Is Kajol overrated? - Page 7

Originally posted by: RaniPreityAish

That's true but Kajol's family, to much knowledge, didn't have much influence by the 90s. I saw the Simi Garewal interview with Rani where Simi talks about how the Mukherjee family is the most prestigious in Bollywood and was considered the most talented in the industry. Rani explained that all this was true but only many generations ago and by the time she was born, she had already missed the family's prime. Their family didn't have that level of prestige by then so she never saw those days Simi spoke of when the Mukherjees were at the top. And Rani was very poor and the family's sole breadwinner which is why she was pushed into acting because she wasn't interested otherwise.

A similar story with Karishma since Randhir Kapoor was an alcoholic and separated from Babita. Karishma was pushed into films because the family needed a breadwinner. On top of that, there was much backlash by male members of their family since they didn't believe Kapoor women should act onscreen. Karishma in particular was considered an ugly duckling in the industry when she debuted and for many years until her makeover in Raja Hindustani. Also, her dancing was considered a bit out there for the time so she was considered loose by Indian standards.

With Kajol, she was not considered a conventional beauty because of how dusky she was. There was a lot of media attention to her lack of fairness and how Bollywood hadn't had a dark heroine like her in so long, but it was this that helped her stand apart once she proved she could act. I don't think she's ugly because she has great features, just needed some grooming.

You're comparing Deepika and Vidya who both debuted in the late 2000s to 90s heroines when 90s heroines all lacked grooming from the beginning. That had nothing to do with these actresses having film family backgrounds and being allowed to look unattractive on screen and still be given chances but more just how the industry worked back then. Grooming didn't really become a thing until the 2000s. Look at Sridevi and Rekha. Sridevi came from the South where nobody thought of her appearance but in Bollywood, she was considered fat and taunted by the media and audience. Remember they called her thunder thighs. Rekha had to get a complete makeover transformation because she was considered ugly in Bollywood for many years. She looks unrecognizable if you compare her look in the 80s to how she debuted. This was simply how the times worked for all heroines back then. Deepika and Vidya cannot be compared because their era is different and has nothing to do with film or lack of film background.

Also you say that no outsider would get a launch like Kajol, well her debut film was Bekhudi. She worked with SRK when he was still an outsider and not super popular. Baazigar was I think her second film and that was what became a blockbuster and launched her and SRK's careers. She didn't work with Aamir until Ishq and Fanaa many years later. So it's not like Kajol was launched and working with established stars from day one. She had to prove it too.

In 1990s most debuted with new comers

Bekhudi had kamal sadhana who was a producers son not some outsider guy hes big producers son

Her second move bazigaar was by venus movies jain brothers who had produced ashiqui a block buster and was bazigaar written by mahesh bhat brother robin bhat

Her third movie yeh dillagi with yash chopra

You really think an outsider can get such good banners and movies without looks or dancing or talent

Why those ppl never casted a juhi chawla or divya bharati (who both had big hits and were upcoming super stars) both outsiders both much more talented why only kajol was taken in these movies its obviously nepotism or favoritism towards an yester year actress daughter nothing else. Kajol was given chance after chance which she never really would be given as an outsider to become a super star because she was shobhana samarth grand daughter and tanuja daughter not because shes a great actress

You really think they saw her talent and took than you do not know whats nepotism

But at same time SRK was not given those chances in deewana he was side hero to rishi kapoor coming at interval on screen and in bazigaar he was a killer role which no hero was willing to do than and in darr he was again stalker. He never got a decent positive main lead in his starting movies as hes an outsider

SRK was forced to take risk by playing stalker and killer etc which other heroes never wanted roles and than only DDLJ happened

With kajol its off she was given heroine roles again and again at cost of other talented outsiders and finally on her own will she did negative in Gupt after 7 years of debut

Here i would not tell of kajol alone karishma, raveena and many others came up same way not by talent but nepotism opportunity's and improved after 5 plus years

Shlpa Shetty had better role and acted better than kajol in baziaagr why was she not given a DDLJ?

Originally posted by: RaniPreityAish

Out of that list, only Ishq was a multi-starrer and it, Pyaar Kiya To Darna Kya, and Fanaa were the only ones with Khans. But even with Salman in Pyaar Kiya To Darna Kya being a hit, this is forgetting that he had flop films. Khamoshi, Auzaar, Jaanam Samjha Karo, Chal Mere Bhai, Hello Brother, etc. all flopped. For Pyaar Kiya To Darna Kya to work, it couldn't have just been Salman's starpower otherwise all his films would have been hits. It took the Kajol part of the equation for the film to work as well.

