Will Ranbir take shots at 83 box office?? - Page 7

SRK was asked about Salman/Aamir fans and he said for Aamir fans they need an idol they can look upto and for Salman fans god bless them

That is him taking digs on them and their fans.

November 2004 KWK

Originally posted by: AwaamKiJaan

He really is an SRK copy ain't he?

Over aggressive PR.

Buying awards.

Arrogance of his success but hides it well in front of common people.

Ranveer is still tame compared to SRK who was far too blunt and aggressive in 90s.

He had openly called Akshay Kumar a junk food hero in 90s.

Atleast Ranveer takes merely indirect digs at flop films but does not attack any star in his interviews.

Nor does he dance at weddings or charge a fee to attend parties.

Anyway, now I can guess why Juhi Chawla and Aditya Chopra said Ranveer reminded them of young SRK. They probably saw lots in common beyond just energy.

I see potential in Ranveer especially after Bajirao Mastani and Padmavat but offscreen I feel he really needs to control himself a bit.

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

SRK was asked about Salman/Aamir fans and he said for Aamir fans they need an idol they can look upto and for Salman fans god bless them

That is him taking digs on them and their fans.

November 2004 KWK

Plenty of such interviews and acts.

In 90s he had called Akshay Kumar a junk food hero. Mocked his films and laughed off prospects of any competition from him.

Ironically tables turned and today Akshay gives socially relevant, acclaimed high grossers while SRK gives films like Zero, Harry Met Sejal blah blah. Karma catches up with everyone. Some people speak through interviews, some speak through their work.

I have never seen Ranbir mock others in any interview or event. So I do not think he will pay back Ranveer for taking digs at Bombay Velvet.

Originally posted by: Journey95

Complete dominance never happens, no star can be the Nr.1 in every year but overall they can dominate more than others.

And SRK did that from the mid 90s-2007. Salman had some hits and one ATB in the 90s, SRK had multiple Blockbusters and hits. He was the bigger star. And then Salman had a horrible decade where he had almost no hits at all (look up his BOI page) and was basically a flop actor until Wanted/Dabaang. Meanwhile SRK continued to regulary deliver hits and was very consistent.

Hrithik was only competition for SRK in 2000 and 2006, rest of the years SRK dominated easily. And Aamir only took over from 2008 onwards, before that SRK was more successful and popular

SRK's popularity and success at his peak were not overhyped at all, it seems people here simply have forgotten because he has been declining for a long time now but thats no reason to play down his previous stardom.

Take a look at Salman's filmography since Dabangg. Almost his every film was a Blockbuster from Dabangg to Tiger Zinda Hain. That is dominance. Even the years in which he didn't give the highest grossser like 2013, 2014 or 2016, he either didn't have a release or still gave a Blockbuster.

Even Aamir since Ghajini, although he does less films, but whenever he did a commercial film it was a Blockbuster or All Time Blockbuster. He only went wrong once with Thugs of Hindostan.

You claimed SRK has been in the top since 1995, probably since DDLJ. Okay, he released many films since DDLJ , but either they Flopped and were moderate Hits until he got another Blockbuster with DTPH in 1997. Then an ATBB in 1998 with KKHH, but again two Flops in between. Next he had Mohabbatein in 2000 which was a Blockbuster, but again he had four Flops in between. Next was K3G but before that he gave 3 Flops. Between these gaps, other stars also released films which were big Hits.

You see, his success streak is not consistent. There was always someone who was a threat to him. That was not the case with Salman.

His films also only worked as a complete package, when it was multistarcast, had good story, music and songs, produced by a big PH like YRF or Dharma.

Salman had more Hits than SRK in the 90s. You can go through their filmography and check it. Hum Aapke Hain Koun was the biggest Hit of the 90s but people remember DDLJ more and its celebrated more in the media because of PR.

He became more consistent in 2000s but he was consistent the same way Varun Dhawan was consistent. His films were Hits but not big Hits. Just that it didn't Flop.

Some of the big Hits of SRK in 2000s like Kal Ho Na Ho, Veer Zaara and Main Hoon Na weren't actually big Hits when you compare it to today's Blockbusters. The footfalls of these films were around 1.30 Crores. That's lower than footfalls of Raees which SRK gave in his bad phase.

Devdas came close the 2 Crore footfalls which is again low, because crossing 2 Crore footfalls became a must for any Blockbuster film later on, and it barely recovered it's budget.

