Vatsal says people go crazy for taimur, so don't cry nepotism if he - Page 5

Originally posted by: Maroonporsche

They said put anyone in the films they'd work. Yet some of those people cant get their own films to run 😆

See this just means that issue is not outsider's struggle or how difficult it is for an outsider to make it in the industry

Issue is talent of star kids or lack of talent of star kids

If Star kid is talented then it doesn't matter that he or she didn't have to audition for their first movie like an outsider does. It doesn't matter if the talented star kids give some flops and yet gets opportunities which a outsider won't as long as the star kid is deemed talented. It doesn't matter if a big producer gives opportunities to a talented star kid again and again and not an outsider.. None of the outsider's struggles and this entire debate doesn't matter if the star kid is deemed talented.

This debate only matters if star kid is deemed untalented other wise all is good in the industry.😆

Even right now the centre of the debate is not outsider and their struggles . Centre of the debate is which star kid is talented and which isnt. Then they people say why star kids are given so much importance? 😆Even now people care more about talent or lack of talent if a star kid than outsider's struggle.

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

Bold- Because audience is to be blamed. We have the ultimate power to be make a movie hit or flop. See all the previous examples of big movies with big stars that flopped like Kalank, Thugs of Hindustan and SRK movies recently.

So many small scale outsiders movies have become hit like Raj Kumar Rao's or Ayushman Khurana's movies.

So lets not pretend audience doesn't have the power or the choice. They have plenty of power and plenty of choices . The true fate if this anti nepotism or anti star kids or untalented star kids vs talented actors will only be proven once next Dharma or Alia movie comes out. Lets see if people can take actual action and not watch these movies or they are only interested in writing hate messages on twitter.

Audience has the power up to the extent possible--that is, we can either watch or not watch movies. But that's only the tip of iceberg... it's not "ultimate" by any means and does absolutely nothing to address the filth that surrounds talented people who come from humble beginnings. It does nothing to address how they have to jostle their way through every possible filth possible with the willpower of steel and mental status of Buddha. Even then, some of them break... understandably. Do you have any explanation for how the self-proclaimed elitists deliberately suppress talent to market their betas and betis, and how that can lead to traumatic experiences for people who put their heart and soul into their work? Apart from the "it happens everywhere" pet excuse?

Your argument that an actor's success only boils down to audience's decision to watch or not watch is simply not valid. That stance holds weight ONLY if all factors apart from audience views were EQUAL for every single actor and actress--but that's not the case here. Let's not pretend that bollywood is a bed of roses where people are fighting equally for audience's attention. If that was the case, then, yes, I would happily concede that the entire power rests on audience's shoulders since box office numbers would be the only determining factor. But it's NOT. So no, you can't divert attention from all the underhanded ways of bollywood head honchos and their beta and betis and pass the blame to audience.

Originally posted by: ranikaadi

Brokeass Kareena and Saif are the ones selling Taimur to the media. no one cares for taimur.

You are so blinded by your hatred for Kareena, Saif and their kid that you just contradicted yourself 🤣

If no one cares for Taimur, why on earth would the media accept to pay 'brokeass' Saifeena for something that no one cares about?😆

Vatsal beta ji ppl liked you in 'just mohabbat' series. It was a hit. Still you've become just a sidekick to sallu bhaijan and others in movies and even in tv serials. Kareena ko bolo jo itni publicity ki thi apni pregnancy ki aur pregnancy fashion shuru kia tha. Btw koi mujhe btaega kareena k wiki page novel me kaise convert hua. Uski performance ,acting technique pe batein likhi h . Itna to Raj Kapoor k baare me bhi nhi likha.

Originally posted by: ~*sindhu*~

If they can't afford they won't. Mandatory thodi na hai.

Getting noticed is important. If it wasn't, all these industry kids wouldn't be spending so much money on pap and pr even before debut.

Originally posted by: LiveEatLove

Getting noticed is important. If it wasn't, all these industry kids wouldn't be spending so much money on pap and pr even before debut.

