How is SRK the king of romance and not ... - Page 3

Originally posted by: FingerFetish

@Blue Ice & Maroon

🤣🤣 My dedication to this post is so strong. I’m hiding in my work toilet for the past 10 minutes just confessing my love for him. WHAT A SIGHT TO IMAGINE!

I found you here 🥳

Because SRK is charming, good looking (age is a factor now but even then, I found him good looking). Only being handsome is not enough to be a romance king. One needs good acting skills ( which many think that SRK doesn't, mainly because his stardom is so much that people start taking acting skills of such stars taken for granted)

I don't think anyone, can play Raj of DDLJ in such a way ,Mohabbatein, Kal Ho Na Ho, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, even obsessive lover like in Anjam and Darr.

Shahrukh has lived his characters and has given us many iconic roles to cherish. Though, I believe, it's also the kind of movies he did which gave him that tag but his screen presence is something else. There is a reason why people are still crazy for him.

Originally posted by: 2RsFan

I haven’t said SRK is ugly but it is a fact he is not conventionally attractive. Same for Salman . Any man below 5’10 can’t be attractive

Conventionally attractive are all the tall model type actors

But there is difference between conventionally looking good and king of romance na.

Conventionally good looking person may look good and are more in demand as models or something like that, I am not getting the proper word but grabbing eyeballs on screen is something different. Also, on TV or Theatre is the height more significant ? What matters is screen presence, the way you say your dialogues, how in any way, by your roles or performance or charm, you can attract the audience.

Why Sid Malhotra, ARK despite looking good can't bring the audience to theatres? Screen Presence and other factors are more important than conventional good looks. 😊

Originally posted by: Renee.Clare

I found you here 🥳

Welcome to my humble domain 😆

Originally posted by: Renee.Clare

But there is difference between conventionally good looking and king of romance na.

Conventionally good looking person may look good and are more in demand as models or something like that, I am not getting the proper word but grabbing eyeballs on screen is something different. Also, on TV or Theatre is the height is more significant ? What matters is screen presence, the way you say your dialogues, how in any way, by your roles or performance or charm, you can attract the audience.

Why Sid Malhotra, ARK despite looking good can't bring the audience to theatres? Screen Presence and other factors are more important than conventional good looks. 😊

I understand that but in comparison some of the actresses made it big or are mostly popular only cos of their looks so I am asking why cant any good looking actor do the same ?

Originally posted by: Renee.Clare

Because SRK is charming, good looking (age is a factor now but even then, I found him good looking). Only being handsome is not enough to be a romance king. One needs good acting skills ( which many think that SRK doesn't, mainly because his stardom is so much that people start taking acting skills of such stars taken for granted)

I don't think anyone, can play Raj of DDLJ in such a way ,Mohabbatein, Kal Ho Na Ho, Kuch Kuch Hota Hai, even obsessive lover like in Anjam and Darr.

Shahrukh has lived his characters and has given us many iconic roles to cherish. Though, I believe, it's also the kind of movies he did which gave him that tag but his screen presence is something else. There is a reason why people are still crazy for him.

You know you have hit the nail on the head. Kudos!!!

I always wondered what was the exact reason people don't take SRK seriously as an actor. But the truth is, he's someone who lives his roles.

Originally posted by: 2RsFan

I understand that but in comparison some of the actresses made it big or are mostly popular only cos of their looks so I am asking why cant any good looking actor do the same ?

We still have male oriented movies in large in Bollywood and only good looks of a particular actor cant carry the whole movie on his shoulders, while, the good looking actresses are more into flower pot roles. The point you kept same applies to good looking females too. Only good looking female can't carry the movie on her own. Do you think someone like Disha Patni can carry a movie? Even Sushmita couldn't make it big Aishwarya too is criticised for her acting and as much I remember, she doesn't have big female oriented movie which was a blockbuster, same with Madhuri. I don't find Vidya very beautiful but she can carry a movie on her own, same with Alia, but because they do have some acting chops, Alia has connections too. So only being good looking, can't help both female and male to be a big star, it needs many other things. Only good looking actresses require a solid actor as co star, female oriented movies need a solid actress as lead.

There never was , never will be, someone like SRK ..

Originally posted by: 2RsFan

I understand that but in comparison some of the actresses made it big or are mostly popular only cos of their looks so I am asking why cant any good looking actor do the same ?

Who is biggest star among kids now ? It can’t be srk or Salman still ???

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

Who is biggest star among kids now ? It can’t be srk or Salman still ???

I doubt anyone from Bollywood . It might be the MCU actors