The musings of a (not-so) single chick in the city. (Don't think that the term chick is derogoratory. We refer to boys by a number of terms). The travails in the life of an ex-miss-goody-two-shoes, ex-journalist, ex-small time model, ex-television actress, of being female in Chennai/ Pune/Bangalore, of ideas old and ideas new....

Showing posts with label young. Show all posts
Showing posts with label young. Show all posts

Friday, January 23, 2015

The slow demise of the die-hard Rajini fan

I saw Lingaa recently and it was at  multiplex in Bangalore and maybe the location played a role in my experience, but I don't think it did. I think the whole Rajini movie watching experience has been changing slowly but surely over the years. And here I'm not speaking about the first day-first show( many first shows, given the advent of the multi-plex) experience, where  no matter the quality of the movie, the joint mob-feeling of euphoria and screaming establish the atmosphere of the movie-watching experience. I'm  talking about going to the theater a week after the film has been released, because you want to enjoy a thalaivar movie without the noise and really enjoy the punch dialogues and the masterful way in which he subdues the villains, helps the needy and the poor and basically gives you a warm fuzzy glow while exiting the movie hall, like Arunachalam, Basha, Shivaji, etc did for us.

I'm guessing that a lot of people are thinking this after watching Lingaa, but only a few are saying it, maybe because of a lingering sense of the years of hero-worship that they have done for the Super-Star of Tamil Nadu stops them from uttering such sacrilegious thoughts- It's time that our Thalaivar hung up his hero-role boots and do what actors do - act in roles instead of being the role the movie is written for and around.

Sonakshi Sinha is younger than both of Thalaivar's daughters and I guess that Anushka Shetty is about the same age, or at most, a year or two older than his eldest. It is quite disheartening to see him dance around with these young girls. One might argue that many heroes of the past have done the same, but that does not mean that it was tasteful or easy to consume for the fans. Those heroes who did it in the black and white era got away with it easier because of the forgiving nature of the technology in those times. But with extra high definition picture quality available these days, the camera is unforgiving in its capture of every skin crease, fold and frailty in movement, especially when trying to bust a move that the hero might have pulled off with elan twenty years ago.

Fans of this era who are more aware of alternate offerings of entertainment might choose to consume those than watch a Thalaivar movie. What Amithabh Bachchan learnt with his last few movies as a hero is what our Rajni Sir needs to learn, but I really don't want to watch our Thalaivar go through that painful experience. I wish that he would understand it by having watched his friends and switch over gracefully to roles that suit his age and gravitas. And that means eschewing young heroines completely in his movies, unless it is a movie like Cheeni Kum where the story mandates an older man and a younger woman falling in love. Else, unless his directors cast age-appropriate leading ladies, his movies are going to disenchant first and then slowly lose him his fan base.









Sunday, February 6, 2011

Accepting what is...

People just don't want to think logically. And people don't want a peaceful existence. Seriously, all I have seen is that people love drama. Okay, this is not true of all people. Mostly, I am talking about young people. And, yeah, they are into pity-parties big time as well.

I am around a lot of kids in their early twenties from non-tier-I cities. These are just out of the clutches of their family-social-settings. And ideally should be beginning to think before they leap. Think before falling in 'lurveeee'. Or just think. Period.

Guys and girls fall in love. This is natural, or so I have been told. Sometimes it so happens, that the person you love doesn't love you back, or doesn't love you back enough. If it is the latter, then please go and see He's just not that into you. If you are a guy, that doesn't matter, the point still applies. A girl might be into you, just not enough.  (Guy or girl, kindly ignore the filmy ending. The film defeats its purpose by doing an about turn at the end. Just like Love Aaj Kal. )

If it is the former, where you are majorly into someone, and they are not, then I have news for you. It is not their fault. Stop abusing them, their fathers, mothers and their ancestors. Not their faults either. Put yourself in their shoes. If someone is majorly into you, and you just don't fancy them, is it your fault that you cannot reciprocate their feelings? Then why is it his/her fault when He/She doesn't like you? It just means that He/She cannot see you the way you would like them to see you. What you perceive as chemistry, might not be, in their eyes. You think you have a lot of common interests but, may be they are looking for something else. You think you are awesome, they don't. As simple as that.

That is how things are. Accepting how things are is a big step in growing up. ( I think I saw a self help book somewhere with the title, Accepting what is. That is what spurred this rant in the first place. Plus I have a younger friend who is deeply in depression about a girl who is not interested).
I have been there, all angst-y, and cursing and being childish in my early twenties, when my ardour was not returned, and put it in devdas terms, ' I had a couple of lurvveee failures' and moped about for weeks, even months.

 Then I started thinking, when my moping lessened, I actually started thinking. Back to the time when boys 'proposed' to girls in school yards with roses and greeting cards on valentine's day. I have returned roses and cards, when accepting a card meant returning/or accepting the 'lurrveee'. I just didn't see myself with those guys. I grew up a little. The scenario changed. It was college campus, and it was a little different. I have turned down 'lets have a coffee' if I knew the guy wanted more than casual friendship and I did not.

And over the years, after dating a few guys, it was turning down invitations to dinner. With some guys, it was turning down one-night-stands. With some it was visiting their mother. (That was downright scary!)

After being the rejected one, and some realisations about the equations between people, I was much nicer about refusing/rather, saying, Thanks, but no  thanks, instead of being harsh/curt.

The realisation that people who reject us are not all that bad took time in coming. I would like to spread this wisdom :-), but have no forum. See, because young people do not want to hear all this wise crap. I certainly did not when people a few years older and wiser told me to take any rejection with a pinch of salt and not give it undue importance.

All I want to ask the kids of these days is :  How is it that when we are the reject-er we are fault free, but when we are rejected the opposite party is a villain?