"best" or "most popular"? FF best actor awards

It's a genuine question, not for bashing, please.

It's because of a post from Virginia that I pondered about that...

Originally posted by: VirginiaPlath

I don't mind Ranbir's win he deserved it for carrying such a lengthy film single handedly, it's another thing that Kjo Alia in their desperation tainted his win.

But you genuinely found him better than SRK in Jawan, I for one think that playing a double role with so many variations so effortlessly was tougher than a somewhat less layered role. Not to mention Jawan was a much bigger success story. So seriously asking you really found him more deserving than SRK?

One important question: what criteria determin the win of a "best actor" for a FF-Award...and for you?

To me, the word "best" is not the same as "the most popular".

(Basically, I think, most awards have not the needed transparency/explanations for the choice done, but here, it's only about the male actor).

Nominations had been:

BEST ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE (MALE)

RANBIR KAPOOR (ANIMAL)

RANVEER SINGH (ROCKY AUR RANI KII PREM KAHAANI)

SHAH RUKH KHAN (DUNKI/JAWAN)

SUNNY DEOL (GADAR 2)

VICKY KAUSHAL (SAM BAHADUR)

What - according to you - made Ranbir the most deserving one?

Originally posted by: JoshandHenry

Hahaha it sounds like you are jealous and bitter just because your darling SRK did not win….so just get over it already

Hahaha to you, "Newbie"...I already read your demeaning posts in another topic so this assumption relative to me is just a childish comment

I changed the topic title hoping it makes clear that the comments are more about the criteria than an assumed bias.

SRK not winning doesn't matter to me (anyways I didn't expect it).

Some more serious discussion would be nice (and welcomed)

Ranbir deserved it either way: Best or Most Popular

And historically, Best Actor "Popular Category" has always been as much about a good performance as the popularity of the character (i.e. mainstream movie doing big business).

One of the reasons for that was, Filmfare awards back in 90s and 2000s (from what I remember) used to take voting from movie fans as well. You would get award forms in newspapers and you could fill those and post it to filmfare (me and sis have done those many times when we were kids) - and then it was 50% audience choice and 50% jury choice collated to decide the Best Actor award (and all the other award winners too)

And I think that is fair, since there is a critics choice category to reward actors purely on the basis of performance

It absolutely would be relatable to me (the voting from movie fans) if I hadn't the feeling that this has become a front (facade).

However, I would contradict to "the best"... intense, yes, but not the best in terms of acting.

So, there should be "a best" for critics and the "most popular" for the other one...

SRK fans talking about the filmfare winners being undeserved. Talk about zero sense of self awareness

What SRK fans do is not what I do...I really prefer comments like the previous one, of CMT... it makes more sense

Why not Pankaj Tripathi OMG 2

I guess it's a mix of both things. It's not just about the acting, and it's definitely not a popularity contest alone. Usually, an award goes to a popular actor who nails a role in a hit film. There are exceptions, though. Like Rani got it for Black, even though it was a box office flop, but she was quite popular back then. Also, if a younger actor is as popular as the more seasoned one, or if their popularity is on the rise, the younger one tends to take the win.

I was surprised ranbir was not nominated in critics best actor category. I actually thought he will win both in critics and main lead.