Posted:
Originally posted by: --sanchita--
I am agree with Luna. That chandrakanta is disgusting. The hero is yuck🤢. He seems more like villain and only interested in showing his body. No acting skill.
Ok Luna u are Bengali. I am also bengali😉.
Another Bengali in the Naagin 2 forum!😳
Glad to meet you!!😃
Ekta should stop casting bad looking male leads in her shows
EK's virendra is currently the worst looking male lead in Indian tv.
I vomited when I first saw his individual promo and after I saw him in epi 1, I was feeling like fainting🤢
I wonder how he got selected in the auditions with this kind of looks and acting skills.
I never disliked Vishal Aditya Singh as an actor, infact I thought he was good enough to be a side character as seen in Begusarai.
Also the stylist of the show was good so Vishal was also looking handsome enough 😆
But my oh my, how ugly Vishal was looking!
Ekta's stylists are so talented that they can make pretty actresses like Mouni and Kratika(Sengar) look bad, so let's leave Vishal who's naturally ugly!
Special mention to the blue eyes of Rajkumar Virendra(fondly called Veer, just like ChandraGupta Maurya is referred to as Chandra in ChandraNandini😉).
I mean, there's logic in Mouni and Adaa wearing coloured lenses in Naagin 2 as they're thereotically playing reptiles, but what's the logic behind Virendra wearing blue lenses!
I mean Virendra is Indian nah, and Indian people rarely have blue eyes.
Not everybody is Aishwarya Rai😆.
Also, Vishal doesn't have a complexion fair enough to look good with blue lenses .
Coupled with his pukeworthy facial features, I fell from my bed laughing when I first saw Virendra with Blue eyes.
Another avoidable folly from Ekta Kapoor which backfired on her.
She could've just leave Vishal to play Virendra with his natural eye colour or black lenses.
The less I say about Madhurima, the better it is .
It might hurt her fans but let's say this:She's worse than the worst choice available in the Hindi Tv Industry for the role of Chandrakanta
Her role has less substance and more skin show to the point that it is uncomfortable for a family audience
She's also extremely mediocre as an actress.
The role of Chandrakanta needs an innocence as well as fierceness from the actress playing the part.
Madhurima is none.
She lacks the innocence of a Chandrakanta oblivious to her magical ancestry and she just comes out OTT.
She's not that bad looking as Vishal is, but as I like to say a spade as spade, Madhurima looks TOO old to play Chandrakanta.
She simply looks too old for the role and also her face lacks the innocence required for the role.
That's why her acting while playing an innocent princess came out so bad and unconvincing-she didn't look innocent enough to mesmerize the audience with her beauty.
She also couldn't emote properly and has a limited set of facial expressions.
I don't know how she passed the auditions: nor she can't act properly nor her looks suitable for her role Chandrakanta enough to act as a cover for her bhangaar acting skills.
She's officially the Lady Patthar of Colors.
Actually, I feel Madhurima would've made a better Iravati or another vamp rather than Chandrakanta.
She isn't that suitable for Costume Dramas, but Madhurima would've done better justice to her acting skills if she had chosen to play a negative role in this show instead of playing Chandrakanta , because that's her forte.
Funnily enough,Madhurima suffers the same problem as Patthar KVB.
While KV did wonders as evil Viraj, Madhurima did justice to evil supermodel Tanu.
While KVB failed as Positive hero Rocky, Madhurima looks sure shot failure as the Cute Princess Chandrakanta.
Looks like EK hasn't learnt her lessons from the massive flopping of Rocky.
Looks are important for historicals and mythologies.And sometimes, there are instances that good acting doesn't help overlook the unsuitable looks of the actors regarding the role they perform.
Chandrakanta is such an occasion where the leads wouldn't be able to save the show regardless of their acting skills, just because they look ugly.(I hate to use ugly for actors but I'm forced to)
Plus Madhurima and Vishal seem to be poor quality actors from whatever I saw of them in the 1st epi of Chandrakanta, so here you
See, I haven't seen Madhurima's acting as the fierce Chandrakanta yet.
