Just wondering...

Do you think that playing a masala hero means throwing acting to the winds? Or can there be a balance between being a commercial larger-than-life hero and having acting chops to do it convincingly?

For e.g. - Govinda always acted in masala films, but he was a very good actor and he did it so effectively.

On the other hand, look at Tiger Shroff and Varun Dhawan of this generation. For them, doing these roles means throwing all acting cues and skills to the wind, and just doing bare minimum in the name of 'acting'.

Actresses who do flowerpot have the same dilemma I think, should they act well or do the bare minimum? The best example I can think of is Sonakshi, who aces the flowerpt roles with good expressions and acting. On the other hand, someone like Kareena is pretty bad when she does these roles, and you wouldn't think it's the same Kareena who has exceled in Chameli, Omkara, Talash, JWM.

This brings into question the reality that is crafted on screen. Should I, as a viewer, invest in realism or fantasy? Which tone should I tune into? Can I do both?

Discuss.

You have to have a persona and charisma for these films

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

You have to have a persona and charisma for these films

Agreed though good acting is a welcomed bonus.

Forget about Indian masala or action cinema (which has multiple examples of great performances) just look at Robert Downey Jr, as Iron Man. Charisma and persona off the charts but also great acting from a top tier actor. The MCU was built on actors giving good to great performances.

To me the matter is half the actors' fault. More often than not larger than life movies are done by directors and writers who are all about gimmicks, and making profit and not about good story and dialogues. They usually bring out the worst in most actors, even the good ones. It's the Rohit Shettys, Sajids, Remos, Kjos who often make these types of movies and they could care less about acting when compared to other things.

Since you mentioned Govinda, I always wonder if Govinda's 90s comedy films with all his 1001 expressions and overacting was being made today for the first time would he have been seen as a great actor? I think each generation has their idea of what is good acting in masala/comedy movies.

Originally posted by: Rhimjhimsawan

To me the matter is half the actors' fault. More often than not larger than life movies are done by directors and writers who are all about gimmicks, and making profit and not about good story and dialogues. They usually bring out the worst in most actors, even the good ones. It's the Rohit Shettys, Sajids, Remos, Kjos who often make these types of movies and they could care less about acting when compared to other things.

Since you mentioned Govinda, I always wonder if Govinda's 90s comedy films with all his 1001 expressions and overacting was being made today for the first time would he have been seen as a great actor? I think each generation has their idea of what is good acting in masala/comedy movies.

True, but what about the audience? How come they don't reject bad acting in masala movies? Or are they so enamored by the masala elements that they forego all notions and expectations of good acting?

No, it shouldn’t. Acting is about making an audience connect with a character...no matter the character. An above average actor is someone who can make an audience believe and connect with any character he plays. Something that Varun, Tiger, Ranbir, SRK, Salman fail to do acting wise but make up for it through charisma and popularity. And something the likes of Govinda. Hrithik, Ranveer, Aamir, Shahid, Sushant etc did/do well.

Originally posted by: mintyblue

True, but what about the audience? How come they don't reject bad acting in masala movies? Or are they so enamored by the masala elements that they forego all notions and expectations of good acting?

No I think for the most part fans do reject bad masala acting. I doubt anyone is watching Varun, or Akshay or even SRK and Salman in their bad masala movies and saying wow what great acting. I am sure there are exceptions among some super fans but overall they are looked down upon by all. The only thing is these movies still make money because fans are willing to overlook the bad acting for everything else the movie has to offer which is mindless "entertainment" for many