usha manohar wrote:

vijay wrote:

usha manohar wrote:

Jaya Bhaduri was known for her realistic and lively roles...I doubt if she has acted in sad movies at all since her persona was that of a bubbly young girl full of mischief. She was a trend setter of her times because of her down to earth homely looks which became a rage with the youngsters . Finally she has the right to compare her times to present times which many people do anyway and feel the same way as she does .. Her political party is her choice, had she been under the dynasty probably she wd have found favors with some , Honestly !!!

Samajwadi Party is under a dynasty for your information. Honestly, the bias comes out.

SP, Lalus party , Deve Gowda are all new and have  just two generations of dynastic rule. There is absolutely no bias because I am clear as to who I am speaking about the original party that had been in dynastic business for 4 generation s , the one for which you fight tooth and nail , each time any reference is made to them...If Jaya were a member of that party I am sure you would have quite a different view

Honestly my views would have been same. You brought dynasty not me.And what justification 4 generations vs 2 generations.

I think Jaya's choice of political party and the dynasty rule in our country's politics can be taken as a different forum discussion. Here she has expressed her point of view over current cinema. We can discuss that. We can agree with her view point or disagree with it. Why should be drag her political career in this??

Arunima Singh wrote:

I think Jaya's choice of political party and the dynasty rule in our country's politics can be taken as a different forum discussion. Here she has expressed her point of view over current cinema. We can discuss that. We can agree with her view point or disagree with it. Why should be drag her political career in this??

You are right, here we should be discuss only about films. Making movie was always business. In earlier making movies are not much expensive and peoples have only one mode of entertainment i.e. movies. But now film making is expensive, so no like to suffer loss. Shashi Kapoor is example of it. Utsav, Janoon, and some more films which are produced by Shashi Kapoor was art movies but no one return him cost of these films.

anil wrote:

Arunima Singh wrote:

I think Jaya's choice of political party and the dynasty rule in our country's politics can be taken as a different forum discussion. Here she has expressed her point of view over current cinema. We can discuss that. We can agree with her view point or disagree with it. Why should be drag her political career in this??

You are right, here we should be discuss only about films. Making movie was always business. In earlier making movies are not much expensive and peoples have only one mode of entertainment i.e. movies. But now film making is expensive, so no like to suffer loss. Shashi Kapoor is example of it. Utsav, Janoon, and some more films which are produced by Shashi Kapoor was art movies but no one return him cost of these films.

A movie's success or Failure depends on the Audience. With time audience taste will change.  There is a vast difference between the  audience   of Jaya Bachchan's time and today's audience. In this speed age audience especially Youngsters lean more towards fast moving movies. And in this regard Producers too make movies catering to the needs of the audience. Otherwise their movies will fail. After all Movie making is a business.

anil wrote:

Arunima Singh wrote:

I think Jaya's choice of political party and the dynasty rule in our country's politics can be taken as a different forum discussion. Here she has expressed her point of view over current cinema. We can discuss that. We can agree with her view point or disagree with it. Why should be drag her political career in this??

You are right, here we should be discuss only about films. Making movie was always business. In earlier making movies are not much expensive and peoples have only one mode of entertainment i.e. movies. But now film making is expensive, so no like to suffer loss. Shashi Kapoor is example of it. Utsav, Janoon, and some more films which are produced by Shashi Kapoor was art movies but no one return him cost of these films.

Since we were speaking about Jaya and her other interests there is no straying since it comes within the purview of the subject unlike it happens at times here where totally unrelated matters are discussed for pages together..

There have been expensive, glamorous and experimental films made even during the sixties and seventies. What is essentially true is the quality and the depth that is missing in the modern day films which is also a reflection of the society.

I am a big admirer of Jaya Bachchan but I beg to differ with her in one context. She has generalized that the present day movies are simply business oriented but that's not true. There are some well made movies which are of low budget but highly praised and in the same way there are high budget movies too which got rave reviews. What is bad about some movies of the recent years are that the filmmakers often cross the thin line between sensuality and vulgarity while making the movies. Glamorizing a movie with the visuals of exotic location and so on do not impact badly but when sex becomes the glamorizing factor then that movie lacks the class. Many filmmakers make films only to earn and have no values to offer which is thoroughly detrimental.

There are and will be exceptions. Bad movies were there during Jaya's time. And Good movies are there in the present days. But I agree with Jaya on one point. That is Present movies are Business oriented. Every Movie maker produces a Movie only to make Money.  No producer makes a Movie to lose Money.

Shampa Sadhya wrote:

I am a big admirer of Jaya Bachchan but I beg to differ with her in one context. She has generalized that the present day movies are simply business oriented but that's not true. There are some well made movies which are of low budget but highly praised and in the same way there are high budget movies too which got rave reviews. What is bad about some movies of the recent years are that the filmmakers often cross the thin line between sensuality and vulgarity while making the movies. Glamorizing a movie with the visuals of exotic location and so on do not impact badly but when sex becomes the glamorizing factor then that movie lacks the class. Many filmmakers make films only to earn and have no values to offer which is thoroughly detrimental.

To a point I tend to agree with you. However, it is but natural for any artiste of calibre like Jaya to compare the films that were made during their times to the present times. There are a few films no doubt that are well made but generally, there is over emphasis on glamor, sensuality and making sure that all the elements that are needed to capture the audience are present with an eye on collection. The casualty is quality and you get to see a hotch potch that hardly makes an impact. The makers make tbeir money by cleverly presenting the film through media to show the few interesting points which draws the audience at least for the first few shows. I wonder if anyone wd want to watch the film second time.

usha manohar wrote:

Shampa Sadhya wrote:

I am a big admirer of Jaya Bachchan but I beg to differ with her in one context. She has generalized that the present day movies are simply business oriented but that's not true. There are some well made movies which are of low budget but highly praised and in the same way there are high budget movies too which got rave reviews. What is bad about some movies of the recent years are that the filmmakers often cross the thin line between sensuality and vulgarity while making the movies. Glamorizing a movie with the visuals of exotic location and so on do not impact badly but when sex becomes the glamorizing factor then that movie lacks the class. Many filmmakers make films only to earn and have no values to offer which is thoroughly detrimental.

To a point I tend to agree with you. However, it is but natural for any artiste of calibre like Jaya to compare the films that were made during their times to the present times. There are a few films no doubt that are well made but generally, there is over emphasis on glamor, sensuality and making sure that all the elements that are needed to capture the audience are present with an eye on collection. The casualty is quality and you get to see a hotch potch that hardly makes an impact. The makers make tbeir money by cleverly presenting the film through media to show the few interesting points which draws the audience at least for the first few shows. I wonder if anyone wd want to watch the film second time.

Basic difference maker is marketing. I don't think any filmmaker wanted to get bankrupt after making a film during Jaya Bhaduri's time but they lacked the provisions of marketing which is available now. Thus, the filmmakers are taking the advantage and trying to earn as much as possible. Consider Amitabh Bachchan's action movies like Suhag, Mr. Natwarlal, Don, Sharabi and many more, are these movies worth watching but they are blockbusters. There is a huge generation leap which we cannot overlook. 

What is wrong if movies make money. Entertainment is a business. Even Patanjali makes money on swadeshi propaganda. Jaya is out of tune with the times. Does Amitabh work for free after amassing hundreds of crores.Let Jaya produce the type of movies she advocates with her family wealth.