Things that went wrong

Just read the news about the show going off-Air and like many I also think it was a good decision. However some would say it was not and I won't disagree with them either. The show had potential but in many ways it went wrong.

First I see many people comparing this show with shows like Bandini and BV and saying that if those shows can be accepted why not this? and then I see them comparing Ratan-Diya with Saif Ali khan and Amrita Singh, now how is it different? Its different in this way that in both the real and reel cases the people were ADULTS. Saif/Amrita it was their own choice. Here the boy is actually a fetus literally.

Second still keeping all the clingy and disgust emotions aside viewers could have accepted the show but the CVs literally showed him STALKING diya its like destroying that child's innocence and not only his but all the kids who are watching this show and I really don't know how the CVs would justify that.

There were many ways the girl could have been the ''pehredaar'' maybe they could have shown Ratan to be a mentally challenged MAN or ok if they want to promote this concept they could have atleast brought a teenage boy. If the supporters or the CVs of the show say that if you can accept incests (Hint *GOT) why not this? the thing is the audience for GOT and indian shows are different. And this show could have done a lot with its uniqueness but failed miserably.

Still hope that if it comes with a second season it does things well

Originally posted by: ramisaaAli

Just read the news about the show going off-Air and like many I also think it was a good decision. However some would say it was not and I won't disagree with them either. The show had potential but in many ways it went wrong.

First I see many people comparing this show with shows like Bandini and BV and saying that if those shows can be accepted why not this? and then I see them comparing Ratan-Diya with Saif Ali khan and Amrita Singh, now how is it different? Its different in this way that in both the real and reel cases the people were ADULTS. Saif/Amrita it was their own choice. Here the boy is actually a fetus literally.

Second still keeping all the clingy and disgust emotions aside viewers could have accepted the show but the CVs literally showed him STALKING diya its like destroying that child's innocence and not only his but all the kids who are watching this show and I really don't know how the CVs would justify that.

There were many ways the girl could have been the ''pehredaar'' maybe they could have shown Ratan to be a mentally challenged MAN or ok if they want to promote this concept they could have atleast brought a teenage boy. If the supporters or the CVs of the show say that if you can accept incests (Hint *GOT) why not this? the thing is the audience for GOT and indian shows are different. And this show could have done a lot with its uniqueness but failed miserably.

Still hope that if it comes with a second season it does things well

The comparison with Bandini and Balika Vadhu wasnt really a smart move. Because, both the shows did not show a marriage between a kid and an adult, whereas focussed on the age gap story like the movie Lamhe did.

The comparison between games of thrones showing controversial things in comparison to ppk was always silly because people disregard the fact that games of thrones is a fantasy set in the medieval times, and ppk is set in present times. That comparison should never have been made. Even the comparisons between this show and shows like balika vadhu and bandini are silly as the age gap in bandini was between two adults, not an adult and a child, and secondly balika vadhu was a show that didn't ever justify child marriage, but actually presented how child marriage ruins the lives of children involved, and which is why, when anandi grew up till her character's death, she was shown fighting to get rid of child marriage practise, having been a victim herself. PPK unfortunately was the complete opposite. Even gulal was different as even though gulal had to marry little kesar under a tricky situation, she promised his parents to get him married to another girl when he was older, kesar acted like a child and still treated her like his bhabhi (as she was the widow of his older brother), then gulal even sent him to boarding school until he was older. Kesar was never shown seeing and treating gulal the same way ratan does with diya. 

In this show (watched first few episodes) that boy RATAN (666) IS VERY CREEPY and NO childish innocence. No other shows showed this before.

Originally posted by: Deb07

In this show (watched first few episodes) that boy RATAN (666) IS VERY CREEPY and NO childish innocence. No other shows showed this before.

The biggest thing that went wrong was showing child marriage as a cute bond, as friendship. The makers took a big social evil (still prevalent and affecting children in India) and decided to show it all cutesy. Their logic was - Friendly child marriage without intimacy or romance is not wrong. When the kid turns 21, then they'll insert the romance part. That was a big fallacy in their thought process since they basically normalized child marriage. 
Edited by ErisedWitch45 - 6 years ago

Originally posted by: ErisedWitch45

The biggest thing that went wrong was showing child marriage as a cute bond, as friendship. The makers took a big social evil (still prevalent and affecting children in India) and decided to show it all cutesy. Their logic was - Friendly child marriage without intimacy or romance is not wrong. When the kid turns 21, then they'll insert the romance part. That was a big fallacy in their thought process since they basically normalized child marriage. 

2ndly the makers purposefully used suhaag raat and honeymoon to provoke audience thinking that it'll lead to more TRP. They thought they can casually insert HM and SR without the intimacy - they thought that was fine. But it backfired massively. 

So from what I gathered they thought that if they don't show romance, they can get away with child marriage or cringey concepts. Even in their press-conference, they were using the same logic.

Reaction of characters was unbelievable. ML loses his parents, gets married to FL and he was not even the least bothered. He settled so well by repeatedly calling FL "his wife" and so on. 

The actors and makers called the show "progressive". Their definition of a "progressive" FL-  18 yo girl (must be only 12th pass) has no interest in further studies despite of being from a good family. Is all fine with a child marriage. From what angle is a 12th pass girl w/o any future plans for college, who belongs to a good family, progressive. She doesn't even value education.

But these are just additional minor points. The normalization of CM and cunning use of SR and HM and other such concepts to grab eyeballs were some major reasons.

Originally posted by: sammy17

I just also read the producers latest interview on the show being taken off air, and I was shocked at his comments. He actually claimed that people took the initial promos and even a few scenes out of context and claimed none of the people who complained and protested against the show have even watched it. WOW! Such a delusional man that he actually thinks nobody would have watched the show if they are complaining about its content. If they wanted to show child marriage, they could have showed it with the aim of showing the evils of child marriage, not showing it all cutesy and try to pass it off as innocent friendship. Super perverted. The actors and producers alike are in denial mode, and them tagging this show as "progressive" is the biggest proof of how in denial they are. In what way have any of the things they have shown on the show, actually progressive?