Humsafar Discussion thread-2 - Page 118

Created

Last reply

Replies

1.1k

Views

177.3k

Users

38

Likes

2.8k

Frequent Posters

pinkeye thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago
with due respect, why is it all analysis finally comes down to mock fawad's fangirls? wow.
and why is this generalisation made that when he make those smug look or with attitude looks are to please all women even if it is meant for disrespecting women? why so much shallow opinions about women or girls who like fk? is it that its a pattern or general belief that all his fangirls are only going ga ga over those attitude looks? and they actually lack any intellect like many others on earth to decipher his played characters, analyse them and have only drooling as their characteristic nature?
I have had enough of this in the name of analysis of a drama. do have some respect for others opinions too and about the actor whose wrk you are dissecting with so much depth.
sorry no offence, but its disheartening to read oh his fangirls are pleased by these only. may be his fangirls are not that shallow and brainless as they are perceived to be.
I never ever tried to offend any one here on this thread or on social media but still each time getting mocked finally gets on to you . so apologies in advance to all for this response. I guess my tolerance was tested enough as an individual to give respect to others opinions.
Edited by pinkeye - 10 years ago
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
aman-ki-asha,

Another thing which limits the practicality in at least pakistani society (and perhaps indian as well - as they may both have something to do with caste system side-effects in both muslim/hindus who live in these countries) - is that there is a general aversion to actually working with your hands and doing things.

This does not exist in the U.S. (may still in u.k. perhaps where there is a class system). In the U.S. being able to work with the hands is considered a source of pride (after all Jesus was a carpenter).

However in pakistan (and maybe in india) - there is a general aversion to doing things yourself. So the husband will offload manual work to his wife - and the wife to hired help if they can afford it.

As a result masses upon masses of (usually the "elite") grow up in an environment where they cannot change their light bulb - or fix a light switch (let alone do some creative repair).

If there are people who are able to do this - they are considered idiots "since who needs to do that yourself - as that is best left to those lower etc." ..

So there is essentially a demeaning of hard work and manual work - and this is not considered a skill (contrast this with U.S./Germany etc.).

As a result our homes are filled with "men" who know nothing about working with their hands or doing anything beyond what their wives are capable of - in fact the men will be even less able - will be incompetent in the kitchen (many will never have washed dishes etc. - and some will consider that a source of pride - as perhaps an affirmation of class/caste within the home - as that is the "job of the wife"). That is not to say there are not exceptions - as there will be people who are good with physical work/crafting - and men will also be good cooks (but usually those who have had at some point been forced to live alone either in college or overseas jobs - those men WOULD have been exposed and some of them may find they are good cooks who have fed their other men friends good meals).

In any case - this dearth of real world knowledge then winds up making many of the "men" in our society incapable of dealing with anything related to real-world issues - how the water will flow on the street - how it should be angled - and stuff like that. Worse they may have no way to deal with other men even sometimes - or how to organize to deal with an asshole. Some of this may come from the same "compromises" (which I outlined above) which wind up plaguing our men - operating in an environment where they have to satisfy family first and then wider society.

The result of which is that it leaves many men without a backbone - i.e. the ability to stand up for what is right and what is wrong (and take the consequences) - or to make standing up for the right as something which is essential to their being. For many this backbone has been broken a long time back - when their grandmother or mother or father asked them to do something to benefit "their family" above the interests of their neighbor.

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago
aman-ki-asha thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago
the in-group affiliation of the larger group has to start at a relatively early age so that the child is socialized into it. Our cities are organized more and more into a ghetto like situations. at one end, ( and increasing by leaps and bounds) are the gated communities which are invested into keeping the area clean becos they have nor just purchased a house but a lifestyle. so you will have a lot of green garbaging and composting because well there are social sanctions of belonging to an aspirational society. At the othe end you have the slums which are in pathetic shape. what we are losing very fast with the insane level of urbanization even in small cities are the mohallas where there was a historical association of people and it was pretty organic because there was always some living space for the blue collar workers. even the growth of transport, local trains and metros has actually helped in the ghettoization because today the builders/ land developers who have to resettle the population when they acquire the land, are able to send the resettled population to far off places. so in the ex-slums you have these terribly swanky 80 storey towers where the original slum dewellers, now travel 30 kms to work in the apartments.
tough deal
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: pinkeye

with due respect, why is it all analysis finally comes down to mock fawad's fangirls? wow.

