Hi Rehan,
In terms of characterization of the adult Krishna, I have to agree with you a bit. Sarvadaman Banerjee was a good actor and my intention is not to criticize him, but I not only found characterization of adult Krishna a bit off, but he was also a bit rude sometimes. So far in the serial, I saw upto Pradyumna Haran and towards the end of the track, when Krishna and Rukmini appear to Bhanumati and convince Pradyumna to let her return to her divine abode, Krishna makes a comment like, "The mother who rears and brings a child up is greater than the mother who gives birth." That just totally put me off the character of Krishna in that part, because that would be like a direct insult to Devaki Devi, and that too by Krishna himself. Krishna, who considered both his mothers equal and never insulted either of them even once, would never have made such a comment. It was also an insult to Rukmini, because she was Pradyumna's birth mother while Bhanumati (or Mayavati in other sources) reared him.
Also, I've noticed that Krishna in the adult phase of SK is not very active. He just sits back and watches while others do the work, while Krishna was supposed to be a very active person who performed many leelas even while he was older. Again, this is not a criticism of SDB since he had to act what he was given, but I was unsatisfied with the characterization of adult Krishna in SK.
That's why in SK, I prefer Krishna from birth-adolescent, because he was very active, humble, friendly, and mischievous at the same time. If I had to show preference for adult Krishnas, I too would go with BRC's MB's adult Krishna. This is not meant to compare shows or actors (since both SDB and Nitish were great actors), but just that the characterization was better in that show.
As for Krishna being blue, that is not only a problem in SK, but every other mytho show. Not only Krishna, but Ram was also supposed to be dark (or blue-hued). Neither Ramanand Sagar, Anand Sagar, Meenakshi Sagar, nor BR Chopra showed their Rams or Krishnas blue in any of their shows. It is always Vishnu who is blue, but never Ram or Krishna. However, this does not really bother me, because color is the least of my worries when characterization goes wrong. As long as Ram and Krishna behave like a Ram and Krishna, I don't care whether they are shown dark, light, blue, pink, orange, etc.π
As for Krishna displaying his divinity to all, that is very much evident in Shrimad Bhagwat Puraan. That is one difference between Ram and Krishna. Ram never displayed his divinity to anyone, and even when Lord Brahma revealed his divinity to all after Ravan's death, he humbly claimed that he was only Dashrath's son Ram, and that's all. Shri Krishna on the other hand made it very much evident that he was an avatar of Shri Hari, because it was necessary for him to in order to carry out the purpose of his avatar. Starting from lifting the Govardhan Parvat on his pinky finger, killing Kans and making the prophesy come true (the prophesy everyone knew about), and etc. According to Bhagawatham, everyone in Mathura knew that only Shri Hari was destined to rid them of Kans's tyranny, and that the eighth son of Devaki was that very Hari. After Krishna killed Kans, the news spread and almost everyone knew that an avatar of Vishnu was residing on Earth, but there were others who did not believe that, and the Kauravas were some of those people. But yes, for the most part everyone knew that Krishna was Bhagwan.
Edited by lola610 - 12 years ago