Since she has done negative roles mostly, I guess she might nail this one.
But then again, Madhurima's acting style is suitable for modern type roles(again, these roles are mostly negative) in EK's family dramas.
She will look like a fish out of place in the garish costumes of Kyunki or Kahani, and imagining her as Chandrakanta is a far fetched thought.
Both Vishal and Madhurima lacks the characteristic grandeur and grace of playing a mytho or histo character.
These problems are faced by Kritika Kamra and Gaurav Khanna too, who play Chandrakanta and Virendra in the Life Ok Version .
I got turned off by the Life Ok version due to the same reason: Unsuitable looking leads with respect to the requirement of the story and bad acting.
Now I'm happily confessing, Kritika Kamra is also worse than the worst choice for Chandrakanta, but EK has managed to find a Chandrakanta who's more unsuitable for the role of Chandrakanta than Kritika.
Gaurav's wigs and costumes always made me vomit, and it's not changing, but he's far better looking than Vishal Aditya Singh and needs only a good stylist to make him look atleast princely.
Madhurima and Kritika are in the same footing regarding their acting, but Kritika has a cuter voice and her dialogue delivery is somewhat better.
Gaurav is far better than Vishal as Virendra.
Urvashi Dholakia, she's the best actress among this mess of an ensemble cast but seems to have lost steam.
Her role Iravati lacks the unique charm Komolika had and instead looks like a vamp saasu maa Ekta has created to capitalize on Yamini's fanbase .
Iravati simply doesn't have the mystery and curiousity filled thrill
In her characterization that promises to glue audience and make them fall in love with her.
Urvashi also seems to have Kokila Modi vibes in her acting, and that makes her look irritating as Kokila Modi is beyond toleration right now(Atleast for me).
Actors may receive badly written roles, but they've improvise upon it by using their charm and acting skills to make their role as unique as possible.
Urvashi is none.
She's half Yamini, half Kokila with stupid magic powers already seen in Baal veer (that was good because it was first of its kind).
Now, since Ekta hates typecasting as she repeatedly says in her "interviews", she could as Well hire Shweta Tiwari aka Prerna for this role.
I've seen Shweta in negative roles in Baal Veer and Begusarai, and have no qualms to say that Prerna would've make a better Iravati than Komolika .
Shweta as Bindiya Thakur, showed the exact grandeur and mysterious but irrestible charm required for the role of Iravati.
Sorry to say, but Urvashi fails to meet the exact expectations of her role I hoped from her.
It seems that the writers tried extremely hard to copy Bahubali but failed miserably.
I won't say much about the supporting cast except that CK's fisherman adoptive family is modeled after Nagarjun's adoptive family from Nagarjun Life Ok.
In fact, Iravati and her gang is searching for CK in the same way Astika and his gang searched for Naagarjun.😉
The woman who played CK's real mom is prettier than Chandrakanta🤣 and she can't really act .
The guy who played CK's real papa is decent enough to be termed a good actor but it looked to me like this guy is looking up at Sameer Dharmadhikari's performance as Bindusara in Chakravartin Ashoka Samrat as his inspiration for essaying his role way too seriously.
Pandit Jagannath also suffers from the same Ashoka hangover-in this case, Pandit Jagannath is trying to ape Manoj Joshi's performance as Chanakya.
While I don't like Manoj Joshi as Chanakya in comparison to Manish Wadhwa's interpretation of the same character, I will advise the actor who plays Pandit Jagannath to stop copying Manoj Joshi because he's simply a bad actor and copying Manoj Joshi will make him look worse.
I know it's a long and boring post maybe, but this is my review and you may accept it or not.
I'm not posting this review in Chandrakanta forum because I may get beaten over there but it's my warning to Naagin fans to avoid Chandrakanta if they want to stay sane after seeing the already nonsense Naagin 2.
comment:
p_commentcount