and why is this generalisation made that when he make those smug look or with attitude looks are to please all women even if it is meant for disrespecting women? why so much shallow opinions about women or girls who like fk? is it that its a pattern or general belief that all his fangirls are only going ga ga over those attitude looks? and they actually lack any intellect like many others on earth to decipher his played characters, analyse them and have only drooling as their characteristic nature?
I have had enough of this in the name of analysis of a drama. do have some respect for others opinions too and about the actor whose wrk you are dissecting with so much depth.
sorry no offence, but its disheartening to read oh his fangirls are pleased by these only. may be his fangirls are not that shallow and brainless as they are perceived to be.
I never ever tried to offenbd any one here on this thread or on social media but still each time getting mocked finally gets on to you . so apologies in advance to all for this response.





Well it is not just fangirls who will "like" Fawad Khan's pout - in a way it suited his character in Khoobsurat when he was all smug with that lawyer in that first scene. It lent a certain sparkle to his character (even though it was not "humble" and not desirable in the classical/moral sense).

My point was that the play deliberately shows him having those attitudes - that is he is NOT humble and very obviously so (usually to highlight against the softening which is to occur later - so for example Fawad Khan is not pouting or posturing in same way later in Humsafar when he is a broken man).

It cannot be denied that a lot of women DO like their men to "have attitude" - this is why they like rockstars more than they like accountants. That could be said for many men also - who may like some supermodel - when the supermodel may be very tough to actually live with.

I guess the offensive part of my comment was when I said that the deliberate act of making Asher slightly snobbish at the beginning (designed to establish his role as an aloof character) - may be desirable for some fans (not all fans).

EDIT: I guess the way that fangirls wound up appearing in an otherwise unrelated discussion maybe because fangirls are a big part of this forum. So any discussion of ghettoization/urbanization may wind up mentioning fangirls as an attempt at currency/relevance to this forum (I think I just shot myself in the foot again).

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: pinkeye

with due respect, why is it all analysis finally comes down to mock fawad's fangirls? wow.

and why is this generalisation made that when he make those smug look or with attitude looks are to please all women even if it is meant for disrespecting women? why so much shallow opinions about women or girls who like fk? is it that its a pattern or general belief that all his fangirls are only going ga ga over those attitude looks? and they actually lack any intellect like many others on earth to decipher his played characters, analyse them and have only drooling as their characteristic nature?
I have had enough of this in the name of analysis of a drama. do have some respect for others opinions too and about the actor whose wrk you are dissecting with so much depth.
sorry no offence, but its disheartening to read oh his fangirls are pleased by these only. may be his fangirls are not that shallow and brainless as they are perceived to be.
I never ever tried to offend any one here on this thread or on social media but still each time getting mocked finally gets on to you . so apologies in advance to all for this response. I guess my tolerance was tested enough as an individual to give respect to others opinions.





I think you have mentioned specifically in some of your posts that Fawad Khan is in fact underrated or misclassified as being just a pretty face - when in fact the real reason he is attractive to many people is his compelling portrayal/dialogue/(baritone as has been identified on this forum) - and his tonal variation (which can be quite subtle and expressive). As I have said in some post earlier that he seems to have the ability to make the simplest and shortest of dialogues and say it in such a way that it carries with it a lot of meaning.

For example the way he says to Sonam Kapoor in Khoobsurat (when sitting on the roof of the palace) - that "so aaj bhi naach hooa kitchen main" with a lilting voice which carries with it inquiry, curiosity .. and mischief (I know something that you didn't know I knew).

So saying it is just his pout which is that standout for "fangirls" may be not applicable for all fangirls.

EDIT:
By the way - FK's voice control is a standout for another reason - most men will LEARN to not convey emotion in their tonality or language - and so for Fawad to have that is quite exceptional. Most men will learn to render their language sterile/devoid of emotion in delivery - this is to allow them room to maneuver in confrontational situations with other men (or to control things so things don't flare up when men are in hostile situations with other men - an accident on the road etc.). This behavior also is not gender-specific - since women too may start to control how they speak if they have to work in hostile environments - so they convey as little emotional state as possible. So this may be a situational-related behavior (rather than a gender-specific).

As I previously posted - FK's voice delivery reminds one of the "golden voices" famous in western film - James Mason and the current Morgan Freeman.

Some of FK's comfortableness with voice modulation may in fact come from his training as a rock musician. And his ability and comfort level with various styles of vocal inflection.

