Why Sooryavanshi's success at the box office should worry us all - Page 6

You would think Sooryavanshi would be disliked because it's cheesy, unimaginative, dealing with the same old hackneyed, done-to-death topics and both it's main leads look 15-20 years too old for their roles... but no.

This author's main objection is that the film depicts terror of a certain type, and doesn't try to sugarcoat it 😳.

Because everyone must either act like this particular type of terror just does not exist, or they must make an effort to legitimise/justify it, right?

Originally posted by: Journey95

I never really understood this argument. This is the same logic some people use when they trash Muslims ("look at how Hindus are treated in Pakistan and Bangladesh, muslims are clearly evil").

Should some extreme islamic countries like Pakistan be our standard? I agree they treat their minorities badly. But India is supposed to be better & also secular. Pushing constantly hate for 200 million people is not a good thing. India is not just for Hindus.

It's not that those countries should be our standard (definitely not, and I think I can speak for most people on this side of politics when I say that).

It's the fact that most of these people who act like India is the worst country in the world when it comes to minority rights (and various other things) have absolutely NOTHING to say about said countries- ever.

Originally posted by: Sashay01

This is not at all surprising. But wait for the hypocrisy in the future- both Karan and Ranveer will cry when their films are attacked- but they're only too happy to play Soft Nazi when it suits them.

When did Ranveer/Karan play soft nazi ?

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

When did Ranveer/Karan play soft nazi ?

I think they're referring to them meeting their own country's prime minister 😆

sooryavanshi is a popcorn action film its there to entertain rather than to educate people. thats the genre of the movie. I can pick tones of hollywood flick that are major blockbusters without much logic.

Originally posted by: Anjalika01

I think they're referring to them meeting their own country's prime minister 😆

Oh ok 😆

I didn't watch Sooryavanshi was there lots of anti islam content ?

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

Oh ok 😆

I didn't watch Sooryavanshi was there lots of anti islam content ?

No there were positive Muslim characters shown too, like there was lots wrong with the film imo but being Islamophobic wasn't one of them!

Also on a side note I can just sense that mods are going to come shut this down real soon with the way these comments are heading 😆

Originally posted by: atominis

Bleh. There are PLENTY of films which have shown dangerous godmen and rioters of other religions in Bollywood. Why single out only Sooryavanshi?

Filmmakers are not obligated to promote specific type of subjects only.

I remember Bollywood has made films like Shootout at Wadala in which they glorified Operation Bluestar and somehow brought 'Sikh militants', but easily kept quiet on 1984 pogrom.

Kangana will also probably show the army op in her next Indira film but easily skip the anti Sikh pogrom.

So?

Is it new? Are 1993 blasts or 26/11 attack not real?

Films are not meant to show all sides. They focus on specific subject.

And please there is no dearth of India bashing films showing Hindus as villains in Pakistan. Many Pakistani dramas also show Hindus and Sikhs as villains or fools or cheats.

Why WaPo singles out only India?

There are many films like Singham 2, PK, OMG which showed godmen of mostly Hindu background as villains. Ajay's Haqeeqat in 90s also has a Hindu godman as villain. Nobody bothered about that.

Films have all sorts of villains depending on subjects they take up. No big deal. Writer is just salty why Akki is close to BJP and his film is a hit.

You are in denial if you think movies like PK, OMG or Haider could still be made now. Bhakts would get butthurt more than the writer of this article has. They would be called anti India/anti Hindu movies and boycotted ASAP. Also just because Pakistan does something doesn't mean India should too, Pakistan is all about being an Islamic country since the beginning (literally why it exists).

India is supposed to be not just for Hindus but also others so villifying any minority group (Muslims, Sikhs,Christians etc.) is wrong in my opinion and sends the wrong message. The problem isn't at all to make a movie about Islamic terrorism but how they handled it was lackluster and hateful, Sarfrosh handled the topic in a better way.

Originally posted by: niyati13

No...it also showed a bunch of Muslims praying in a mosque jointly help the Hindu priest to secure a Ganesha idol from nearby temple when police was evacuating the place coz of bomb scare. Everyone worked in harmony..

Honest muslim police officers too..even in Family Man...not that the religion of brave officers who work for our safety n security matters..but bigots need to be told.

But bigots cannot see that..doesn't suit their agenda..

Originally posted by: atominis

This article by SRK is a good response to Rana Ayyub who makes up issues out of nothing. He clearly did not like being made subject of her columns on Muslims:

https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/shah-rukh-khan-golden-globe-awards-journalism-why-no-indian-meryl-streep-4490028/

https://www.thequint.com/entertainment/shah-rukh-khan-reacts-to-rana-ayyubs-article-him-playing-muslim-characters-in-recent-films-raees-adhm-dear-zindagi

The dig at journalists with 'new found stardom' was well deserved for likes of Rana.

Yet SRK has been constantly trashed by the right for his comments (remember the backlash for the intolerance comments), people say he should go to Pakistan and isn't a real Indian etc.

So of course now SRK won't say anything anymore and keep out of politics