina among them, the 30-somethings would be fading by now.

capricornrcks thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Voyager Thumbnail
Posted: 5 years ago
#10

So the general opinion is that the current crop of actresses look...generic. I agree. Shradda/Disha and Ananya/Tara are interchangeable for me. Nothing which distinguishes them from their contemporaries. Which could be due to the sheer amount surgeries done to fit in with what is "deemed" as popular little realising that it also makes them generic. Again frequenting the same designers, same stylists etc.


2. They are doing fewer films than the actresses in the 80s and 90s. The stars from the 80s and 90s had at least 5-6 films coming out a year which gave them opportunity to learn the craft quickly and win over the audience. Another advantage was that the flops didn't linger in the public memory since the next film came out in the next 2-3 months. If that's a hit everything is forgiven/forgotten.


3. Hindi films have always placed looks above talent. There were actresses like Neelam who were pretty popular in the 80s and 90s who were lacking in the acting department. But there were always enough actresses with talent to counterbalance it.

Related Topics

Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: priya185 · 3 months ago

Bollywood Hungama actors roundtable Ishaan Vicky Ayushmann Aditya Raghav and Vishal...

Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: iamrebelheart · 3 months ago

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DQUN4bbD5pk/?igsh=MWp3bjcydnBwODJhZg==

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DQUN4bbD5pk/
Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: Amira21 · 5 months ago

Raj Kundra transferred money to 4 actresses account recently from the 60 crore that he looted from other people to run his business. One of them...

Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: 3was · 5 months ago

I've always been fascinated by scenes where two actresses share the screen there’s something electric about it when it's done right. Think of...

Expand ▼
Bollywood thumbnail

Posted by: WhipCreamThong · 5 months ago

So many I can name that qualify for stiff and sleepwalking characteristics: - Queen Aishwarya Rai - Katrina Kaif - Deepika Padukone - Jahnvi...

Expand ▼
Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".