Fanaa came out when Aamir's career was lagging and he wasn't considered quite as bankable a box office star. Kajol had more starpower than him at that point and she also ran away with the best reviews. This is most evident when you look at the Filmfare 2007 cover of the top actors in the industry, and despite Kajol not having made a movie for 5 years between K3G and Fanaa, Kajol is included near the top.

Her equation with Ajay was always popular so their films usually did well in the 90s. Hum Aapke Dil Mein Rehte Hain was a female-oriented movie. Anil Kapoor is just there to support the female lead and this was one of Kajol's biggest hits which showed that she could carry a movie herself, much like Sridevi with Laadla or Madhuri with Raja. Gupt featured Manisha, who was never a big box office star and most of her films flopped (none of the movies she did with the Khans were ever successful) and fairly new Bobby Deol. Bobby had established himself as a star with Barsaat and later Soldier, but at this point Kajol was still the bigger star than him and there's a reason why people remember the movie for her.

You are spreading misinformation about 90s.

Salman was doing well till 2000.You have nitpicked his flops here and there and clubbed them together as per your convenience to suit your narrative. Khamoshi was in 96.Salman had a hit in Judwa in 97.PKTDK was in 98, the same year he had a hit in Bandhan.He had 3 to 4 hits/bbs in 99. He had a hit movie Dulhan something released in the same year before Chal Mere Bhai.

Before Fanaa,Aamir had a record breaking opening, opening weekend in MP and superhit RDB with bumper opening.

Before Ishq, Ajay and Kajol starrer movies were flops ,Gundaraj and Hulchul and their solo superhit PTHHT was after that movie.

Originally posted by: Rangaaa

You are spreading misinformation about 90s.

Salman was doing well till 2000.You have nitpicked his flops here and there and clubbed them together as per your convenience to suit your narrative. Khamoshi was in 96.Salman had a hit in Judwa in 97.PKTDK was in 98, the same year he had a hit in Bandhan.He had 3 to 4 hits/bbs in 99. He had a hit movie Dulhan something released in the same year before Chal Mere Bhai.

Before Fanaa,Aamir had a record breaking opening, opening weekend in MP and superhit RDB with bumper opening.

Before Ishq, Ajay and Kajol starrer movies were flops ,Gundaraj and Hulchul and their solo superhit PTHHT was after that movie.

Not really.

Read this article about Salman's success in the 90s. And I never said all of Salman's movies were flops. I said he had many flops so we can't attribute the success of his movie with Kajol to Salman alone.

https://boxofficeindiarecords.blogspot.com/2017/04/shahrukh-khan-vs-salman-khan-90s.html

Madhuri Dixit was the biggest female superstar in the first half of the decade, followed by Karisma Kapoor in the second half. Salman Khan got the majority of success with these two Supreme actresses. When these actresses were at their peak. Salman Khan didn't get much credit in Hum Aapke hain kaun (1994). He was completely overshadowed by Madhuri Dixit. In 1994, Salman Khan did 4 films, 3/4 became washout disasters with washout initials, and Hum Aapke Hain Kaun became a huge all-time blockbuster and record-holder. After that, in the 1995 January Opinion Poll results, Salman Khan got just 1% votes. On the other hand, Madhuri Dixit alone got 52% of the votes in the Favorite Hero/Heroine category. That was the dominance of Madhuri Dixit in Hum Aapke Hain Kaun. Madhuri Dixit also won Filmfare for her performance in Hum Aapke Hain Kaun.

Salman Khan's best years in the 90s were 1998 and 1999. He managed to achieve a THIRD-place in these years. The year 1999 was a record year for Salman Khan. He made five films in 1999.Three multi-starrers became big hits, and two solo films failed at the box office. Most of his solo lead films bombed badly at the box office in the 1990s.

https://boxofficeindiarecords.blogspot.com/2016/05/shahrukh-khan-unprecedented-22.html

Let's also look at this article about which movies became blockbusters overseas. Most of them are SRK movies but what's relevant to this topic are the non-SRK ones. Salman's first blockbuster overseas is HAHK. As said by the article above, that was because of Madhuri's starpower, not his. He didn't have another blockbuster overseas until Bajrangi Bhaijaan more than 20 years later.

