Sasha to play karna in rakesh omprakash mehra's mahabharata???? - Page 4

nowadays people are writing their own version of MB in other platforms🤣

karna-draupadi love angle😆😡

justice for subadara😆

arjun-draupadi link up is a sin🤣

I came across these few and totally got shock of my life what the hell am i reading🤦🏻‍♀️

Karna gets a lot of leeway because he was suta.

Thing is suta wasn't even low caste😆, just intercaste between brahmana and kshatriya. Many confuse it with shudra.

KRISHNA was a suta. KUNTI was biologically a suta, adopted kshatriya. SUBHADRA was a suta. BHEESHMA was a suta because Ganga was Rishi Jahnu's daughter (a brahmana woman). Uttara's mother and uncle were sutas. Ugrasravas Sauti was a suta.

So why does Karna get extra credit?

Of all the lower caste people in Mahabharata, Vidura was one. He was a kshatta, which was considered even lower than shudra. He was treated with utmost respect by Pandavas and Panchali.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

Karna gets a lot of leeway because he was suta.

Thing is suta wasn't even low caste😆, just intercaste between brahmana and kshatriya. Many confuse it with shudra.

KRISHNA was a suta. KUNTI was biologically a suta, adopted kshatriya. SUBHADRA was a suta. BHEESHMA was a suta because Ganga was Rishi Jahnu's daughter (a brahmana woman). Uttara's mother and uncle were sutas. Ugrasravas Sauti was a suta.

So why does Karna get extra credit?

Of all the lower caste people in Mahabharata, Vidura was one. He was a kshatta, which was considered even lower than shudra. He was treated with utmost respect by Pandavas and Panchali.

wow,thats an amazing info actually

though i am a hindu i am a free thinker when it comes to caste so its a great read👍🏼

Mahabharata is one of the most fascinating epics. The fact that people still debate on which character was actually better 2000 years after it happened speaks volumes on the story and the characters of the topic.

Who are we to judge about people who lived in a different era, Mahabharata shows and teaches us about life and to learn from these characters, that is why Mahabharata is taught not to judge as to the characters in the epic😁😁

Many writers and directors have actually used the some of the qualities and stories of these characters, case in example Raajneeti, Thalapathy etc.

Rajmouli actually took some characteristics of Mahabharata and even Ramayana and put it in Baahubali.

Katappa loyalty similar to Bheeshma, Bhallaladev similar to Duryodhana, his father similar to Dhritarashtra, the childhood of Shivudu and the whole baby found in the river similar to that of Karna.

Originally posted by: cts22

Mahabharata is one of the most fascinating epics. The fact that people still debate on which character was actually better 2000 years after it happened speaks volumes on the story and the characters of the topic.

Who are we to judge about people who lived in a different era, Mahabharata shows and teaches us about life and to learn from these characters, that is why Mahabharata is taught not to judge as to the characters in the epic😁😁

Many writers and directors have actually used the some of the qualities and stories of these characters, case in example Raajneeti, Thalapathy etc.

Rajmouli actually took some characteristics of Mahabharata and even Ramayana and put it in Baahubali.

Katappa loyalty similar to Bheeshma, Bhallaladev similar to Duryodhana, his father similar to Dhritarashtra, the childhood of Shivudu and the whole baby found in the river similar to that of Karna.

Who are we to judge? Humans, readers, students of history.

Some things were considered crimes then and are considered crimes now. Sexual assault is one of them. So is murder - by poisoning, by burning. So is sex trafficking.

So yeah, such criminals will and should be judged and not whitewashed ever.

@Bold. Kid found in river was the Krishna story, not Karna. Because Krishna was actually brought up clandestinely to save him from a murderous tyrant. Karna was sent along by his mom because she was a child-mother with no resources.

