Gen Z disappoints

mintyblue thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 2 years ago
#1

They all seem so stiff and wooden and lack star quality.


Future of Bollywood is dim lol.


Not a single one of them has that charm, at least so far what I've seen.


What can be the reason?


They all seem clones of each other.

Created

Last reply

Replies

40

Views

3.8k

Users

16

Likes

47

Frequent Posters

mintyblue thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 2 years ago
#2

Well, Ananya and Janhvi for starters lol.

Jaitreya23 thumbnail
7th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 2 years ago
#3

All those who are born after 2000 or whose age will forever oscillate between 17-24😂😂 and whose Dad 's were / are actors.

mintyblue thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 2 years ago
#4

No 1997 onwards...is Gen Z


Generation Z | Definition, Characteristics, Trends, & Birth Years | Britannica

642126 thumbnail
Posted: 2 years ago
#5

Only among nepo kids.

Some outsider can do well just as Deepika, PC, Kat etc did well earlier.

I see greater lack of male outsiders though. Their number has continued to shrink post Akki/SRK era.

Most male stars are nepo kids. Except maybe Kartik.

Future looks dim as they focus more on PR or plastic surgery than real effort on learning acting or voice modulation or dance etc.

mintyblue thumbnail
17th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 2 years ago
#6

Ayushamnn, Rajkumar Rao, and Kartik Aryan are all outsiders, right?

642126 thumbnail
Posted: 2 years ago
#7

Yes but Raj and Ayush are niche cinema actors and offbeat type.

Only Kartik is more massy and mainstream.

Earlier John and Vidyut had potential but they have aged.

No era like Kaka, Amitabh, Vinod, Dharam, Jeetu, Mithun, SRK, Govinda, Akki etc now where we had good number of variety of stars from outside among males too.

sanityinfinite thumbnail
11th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 30 Thumbnail Navigator Thumbnail
Posted: 2 years ago
#8

Couldn't agree more! Besides the overexposure takes away any factor of intrigue! Intrigue apart from filmy success forms a major component of that 'Star quality'. It's one of those X factors, which all of them lack.😆

Jaitreya23 thumbnail
7th Anniversary Thumbnail Rocker Thumbnail
Posted: 2 years ago
#9

Originally posted by: mintyblue

No 1997 onwards...is Gen Z


Generation Z | Definition, Characteristics, Trends, & Birth Years | Britannica


It's roundabout the same😆

Precision is not required here. 😆

642126 thumbnail
Posted: 2 years ago
#10

Intrigue and mystique were one of reasons why actors were called stars as they were distant like a star.

Also many watched films only to see the star somewhere.

Nowadays actors are all over the place, over exposed, upload every waking moment on social media. There is no incentive left to buy tickets to see them.

In this sense I appreciate Ranbir for not making any official SM account and not speaking to every podcast or YouTube channel out there. He is the only one who maintains some lack of easy accessibility.

Related Topics

Bollywood Thumbnail

Posted by: mintyblue

2 months ago

Are millennials in Bollywood far, far better than Gen Z?

There’s a growing sentiment that the millennial crop in Bollywood—Ranbir, Deepika, Alia, Ranveer, Rajkummar, Vicky Kaushal—had weight. They...

Expand ▼
Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".