Jayeshbhai Jordaar review and box office thread. Streaming now - Page 7

Something is seriously wrong with Bollywood.

Shahid must be relieved today.

Ranveer is being considered huge star now. But such a opening is shocking. Not even 7-8crrs opening day is really poor.

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

1. Do you think it would've fared better from a female POV and with a female lead? *cough* Chappak *cough*. Production houses do make socially conscious movies, but they're not in it to waste crores of money. They would at least want a prayer of making back what they spent which they wouldn't with the women leading *this* story.

You want a socially conscious movie almost guarantee to fail? Fine. Put your money where your mouth is. Invest in such projects. I don't see too many doing so, do you?

2. The audience is nation-wide, but the people who need to hear the story are still rural men regardless of whether they are watching it or not. As small as the rural audience for this film is, it would've been nonexistent with the woman as the lead. How much did Queen or English Vinglish resonate with rural audiences as opposed to Dangal?

3. Now if your contention is Ranveer Singh is not as big a star as his fans believe, that's a different discussion. Nothing to do with women's rights or feminism. 

1. Chaapak opened to 4.5 Cr. Had a much more mature theme with a very somber storyline. Will Jayesh Bhai even reach the 18 cr opening weekend in its lifetime? 

You are asking me if I am producing films with female leads? Is that seriously the argument? It's not doing what you think it is doing. 😆

2. I do find it interesting that your believe putting a prominent female character would cause the film to tank. When all the examples you listed, did 3-4x times what JJ did.  ❤️ 

Both EV and Queen are very much not targeted at same audience as JJ. They don't really go to Paris or USA for holidays. They are both middle class urban women centric films.

3. Again never asked for Ranveer to be replaced. It was to give the female characters some space in the trailer. Not everything is about star power. This film was always just going to play urban centers and would do the same business regardless. They could have put the money where their mouth supposedly is. 

Edited by McGorgeous - 1 years ago

Am planning to watch it this Sunday with my mother. Both of us want to watch this movie for the content. The reviews so far are dismal and the movie may not have been made well, but it is still worth  a watch due to its content..

However, at this point I am flummoxed to say the least. It was said that during pandemic the audience were conditioned to watch "content" driven movies, the habit that would continue even after returning back to normal.  However, the fates of 83, Jersery and now Jordaar have pointed otherwise.  Sooryavanshi that was the worst franchise in Shetty's cop universe did well but then Heropanti fell flat on its face. On the other hand the South movies like Pushpa, RRR and YRF2 have done extremely well...

What do all of these tell about the audience's pulse? That since people can watch content on OTT, they would want to watch mindless escapist movies on big screen, that audience have become extremely selective even when it comes to mindless masala genre and that  people would rather watch South Indian movies that are better in terms of everything over both content driven as well as mindless Bollywood movies??

Originally posted by: McGorgeous

1. Chaapak opened to 4.5 Cr. Had a much more mature theme with a very somber storyline. Will Jayesh Bhai even reach the 18 cr opening weekend in its lifetime? 

You are asking me if I am producing films with female leads? Is that seriously the argument? It's not doing what you think it is doing. 😆

2. I do find it interesting that your believe putting a prominent female character would cause the film to tank. When all the examples you listed, did 3-4x times what JJ did.  ❤️ 

Both EV and Queen are very much not targeted at same audience as JJ. They don't really go to Paris or USA for holidays. They are both middle class urban women centric films.

3. Again never asked for Ranveer to be replaced. It was to give the female characters some space in the trailer. Not everything is about star power. This film was always just going to play urban centers and would do the same business regardless. They could have put the money where their mouth supposedly is. 

1. You're telling me female feticide is not a grim storyline?

Nah. I'm not asking *you* per se. It was a generic you although I'm going to hazard a guess that few of these keyboard feminists actually saw Chappak or Thappad or Lipstick Under a Burkha in theaters. So yeah, put your money where your mouth is by at least buying a ticket for such movies.

2. Nuh-huh. I didn't say female-led movies would always tank. Compare EV or Queen's lifetime to Dangal's. I looked it up. Queen: 90+ crores worldwide. EV 80 crores. Dangal 2000+ crores. Imagine you were a production house honcho. Unless he were looking for a project for money-laundering purposes, he'd pick a Dangal.

Your current argument seems to be: Ranveer can't bring box office clout, so let's pick someone with even less box office clout because women's rights will be better served if even less people watch?

3. Will take your word for it this isn't an argument started to attack Ranveer's stardom. I anyways happen to think none of them can match up to the prior generation's clout. 

Edited by HearMeRoar - 1 years ago

https://twitter.com/taran_adarsh/status/1525378415406198784?s=21

Originally posted by: HearMeRoar

1. You're telling me female infanticide is not a grim storyline?

Nah. I'm not asking *you* per se although I'm going to hazard a guess that few of these keyboard feminists actually saw Chappak or Thappad or Lipstick Under a Burkha in theaters. So yeah, put your money where your mouth is by at least buying a ticket for such movies.

2. Nuh-huh. I didn't say female-led movies would always tank. Compare EV or Queen's lifetime to Dangal's. I looked it up. Queen: 90+ crores worldwide. EV 80 crores. Dangal 2000+ crores. Imagine you were a production house honcho. Unless he were looking for a project for money-laundering purposes, he'd pick a Dangal.

3. Will take your word for it this isn't an argument started to attack Ranveer's stardom. 😆 I happen to think none of them can match up to the prior generation's clout. 

It's the tone of the film. One is a comedy, one is a drama. Bad wording on my part, agreed. Neither of us have anything to go by for whether people are putting their money where their mouth is. So no point discussing that. 

Again, all I have been saying is that something like Dangal works much better, because it keeps the story in the male perspective about a social issue affecting a large audience group while adding strong supporting female characters that make it land. Dangal, Bajrangi, Secret Superstar, Hindi Medium, Toilet. Most Bollywood films that break-out in China actually share these similarities. Could Bollywood honchos have worked out that simple lesson themselves? Clearly not. But hey, when have they ever been able to take an obvious hint. 

https://youtu.be/959DrRfwlrE

😆

Originally posted by: altgr

Something is seriously wrong with Bollywood.

lack of good writers and commercial awareness