Screenindia : Favourite Pics
PopularNews
Most Emailed Articles
Most Read Articles

Age matters only to one half?

-A +A
Font
Premankur Biswas Posted: Dec 31, 2008 at 1109 hrs IST
PrintEmailNewsletterPost CommentsRSS
Ghajini RNBDJ
Related Articles
I know film industry's economics, says MadhurKamal Hassan turns 55, celebrates with familyCourt adjourns Shiney Ahuja case till Nov 16Danny Boyle 'tired' with Slumdog child stars demandsI was told there was no kissing scene in the script: Soha
It is the last day of the year and there are two big Bollwood blockbusters ruling cinema halls across the country. Yes they are both Khan starrers ( Aamir Khan’s Ghajini and Shah Rukh Khan’s Rab Ne Bana Di Jodi), yes they are both vehicles for these men to reclaim their position as Bollywood reigning deities, but if you look closer they also are major pointers to a trend that takes our cinema back to neolithic times.

Some three decades back a 50 plus Rajesh Khanna in a hideous wig would romance teenaged heroines like Padmini Kolhapure, Poonam Dhillon and Sridevi in films like Souten, Dard and Masterji, and we would snigger. Today a 40 plus Shah Rukh Khan discards the Ranis and the Prietys to find an arm candy in a 19-year-old Anushka Sharma, and we don’t even bat an eyelid. Aamir Khan’s love interest in Ghajini is good 20 years younger than him, but that doesn’t make the perfectionist Khan question the credibility of the venture. Considering the fact that both these men stand for progression in the Hindi film industry, their blatant endorsement of ageism is disturbing indeed.

And to think that the year started with a lot of promise. With Nishabd and Eklavya, Amitabh Bachchan was finally playing his age. Aamir Khan made a sensitive film on child psychology called Taare Zameen Par and middle class India found a voice in Dibakar Banerjee’s Khosla Ka Ghosla.

But 2008 hardly took the story forward. Actually, it took a step backward and stumbled into a pigshit of ageism and sexism. This isn’t a criticism but an observation, the truth is that Bollywood has done precious little to portray progressive female lead roles. Instead it has reinforced those very stereotypes that we have tried to shrug off for all these years. Be it the simpering mother of a kidnapped daughter (Vidya Malvade in Kidnap) or a vivacious girl who finds love in a man twice her age simply because she is married to him (Anushka Sharma in Rab Ne …) leading ladies in Bollywood proved to be just sexed up versions of their much-neglected predecessors.

Glance over the year and see that apart from the odd Fashion, Sorry Bhai! and Rock On hardly any other film gives a lady a chance to show some brain power on the screen. Bollywood producers might be paying the Priyanka Chopras and Kareena Kapoors millions, but it’s pretty evident that they are destined to play second fiddles to the Khans and the Kumars for most of their acting career.

Closer home in Tollywood, things aren’t much better. A 40 plus Prosenjit continues to romance women half his age in films like Juddha and Rajkumar, while Jeet dominates action flicks where lead actresses are little more than arm candies. Even in romantic films like Chro dini tumi je amar (the biggest hit in Tollywood for the past decade), the heroine is a mute victim who has no other choice than to marry the guy of her parent’s choice.

But if you thought Hollywood stands for progression then think again. It’s quite a patriarchal set -up there too. The blog “Women and Hollywood” features telling statistics: last year only five of the top 50 films of the year had major roles for women. Only 15 per cent of directors, producers, writers and high-ranking staff are women. Thelma Adams, film critic for US Weekly, tells the site, “The point here is can women open movies there? Meryl Streep can’t. Jodie Foster can’t. Julianne Moore can’t. Julia Roberts can’t”. So there.
PostComments
Post Comments
Name * Message *
Email ID *
Subject *
TERMS OF USE: The views, opinions and comments posted are your, and are not endorsed by this website. You shall be solely responsible for the comment posted here. The website reserves the right to delete, reject, or otherwise remove any views, opinions and comments posted or part thereof. You shall ensure that the comment is not inflammatory, abusive, derogatory, defamatory &/or obscene, or contain pornographic matter and/or does not constitute hate mail, or violate privacy of any person (s) or breach confidentiality or otherwise is illegal, immoral or contrary to public policy. Nor should it contain anything infringing copyright &/or intellectual property rights of any person(s).
I agree to the terms of use.
ViewComments
View Comments
bolly age by srinivas on 2009-01-06 12:18:31.898768+05:30 age of bolly wood hero

Reply | Forward

Indian audience to blame. by Lalitha.S on 2009-01-06 11:27:56.297648+05:30 It is the male chauvinist Indian outlook and by extension, the audience that is to blame. It happens in Hollywood too, but to a lesser extent. I mean there you have the middle aged pair of Helen Hunt and Jack Nicholson essaying mid-life centered roles in films like As Good as it Gets--and the film goes on to win Oscars, plus works decently at BO.But it was a sexy boob-spilling Julia Roberts that was needed to draw the American Audience in for an excellent drama like Erin Brockovitch. The original Erin has been known to be an ordinary lady!In India too sometimes a good and effective but not so young pair can still bring the crowds in.A couple of years back, in May 2006 to be precise, Fanaa released and became a big hit. It starred the 40 plus aamir and 30 plus Kajol. Both looked charming despite a bit of extra fat--Aamir's puffy face and Kajol's mini paunch, post baby. Thankfully the film still worked. And yet poor Madhuri's comeback vehicle Aaja Nachle was rejected, possibly because there was no powerful 40 plus male performer to draw the audience in!At the end of 2008, the theatres are posting good revenues thanks to the BO clout of guys like SRK

Reply | Forward

1 contd from last post.
by Lalitha.S on 2009-01-06 12:15:47.98583+05:30My message got cut off due to length.Well I had written that BO clout counts and so 40 plus leds like Aamir, SRK and Akshay Kumar, aided by young heroines, help draw in audiences if the film is good on the whole. But films without young heroines--these work too--A wednesday, Aamir and so forth.I wish SRK or Aamir or any other 40- ish star would do a solid film with Madhuri--and draw the audience in.

Reply | Forward

Not ageist by Lalitha.S on 2009-01-02 15:53:00.634979+05:30 I feel that the author is not really right in his statement that Aamir and SRK are endorsing ageism.Aamir plays a businessman in love with a model. Is there any rule that the businessman has to be 30 plus only, not 40 plus? Did not author Salman Rushdie marry somebody 20 yrs his junior? SRK is clearly playing a character who is much older than the female lead. So where is the problem?Blame the male chauvinist Indian audience, not the stars AK and SRK. It is the Indian audience that rejects even Rani Mukherjee, Aishwarya Rai and other such just 30 and 30 plus stars, unless they are paired against top male stars of whatever age. The crowds are coming to watch Aamir and Asin, the latter especially for her nubile beauty. And Aamir did justice to his role, turned an ordinary film into a potential blockbuster, something a young Shahid Kapoor could not have achieved.

Reply | Forward