|
|
Post by faneu on Jan 20, 2019 11:13:14 GMT -8
www.hindustantimes.com/bollywood/aanand-l-rai-on-failure-of-shah-rukh-khan-s-zero-not-disappointed-this-is-the-story-i-wanted-to-tell/story-NiOR1s8meYclBnwPeuZS8J.html"Aanand L Rai’s ambitious Zero, starring Shah Rukh Khan, Katrina Kaif and Anushka Sharma, may have crashed at the box office but the director is not disheartened with the response. Instead, the filmmaker views the experience as a lesson learnt. Billed as one of the biggest films of 2018 in which SRK played a dwarf, the director said, “I won’t say I am disappointed. I will need to understand (what went wrong). This is the story I wanted to say and I made it. After making Ranjhaanaa and Tanu Weds Manu and the second one, this film (Zero) was due for me to make... To take a certain flight and I have not landed on it properly. It is a learning and it will help me grow as a director. I am not afraid to take risks and experiment,” Rai said. Zero had Shah Rukh as a middle aged man looking for a bride, Katrina featured as a troubled star while Anushka portrayed a scientist with cerebral palsy. The film released on December 21 and did not receive favourable response, either from audience or critics." Great that he just had to risk things when he made a movie SRK (not before)... like Imtiaz I'm sure he will learn from it but it won't benefit SRK. Not sure why these directors go crazy when they work with SRK
|
|
|
|
Post by mohan10 on Jan 20, 2019 12:06:27 GMT -8
At this point does it even matter who the director is when it comes to SRK?
Once a big section of the audience is done with you it’s almost impossible to recuperate from it.
|
|
|
|
Post by faneu on Jan 20, 2019 12:25:05 GMT -8
At this point does it even matter who the director is when it comes to SRK? Once a big section of the audience is done with you it’s almost impossible to recuperate from it. True but there was plenty of hype for Zero and if ALR actually delivered (like he usually does) then I think the movie would have been a success. Even if there were many sceptical people (because of SRK's bad track record in this decade), good WOM would have helped a lot. Instead the opposite happened and this movie just lead to even more people being done with SRK. Also Salman showed that winning back the audience can be done with just a few movies, he was in a similiar bad situation until Wanted and then Dabangg. If SRK picked better scripts (with mass appeal) he would have already come back strong imho. It only seems impossible because the directors and SRK keep screwing up for some reason. |
|
|
|
Post by clochette on Jan 20, 2019 13:28:05 GMT -8
"The film released on December 21 and did not receive favourable response, either from audience or critics."
That is just a false and tendentious remark...there was a considerable part of the audience and also critics who responded favourably. There were simply not enough people who made their own opinion by watching the movie but instead believed opinions manifoldly repeated (even from people who hadn't watched the movie). In my thinking, the outcome of Zero suffered from (negative) propaganda - and Simmba profited from (positive) propaganda.
Aanand and ShahRukh have made a movie they can be proud of. It's not "screwing up" if one experiments and takes risks and gets that kind of poor response which this movie - in no way in my opinion - doesn't deserve.
|
|
|
|
Post by faneu on Jan 20, 2019 13:52:30 GMT -8
"The film released on December 21 and did not receive favourable response, either from audience or critics." That is just a false and tendentious remark...there was a considerable part of the audience and also critics who responded favourably. There were simply not enough people who made their own opinion by watching the movie but instead believed opinions manifoldly repeated (even from people who hadn't watched the movie). In my thinking, the outcome of Zero suffered from (negative) propaganda - and Simmba profited from (positive) propaganda. Aanand and ShahRukh have made a movie they can be proud of. It's not "screwing up" if one experiments and takes risks and gets that kind of poor response which this movie - in no way in my opinion - doesn't deserve. Clearly not enough people liked it, otherwise it wouldn't have been a big flop (so best to replace "considerable" with minority). Watching the movie costs money so of course many will simply not watch it after hearing from others that it sucked, that's called bad WOM not propaganda (an excuse fans make for every SRK movie since Dilwale..it's all a conspiracy). Sure there are some rabid haters who didn't even watch it but they don't matter overall. See Chennai Express which got plenty of hate yet it was a Blockbuster because most people who watched it did enjoy it. It had good WOM which movies like Zero or JHMS have clearly lacked. That's it. Deserving or not, that doesn't matter. I mean I guess they can be proud overall but the movie failed and SRK will likely have to pay people again for the losses so I doubt he is satisfied. |
|
|
|
Post by clochette on Jan 20, 2019 23:20:06 GMT -8
" Deserving or not, that doesn't matter. I mean I guess they can be proud overall but the movie failed and SRK will likely have to pay people again for the losses so I doubt he is satisfied."
What a strange remark, faneu... You "guess they can be proud overall" and you "doubt he is satisfied". So, if you imagine a balance, one side would hold the creative and artistic input and the other side the public response. My interpretation of your line: He/they can be proud of the movie but not satisfied with the outcome. No, "not enough people liked it" - not enough people watched it because the tendency was conveyed that it is a 'bad' movie. That has nothing to do with a conspiracy theory...manipulation of opinion is a human-old tool. |
|
|
|
Post by faneu on Jan 20, 2019 23:41:50 GMT -8
" Deserving or not, that doesn't matter. I mean I guess they can be proud overall but the movie failed and SRK will likely have to pay people again for the losses so I doubt he is satisfied."
