Sonakshi: regressive or progressive?

Page

Next Last

chatpati900

@chatpati900

Navigator

Posted: 12 years ago

So I was just reading an article about Sonakshi that someone posted in another topic and it made me think about this. Sonakshi constantly claims that she will not strip, kiss on screen, or do anything that ruins her family honor because these are ideals that embody the perfect Indian woman. However, she's perfectly alright playing the same flowerpot role in each of her films and being referred to as "maal" or "item" . She endorses being a part of cinema whose sole purpose is to cater to the rickshaw-walas and masses and cross the 100-crore mark (and this is me putting it kindly).

On the other hand, you have actresses (ranging from Bipasha to Vidya to even Mallika) who have done many risque roles in their career which require kissing or baring their body but have faced criticism for being "cheap" or "s**tty". However, if you look at their roles, they played crucial roles in these films and the female protagonist was often even the center of the film ( Bipasha: Jism, Vidya: The Dirty Picture, Mallika: Murder). In lesser popular actresses, you have people like Neha Dhupia or Isha Koppikar who used sex to sell their films but were at least the main protagonists of the films they were endorsing (Julie, Girlfriend etc.).

So, what exactly constitutes an actress as being regressive or progressive? Is her resorting to skin show or on-screen kisses to play a pivotal role a sign of weakness or empowerment? Is her attempt to epitomize the ideal Indian woman as someone who's sole purpose is to be the object of desire of a man admirable or disgusting? Or is there some middle ground?

(I apologize for the bias in this post. I think it's pretty clear where my opinion lies but I'm trying my best to refrain 😆)

Edited by chatpati900 - 12 years ago

Quote

Frequent Posters

linux..

@linux..

Navigator

Posted: 12 years ago

not in a mood to write much but i agree..the solution is to not gift wrap ur weakness/convenience as a higher moral stand n in d process mock the odrs...live n let live...u dont want to do something dont do it but justifying it n putting odrs down n then doing d same thing in another way is plain double standards...

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

d-_-b

@d-_-b

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

Even though I love her as an actress,she does come across as an holier than thou and sanctimonious person.

I think Sonakshi can do whatever she wishes to on the screen,be it exposing or being covered in 9 yards saree as long as she doesn't put down other actresses for their choices.

She comes across as a big hypocrite,cos on one hand she attributes her not wearing short skirts to her father's social standing,and on the other hand if you Google search you will find many photo shoots where is wearing extremely short cloths.She conveniently changes her stance on short cloths with her ever changing body type. If she has lost weight we see her in shorter clothes compared to when she has put on weight. Atleast if she says that she dresses according to her body type,its ok.

Its really not regressive or progressive thought but just changing their stance as per their convenience. Tomorrow if Sonakshi stops getting desi girl type of roles then she will lose weight and get into mini skirts in one sec.😆

Quote

chatpati900

@chatpati900

Navigator

Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: .DejaVu
Even though I love her as an actress,she does come across as an holier than thou and sanctimonious person.

I think Sonakshi can do whatever she wishes to on the screen,be it exposing or being covered in 9 yards saree as long as she doesn't put down other actresses for their choices.
She comes across as a big hypocrite,cos on one hand she attributes her not wearing short skirts to her father's social standing,and on the other hand if you Google search you will find many photo shoots where is wearing extremely short cloths.She conveniently changes her stance on short cloths with her ever changing body type. If she has lost weight we see her in shorter clothes compared to when she has put on weight. Atleast if she says that she dresses according to her body type,its ok.

Its really not regressive or progressive thought but just changing their stance as per their convenience. Tomorrow if Sonakshi stops getting desi girl type of roles then she will lose weight and get into mini skirts in one sec.😆

I wish you'd never told me that. My poor eyes 😆😆

Edited by chatpati900 - 12 years ago

Quote

d-_-b

@d-_-b

Sparkler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

^ Lol I had posted the same in some other topic where she mentions that she doesn't wear short clothes. https://www.indiaforums.com/forum/bollywood/3770093/sonakshi-sinha-on-bikini-kissing-and-short-clothes

Originally posted by: .DejaVu

Edited by .DejaVu - 12 years ago

Quote

Anamika

@.Anamika.

