I sort of see what Shah is saying, although he goes about articulating it poorly. Khanna was an important actor because he initially acted in socially relevant movies like Aradhana, Kati Patang, Anand, Amar Prem et al. at a time when Bollywood still focused on somewhat intellectual subjects in a subtle manner - reflecting on life and death, humans coping with tragedy, and existential issues. In his works after 1975, there was a shift to movies that were not as substantial in content as he was trying to remain in competition with Bachchan's angry young man.
Was Khanna as skilled an actor as his worshipping fans claim him to be? Maybe, maybe not. Personally, I would put Sanjeev Kumar above him as far as acting is concerned but I do think it admirable that Khanna didn't shy away from sharing screen space with the likes of Bachchan, and Kumar in his heydays. That said, his fans should not be driven to rageful conniption because someone does not share the same opinion.
LOL at people acting like Shah is the male equivalent of Rakhi Sawant who is pressed because he didn't enjoy the same stardom that Khanna did -- I don't think he was ever in that rat race to begin with and if he was, boy did he pick the wrong movies like Katha, Sparsh, Albert Pinto Ko Gussa Kyon Aata Hai, Jaane Bhi Do Yaroon to try to capitulate himself into stardom.
comment:
p_commentcount