We can say Hrithik dethroned or almost dethroned SRK from top spot in 2006 with two back to back Blockbusters, especially when trade got a Blockbuster film after 5 years of lul phase. SRK ruled that lul Phase which is not really something to be proud of.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

I did. And my response to you is the same.

Understand that film industry is a a business. The producers don't put money into someone without expecting returns. They expect returns because they actually see the box office numbers. Youi don't. Nor do I. We're typing away on IF, claiming this and that, while people with actual skin in the game acknowledged SRK as THE superstar of the 90s and 2000s with actual cash.

Unless of course you're claiming you know better than the experienced peeps who also somehow fell for the PR.

Producers were also putting money on Salman in 2000s, who was giving Flops left, right and center. What's your point?

Did I say SRK ain't a Superstar? I said his stardom was over hyped. That's not the same thing!

Originally posted by: AwaamKiJaan

Take a look at Salman's filmography since Dabangg. Almost his every film was a Blockbuster from Dabangg to Tiger Zinda Hain. That is dominance. Even the years in which he didn't give the highest grossser like 2013, 2014 or 2016, he either didn't have a release or still gave a Blockbuster.

Even Aamir since Ghajini, although he does less films, but whenever he did a commercial film it was a Blockbuster or All Time Blockbuster. He only went wrong once with Thugs of Hindostan.

You claimed SRK has been in the top since 1995, probably since DDLJ. Okay, he released many films since DDLJ , but either they Flopped and were moderate Hits until he got another Blockbuster with DTPH in 1997. Then an ATBB in 1998 with KKHH, but again two Flops in between. Next he had Mohabbatein in 2000 which was a Blockbuster, but again he had four Flops in between. Next was K3G but before that he gave 3 Flops. Between these gaps, other stars also released films which were big Hits.

You see, his success streak is not consistent. There was always someone who was a threat to him. That was not the case with Salman.

His films also only worked as a complete package, when it was multistarcast, had good story, music and songs, produced by a big PH like YRF or Dharma.

Salman had more Hits than SRK in the 90s. You can go through their filmography and check it. Hum Aapke Hain Koun was the biggest Hit of the 90s but people remember DDLJ more and its celebrated more in the media because of PR.

He became more consistent in 2000s but he was consistent the same way Varun Dhawan was consistent. His films were Hits but not big Hits. Just that it didn't Flop.

Some of the big Hits of SRK in 2000s like Kal Ho Na Ho, Veer Zaara and Main Hoon Na weren't actually big Hits when you compare it to today's Blockbusters. The footfalls of these films were around 1.30 Crores. That's lower than footfalls of Raees which SRK gave in his bad phase.

Devdas came close the 2 Crore footfalls which is again low, because crossing 2 Crore footfalls became a must for any Blockbuster film later on, and it barely recovered it's budget.

We can say Hrithik dethroned or almost dethroned SRK from top spot in 2006 with two back to back Blockbusters, especially when trade got a Blockbuster film after 5 years of lul phase. SRK ruled that lul Phase which is not really something to be proud of.

Salman's box office dominance is unprecedented, it never used to happen before. He could made everything work from 2010-2017 apart from Tubelight. But he wasn't ruling alone, Aamir close and even surpassed him at certain points.

SRK didn't have that type of dominance but back then when every star made lots of movies per year it was also not possible. My point was just that despite others being a threat to him he was overall the most successful and most popular Bollywood star from 1995-2007. I don't see anyone else who could take that place. Hrithik and Aamir were too inconsistent, same for Akshay (who only really became more popular from 2007 onwards). Salman declined far too much as well.

I'm looking at box office India right now and its not true. SRK had 5 blockbusters in the 90s (Darr, Karan Arjul, DTPH, DDLJ & KKHH which were both ATB) while Salman Khan had just two (HAHK and Karan Arjun). Salman Khan had more hits (like 3 more) just because SRK delivered more blockbusters overall which are far more important. Both had tons of flops, literally every popular 90s actors had those because actors went for the quantity over quality approach back then.

Also comparing him with Varun Dhawan is ridiculous. The latter doesn't come close to SRK's peak stardom in any way and never dominated any year.

You can't compare early 2000's movies box office with how it is now. Its not like other actors were delivering blockbusters while SRK wasn't. Devdas, Veer Zaara (followed by Main Hoon na) & Kal Ho Na Ho were still the most successful movies of those years. That's clear dominance and something to be proud of. SRK was far more consistent than any of the other actors back then.

