Originally posted by likarsh
Originally posted by ilovedhanjanird
Nandini is THE lead , if not the only lead. In the Bengali version though, the other woman was the lead. It's not about screen space, it's more about Nandini being able to connect to the viewers. A woman who spent months grieving for her husband, can't be shown to fall in love right now. As for meera, Agasthya's interest in her is very much one sided.
Nandini's character has been MUCH stronger than the beginning of the series. You know the difference if you compare the initial episodes with episodes that are aired now. She seldom sheds tears now and even if she does, it's remembering good times with Ani. Nandini was very devoted to that cheater so it will take time for her to come to terms with everything.
Don't worry we will see a lot of nandini in the upcoming episodes !
@bold, i don't think so. I think the three of them are the leads, and more specifically the two women.
The title card for India shows Meera and Nandini in the foreground with Balraj further back, but the title card for the overseas feed shows Meera in the foreground with Balraj and Nandini in the back. The promos show Balraj in the middle and in the foreground with the two women at the back.
The descriptions and synopsis all say Meera and Nandini or Nandini and Meera. It's about both of these women.
This show is quite daring to have Meera as a lead in the Hindi GEC space. There was a time around 15-20 years ago where it would have fit in with other heroines at that time. But now, and for the Hindi market this is quite a daring move. They've changed Meera's characterization enough to make it more suitable, as well as tweak Nandini's character to make it stronger. (And frankly, from what I've read of the Bengali summary, I do like the Hindi version's characterization and narrative better.)
@bold likarsh dear, thank you so so much for clarifying all the title cards both here in the US and in India, coz what you say is indeed true and factual.
Friends, the show is not about this or that actor. It is about this or that character and in this case it is about both Meera and Nandini or Nandini and Meera.
(Sidebar: It is understandable to lean towards a certain actor because his/her performance/story touched you immensely and emotionally. In my case, MY Varun Badola and Nikki about 12 years ago in "Astitva, Ek Prem Kahani" are THE MOST FAVS of mine hands down !!
And when I found out, that Varun, after a long absence, was going to be a thakur in this serial, my heartbeat as if stopped. And Nikki once mentioned that she is very picky and particular about her characters, so much so that she has NOT come back yet in any soap or big screen! Frankly, me not surprised coz that speaks volumes for actor's own opinions, feelings, significance, importance of how they can make a difference by being so so picky!)
Here's to such great actors !!
And for completing 100 years of Hindi
Cinema Acting, on May 3rd, 2013
Raja Harishchandra was the 1st movie
released on May 3, 1913 !!!!
And look how far we have come!
!! Rest as they say is history, literally !!
100 years of Indian cinema: For better or for worse
The 100 years milestone will be marked with the release of "Bombay Talkies," made up of short commemorative films by four leading directors of Bollywood. (AN photo)
Monday 29 April 2013
Last Update 29 April 2013 12:36 am
(BTW, the above four leading directors have been repeatedLY SHOWN ON STAR PLUS BY THE HOST ANUPAMA CHOPRA)
MUMBAI: One hundred years after the screening of a black-and-white silent film, India's brash, song-and-dance-laden Bollywood film industry celebrates its centenary later this week.
The milestone will be marked with the release of "Bombay Talkies," made up of short commemorative films by four leading directors, while India will be honored as "guest country" at next month's Cannes festival. Exhibitions in the capital New Delhi are showcasing a century of cinema It is also a time for reflection on how the industry has evolved, from its early screen adaptations of Hindu mythology to the garish romantic escapism of modern blockbusters.
Commercially, cinema is thriving: India produced almost 1,500 movies last year and the industry is expected to grow from $ 2 billion to $ 3.6 billion in the next five years, according to consultancy KPMG.
Leading the way is Hindi-language Bollywood, which took the "B" from its home in Bombay and won the hearts of movie-mad Indians.
But old-timers complain that it has become superficial, neglecting to deal with pressing social concerns of the age.
"There's a dumbing down that has taken place in the content. I think we are suffering from what is called the narrative crisis," said veteran director and producer Mahesh Bhatt.
He contrasts modern filmmakers with Dhundiraj Govind Phalke, known as the "father of Indian cinema," who brought the first all-Indian feature film to the silver screen in Bombay (now Mumbai) on May 3, 1913.
A tale from the Hindu epic Mahabharata, "Raja Harishchandra" quickly became a hit despite its female characters being played by men ' women acting was still widely frowned upon. Phalke made more than 100 films until his silent style fell victim to "talkies" in the 1930s, but the advent of sound technology allowed India cinema to flourish.
Bollywood plotlines today can involve stars breaking into song, often in picturesque far-flung locations, apropos of nothing ' a style that may bemuse a Western audience, but one that helps to set Indian cinema apart.
"If it was exactly the same thing as Hollywood, Hollywood would have run us over. We don't have that money," said film critic Anupama Chopra. For her and many others the "golden age" of cinema was the 1950s, when movie greats emerged such as Satyajit Ray, India's most renowned filmmaker, who hailed from the alternative film hub of West Bengal. It was the era of newly independent India, searching for an identity and producing films such as Mehboob Khan's 1957 hit "Mother India," which combined social concerns with popular appeal.
The 1970s and 80s saw a growing commercialism with the rise of the "masala" movie ' a family entertainer that typically mixed up romance and action, songs and melodrama, a comedy touch and a happy ending.
Parallel Cinema continued to focus on realism, with films such as Mahesh Bhatt's "Arth" (Meaning) in 1982, a gritty tale of an extramarital affair that presented strong female characters.
It was a path-breaker in a decade described as the "dark ages" of Hindi cinema, which struggled with the advent of color television, rampant piracy and dependence on the Mumbai underworld for funding.
Things improved after India's economy opened up in the early 1990s, and again a decade later when filmmaking won formal "industry" status. Both steps encouraged foreign firms, such as Fox and Disney, to invest in Bollywood.
But subsequent leaps in technology have not been matched by advances in storytelling, say critics, who lament the formulaic plots, passive roles for women and the copying of Hollywood.
Bollywood's escapist fantasies have long held mass appeal because "there's enough realism in the common man's life," said Bhatt.
But with ever more TV shows, the Internet and easily available global films, such movies may no longer meet the demands of the educated middle-class.
This expanding group "wants to see something better than trash which caters to the common man who drives auto-rickshaws. They want to see a different kind of cinema," said veteran actor Rishi Kapoor.
A new crop of experimental filmmakers has started to appear, such as "Hindi indie" darling Anurag Kashyap who is a fixture on the global film festival circuit.
Trade analysts say the growth in multiplex cinemas has also encouraged mainstream films to diversify: A surprise hit last year was "Vicky Donor," a romcom about sperm donation.
Raj Nidimoru is co-director of upcoming "Go Goa Gone," one of India's first zombie films, and he believes the move away from staple Bollywood is only just beginning.
"This is just a ripple right now, it's going to become a wave."
Edited by radev24 - 07 May 2013 at 11:46pm