Re: why the name was not changed then
by Nadim on Jan 14, 2012 06:36 PM
All muzims are very active on discussion particularly on useless topics-like filmy gossips, saas bahu sopera, etc...but in important aspects of society welfare, national issues, community welfare, they get vanish to slum areas...hypocrites...shame in the name of muslims...knows only to eat cow 9with skin and hoof)
But why cant established makers like Johars, Chopras, Farhan Akhtars, Ramus, Bhatts etc pick original scripts? In a land like ours which has such a rich pool of literature, if these would not use it, who else would?
people have gone nuts.. since when Agneepath has been termed as a 'classic'? Do you people understand the meaning of a classic? It was a good movie but many actors hammed their way to glory in that film. Danny's performace was awesome.. Mr.Bacchan managed well as well.. but other actors re-defined 'over-acting'. Please stop calling it a classic.
Re: Agneepath was not a classic..
by Balaji Balasubramanian on Jan 13, 2012 09:05 PM
I agree. Plus, anyone that has seen Scarface would be hardpressed to call this anything more than fluff.
Dialogue delivery, screen presence in that huge 6 foot 2 frame, intense eyes, and a powerful voice. teeny weeny girlish looking actor like Hrithik can take a hike and do their stupiiidd jackson copycat routies and feel like on top of the world in the world of you know what; a make believe self praising world ! SRK is another matter though :-)