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago
pinkeye thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: reviewmovies



Well it is not just fangirls who will "like" Fawad Khan's pout - in a way it suited his character in Khoobsurat when he was all smug with that lawyer in that first scene. It lent a certain sparkle to his character (even though it was not "humble" and not desirable in the classical/moral sense).

My point was that the play deliberately shows him having those attitudes - that is he is NOT humble and very obviously so (usually to highlight against the softening which is to occur later - so for example Fawad Khan is not pouting or posturing in same way later in Humsafar when he is a broken man).

It cannot be denied that a lot of women DO like their men to "have attitude" - this is why they like rockstars more than they like accountants. That could be said for many men also - who may like some supermodel - when the supermodel may be very tough to actually live with.

I guess the offensive part of my comment was when I said that the deliberate act of making Asher slightly snobbish at the beginning (designed to establish his role as an aloof character) - may be desirable for some fans (not all fans).

then there was no need to generalise the FANGIRLS TOO in your comment. isn't that unfair?
I have been reading your posts for long and I guess you like to give detailed take on everything and thus this much exploration of the drama and the characters. I do like to read few of them and also actually agree on few parts too. but will say when you are analysing it and making analogies with real life situations , you have to remember that these dramas are made for entertainment purpose and not for making it an psychological case study or socio economic status research to be made on those. sometimes writers specially a romantic novel writer may not have given this much though which you have analysed. in popular culture, isn't it a common pattern? how many romantic books or series or films are actually without loopholes? and its always means biz too. if reel was exactly mimicking real and there is no fluffiness, away from reality , fairy tale touch to these stuffs, it will never get sold to common people. because no one absolutely no one wants to see their real life getting translated on screen. may be that's a word called CREATIVE LICENSE is used for fictional content. so when we are reviewing in depth, we can sometimes consider it too , otherwise it becomes tedious and less enchanting as an entertainment programme.
coming to Asher character, he was a very flawed character and as the writer herself told that. so when the creator herself admitted it to be an weak character, then its pointless to go and on about what should have been done and what shoudnt be his behaviour. the creator wanted to show her creation like that. actor just followed that skect to breathe in life. for me actors are like colors to a charcoal sketch made by writers. so what Fk deliberately did that as it must have been expected from him. we cannot expect Monalisa to smile whole heartedly as Da Vinci never perceived her like that as it was his creation.why that depiction? only creator can answer.
and Fk pouting or giving those smug looks, as you have already demand of the situation. was it amoral, mocking or disrespecting? the jury ie the audience is out there to judge. and audience consists of different people from different backgrounds, dii tastes, diff educational eligibilities etc etc with individual likings. so how to decipher whts the verdict? just like any other stuff is decided in large demography, majority opinions matter. so may be that's why these actors get pronr to those mannerisms, body languages and expressions as they feel its a tried and tested one to safely deliver. thus from Marlon Brando to Srk to Ab senior every body has their signature style. its not their shortcomings or way of flattering audience imo rather playing it safe. and in no way I am comparing these great actors with an ordinary actor like fawad. just trying to reply your point saying Fk knows what woman want to see from him.
for me Asher was an emotionally abusive character who got influenced by others always and many of FAWAD's fangirls pinpointed the flaws they saw including myself.even its been extensively discussed that how it is disturbing at times to come to terms with this kind of male lead though played by their favourite. I guess that's conveniently forgotten each time because its a cool thing to tag all women who likes a good looking actor as fangirls? its actually helps few others to boast about their intellectual nature may be. My only objection was that why this low opinion and generalisation just to put forth own analysis. fawad's fangirls atleast here have been extremely gracious throughout though they have been mocked several times and even opinions differed.
lastly, what women like in men and vice versa is completely a different topic and another argument. I think its individualistic preference and no set rules.liking, loving or hating ?disliking is very deep personal emotion and I do not think that can be categorised. yes unfortunately there is a belief that good girls like bad boys, boys with attitude and that's get more and more indulged by popular culture mediums. even women like abusive guys is also shown , but is that truth or a hyped myth? in reality no one absolutely no one would like to deal with a husband like Asher Hussain or many other iconic characters of television. but does that mean this characters should be completely written off or only shown in negative light? no that's not true too as its popularity certifies that few things which are not liked in real is appreciated on reel as its finally an unreal world , no real person is living that and its larger than life. popular culture medium can be realistic or closest to reality but never real. Real is what we are living and drams what we see for reacreation and not living that. hope that makes sense.
your comments on women at times are difficult to digest frankly , no offence. but your opinions, fair enough to you. but hope fawad;s fangirls would be spared from this generalisation henceforth. want to analyse characters , go ahead. forums are only for that.
sorry for this long essay.
Edited by pinkeye - 10 years ago
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: pinkeye

then there was no need to generalise the FANGIRLS TOO in your comment. isn't that unfair?

