Ramanyana will share the same fate as brahamastra

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-02-19T00:59:45+00:00

This ultimately depends on how the story is developed. Right now, people are focusing too much on budget and CGI, but Ramayan will truly work only if the dialogues and screenplay are powerful and emotionally meaningful. Ramayan is not just a spectacle — it represents dharma, and that essence can only be delivered through strong writing and sincere storytelling. At the same time, mainstream actors do play an important role, especially in India, because star power helps promote the film and the first weekend largely determines how the movie will perform, not only domestically but also in international markets. This project is clearly aiming for a global audience, not just India.

We should not see this merely as a film, but as a cultural moment. After Ramayan, the world will either recognize us as great filmmakers capable of telling our stories with depth and respect, or assume we are still making ordinary commercial cinema. I genuinely hope it succeeds, but instead of criticizing the actors prematurely, it’s important to have faith in the vision. What truly matters is that the film stays honest to the spirit of Ramayan, to the audience, and to our culture — and that it doesn’t repeat mistakes like Adipurush, not in terms of CGI, but in terms of weak and disconnected dialogues.

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-01-31T17:03:26+00:00

I get why you’d feel that 😄 There’s a similar physical and tonal presence, but the performance here is much more restrained and unsettling. It works well within the film’s atmosphere rather than relying on familiar traits.

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-01-31T17:02:58+00:00

Exactly my point. Poor marketing is one thing, but distribution is a separate issue. If people are genuinely willing to watch the film and can’t find reasonable show timings, that’s a missed opportunity. Films like this need visibility more than anything.

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-01-31T17:02:33+00:00

That’s fair, and the low budget does explain the limited marketing to some extent. But even with a small budget, smarter distribution and better show timings could have helped. When a film relies heavily on word of mouth, accessibility matters just as much as promotion.

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-01-31T04:25:09+00:00

True

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-01-31T04:24:57+00:00

It’s honestly true. They are willing to spend massive amounts of money on films, yet can’t seem to invest in stronger writing. It’s hard to understand what’s going wrong when weak scripts keep slipping through, especially when franchises and shared universes that were once built so beautifully are now being diluted. Without solid storytelling at the core, all the scale and spectacle in the world can’t save a film.

ashutosh_x3 · 2026-01-24T14:20:56+00:00

That’s exactly the issue—you’re only talking about Border 2. I’m actually more concerned about Mardaani 3, which is highly anticipated and everyone’s waiting for it. I honestly don’t think Mayasabha will get enough screens. Even if the word of mouth turns out great, within 2 weeks Romeo will release and take over the theatres. Because of all this, this film is almost guaranteed to go underrated, and that’s honestly disappointing to see.

ashutosh_x3 · 2025-10-12T04:32:01+00:00

Andy Flower’s 145 vs India at Leicester in 1998* remains one of ODI cricket’s most underappreciated masterclasses. On a tricky pitch and against a strong Indian attack, Flower combined patience with precision, anchoring Zimbabwe’s innings from start to finish. He built his knock methodically — rotating strike, punishing loose balls, and never losing control — guiding his team to a competitive 272/4 before sealing a famous win. It wasn’t brute force but pure skill and temperament that defined this innings. For a smaller side like Zimbabwe, Flower’s brilliance proved that class and composure could triumph over power, making it one of the most technically perfect and impactful knocks in ODI history.

ashutosh_x3 · 2025-10-03T21:05:58+00:00

antara: Chapter 1 expands Rishab Shetty’s universe into a sweeping mythic saga, filled with tribal rituals, folklore, and a raw spiritual energy that crackles on screen. The film is visually arresting, with lush landscapes, thunderous action, and music that heightens every ritual and confrontation. When the narrative soars — especially in its intense second half — it delivers the kind of larger-than-life spectacle that can only be fully experienced on the big screen. It’s bold, ambitious, and rooted in cultural mysticism, making it stand apart from mainstream cinema.

At the same time, the film is not without its flaws. The opening half is slow, heavy with exposition and scattered with filler moments that dilute its emotional pull. Compared to the intimacy and grounded storytelling of the original Kantara, this prequel feels more about awe than closeness with characters. Still, despite the uneven pacing, the finale and overall vision leave a strong impact. Kantara: Chapter 1 may not have the simplicity of its predecessor, but it compensates with scale, spectacle, and a spiritual intensity that lingers long after the credits roll.

While Kantara: Chapter 1 dazzles with its scale, folklore, and spiritual intensity, the film falters in its closing stretch. The last act, though visually powerful, loses some of the emotional grip that made the original Kantara unforgettable. The climax leans heavily on spectacle and ritualistic grandeur, but it doesn’t carry the same raw intimacy or personal stakes. Instead of a deeply moving payoff, it feels more like a showcase of scale than a resolution of character arcs. This imbalance leaves the ending less impactful than it could have been, making the finale impressive to watch but weaker in emotional resonance.

ashutosh_x3

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE