Rakesh Roshan doesn't know the first thing abotu writing a script. His success is due to the lower than lower standards of Indian viewers. Krrish was a pathetic stunt film.
RE:Rakesh Roshan the mediocre film director
by dd kk on Oct 03, 2007 07:35 PM
Krrish's future telling computer concept was stolen from Ben Affleck's 2003 movie Paycheck..Roshans' or the writers just plugged the superman thing into this and made a movie..wow..stupid indian public thinks its a unique story and idea...great going sir roshan sr...
RE:Rakesh Roshan the mediocre film director
by Waheed Hamid on Oct 03, 2007 10:56 PM
Hey Ajay, INdian viewers dont have low standard. Guys like you have low standards. You dont deserve to be called Indian. GUys like you can only think bad about our country. Get cheked with a psychiatrist.
RE:Thank God no more Krrrrrrish....Hrithik plz first learn acting yaar
by Waheed Hamid on Oct 03, 2007 11:05 PM
You stupid, what do you know about acting?
RE:raman is a character
by Pankaj Sharma on Oct 03, 2007 08:19 PM
i think we should not talk on this subject. discussion might go in wrong direction and it may become communal so lets end the topic here caz i dont want to see any words for any religions LETS GIVE RESPECT TO ALL!!!!!!!!!1
RE:raman is a character
by Snehasish on Oct 03, 2007 05:03 PM
Dear Don..First learn How to spell "Ram". Its "Ram" and not Raman. When you dont know the name of a GOD, you dont have the right to say anything on HIM. Concentrate on Jesus instead.
RE:RE:raman is a character
by Krishna DPR on Oct 03, 2007 04:47 PM
If u say Ram doesnt exist, even there is no evidence of existance of Jesus Christ or Mohammed Profit.. its jst our belief.. & in a democratic country, no1 has the right to interrupt other beliefs... There is no evidence that GOD Exists.. its jst our belief, so is the RAM...
RE:raman is a character
by deep luv on Oct 03, 2007 05:48 PM
Ofcourse you are right in stating that there is no proof that the God exists, and its ture also that there are no proofs of the existance of lord Ram & Lord Krishna... at least no Historical proofs, Mythological ofcourse they are,, But you can't say the same about the Jesus Christ & Profet Mohammad because they were on the face of earth and have plenty of historical & Mythological proofs, Like we have for Profet Gautam Budha, Swami Mahavir, and Latest of all is Saint Nanak Dev.. But these all are the Profets means the messengers of the God, Ishwar, Allah etc.. Not the Ishwar, God, Allah themselves.. And in a democratic country like India only you have a right to air your belief whether you like it or not, but we have to still be more petiance about the other's beliefs, so we dont hurt others sentiment & if someone is with right arguement then we do not oppose that also.. And a Super Natural Power like Ishwar, God, Allah can only in one's belief, coz if something is so much powerful ever existed or still exists then there should not be so many problems, And don't you think that the Earth is very small to be a battlefield of so many GREAT POWERS called Ishwar, God, Allah.
RE:raman is a character
by Vasantgopal on Oct 04, 2007 12:01 AM
Who said that there is no proof of Krishna or Rama? Dwarka excavation has clearly shown evidence. And Rama pre-dates Krishna. Common logic is that closer the history more the material evidence. Even so there is no material proof of Jesus or Mohamad except that the places they lived are in existence today. If you go by same yardstick, places mentioned in Ramayana and Mahabharata exist. So either believe both or don't believe both -its still a question of faith- nothing more nothing less. And Mr.deep luv, according to Catholic Church Jesus is god, not son of god (that is the protestant version). Hinduism is not a revealed religion and hence there are no messengers, each one has to experience God. And noble souls attain Godliness by virtue of acts that save Good, (and not by cheap miracles and tricks. Again, God is a manifestation of supreme power- there is a difference according to Hinduism. Most important is the fact that near history would naturally have more proof than 'far-history'