Dazzler

+ 2

Posted: 12 years ago

Great topic! I haven't seen Lootera yet but from what I've heard, she's done really well in the movie and she's a fantastic actress. But apart from that movie, all her other movies are literally a waste. She could be replaced with any other actress and it would make no difference to the movie overall.

Like Kangana said in her interview with Anupama, sometimes actresses need to just pay bills and so they do stupid "comedy/masala" movies. But in Sonakshi's case, she has the power to movies that aren't regressive. And she's not a bad actress either so her acting ability isn't limiting her to the flower pot roles, so then why isn't she going out and doing something different?

If she's not comfortable with kissing/wearing short clothes, that's completely fine but there are still ways to avoid that and actually do something that's more innovative. I agree with DejaVu that she comes across as a hypocrite sometimes. I don't think a woman has to look cheap if she's shown kissing on-screen. Vidya Balan didn't look cheap in the dirty picture to me.

Sonakshi has so much potential but she wastes it on utterly inane characters and movies. I understand if she wants that commercial success but there's a way to balance it which she hasn't quite learned yet.

Quote

gilmores

@gilmores

Stunner

+ 8

Posted: 12 years ago

I don't really get Sonakshi and her holier than thou act is rather annoying.

I just don't get why its not ok to wear short clothes/kiss but it is ok to be called maal in a film. I personally find the latter situation much more derogatory...and one that would affect someone's reputation more. 😕

Edited by chocolover89 - 12 years ago

Quote

chatpati900

@chatpati900

Navigator

Posted: 12 years ago

Originally posted by: .Anamika.
Great topic! I haven't seen Lootera yet but from what I've heard, she's done really well in the movie and she's a fantastic actress. But apart from that movie, all her other movies are literally a waste. She could be replaced with any other actress and it would make no difference to the movie overall.

Like Kangana said in her interview with Anupama, sometimes actresses need to just pay bills and so they do stupid "comedy/masala" movies. But in Sonakshi's case, she has the power to movies that aren't regressive. And she's not a bad actress either so her acting ability isn't limiting her to the flower pot roles, so then why isn't she going out and doing something different?

If she's not comfortable with kissing/wearing short clothes, that's completely fine but there are still ways to avoid that and actually do something that's more innovative. I agree with DejaVu that she comes across as a hypocrite sometimes. I don't think a woman has to look cheap if she's shown kissing on-screen. Vidya Balan didn't look cheap in the dirty picture to me.

Sonakshi has so much potential but she wastes it on utterly inane characters and movies. I understand if she wants that commercial success but there's a way to balance it which she hasn't quite learned yet.

That's a million-dollar question. I seriously cannot stand to watch another song of hers where she is prancing around like an idiot with the over-the-top "mast" expressions. It's become SO irritating. She has the opportunity and the means to experiment but she's simply choosing not to and that drives me up the wall. I find it really hard to respect her as an actress when I know she's willingly subjecting herself to such cinema and worse, justifying her reasons under some kind of moral ground.

Like I said in a previous topic, she needs to grow up and get off her high horse. She's an actress and it's high time she actually tried to prove her mettle in more than 1 film.

Edited by chatpati900 - 12 years ago

Quote

Mallika-E-Bhais

@Mallika-E-Bhais

Trailblazer

+ 5

Posted: 12 years ago

I think she tends to put herself on a pedestal to make herself feel better for all the fun she is making on-screen!! 😉

Because off-screen she does exactly what all the rest do on-screen & more. 🤣

Edited by Mallika-E-Bhais - 12 years ago

Quote

Aisha

@MOTHERHOOD

Stunner

+ 10

Posted: 12 years ago

#10

The actresses who say that they will never kiss or strip are the ones who do them much more than other actresses. Sona will also do the same. She has worn short clothes. You will also see her kissing. She is just acting like a saint.