Originally posted by: Harley_Quinn
This is not the answer to my question. What they want, they only know that.
Ok then this
The premise of your question is faulty
I dont think Gadar raised to Maga status. Even for a day I wouldnt say he was the Maga Star 😆
Originally posted by: Maroonporsche
Ok then this
The premise of your question is faulty
I dont think Gadar raised to Maga status. Even for a day I wouldnt say he was the Maga Star 😆
How is it faulty?
Originally posted by: Harley_Quinn
How is it faulty?
Because it's like saying Sam Worthington in Avatar was the biggest star in Hollywood because for 10 years he starred in the biggest hit.
Gadar was an anomaly and it did very little for Deol's career after showing that it's success was not really based on it's lead actors star power. If he'd had a couple of smaller blockbusters after and a few hits then it would be seen as a peak in his stardom that later faded instead of an aberration.
Even between Border and Gadar he had an average, five flops and one below average film.
Post Gadar the next film was a flop. Then he had one hit in Indian less than 1/3rd the size of Gadar and then not another hit for 10 years with 10 disasters and 3 flops in between. It also wasn't the matter of high budget films not making distributors money - they were also very low in footfalls.
Because it's like saying Sam Worthington in Avatar was the biggest star in Hollywood because for 10 years he starred in the biggest hit.
Gadar was an anomaly and it did very little for Deol's career after showing that it's success was not really based on it's lead actors star power. If he'd had a couple of smaller blockbusters after and a few hits then it would be seen as a peak in his stardom that later faded instead of an aberration.
Even between Border and Gadar he had an average, five flops and one below average film.
Post Gadar the next film was a flop. Then he had one hit in Indian less than 1/3rd the size of Gadar and then not another hit for 10 years with 10 disasters and 3 flops in between. It also wasn't the matter of high budget films not making distributors money - they were also very low in footfalls.
Don't compare Hollywood with Bollywood.
Bollywood is star-driven industry.
Hollywood is studio and franchise driven industry.
And I was talking about peak. Not consistency or overall career.
If we start looking into consistency then there would hardly be any Superstars before the multiplex era.
Multiplexes made it easy for actors to be more consistent in their career because then the movies started releasing all over the country at once, and the film's fate is decided on first weekend itself.
That's why Salman is able to make his crap films Blockbusters because WOM for frontloaded massy movies doesn't matter now like the old days.
While in the single screen era, movies had to run for months to just get the Hit verdict.
Originally posted by: Harley_Quinn
Don't compare Hollywood with Bollywood.
Bollywood is star-driven industry.
Hollywood is studio and franchise driven industry.
And I was talking about peak. Not consistency or overall career.
You're talking about a peak in STARDOM. If you don't want to look at his other films surrounding it that also indicate his stardom then you're just talking about the box office for one film and measuring it against the box office of other films with stars. The aftermath of Gardar on his career shows it had very little to do with the power of his stardom just as Avatar had very little to do with the power of Worthington's stardom.
Why do you bother asking people what they think when you're not actually interested?
You're talking about a peak in STARDOM. If you don't want to look at his other films surrounding it that also indicate his stardom then you're just talking about the box office for one film and measuring it against the box office of other films with stars. The aftermath of Gardar on his career shows it had very little to do with the power of his stardom just as Avatar had very little to do with the power of Worthington's stardom.
Why do you bother asking people what they think when you're not actually interested?
Ah...you know me so well to know what I'm interested in and what I'm not.
What do you want?
I should accept your logic and reasoning without any questions asked?
Salman had five Flops before HAHK and 5 Flops after with one exception of Karan Arjun which also had SRK.
SRK had 3 Flops before DDLJ and 3 Flops after except one small Hit Ram Jaane which was nowhere near the mammoth success of DDLJ.
Aamir also before and after Raja Hindustani just had small Hits and movies which barely broke even it's budget.
So these films did nothing for the Khans although their fans claim that these films made them Superstars.
Gadar & Dabangg are two blockbusters that are powered by just plain raw star power.
I would say his peak is slightly below SRK & Salman but higher than Aamir. Not based on Gadar but Bumper openings which IMO is the true measure of Star-Power. Only Salman, SRK, Sunny Deol & Amitabh Bachchan have had double digit Record Openers in the last 40 years. Paaji is highly underrated. Short peak but as good as anyone.
| topics | author | replies | views | reply |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lostsoul11 | 43 | 1860 | ||
| StacyStyle | 273 | 9518 | ||
| mintyblue | 3 | 423 | ||
| AamirKingKhan | 21 | 1947 | ||
| FatalFlaw | 66 | 4768 |
comment:
p_commentcount