What a strange remark, faneu... You "guess they can be proud overall" and you "doubt he is satisfied". So, if you imagine a balance, one side would hold the creative and artistic input and the other side the public response. My interpretation of your line: He/they can be proud of the movie but not satisfied with the outcome. No, "not enough people liked it" - not enough people watched it because the tendency was conveyed that it is a 'bad' movie. That has nothing to do with a conspiracy theory...manipulation of opinion is a human-old tool. Basically although I doubt he is proud at all, I only said that because of your post ("Aanand and ShahRukh have made a movie they can be proud of.") and my point is like you said that even if they are proud of the movie they won't be satisfied with the outcome since it was a failure. And the whole risk taking bs just seems like an excuse already from both. That was conveyed because most people who watched Zero didn't like it (both from the critics and audience) so that way it got lots of negativity. That's called bad WOM, not really "manipulation". It's normal to post what you think about a movie (and for critics it's even their damm job). It's SRK & co.'s job to deliver a movie that most like so it has a good WOM which leads to success. That's what he used to do ca. a decade ago and sure even back then there were lots of haters who also tried to push that his movies like OSO or RNBJ for an example sucked. But guess what, they didn't matter because overall most liked them. That's the difference and it's best to accept that. |
|
|
|
Post by clochette on Jan 21, 2019 0:14:39 GMT -8
Dear faneu, we will never agree about what I call "the so-called word of mouth" (meaning propaganda) and you just admit as "genuine word-of-mouth". I don't want to convince you. it's just my way to look at the negativity that surrounds ShahRukh's movies since MyNameIsKhan, nothing more, nothing less. We know our point of views by now, I think. I also have another meaning about ShahRukh's "job" because when it comes to his movies, he has more than one "job". You really seem to prefer a negative view on almost everything related to ShahRukh's movie work...and you have manifold company where people repeat over and over again the same negative things whatever ShahRukh does. Your distinction in what you personnally liked about the movie and what not shows me that it is just one angle but you trash the whole movie. Instead of trying to see or to feel the sense for this angle, it is so much easier to just reject it and - in addition - make it the judgement over the whole movie. For me that is like rejecting a kid only because it has a default that becomes the most important and overshadows all the lovable (like Zero's father's attitude towards his son from childhood on formed Zero's flaws - in addition to the genes). We can do a play, faneu...you tell me a flaw in the movie and I respond to it  |
|
|
|
Post by faneu on Jan 21, 2019 0:25:06 GMT -8
Dear faneu, we will never agree about what I call "the so-called word of mouth" (meaning propaganda) and you just admit as "genuine word-of-mouth". I don't want to convince you. it's just my way to look at the negativity that surrounds ShahRukh's movies since MyNameIsKhan, nothing more, nothing less. We know our point of views by now, I think. I also have another meaning about ShahRukh's "job" because when it comes to his movies, he has more than one "job". You really seem to prefer a negative view on almost everything related to ShahRukh's movie work...and you have manifold company where people repeat over and over again the same negative things whatever ShahRukh does. Your distinction in what you personnally liked about the movie and what not shows me that it is just one angle but you trash the whole movie. Instead of trying to see or to feel the sense for this angle, it is so much easier to just reject it and - in addition - make it the judgement over the whole movie. For me that is like rejecting a kid only because it has a default that becomes the most important and overshadows all the lovable (like Zero's father's attitude towards his son from childhood on formed Zero's flaws - in addition to the genes). We can do a play, faneu...you tell me a flaw in the movie and I respond to it But then how was Chennai Express such a huge success? Like I said I don't doubt that there are some haters who push the whole "this SRK movie sucks" narrative each time a movie of him comes out but I just doubt they have that much influence. As long as the majority of the general audience (geniune word of mouth because they aren't invested like we or the haters are, they just want to see an enjoyable movie) likes it, the movie is still successful. But yes we will likely not agree on this. I mostly bash his movies just since Ra One though (although there were earlier SRK movies that I didn't like either but not that many) so I wouldn't say "almost everything" and even then I have praised Fan & Raees multiple times so not everything is bad. I'm really just frustated with SRK at this point. I trash the whole movie because some twists/story directions just ruin a movie for me even if there are some good things there. Bad stuff like the "god promise" & amnesia in JTHJ and now the Nasa/Mars bs in Zero. Now compared to that movies like Raees or MNIK have flaws but I still think they are amazing overall because for me there was no flaw that wrecked the whole story. I think it's best to move the Zero discussion to the member reviews section! |
|
|
|
Post by clochette on Jan 21, 2019 0:57:41 GMT -8
I would like to respond to Chennai Express and JTHJ, but this isn't the place... and I agree to the shift for the Zero discussion  (but for now real life calls me ) |
|
(but for now real life calls me