Next let's look at Aamir. His first blockbuster overseas was Fanaa. He didn't have a single movie become a blockbuster overseas until Fanaa. Not even Lagaan which was not nearly as big a hit overseas as it was made out to be. Only with 3 Idiots, did he finally get his 2nd blockbuster overseas, followed by Dhoom 3, PK, and Dangal. So he had 5 films total that were blockbusters overseas. What's relevant here is that before 3 Idiots, he had none except Fanaa. What made Fanaa so different? Because it was a YRF film starring Kajol and Kajol was the main draw overseas.

Originally posted by: myviewprem

In 1990s most debuted with new comers

Bekhudi had kamal sadhana who was a producers son not some outsider guy hes big producers son

Her second move bazigaar was by venus movies jain brothers who had produced ashiqui a block buster and was bazigaar written by mahesh bhat brother robin bhat

Her third movie yeh dillagi with yash chopra

You really think an outsider can get such good banners and movies without looks or dancing or talent

Why those ppl never casted a juhi chawla or divya bharati (who both had big hits and were upcoming super stars) both outsiders both much more talented why only kajol was taken in these movies its obviously nepotism or favoritism towards an yester year actress daughter nothing else. Kajol was given chance after chance which she never really would be given as an outsider to become a super star because she was shobhana samarth grand daughter and tanuja daughter not because shes a great actress

You really think they saw her talent and took than you do not know whats nepotism

But at same time SRK was not given those chances in deewana he was side hero to rishi kapoor coming at interval on screen and in bazigaar he was a killer role which no hero was willing to do than and in darr he was again stalker. He never got a decent positive main lead in his starting movies as hes an outsider

SRK was forced to take risk by playing stalker and killer etc which other heroes never wanted roles and than only DDLJ happened

With kajol its off she was given heroine roles again and again at cost of other talented outsiders and finally on her own will she did negative in Gupt after 7 years of debut

Here i would not tell of kajol alone karishma, raveena and many others came up same way not by talent but nepotism opportunity's and improved after 5 plus years

Shlpa Shetty had better role and acted better than kajol in baziaagr why was she not given a DDLJ?

Juhi Chawla was cast by YRF in Darr and Aaina. This is after having a cameo in Chandni. Both films were meant for Sridevi but she rejected them so they went to Juhi. Baazigar as originally also supposed to go to Sridevi in a double role with her playing both sisters.

Juhi was also first choice for the Nisha role, opposite Madhuri, in DTPH. Juhi refused because she didn't want to play second fiddle to Madhuri and was insulted. Urmila, another outsider, got the role and filmed for a day before quitting and it was Karishma who got the role then (Urmila took her role in Judaai). Even after DDLJ's success, Kajol was never considered for DTPH.

I know less about Divya Bharti but her career ended because she died so young. You can see all the movies she was supposed to do went to a variety of actresses. Kajol only took her Hulchul.

SRK had Chamatkar after Deewana and before Baazigar and Darr, where he wasn't a villain but still the lead actor and romantic interest. He did say that he got those villain roles because most major actors refused negative roles. Also most didn't want to play second to Sunny Deol as Aamir Khan, originally considered for Darr, demanded his role be equal to Sunny's.

Clochette would know more about SRK's start in the industry but from what I read, he was already popular from TV and had done a lot of networking which is how he got to know Salman Khan's family and the Chopras. And they were willing to give him a try.

Heroines did not get villain roles back then. Outside of maybe playing the vamp, you didn't see actresses play villain roles. Look at Filmfare's Negative Performance Award and in all the years it was running, only 2 actresses won: Kajol and Priyanka. And only a few more ever were nominated like Urmila, Preity, and Shabana.

Laadla was one of the first time that a mainstream actress got a negative role. It was meant for Divya Bharti but when she died it went to Sridevi. She had been asked to do the Tamil and Telugu versions but refused because she didn't want to do a negative role at first. She changed her mind after Divya died.

