Mukesh Khanna speaks against Starbharata! - Page 6

on a complete off point, doesnt he remind anyone of sylvester stallone?

Originally posted by: -Shruti

Many people who don't know anything about Mahabharata are being misguided by this serial.

It's useless to explain these things to ignorant people, you're one among them.

Tfs shruti.

I saw the speech for 3 minutes - that's it! Extremely disappointed with Mukesh Khanna for giving this speech to a bunch of kids. He seems bitter. You never tell kids not to watch Mahabhart. That is just wrong!!

Originally posted by: Bhabhuha

if Mahabharat was not adapted with changing times and for regional tastes, it could have been extinct by now. It's a 5000 yrs old story how can confirm what is poplular as Vyasa Bharat is correct one

I like Star plus portrayal of MB. It's awesome for the kind of effort they have put in with limited budget constraints. Also Actors in Star Bharat are great I watched all episodes atleast twice on Youtube and liked them.

SP is bringing enthu towards Mahabharat many ppl how doesn't know MB are getting interested with this and learning.

MukeshJi is struck in time just like Maha Mahim Bhishma

But Ved Vyasa is the original composer, poets and other scholars entered the scene later, that more credit is given to them over the founder so to speak is a shame. Though other versions interest in their own poetical way with variations of one kind or another, you can't really gain an all rounder view with plenty of contradictory incidents crowded into one which the show is guilty of doing. Serial wise, this show is in a mess story n character wise in some cases. You can't deny that the serial lacks real depth, and power to create impact on a spiritual level something that Brc was able to do. You feel often that they operate on the drama level that is a star plus trademark, where you have a reduction of true value instead materialistic import given to glam looking sets n actors and their ordinary 'modern' emotions via poor direction
I would like to know whether in their research they read at all the readily accessible earliest version of Mahabharata, or simply took the shortcut by reading around it, through shorter stories n what not.

Originally posted by: -Shruti

Nowadays the makers hide behind an excuse that they are making Mahabharata for the modern people.

He said: "Sanskriti kabhi modern nahi ho sakti, sanskriti ko modern karoge toh woh khatm ho jayegi"

Originally posted by: bunnylovessunny

Nope, Mahabharat is not ALL traditional my pal... It is an epic from a yug where people learnt deceit, cruelty, ignorance, selfishness and pride. Mahabharat is a Political drama where all kinds of illegal things took place and illegitimate children were born. So does it really matter HOW it is being portrayed?

Of course it matters
Mahabhart isnt any normal story its pour epic our tradition of course it matters how its characters who are our epic heroes are portrayed.

Originally posted by: shyam09

2 points really --

First off -- We will never be able to confirm that (part in bold). It's impossible. But because it is impossible to do that, it doesn't justify throwing in random tidbits of utter BS. The problem Mukeshji probably has it with the characterizations and possibly the plot. Would he have minded if Dhriti was played by a 6-pack model but the role he played showed off Dhriti as who he really was [[from the beginning]], no.

Second point -- learning what? No one learns anything from fictionalized stuff. It's like watching Harry Potter and saying "oh Hogwarts exists!!... Dammit.. I'm a muggle!" ... Some messages they promote are good, but if I, being 20 years old, have trouble understanding it the first time watching it ... how would it make sense for kids to understand the messages?

The way modern day society works is on the level of easiness. Why read a book when there is a movie you can watch... Why go to the library and look for books when we have Google...

I've said it before, and I'll say it again - the problem is that we define this as mythology ... with mythology people have the freedom to do whatever the hell they want ... but the moment we change it so it becomes history, it's set in stone and no one will dare mock it. If they do, it becomes labeled has historical fiction and everyone should know the definition of fiction.

But if you distort mythology -- you get mythology. And people are left confused! Is mythology no. 1 right or mythology no. 2??

Of course we can bring up the question of which version is correct since we don't know which version holds the truth, but we should be able to easily eliminate foreign versions, fictional / modern retelling, and choose the best among the few versions that are left (if there are even a few left)...

(if you think I felt rough somewhere above, I'm truly sorry. I'm just trying to be as frank as possible so my message is clear. No offense intended)

agree especially with the bold

Tomorrow if they show 'Ajaya' or 'Palace of illusions' as Mahabharata are we to accept that as well just because actual ved vyas's story is not known?

Whatever version is available to us today we need to go by that version and we should be able to tell whether this is a fictional retelling of Mahabharata or an interpretation.Stabaharat lies in the former category
Are the good sets ,technology and acting entertaining yes of course but does that make character distortions ok of course not

I may not remember BRC much but i do remember that many tracks they did were quite close to the epic the whole story of shantanu and ganga,birth of Dhrit and Pandu, rangbhoomi,lakshagarh,DRau's swayamber and all were portrayed quite close to the way it is in the epic.Although yes there some deviations in BRC as well

IT is curious how a forum thinks itself a scholar great enough to look onto with utter disdain an honest effort at a retelling.