If its important than they will have to arrange funds for it. Or find other affordable means to promote themselves.

Originally posted by: ~*sindhu*~

If its important than they will have to arrange funds for it. Or find other affordable means to promote themselves.

An upper middle class born can still try . A lower middle class background person wont be able to . And the industry kids will always have the big kick start and buzz around their debut. Coz with their money power they ensure to get familiar with the audience even before their debut. That was my point .

Originally posted by: Sabhayata

Who decides who is talented and who is talentless? or how do we decide that? This is not a universal thing . Its personal opinion. Though i agree with you but this a statement is very generic and hence depends on the definition of talent which is very subjective

Some may think Karthik Aryan is more talented than Ranbir and hence Ranbir getting big budget films over Karthik is unfair

Some may say no Ranbir is genuinely more talented hence he deserves these movies

For some Shradhha very talented and for some she is talentless star kid getting several opportunities

Same for Alia some think she is untalented and for some she is talented and hence she deserves her success

I mean the only universal metric can be box office success. If audience decides to watch an insider's movies again and again and not one but several of his/ her movies are a hit and outsider doesn't get the same doesn't it automatically mean that insider is more talented as he or she is able to bring in the audience? For example Alia, she has hardly had any flops most of her movies are hit or semi hit. She has been able to pull in the audience . So is she an untalented star kid? I mean definition of talent can be different for everyone. It means as long as one views the star kid as talented there is no issues if they are getting opportunity again and again which outsiders don't? It doesn't matter how they got their first movie or how they get their other moves easily as long as they are deemed to be talented?

Did you read my whole post? I identified 2 issues. I didn’t mean that you should just get work if you are talented. I also pointed out how it’s wrong to use underhand tactics to eliminate another just so one can pave the way to their success.

RE: defining of talent

Yes, everyone has a different perspective. But I think most people are not naive enough to believe that huge box office numbers = talent.

Over the years, there has been so much discussion (not just on IF, but even in terms of public discussion) and most people will agree that Salman isn’t the best actor yet people watch his films. They watch it because they enjoy the genre of films he creates. Also has to do with the image that he’s created as a star that people go to watch him just for him, and not for his acting. This is an established opinion.

So to answer your question on who decides who is talented, it is a majority opinion. Just like democracy is about majority. (And majority doesn’t equate to IF majority. It equates to public views, which one can easily find on social media, on movie reviews etc)

Also, I don’t believe in pitching talent one over the other. If you look at my post, I simply spoke about talent. If Karthik is talented, he deserves movies just like Ranbir. Why do you need to compare who is more talented than who? What is the comparison scale for that? Unless 2 do extremely similar roles then only one can make a valid comparison. This is the reason why I don’t really like comparison posts of actors because one may have been brilliant in Role A and bland in Role B vice versa. If both are talented, both should be celebrated.

Also that is why the system needs to change. Because if for eg Karthik is talented then he deserves opportunities just like Ranbir in terms of big movies.

Originally posted by: HugeScarcity

It's not the actors' fault. They are being asked about nepotism, not bullying. Audience and media themselves have muddled this conversation by saying nepotism everywhere but they don't realize that they are really bothered most by the toxic practices of the industry. Nepotism is simply Taimur getting a film without any fair process for others (it sounds silly but this is almost equivalent to Deepika getting OSO because she has a genetic advantage). Replacing actors in films, lobbying for awards, spreading negative gossip is NOT nepotism but this unethical behaviour is where the focus needs to be. Sadly, mostly everyone keeps asking actors questions around nepotism, insider-outsider, etc.

Well, a smart actor/interviewee would point out to the interviewer what the actual question and debate is & how one should not conflate the 2 issues, and then give his opinion on the actual issue. (I’ve seen Sushant do exactly that in an interview, and even Amitabh)

Taimur's pics showing up on the internet every other day. Does it make sense?

Star kids pics showing up on the internet every other day to make the public going gaga looking at their pics.

Bring in talents like Divya Bharti. Everyone with forget Taimur.