Sridevi: "I refused the Tamil and Telugu version of Laadla because I thought it's a negative role, the audience will hate me. However, when they became big hits, I realised I had made a mistake. So when I was approached for the Hindi version (after Divya Bharati's tragic death), I accepted it, without hesitating. I liked the character. She's not killing anyone, she's not a vamp. I am demanding too, I want everything to be perfect. Whether it's my house or my dress, I never compromise. But that's where my similarity with the Laadla character Sheetal Jaitley ends (laughs!)."

https://www.indiatoday.in/magazine/eyecatchers/story/19940415-sridevi-plays-negative-role-in-her-latest-film-laadla-809000-1994-04-14

Sridevi plays negative role in her latest film 'Laadla'

Being bad is now good. After Shah Rukh Khan's success as a psycho-killer in Baazigar, the latest player to join the game is the simpering Sridevi.

Only this time the normally treacly-sweet actress plays the super bitch, Sheetal, in Laadla, her latest film. "Nasty, nasty, nasty" Sheetal is the country's top industrialist given to slapping her manager and being vicious.

Sridevi says: "It was fun. I have nothing against negative roles but I don't want to repeat it." Of course, Laadla's end has Sheetal repenting. But as Sridevi says: "This was a film for the masses. It had to end like this." Especially for her to remain Bollywood's laadli.

You can see from the headline of the magazine that it was SRK's success with Baazigar that inspired more villain roles for mainstream actors, including negative ones for actresses. So Sridevi got Laadla and paved the path for more unsympathetic roles like Kajol in Gupt. Kajol not getting a role like Gupt early in her career isn't because she was a star kid who didn't have to do unflattering roles like that as SRK did, but because those roles barely existed for women.

Hema Malini had Jamai Raja where she's playing a strict mother-in-law but obviously Kajol isn't going to be up for the role of Anil Kapoor's mother-in-law and Madhuri's mother.

I do agree with you that star kids have it easier. They get better debuts usually, more opportunities, and even if they start off bad, they get more of a chance to continue to improve. Like you said with Karishma and her appearance. She wasn't taken seriously as an actress until the late 90s/early 2000s which is something she herself said in interviews about how that's what she wanted all along to finally be seen as a real actress.

My main defense of Kajol here is not that she's a starkid but that for her to become as popular as she did, she had to appeal to audiences. Her Mukherjee family name wouldn't save her like the Bachchan name didn't save Abhishek or Deol name didn't save Esha. For Kajol to keep getting roles with SRK is because audiences were charmed by their pairing. Twinkle Khanna is also a star kid but her career completely flopped despite having a successful debut with Bobby in Barsaat.

Like you said, star kids get better debuts and usually are paired together but that alone can't save them. You're as good as your next film and Twinkle never got accepted by audiences. For Kajol to be accepted, she had to have something in her and no family bloodline can provide that alone. The same way Juhi, Madhuri, Urmila, and Shilpa are not from film families but they still proved to be successes.

And I agree with you that Shilpa deserved more opportunities. She's said in an interview that she felt the industry never praised her work and she didn't get the accolades she deserved. I agree with her and I feel that's because she's also an outsider, although she networks a lot and makes a point of being close to all the important Bollywood bigwigs. She never got an opportunity with SRK again after Baazigar so I do agree with a lot of what you say about how nepokids have it better and easier.

Originally posted by: RaniPreityAish

Not really.

Read this article about Salman's success in the 90s vs SRK.

https://walk-fit.io/?branch-name=wf_general&link-id=go3ggl&utm_source=google&utm_medium=cpc&campaign_id=20986867834&adgroup_id=157932131989&ad_id=704024620795&utm_term=&placement=boxofficeindiarecords.blogspot.com&gad_source=5&gclid=CjwKCAjwreW2BhBhEiwAavLwfLJGk-fTuI7-IDOd1yygSLqDbp6VI2LyiGHSy4H5239ESdX54Kr3fRoCCWYQAvD_BwE

It's 2024 and by now nobody relies on BOI for their commentary. You clearly don't follow that site. A site that's made misogynistic and racist articles. That site was created in mid 2000's.They are only referred for their BO numbers by some on the internet.

