Archies Review/Spoilers Discussion - Page 51

Originally posted by: Supari_khala

The bucktooth girl is especially horrendous looking on screen. She should stick to being a model with her mouth closed. Because I ain’t ever paying money to watch that

https://www.instagram.com/reel/C0lgCICPnXv/?igshid=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

Are you referring to Sridevi's daughter?

Originally posted by: Agni_Jytsona

... Coming to the main three. If I had to describe their performance in the film or even their overall attitude toward their craft it would be - Lazy and insincere...

Exactly these kind of comments prove the bias, insensivity and utter prejudice that the three have to face.

"lazy" - what do y o u know about the work they did

"insincere" - what a vile judgement

If you had written 'insecure', I would be able to relate more as the three exactly knew that the focus - and all the (negative) judgements - would lay on them.

Wow...the insensitivity some display is of a tripled dimension...

Originally posted by: Clochette

Exactly these kind of comments prove the bias, insensivity and utter prejudice that the three have to face.

"lazy" - what do y o u know about the work they did

"insincere" - what a vile judgement

If you had written 'insecure', I would be able to relate more as the three exactly knew that the focus - and all the (negative) judgements - would lay on them.

Wow...the insensitivity some display is of a tripled dimension...

Relax mate. It's just a movie review.

Bias, and insensitive are all the racist comments that are being made on Suhana. Those are utterly despicable

Prejudice is all the big tooth/gum comments being made for Kushi and Agastya

Calling somebody insecure is worse than calling someone insincere

Kushi, Suhana, and Agatsya were insincere and lazy. They did not put any effort into the characters they played.

If in future any of them give a half decent performance. I will praise them as well

But right now they had no sinscerity and were lazy. Sleep walking throughout the film

Originally posted by: desigal90

I think the best way I can explain suhana is this. She isn’t “bad” at acting nor good. She’s passable. The problem is, she had ZERO screen presence. And she’s strictly average looking. And these two factors are enough to take her down. Basically there’s nothing going in her favor. Same with Agastya. He’s another Abhishek. At least Khushi is pleasant looking. Vedant is the best thing in the movie

bold: not to me! (though, it's to you, right?) ... and you, do you take her down also for these two factors...and what about Khushi's role she played?

Is this what people take away from this movie...how actors/actresses l o o k s are??? So all those actors/actresses in whatever movie who don't have 'the looks' are just bashing material??? Come on...these arguments are totally superficial ... and worth = nothing (despite getting repeated in abundance)

I just try to imagine that Vedang, Mihir, Dot are star-kids and Suhana, Agastya and Kushi the outsiders... and then the comments...

Originally posted by: Agni_Jytsona

Relax mate. It's just a movie review.

Bias, and insensitive are all the racist comments that are being made on Suhana. Those are utterly despicable

Prejudice is all the big tooth/gum comments being made for Kushi and Agastya

Calling somebody insecure is worse than calling someone insincere

Kushi, Suhana, and Agatsya were insincere and lazy. They did not put any effort into the characters they played.

If in future any of them give a half decent performance. I will praise them as well

But right now they had no sinscerity and were lazy. Sleep walking throughout the film

Repeating all this just confirmed my opinion you quoted.

Of course, it's "just a movie"...but you forget it when writing about, don't you? You made it personal, n o t about the movie and the characters they enacted...it's purely the 'outward' that counts, n o t the correlation between the role and the acting.

Fortunately there had been a few comments where the comics-characters had been described and accurately set in correlation with the movie-characters. Thanks for those posts

"Relax mate"... ha ha...you really think that going against superficiality would affect my emotional condition? No way!

There is review & then there is review for reviews!😇

Let all kind of opinions exist!

More fun to read diverse views.😊

Originally posted by: Clochette

Repeating all this just confirmed my opinion you quoted.

Of course, it's "just a movie"...but you forget it when writing about, don't you? You made it personal, n o t about the movie and the characters they enacted...it's purely the 'outward' that counts, n o t the correlation between the role and the acting.

Fortunately there had been a few comments where the comics-characters had been described and accurately set in correlation with the movie-characters. Thanks for those posts

"Relax mate"... ha ha...you really think that going against superficiality would affect my emotional condition? No way!

How did I make it personal? Why will I even make it personal? I don't even know any of them

I did not like their performance. I thought they were lethargic. Just sleepwalked through the film.

When I call them lazy and insincere - I mean THEIR PERFORMANCE/ACTING was Lazy and insincere. I did not find any of Archie's naivety in Agastya s performance, Betty's sweet, large-heartedness in Kushi's, or Veronica's spunk and Bitchiness in SUhana's

My comment was strictly about their role and acting

I don't care what an actor looks like. "Their outward" appearance. I don't care about their family background ( I am a Ranbir Kapoor fan) as long as they act well.

Originally posted by: Shaitan-Haiwan

Also I am pretty sure Vedang is actually 23. Because he has pics up from 2019 and he legit looks like a kid in them. Even in the above videos that are 3 years old, he does not look 24 (since some claimed he was 28)

He can't be more than 23. In one of the interviews he said he was in his final year of undergrad when he auditioned for the Archies. Considering in India undergrad is typically a 3 years course, he must have been 20. And this was in 2020, so yeah now he's 23. No idea why all these media portals are calling him 28.

Okay...thanx for clarifying (to me, it seemed to be in the same vein than other posts).

One has to ask people who have worked with them if indeed your impressions are warranted.

Vedang's birthday is the last day of December and he was born in 1995...so he will be 28 in 3 weeks...

https://starsunfolded.com/vedang-raina/

...and he was 25/26 when playing a 17 year old...