I Didn't know they would glorify the villian in DARR - Sunny Deol - Page 3

Created

Last reply

Replies

119

Views

39817

Users

61

Likes

441

Frequent Posters

Terenaina thumbnail
Anniversary 17 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 4 years ago

You see back then villian was not appreciated. SRK was an outsider he couldn't choose roles, he took the villian role. Nobody understands the struggle of an outsider. These days people choose villian roles because it's a cool thing now. Back then so many stars from salman to many turned down the negative role and it went to srk. It's not right to glorify negative roles but srk did a great job in that movie.

anjs thumbnail
Anniversary 12 Thumbnail Group Promotion 7 Thumbnail + 6
Posted: 4 years ago

Originally posted by: hotchic2

At least spare the dead now.


His comment about Yash Chopra is from 2001. 

oT: I did feel bad for SRK and sympathized with his mental health.... Was that glorifying or I had a wrong mentality, I don't know..... But I did like SRK with Juhi and wished they treated his issue and somehow Juhi fell for him in the end...

mystic786 thumbnail
Anniversary 10 Thumbnail Group Promotion 4 Thumbnail Engager 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 4 years ago

@Bold I don't think there is anything wrong with sympathizing. Every villain needs a good back story and there is nothing wrong with garnering a bit of sympathy. We're talking about a human here not the Devil. The villains obviously didn't become bad overnight, something happened in their past which made them like that. 

Then there are others who are just evil for no damn reason and they're pretty one dimensional and stupid. So I'm glad they actually gave SRK a decent back story here.

Originally posted by: Luna46

 

I once heard that Sunny doesn't use to read scripts before signing a film. He just hears the plot. If that's the case then its his own fault. How can you sign a film without reading the script? And SRK's character wasn't glorified in Darr. Sympathized?  Yes, they gave him a tragic backstory and justified his wrongdoings by making him complete psycho who should be in mental hospital. SRK was glorified in Baazigar actually, where it's okay for him to kill innocents just because his Dad was murdered and mom went crazy.

Edited by mystic786 - 4 years ago
Posted: 4 years ago

Originally posted by: mystic786

@Bold I don't think there is anything wrong with sympathizing. Every villain needs a good back story and there is nothing wrong with garnering a bit of sympathy. We're talking about a human here not the Devil. The villains obviously didn't become bad overnight, something happened in their past which made them like that. 

Then there are others who are just evil for no damn reason and they're pretty one dimensional and stupid. So I'm glad they actually gave SRK a decent back story here.

Yeah, but in 90s people were used to generic villains who are evil just for the heck of it. Sympathizing with Villain is not wrong obviously, it gives their character more layers and makes them feel real.

Sunny seems to be butthurt till this day because Darr remains to be his only film where someone stole his thunder. 

Edited by Luna46 - 4 years ago
IAmLuvBolly thumbnail
Visit Streak 500 0 Thumbnail Visit Streak 365 0 Thumbnail + 7
Posted: 4 years ago

He does sound salty and bitter about it many years later which makes him seem immature.  But the whole story is not that simple.  


First of all I do think there was some glorification of SRK’s character in Darr.  He wasn’t a typical Hindi movie villain.  I mean they gave him an actual romantic song with Juhi.  So Sunny is not totally wrong in saying the villain was glorified.  


The role was first offered to Aamir who turned it down saying things like he didn’t have time or whatever.  Years later when he was asked why he really didn’t do Darr Aamir said that he had asked Yash Chopra several times for a joint narration with him and Sunny and Yash Chopra wouldn’t do it.  I know Yash Chopra is dead now and we shouldn’t speak ill of the dead and all that, but Sunny wasn’t the first mainstream actor to have had issues with him.  Akshay Kumar wasn’t too happy either after his cameo in Dil To Paagal Hai over some monetary issues.  So to me it is not that hard to believe that Sunny got played by Yash Chopra with regards to Darr.  

Hippopotamus160 thumbnail
Posted: 4 years ago

yeah if that were to not happen we would be seeing sunny deol spreading arms and millions of fans getting crazy

let me summarize it

he looks better

he acts better

women liked him more 

he is not rectangle like u

he is more charming

he has personality

he has not sharmeela pappu

he is not yamla 

lol...why cant people accept failure? never understood that. i fail in life daily...i see people doing much better than me daily...i never whine.

learn to accept that there are people better than u

total idiot

FruitToasty thumbnail
Anniversary 6 Thumbnail Group Promotion 4 Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 4 years ago

Don't think SRK had any kind of power over anyone when they did Darr, he was simply happy that he is doing a movie and earning money. 

SRK won Filmfare best actor in negative role for this movie (I am not sure), villain wasn't glorified, he died in the end, villain was a human and a very unlikely character for hindi cinema, generally villains back then were old powerful with muscle and money power, this one was a psychopath, people connected to him more because of SRK's acting and the fact that he was younger than the hero and obviously more good looking, so there will be comparison.... I won't draw a parallel between Anupam Kher and Sunny Deol

Coming to Sunny, the dude is an MP now, he can stop being petty about it, yelling Dhai kilo ka hath is not acting 

Edited by FruitToasty - 4 years ago
Haegeum thumbnail
Love Couple India Season 2 0 Thumbnail Anniversary 9 Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 4 years ago

Wow someone is still salty after all these years  

mystic786 thumbnail
Anniversary 10 Thumbnail Group Promotion 4 Thumbnail Engager 1 Thumbnail
Posted: 4 years ago

Yeah it gives them layers and makes them believable. I totally agree that everything in the 90s was stereotyped, stupid and over the top in BW  That's why Darr was different. 

We still don't have a whole lot of decent villains in BW and on Indian TV. 😪 It's still mostly black or white.

@Bold Oh really? lol 😁😁

Originally posted by: Luna46

Yeah, but in 90s people were used to generic villains who are evil just for the heck of it. Sympathizing with Villain is not wrong obviously, it gives their character more layers and makes them feel real.

Sunny seems to be butthurt till this day because Darr remains to be his only film where someone stole his thunder. 

Edited by mystic786 - 4 years ago
tanvismile thumbnail
Anniversary 14 Thumbnail Group Promotion 6 Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 4 years ago

Well there was glorification of villian 

Giving a song Kiran to SRK isn't it romantic intrepretation for stalking .... People are suppose to hate the stalker not sympathise with his emotions . Now recently there was a TV show the lead was obsessive and parallel lead was positive yet it was the main lead show who was obsessive. People sympathised with her.Though now if u check YouTube videos people are understanding who is positive .The concepts from the perspective of negative character people end up sympathising with them.So that's called glorification of villian.