Originally posted by: myviewprem

In 1990s most debuted with new comers

Bekhudi had kamal sadhana who was a producers son not some outsider guy hes big producers son

Her second move bazigaar was by venus movies jain brothers who had produced ashiqui a block buster and was bazigaar written by mahesh bhat brother robin bhat

Her third movie yeh dillagi with yash chopra

You really think an outsider can get such good banners and movies without looks or dancing or talent

Why those ppl never casted a juhi chawla or divya bharati (who both had big hits and were upcoming super stars) both outsiders both much more talented why only kajol was taken in these movies its obviously nepotism or favoritism towards an yester year actress daughter nothing else. Kajol was given chance after chance which she never really would be given as an outsider to become a super star because she was shobhana samarth grand daughter and tanuja daughter not because shes a great actress

You really think they saw her talent and took than you do not know whats nepotism

But at same time SRK was not given those chances in deewana he was side hero to rishi kapoor coming at interval on screen and in bazigaar he was a killer role which no hero was willing to do than and in darr he was again stalker. He never got a decent positive main lead in his starting movies as hes an outsider

SRK was forced to take risk by playing stalker and killer etc which other heroes never wanted roles and than only DDLJ happened

With kajol its off she was given heroine roles again and again at cost of other talented outsiders and finally on her own will she did negative in Gupt after 7 years of debut

Here i would not tell of kajol alone karishma, raveena and many others came up same way not by talent but nepotism opportunity's and improved after 5 plus years

Shlpa Shetty had better role and acted better than kajol in baziaagr why was she not given a DDLJ?

Gyaan ki kitni bakchodi karega. Woh bhi galat bata raha hai. Bhai har bhaat pe essay likna zaroori hai kya.

Originally posted by: RaniPreityAish

...Clochette would know more about SRK's start in the industry but from what I read, he was already popular from TV and had done a lot of networking which is how he got to know Salman Khan's family and the Chopras. And they were willing to give him a try. ...

There certainly are members here who may not read through your detailed comments...I happily do because - from time to time - I learn about things I didn't know before

Coming to the quoted paragraph, it wasn't really ShahRukh who did the networking but influential people who had worked with him and valued his work... Fauji had been a major push, but also his movie with Mani Kaul. In addition he worked with Joy Mukherji in Umeed where he made a very good impression (Joy is a member of the Mukherjee family, one of Sashadar Mukherjee's sons, his brother is Ayan Mukherjee's father and also the FIL of Ashutosh Gowariker with whom SRK worked in Circus, Chamatkar and KHKN).

Aziz Mirza and Kundan Shah casted him in Circus because they very much had liked him in the Fauji series, Vivek Vaswani had been mighty impressed with his performance in Mani's Mini-series/film. At the time when Hema signed him for Dil Ashna Hai, he was also signed by Kundan (KHKN), Aziz (RBGG, producer Vivek Vaswani), Rakesh Roshan (King Uncle) and Raj Kanwar's first movie (Deewana), latter needing replacement for Armaan Kohli and having loved SRK in Circus and TV show Dil Dariya he suggested him to the producer (the cousin of Dharmendra)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/hema-malini-75th-birthday-she-offered-shah-rukh-khan-his-first-film-dil-aashna-hai-101697373299083.html

https://www.rediff.com/movies/special/how-shah-rukh-khan-became-a-deewana/20220629.htm

Karan and Adi only became his friends during the shootings of Duplicate (Yash Uncle producer) [edited: earlier already during DDLJ shooting] and Darr like Yash uncle (Karan's father) and Yashji (Adi's father) became his fatherly friends (which never changed).

How SRK got Baazigar (SRK's 2nd super hit) is an interesting story as the directors (Abbas-Mustan) specifically wanted SRK to play the sole lead of the anti-hero. Initially, it had been SRK's co-star in KHKN, Deepak Tijori, who wanted to play the Matt Damon role [edited: Matt Dillon role] in an adaptation of A Kiss before Dying (after the thrilling book of Ira Levin) and had gone to show the US movie to the brothers (with already a producer at hand). They met Tijori's producer but told him that they would change the personality of the killer, would want to cast SRK and already had Venus (the Jain brothers) as producers. (Just adding: the budget had been 2 cr and the India net collection almost 8 cr...)

Originally posted by: RaniPreityAish

Not really.

Read this article about Salman's success in the 90s. And I never said all of Salman's movies were flops. I said he had many flops so we can't attribute the success of his movie with Kajol to Salman alone.

https://boxofficeindiarecords.blogspot.com/2017/04/shahrukh-khan-vs-salman-khan-90s.html

Madhuri Dixit was the biggest female superstar in the first half of the decade, followed by Karisma Kapoor in the second half. Salman Khan got the majority of success with these two Supreme actresses. When these actresses were at their peak. Salman Khan didn't get much credit in Hum Aapke hain kaun (1994). He was completely overshadowed by Madhuri Dixit. In 1994, Salman Khan did 4 films, 3/4 became washout disasters with washout initials, and Hum Aapke Hain Kaun became a huge all-time blockbuster and record-holder. After that, in the 1995 January Opinion Poll results, Salman Khan got just 1% votes. On the other hand, Madhuri Dixit alone got 52% of the votes in the Favorite Hero/Heroine category. That was the dominance of Madhuri Dixit in Hum Aapke Hain Kaun. Madhuri Dixit also won Filmfare for her performance in Hum Aapke Hain Kaun.