I have been reading your posts for long and I guess you like to give detailed take on everything and thus this much exploration of the drama and the characters. I do like to read few of them and also actually agree on few parts too. but will say when you are analysing it and making analogies with real life situations , you have to remember that these dramas are made for entertainment purpose and not for making it an psychological case study or socio economic status research to be made on those. sometimes writers specially a romantic novel writer may not have given this much though which you have analysed. in popular culture, isn't it a common pattern? how many romantic books or series or films are actually without loopholes? and its always means biz too. if reel was exactly mimicking real and there is no fluffiness, away from reality , fairy tale touch to these stuffs, it will never get sold to common people. because no one absolutely no one wants to see their real life getting translated on screen. may be that's a word called CREATIVE LICENSE is used for fictional content. so when we are reviewing in depth, we can sometimes consider it too , otherwise it becomes tedious and less enchanting as an entertainment programme.
coming to Asher character, he was a very flawed character and as the writer herself told that. so when the creator herself admitted it to be an weak character, then its pointless to go and on about what should have been done and what shoudnt be his behaviour. the creator wanted to show her creation like that. actor just followed that skect to breathe in life. for me actors are like colors to a charcoal sketch made by writers. so what Fk deliberately did that as it must have been expected from him. we cannot expect Monalisa to smile whole heartedly as Da Vinci never perceived her like that as it was his creation.why that depiction? only creator can answer.
and Fk pouting or giving those smug looks, as you have already demand of the situation. was it amoral, mocking or disrespecting? the jury ie the audience is out there to judge. and audience consists of different people from different backgrounds, dii tastes, diff educational eligibilities etc etc with individual likings. so how to decipher whts the verdict? just like any other stuff is decided in large demography, majority opinions matter. so may be that's why these actors get pronr to those mannerisms, body languages and expressions as they feel its a tried and tested one to safely deliver. thus from Marlon Brando to Srk to Ab senior every body has their signature style. its not their shortcomings or way of flattering audience imo rather playing it safe. and in no way I am comparing these great actors with an ordinary actor like fawad. just trying to reply your point saying Fk knows what woman want to see from him.
for me Asher was an emotionally abusive character who got influenced by others always and many of FAWAD's fangirls pinpointed the flaws they saw including myself.even its been extensively discussed that how it is disturbing at times to come to terms with this kind of male lead though played by their favourite. I guess that's conveniently forgotten each time because its a cool thing to tag all women who likes a good looking actor as fangirls? its actually helps few others to boast about their intellectual nature may be. My only objection was that why this low opinion and generalisation just to put forth own analysis. fawad's fangirls atleast here have been extremely gracious throughout though they have been mocked several times and even opinions differed.
lastly, what women like in men and vice versa is completely a different topic and another argument. I think its individualistic preference and no set rules.liking, loving or hating ?disliking is very deep personal emotion and I do not think that can be categorised. yes unfortunately there is a belief that good girls like bad boys, boys with attitude and that's get more and more indulged by popular culture mediums. even women like abusive guys is also shown , but is that truth or a hyped myth? in reality no one absolutely no one would like to deal with a husband like Asher Hussain or many other iconic characters of television. but does that mean this characters should be completely written off or only shown in negative light? no that's not true too as its popularity certifies that few things which are not liked in real is appreciated on reel as its finally an unreal world , no real person is living that and its larger than life. popular culture medium can be realistic or closest to reality but never real. Real is what we are living and drams what we see for reacreation and not living that. hope that makes sense.
your comments on women at times are difficult to digest frankly , no offence. but your opinions, fair enough to you. but hope fawad;s fangirls would be spared from this generalisation henceforth. want to analyse characters , go ahead. forums are only for that.
sorry for this long essay.



I think it is a testament to the strength of the play/drama that people are even attempting to expect some rationality in it. Obviously the same expectation is not there with other dramas - and people do not try to do a serious examination of the faults and "what could have been".