Shahid kapoor is unfirt to play karna

for God sake karna is a warrior take a 6 feet and above strong man

He spoiled ratan singh in padmavaat hope he does not spoil mahabharat

We can have foll people

Bheesma - Amitabh bachchan

Dhritarastra Anupam kher

Yudishtra Hrithik Roshan

Bheema The guy who played bhallal deva in bahubhali or a new actor (some wrestler)

Arjun - Prabhas

Duryodhan Sonu Sood

Dushashan

Karan Bobby deol

Krishna Amir Khan

Draupadi Deepika padukone or anushka shetty(bahubhali fame)

I found out today that even mb has a strong fandom. 😆

.. I just remember the childhood mb. The ekta mb was beyond pathetic and i personally did not like the star plus mb either. Barring 2/3 actors, the rest were terrible. But apparently it has alot of fans

Thanks to all the people who linked and quoted the original texts. These were things i didn't know of at all.

Ott- Shahid just doesn't have the gravitas to play this role.

Whenever Shahid is chosen as a cast for a film, the forum goes like- "Shahid is oh-so-unfit for the role!"

The same was said when he signed for Haider, but once the film was released, the rest became a history. Even earlier many doubted on him when he chose to play double roles in Kaminey as Charlie and Duggu, but that was the film where he had broken his chocolate boy stereotype. Then when he agreed to play Arjun Reddy remake, people started to bash him and told that he would never be able to do justice for the role like Vijay did. But Shahid has indeed done justice in his own way, and the box office report definitely speaks.

Karna might be a controversial historical figure, but we don't know how the makers are gonna portray him as. Even Alauddin Khilji's character was glorified in Padmaavat, but the critics and audience hailed Ranveer's performance like anything. Sometimes the actors end up choosing a controversial role for the sake of it's arc and range of emotions. So we can't blame them for choosing such scripts. And it's too early to judge whether Shahid is fit or unfit for the role unless we see how he performs. Also it's foolishness to bring up his performance as Rawal Ratan Singh here, he got the smallest piece of cake in Padmaavat after all and he wasn't well trained by SLB to fit the character, coz sadly SLB's all focus was on Ranveer. Even DP sucked there. So rather than comparing Shahid's past performance, let's see if Shahid can excel here if he really signs for the film.

Originally posted by: ffkhan

Whenever Shahid is chosen as a cast for a film, the forum goes like- "Shahid is oh-so-unfit for the role!"

The same was said when he signed for Haider, but once the film was released, the rest became a history. Even earlier many doubted on him when he chose to play double roles in Kaminey as Charlie and Duggu, but that was the film where he had broken his chocolate boy stereotype. Then when he agreed to play Arjun Reddy remake, people started to bash him and told that he would never be able to do justice for the role like Vijay did. But Shahid has indeed done justice in his own way, and the box office report definitely speaks.

Karna might be a controversial historical figure, but we don't know how the makers are gonna portray him as. Even Alauddin Khilji's character was glorified in Padmaavat, but the critics and audience hailed Ranveer's performance like anything. Sometimes the actors end up choosing a controversial role for the sake of it's arc and range of emotions. So we can't blame them for choosing such scripts. And it's too early to judge whether Shahid is fit or unfit for the role unless we see how he performs. Also it's foolishness to bring up his performance as Rawal Ratan Singh here, he got the smallest piece of cake in Padmaavat after all and he wasn't well trained by SLB to fit the character, coz sadly SLB's all focus was on Ranveer. Even DP sucked there. So rather than comparing Shahid's past performance, let's see if Shahid can excel here if he really signs for the film.

It's precisely because Shahid is good that I'm expecting he's going to evoke sympathy for a blatantly criminal character... a sex assaulter and child trafficker.

Originally posted by: cts22

Mahabharat is full of grey characters and extreme nuance which is very difficult to interpret in a 3 hour time. The religious and spiritual aspect is definitely the best of Mahabharata in terms of teaching you every life lesson and just learning from it.

However the best part of Mahabharata is that you can interpret in multiple ways, if you see it as a story, I am not a fan of whitewashing or blackening the characters as it takes away the very essence of these characters but I can understand why they do it more like a fanfiction version of sorts.

it’s impossible to do Mahabharata in a single movie or even 2 . At best they can do one ‘parva’ in one movie .