Hrithik "dethroned" SRK for one year which barely counts (with that logic SRK dethroned Aamir and Salman just because CE was the most successful Bollywood movie when it came out but it didn't last long), in 2007 he again delivered a blockbuster and superhit and in 2008 another blockbuster while Hrithik disappeared. Only Aamir dethroned him with Ghajini and 3 Idiots (and then Salman with Dabaang).

Originally posted by: Journey95

Hrithik "dethroned" SRK for one year which barely counts (with that logic SRK dethroned Aamir and Salman just because CE was the most successful Bollywood movie when it came out but it didn't last long), in 2007 he again delivered a blockbuster and superhit and in 2008 another blockbuster while Hrithik disappeared. Only Aamir dethroned him with Ghajini and 3 Idiots (and then Salman with Dabaang).

2000, 2003 and 2006 - three years. Hrithik had 5 of the top 10 footfalls of the 2000s.

Top 10 Footfalls Hindi - 2000s

1. Gadar : 5.05c

2. 3 Idiots : 3.17c

3. K3G : 3.11c

4. Kaho Na Pyaar Hai : 3.06c

5. Mohabaatein : 2.67c

6. Ghajini : 2.40c

7. Dhoom 2 : 2.15c

8. Devdaas : 2.05c

9. Krrish : 1.96c

10. Koi Mil Gya : 1.94c

Hrithik had Jodhaa Akbar in 2008 - then a declared Super-Hit by BOI until they degraded it to a Semi-Hit as is their wont with Hrithik films (3 guesses as to why)

Originally posted by: Talis

2000, 2003 and 2006 - three years. Hrithik had 5 of the top 10 footfalls of the 2000s.

Top 10 Footfalls Hindi - 2000s

1. Gadar : 5.05c

2. 3 Idiots : 3.17c

3. K3G : 3.11c

4. Kaho Na Pyaar Hai : 3.06c

5. Mohabaatein : 2.67c

6. Ghajini : 2.40c

7. Dhoom 2 : 2.15c

8. Devdaas : 2.05c

9. Krrish : 1.96c

10. Koi Mil Gya : 1.94c

Hrithik had Jodhaa Akbar in 2008 - then a declared Super-Hit by BOI until they degraded it to a Semi-Hit as is their wont with Hrithik films (3 guesses as to why)

Why would they degrade it? Don't see any box office site declaring it a superhit. Its a well known semi hit.

RNBJ was a blockbuster but overall Aamir won that year

Also since when do footfalls decide who is the Nr.1?

Originally posted by: Journey95

Why would they degrade it? Don't see any box office site declaring it a superhit. Its a well known semi hit.

RNBJ was a blockbuster but overall Aamir won that year

Also since when do footfalls decide who is the Nr.1?

As a reference it shows which hits were more attended. Regardless he won the top B.O. spot for 3 years - not 1.

BOI changes designations (as well as box office and budgets) all the time to benefit their favorites and downgrade those out of favor.. Just look at the way they've gone after 83 as if it's an affront to Bollywood and not a well made and reviewed film that was over budgeted for it's subject matter. The budget is in dispute but they've gone for the highest rumored one to make it look as bad as possible.

https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/bollywood/899167/jodhaa-akbar-emerges-superhit

Jodhaa Akbar Emerges Superhit

Source: BOI

Date: 25th March, 2008

After facing many problems with its release and sections of the media wanting to see it fall flat on its face, Jodhaa Akbar is having the last laugh as it emerges a Superhit film.

Even after many steady weeks many of the film's detractors were calling is a success but grudgingly by claiming the reason was that it had no competition and many open weeks. But it seems that Jodhaa Akbar has also answered these detractors with the competition of box office record breaker Race as it has all other detractors over the last five weeks.

The sixth weekend saw Jodhaa Akbar notching up business of 1.80 crore nett with 1.60 crore nett coming from the hindi version and this was with the competition of Race which can be called the biggest opener ever in terms of volume of business over the first three days. Jodhaa Akbar has shown less than 50% drop despite the mega competition from Race. The film was showing at just 2/3 shows at multiplexes and some single screens and the occupancy was excellent at 70-80%.

It is now heading for final business of 62-64 crore nett(hindi version only) without Rajasthan. If the film had managed a clean release with no multiplex issues and no bans we may have had another 70 crore grosser.