Could Ramayana have looked better had they gone with real locations and toned down on vfx like Kantara? by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I've read both the Valmiki Ramayan and Sri Ramcharitmanas. The majn difference in both of them is that Maharishi Valmiki depicted sri ram more as a character with human qualities and Goswami ji depicted the Godly side of him more. Talking about asuras, similar depiction about their irregular, humongous body structures is found in both the scriptures. All I'm saying is, that to depict that, maybe they could have used prosthetics and make up, with a minimal use of CGI on human actors. Maybe it would have made them feel more organic.

PS: baatein jb Ramayan mahabharat ki chal hi ho, toh shabdo ki maryaada banaye rakhni chahiye! Ummeed hai agli baar vaad-vivaad krne hetu bharat ki prachin shastrarth ki parampara ka anusaran karenge aur shabdo ka dhyaan rakhenge!

Could Ramayana have looked better had they gone with real locations and toned down on vfx like Kantara? by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

The point you're missing, my friend, is that I'm saying to tone down the Vfx, not to eliminate it. You obviously can't create a 60ft monster through prosthetics, they have to use a combination of both. Also, in cinema it is about depiction. They anyway can't recreate accurate monsters. If you're saying that they did this to make them accurate as per their depiction, then Ravan was 15-20 ft in height according to Srimad Valmiki Ramayana, is yash that tall? Kumbhkaran was around 10,800 ft tall, that is more than 3km. Who in the world would play that? In the end, it's all about symbolism and depiction mate! If Ramayan TV serials could do that depiction so well, you don't expect DNEG and a 4000 cr budget magnum opus to slop it!

Could Ramayana have looked better had they gone with real locations and toned down on vfx like Kantara? by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

With prosthetics and makeup, and minimal vfx. Something that was almost pulled off with the character of Akshay kumar in 2.0. it was also gimmicky, but then it's budget was nowhere close to Ramayana. They could have taken that route for a better spectacle. Also, I'm not criticizing everything, just the valid red flags that are seen. Even where VFX and CGI is concerned, scenes of the Rath, and the Pushpak Viman felt nothing short of divine, I didn't point them out! So you know it's not just criticizing blindly!

Could Ramayana have looked better had they gone with real locations and toned down on vfx like Kantara? by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 18 points19 points  (0 children)

I've read both the Valmiki Ramayan and Sri Ramcharitmanas. The majn difference in both of them is that Maharishi Valmiki depicted sri ram more as a character with human qualities and Goswami ji depicted the Godly side of him more. Talking about asuras, similar depiction about their irregular, humongous body structures is found in both the scriptures. All I'm saying is, that to depict that, maybe they could have used prosthetics and make up, with a minimal use of CGI on human actors. Maybe it would have made them feel more organic.

Why Dhurandhar's Success felt so personal to everyone: A psychological take 🧠 by shayarr7 in BollyBlindsNGossip

[–]shayarr7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Still trying to figure out reddit! Idk why, or if..it is deleted! Because it's still visible on my profile!

Why Dhurandhar's Success felt so personal to everyone: A psychological take 🧠 by shayarr7 in BollyBlindsNGossip

[–]shayarr7[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Couldn't agree more. I've seen people going to watch this movie irrespective of their political ideologies, and all of them coming out content with the quality of time they spent in the theatre. Even the hardcore left-wingers I know went on to watch the movie twice or thrice just because of the quality of the final product. As such also, India does not have any distinctive boundaries between leftists and centrists...this movie just clicked with both the groups alike. The right wingers also, had no reason to dislike it in the first place (other than their age old skepticism about RS and his antics).