Salman Khan's best years in the 90s were 1998 and 1999. He managed to achieve a THIRD-place in these years. The year 1999 was a record year for Salman Khan. He made five films in 1999.Three multi-starrers became big hits, and two solo films failed at the box office. Most of his solo lead films bombed badly at the box office in the 1990s.

https://boxofficeindiarecords.blogspot.com/2016/05/shahrukh-khan-unprecedented-22.html

Let's also look at this article about which movies became blockbusters overseas. Most of them are SRK movies but what's relevant to this topic are the non-SRK ones. Salman's first blockbuster overseas is HAHK. As said by the article above, that was because of Madhuri's starpower, not his. He didn't have another blockbuster overseas until Bajrangi Bhaijaan more than 20 years later.

Next let's look at Aamir. His first blockbuster overseas was Fanaa. He didn't have a single movie become a blockbuster overseas until Fanaa. Not even Lagaan which was not nearly as big a hit overseas as it was made out to be. Only with 3 Idiots, did he finally get his 2nd blockbuster overseas, followed by Dhoom 3, PK, and Dangal. So he had 5 films total that were blockbusters overseas. What's relevant here is that before 3 Idiots, he had none except Fanaa. What made Fanaa so different? Because it was a YRF film starring Kajol and Kajol was the main draw overseas.

You have never followed BOI over the years. Like I had mentioned it was not even there in 90s.

Why just Salman even SRK's success can be attributed to YRF, the big directors ,story, genre, producers and his co-stars. Not just these two any superstar or star out there like the way you are trying too hard.

India se ab oversees pe aa gaye.

Aamir was much bigger than Kajol in overseas.

Aamir was known in oversees but after Lagaan he became a big draw. RDB and Ghajini were blockbusters overseas. Alongwith these two, all those blockbusters you mentioned were not distributed by YRF except Fanaa and Dhoom3.

Approximate numbers of blockbusters oversees in 2006.

multistarrer KANK ($10m), Dhoom 2 ($8m) , Fanaa ($7m) ,RDB ($6m), LRMB ($5 - 5.5 m).

Yash Chopra's Chandni and Lamhe were blockbusters overseas.

YRF is probably the biggest distributor overseas. All Dharma productions movies ,Kaho Na, Koi Mil Gaya and many more were distributed by them.

To add something to the former post: ShahRukh met a lot of people - especially those of his age - already during the shooting of Circus which mostly happened in Mumbai, so he already made some friends at that early time. When he then left Delhi after his mother's death and before his marriage he hasn't a flat of his own yet but was given shelter in various homes...one can say that the elder people quasi 'adopted' him and the younger ones became brotherly friends. Some of those had been Salim and Salman, but also Chikki Pandey and of course also co-stars like Jackie Shroff...he slowly grew into this circle of industry-people. Also his family background helped, his father not unknown in Delhi, from his mother's side with army people and connections to the Ghandi family. Also his quick mind, education, charme, energy, work ethics and straightforwardness made it easy to him to get accepted.

But he also got 'enemies', especially with what some would call 'arrogance' (I would give it another name...especially with what I read a lot here: 'manifestation').

Originally posted by: Clochette

There certainly are members here who may not read through your detailed comments...I happily do because - from time to time - I learn about things I didn't know before

Coming to the quoted paragraph, it wasn't really ShahRukh who did the networking but influential people who had worked with him and valued his work... Fauji had been a major push, but also his movie with Mani Kaul. In addition he worked with Joy Mukherji in Umeed where he made a very good impression (Joy is a member of the Mukherjee family, one of Sashadar Mukherjee's sons, his brother is Ayan Mukherjee's father and also the FIL of Ashutosh Gowariker with whom SRK worked in Circus, Chamatkar and KHKN).

