Originally posted by Jugliji
@ Liks. VD is an O.K actor. It is the character of R.K that was portrayed as an uncaring selfish and ruthless man. And he did that well enough.
But I find the story went south when MB as a smart and strong woman was turned into a doormat for a man that never wanted to change.
I wanted her to be the focus of making progressive decisions and move the story with her as an example of a modern self-respecting woman.
Even if she fell in love she should have moved on first in her life and later if she saw a genuine change come back.
It had to be R.K.'s responsibility to prove his love not MB's .He was the one who dug his own grave by his obnoxious behaviour and no matter how long it took the CV's should have shown that a man has to try just as hard to win his love if he REALLY did love her and make him do the hard work of winning her trust back.
@red. But that's what all these stories do. The guy is a jerk, jackass, etc. And of course oh, he genuinely changes. But the fact is much of it is romanticized and they don't all change like that. The jackasses remain jackasses and considering the way Madhubala was forced into the marriage the way she was, the basis of the love itself is very problematic. So the fact that she saw a genuine change and come back just goes into the same notion: guy is a jackass, jerk and can do all these things to a girl but later he can have a genuine redemption; and the girl will take him back since he's been redeemed and she's in love with him--and again the basis of her falling in love with him was that she lived with him as his wife and saw his 'real self' (though that was his act), and as I keep saying the fact that she was married in that manner should've completely nixed any romantic possibility.
@blue...my point is that this love should never be one that he wins back, even if he does love her. and here his 'love' is often shown to the audience as his zidd.