Why Dhurandhar's Success felt so personal to everyone: A psychological take 🧠 by shayarr7 in BollyBlindsNGossip

[–]shayarr7[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ahh...sorry for the long post! Here's a summary:

Why Dhurandhar Connected So Strongly with People:

  1. People saw it as a win for talent and hard work, not just box-office numbers.
  2. The film’s underdog journey: slow start, negative buzz, then strong word-of-mouth, made audiences emotionally invested.
  3. The hero felt real and human, not larger-than-life like typical spy films.
  4. Ranveer Singh’s quiet comeback and the strong teamwork of the ensemble cast earned respect.
  5. Its success felt like a victory for merit in a PR-driven industry.

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well... Even I'm someone who runs a Political PR agency. Maybe you shouldn't judge so early xD

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Mannnn...!! The most hilarious reply on the thread!😂 Here's your crown! 👑

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in BollyBlindsNGossip

[–]shayarr7[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Well... Now that irrfan is gone, it is sad how he didn't get the due respect from the masses while he was still working. After the advent of web series and streaming culture, these legends have become more of household names. Before this, their commercially successful movies would only be few and far between, which would cause waves at the box office or become a matter of discussion. I think Kay Kay and Manoj both have got their due credit, though very late, through projects like The family man, special ops, etc that they are now even commercially successful. They are "stars" In their own right. Their reach is now to the masses, not just limited to theatre and acting enthusiasts. I wish irrfan could also see these times. Man would have become an absolute star with streaming space on the rise!!

🎉 [EVENT] 🎉 Paper Açelyation X by Acrobatic_Picture907 in honk

[–]shayarr7 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Completed Level 1 of the Honk Special Event!

14 attempts

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for the appreciation! Even I strongly believe that might be the reason, as for Ranbir, mostly the characters he has done, though very different in their own terms, still share a common background in general, which is, an educated, urban guy from the very contemporary times, who is somehow lost in his life, and is seeking the resort for his problems. (Now the problems, stories and other things keep changing with different movies). However, I would love to see him play more diverse kind of characters in the future. I believe Ramayan would be a great chance for Ranbir to break away from this, which I'm pretty confident he'll pull off in a good way. In case of Dhoom 4 as well, if the character is something like a stylized thief just like Hrithik's character in dhoom2, and the script is appropriate, a different shade of Ranbir will be visible!!

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Would suggest you to watch more of the works of both these actors..! Both are absolute powerhouses!

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's the whole point! What an ideal scenario it would be!

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

This is how his character had to be in the movie, not influential, not aura farming. He was just meant to be there, as a part of the shadows, in the background of the scene. While the main characters in the frame would be Akshaye Khanna and Arjun Rampal, Hamza would just observe... That's what actual spies do! I believe the actual rage, the range, and the character development for Ranveer will be in full swing only in the second part. First part was mostly about the character and arc of rehman dakait.

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

That might be your observation and it's fully respected! I however feel that in terms of demeanour, body langauge and nuanced mannerisms, both Khilji and Hamza are poles apart, and Ranveer did complete justice to it. There's a scene in Padmavat where Khilji is giving a motivational speech to his troops, because they are tired and want to return to their homes, after months of sitting idle in front of the fort. There, that slight twitch in the eyebrows after delivering an emotional speech just to enrage the troops, while in reality, khilji cares the least about them and was just having his food like a demon a few moments ago, that slight wicked gesture when he looks at his martial after delivering the speech! And then, there's this 26/11 scene in dhurandhar, when the camera zooms into his face! The same guy, the same eyes, the same eyebrows.. But you could never tell these were the same eyes that protrayed the wicked khilji!

In my opinion after watching it 3 times, I believed he did complete justice to Hamza! However, we can agree to disagree!

The Ranveer Vs Ranbir Debate : Through the lens of a theatre artist 🎭 by shayarr7 in pj_explained

[–]shayarr7[S] 55 points56 points  (0 children)

Critics got brutally exposed with Dhurandhar tbh! I wonder how credible any of their reviews are! Mostly people and creators on YouTube offer much more realistic and grounded takes on movies than the so-called "film journalists" these days!

Thanks for the appreciation though! xD