Aziz Mirza and Kundan Shah casted him in Circus because they very much had liked him in the Fauji series, Vivek Vaswani had been mighty impressed with his performance in Mani's Mini-series/film. At the time when Hema signed him for Dil Ashna Hai, he was also signed by Kundan (KHKN), Aziz (RBGG, producer Vivek Vaswani), Rakesh Roshan (King Uncle) and Raj Kanwar's first movie (Deewana), latter needing replacement for Armaan Kohli and having loved SRK in Circus and TV show Dil Dariya he suggested him to the producer (the cousin of Dharmendra)

https://www.hindustantimes.com/entertainment/bollywood/hema-malini-75th-birthday-she-offered-shah-rukh-khan-his-first-film-dil-aashna-hai-101697373299083.html

https://www.rediff.com/movies/special/how-shah-rukh-khan-became-a-deewana/20220629.htm

Karan and Adi only became his friends during the shootings of Duplicate (Yash Uncle producer) and Darr like Yash uncle (Karan's father) and Yashji (Adi's father) became his fatherly friends (which never changed).

How SRK got Baazigar (SRK's 2nd super hit) is an interesting story as the directors (Abbas-Mustan) specifically wanted SRK to play the sole lead of the anti-hero. Initially, it had been SRK's co-star in KHKN, Deepak Tijori, who wanted to play the Matt Damon role in an adaptation of A Kiss before Dying (after the thrilling book of Ira Levin) and had gone to show the US movie to the brothers (with already a producer at hand). They met Tijori's producer but told him that they would change the personality of the killer, would want to cast SRK and already had Venus (the Jain brothers) as producers. (Just adding: the budget had been 2 cr and the India net collection almost 8 cr...)

Sharaban claims not to read my essays and seems to have a timer set as to which hours of the day to block and unblock me, yet somehow even when I'm blocked, I get reactions to some of my long essays from this user that they allegedly don't read.

I'm glad my posts are of interest to some and you even learn some things from them.

Thank you for that wealth of information as to how SRK's career started. I didn't realize SRK and Karan only became friends during Duplicate. I assumed the friendship began in DDLJ since SRK agreed to make a film with KJo then. I know Karan said that SRK was a great help in getting Yash Johar to accept Karan's sexuality. I know Gauri and KJo are closer friends now than SRK and KJo so I wonder when she became close to him first.

You meant Matt Dillon for A Kiss Before Dying right? Deepak Tijori is who I remember always played a side character in 90s movies so it's interesting that he was interested in playing the lead role.

Originally posted by: Clochette

To add something to the former post: ShahRukh met a lot of people - especially those of his age - already during the shooting of Circus which mostly happened in Mumbai, so he already made some friends at that early time. When he then left Delhi after his mother's death and before his marriage he hasn't a flat of his own yet but was given shelter in various homes...one can say that the elder people quasi 'adopted' him and the younger ones became brotherly friends. Some of those had been Salim and Salman, but also Chikki Pandey and of course also co-stars like Jackie Shroff...he slowly grew into this circle of industry-people. Also his family background helped, his father not unknown in Delhi, from his mother's side with army people and connections to the Ghandi family. Also his quick mind, education, charme, energy, work ethics and straightforwardness made it easy to him to get accepted.

But he also got 'enemies', especially with what some would call 'arrogance' (I would give it another name...especially with what I read a lot here: 'manifestation').

I mainly knew about Chunky Pandey, who gave SRK a break when nobody else would, and this is why Ananya grew up so close to SRK's kids. Also that SRK spent a lot of time with Salman's family. On Reddit, the claim is also that there are certain groups or exclusive events that Ananya can only get into because of SRK's name and because he pays for her invitations since Chunky could not afford to. This is SRK's way of paying back one of his first friends in the industry who loaned him money to help start him off.

I imagine that arrogance or manifestation probably ticked off a lot of people who felt they were more deserving, especially if they came from a film background. I wonder if SRK's close friendship with the Bachchans is also in part because Big B was self-made unlike say the Kapoor film who I don't think SRK has ever been really close to. In turn, Abhishek feels a level of comfort with SRK he doesn't feel with anyone else. We know he's deeply insecure of his failed career as a leading man but he's never had any problem playing a side role to SRK, whether in KANK, Happy New Year, or the upcoming film where Abhishek is a villain. Even in OSO, he had no problem spoofing his image and how the Dhoom franchise would likely continue without him (apparently he felt he had nothing to do in Dhoom 2. And we know he was not pleased with his lack of any agency in Dhoom 3).