I think some allowance should be made for inquiry of a different sort (more academic) - because there can be interest on the lines of trying to understand what about the play is so compelling (i.e. not just because one observes others liking the play - but because one finds the play has something about it as well).

In a way the finding the chinks in the armor of the play is an academic exercise as well - for example identifying (the few times) where it fails. This is meant as an exercise in understanding the boundaries of it's "emotional rationality". That is the reviewer is already compelled by the play - but is trying to find the edges of reason in the play - and then perhaps to delimit that or to provide excuses for why they may have been injected in the play.

The analogies with real life situations are made because the play has a compelling nature which suggests closeness to many real life situations (one has encountered or heard about). And so whenever a drama which ventures this close to reality (or feels closer to reality) is encountered it is natural to make comparisons to reality.

If the drama veered far away into fantasy then it would be less likely that a reviewer would expect adherence to reality (or convention) in the play.

Contrary to your assertion that the romantic writer may not have given thought to some idea/flaw - I would differ slightly - because I think the writer has given very good compulsions throughout the play for why things happen. As I said in one post earlier that what may make the play so "butterflies in the stomach" is that it narrates in a very non-judgemental way (leaving the viewer to judge) - and in a way the proceedings in the play proceed like clockwork - as if according to physics/dynamics. The creativity is in the situations which are created which then indirectly divert the play in a certain direction. For this reason the play is a very "motivational" ethos to it - i.e. events do not just happen - they are events which bring about some change which bring about the change in dynamics. Which suggests to me that the author understands very well the dynamics of individuals and the process by which events move. The characterization for the most part (in Humsafar) is less conversational than event driven - that conversations are memorable seem solely due to the expressiveness of the actors (any other actor deadpanning those dialogues would have given a very flat impression). Much of the nuance and subtlety of the play is because of the "iconic" scenes (and there are more in Humsafar than ZGH) - which stand out purely because of their delivery or in their nuance.

It is because of this mastery that one sees the writer having - that a reviewer then starts to expect that thought went into every other aspect of the play - even the minor points. So I will disagree on the expectation of weakness on the part of the author - since for the reviewer there is already considerable mastery present in the motivations that are used by the author.


Examining Asher and what he should have done etc. etc. .. yes that is probably not a valid way to criticize a play .. I think this is more venting rather than criticism - since the play does stress the viewer - and for some there will be plot holes which will bother and thus the venting. It is like venting on the waterboard/hovercraft not having water source in Bang Bang - some will not be able to get over that and will want to vent - while others will not see that as anything relevant.

Regarding women being mentioned in analysis - I think the reason those things wind up is because of the women fan base of these plays - and thus any analysis of it's popularity or it's impact on society will wind up "targeting" women more - in which case it will look like the analysis is less about Humsafar than about women - and that is a valid criticism. However not all criticism of "women" (in a statistical sense) should be taken as offensive if one is discussing the biggest trend among women first (and not mentioning the variations among the women demographic) - although it will seem like stereotyping. But there will always be stereotyping if one refers to the majority demographic among women first (without mentioning the variations present in women). I think a similar fate befalls when "men" are analyzed as a demographic as well. Although I do understand that a classification based on stereotype will be offensive to those who do not fall within that stereotype. Perhaps I should be more careful.

pinkeye thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago
@reviewmovies, no by saying that mentioning fawad fangirls is actually taken as attempt to question relevance of forum - you hacent shot yourself again on foot. Unfortunately fangirls are not that intolerant too you see. Its your opinion and you are free to discuss whatever you want. I havent seen any of Fk fangirl even replied ever about Asher character analysis.

My only objection was that there is no need to genralise fangirls and their behaviour to show how and why Fawad is liked by women. I repeat it was about the generalisation.

Getting into unrelated discussion, isnt this discussion about Asher character and humsafar drama which Fawad was part of and all these days most of his fangirls actively participated in all discussions. So when his characters and film is getting mentioned in your post repeatedly, how that all of a sudden become unrelated to them? Or they are allowed to comment on certain posts only.

Lastly, this forum do have many Fawad fangirls , bur no it will not loose its relevance without them as their are others too and people are here for content too. So people will hold onto this forum irrespective of Fawad factor and minus fawad fangirls. But one interesting observation , most discussions on each drama irrespective of Fk is actually discussed by Fawad, s fangirls mostly. Fk fangirls do not confine themselves only to discuss humsafar and zgh and Fk work, you can scan through all posts here. They participate on different content shown on zindagi too. Dont know if it shows relevance or ignorance of being a fangirl or not.


