It's a genuine question, not for bashing, please.
It's because of a post from Virginia that I pondered about that...
Originally posted by: VirginiaPlath
I don't mind Ranbir's win he deserved it for carrying such a lengthy film single handedly, it's another thing that Kjo Alia in their desperation tainted his win.
But you genuinely found him better than SRK in Jawan, I for one think that playing a double role with so many variations so effortlessly was tougher than a somewhat less layered role. Not to mention Jawan was a much bigger success story. So seriously asking you really found him more deserving than SRK?
One important question: what criteria determin the win of a "best actor" for a FF-Award...and for you?
To me, the word "best" is not the same as "the most popular".
(Basically, I think, most awards have not the needed transparency/explanations for the choice done, but here, it's only about the male actor).
Nominations had been:
BEST ACTOR IN A LEADING ROLE (MALE)
RANBIR KAPOOR (ANIMAL)
RANVEER SINGH (ROCKY AUR RANI KII PREM KAHAANI)
SHAH RUKH KHAN (DUNKI/JAWAN)
SUNNY DEOL (GADAR 2)
VICKY KAUSHAL (SAM BAHADUR)
What - according to you - made Ranbir the most deserving one?
comment:
p_commentcount