General discussion thread #9 - Page 18

Originally posted by: RainOfDew

sahi kiya, he looked like anything but Karna

Imo only the cast of BRC MB had that royal look , physique and looked beleivable as princes and kings

Rest all looked like models in the other versions (their acting was good tho)

Originally posted by: CID-fan-394

Imo only the cast of BRC MB had that royal look , physique and looked beleivable as princes and kings

Rest all looked like models in the other versions (their acting was good tho)

I liked casting of SPMB as well, on point i'd say.. spcly Krishna and Draupadi, they lived those characters.

Originally posted by: Moonks

Shakuni toh nahi tha kyunki woh villain tha na

To Duryodhana and Dusshasan villian nhi the?

Jab unko la sakte the to Shakuni ne kya aur paap Kiya tha(pun intended)

Originally posted by: RainOfDew

sahi kiya, he looked like anything but Karna

Okay, we agree that Karna was a villain but uski bhi koi izzat hai ki nahi

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

To Duryodhana and Dusshasan villian nhi the?

Jab unko la sakte the to Shakuni ne kya aur paap Kiya tha(pun intended)

Sonyputra corona dekhe aap samajh jaayengi

Originally posted by: RainOfDew

Ikr, daily soap ban gaya tha pura, i left it after their marrkage though... so boring it was!! Also Karna did lived like king but they shown ppl of Anga forcing them to live like sutas only

Many shows do this, to show Karna superior they make Arjun look like bad guy, directly challenging Shri Krishna's decision of supporting him.

Showing Arjun bad still is acceptable but people of Anga forcing him to stay as Suta is next level of victimization.

Like he was the king, how could they even dare to stand against him? Nandas were Shudra kings, did anyone ever dare to ask him start behaving as Napiks?

Originally posted by: mistofshadows

I wonder at times why people would like to alter the basic characterization of Karna.

He had his good parts like his Daanveerta, his determination to rise above his birth station, his talents etc. But why cloak his flaws? These flaws and good parts together make him such a layered and remarkable character that he is talked about even today. In fact one of the few who toed the line of Dharma and Adharma simultaneously.

But people have whitewashing tendencies and would rather like to believe him as a rags-to-riches ka Prince who was the main hero😪🫠

It disturbs me how far media too can go to wipe away what Karna actually was.

@bold I think all major characters of Mahabharata did toe between Dharma and Adharm, few were more Adharmi few were less

About Karna, firstly he becomes a proper example of rags to riches story and that's how they want to present him

Secondly it has to do with leftist agenda about how ill low caste were treated and Karna is a flag bearer, obviously he can't be shown to be negative

Originally posted by: FlauntPessimism

Showing Arjun bad still is acceptable but people of Anga forcing him to stay as Suta is next level of victimization.

Like he was the king, how could they even dare to stand against him? Nandas were Shudra kings, did anyone ever dare to ask him start behaving as Napiks?

@b: Him and his family, Radha Adhirath Uruvi. Supriya i m not sure

He was sutputra before Anga king acc to that show so..

Is the Star Plus Mahabharata rly that good! I haven't watched it cuz am skeptical since it aired on Sitara.. Shld I give it a shot?

Originally posted by: Moonks

💯

Okay, we agree that Karna was a villain but uski bhi koi izzat hai ki nahi

Same. Villian ho ya hero wo saare k saare yoddha the and were greats of our history, unko itna bekar kaise dikha sakte hain

I really hated the way the presented Duryodhana carving for Karna in SPK, like uski zindagi ka Karna ko paane k alaawa koi objective hi nhi hai

In Ekta Kapoor, kahani Humaare Mahabharata ki, they made Azaz Khan play Dusshasan and he looked such an idiot, that for the first time(and only time) in my life I felt bad for real Dusshasan