Enjoy the discussions here . And participate in other drama discussions too as manynother peopke would like to read your views on those too.

No offence intended. Peace.
Edited by pinkeye - 10 years ago
pinkeye thumbnail
13th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 2
Posted: 10 years ago
Its early morning here reviewmovues. So will reply to your response later.

Sorry for not repkying at the moment.
reviewmovies thumbnail
Explorer Thumbnail
Posted: 10 years ago

Originally posted by: pinkeye

@reviewmovies, no by saying that mentioning fawad fangirls is actually taken as attempt to question relevance of forum - you hacent shot yourself again on foot. Unfortunately fangirls are not that intolerant too you see. Its your opinion and you are free to discuss whatever you want. I havent seen any of Fk fangirl even replied ever about Asher character analysis.

My only objection was that there is no need to genralise fangirls and their behaviour to show how and why Fawad is liked by women. I repeat it was about the generalisation.

Getting into unrelated discussion, isnt this discussion about Asher character and humsafar drama which Fawad was part of and all these days most of his fangirls actively participated in all discussions. So when his characters and film is getting mentioned in your post repeatedly, how that all of a sudden become unrelated to them? Or they are allowed to comment on certain posts only.

Lastly, this forum do have many Fawad fangirls , bur no it will not loose its relevance without them as their are others too and people are here for content too. So people will hold onto this forum irrespective of Fawad factor and minus fawad fangirls. But one interesting observation , most discussions on each drama irrespective of Fk is actually discussed by Fawad, s fangirls mostly. Fk fangirls do not confine themselves only to discuss humsafar and zgh and Fk work, you can scan through all posts here. They participate on different content shown on zindagi too. Dont know if it shows relevance or ignorance of being a fangirl or not.


Enjoy the discussions here . And participate in other drama discussions too as manynother peopke would like to read your views on those too.

No offence intended. Peace.





By the way - even though they may be a smaller demographic - it may be a significant exercise itself to examine why men like Humsafar (or what they find intruiging in it) - or are they only watching because others are watching it (so has cultural relevance so they feel they need to understand it).

But evidently that is not on the priority list for many (since it is a smaller demographic and less relevant commercially and in most other ways as well).

What has been examined thus far has been the usually differing reaction of men vs. women - i.e. men tending to favor criticizing FK - while women tending to excuse FK (for the most part - have to start qualifying these things) and focus on the women villains more.

This I think I explains partly maybe because men tend to focus on their own gender as the people they can perhaps change (or who they are vicarously identifying with). In addition men will generally not have an expectation that they can change 3 women - so their focus will be on what the guy could have changed. And conversely for women - they will focus on what the 3 villians could have changed - and not expecting Asher to do much (he is perfect as he is :-)).

So this is at least one very blatant difference.

The things that men will appreciate about FK - will be (as I said) - the baritone (though I will admit I only realized this after hearing ladies swoon over his baritone on these forums) and his incredible vocal variation. I had noticed his vocal "expression" was outstanding myself - i.e. the most banal of dialogue was infused with much subtlety - but then saw also on these forums people mentioning his pitch/vocal modulation - and it made sense as well.

Men may differ on some of the other matters usually mentioned like his look or his choice of clothes or his posturing - for example some of the GQ type fashion shoots would be clothes you would probably not wear in public (but perhaps they are for weddings - and are a bit "preppy" and not exactly like the macho man going out to fight the Taliban or something - which most of Pakistan is facing right now).

However, from the point of view of women as well - I think some people have confirmed that they knew of FK and did not find him that arresting - and it was only after his performance in Humsafar that he became a female hearthrob - which would confirm pinkeye's view of what actually defines FK.

Regarding his look though - one thing however does stand out - that he seems to have less of a nasty or crafty look than say Ali Zafar - and some of that may be due to different training/background - and perhaps also the life experiences that FK may have gone through from diabetes etc.

EDIT: I forgot to mention - one important reason men may be interested in FK may also be that he is liked so much by women - so this in itself makes him an intruiging figure for that reason (it is one thing to be liked by women - it is another thing to be UNIVERSALLY liked by women - i.e. a 100% hit record phenomenon).

Edited by reviewmovies - 10 years ago

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".