Should movies like Adipurush be given a chance? - Page 3

Honestly if Indian audiences can watch films like Pathaan and Tiger 2, we can spare some time for Adipurush and Brahmastra. It's not like they are particularly picky. 😆

Originally posted by: MostlyHarmIess

Honestly if Indian audiences can watch films like Pathaan and Tiger 2, we can spare some time for Adipurush and Brahmastra. It's not like they are particularly picky. 😆

Well, Adipurush was thaught as an 'event-movie', like Bahubali, RRR, Pushpa, Brahmastra etc.

Those movies, not only larger-than-life but also on-a-large-scale, need good VFX (either spectacular like in Brahmastra or seemingly natural)...and good/excellent VFX takes time, many people to work on and raises the budget.

Brahamastra had to better its VFX by hiring the London VFX company DNEG which catapulted the budget into a spectacular hight which could not even get covered through theatrical release.

Same with Adipurush...they akso hired DNEG...with seemingly a lesser good outcome but an even higher budget.

A movie that wasn't even meant as an 'event-movie', but with impeccable VFX-work (internationally lauded), done by the production house RedChillies for Zero, made the budget to be 200 crores (which even is not much with regard to the work and the quite natural effect). This only is an example that Silpa is right when mentioning the need of a good execution.

Maybe sparing some time (so waiting for OTT), but why spending a lot of money by going to the movies for something one - most probably - won't enjoy?

Originally posted by: TheMinion

Any vishesh tippani from you, my ladies? 😆

Thanks for the tag.

Yes I think you have a huge point to rightly address in this. I haven't watched the movie and my knowledge of Ramayana will not be the same as yours.

So this is how I look at it.

The names have been changed. Which means it's not a historical event movie depicticting the history like for like. It is a movie that is intentionally based off the event. In that, they will make huge changes.

Their focus here is action rather than story telling. So their views are not intentional to hurt viewers sentiments. But they play the Shri Ram song. So contradiction there.

I didn't actually know Thor and Loki were actually real mythological characters. Did I tell u Loki is just 😍.

If we were to take the Greek audiences and the Indian audience are going to take it very differently. The Indian society is very compassionate and its all because of the fact they are the most emotional and sensitive. Whatever it is naturally, any topic.. they will invest 100% of their emotions into it.

Hence I am not sure, before the movie went to the floors how much emphasis was made around the depiction and made clear by the makers what the audience is to expect.

I agree with Natu, that if Lohe ki Lanka was a major thing in the actual story, then something like that should have been picked for the movie.

As a younger generation, I see Minions point of let's educate the generation in a way they will enjoy it and in bitesize version.

But then that again comes to the same thing, is this movie educating or not? In which case should the alterations be acceptable as it's not adhering with the correct history.

So it has to be accepted, to take this movie for what it is. A movie based off Ramayana only. But even then comes the other debate, the Movie is called Adipurush. The First man. As it is believed Lord Rama is the reincarnation of Lord Vishnu in human form. So then, it is keeping to the roots and clearly stating that this is Rama's story.

If it was Ek Adhesh Purush or something then that would have separated it somewhat.

But Ravans name is the same.. so.

But end of the day as all movies, it will be down to own perception as to how they see it, if they are happy and don't mind the changes or those who wanted to keep it more realistic.

Whenever working with such concepts the makers have to be very clear in all aspects.

So whilst writing this and researching on the movie. I conclude.

Adipurush

The Ram song ref

Ravan name

It's giving identity to the figures of history. So in which case They needed to stick with the real details. Coz in a way it is a story of the religion. So that's how it's gonna be looked upon.

If the makers would have made certain of taking care of these things then yes, it can be viewed differently. This is too familiar, to familiar so I say alterations are not a good idea for the public.

I like the cast. I mean Kirti for me is just wallpaper. So I don't know what she will do in this. Otherwise I haven't a problem with the cast.

The VFX is quite bad. Worse than Pathans.

If it was normal history, like on a king etc.. differences can be adapted. When it comes to religion.. ppl will feel strongly about it.

I haven't watched the movie yet and I don't think I'd be doing so with so much negative words of mouth..

Since, I'm not in a position to give first hand comment on the movie for the very reason, I can only say things that didn't click for me, both in trailers/teasers and stills..

For me, Prabash is a total misfit as Ram (not discounting his acting caliber but even in Bahubali, it was Bhallaldev who took the thunder for me).

I have friends in Nepal and the movie, they say is banned there. cThe issue is with a specific line in the movie where Sita is referred to as the 'daughter of India. I don't know if such a dialogue exists in the movie, but if it does, it is an error of humongous magnitude. Isn't Sita's Nepalese legacy one of the cultural/religious factor in Nepal India's diplomatic ties?

The people in my circle who gave watched the movie have thrashed the VFX, non-emotive acting, especially from the male lead and most importantly, graphical inaccuracies. For time immemorial us Hindus have certain image and imagination about our mythological characters which did not involve Ravan as male version of Hela Odinsdottir and Hanuman as Abominable Chimpanzee. Religion is a touchy subject which requires great deal of sensibilities and artistic brilliance to get it right.

So, I would say yes every kind of movie should be given a chance but the promotion and marketing needs to be correct. The makers should have promoted the movie as the modern day reboot of Ramayana instead of story of Treta Yug's Bhagwan Ram..

To the society whose values are built upon the mythology it really matters how the representation is.

The devotion to the characters is so much that actors like Mohit Raina are still referred as Mahadev though he had played various other characters.

There is no need for chapri dialogues or faded haircut to connect to new generation coz they are far more religious than the previous gen.

costumes/ appearance of characters and dialogues are the core features of Mythology/ fantasy film which distinguishes it from your regular masala flick. Brahmastra wasn't deemed perfect for the same chapri or not so impactful dialogues.

Moreover there is no divinity in the characters -

Old and grave looking Ram

Modern looking seeta

Faded cut chapri looking Raavan aren't giving the vibe 😆

I haven't seen the movie and have no intention of doing so.

I saw Prabhas fans beating up someone who said he didn't like the film. Just for that I hope the film flops badly😆

I forgot to tell you something.

My sister and her family had gone to watch Adipurush yesterday. Today morning she called me up and and said save your money. Don't go to watch that movie. Except for the songs she had nothing good to say about the movie. 😆

Now this is the type of topics that make my day. 🤣